v>EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Research and Development
Washington DC 20460
EPA 600/8-78-003
April 1978
Laboratories Needed
to Support
Long-Term Research
in EPA
A Report to The President
and The Congress
-------
LABORATORIES NEEDED TO
SUPPORT LONG-TERM EXPLORATORY RESEARCH
IN THE
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
A Report to the President
and the Congress
March 31, 1978
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
5 APR 1978
THE ADMINISTRATOR
The President
Speaker of the House of Representatives
President of the Senate
Dear Sirs:
In accordance with Section 6(b) of Public Law 95-155, the Environmental
Research, Development and Demonstration Act of 1978, I herewith submit a
report on laboratories needed to support long term research in the
Environmental Protection Agency. The report examines alternative approaches
for conducting long term environmental research and presents eight findings
and recommendations. Strengthening our long term activities is an important
part of our overall research strategy in EPA and I endors^the recommendations
contained herein.
Sin/edely
Enclosure
ill
-------
CONTENTS
Section Page
1 Summary 1
2 Findings and Recommendations 2
3 Introduction 5
4 Study Objectives and Approach 7
5 Research and Development in EPA
. History 10
. The Research and Development Process 11
. Resource Trends 13
6 Areas Needing Enhanced Exploratory Research 18
7 Laboratory Mechanisms Used by Other Agencies 28
Extramural Mechanisms 30
. Individual Grants and Small contracts 31
. University/Institutional Centers 31
. Government-Owned, Contractor-Operated 33
Centers
. General 34
8 Options for Conducting Exploratory Research 35
Separation or Integration of Exploratory 36
Research and Regulatory/Operational
Support Research and Development
Separation or Integration of Intramural 37
and Extramural Exploratory Research
Activities
-------
CONTENTS
Section Page
Geographical Consolidation of Intramural 38
Exploratory Research Laboratories
Extramural Exploratory Research Options 38
9 Bibliography 41
10 Appendices:
A. Office of Research and Development 43
B. Examples of Exploratory Research Advances 47
VI
-------
1. SUMMARY
This report examines alternative laboratory approaches by which the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could conduct long-term environmental
research. The report was prepared in response to a congressional request
contained in Public Law 95-155 Sec. 6(b) of EPA's Research and Development
Act of 1978. To prepare the report, more than 100 scientists and managers
in 20 agencies and laboratories were interviewed, and numerous persons
within EPA were contacted. The Science Advisory Board of EPA partici-
pated in all phases of report preparation.
Four subject areas are treated in the report. The first area is EPA
history which reviews how present laboratories were formed, discusses the
research and development (R&D) within the Agency, and presents evidence
that long-term exploratory research is being conducted by EPA. The second
subject deals with areas that need enhanced exploratory research and pre-
sents a brief review of 11 representative research areas that could benefit
from enhanced long-term support. The third subject area consists of mechan-
isms used by other agencies. Advantages and disadvantages are discussed of
four mechanisms for conducting long-term research—individual grants and
contracts, Federal contract research centers, university or other private
centers, and Federal laboratories. The fourth and final topic discusses
options for conducting long-term exploratory activities within EPA.
The report presents eight findings and recommendations. Each is aimed
at improving the mechanisms and climate for conducting long-term exploratory
research in EPA.
-------
2. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Finding; Contrary to some perceptions, exploratory (long-term) research
is an ongoing, important component of EPA's current research program.
Exploratory research, however, is not a sufficiently visible component of
EPA's present R&D program. Based on definitions contained within the report
and other criteria used by EPA laboratory director's, approximately 30% of
the FY-1977 base (non-energy) R&D budget was estimated to be in the
exploratory area.
Recommendation; Ongoing exploratory research should be continued and
budgeted as an identifiable program. An office of exploratory research
should be established to serve as a visible focal point for coordinating
such activities and for managing basic and anticipatory research activities.
Responsibility for implementing exploratory activities should rest primarily
with existing EPA research and development laboratories.
2. Finding; The nature of exploratory research is such that it must be
integrally linked to applied research efforts at the laboratory level. At
all the institutions visited, it was noted that the cc—existence of explora-
tory and applied activities in one laboratory strengthened and stimulated
both types of programs.
Recommendat ion; Exploratory research activities should generally be
conducted by institutions that can optimize the link between exploratory
and applied programs. Exploratory programs should not be geographically or
intellectually isolated.
3. Finding; Research gaps are present within EPA's exploratory activities.
(Section 6 presents a representative list of research areas in EPA that would
benefit from enhanced support for exploratory activities.) EPA's activities,
however, represent less than one-fifth of the total Federal R&D expenditures
for the environment and natural resources. The fraction of long-term research
activities conducted by agencies other than EPA is presently unknown. Addi-
tionally, there are few mechanisms which can address all the needs for
coordination of long-term R&D between EPA and other agencies and laboratories.
Recommendat ion; Both intramural and extramural exploratory research
should be expanded selectively to complement existing EPA and other Federal
activities. Expansions should take place only after examining opportunities
for internally shifting resources to exploratory activities. An examination
of exploratory R&D across the Federal government should be undertaken and the
R&D pertinent to EPA problems should be identified. Exploratory research
-------
directed at problems which may eventually require regulatory actions should
have better coordination. EPA will have to develop mechanisms to match its
specific needs. Mechanisms such as the Interagency Regulatory Liaison Group
and the use of the lead agency concept in conjunction with pass-through
funding, should be increasingly utilized.
Other elements for improved coordination should include:
1) Broad annual program planning and accomplishment
meetings for all related Federal activities.
2) Program planning meetings dedicated to specific
research areas between pertinent Federal agency
managers.
3) A series of scientific workshops by all EPA labora-
tories and extramural centers on specific research
areas. Workshop funds should be built into the
budget of each laboratory and center.
4. Finding; Many of EPA's intramural research laboratories have unique
talents and facilities and have received peer recognition for their ex-
ploratory research contributions. Often these activities have not received
sufficient recognition within the Agency since good performance was often
equated with the ability to provide short-term solutions for regulatory
purposes.
Recommendations; The use of personnel exchanges, sabbaticals,
and other mechanisms should be encouraged as a means of assuring vitality
to exploratory projects, but only when not detrimental to long-term acti-
vities. Internal scientists should be encouraged to publish in scientific
and technical journals on a regular basis. Mechanisms to reward outstanding
achievements by individual scientists should be developed.
5. Finding; The nature of exploratory research is such that it is
strengthened and enhanced by a critical scientific and technical review
process.
Recommendat ion; A peer review process is particularly important
for this type of research. A peer review process for ongoing activities
should be established throughout ORD for both intramural and extramural
exploratory research activities.
6. Finding; Exploratory research problems are diverse and require a
wide variety of talents. Many sources of such expertise exist throughout
the country in the form of Federal laboratories, university centers,
Federal contract centers, and other institutions. These sources can be
utilized along with internal EPA laboratories to fill research gaps
and to conduct an expanded exploratory research activity.
-------
Recommendation: In the near term, EPA should draw upon and utilize
existing institutional resources as one method of filling research gaps.
Approximately five to ten centers of expertise should be supported pri-
marily at existing institutions with specialized expertise. New centers
should be established only when unique circumstances are present. Approxi-
mately, $500,000 to $1 million will be required annually to support each
center. A large Federal Contract Research Center for long-term research
should not be established solely to support EPA activities at this time.
Such a center would delay opportunities to utilize existing centers parti-
cularly those in the Department of Energy. No new legislation would be
required to implement this recommendation.
7. Finding; This study has concentrated on activities pertinent to EPA's
mission. However, man is exposed to harmful substances through many sources
—the natural environment, the work place, food and other consumables.
It is apparent that the need to assess total exposure from all sources is
expanding rapidly.
Recommendat ion; In the long-term, activities may be needed to address
a broader and expanded number of environmental, occupational, and consumer
problems on an integrated basis. Activities of this type may require a
research capability beyond that of existing institutions. A new institu-
tional mechanism significantly larger than those required solely for EPA's
mission may be necessary in the future. New relationships with private
sector research laboratories may also need to be explored. These trends
should be monitored and associated research needs documented. Further
consideration should be given to a new and expanded institutional mechanism
at a later date.
8. Finding; Exploratory research requires a stable fiscal and managerial
atmosphere to be productive.
Recommendation: The Assistant Administrator for R&D in consultation
with the Administrator and other Agency officials should define the resource
level for exploratory research within the ZBB process. Stable funding
should be provided to assure research continuity over long periods.
Competition for resources should occur within the exploratory research
category.
-------
3. INTRODUCTION
EPA was established to protect the environment and the American public
against possible threats posed by physical, chemical, and biological agents.
To pursue this mission, EPA (1) establishes criteria, standards, and guide-
lines to control environmental pollutants; (2) takes enforcement actions to
ensure compliance with the Agency's regulatory actions; and (3) maintains
monitoring programs to assess changes in pollution levels and emissions
over time. In addition, the Agency provides support for municipal treatment
facilities, and for State and other environmental progams. A significant
input to all major Agency decisionmaking in these areas is the quantity and
quality of its scientific and technical information. Congress has recognized
this need for information and the important link between research and regu-
latory functions by authorizing EPA to conduct Research and Development
through the 11 different acts. The Office of Research and Development (ORD)
is the EPA unit specifically charged with conducting most of the Agency's
research under these legislative mandates.
In carrying out its responsibilities, ORD has recognized a need to
balance near-term research objectives in support of regulatory and opera-
tional programs with longer-term objectives to stimulate advances in the
environmental sciences. From its inception, however, EPA has been driven
by legislation to meet short-term regulatory deadlines. These regulatory
responsibilities along with limited resources have created an atmosphere
that requires, a significant portion of the R&D program to be oriented
toward short-term regulatory problems. Long-term activities, though impli-
citly considered important, have not received sufficient recognition. This
problem has been identified in two different studies: one by the National
Academy of Sciences (NAS) [see Section 9, Bibliography, Item number 18] and
the other by Congress Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) [see Section 9,
Bibliography, item number 19].
The Senate Committee on Environmental and Public Works, which shares.
these concerns, included in the FY 1978 Research Development Authorization
Act a requirement for EPA to report to the President and the Congress con-
cerning the desirability and feasibility of establishing a national environ-
mental laboratory or system of laboratories to assume or supplement long
term environmental research. Specific recommendations are requested on:
• types of research to be carried out by such laboratories;
• coordination and integration of research to be conducted by such
laboratories with research conducted by existing Federal or other
research labs;
-------
• methods for assuring continuous long-range funding; and
• other administrative or legislative actions necessary for establish-
ing such a laboratory.
This report has been prepared in direct response to this Congressional
request.
-------
4. STUDY OBJECTIVES AND APPROACH
The major objective of this study is to examine the need and feasibility
of establishing a single laboratory or network of laboratories for conduct-
ing long-term or exploratory environmental research. For the purposes of
this study, a laboratory or system of laboratories was interpreted to
include (1) development of in-house expertise within ORD's existing labora-
tory system; (2) creation of new government owned, contractor operated
research centers (GOCO) or utilization of existing ones; (3) development
of university centers of expertise or utilization of existing ones; and (4)
use of individual grants and contracts specifically aimed at conducting
exploratory environmental research.
This study aims to determine which of these mechanisms is most appro-
priate for conducting exploratory environmental research in EPA. Such a
mechanism should be tailored to the ongoing and future exploratory environ-
mental research efforts in the Agency. It should also be a mechanism that
can function within the framework of the Agency's organizational structure
without violating any legislative or institutional constraints placed on EPA.
As a result, the following tasks were undertaken:
• Quantification of the exploratory research currently being conducted
in ORD and identification of gaps where future ORD exploratory
research should focus.
• Analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of various mechanisms
for conducting exploratory research.
• Recommendations as to the appropriate mechanisms for EPA in light of
current and future exploratory research activities and legislative,
organizational, and institutional considerations.
To prepare this study, the Acting Assistant Administrator for Research
and Development, Dr. Stephan Gage, formed a task force of EPA scientists and
managers in October 1977. Members of the task force were selected because
of their widely varied backgrounds. They included persons with experience
in EPA, its predecessor agencies, other agencies such as NASA and AEC, and
industry and university research programs. Selections were also based on
experience with problems in a number of different environmental media and
in several scientific disciplines. One member of the task force was also a
staff member of EPA's Science Advisory Board. The task force used interviews
and questionnaires as the principal devices to gather data in the support of
the above tasks.
-------
For the first task, (quantification of current EPA exploratory research),
working definitions of basic, anticipatory, and exploratory research were
developed in consultation with EPA's Science Advisory Board. These defini-
tions were incorporated into a questionnaire forwarded to ORD's 15 labora-
tory directors. The questionnaire specifically requested each laboratory
director to make a major division of his laboratories activities into
either exploratory research or regulatory/operational support R&D. Within
each major category, a designation concerning the funds dedicated to inhouse
and extramural efforts was also requested. These data were later used as
one measure of the applicability of each mechanism available to EPA for the
conducting of exploratory research and development. Additional questions,
including a request to identify research gaps, are presented in Figure 1.
For the second task analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of current
mechanisms used (by the government for exploratory research), in-depth
interviews were conducted with key officials in relevant government agencies,
private research institutions, and universities. These interviews focused
specifically on (1) determining examples of successful long-range research
efforts, (2) determining the management structure associated with each
successful mechanism, (3) estimating the level of resources required to
sustain each mechanism, and (4) determining the potential applicability of
each laboratory system to the exploratory research efforts of EPA.
Achievement of the first two tasks laid the foundation for the third
(recommendations on exploratory research). It was recognized that any
recommendation must reflect a consideration of EPA's operational con-
straints. The senior staff in EPA headquarters and ORD laboratories were
thus interviewed to identify organizational, institutional, or legislative
constraints that could conceivably affect the viability of candidate
exploratory research mechanisms.
The results from this round of interviews and the first two tasks were
then consolidated to arrive at the findings and recommendations presented
in this report.
Finally, it must be noted that assembling quantitative data for this
type of study is extremely difficult. Hence the findings presented in
the report flow primarily from subjective judgments rather than vigorous
quantitative analyses. Also, the short time period allowed for the report
precluded in-depth examinations of the scientific programs conducted by
the many agencies and institutions contacted during the study. No judgments
were made about the quality of the science associated with each institution.
-------
1. What is the existing research mix within your laboratory, i.e., between
in-house (long-term, fundamental and anticipatory research and direct
research in support of regulations) and extramural (long-term, funda-
mental, and anticipatory research and direct research in support of
regulations) research?
FY 1977 ($ and MY)
In-house Total Extramural Total
a. Long-term/Fundamental/ a. Long-term/Fundamental/
Anticipatory Research Anticipatory Research
b. Research in Direct Support b. Research in Direct Support
of Regulations of Regulations
2. What are the essential ingredients that should be considered in developing
a long-range fundamental research activity?
3. What are the unique circumstances at your lab that would drive you
to pick a particular extramural laboratory system and corresponding
management approach?
4. If you were directing ORD, what type of management system would you
utilize in a fundamental research program in planning and allocating
resources, reviewing proposals, and monitoring projects?
5. What environmental long-term fundamental research gaps exist that
should be addressed by ORD's existing labs or supplemented by an
expanded national laboratory system, i.e., Federal Control Research
Center's University Centers, etc.?
Figure 1. Questionnaire for ORD Lab Directors
-------
5. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT IN EPA
History
EPA was created in December 1970 by Executive Order No 3. This order
assigned to the new agency the major environmental regulatory components of
five separate Federal agencies. These components included 30 laboratories
and field sites, many of which formed the nucleus of the research and
development organization of the new agency. Typically, the staffing and
facilities of these laboratories were structured to provide the scien-
tific and technical support required for implementation of specific,
single-media-oriented environmental laws. There were very few intermedia
activities, and the long-term and anticipatory research was not a signifi-
cant ingredient of the program.
In the past 7 years, ORD has made a continuum of changes in attempting
to integrate the diverse elements of previous groups into a balanced organi-
zation to support the Agency in implementing existing laws and to provide
research to guide the development and formulation of new environmental
policies, legislative initiatives, and regulatory actions. From its
inception ORD recognized that its research functions should include a broad
responsibility to conduct research programs of an exploratory and long term
nature. But, the legislation of the early seventies created significant
demands for scientific and technical information to support development of
regulations and enforcement actions. Programs directed at filling short
term regulatory needs clearly required priority during these years.
Today, ORD is made up of a headquarters staff and 15 laboratories.
(Appendix A provides a description of the present ORD). The director of
each laboratory reports to the Assistant Administrator for Research and
Development through one of the four following Deputy Assistant Admini-
strators' Offices:
-Health and Ecological Effects
-Air, Land, and Water Use
-Energy, Minerals, and Industry
-Monitoring and Technical Support
ORD includes approximately 1,700 permanent personnel positions and adminis-
ters a budget of approximately $320 million per year. The staff includes
some 60 different professional disciplines. Program resources, as described
later in this chapter, are balanced between short-term regulatory requirements
and longer-term needs in proportion to the primary functions of the above
offices.
10
-------
In fiscal 1979, this program will represent only one-fifth of the Federal
efforts on basic and applied environmental and natural resources research
(see Section 9, Bibliography, Item 19). Thus there is growing recognition
that EPA must utilize the research expertise and results available in other
agencies and must develop mechanisms to accomplish this need.
EPA has taken this charge seriously and has signed numerous interagency
agreements aimed at utilizing the capabilities of other agencies. One of the
most successful experiments to date in interagency coordination has been the
Federal Interagency Energy/Environmental Research and Development Program.
This program, which was launched in 1974, has involved 17 Federal agencies
cooperating under EPA leadership. Funding for the program has averaged about
$100 million per year from fiscal 1975 on. Another more recent example is the
cooperative effort of Administrator Costle, and the heads of the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration, the Food and Drug Administration, and the
Consumer Product Safety Commission. Under their leadership, an interagency
regulatory liaison group was formed to maximize the coordination of regulatory
and other activities within each agency. This group has already begun sharing
information on ongoing research projects, initiating joint research planning,
and acting to assure the transfer of research results. In the future, inter-
agency cooperation of this type will continue to represent an important
responsibility of EPA.
The Research and Development Process
The language adopted in the Environmental Research Development and
Demonstration Act of 1978 indicates that Congress recognized that all EPA
research and development programs have some inherent long-term components.
In fact, research and development activities, whether in EPA or other insti-
tutions are all on a continuum wherein various stages cross-fertilize and link
with one another.
In the Defense Department, these stages are known as research, develop-
ment, testing and evaluation (RDT&E). In other agencies, the terms, "basic",
"applied", and "development activities" are utilized. Regardless of the
terminology, it is important to recognize that these various research and
development activities cannot be arbitrarily separated, but must be closely
tied to each other. It is rare that basic research, beginning in isolation,
produces results that applied R&D activities utilize in a seguential fashion.
More often, the need for advances in basic understanding is perceived by
applied programs, and this need is translated into increased basic research
activities. The flow of ideas and results is an iterative process. It
involves the amalgamation of new facts with old ones and a resynthesizing of
the whole. At the laboratory scientist level, the applicability and ultimate
use of much basic research may at times remain obscure. But there is always
the possibility that any discovery may become the life blood of applied
mission programs.
11
-------
In EPA, R&D activities are grouped into three categories, which are
defined as follows:
a. Exploratory R&D: Research conducted primarily to develop funda-
mental knowledge applicable to the solution of currently intractable
problems or scientific questions; or, research aimed at identifying
or understanding environmental problems that are on the horizon but
for which no specific regulatory activity is currently scheduled.
b. Regulatory/operational support R&D: Research done in response to
identified program or regional office operation requirements; or,
research designed to enhance or confirm agency, program, or regional
objectives but not immediately required in support of scheduled
regulatory actions. This type of R&D also includes technical
assistance support services in response to ad hoc needs or special
requirements that cannot be planned through the normal planning
cycle.
c. Assigned mission R&D: Research performed in response to missions
specifically assigned to EPA by the White House, Congress, or
Office of Management and Budget beyond the general requirements
of the Agency's enabling legislation. (Examples include the
Interagency Energy/Environment Program and the Biological and
Climate Effects of Radiation Program—BACER.)
In this context, the principal components of exploratory research are
defined to include basic environmental, anticipatory, and applied research.
Basic Environmental Research. Basic environmental research is conducted
primarily to develop new environmental knowledge and principles. It
is not usually directed at a specific environmental problem; rather,
it seeks new laws and understanding that can be used to define and
predict the relationship between environmental factors and physical,
chemical, and biological phenomena. Basic environmental research is
not usually conducted in support of a specific regulatory action, but
it does serve as the basis of scientific knowledge to be employed by
applied research programs that support the Agency's mission and as a
source of information for anticipatory research activities. Basic
environmental research objectives may not always be well-defined, and
the applications may be difficult to predict. The activities usually
take considerable time, but the specific length of time needed for a
project is difficult to predict. (In this context, basic environmental
research does not include research that is directed solely toward
advancing the state of knowledge in a specific discipline such as
mathematics, but it does include research in a single discipline that
is relevant to the mission of the Agency.)
Anticipatory Research. Anticipatory research identifies or charac-
terizes a problem on the horizon that may be only faintly perceived
and for which no specific regulatory decision or action is planned.
It is aimed at determining whether or not something should be done
12
-------
to avoid a crisis, and whether a more formal research effort should
be established. Anticipatory research includes the analysis of emerg-
ing industrial, agricultural, transportation, and urban trends; forecasts
of significant environmental insults; and investigations of the nature
and scope of environmental problems. This research may ultimately result
in the establishment of a regulatory support research and development
program. The time necessary to conduct this research varies but the
horizon the activities are scanning will be long-term.
Applied Research (Advanced Concept Development). Applied research
explores the feasibility and utility of basic research results. It
extends basic results into pilot efforts to test, develop, and confirm
concepts and tools under different conditions. The time frame for
conducting this effort, is uncertain but more predictable than for
basic research. Applied research links basic activities to applied
regulatory support research and development oriented studies.
For the purposes of this report, the universe of activities correspond-
ing to the congressional long-term program includes all exploratory research,
whether it is basic, anticipatory or applied. The long-term program also
includes all activities in the regulatory/operational support R&D category
that require long periods of time or span a broad time horizon. A broader
scientific definition of exploratory research has thus been adopted for the
purposes of this study. Note that EPA's programs are not presently budgeted
by these categories.
Resource Trends
A history of ORD resources for the past 7 years is shown in Table 1.
Funding for core activities (except for energy related research) has remained
relatively stable in recent years. The number of personnel positions has de-
clined, but the workload has increased across ORD. Total funds per authorized
position have more than doubled from fiscal 1973 to fiscal 1977. The result
is a trend toward reduced intramural programs and increased extramural con-
tract and grant activities.
Exploratory research estimates for fiscal 1977 for each major program
office and associated laboratory are presented in Table 2. Exploratory
resource levels were estimated by each laboratory director, based on the
previously presented definitions of exploratory research and regulatory/
operational support R&D. In all cases, judgments were required about the
applicability of the research activities to presently planned regulatory
actions, the length of time required to conduct the research, and the nature
of the research. Table 2 indicates that all laboratories and all principal
research offices are presently conducting some exploratory research. This
effort is significant and exceeds early perceptions about the amount of
exploratory research conducted by ORD. It also requires a further elabora-
tion of how these estimates were derived.
13
-------
Table 1. HISTORICAL TREND OF ORD RESOURCES
FY-71 FY-72 FY-73 FY-74 FY-75 FY-76 FY-77 FY-78**
Total New 01,764.0 123,437.3 129,807.1 144,320.9 282,444.2* 252,423.6 241,949.4 245,666.1
Obligational
Authority
(in thousands
of dollars)
Authorized 1379 1705 1914 1814 1750 1750 1727 1729
Personnel
*$134,000 Energy/Environment program added
**FY-78 Carter Budget
-------
Table 2. FY-77 EXPLORATORY RESEARCH FUNDS BY ORD
PROGRAM OFFICE AND LABORATORY (EXCLUDES ENERGY FUNDS)
($K)
Total Total % of
Exploratory Research $ (K) Exploratory Research
19%
10%
19%
0
11%
29%
20%
0
19%
69%
30%
51%
21%
0
42%
40%
11%
68%
25%
37%
38%
0
34%
0
31%
Office of Monitoring
EMSL - RTF
EMSL - CINC
EMSL - LV
HQ - OTHER
TOTAL
and Technical Support
$ 1,016
550
1,724
—
2,740
$ 5,221
5,611
9,065
5,169
25,067
Office of Energy, Minerals and Industry
IERL - RTF
IERL - CINC
HQ - OTHER
TOTAL
Office of Air, Land
ESRL - RTF
MEPL - CINC
ESRL - Athens
ESRL - Ada
HQ - OTHER
TOTAL
Office of Health and
HERL - RTP
HERL - CINC
HERL - Corvallis
HERL - Duluth
HERL - Narragansett
HERL - Gulf Breeze
HQ - OTHER
TOTAL
Other
ORD Total
1,320
1,500
—
2,820
and Water Use
11,642
5,774
3,925
1,320
—
22,661
Ecolgocial Effects
9,291
950
5,271
1,550
1,280
1,074
19,416
$ 47,637
4,426
7,561
2,516
14,504
16,946
19,094
3,925
1,320
3,718
53,581
22,805
8,222
7,706
6,162
3,477
2,831
5,297
66,725
3,251
152,628
15
-------
First, it must be recognized that the nature of the definitions was a
significant factor in influencing the results of this survey. Second, as
laboratory directors utilized the definitions to examine their programs, a
common operational approach evolved by which the degree and definitiveness
of EPA program office support became a governing criterion. Thus, the
estimates presented in Table 2 were developed not only on the basis of the
scientific definitions presented previously, but also on the basis of how
well each laboratory could couple its programs to program and regional
office needs. Finally, it must be noted that although an estimated $47
million was designated for exploratory research, in fiscal 1978 only $4.7
million actually fell in the basic environmental and anticipatory category.
Thus, most resources placed in the exploratory category were advance con-
cept development programs that ORD Laboratory Directors viewed supportive
of potential long-term regulatory need but not applicable to short-term
requirements.
Further examination of Table 2 indicates that the percentage of resource
dedicated to exploratory efforts varies with the mission of each office and
laboratory. For example, the Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
in Cincinnati indicated that only 10 percent of its research was exploratory
because its programs are heavily oriented toward developing standard mea-
surement methods and quality assurance programs to support the regulatory
programs of the Office of Water and Hazardous Material (Effluent Guidelines,
etc.). The Environmental Sciences Research Laboratory in Research Triangle
Park indicated that almost 70 percent of its resources were dedicated to
exploratory efforts. Again, this figure reflects the major emphasis of the
laboratory, which, in this case is to develop advanced air pollution measure-
ment methods and to conduct basic research into atmospheric transport and
transformation processes. Further insights are possible by examining more
closely a program that estimated that 30 percent of its resources were in
the exploratory category. The Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
in Cincinnati, is representative of this type of split program. It has a
Solid Waste Research Division, a Water Supply Research Division, and a
Wastewater Research Division. Within this laboratory, the Wastewater
Research Division examined its projects and placed the following kinds
of activities within the exploratory category:
1. Studies to assess the potential reuse of municipal effluents
discharged aboved water supply intakes. These studies to characterize
effluents and stream water quality are coupled with other studies to
determine the health impacts on populations exposed to wastewaters.
These studies were conducted in advance of Agency regulations or
policies on wastewater reuse.
2. Studies to examine the chemical structure of toxic substances and
to determine correlations with the effectiveness of different treatment
processes. (The purpose is to be able to estimate the effectiveness of a
treatment process on an untested toxic substance whose chemical structure
can be described.) Present regulations on publicly owned treatment works
require only treatment for biological oxygen demand (BOD) and suspended
solids (SS).
16
-------
3. Studies of methods to control stormwater runoff. At present, EPA
does not have regulations to control stormwater runoff.
These examples, though clearly not at the basic end of the research
spectrum, were designated as exploratory because they matched the defini-
tion of applied research in support of advanced concepts and because they
did not closely support a planned regulatory initiative. Additional
examples of exploratory activities conducted in the past, often before
regulatory actions were planned, are presented in Appendix B. These
projects are typical of the type that allowed ORD's laboratory staff to
be involved in research activities that enhanced their ability to conduct
applied research or to provide technical assistance. When initiated, these
projects were often not perceived to be important by program offices
because the problems were long-term, multimedia, or high risk ventures.
Finally, it should be noted that often different programs are conducted
within each laboratory. This is the case within the Municipal Environmen-
tal Research Laboratory, the Health Effects Research Laboratory in Research
Triangle Park, and a number of other laboratories. Each program may have
relatively different proportions of exploratory research and regulatory/
operational support R&D. For example, Health Effects Research Laboratory's
program to determine the health effects of pollutants from transportation
sources conducts relatively few exploratory activities. In contrast, the
environmental carcinogen program conducted by the same laboratory is almost
totally anticipatory in nature. Such distinctions are masked by the data
presented in Table 2, but the co-existence and intermingling of exploratory
research and regulatory/operational support R&D within the same laboratory
is important to the vitality of each ORD Laboratory and must be recognized.
17
-------
6. AREAS NEEDING ENHANCED EXPLORATORY RESEARCH
The previous chapter documented the program areas and laboratories
that are conducting exploratory research activities. This chapter high-
lights briefly research areas that either are not being addressed or could
be enhanced by a supplemental effort. The list of potential needs is
considerable, however, and the task force therefore determined that areas
identified in this report should meet the following tests:
1. To be included, either (1) the research need should not be addressed
by the present program, or (2) the complexity of the problem or the
present level of effort should indicate that supplementary efforts
are warranted.
2. The research problem should require a long-term, sustained support
rather than a short, intensive burst of activity. Also, the
research results should be needed to stimulate applied research
activities, and the results should be basic enough to support
environmental control requirements regardless of policy or organi-
zational changes.
In adopting this approach the task force recognized that many worthy
research areas would be excluded. It also recognized that the passage of
time would allow new insights to be developed into areas needing enhanced
efforts. The present areas that need enhanced exploratory research are as
follows:
. Atmospheric processes and effects
Chemical and physical methods of measurement
. Development of risk assessment methodologies
. Ecosystem dynamics
. Epidemiology
. Fundamental mechanisms involved in land application of wastes
. Global problems
. Groundwater research
. Integrated exposure assessments
. Pollution control processes
. Screening techniques and early indicators of toxicity
. Socio-economic research
This list should be considered representative only. New and perhaps more
important needs will most certainly evolve in the future.
18
-------
The list was developed on the basis of suggestions from Laboratory
Directors, discussions with scientists and environmental managers in non-EPA
laboratories, and interviews with other EPA personnel. In almost all areas,
the actual research could be conducted through either extramural or intra-
mural efforts. Many factors such as personnel ceilings and the availability
of qualified staffs and facilities must be considered before implementation
can proceed.
The sequence in which the activities are selected or implemented will
depend on a number of factors, including availability of funds, presence
or absence of scientific capability, guidance from the scientific community,
activities of the Interagency Regulatory Liaison Group (IRLG), and the
Agency's perceptions of research areas needing increased attention.
The Interagency Regulatory Liaison Group is addressing research and
development collaboration, risk assessment procedures, and the development
of compatible testing and epidemiology standards and guidelines. These
efforts are designed to improve the usefulness of the information developed
by the four agencies as well as the private sector. Close cooperation of
this type is required with other pertinent agencies.
Integrated Exposure Assessments
Man is exposed to substances in the environment from multiple sources,
(water, air and food, for example) that come in contact with human tissues
through inhalation, ingestion, and contact with the skin. He is exposed
while in his work place, home, or recreational environment. Some of the
substances that effect him are manmade, and others are natural background
materials. Responsible regulatory approaches must thus require that consid-
eration be given to total exposures and body burden levels. But our ability
to collect and analyze data in order to derive exposure assessments, except
under unique conditions, is limited. When attempts are made to estimate past
exposures, even over the last 20 years, the job becomes even more difficult
and points up the need for reliable monitoring methods.
In the future, all regulatory agencies responsible for protecting man
will likely require total exposure information. Such data are essential to
epidemiological studies and ultimately to an integrated regulatory approach.
The development of techniques and methods to obtain and analyze exposure
data will require a sustained effort over a long period of time. Multi-
disciplinary teams of biologists, toxicologists, industrial engineers, and
mathematicians will be required to develop and test exposure assessment
approaches.
Epidemiology
One method of evaluating human health risks is through epidemiological
studies. Such studies are inherently long-term, require the use of good
exposure data, and must consider many variables at one time. Recently,
19
-------
data gathering and statistical approaches to manipulate data have become
increasingly complex to assure that scientifically valid experiments are
conducted. Yet when regulatory decisions must be made, good epidemiologi-
cal information is not always available.
EPA uses epidemiological studies along with chemical and toxicological
tests to determine human health risks. The spectrum of epidemiological
research needs within this area includes (1) the development of unproved
methodologies, (2) the systematic collection and storage of demographic,
genetic, and body burden data bases, (3) the improvement of statistical
techniques, (4) the conduct of prospective epidemiological studies to
explore potential correlations between environmental pollutants and diseases
such as emphysema and hypertension, (5) and the conduct of routine studies
with proven methods in support of regulations. EPA's present activities in
this area emphasize the need to develop information for regulatory purposes.
Relatively few studies are directed at improving methodologies.
Closely associated with this research need is a requirement for trained
personnel to conduct research. A study by the Department of Health Education
and Welfare, "Human Health and the Environment—Some Research Needs," (see
Section 9, Bibliography, Item number 8) indicated that epidemiology training
was primarily at the post-doctoral level. The output of scientists was
small and varied between 3 and 10 during the period 1966 to 1975. The out-
put in 1975-76 increased to 20. This study noted that though the demand
for epidemiologists could not be quantified, demand substantially exceeded
the supply and would increase in the future with new laws and industrial
research activities. In the near term, additional research support will
further stress this manpower shortage; but in the long run, additional
research will complement training activities to assure that the national
need for this scientist is met.
Socio-Economic Research
The need for socio-economic research that is aimed at environmental
control programs has been recognized within EPA, the academic community,
and industry, as illustrated by a recent report by the National Research
Council (see Section 9, Bibliography, Item number 6). There has been less
agreement about what should constitute the nature of such a program. Recent
activities have been focused on a limited program to improve methodologies
for estimating the benefits of pollution control and to develop incentives
to supplement regulatory actions. This approach, undertaken because of
limited and unstable resources, does not provide for comprehensive analyses
of many important problems or for the continuing development of methodologies
and information to support a national environmental protection program.
Within this area, several research needs (in addition to further devel-
opment of benefits/cost methodologies) appear to warrant a continuing
commitment. These needs include (1) the continuing development and eval-
uation of improved incentives, including economic tools for pollution control
decisionmaking, (2) development and evaluation of actual field-level testing
of alternative implementation approaches, and (3) development of methods for
20
-------
coupling economic approaches with other research approaches (epidemiology,
for example). Furthermore, a great deal more research needs to be conducted
on the mechanisms used by the private sector to respond to government regu-
lation. An understanding of typical response patterns would enable EPA to
make more precise estimates of the anticipated economic impact of proposed
regulations. It might also enable the agency to formulate regulations in
ways that would minimize adverse economic effects. For example, it could
be hypothesized that EPA consistently overestimates the anticipated private
sector costs of complying with regulations because it underestimates the
ability of the private sector to adjust to regulatory actions. An exami-
nation of the economic effects of past regulatory actions would shed light
on the extent to which this hypothesis is true.
The development of this research area must be carefully considered
prior to implementation.
Groundwater Research
The Nation's groundwater constitutes one of its most valuable natural
resources. Groundwater supplies the domestic water needs of 20 of our
100 largest cities and 96 percent of rural America. At least half of the
population relies on groundwater for drinking water.
Though the nature of groundwater makes it available in various quan-
tities in most locations, it is subject to contamination from a wide variety
of sources, which are also widely distributed. Dealing with such contami-
nation is complicated by the extremely slow movement of pollutants through
the subsurface environment. Decades or centuries may pass before groundwater
quality can be naturally restored after contamination.
Our scientific, engineering, and economic goals should thus be primarily
directed toward the protection of groundwater quality rather than its restora-
tion. Protection of the groundwater resource must be based on understanding
the subsurface as a pollutant receptor and on systematic development of
information concerning the transportation and transformation of pollutants in
both the unsaturated and saturated subsurface environments. The development
.of sampling technology, analytical methodology, and contaminant indicators
is prerequisite to definitive groundwater studies.
EPA recently announced the expansion of its groundwater research program
in Ada, Oklahoma. The prime objective of this internal program is the
development of source control criteria documents to support regulatory needs.
The complexity and size of the problem are such, however, that complementary
longer-term efforts are required to stimulate the near-term program and
strengthen its scientific foundations. Close coordination with the U.S.
Geological Survey is also required.
21
-------
Fundamental Mechanisms Involved in Land Application of Wastes
In order to take better advantage of the opportunities for land appli-
cations, more information is needed on a number of processes. We must be
prepared to answer questions such as: (1) What are the long-term impacts of
waste materials on soils, surface waters, and groundwaters? and, (2) What
are the potential health threats?
A fundamental understanding of the transport, transformation, and fate
of materials in waste is essential if we are to adopt these practices on a
large scale. Materials that need investigation are heavy metals, organic
compounds, other toxic substances, and nutrients. Studies are needed to
determine the fate of organics in soils, formulations of degradation pro-
ducts, effects on soil structure and vegetation, movement through the soil
profile, and changes in those compounds as a result of chemical, physical,
and biological activity of the soil systems. The interactions of metals and
other toxics in soils require similar investigations. Also needed are new
approaches for detoxification effluents from publicly-owned waste treatment
works and new definitions of critical parameters that identify and charac-
terize degrees of toxicity.
Finally, problems associated with the management of nutrients, (parti-
cularly nitrogen and phosphorous) must be resolved. A primary objective
is to manage soil treatment systems so that nutrients are both utilized
and prevented from entering groundwater and surface water in harmful
concentration.
The need for health information related to land application practices
is equally important. These needs center on information related to (1)
uptake and effects of metals, organics, and other toxic substances on food
chain and man, and (2) viruses, parasites and bacteria that may enter
groundwater systems. (This area is an important segment of groundwater
research as well.) Some food chain studies are being undertaken, but to
date these have been limited to only a few food, soil, and pollutant
combinations.
Chemical and Physical Methods of Measurement
Programs to control and abate environmental pollution are critically
dependent on the ability to identify and measure substances in the environ-
ment. As obvious forms of pollution are brought under control, concern is
turning toward the more ubiquitous pollutants present in the environment
at low concentrations. This concern has become particularly acute as the
potential link between pollution and cancer increases and as other more
subtle and far-reaching effects are investigated. These concerns have
presented the measurement method scientists with some severe challenges:
• Methods are now required to qualitatively and quantitatively mea-
sure environmental pollutants present in a background of great
variety. The methods must provide reasonably accurate measure-
ments at concentrations as low as the part-per-trillion level.
22
-------
9 Methods must be made available for the analyzing of soils, sedi-
ments, participate matter, and tissues. All of which present
problems significantly different from the analysis of air and
water samples.
• Methods must be translated into low-cost, reliable devices for
unattended deployment at remote sites. Widespread use of such
devices is necessary in progams requiring continuous surveillance
and monitoring.
To meet these challenges, basic studies are needed to accomplish the
following goals:
1. Physical and chemical properties should be determined for sub-
stances that might lead to more selective and sensitive analytical
methods. Studies should also be carried out to provide the basis
for the measuring instruments needed for unattended use in monitor-
ing activities.
2. Sampling methods should be improved to provide for the efficient
sampling of classes of compounds and the selective sampling of
specific compounds. Success in this area would allow analytical
methods to be more readily applicable to the identified measurement
requirements.
3. Our understanding should be improved about the mechanisms that
govern the quantitative analysis of substances adsorbed to or
interspersed in solid materials.
4. Quality control should be provided for all aspects of environmental
measurement.
Global Problems
Formulation of many regulatory strategies within the United States
requires knowledge about worldwide background levels, sources of manmade
and natural pollutants, and movements and transformations of pollutants.
In most instances, relatively little is known about what constitutes
natural pollutant levels, whether pollutants are increasing or decreasing,
or whether controls within the United States will substantially affect
world levels in light of continuing emissions from natural or industrial
sources in other countries. Impacts of specific activities or trends i.n
other countries, (deforestation, for example) on U.S. environmental
efforts remain largely unknown.
EPA activities in this area are primarily oriented toward supporting
United Nations programs. Global trend and impact analyses within the United
States are not conducted in a systematic manner. Efforts to develop and
store data to support such analyses are equally scattered. Recently, lead,
DDT, transuranic materials, carbon dioxide, freons, mercury, and petroleum
hydrocarbons have emerged as pollutants with worldwide implications. But
in each case, only limited information has been available, and each analyti-
23
-------
cal team has had to develop its own methdology to obtain and analyze data.
A focal point for U.S. efforts would simplify this task. The principal
mission of such an activity could include methodologies for analyzing
global problems and for collecting and storing data on pollution sources
and trends.
Ecosystem Dynamics
Our present knowledge of ecosystem dynamics is mostly descriptive.
Our capacity to quantify changes is limited, and our ability to predict
effects is even less certain. However, some simple ecological principles
are being used to manage the agriculture/ aquaculture/ and silviculture
industries, even though the governing ecological principles are only
partly understood. These management practices have been perfected mainly
through trial and error. Management of the more complicated natural
ecosystems will require greatly increased knowledge of the limiting
parameters of their structure, function, and dynamics.
To develop this knowledge, long-term studies on the structure of eco-
systems under stressed and unstressed conditions should be conducted, and
the abiotic and biotic components that structure the system should be
described.
Investigations of the functions and dynamics of ecosystems are required
to define the adaptive and variable characteristics of the normal systems.
Results can then be used to quantify the responses of selected ecosystems
to stress perturbations and determine their reversibility. Ecosystem
responses include changes in species composition and the reduction of
community-level functions, including decreased productivity, simplified
structures, and decreased species diversity.
Information from such studies is not developed in a short period of
time. Sustained support for dedicated professionals is necessary to
assure that long-term objectives are achieved.
Pollution Control Processes
The development and adoption of new pollution control technology is a
complex process. The private sector has an important role to play in fos-
tering and developing new processes. Advances may begin with the identi-
fication of a generic concept—electrostatic separation, flocculation,
chemical reaction, or biological digestion for example. From the initial
concept, development proceeds through various laboratory, pilot-, and
full-scale experimentations and demonstrations until a reliable form of the
technology is established. As the concept matures, the number of applica-
tions may increase, and with it, the number of specific technical problems
that must be solved.
EPA's control technology research, development, and demonstration program
has in the past been involved in the full range of activities associated with
developing new control options. Near term applied and development activities
have received the highest priority. The efficiency of the program (i.e., the
24
-------
number of problems solved with a special level of resources) is controlled by
two aspects of the quality of the research. The first is engineering innova-
tion or the ability to invent or find new concepts for removing pollutants.
The .second is the sophistication of the researcher in understanding the
basic science (i.e. physics or chemistry) of the technical problems
impeding successful demonstration of a technology.
Many of the problems in separation or pollution control can be assessed
from the point of view of their basic physics and chemistry. To sustain
applied activities, exploratory studies are needed to advance basic under-
standing of the mechanisms that limit our ability to reduce, recover,
and/or reuse pollutants. Studies of advanced separation and concentration
techniques are needed to improve the treatability of wastes. Research
efforts should first include principles in separation and concentration
techniques such as activated carbon, reverse osmosis, etc. Also, innova-
tive detoxification methods that reduce environmental impacts of residuals
should be assessed.
The applied nature of the past efforts has not provided the opportunity
for research that would underpin the present state of the art or catalyze
the scientific community to consider conceptually new control concepts and
waste management options. Because regulatory incentives for advancing the
knowledge are at best limited, the technology reservoir is running dry.
The state of the art for pollution control has become increasingly
sophisticated as the push increases for higher efficiency and pollution-
specific effectiveness. The ability to adapt known treatment techniques
to varying uses is hampered, however, by a lack of understanding of the
basic chemical, biological, and physical processes that govern the treat-
ment process. This research problem is a candidate for longer-term
exploratory research and can influence the general applicability of
available technology.
Multimedia (i.e. air, water and land) pollution control is a management
option with potential for economic and technological benefit. Since the
EPA regulatory mandates promote individual media control programs, the
opportunities to exploit combined control at any one point source site
(i.e. industrial, municipal) are limited. Research to identify and
characterize these multimedia opportunities should be conducted on a
limited basis to provide feasibility criteria for influencing the future
direction of Agency regulatory programs. The increasing complexity of
pollutant control will likely require future consideration of more inno-
vative waste management alternatives such as combined and multimedia
environmental control.
Screening Techniques and Early Indicators of Toxicity
Passage of the Toxic Substance Control Act has created significant
demands (1) for techniques to screen new chemicals and (2) for information
that relates easily recognized disease to more subtle physiological effects.
The first area requires reproducible, sensitive, and rapid tests that can
25
-------
be used to assess the potential toxicity of the many chemicals, compounds,
and mixtures that are entering the environment. In this area, exploratory
research is needed to find new and or improved ways to screen for human/
ecological effects. Scientific criteria that link toxicological effects
with measurable reactions must be provided so that screening methodologies
can subsequently be developed for regulatory or research use.
In the second area of physiological effects, improved understanding of
the physiological, biochemical, and pathological processes associated with
toxicity is required to relate sublethal effects identified in early-stage
testing with longer-term studies. From this information, models can be
developed that reduce the need for using long-term, full-duration exposure
studies as the primary assessment tool.
The development of new chemicals is not likely to abate in the future.
The corresponding need to develop screening techniques and improve the
understanding of toxic effects will not be easily accomplished. This kind
of research requires the slow building and extension of existing scientific
knowledge as well as long-term, stable resource commitments.
Atmospheric Processes and Effects
Atmospheric processes and effects research provides information that
relates to several important EPA needs. It is particularly important
because potentially large social impacts could occur as efforts to prevent
significant air quality deterioation were forward. This type of research
provides information on the link between air pollution sources and recep-
tors, and on atmospheric effects such as visibility degradation. Mathe-
matical models incorporating transportation and transformation terms of
atinospheric processes are an important end product of this research.
Individual tasks include theoretical and basic experiments in photo-
chemistry, laboratory simulations of atmospheric processes in smog
chambers and wind tunnels, and rather large field experiments involv-
ing a number of investigators.
Information from these studies contributes to the resolution of many
environmental problems: Visibility deterioration, Influence of halocarbons
such as the aerosol propellant freons on lower atmosphere photochemistry
and stratospheric ozone, Greenhouse effect of CO-, Natural air pollutants,
Self cleansing of the atmosphere, Air pollutant transport across state and
national boundaries, Transfer of air pollutants to soil and water by both
dry and wet deposition, Transfer of pollutants in water to air by volati-
lization or aerosolization, Transport and lifetimes of toxic substances
(including carcinogens) in the air, Formation of toxic substances
in the air by photochemical or nonphotochemical atmospheric reactions,
Effect of air pollution on climate and weather, Effect of complex terrain
on ground level air pollutant concentrations, Transport and transformations
of pollutants from diesel-powered vehicles in the vicinity of high traffic
density roadways, Transport and transformation of pollutants emitted to
the air by new energy technologies.
26
-------
Development of Risk Assessment Methodologies
Risk assessments are an essential component of all regulatory deci-
sions. These assessments must follow the development of information on
exposures and toxicity, and they involve a mixture of statistical, scien-
tific, and public policy considerations. In some instances, the benefits
conferred by a suspected substance, process, or facility can be achieved
by alternatives, in which case the regulatory decision may be clear-cut.
In many other cases, important benefits may be lost, and the size of the
risk must be balanced against the benefits. Insufficient data is a common
deficiency that plagues almost all assessments, but the development of
methodologies to properly assess risks may represent a more formidable and
complex problem.
Recently, the need to make assessments regarding carcinogenic substances
in food, water, and air has focused attention on assessment procedures. A
determiation of acceptable daily intakes of potentially carcinogenic sub-
stances is an important part of this procedure. The methodologies for making
this determination have been reviewed in the literature. Interest in carcino-
genic risk has aroused attention, but environmental assessments are much
broader, and the need for unproved methodologies is much more pervasive.
Improved risk assessment methodologies are required to assure that proper
balances are achieved and over protection does not become a common approach.
27
-------
7. LABORATORY MECHANISMS USED BY OTHER AGENCIES
Many mechanisms exist to ensure that long-term research is conducted.
To determine which mechanism is most appropriate for EPA, we first performed
an extensive review of past studies that had evaluated the effectiveness of
(1) intramural laboratories, (2) individual grants and contracts, (3) Uni-
versity Centers and, (4) Government-owned, contract operated research
centers (GOCO's). Though the literature provides some insights into each
mechanism's function, it does not suggest that any mechanism should be
initially rejected. Instead, it was determined that the viability of a
particular mechanism for long-term research depends on the unique set of
circumstances governing the operations of the sponsoring organization.
From this point, in-depth interviews were conducted with approximately 90
key people in the following 20 organizations:
National Cancer Institute
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Department of Agriculture:
Cooperative State Research Service
Agricultural Research Service
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Department of Defense (Navy)
Food and Drug Administration
National Science Foundation
Department of Energy
Electric Power Research Institute
Universities:
Cali for n i a-Dav i s
Rhode Island
Wyoming
Oregon State
Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory
Battelle Northwest Laboratories
Oakridge National Laboratories
28
-------
Organizations were selected to include a wide variety of activities and
organizational forms. Organizations devoted to basic research, combina-
tions of basic and applied research, and development of engineering
methodology were included. Sizes ranged from a one-office operation to
multi-million dollar facilities. Institutional settings ranged from
universities to private corporations. Interviews were conducted with
organization directors, middle managers and bench scientists.
The agencies contacted used combinations of intramural laboratories,
GOCO's, university centers, or individual grants and contracts. All
of the agencies attempted to select the best mechanism for a particular
type of work, and all recognized the interrelationship between basic,
fundamental or anticipatory research and research of a more applied
nature.
One of the better statements on the relationship between basic and
applied research comes from a recent report of the Director of the National
Science Foundation (see Section 9, Bibliography, Item number 22).
The interaction of basic and applied research gives us insight into
the nature of technological innovation. It strikes me that we are dealing
with a sort of intellectual riverine system. As the flow of ideas nears
its terminus, it is a forceful and purposeful thing. We cannot, however,
overlook the fact that this great river must rise in thousands and tens
of thousands of creeks and brooks at the higher elevations and remotest
limits of its drainage basin. It is the myriad contributions of the
latter that give the river its ultimate force and, quite simply, this is
why we must nurture the earliest sources if we are to safeguard the
creative force of the entire process.
Intramural Laboratories
Federal agencies that have inhouse laboratories have confidence in them.
It is there that the few Nobel laureates within the Federal government work,
and it is there that future research managers develop. Most studies empha-
size the need for an intramural capability. The Report to the President on
Government Contracting for Research and Development, Bureau of the Budget
(McNamara Report), [see Section 9, Bibliography, Item number 17] states
that:
"The management and control of the Federal research and development
effort must be firmly in the hands of full-time Government officials
clearly responsible to the President and the Congress.
Subject to this principle, many kinds of arrangements—including
both direct Federal operations and the various patterns of contrac-
ting and granting now in use—can and should be used to mobilize the
talent and facilities needed to carry out the Federal research and
development effort. Not all arrangements, however, are equally
suitable for all purposes and under all circumstances and discri-
minating choices must be made among them by the Government agencies
having research and development responsibilities."
29
-------
The Department of Defense Laboratory Utilization Study of April 1975,
Office of the Director of Defense Research and Engineering (see Section 9,
Bibliography, Item 5) had the following reference:
"This study found, as did the Service studies, that there is a vital
role for the (intramural) laboratories not satisfactorily available
from other sources such as industry, universities, FCRC's, Headquar-
ters staffs, Systems Commands, etc. The combination of attributes
possessed by the laboratories qualified them to play a unique and
needed role in the military planning function, especially to the
planning of systems development acquisition and usage and the plann-
ing of the Technology Base program to support future systems develop-
ment. Laboratories also help the services to be "smart buyers" by
providing technical advice and supervision to the services interaction
with industry, by providing an alternative source of technology so that
their existence serves as a source of stimuli to industry to perform
well, and by providing centers of excellence in areas of little or no
industrial interest."
Several advantages and disadvantages of intramural laboratories were
identified during the interviews. Primary advantages were that they:
—provide a continuing center of expertise related to the
agency's mission
—have the ability to guide or monitor work done by grant or
contract
—can manage major developmental activities.
Disadvantages are that they:
—are difficult to change concerning personnel because of civil
service regulations
—lack flexibility in changing mission
—have ceilings on government salaries that slow recruitment at
top levels.
Extramural Mechanisms
Agencies and Congress, through its legislative initiatives, have provided
a number of methods for conducting research and development. Most agencies
have settled on variations of individual grants, university centers, con-
tracts, and GOCO's. Parts of some agencies clearly separate the intramural
research staff from grant and contract activities, but most combine the
activities in varying degrees. A brief description of the extramural mechan-
isms follows.
30
-------
Individual Grants and Small Contracts
As can be determined, all agencies use the individual grant and contract
mechanism to further their research. Individual grants and contracts are
characterized by their size and method of selection for funding. Grant
applications usually represent the ideas of an individual and are evaluated
through a peer review system which includes reviewers from outside government.
Contracts are defined by scopes of work developed through various methods by
the agencies and usually are evaluated by agency personnel.
Grants and small contracts have the advantage of utilizing the talents
of individuals or small groups outside government to meet national research
needs. The work is usually disciplinary in nature and directed toward
results amenable to the disciplinary approach.
Other advantages are:
The scientific approach can be excellent if the grants are
carefully selected
There is no long-term Agency commitment
The investment is relatively small
The small grants may be the only mechanism to support
the ideas of an individual; and this opportunity may be
unique
Individual grants are relatively easy to end though the
judgement to end them may be difficult.
The disadvantages of the individual grants or small contracts are
that it is sometimes difficult to build a cohesive program through this
mechanism alone and it is sometimes difficult to mount an interdisci-
plinary effort.
In summary, the individual grants and small contracts represent
the creeks and brooks of the riverine system, but they do not neces-
sarily result in an organized river system.
Un ivers ity/Institutional Centers
Agencies can choose broadly based, multidisciplinary university
centers covering a considerable part of the agency's interest, or they
can select centers to deal with specific areas of research to supple
ment the government laboratory's capability. Indeed, some agencies have
chosen both paths. The essential ingredient for a center is a firm base
within a university or institution that has a common interest in the public
31
-------
need as perceived by the agency. This common interest must be shared by
leaders within the institution and the agency. Efforts on the part of the
Federal establishment to create excellence within an academic institution
in the absence of a strong leader and firm institutional base have been
unsuccessful. Infusions of money into such institutions have also failed.
Once the common interest is established, there are many choices. The
agency can support centers broadly oriented to many of its interests or
targeted to specific purposes. The agency can either support a core group
with salaries, equipment, and facilities and require the center to gain any
additional support through individual grants and contracts, or it can support
most of the cost of the center. The cost of a center ranges from $100,000 to
$1.5 million per year.
University centers are widely used by the National Institutes of Health,
National Institutes of Environmental Health and Safety, National Oceanogra-
phic and Atmospheric Administration's Sea Grant Program; and other agencies
are beginning to use this mechanism. The centers can vary in size from
one supported center director to a laboratory employing one to two hundred
people. Many centers established by one agency now receive support from
several others. In such cases, the agencies providing secondary support
have been able to capitalize on the talent pool created by the foresight
of the original sponsor. Advantages of university centers are that they:
—are sources of high quality science
—can mount a multidisciplinary effort
—provide talent not available to the agencies elsewhere
—may not require extensive facilities
—may be dedicated to an agency mission
—are within reasonable cost ($500,000 to $1.5 million
a year)
Disadvantages are that they:
—may sit uncomfortably within a discipline-oriented academic
institution
—depend strongly on center director for success
—take time to establish
—can cause conflict with individual researchers'
teaching function
—may be difficult to redirect or terminate.
32
-------
Covernment-Owned, Contractor-Operated Centers (COCO)
GOCO institutions date back to 1936, when they were formed in quick
response to Federal needs in areas where the Federal laboratory capability
was thought to be insufficient and where no single university source was
able to meet the needs.
GOOO's are useful in situations where research goals demand large,
integrated programs of long duration, where the work may be sensitive or
unique (skills not otherwise available), and where interdisciplinary
studies predominate.
GOCO's and Federal contract research centers (FCRC's) (facilities
furnished by contractor) have similar characteristics. The centers are
established to address a requirement that is not met by existing Federal
laboratories or a possible consortium of universities. The money require-
ments are substantial—$50 to $150 million or more—and the contract time
can vary from 1 to 5 years. The Government may or may not own the facilties.
The Center may derive all of its money from one agency (or part of an agency),
or it may seek funds from any source. An agency may support a small part
of a center, or it may make a substantial and continuing investment in such
a center.
Federal contract research centers have been started for a variety of
reasons. The Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory, for example, was
founded to deal with the problems of faulty artillery shells in World War
II. The AMES Laboratory tested aircraft during the same period. Functions
of both laboratories have changed and expanded over the years.
In the past 40 years, the use of FCRC's and GOCO's has spread throughout
the Federal establishment. In an Office of Management and Budget draft
Circular on Research and Development Acquisitions, it is recommended that:
(a) sufficient intramural skills be present in the sponsor agency to
determine whether it is appropriate to give a specific piece of work to the
FCRC, (b) effectiveness, efficiency, and work output of an FCRC be evaluated,
(c) an effective program for cost control be established, and (d) a periodic
review of the FCRC's operation be provided.
The advantages of FCRC's and GOCO's are that they:
—can bring together resources not available elsewhere
to address a problem area
—can move projects from a basic research effort into
practice
—are large enough to provide multidisciplinary staff.
33
-------
The disadvantages are that they:
—require a large investment to support (2000 to 3000 people)
personnel and facilities. (For example, a major FCRC or GOCO
would require more money and staff than EPA now has for its
entire research program)
—are difficult to terminate and may be slow to change direction
or mission
—need a clearly described and firmly controlled mission (both
in scope and duration) to provide a basis for proper management
—need strong financial management
—may move toward self-perpetuation and survival, which reduces
flexibility.
Within the organizations contacted, the Electric Power Research Insti-
tute stands out as an example of a sizable institution not funded by the
Federal government. The institute conducts activities that range from basic
research to large development projects on a budget of approximately $190
million funded by the electric power industry. The present staff totals 350
technical and 150 support personnel. The relative newness of the institute
(1973) provides some important insight. At the time it was established, the
institute recognized that it wanted to develop information quickly. It
elected to use outside contracts of varying sizes as the principal mechanism
for conducting its research activities. The institute did not establish an
internal laboratory, but rather hired a cadre of senior professionals to
manage its program. Considerable flexibility to recruit and pay for this
senior team was essential to its success, and the utilization of existing
organizations was important to a rapid start.
General
The essential ingredients in selection of an extramural research
mechanism appear to be as follow:
1. The agency must articulate its goals,
2. The agency must examine those goals and decide that meeting
them requires the assistance of institutions outside govern-
ment,
3. The agency must consider the merits of individual grants,
university centers, GOCO's and FCRC's
4. The Agency must select the mechanism(s) and institutions thought
to match their own goals most closely.
34
-------
8. OPTIONS FOR CONDUCTING EXPLORATORY RESEARCH
The analysis thus far has revealed a number of directions in which
EPA could channel it exploratory research efforts. This chapter presents
the generic options that the task force considered in arriving at its major
conclusions and recommendations. Specifically, there are four options for
exploratory research that must be carefully examined. These are:
1. Separation or integration of exploratory research and regulatory/
operational support R&D;
2. Separation or integration of intramural and extramural exploratory
research activities;
3. Use of the existing laboratory network or consolidation into "super
labs" for conducting exploratory research; and finally
4. Continued use of existing mechanisms or development of new mechanisr
for the performance of extramural exploratory research.
This chapter will explore these four options while taking into consid-
eration the following factors:
• The past experience of ORD/EPA in planning, implementing, and
reviewing environmental research
• The experience of other Federal agencies engaged in exploratory
research through use of contract laboratories
• The experience of other Federal agencies in establishing
independent research centers within universities
• The advantages and disadvantages of existing FCRC's, university
centers and individual contract/grant programs
• The management approach necessary for each of the above research
mechanisms
• The environmental research most suitable for each type of research
laboratory.
35
-------
Separation or Integration of Exploratory Research and Regulatory/Operational
Support R&D
As shown earlier, approximately 30% of all EPA research and development
funds are currently devoted to exploratory research. All ORD laboratories
conduct various levels of both exploratory research and regulatory/opera-
tional support R&D. Currently, no administrative or program differentia-
tions exist between these two types of research, which are integrated at
the laboratory level. Our investigations have shown that within most other
Federal agencies, basic, applied, and development activities are commonly
located together at the laboratory level. However, some agencies have created
administrative mechanisms to separate these research areas. Examples include
the Department of the Navy, which has a six-point budget wherein basic and
exploratory activities are two elements, and the Department of Energy, which
recently established a separate Office of Research to direct more fundamental
activities. Some laboratories were found to separate basic research from more
applied research. Within the large contract research laboratories visited by
the task force, two of five had a separate division devoted entirely to basic
research. It should also be recognized that nationally a pseudo separation
occurs between exploratory and applied research because a large portion of
U.S. exploratory research is being conducted by academic institutions.
Since both the separation and integration approaches appear to be viable
methods of conducting exploratory research, the task force examined both
approaches. If ORD were to separate these functions at the laboratory level
into a dual laboratory system, some of the major advantages might be as fol-
lows:
1. It would be easier to isolate researchers from the quick-response
needs that so often accompany regulatory/operational support research
and development and assure a stable atmosphere.
2. The exploratory research would have more organizational visibility,
which would demand increased accountability.
3. Bottom-up planning for exploratory research would be facilitated.
The major advantages of continued integration of exploratory efforts
with more applied efforts are as follows:
1. Better control could be exercised over research projects that involve
aspects of both exploratory and applied research.
2. A strong synergism would continue to occur between the two types
of research.
3. No significant organizational changes or personnel transfers would
be required.
36
-------
The advantages of continued integration at the laboratory level appear
to outweigh the advantages of separation into a dual laboratory network.
However, the task force does feel that it is warranted to have exploratory
research separated administratively from regulatory/operational support
R&D. The functional separation of these two activities would weaken
existing efforts. In particular, the isolation of exploratory activities
into a number of separate or super-labs is not warranted because explora-
tory scientists would then be insulated from their regulatory/operational
support R&D peers at other locations. Such an arrangements would be
both financially and scientifically expensive. Both types of scientists
need to be able to communicate on a regular basis to enhance each others'
approaches. The exploratory research could be planned, implemented, and
reviewed by ORD. The regulatory/operational support R&D could be planned
and reviewed by both ORD and the program offices and for the most part
implemented by ORD.
Separation or Integration of Intramural and Extramural Exploratory
Research Activities
Within EPA's predecessor agencies, extramural research activities were
often managed separately from intramural research programs. After EPA
was formed, extramural and intramural activities were integrated and
managed as a total program aimed at achieving a particular objective. For
the most part, this integration into a total program has been successful in
EPA. The extramural activities are considered to be extensions of intra-
mural efforts, and they are aimed at filling information gaps not easily
satisfied by intramural researchers. The success of this approach depends
on having an adequate, well qualified intramural staff to plan, develop,
and review extramural activities. The staff must do an effective job of
managing the extramural program and must also act as an information
transfer link through which new information flows into the Agency.
Our interviews have shown that independent extramural programs are being
conducted successfully in isolation from intramural programs by a number of
organizations (e.g., the National Science Foundation). The primary reason
for the success of either method lies in the purpose and the nature of the
research programs. The purpose of EPA's overall research effort is to
develop information to support regulations, whereas the National Science
Foundation's overall objective is to develop basic scientific knowledge.
The former type of research requires directed and integrated intramural and
extramural activities to achieve the regulatory objectives of EPA. The
latter activity, on the other hand, is not always directed toward specific
application objectives.
The Task Force believes that it is appropriate for EPA to integrate the
intramural and extramural research activities conducted in support of regu-
lations. These shorter-term activities must be closely managed and directed
toward filling information gaps for regulatory purposes. The Task Force
also believes that this arrangement should apply to exploratory efforts to
assure the transfer of research results. But, because these activities
will focus on longer-term objectives, a greater degree of freedom in the
management of extramural projects is possible, and scientist to scientist
37
-------
contact between EPA and the academic community should be an important means
of assuring that coordination is achieved. Closer coordination of projects
funded by other agencies should also be established.
Geographical Consolidation of Intramural Exploratory Research Laboratories
The 15 existing EPA laboratories are located in nine different geogra-
phical sections of the United States. Another mode of operation for this
laboratory system would be to physically locate all intramural research at
one or more laboratories dedicated solely to exploratory research. (For
example, to minimize the movements of people, one lab could be at Cincin-
nati, one at Research Triangle Park, and one at another location). Though
one can argue that this arrangement would increase synergism among the
various media and discipline-oriented exploratory scientists, it would
have the following disadvantages:
1. Programs and researchers not currently located at the three selected
laboratories would have to be moved at significant costs and delays
in research outputs.
2. A separation would be created between exploratory research and
regulatory/operational support R&D.
3. A duplication of some personnel, facilities, and equipment would
occur in the separation of exploratory and regulatory laboratories.
Unless a broad new exploratory research area not currently addressed
by the existing ORD laboratory network is identified, the present laboratory
system appears to be a satisfactory method for conducting research
in EPA.
Extramural Exploratory Research Options
EPA currently employs three mechanisms for its extramural research acti-
vities. The Agency conducts most of its extramural research through contracts
and grants to universities, private institutions, and other Federal laborator-
ies. EPA does not have its own contract laboratories* (such as the National
Laboratories of the Department of Energy) or any centers within universities
(such as those sponsored by the National Insitutes of Health). However, EPA
does utilize the National Laboratories to conduct individual projects through
passthrough funds and by the Interagency Agreements (IAG) mechanism. These
cooperative interagency approachs should be expanded for exploratory research.
Recently, another mechanism known as mission contracts has been encouraged
within EPA because of the limited contract management personnel needed to
administer numerous small projects.
*EPA does provide support along with the Food and Drug Administration
for the National Center for Toxicological Research.
38
-------
Traditionally, EPA relied on these mechanisms because they were
proven adequate to meet Agency needs for producing information, primarily
in support of regulations. But, exploratory activities require a stable
atmosphere, top quality scientists with long-term professional commitments,
and good facilities. Exploratory research must also be administratively
isolated as much as possible from the day-to-day pressures of the regula-
tory programs. The individual grant is therefore a good mechanism for
supporting talented scientists working on specific exploratory research
problems. The Task Force recommends that individual grantees continue to
be utilized as one approach to conducting this type of research. Indivi-
dual grants allow scientifically diverse and geographically separate
innovative researchers to contribute to the national environmental effort.
Other exploratory activities associated with the research areas iden-
tified in Section 6 require a larger research team than available through
a single grantee. To conduct programs of this magnitude, other Agencies
have traditionally used either FCRC's or institutionally based centers.
If we consider the development of either of these two mechanisms within
the framework of EPA, the following observations can be made about the
FCRC mechanism and scientific centers.
First, an environmental FCRC would:
—require $100,000 to $150,000 to operate (this would necessitate
a 40-to 60 percent increase in ORD's budget);
—require 2 to 5 years to become operational because of staffing and
facility requirements;
—to some extent deplete the professional staffs of many existing
Federal, university and private labs;
—require an increase in EPA management and administrative personnel;
—duplicate many facilities now in existence.
—delay efforts aimed at allowing EPA to expand utilization of large
centers such as those operated by they Department of Energy.
Second, a system of centers located in universities and other insti-
tutions would:
—enable EPA to take advantage of existing research groups
throughout the country;
—be compatible with the size of EPA's present programs;
—be implemented quickly because only moderate staff increases would
be required and no large facilities other than equipment would be
needed;
39
-------
—be able to target one specific problem rather than a broad number
of problems and managed with relative ease;
—be implemented at a reasonable cost of between $500,000 to $1
million per year for each center.
The Task Force therefore recommends that institutionally based
centers be used if EPA significantly expands its extramural
exploratory research program into any of the areas identifed
in Section 5.
In summary, this analysis has lead the task force to the following
conclusions:
o Exploratory research and regulatory/operational support R&D should
continue to be linked at the laboratory level.
o The present EPA laboratory system should not be reorganized into a
few super exploratory laboratories and other laboratories directed
to regulatory/ operational support R&D.
o Intramural and extramural exploratory programs must utilize scien-
tist-to-scientist contacts to assure that research conducted by
these two mechanisms remains integrated.
o Small centers dedicated to specific research problems are the best
mechanism within EPA's framework to supplement exploratory research.
(Such small centers would match the nature and size of the problems
needing to be addressed at this time.) Five to ten such centers
should be established.
o A large Federal Contract Research Center for long-term activities
should not be established at this time.
o The problems associated with protecting man from substances con-
tained in water, air, and food are expanding rapidly. In the
long-term, a significantly larger and different institutional
mechanism may be warranted to match this evolving need. These
requirements should be monitored and re-evaluted in the future.
40
-------
9. BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Biomedical Science and Its Administration, Office of Science
and Technology
2. Carcinogenic Risk Assessment, Science Magazine, Volume 198,
No. 4318, November 1977
3. Contract Research and Development Adjuncts of Federal Agencies,
An Exploratory Study of Forty Organizations, Denver Research
Institute, University of Denver, March 1969
4. Defense Systems Management College, Program Management Course,
Individual Study Program
5. POD Laboratory Utilization Study, Office of the Director of
Defense Research and Engineering, 1975
6. Environmental Research Assessment, National Research Council
7. Future of Federal Contract Research Center, Harvard Business
Review, Dean G. Gogginton and Gordon Milliken, April 1970
8. Human Health and the Environment—Some Research Needs, U.S.
Department of Health, Education and Welfare, December 1976
9. Management of the Federal Contract Research Centers, Department
of Defense, Director of Defense Research and Engineering,
June 1976
10. Military Cost Analysis in the FCRC's, 1950-1975, Institute for
Defense Analysis, October 1975
11. Problems in the Management of Federal contract Research Centers,
Mitre Corporation, September 1970
12. Report of the Defense Science Board, Task Force of Federal Contract
Research Center Ulitization, Office of Director of Defense
Research and Engineering, February 1976
13. Report of the Secretary's Advisory Committee on the Management of
National Institutes of Health Research Contracts and Grants,
U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, March 1966
41
-------
14. Report on Research, Development, Monitoring and Technical
Support System of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, August 1977
15. Report on Possible Conflicts of Interest Involving Center
for Naval Analyses, Subcommittee on Center for Naval
Analyses of the Committee on Armed Services, United
States Senate, November 1971
16. Report on the Presidential on Government Contracting for
Research and Development, Bureau of, the Budget, May
1962, (McNamara Report)
17. Research and Development in the Environmental Protection
Agency, Volume III, National Academy of Sciences, 1977
18. Review of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environ-
mental Research Outlook, FY 1976 through 1980, August 1976,
United States Congress, Office of Technology Assessment
19. Special Analysis, Budget of the United States Government,
Fiscal Year 1979, Executive Office of the President,
Office of Management and Budget
20. Technical Laboratory FCRC (APL/JHU) and the Navy W5AM
Program Office, Defense System Management College,
November 1976
21. Twenty-Sixth Annual Report, National Science Foundation,
1976
22. Utilization of Federal Laboratories, Committee on Scien^
and Astronautics, 1968
42
-------
10. APPENDICES
Appendix A. Office of Research and Development Program Structure
The Office of Research and Development functions as the principal scien-
tific component of EPA under the direction of one of the six assistant
administrators of the Agency. Its fundamental role is to produce scientific
data and technical tools on which to base sound national policy in the devel-
opment of effective pollution control strategies and reasonable environmental
standards. ORD seeks to answer the following questions:
• How can pollution be identified, measured, and monitored?
• What are the relationships between pollutant discharges and environ-
mental degradation?
• What levels of pollutant discharge from specific sources can be
permitted while still attaining defined ambient quality standards?
• What are the health and ecological effects of pollutants on people,
other life forms, and the inanimate environment?
• What technologies are available for controlling pollution and what are
their characteristics?
• How can environmental quality best be maintained and improved?
The Office of Research and Development Program is carried out by about
1,700 employees with a current budget of $250 million per year. The Office
staff is composed of professionals in 60 disciplines located throughout the
Nation in 15 major laboratories and one headquarters office. All personnel,
scientists, and engineers contribute to a research program that consists of
inhouse activities as well as programs shared with the academic community,
the private sector, and numerous Federal, State, and local agencies. The
organization of ORD is presented in Figure A-l .
EPA's research program is multidisciplinary and multimedia in nature.
For purposes of budgetary authorization and appropriation, programs are
classified along media and/or categorical lines as follows:
Air • Water Supply
Water Quality • Toxic Substances
Solid Waste • Energy Research
Pesticides
Radiation
43
-------
OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL
SCIENCE ADVISOR
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR
ASSOCIATE ASST. ADM.
OFFICE OF
NNING 1 REVIEW
CARCINOGEN ASSESSMENT
GROUP
OFFICE OF FINANCIAL
« ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICES
OFFICE OF MONITORING
AND
TECHNICAL SUPPORT
OFFICE OF ENERGY
MINERALS AND
INDUSTRY
ENVIRONMENTAL
MONITORING & SUPPORT
LABORATORY -
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK
ENVIRONMENTAL
MONITORING & SUPPORT
LABORATORY •
CINCINNATI
OFFICE OF AIR
LAND AND WATER
USE
INDUSTRIAL
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
LABORATORY •
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK
INDUSTRIAL
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
LABORATORY •
CINCINNATI
ENVIRONMENTAL
MONITORING i SUPPORT
LABORATORY •
LAS VEGAS
ENVIRONMENTAL
RESEARCH INFORMATION
CENTER-
CINCINNATI
OFFICE OF HEALTH
AND
ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
RESEARCH LABORATORY -
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK
MUNICIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL
RESEARCH LABORATORY -
CINCINNATI
ROBERT S. KERn
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
LABORATORY -
ADA
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
LABORATORY
ATHENS
Figure A-l. ORD Organizational Chart
HEALTH EFFECTS
RESEARCH LABORATORY
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK
HEALTH EFFECTS
RESEARCH LABORATORY -
CINCINNATI
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
LABORATORY •
COnVALLlS
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
LABORATORY -
OULUTH
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
LABORATORY •
NAfWAOANSETT
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
LABORATORY -
GULF BREEZE
-------
However, pollution problems often have broad impacts. For example,
various control systems for air pollution emissions may produce residual
that become solid waste or water pollution problems. Therefore, ORD is
structured and operates along parafunctional lines (i.e., research to deter-
mine the health effects of exposure to pollutants is grouped in one program'
area). The ORD research program is made up of the following components:
Health effects research assesses health hazards resulting from environ-
mental pollution in several media and/or categories including air, water,
pesticides, radiation, water supply, and toxics. Research problems are
classified according to exposure levels, perceived effects, and the need to
take regulatory actions to protect man.
Ecological processes effects research focuses on determining the effects
of atmospheric, aquatic, and terrestrial pollutants on the structure and
function of ecosystems and their biotic and abiotic subcomponents.
Transport and fate of pollutants research examines the biological, chemi-
cal, and physical phenomena affecting pollutants as they migrate from source
to receptor and otherwise transform and persist in the ambient environment.
Empirical and analytical techniques are developed that relate atmospheric/
aquatic/terrestrial pollution to sources and receptors.
Minerals, processing, and manufacturing research addresses point sources
of pollution from industrial sectors, especially those from mining, manufac-
turing, service, and trade industries that extract, produce, and process non-
energy materials into consumer products. Methods to control and prevent
environmental degradation resulting from accidental spills of selected
materials are also researched.
Renewable resources research encompasses development of total management
systems to control air, water, and land pollution resulting from the production
and harvesting of food and fiber and their related residual wastes. Predictive
methodologies are developed, and probable trends in production of renewable
resources and resulting environmental impacts are assessed. An example is the
demonstration of pest management strategies to minimize the usage and runoff
of agricultural pesticides.
Waste management research focuses on the prevention, control, treatment,
and management of pollution resulting from wastewater discharges from com-
munity, residential, or other nonindustrial activities, including urban
runoff. Problems associated with the collection, transport, and management
of solid wastes are also researched. This subprogram provides technical
information to support the Agency's operating program in construction grants,
comprehensive water quality planning, and solid and hazardous waste manage-
ment.
45
-------
Waste supply research, development, and demonstration activities provide
the technology and management criteria necessary to maintain dependably safe
surface and groundwater supplies of drinking water. Health effects resulting
from contaminants in drinking water are also studied.
Environmental management research develops improved procedures for plan-
ning, implementing, enforcing, and assessing cost-effective environmental
protection strategies for particular problem areas such as air and water.
Institutional, economic, and decisionmaking problems faced by governmental
multimedia environmental programs at local, State, and regional levels are
analyzed. New management methods for implementing environmental protection
plans are evaluated.
Characterization and measurement methods development provides methodo-
logies and measurement instrumentation for all pollutants (pesticides, toxic
substances, industrial chemicals, petrochemicals, combustion products, etc.)
in air, land, and water (surface and groundwaters). Research deals with the
basic physical and chemical parameters of pollutants and development and/or
adaptation of instruments to detect and quantify pollutants.
Measurement, techniques, and equipment standardization research provides
reference methods, sampling procedures, and monitoring systems so that stan-
dardized techniques are available for monitoring the environment.
Quality assurance provides methodologies and criteria for establishing
validated measurement systems and conducts quality control activities to
assure the intercomparability of all monitoring dasta. This subprogram
provides standard reference materials and samples, develops quality control
guidelines and manuals, conducts onsite evaluations of analytical laboratories,
and makes interlaboratory performance checks to assure that legally defensible
data are produced by Agency laboratories.
Technical support is a scientific and technical consultative service
provided to other organizations within the Agency to solve immediate and
short-term problems through the use of specialized expertise and facilities.
The activities typically require analytical measurement or monitoring, but
other program expertise is also available.
Technical information research is aimed at managing and coordinat-
ing the effective dissemination and transfer of the findings and
products of the Research and Development program to users within the
Agency and throughout the public and private sectors.
Energy extraction and processing technology covers the charac-
terization of pollutant sources, assessment of environmental problems,
and development of control techniques to mitigate the environmental
impact of the extraction and raw material processing of energy fuels.
Solid, liquid, and gaseous fuels, as well as advanced energy sources
such as uranium and goethermal sites are considered.
46
-------
Energy conservation, utilization, and technology assessment aims
to ensure adequate energy production from fossil fuels with minimum
damage to environmental quality. Integrated technology assessment
activities identify environmentally, economically/ and socially
acceptable alternatives for meeting national energy demands.
Energy health and ecological effects research determines the
environmental effects of energy extraction, transmission, conversion
and use so that criteria can be developed in a timely manner to
protect human health and the ecosystem. Identification of pollutants
released by energy-related industrial operations and determination of
their impact on the environment aid in defining the pollution control
requirements for energy, producing operations.
Appendix B. Examples of Exploratory Research Advances
1. The Environmental Research Laboratory in Corvallis, Oregon, completed
research in 1976 that identified the cause and effect relationships
of air supersaturation in Pacific Northwest rivers. Super-saturation
or gas bubble disease was killing millions of salmon each year. The
results of this research provided information that led to establish-
ment of State standards and development of methods to prevent gas
bubble disease. The research staff received the EPA Gold Medal Award
for this work.
2. The Environmental Sciences Research Laboratory in Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina, initiated research on freons and other halogenated
organic air pollutants in the late sixties and early seventies. This
action was started as a result of concern for the potential effects
that could result from increasing use and release of these materials
to the atmosphere. The work was done inhouse and through two research
grants. The information developed contributed to our understanding of
the problem of stratospheric ozone depletion, which was clearly iden-
tified in the mid 1970's.
Also in the late 1960's and the early 1970's, air pollution researchers
recognized that total suspended particulate matter (TSP) was not an
adequate air pollution specification. Exploratory research conducted
by the Environmental Sciences Research Laboratory, Research Triangle
Park, on chemical and physical characterization of suspended particu-
late matter has produced techniques for size discrimination as well as
elemental and compound analysis. The availability of these techniques
to investigate problems identified at a later date made it possible to
obtain important information on sulfate formation in power plant
plumes, on sulfuric acid aerosol emissions from catalyst-equipped
vehicles, and on the Denver "brown cloud."
Dr. Paul Altshuller and other scientists have received numerous awards
from scientific societies in recognition of their contributions to the
field of atmospheric chemistry.
47
-------
3. The Environmental Research Laboratory in Athens, Georgia, developed
a computer program that uses laboratory data to predict the photo-
chemical transformation rates of organic pollutants in rivers, lakes,
and impoundments. Already in use by several laboratories in the
United States, Canada, and Europe, the model allows environmental
scientists and managers to predict the photochemical behavior of
a pollutant without costly and time-consuming field studies of a
specific water body.
Dr. John M. McGuire and Dr. Arthur W. Garrison of the Athen Sciences
Research Laboratory received the EPA Silver Medal for their excep-
tional achievements in demonstrating the applicability of gas chro-
matography/mass
Dr. John M. McGuire and Dr. Arthur W. Garrison of the Athens Environmen-
tal Sciences Research Laboratory received the EPA Silver Medal for their
exceptional achievements in demonstrating the applicability of gas chro-
matography/mass spectrometry to the identification of specific organic
water pollutants, and in developing an economical system for identifying
organic pollutants from their mass spectra on a nationwide basis.
4. In the early 1970'.s, researchers from both the Municipal Environmental
Research Laboratory in Cincinnati and the Environmental Research Labora-
tory in Corvallis, Oregon, tested the widely held hypothesis that removal
of a critical nutrient would restore a highly eutrophic lake. In this
project, the critical algal growth-promoting nutrient phosphorus was
removed by advanced treatment of municipal wastewater while permitting
such treated effluent to continue to flow into the lake. The treatment
facility at Ely, Minnesota, achieved a discharge with less than 0.05mg/l
of phosphorus in the final effluent. This is the only full-scale plant
in the world to achieve this low phosphorus residual. The project has
increased our understanding of the development of the dynamics of lakes
and the factors involved in their restoration.
5. The Solid Waste Research Division in Cincinnati recently developed and
tested a new process whereby microwave plasma detoxifies hazardous wastes
by decomposition into their elements or into simple compounds. The pro-
cess was applied successfully at 5 to 7 Ib/hr rates in the laboratory to
concentrated forms of malathion, PCB's, phenylmercurie acetate, Kepone, and
other materials. Currently, a pilot scale verification is underway wherein
a 15-kw unit with a 10 to 30 Ib/hr capacity for liquids and solids is being
built, including all refinements needed for continuous operation.
6. The Water Supply Research Division in Cincinnati, through a number of
grants, has developed methods for quantifying virus aggregation and
determining its effects on disinfection rates. Virus aggregation or
clumping was suspected as being a signficant factor in deviation of
virus disinfection results from those expected theoretically. These
methods are being used in further research to determine the physical
and chemical factors that influence formation and dissolution of viral
aggregates. The results of these studies have important implications
for other aspects of environmental virology, such as the development
of improved virus detection methods and the understanding of disin-
fection processes.
48
-------
7. The Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory in Cincinnati has demon-
strated the feasibility of using chemical pumping techniques for concen-
trating metal ions in industrial wastewaters via coupled transport
membranes. This new technology uses the phenomenon of chemical pumping
whereby metal ions from a dilute solution are transported through a
microporous membrane to a concentrated one. The process derives its
energy from hydrogen ions flowing through the membrane in the opposite
direction. This action is made possible by an organic exchange agent
contained within the pores of the membrane, acting as a shuttle. This
compound combines with the metal ions on the dilute side, transports the
ions through the membrane and exchanges them for hydrogen ions on the
concentrated side.
8. The Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory in Las Vegas, Nevada,
has developed the capability for characterizing plumes by airborne moni-
toring. This work added the vertical dimension to the traditional ground-
based air quality network. The technique was used in four locations at
which dispersion of point sources over complex terrain was measured, and
at two locations to measure ozone flux from urban areas.
9. The Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory in Research Triangle
Park, has undertaken fundamental research in the area of combustion
kinetics that has shown that N0x can be reduced by at least 50 percent by
simple combustion modification procedures. This exploratory research
effort is continuing and is the keystone to future regulations for the
content for NO .
49
------- |