CONF-721002
PROCEEDINGS  OF THE  INTERAGENCY
CONFERENCE  ON  THE  ENVIRONMENT

University of  California
Livermore,  California

19  October  1972
                          DISTRIBUTED BY:
                          National Technical Information Service
                          U. S. DEPARTMENT OF  COMMERCE
                          5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield Va. 22151

-------
                         CONF 721002
        PROCEEDINGS
            OF THE
INTERAGENCY CONFERENCE
  ON THE ENVIRONMENT
           October 17-19,1972
          Livermore, California
        Sponsored by U.S. Environmental
               Protection Agency

               U.S. Atomic Energy
               Commission

       Hosted by Lawrence Livermore Laboratory,
               University of California

-------
                                NOTICE

This report  was prepared as an  account  of work  sponsored  by the United Sate*
Government. Neither the United States nor the Uatted Sates Atomic Energy Commission,
nor any  of their  employees, nor  any of their  contractors, subcontractors, or their
employees,  makes any  warranty, exprets or implied, or assumes any legal  liability or
responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, apparatus,
product or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned
rights.

This report has been reproduced directly from,the best available copy.

Available from the National Technical Information Service, U. S. Department of
Commerce, Springfield,  Virginia 22151.


                           Price: Paper Copy  $6.00
                                 Microfiche  $0.95.

-------
                 NOTICE








THIS DOCUMENT  HAS BEEN REPRODUCED FROM THE



BEST  COPY FURNISHED  US BY THE SPONSORING



AGENCY.   ALTHOUGH  IT IS RECOGNIZED THAT  CER-



TAIN  PORTIONS ARE ILLEGIBLE, IT IS BEING  RE-



LEASED IN THE INTEREST  OF MAKING AVAILABLE



AS MUCH  INFORMATION  AS POSSIBLE.

-------
       PROCEEDINGS
          OF THE
INTERAGENCY CONFERENCE
   ON THE ENVIRONMENT
                                    CONF721002
                                 Dittribution Category UC-2
        October 17-19, 1972
        Livermore, California

-------
                                Table of Contents

COMMENTS OF THE PROGRAM CHAIRMAN  	    1
CONFERENCE AGENDA	    5
OPENING REMARKS
     R. E. Batzel	    8
CONFERENCE PAPERS	10
The Federal Government, the National  Laboratories, and the Environment
     W. K. Talley	11
Discussion of the Talley Presentation	21
An Overview of Research in the  Environmental Protection Agency
     S. M. Greenfield	23
Discussion of the Greenfield Presentation	3^
Environmental Standards
     D. S. Earth, W.  F. Durham, C. R. Porter, and J. C. Cross	36
The Development of Technology for Environmental Control
     A. W. Breidenbach	52
Discussion of the Earth and Breidenbach Presentations	69
The Mission and Work  Programs of the  Environmental Studies Division of EPA
     P. W. House	71
Discussion of the House Presentation  	   80
Environmental Modeling - Ecosystems
     N. A. Jaworski and A. F. Bartsch	8l
Discussion of the Bartsch Presentation  	   93
Environmental Modeling of Hydrologic  Systems
     W. N. Fitch	9^
Water System Model Development  and Applications within AEC and NASA Laboratories
     J. R. Eliason	106
The Status of Air Quality Simulation  Modeling
     W. B. Johnson	llU
Atmospheric Modeling  and Environmental Protection Needs
     J. B. Knox	128
Discussion of the Johnson and Knox Presentations
                                                             Preceding page blank

-------
The Land Use and Transportation Impact on Air Quality
     R. A. Venezia	
Discussion of the Armstrong Presentation 	  152
Research Problems and Issues in the Application of Land Use Control to
     Environmental Protection
     K. G. Croke, A. S. Kennedy, and T. E. Baldwin	153
Large Computer Facilities
     J. G. Fletcher	158
Discussion of the Fletcher Presentation	165
Monitoring Environmental Quality
     G. Morgan, G. Ozolins, and W. Sayers	166
Discussion of the Morgan Presentation	176
The EPA Measurements and Instrumentation Program
     A. F. Forziati and L. G. Svaby	177
Monitoring Equipment:  I - Survey of Air Monitoring Instrumentation
     C. D. Hollowell	198
Monitoring Equipment:  II - Survey of Water Monitoring Instrumentation
     S. L. Phillips	.206
Discussion of the Forziati and Phillips Presentations	211
Remote Sensing for Environmental Protection
     J. D. Koutsandreas and R. F. Holmes	212
Remote Sensing of the Environment
     J. D. Lawrence and L. S. Keafer	22k
Discussion of the Holmes and Lawrence Presentations	235
Nuclear and X-Ray Techniques
     W. S. Lyon	236
Discussion of the Lyon Presentation	250
National Water Quality Control Information System (STORET)
     G. W. Wirth and L. C. Wastler	251
National Air Data Branch:  NEDS/SAROAD
     J. R. Hammerle	265
Survey of AEC and NASA Capabilities in Computerized Data Management
     N. B. Gove and V. R. Watson	275
Discussion of the Wirth, Hammerle, and Gove Presentations	28U
Federal Laboratories as Centers of Excellence in the Environmental Sciences -
     A Case Study
     E. J. Croke and J. E. Norco	287

                                          -iv-

-------
Discussion of the Norco Presentation .......................  301
Post-Conference Paper
Cities, States, and National Laboratories - An Account of Productive Interaction
     N. L. Kostyk .................................  302
WORKSHOP REPORTS .................................  3lU
Workshop 1 - Atmospheric Transport Models .....................  315
Workshop 2 - Water Transport Models ........................  323
Workshop 3 - Land Use Planning ..........................  325
Workshop k - Unified Data System ..................... .  .  . .  328
Workshop 5 - Environmental Monitoring .......................  330
Workshop 6 - Remote Sensing ............................  331
Workshop 7 - Advanced Sensing Techniques .....................  333
Workshop 8 - Global Scale Monitoring .......................  336
Workshop 9 - Transfer of Scientists ........................  337
BANQUET PRESENTATION
The National Laboratories and Environmental Research
     Rolf Eliassen ................................  3^0
CONFERENCE SUMMARY
EPA, the National Laboratories, and the Environment
     W. R. Ott  ..................................
CLOSING REMARKS
     R. C. Maninger ................................
LIST OF ATTENDEES ................................. 352
                                          -v-

-------
Comments of the Program Chairman
              -i-

-------
                         COMMENTS OF THE PROGRAM CHAIRMAN
             CONFERENCE GOALS

     These Proceedings are a record of the
Interagency Conference on the Environment,
which was held at the Lawrence Livermore
Laboratory (LLL), Livermore, California, on
October 17-19, 1972.  The conference was
Jointly sponsored by the Office of Research
and Monitoring of the U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and by the U. S.
Atomic Energy Commission (AEC).

     The stated purpose of the conference
was "to promote an effective exchange of
ideas and information on environmental
research between technologists from the AEC
and NASA laboratories and appropriate
representatives from EPA and other federal
agencies".  The intent was to explore ways
by which the capabilities and facilities
of the AEC and NASA laboratories might be
more effectively used to complement and
supplement the existing EPA research program.
In-depth discussions of all environmental
areas of mutual concern to representatives
of EPA and the laboratories are clearly.
beyond the scope of a single conference of
a few days duration.  Therefore, it was
mutually agreed between the Office of
Research and Monitoring and the conference
organizers at T.T.T, that the Interagency
Conference on the Environment would be
limited to three days and the topics to be
discussed would be restricted to environ-
mental modeling, environmental monitoring
and measurements, and storage and analysis
of the resulting data.  These three areas
were considered to be areas in which the AEC
and NASA laboratories had particular exper-
tise which might be of immediate interest
to EPA.

         CONFERENCE ORGANIZATION

     The conference was organized around the
concept that, in order for there to be effec-
tive cooperation between two or more agen-
cies, there must be a mutual awareness be-
tween the persons involved of the capabili-
ties, interests, and priorities of the
agencies involved, as well as any limitations
or restrictions under which they must oper-
ate. In addition, EPA's needs and viewpoints
must always be kept in mind, not only because
it has the primary federal responsibility
for environmental protection, but also to
reduce any tendency for national laboratory
representatives to adopt the "solution
looking for a problem" approach which is
sometimes prevalent in proposed environmental
research.  To accomplish these goals, a
two-stage program was developed for the
conference.

     The first part of the conference was
devoted to the presentation of a series of
papers which were intended to give the
attendees an overview of EPA's organization,
philosophies, and research activities;  a
more detailed look at EPA's interest and
involvement in environmental modeling,
monitoring, and data handling;  and a
description of the collective capabilities
and facilities of the AEC and NASA lab-
oratories in these areas.  The EPA author
in each technical area was asked to write
a "position" paper, describing EPA's
activities in the area, the level of Its
current and near-future research effort,
the adequacy of the present technology,
and particular problems associated with
the area where new or additional research
is needed.  The response to each of these
position papers was a "survey" paper,
written by a staff member from an AEC or
NASA laboratory, who was asked to describe
the collective capabilities and facilities
of the AEC and NASA laboratories which might
be used to complement and supplement the EPA
research activities in the area.  Whenever
possible, a draft of the EPA position paper
was given to the author of the correspond-
ing survey paper in time for him to focus
his paper appropriately.

     The conference organizers realized
that time limitations would not permit
most authors to completely cover the material
in their paper in an oral presentation at
the conference;  most speakers would have
to restrict themselves to a summary of the
highlights of their papers.  So that the
conference attendees might be participants
rather than merely listeners, to allow them
to prepare questions and comments in advance,
perhaps on points that a speaker might not
have time to cover in his presentation,
preprints of all available papers were sent
to prospective attendees several weeks
before the conference.  Unfortunately, many
of the attendees did not receive these
preprints.

     For the second part of the conference,
each attendee was assigned to one of nine
workshops.  The purpose of these informally
structured workshops was to al^ow dialogue
between conference participants who are
mutually interested in specific areas of
environmental research.  Each workshop was
                                           -2-

-------
given a set of questions to collectively dis-
cuss and answer.  These questions were intend-
ed to focus the discussion, not limit it;
the workshops were encouraged to extend their
discussions beyond the points raised in the
questions, and all of them did so.  Each
workshop was asked to generate a written
report, but no particular format was
specified.  Each workshop presented a brief
oral summary of its deliberations during
the final session of the conference.

     Attendance at the conference was
essentially restricted to appropriate
representatives from EPA, the AEC, and the
AEC and NASA laboratories.  A few partici-
pants from other agencies and organizations
were invited because of their particular
expertise or interest in the topics covered
by the conference.  To keep the workshops
from becoming overcrowded, total attendance
had to be limited.  This resulted in some
laboratories sending fewer representatives
than they otherwise would have.

       CONTENTS OF THE PROCEEDINGS

     These Proceedings closely follow the
agenda of the conference.  The papers are in
their final written versions;  some post-
conference revisions have been made in many
of them.  The discussion, if any, of each
corresponding oral presentation is also
included.  These were transcribed from
the tape recordings which were made of all
conference sessions other than the workshops.
Hopefully, no significant confusion will
be caused by points raised in the discussion
of an oral presentation that were not
explicitly mentioned in the written paper.
In a few cases a paper author could not
attend the conference, and the oral pres-
entation was made by an appropriate sub-
stitute.  The speakers are listed in the
Conference Agenda;  the authors are listed
on their papers.

     The reports from the workshops are also
the final versions;  some have been revised
or rewritten since the conference.  Their
formats vary widely, since each of the work-
shops devised its own format.  There was brief
discussion at the conference of some of these
reports and extensive discussion of the re-
port on atmospheric modeling.  Again, these
discussions, as recorded at the conference,
follow the corresponding workshop report.

     Also included are written versions of
the talk given at the conference banquet by
Rolf Eliassen, the summary given by Wayne
Ott, and the concluding remarks of Carroll
Maninger.  Finally, there is included one
post-conference paper, submitted by the
Center for Environmental Studies of the
Argonne National Laboratory, which summar-
izes the interactions of the AEC and NASA
laboratories with state and local agencies
in various areas of environmental research.
It has been included because it seems very
pertinent to the objectives of the conference.

     Each reader will note that the type
used to produce these Proceedings varies
from paper to paper and, in some instances,
within an individual paper.  This arises
from the fact that, at our request, the
masters from which the Proceedings have
been produced were typed at the laboratory
or office of the individual authors.  Minor
corrections and revisions to some papers
were made here at Livermore.  In addition
to giving the Proceedings a special character,
this process significantly reduced the time,
effort, and cost necessary to produce them.

        RESULTS OF THE CONFERENCE

     It is as yet too early to completely
assess the success of the conference or to
evaluate the results of it.  However, some
conclusions can be drawn.  The conference
was well received by those who attended it;
every participant that we have talked to
felt that his three days were well spent.
Both EPA and laboratory personnel were
very glad for the opportunity to learn
about the programs and priorities of their
own organizations as well as those of the
other agencies.  Many valuable lines of
communication were established.  Already
discussions regarding cooperative research
efforts are underway.  For example, NERC-
Corvallis and the Lawrence Livermore Lab-
oratory are exploring the possibility of
cooperative programs in water sample
analysis and atmospheric modeling.  NERC-
Las Vegas and NASA's Ames Research Center
are considering Joint efforts in atmos-
pheric studies.

     Thus the conference has been an
effective beginning.  Further and continued
communication and cooperation between EPA
and the AEC and NASA laboratories certainly
can be expected.  But even that will only be
a beginning.  The pattern of communication
and cooperation must be established between
all agencies and laboratories, whether
federal, state, or local, if a truly effec-
tive and integrated environmental research
effort is to be established.  Perhaps
integrated is the key word;  since the ac-
tual and potential degradation of the
environment is a complex and integrated
one, its solution requires an integrated
                                            -3-

-------
program of control strategies.  The
development of such a comprehensive
program will require a coordination of
efforts between control agencies, between
researchers, and between control agencies
and researchers.  Continual communication
and cooperation will be necessary.  There
must be a common awareness of problems
and priorities, agreement on how the
complex environmental puzzle should be
broken down into pieces which can be
effectively attacked by individual research
teams, and a mutual understanding of how
these individual solutions, once obtained,
are to be integrated into the overall
control program.

     The Interagency Conference on the
Environment was marked by a near-unamimous
consensus, which is particularly reflected
by the workshop reports in these Proceedings,
that much more of three ingredients are
needed for a truly effective environmental
research effort:  money, communication, and
cooperation.  Without downplaying the need
for the first, we could accomplish much
more than we are doing now if there were
larger inputs of the latter two.

             ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

     Many people contributed to the success-
ful organization and operation of the Inter-
agency Conference on the Environment.  The
efforts of all of them were greatly apprec-
iated.  Special thanks are due to several
individuals and organizations:  first, to
Stanley M. Greenfield and the Office of
Research and Monitoring, EPA, for supporting
the conference;  second, to the AEC and the
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory for hosting
the conference;  next, to Wayne R. Ott of
ORM and R. Carroll Maninger of LLL, not
only for serving as cochairmen, but also
for much advice and effort in organizing
the conference;  and last, but not least,
to E. P. Floyd of ORM and Charles F. Miller
of TiTJ, for their help in overseeing the
endless number of details involved in
arranging the conference.
George D. Sauter
Program Chairman/Editor
Interagency Conference on the Environment

Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
January, 1973
                                           -4-

-------
Conference Agenda
      -5-

-------
                     AGENDA OF THE INTERAGENCY CONFERENCE ON THE ENVIRONMENT
             OCTOBER 17, 1972

MORNING SESSION

Chairman:  R. C. Maninger (ILL)

1.  Opening Remarks
    Roger Batzel, Director
    Lawrence Livermore Laboratory

2.  "The Federal Government, the National
    Laboratories, and the Environment"
    Wilson Talley, Assistant Vice President
    University of California

3-  "An Overview of Research in the Environ-
    mental Protection Agency"
    Stanley Greenfield, Assistant Admin-
    istrator for Research and Monitoring
    Environmental Protection Agency

k.  "Environmental Standards"
    Delbert Earth, Director
    National Environmental Research Center-
    Las Vegas, EPA

5-  "The Development of Technology for
    Environmental Control"
    Andrew Breidenbach, Director
    National Environmental Research Center-
    Cincinnati, EPA
AFTERNOON SESSION

Chairman:  W. R. Ott (EPA)

1.  "The Mission and Work Programs of the
    Environmental Studies Division of EPA"
    Peter House, Director
    Environmental Studies Division, EPA

2.  "Environmental Modeling-Ecosystems"
    A. F. Bartsch, Director
    National Environmental Research Center-
    Corvallis, EPA

3-  "Environmental Modeling of Hydrologic
    Systems"
    John Kingscott
    Division of Water Planning, EPA

k.  "Water System Model Development and
    Applications Within AEC and NASA
    Laboratories"
    Jay Eliason
    Pacific Northwest Laboratories-
    Battelle Memorial Institute
5.  "The Status of Air Quality Simulation
    Modeling"
    Warren Johnson
    Division of Meteorology, EPA

6.  "Atmospheric Modeling and Environmental
    Protection Needs"
    Joseph Knox
    Lawrence Livermore Laboratory

7.  "The Land Use and Transportation
    Impact on Air Quality"
    Donald Armstrong
    Office of Air Programs, EPA

8.  "Research Problems and Issues in the
    Application of Land Use Controls to
    Environmental Protection"
    A. S. Kennedy
    Argonne National Laboratory

9.  "Large Computer Facilities"
    John Fletcher
    Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
             OCTOBER 18, 1972

MORNING SESSION

Chairman:  R. E. Engel (EPA)

1.  "Monitoring Environmental Quality"
    George Morgan
    Office of Research and Monitoring, EPA

2.  "The EPA Instruments and Measuring
    Program"
    Alphonse Forziati
    Office of Research and Monitoring, EPA

3.  "Monitoring Equipment"
    Sidney Phillips
    Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory

k.  "Remote Sensing for Environmental
    Protection"
    Robert Holmes
    Office of Research and Monitoring, EPA

5-  "Remote Sensing of the Environment"
    James Lawrence
    Langley Research Center, NASA

6.  "Nuclear and X-Ray Techniques"
    William Lyon
    Oak Ridge National Laboratory
                                            -6-

-------
AFTERNOON SESSION

Chairman:  E. P. Floyd (EPA)

1.  "National Water Quality Control Infor-
    mation Program (STORET)"
    George Wirth
    Office of Water Programs, EPA

2.  "SAROAD and NEDS:  The National Air
    Data Branch"
    James Hammerle, Chief
    National Air Data Center, EPA

3.  "Survey of AEC and NASA Capabilities
    in Computerized Data Management"
    Norwood Gove
    Oak Ridge National Laboratory

U.  First Workshop Sessions
EVENING SESSION

Conference Banquet
"The National Laboratories and Environ-
mental Research"
Rolf Eliassen
Professor of Environmental Engineering,
Stanford University
General Advisory Committee, AEC
            OCTOBER 19, 1972

MORNING SESSION

Continuation of Workshops


AFTERNOON SESSION

Chairman:  G. D. Sauter (T..T.T.)

1.  "Federal Laboratories as Centers of
    Excellence in the Environmental
    Sciences-A Case Study"
    Jay Norco
    Argonne National Laboratory

2.  Presentation of Preliminary Reports of
    the Workshops
    Workshop 1-Atmospheric Transport Models
    Harry Moses
    Argonne National Laboratory

    Workshop 2-Water Transport Models
    Steven Reznek
    Processes and Effects Division, EPA

    Workshop 3-Land Use Planning
    Donald Armstrong
    Office of Air Programs, EPA
    Workshop ^-Unified Data System
    Norwood Govc
    Oak Ridge National Laboratory

    Workshop 5-Environmental Monitoring
    Dwight Balllnger
    National Environmental Research Center-
    Cincinnati,  EPA

    Workshop 6-Remote Sensing
    Gilbert Leppelmeier
    Lawrence Livermore Laboratory

    Workshop 7-Advanced Sensing Techniques
    Russell Heath
    National Reactor Testing Station-
    Aerojet Nuclear Corporation

    Workshop 8-Global Scale Monitoring
    I. G. Poppoff
    Ames Research Center,  NASA

    Workshop 9-Transfer of Scientists
    R.C. Maninger
    Lawrence Livermore Laboratory

3.   Conference Summary-"EPA, the National
    Laboratories, and the Environment"
    Wayne Ott, Conference Cochalrman
    Office of Research and Monitoring, EPA

U.   Closing Remarks
    R. C. Maninger, Conference Cochairman
    Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
                                          -7-

-------
Opening Remarks
       -8-

-------
            OPENING REMARKS FOR INTERAGENCY CONFERENCE ON THE ENVIRONMENT

                                Roger Batzel,  Director
                            Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
                             Livermore, California  9^550


     I am Roger Batzel, Director of the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory.   I want to wel-
come all of our guests from the Federal Agencies and the National Laboratories.

     I am proud that Livermore is the site of  this Interagency Conference on the Envi-
ronment.  This meeting can be the start of something important to the environmental R&D
effort of the county.  We are keenly aware that funds must be used to the greatest
advantage.  Our institutions represent a powerful combination of resources that can be
focused on the environmental effort.  This effort needs both the technical expertise
available in the laboratories and the awareness and special experience of organizations
such as the Environmental Protection Agency.  It is important that we explore each other's
capabilities, priorities and viewpoints.  Perhaps we can begin here a coordinated and
concerted effort that will speed our progress  in the environmental area.
                                          -9-

-------
              Conference Papers
   These papers are the papers, in some cases slightly
revised,  upon which the oral presentations given at the
conference were based.  The discussions, if any,  which
resulted from the various oral presentations follow the
corresponding papers.
   The final paper,  "Cities,  States, and National
Laboratories — An Account of Productive Interaction,"
which was submitted after the conference, is included
since the subject is  so germane to the objectives of the
conference.
                        -10-

-------
                     THE  FEDERAL GOVERNMENT,  THE NATIONAL
                       LABORATORIES, AND THE ENVIRONMENT

                               Wilson  K. Talley, Ph.D.
                     Assistant Vice President, Academic Planning
                                 and Program Review
                               University of California
                              Berkeley,  California   94720
      In  these remarks,  I would  like
to sketch the prehistory  of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency and,  in doing
so, explain the intent  of its creators.
I  would like to discuss the present
state of environmental  research —  mainly
in budgetary terms. Finally, these
first two points form the rationale for  the
Conference we are now attending.

      Chaired by Roy  Ash of Litton
Industries, the President's Advisory
Council on Executive Organization was
created in  April of 1969.   (It was
immediately dubbed the "Ash Council"
and bore that name throughout its entire
existence.)  The Ash Council was asked
to examine the Executive Branch  and
recommend ways in which  it could be
better  organized.   Perhaps because the
charges  laid  to it were specific and
finite in  number, the Council is almost
unique among Presidential commissions
in that its recommendations were not
only accepted, some have even been
implemented.  (The usual course for a
Presidential Commission  is that it  is
appointed,  reviews  the work of previous
commissions, then writes a report  agree-
ing with the  previous  august bodies that
change is, indeed,  needed — and that is
all that is accomplished.   Not the first
time, but the N  plus first time the same
action  is recommended will it be followed.)

      The first task addressed by the
Ash  Council was the reorganization of
the Executive Office of the President.
The  result was the  creation of  the
Domestic Affairs Council  — to parallel
the impressively successful National
Security  Council --, the restructuring
of the  Bureau of the Budget into  the
Office  of Management and Budget —
thus recognizing the planning responsi-
bilities of that bureau  —,  and other
changes.  The most important result
was  a  reduction  in  the number of
people who report directly to the  Presi-
dent.

    In December of 1969,  questions of
pollution, environmental quality, and
resource management became important
to the Administration.   By direct  order
of the President, programs  having to
do with pollution and natural resources
were to be examined next by the  Ash
Council so that preliminary recommendations
might be ready by April  1970.  The
Council set up a panel  of a dozen
professionals as staff.  These people were
drawn from  existing Federal agencies
(HEW, OST,  Interior, Corps of  Engineers,
etc.) and from outside  the Federal govern-
ment.  No one can really say how many
pollution/environmental/natural  resource
programs are scattered  throughout the
Executive Branch.  The number depends
not only  on  how one defines a "program,"
but also  on  how one defines "environ-
ment."  Activities once  unbashedly "public
works" were being renamed.  At  any
rate, it was clear that programs having
to do with pollution abatement were not
only smaller  in number than those concern-
ed with the  environment in  general.
They were excisable from their  parent
organizations  -- if one  did not mind
shedding blood.  The panel split  into
three subcommittees: pollution abatement,
renewable resources, and non-renew-
able resources.  While  the three groups
kept in constant touch,  it became clear
that  pollution  abatement programs could
stand alone,  but not the other two;
consequently, that panel not only  finished
its work  earlier, it had  an  easier sales
job with  the Ash Council and, through
it, the President.

    In the course of its analyses, the
staff employed consultants and delved
into  the voluminous written record
(especially Congressional hearings).
The  number of people consulted --
                                         -11-

-------
Congressional staff and leaders, the top
officials of all the government programs
examined,  former government officials,
public administration experts, ecologists,
pollution experts, and resource econo-
mists — numbered in the hundreds.
Regional, state and  local pollution/environ-
mental authorities were queried as to what
was  wrong with the present intergovern-
mental structure  and whether or not they
were planning alternatives.  The Council
had  been told by  the President not  to
let political considerations influence  its
recommendations  and, to a  remarkable
extent,  the products did represent the
best structures possible.  The complete
story of the half  year of intense staff
work has been chronicled by Elizabeth
Haskell of the Smithsonian.  She  makes
few  factual errors and confines her
speculations as to what went on behind
the scenes to a minimum.

    The conclusion  of the study was
simply that the fragmentation of pollution
control  programs  among several government
agencies did not  serve the  public interest.
Not only did it inhibit the effective use
of public and private funds,  it was
wasting the talents  and  energies of con-
cerned  and dedicated people.  Worst of
all,  it made impossible the kind of  inte-
grated planning,  research, and  standard-
setting  that,  in the  long run,  is necessary
to deal  with pollution.   The alternative
was  that we would  see a continuation of
crisis management.   (A crisis-by-crisis
treatment, it was  also noted, would  doom
us to forever  handling the problems on
the Federal level  instead of mobilizing
the resources of  state, regional,  and
local governments,  the private  sector,
and  national laboratories.  Such a proce-
dure would simply not allow sufficient
time for interaction.) This conclusion
was  reached with full recognition of the
existing interagency agreements and
working-level communication;  such
efforts, in general,  had not proved
successful.  What was needed, it was
decided,  was  a single agency responsible
for developing an integrated research,
standard  setting,  and assistance program.
But  of these three functions, what ought
to be the central  theme?

     We would be  attending a far different
sort of meeting  had research been chosen
as the organizational key.  It was not
so chosen.  That  a central, guiding
concept was needed was clear from the
fact that it would  have been impossible
to bring under one organizational roof
all the Executive Branch entities  dealing
in any way with environmental pollution.
It is probably not even a desirable goal.
It was decided to  limit the  scope  of the
organization, EPA, by concentrating on
those functions essential to setting
standards for  pollution control.   The key
word  is "essential", as we shall  see.

    Also of interest was the decision to
create EPA as an entirely independent
agency, rather than affiliate it  with  any
single existing department.  The  range
of activities of EPA would be so great
that some would interact  with the other
functions of the parent department.
Further, that  department, through the
standard setting function, would  be  called
upon  to make  decisions affecting  other
departments. Fairly or unfairly,  its  own
objectivity could be called into question.
(I find that point  of view still persuasive.)
The Council believed that the key standard
setting function should be performed
outside  agencies whose other interests
may  affect  and be affected by those
standards.  Hence,  an independent EPA
was regarded as the strongest organiza-
tional alternative.  The  Council then
turned to deciding what other functions
such  an agency must possess to discharge
its mission.

    Given that EPA  was viewed as a
regulatory  agency,  it is  clear that the
standard-setting function cannot stand
alone.  Standards must be  soundly based,
thus a research capability is necessary.
To know if the standards are working,
there must be a monitoring capability.
It should also be able to offer incentives
and assistance for compliance, as well
as being able to move against violators.

    The decisions as to  what programs
should be included in the EPA involved
a delicate balancing between what the
new agency needed to fulfill its mission
and the needs of the existing agencies
from which programs would be moved.
The Council adopted as a guide in
                                          -12-

-------
considering organizational  changes the
principle that the burden of proof rested
with those  who proposed transferring
a program  to EPA.   This sounds fine
in theory,  but in practice, it developed
that there may not  have existed enough
resources to allow  even one agency to
fulfill its mission.  Whatever, the Coun-
cil was careful to identify  only  those
programs demonstrably essential to the
functioning  of the EPA  as  a regulatory
agency.  The result had to be a lean
agency  — lean not  only in terms of
statutory authority  but  also in terms
of in-house and  extramural allocatable
resources.   So EPA is.

    First, it was recommended that there
be transferred all existing standard-
setting  authority covering  all major
classes of pollutants and also the two
principal transporting media, air and
water.

    Second, there was  consideration
given to transferring most of what was
to become NOAA in order  to provide
physical monitoring capability.  The
decision was made  not  to do so.  The
data EPA needs would be available no
matter  where NOAA is located.  This
established  a corollary  principle;  EPA
need not do everything, it need only
insure that  everything  is being done.

    These two decisions guided the
actions  that eventually  gave EPA its
research capability:  EPA  must have
the competence to convert  research into
standards and also  to suggest needed
research.  It was never proposed that
all pollution-related research be con-
centrated in the new agency. Research
on a particular form of pollution may
be a spin-off of the activities of other
government agencies or the work of
industries affecting the source.  Radia-
tion and the AEC's  programs  involving
the utilization of nuclear energy was
one example.  The  DOT aircraft engine
noise abatement program was another.
EPA  was envisioned as  serving as a
central point of cognizance for such
specialized  research, relying on the
processes of information and funding
transfers to make sure  that the  total
research effort is adequate and well
articulated.   Existing skills — inhouse
and extramural —  were to be recognized
and used by EPA in gathering data for
the formulation of standards.   But some
research and some scientific awareness
were required.  The concern was  that
EPA have an in-house appreciation for
any external competence.  Hence,  this
was the area where the  Council, and
later the OMB in making up the Deter-
mination Orders, searched its soul most
carefully.

    Finally, EPA was given the major
Federal technical assistance and grant
programs which have been  and continue
to be  the backbone of the government's
antipollution effort.  For  example,  in
water, the tail that wags the  regulatory
dog is the  mammoth grant program for
municipal sewage treatment plants.  In
solid waste, the Federal government set
no standards nor enforced any regulations
— all that  there was was a small   (by
Federal standards) R and D program.
These operations,  too, were transferred
to EPA.

    To summarize its status,  EPA, by
design and  by  administrative mandate,
is a regulatory agency.   (Note that it
does not perceive  enforcement as  its
main mission —there is  a difference.) It
must have research performed if it is to
discharge its mission, but it  need  not do
all that research on its own.   It is also
clear  that if research is done, the results
must be made available rapidly. Further,
since  the initial scope of any research
effort  affects the result,  EPA  would be
well advised to  develop  cognizance at the
beginning of the research,  rather  than
rely on serendipity.

    When EPA was  created, the situation
was far from perfect.  Many  agencies
were involved - EPA, AEC, NASA, USDA,
DHEW, DOD, DOT, NOAA, NSF, CEQ, and
others.   The list of "others"  grew as it
was realized that "environmental research"
had a better image -- and chance of funding
-- than plain "research."  Further, for
reasons less than rational,  there was  a
general impression that funds for  such
research would  dramatically increase.
There was  little intercommunication and
almost no coordination.  This  should
                                         -13-

-------
surprise no one, for if the primary
purpose of a research program was
not evironmental,  then  public relations
statements  did  not upgrade the environ-
mental aspects  to a dominant role.  In
such cases, coordination  not only made
no sense to program administrators,
yielding any measure of control to
a central coordinator would have been
a managerial error.

    The result  was feast  or famine  —
with constant indigestion.  In  some
areas there was not only duplication,
but excessive duplication.  Examples
that come easily to mind  are atmospheric
modeling and marine biology.  Other
areas were neglected, relative to their
importance. For instance, while there
was lip service to the international
aspects of  pollution,  little has  been done
on global  scale pollutant  sinks.

    Yet decisions  designed to  abate
pollution were  being made.  The basis,
by default, was an adversary  process.
Since "winning" became the goal,  an •
unbalanced and "cyclical" regulatory
system developed:   Standards  were set
as high as  the regulatory authorities
dared, they were  then  honored more in
the breach than in the  observance, an
ecological  disaster would eventually
occur, following which the standards
would  be  stiffened and, for awhile,
strictly enforced.  The cycle was good
for uncounted repetitions.

    Is  the  problem simply one of coordina-
tion?   Some say the problem is that not
enough resources  are being devoted to
environmental protection  — that coordinat-
ing the insufficient resources is like
substituting a fishnet for a bed  sheet.
My personal belief is that the  money
available is roughly  comparable to our
ability to  spend it effectively.

    I  stress that this is my personal
view.  I also believe that massive new
funds would not be  warranted  until we
know that  existing monies are  being
used most  effectively -- and that the
careful spending of  present funds can
produce a  strong case  for acquiring addi -
tional  monies.
    The present  situation is, at best,
murky.  It is clear that the Federal
government's commitment for programs
to control and abate pollution has  grown
dramatically over the past few years.
(See Table I.)

    The major portion of these  funds
have been  directed to grants to  State
and local governments for the construction
of municipal  sewage treatment facilities,
as can be seen in Table II.

    Even if the funds related to these
grant programs are  excluded, R &  D
still  doesn't represent the majority
of the remainder.  It's instructive  to
note  that the fastest growing elements
are those with most immediate payoff —
and R  & D  is  notoriously slow and
uncertain in  terms of payoffs.  That's
only reasonable.   The public attitude
toward pollution  since Fall,  1969 has
been characterized  by mild hysteria.
The professionals were pleased at
the attention  they received,  but some
are now dismayed at the pressure on
them to solve problems that are even yet
not well defined.

    Another category is of interest to us,
since it includes  R & D.  This  is
(Table III)  the area of "problem definition."

    The question then arises, of the
nearly one billion dollars spent by
Federal agencies  in  1973, what  fraction
is to be distributed  through the national
laboratories?  There  appears to  be no
way  to find an exact answer.  The best
compendium of past  levels of activity is
the report  prepared by the Policy  Institute,
Syracuse University Research Corporation,
"Environmental Research Laboratories in
the Federal Government:  An Inventory,"
published in  September  1971.  Sponsored
by NSF,  the  report reviewed the programs
of about  170  laboratories and runs to 973
pages.  Complete as  it is, the authors
admit to errors.  Further,  interagency
transfers lead to  double-counting.

    If we can't be exhaustive, it may be
helpful to be exemplary.  Because I am
more familiar  with the AEC laboratories,
I  have broken out their programs  as
                                         -14-

-------
representative:  This is presented  in
Tables V and  VI.   (The $44 million is
less  than half the $92  million spent by
the AEC on pollution control and  abate-
ment R & D in FY'72 (Table IV).  The
difference may be partly  explained  by
extramural programs and the like,  but
it is probably more due to  different
people preparing different reports for
different purposes  at different times.)

    For these laboratories,  we see  that,
according to Tables V and  VI, extramural
funds amount  to about 39% of the  total
spent on environmental R & D ~  and
that  EPA provides about 3.4% of the
total.

    The three points I want to make are
qualitative:

    1)  A large sum  of money is spent
       on environmental R  & D.

    2) The  national laboratories are
       already sharing in this work .

    3) EPA occupies a pivotal or
       "pump-priming" position with
       respect to funding.

    Looking at the  current  situation,  I
believe that there will be no  large
increases in Federal R & D for environ -
mental enhancement.  I think, too,  that
the present amounts, if spent optimally,
are enough to generate results that will
demonstrate that  a  few  more dollars
spent on R  &  D will save large sums in
abatement and control.   The question is,
how  to best spend  the money?

    The linking of environmental  problems
and  the resources to solve  them  has
been debated  for several  years.  Among
other organizational structures that have
been suggested is the concept of  one or
a few national environmental  centers or
laboratories (NEL), patterned after the
national laboratories.  The  usual  Federal
procedure  is to take an agency that must
act and couple to it an R & D element.
This linkage of research/development/action
clearly  identifies the social and political
goals and keeps  the research directed
or focused.  Research, by  its nature,
is  forward  looking  and thereby forces
the action programs to consider more
than the immediate consequences of
their activities.

  There are exceptions to this tandem
arrangement.  NASA and AEC are
technology based and  their laboratories
reflect the fact.  The  proposed NEL's
are akin to these laboratories.  Free
to define problems (their basic budgets
derived  from  trusts, direct Congression-
al authorizations,  or whatever), they
are to  provide "best"  answers, ostensi-
bly because they can  consider the total
problems:  technical,  economic, social,
even political.

  That  may be the best solution.   I
do not know.   First,  however, I
would  like first to see an exhaustive
attempt made  to utilize all present
resources.  This means, to  me, that
the present national laboratories must
accept those tasks  that are appropriate
to their  present capabilities.

  It means that stronger  coordination
of all existing programs  is necessary,
that concepts  and  information generated
in one place must be  readily available
to all workers who could use them
effectively.

  It means that EPA continues to play
broker,  middleman ~ what  have you —
in directing all financial  resources
available to the best presently available
capabilities.

  This-means, of  course, that if EPA
is to work wholeheartedly for optimal
uses of all present resources, it will
have to  go slow in building any overly
large in-house capability.

  In essence,  I am suggesting that
differing modes of utilizing present
resource be explored,  rather than
creating new  (in some cases,  duplicating
old)  resources.  There is not, I fear,
sufficient money for any  avoidable
duplication.

  The  problems involved in  protecting
our environment are complex and
inter-related.   To be  successfully
solved,  they must be  subjected to  a
comprehensive attack  which  integrates
a broad spectrum  of technologies and
                                          -15-

-------
which is oriented  toward a long-range
solution.  In short,  they have the
same technical characteristics as the
problems which the  national laboratories
were established to  attack.  Further,
the scope of these environmental problems
is  so large  that available resources
of  a sufficiently comprehensive  nature
are few.  The technical capabilities
of  the national laboratories certainly
represent the  sorts of resources that
ought to be used.

  At the same time,  it must be  recognized
that environmental problems are not
solely technical in nature  —social,
economic, and political considerations
are also of  fundamental importance.
In   many instances,  such non-technical
factors  will be paramount  in the
determination  of how a particular pro-
blem is to  be  attacked.  Clearly,
therefore, effective solutions to
environmental problems  will require
a mutual appreciation — between
scientists and technologists on the
one hand and  environmental decision
makers  (private businessmen as well
as  public officials) on the other —
of  the capabilities and restraints under
which each  must operate.

  To work together,  decision makers
and scientists must agree  upon correct
and mutual  definitions of the environ-
mental problems they wish to solve.
Decision makers  must explain,  and
scientists understand, the non-technical
factors  which  affect  the  decisions they
make, as well as the time scales  for
these  decisions.  In turn, the scientists
must explain,  and the decision  makers
be aware of,  the current or soon to
be available technologies that can be
brought to bear on a particular problem.
This kind of exchange of viewpoints,
capabilities, and restraints is a neces-
sary basis for the realistic establishment
of  program  priorities and  technical
goals.

  The dialogue that  is to take place
here will be between the "technologists"
of  the national laboratories and the
Federal technologists and  decision-
makers. There are three things  to
keep in mind.  The first is that there
will be  a blurring of the roles.   At
times, the people from EPA, say, will
be acting as decision-makers with
technical problems.   At other times,
they will  be indistinguishable from  the
technologists with proposed  solutions.

  The second is  that this conference
is intended to avoid the "solution-looking-
for-a-problem" syndrome that has
plagued similar  meetings.   The EPA
representatives are  going to state their
views of the problems and will  lead
the workshops in examining technologies
that  may offer solutions.

  The final point is that while the scope
of topics to be addressed is limited,
the hopes for the results of the con-
ference are not.   If this meeting
produces  the start of a  continuing
communication among the people with
the problems and the people with
the potential to solve them,  it will be
a success.

  Thank you.

Acknowledgements and References.  I am
indebted to Mr.  Roger  Strelow  of the
CEQ and to Dr.  Winfred Malone of the
EPA for their help in  finding data on
Federal environmental R and D  funds.
The  best  single overview was provided
by OMB's Special Analysis,  Budget of
the United States Government, 1973,
pp.  296-309. For those  interested in an
analysis of governmental organization
and  reorganization,  I can recommend
E. Haskell and V. Price "State  Environ-
mental Management," to be  published by
Praeger.   The story of  the creation  of
EPA appears as  an Appendix.
                                        -16-

-------
                        TABLE I

        POLLUTION CONTROL AND ABATEMENT
                 (In millions  of dollars)

                    1969    1970       1971     1972     1973
                  estimate  actual     actual  estimate estimate

Budget authority    775    1,432      1,823    3,258    3,419

Obligations          830    1,071      2,017    3,288    3,612

Outlays             685       751      1,149    1,975    2,440
                       TABLE II

     POLLUTION CONTROL AND ABATEMENT ACTIVITIES
             (In millions of dollars, as of 1/72)

Type of Activity     Budget authority
                              Outlays
1971
actual
1972
estimate
1973
estimate
1971
actual
1972
actual
1973
estimate
Financial aid to
 State  & local
 governments
1,082    2,121
Research  & Develop-
 ment                 442
Federal abatement
 & control
 operations
  136
Manpower development 19

Reduce pollution from
 Federal facilities     116
Other pollution
 control  &  abate-
 ment activities

Separate
 transmitted
   49
516



198

 18


280



124
2,123      554   1,014


  599     366     474



  219       92     189

   15       17       18
                    315
  113
                     35
           74     186
45
94
1,250


  561



  206

   14


  272



  115


   22
      Total
175213,258    37315     nns    1,975      2,440
1
 Not reflected in preceding activity lines are proposals that will be
 transmitted  subsequently for an estimated $35 million in budget
 authority  and $22 million in outlays in 1973 for EPA for  implementing
 legislation proposed by  the administration.
                                -17-

-------
                          TABLE III

              UNDERSTANDING, DESCRIBING AND PREDICTING
                THE ENVIRONMENT (In millions of  dollars)


Type of Activity       Budget authority	Outlays
1971
actual
Observe & predict
weather & ocean
conditions, dis-
turbances:
Research &
development 193
Operations 284
Locating & describ-
ing natural resources:
Research &
development 172
Operations 70
Physical environ-
mental surveys:
Research &
development 6
Operations 81
1972 1973 1971 1972 1973
estimate estimate actual estimate estimate




210 253 163 194 223
297 313 287 290 308


172 149 156 152 148
70 81 66 77 81


8 14 6 8 14
99 102 76 87 102
Weather modifi-
 cation.               17        19         24     17       18      22

Research on environ-
 mental impact on
 man.                 33        42         51     29       38      47

Ecological & other
 basic environment
 research.             58       105        114     56       87      106
     Total            914      1,031      1,101     856     951     1,051

These last  two can  be broken down by agency (-- but  a caveat.  While
OMB prepared all these figures, there was a large problem with
respect  to  definitions.   The result is inconsistency in  at least the
third figure of the totals.),  as is done in Table IV.
                               -18-

-------
                                                           TABLE IV
CO
i
                                              RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, BY AGENCY
                                                         (In millions of dollars)
                                      Pollution Control
                                       and Abatement
 Selected Environmental
     Protection and
 Enhancement  Activities
                            Understanding, Describing
                                  and Predicting
Agencies
EPA
AEC
USDA
DOD
INT
DOT
NASA
DOC
TVA
Smithsonian
Post Office
Corps, of Eng.
State
GSA
HUD
ARC

71
142
89
42
37
38
28
24
3
2
.1
1
1
.2
2
2
1
BA
72
175
92
48
45
54
40
30
8
2
.2
2
2
.2
-
5
1
Outlays BA Outlays
73
175
102
48
62
68
72
28
9
2
.2
2
3
.2
.2
7
.4
71
109
89
40
30
37
19
24
2
2
.1
1
1
.2
a
1
.3
72
157
92
47
40
47
34
30
5
2
.2
2
2
.2
1
3
1
73 71 72
174
102
47 11 11
47
68 9 11
58
28
9
3
.4
2
3
.2
.2
5
1
73 71 72 73 71


11 10 11 11 17
41
11 9 11 11 60
2
171
72






2

BA
72


17
33
68
6
158
98






2

73


18
34
83
9
145
123






6

71


17
34
59
2
157
52






1

Outlaje
72 73


17 18
36 36
67 80
6 9
141 135
81 105






1 3

                             412   504   579   357   463    548   20
22
22
19    22    22   365   382   418   322   349 386

-------
                                      TABLE V
AEC FY 1972 funding for environmental research in the AEC's multi-purpose
laboratories (in thousands):

                            Measurement                 Prevention
               Transport        and       Evaluation        Control
               and Fate      Monitoring    of Effects      Technology     Total
Argonne Nat'l
Lab. $
Brookhaven
Nat'l Lab.
Lawrence
Berkeley Lab.
Lawrence
Livermore Lab.
Los Alamos
Scientific Lab.
Oak Ridge Nat'l.
Lab.
$
591
613
0
1,718
0
673
3,595

$ 440
0
0
0
0
267
$707

$ 6,198
3,098
1,050
1,632
1,149
9,511
$22,638

$ 145
0
0
0
0
210
|355~

$ 7,374
3,711
1,050
3,350
1,149
10,661
$27,295

                                     TABLE VI

Funding by other agencies for environmental and  related health research in AEC's
multi-purpose laboratories in  FY 1972  (in thousands):
                  HEW
NSF   Interior
           EPA    Other     Total
Ames Lab.      $

Argonne Nat'l .
 Lab.

Brookhaven Nat'l.
 Lab.

Lawrence Berkeley
 Lab.

Lawrence Liver-
 more Lab.
$ -
217 127
472 178
182 138
_ _
$ - $ 40
1,014
682 214
38
_
$ 25
681
292
-
55
$ 65
2,039
1,838
358
55
Los Alamos
 Scientific Lab.    1,171

Oak Ridge Nat'l.
 Lab.             4,878
4.52
1,081
204
                              113     1,284
858,     11,559
                 $6,920   $4,981   $1,763    $1,510     $2,024    $T7,198
                                       -20-

-------
                   DISCUSSION OF THE PRESENTATION BY WIU30N TALLEY
Ott:  On what do you base your personal view
that the resources (money) for environmental
research that are scattered around the fed-
eral government are comparable to the ability
to spend the money?

Talley;  I see too many proposals floating
up which appear to be people wanting to do
the same thing they've always done and now
labeling it environmental research instead
of EPA guiding the proposals people make -
that's, by the way, the point of this con-
ference.  I have attended conferences
where people seem to be just repeating what
they've said the previous year.  They were
doing work on such and such a field and now
it had environmental applications, and this
may be the first conference where the pro-
blems of the environment are laid out by
the agency responsible for solving them and
that is going to direct the research efforts.
I think that it's things like that, the fact
that the people moving into the area are
sometimes doing it because they can't get
the funds from the sources they used to,
that make me feel this.  The total amount
of money is something like a billion dollars
being spent on environmental research for
fiscal year '73, and that's an awful lot of
money.

Ellsaesser:  It seems to me that the comment
just made about research efforts might also
be directed against the formation of EPA
itself?

Talley;  How so?

Ellsaesser;  What was the problem EPA was
created to solve?  Was the problem of the
magnitude to warrant such a large organ-
ization to begin with?  What evidence is
there that we were facing a crisis in the
environmental field?

Talley;  First, the situation probably
hadn't deteriorated any from December, 1969,
to April, 1970, the time the decision was
made.  Six months is not a long time for geo-
systems.  We knew we had a public demand
for something to be done and the existing
organizations were not capable of respond-
ing to it.  If you are asking "Do I believe
the prophets of doom and gloom that eco-
logical disaster was right around the corner?,"
you know that I don't.  I did think it was
time we began to make effective uses of our
resources and curbed long term trends.  And
it was in response to that, not any hyster-
ical demand for immediate solutions, that
EPA was created.

Ellsaesser;  I am also questioning what
the long term  trends were.

Talley;  There's some split as to whether
or not the windows between tolerance levels
for existence and ambient conditions are
remaining static or whether they are
shutting, and some people believe there's
been no real change.

Ott;  The one billion dollars that you
mentioned in the paper:  Since it is so
difficult to account for what the Federal
Government spends on the environment, I
have trouble understanding where the figure
came from, and I have a little trouble
reconciling it with our own (EPA) research
budget which is a very much smaller figure.

Talley;  The question is where does the
billion dollars come from and why doesn't
EPA have it?  The billion dollars comes
from the gradual accumulation of programs
that were started years ago in places like
the Department of Interior, the Department
of Agriculture, and the AEC.  The reason
EPA doesn't have it is because the Ash
Council wouldn't let us put it in.  There
was a very attractive 80 million dollar
program in the AEC's Division of Biology
and Medicine.  Looking at the program,
73 million could have been profitably
transferred to EPA.  No compelling argument
for the transfer could be made that the
EPA needed it more than the AEC did.  So
close to 100 million dollars for environ-
mental research is done by the AEC.  Now
the EPA occupies a swing position, a piv-
otal position;  all you've got Is pump-
priming money.  A little pump.  You have
relations with other agencies, strained
sometimes, and it's a difficult task to
persuade another agency to spend its money
especially when you have no more clout, or
your administrator has no more clout, than
the cabinet officer or other administrator.
But the total is, according to the Office
of Management and Budget, better than one
billion dollars in 1973.

Question;  You use the term "me" several
times here.  Can you describe your own
personal experience during this time that
EPA was being formed?  Were you a member
of the Ash Council?

Talley;  I was on the staff.  I was for-
tunate enough not to get stuck on renewable
or nonrenewable resources.  I was on the
                                           -21-

-------
pollution abatement group.  Terry Davies,
from the Council on Environmental Quality,
was going to come to this conference.  He
and I were the two Ph.D.'s of the six of
us.  His Ph.D. is in political science.
He turned out to be much more effective
than I.

Greenfield:  Now that Wilson is gone, I
suppose I should answer some of the things
he said, but he knows what my feelings are
and we talk continuously, so anything I say
behind his back I can say to his face as
well.  I think it's fine to have organiza-
tional theories where you put together an
organization and say this is the way it's
going to run, but I think in practice
things don't really work out quite that way.
Yes, EPA is a regulatory agency, but it's
only as good a regulatory agency as the
information base or foundation on which it
stands.  Our knowledge of environmental
effects, what is really happening, what
is going on, and how to correct it, is not
very good at the present time.  So the
effectiveness of a regulatory agency like
EPA, its ability to set justifiable and
reasonable standards within the economic
demands as well as the environmental de-
mands of this country, must depend very
heavily on its ability to gather informa-
tion and do an effective job of under-
standing the environment with which it must
deal.  Giving it a small lever arm or pump
priming capability doesn't quite do it.
Other agencies being what they are, and
we all are familiar with the way agencies
work in government, particularly at the
federal level, they do not respond nor-
mally to please other agencies, to coor-
dinate their programs.  They build their
program based on their own desires, their
own view of the world, and it's only happen-
stance usually if it comes into close
coordination or close compatability with the
programs that are existing in other agencies.
EPA can buy some research, and that's where
you do get some of the capabilities of
some of the other agencies effectively
matching your own or complementing your
own program.  That doesn't mean that you
have a pump priming capability.  It means
you actually have an effective program to
buy this research.  In a small budget, a
relatively small budget, this doesn't mean
very much.  So while I would like to be-
lieve what Wilson describes, or the Ash
Council described, as an effective way of
dealing with the situation, making EPA
a lean agency, it's another thing to try
and put this into practice in an effective
way.  As a result, what has come to be the
EPA research program, after the rather
difficult time of the last two years of
trying to weld together five independent
agencies into one effective agency, what
has come to be the EPA program is one that
is pointed specifically at meeting the
needs of this agency.  By definition, it's
got to be that way.  We cannot, as much as.
we'd like to, reach out and count, on a
day to day basis or a year to year basis,
on what other agencies are going to produce.
Now this may change with time.  There are
programs that are moving, such as the
National Center of Toxicological Research,
which may in time produce more effective
local agencies programs to help us.  But
at the present time, faced with the regula-
tory mandates that Congress has given us,
it's mandatory in the research program
that these match in very closely with the
needs.  I'll say more about this as I go
along, but I felt I had to comment a
little bit on this, and I hope some more
of this will come out with time.
                                          -22-

-------
                                AN OVERVIEW OF
           RESEARCH IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY


                          Stanley M. Greenfield, Ph. D.
                             Assistant Administrator
                          for Research and Monitoring
                        Environmental Protection Agency
                   401 M Street, S. W. , Washington, B.C.  20460
       I'm very happy to be here today
to meet with members of the Interagency
Conference  on the Environment and dis-
cuss the environmental research activi-
ties of the Environmental Protection
Agency.  EPA is one of the youngest
branches of the federal government --
less than 2 years old --  but already it is
one of the best known and most widely
publicized.  The President declared that
the 70's were to be the environmental
decade.  In  EPA it seems as though that
whole decade has passed in the last 18
months.

       Every kind of environmental dete-
rioration known to man can be  found in
the United States.   A Nation which  has
long taken pride in its technological ad-
vancement now finds itself troubled by the
by-products of that advancement: polluted
water and air, wasteful use of  materials
and energy,  urban crowding, noise, and
a host of other threats to the public and
welfare.

       Indeed, some of us are beginning
to think that the deterioration may  not be
the by-product, however unintentional,
but instead the main product of technical
advancement.  As Irving Kristol put it, in
a more general indictment of human folly,
"The unanticipated consequences of social
action are always more important,  and
usually less agreeable, than the intended
consequences."  (On the  Democratic Idea
in America, Harper and Row,  quoted in
New York Times Review, May 10,  1972.)

       To list the particular environmen-
tal problems about which we are most
concerned in the United States  is useful
only if we realize that such a listing
reflects our ignorance as well as our
knowledge.  The processes by which na-
ture absorbs polluting substances and
renders them harmless are still very
imperfectly understood.   We do not know
enough about the natural environment to
take control actions with confidence that
they will be effective. We must continue
to study the relationship between man and
the environment and at the same time do
the best we  can with our imperfect know-
ledge and techniques to reduce pollution
wherever it seems possible to do so.

         The most urgent environmental
problems in the United States are those
which pose immediate threats to human
health: impure water, polluted air, solid
waste disposal,  pesticides  and  other
toxic substances,  and ionizing radiation.

         During the last two decades the
U.S.  Congress has been increasingly
concerned with these problems.  It has
passed legislation to support research,
to develop and demonstrate control
methods, and to aid State and local
governments in pollution control work.

         Such legislation has usually
dealt with a particular kind of pollution
or polluted medium.  It has tended to
assert and establish a federal responsi-
bility, supplementing and in some ways
superseding the local and State  laws that
were based  on long-standing local powers
to protect public health and to prevent
nuisances.  The imposition of federal
controls has accelerated over the last
decade,  and federal legislation  in now
dominant in all five pollution areas, with
the exception of some aspects of solid
waste disposal.
                                         -23-

-------
         Toward the close of the 1960's
public  concern increased,  and it became
apparent that the divided approach - -
controlling pollution by the type of pollu-
tant or the polluted medium -- was likely
to be wasteful and sure to  be ineffective.
The environment is complex and intercon-
nected; its protection would require a
unified, coordinated effort.

         This  policy was officially recog-
nized in the National Environmental Poli-
cy Act, signed by President Nixon on
January 1, 1970, which declared it a na-
tional policy to "encourage productive and
enjoyable harmony between man and hie
environment"  and set forth the principles
for coordination of the federal responsi-
bility.

         In December 1970, the Environ-
mental Protection Agency was established
to bring together in one central unit,
which would report independently to the
President, the various  anti-pollution
programs already established in more
than a  dozen different agencies.

         The existing environmental pro-
grams had each been mandated by sepa-
rate legislation,  and they were adminis-
tered by separate, and in  some cases
several, agencies. Moreover,  the pro-
grams were shaped by their attachment
to more traditional government depart-
ments.  Most of the departments or agen-
cies responsible for an environmental
program had been established for, and
long concerned with, other purposes.
Environmental considerations were late
comers in the Agency's raison d'etre.
Also, the former divisions of environmen-
tal programs among various agencies
made it difficult for them to keep in
touch with each other.  It does little good
to make  an industry stop discharging a
pollutant into the air if it can liquefy the
offending substance and pour it into a
river,  or solidify it and dump it on the
land.

         EPA brought the five principal
anti-pollution programs together for uni-
fied action standard setting, research,
and monitoring, under one organizational
roof.  It put the enforcement function
outside the  government components that
have long been associated with certain
sectors of the economy and are usually
committed,  by law or by custom, to
promoting the very activities they are
supposed to regulate in the public inter-
est. As Administrator William D.
Ruckelshaus expressed it, "EPA is not
obligated to promote anything but a  better
environment. "

      If conflicts arise,  we in EPA  feel
they should  be debated openly and decided
on the  merits of each case.  The National
Environmental Policy Act provides  a
very potent  procedure for this purpose:
the environmental impact statement.  All
federal agencies, before taking any action
that may affect the environment, must
first draft a statement setting forth such
expected effects, listing other possible
actions, and giving reasons why the par-
ticular proposed action was chosen  over
the options. These impact statements are
submitted in draft to the Council on Envi-
ronmental Quality.  They also are sent to
EPA and to  any other agency having a
legal interest in the proposed action or
technical expertise in the  kind or quality
of the  environmental effects  involved.
Impact statements are also circulated to
State and local governments  when they
are affected.  The reviewing bodies'
comments, which are often highly critical,
furnish the originating agency with a
basis for revising its final statement, or
they are included with it as attachments.
The drafts,  comments, and final state-
ments  are all public  records, available to
any interested party and to the press.
Public hearings are frequently held to
help an agency assess the environmental
impact and to revise its  statement.
Last year EPA reviewed more than 2,400
impact statements.  In rough order of
frequency they concerned road building,
watershed protection projects, dams,
canals, harbors, airports, parks, and
power  plants.  Since most large construc-
tion by private industry or municipalities
involves federal licensing of some sort,
the environmental effects of many non-
governmental actions are also subject to
this  kind of  public review.
                                        -24-

-------
         The impact statement procedure
has helped to convert project planners,
both public and private, to greater envi-
ronmental awareness.  Government agen-
cies are becoming more competent in
environmental assessment, and they are
coming to realize that such assessment is
an integral part of their function. A new
purpose has been added to the host of
organic laws under which government
agencies operate.  Naturally there are
conflicts over technical matters, over
legalisms and interpretations,  and espe-
cially over the estimating of benefits and
costs.   These open conflicts help to
stimulate and give a focus to environmen-
tal protection.

         Although EPA is the federal
government's principal anti-pollution
agency, setting and enforcing standards,
the agency does not try to be an all-pow-
erful,  central policeman of pollution.  No
single  group can watch every mile of wa-
terway, every industrial stack and outfall,
every automobile tail pipe.  The Agency
uses legal action vigorously but selective-
ly.   It  tries to work through State and
local governments wherever possible,  to
create pressures, to encourage as well as
to threaten.

         Last year  EPA took legal action
against industrial and municipal polluters
on an average of 15 times per month.  The
threat  of a law suit frequently produces
voluntary compliance by the offender or a
specific plan for achieving compliance by
a certain date.

         Nationwide standards  for air
quality were set by EPA last summer, as
required by law. They define for the
first time  the quantities of six major
types of air pollutants, that are dangerous
to health and well-being.   These are very
specific standards  -- parts per million,
measured in certain ways,  and persisting
over certain times.  They apply through-
out the Nation, in rural areas as well as
in cities.

         Declaring  a  standard does no
good unless it is implemented, which
means unless definite actions are taken
to achieve the standard and these actions
are enforced.  Fifty States plus the Dis-
trict of Columbia, Puerto Rico,  Virgin
Islands, and American Samoa submitted
implementation plans to EPA.  Several
months ago  (May 31) all of them were
formally approved by EPA, but only ten
of the plans were approved without excep-
tions specified by the EPA Administrator.

        Each State plan sets limits  for
pollutant emissions from all major  sour-
ces.  The limits are based on a careful
inventory of sources:  industrial and
power  plants, automotive vehicles,  and
so on.   Each plan sets  forth the control
regulations  to be established, enforce-
ment provisions and penalties, and
detailed procedures for coping with air
pollution emergencies.

        Direct federal regulations of
industrial air pollution have been estab-
lished for new or  substantially modified
installations in five types  of industry, all
of which are notorious  air polluters:
fuel-burning steam generators: large  '
incinerators; and  plants producing cement,
sulfuric acid, and nitric acid.  The regu-
lations specify maximum amounts of pol-
lutants in weight per unit of plant output.
The limits are calculated  to require these
industries to use the best  available con-
trol technology.

        A permit system to control the
dumping of  waste  materials in waterways
is being established under the authority
of a little used provision of the River  and
Harbor Act of 1899.   The provision, called
the Refuse Act, forbids the discharge of
any waste into navigable waters  or their
tributaries.

        The actual issuance of permits
has been  delayed by a ruling, at the low-
est level  of the federal courts, that an
environmental impact statement should
have been submitted with each permit
application. We regard this as an obstruc-
ting tactic,  and we are seeking to get the
ruling reversed, either by appealing to a
higher  court or getting the law changed
or both.  Under the 1971 amendments to
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
                                         -25-

-------
which are still pending on Capitol Hill,
the Refuse Ret permit program would
continue and expand.  The issuance of
permits to industrial dischargers and
municipalities would be the key mecha-
nism whereby the requirements under the
bills would be articulted with respect to
individual dischargers.  Bills in both
Housesof Congress provide for and anti-
cipate State permit programs in place of
the initial federal program.

          The House bill would provide for
an interim delegation of the permit-
issuing authority to the States, subject to
federal "veto."  Once a State has
assumed full authority for the permit
program, under the House bill, federal
approval of State-issued permits would be
necessary only when a State other than the
State issuing the permit objects.  Under
the Senate bill, State-issued permits
would be subject to federal review and
approval unless waived either with re-
spect to individual permits or for clas-
ses or categories of permits.

          Under both bills, the federal
government could resume the permit-
issuing fuction if it is determined that
the State's permit program is inadequate.

     Even though the permit program
is stalled, we are already making use of
the information contained in the 19,000
permit applications.  These constitute an
extremely valuable inventory of the
sources of liquid waste in our waterways,
information that is unique and unprece-
dented.  When combined with information
on other effluent sources, e.g., munici-
pal sanitary and storm sewers, which
are not covered by the 1899 law, we will
have a comprehensive factual base for all
future efforts to control water pollution.

          The Agency has established
strong regional organizations in the ten
federal administrative regions through-
out the country.  Each one now has a
regional EPA Administrator and a com-
plete staff of local experts in the program
areas and in law enforcement.  The ob-
ject is to bring more of the decision-
making power close to the areas
concerned, so that EPA' s actions will be
prompt, effective, and sensitive to local
conditions.  On-the-scene decisions will
be particularly important in the adminis-
tration of the Refuse Act permit program.

          EPA has reorganized the research
and development programs of its prede-
cessor bureaus.  Four national environ-
mental research centers have been esta-
blished, each with a broad charter for
research and a specific theme:  in Cincinnati,
Ohio, for control technology;  in Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina, for health
effects;  in Corvallis, Oregon, for eco-
logical studies;  and in Las Vegas, Nevada,
for environmental monitoring.  The programs
of these four centers and their satellite
laboratories (31 altogether, in 19 States
from Alaska to Florida and from Washington
State to Rhode Island) are designed to
enable the Agency to predict and anti-
cipate environmental hazards as well as
reacting to them.  This entire program is
organized as a single directed effort under
my office and as such represents a some-
what unique prominence of research in a
federal regulatory agency.

          Research aind monitoring are vital
to environmental improvement.  Effective
standard-setting and enforcement require
sound data on what is being introduced
into the environment and on its impact on
ecological stability, human health, and
other factors important to human life.
Another obligation of research and develop-
ment is to deliver to the public some tech-
nological means to comply with published
regulations.  When we develop an item of
material or a technique and bring it through
the demonstration stage and prove that it will
work, that is the end of it for us.  Our
purpose is to advance the state-of-the-art
and to provide a capability to meet the
required standards.  Once this available
technology is developed, it is up to the
producer, the developer, and the manufac-
turer to sell it to the public.  EPA is not
the customer.

     Our philosophy in EPA, since we
are so strongly mission-oriented, is
that all of our work in research and tech-
nological advancement is done with anti-
                                          -26-

-------
cipation for use in problem solving.  We
have no undirected type of research.  In
closely coordinated research programs,
EPA strives to develop a synthesis of
knowledge from the biological, physical,
and social sciences which can be inter-
preted in  terms of total human and envi-
ronmental needs.

       Major aims of the Agency's re-
search efforts at this time include:

       Expansion and improvement of
environmental monitoring and surveil-
lance to provide baselines of environmen-
tal quality.

       Better understanding of long-term
exposure  to contaminants, of sub-acute
or delayed effects on humans and other
organisms,  and of the combined andsyn-
ergistic actions of  chemical, biological,
and physical stresses.

       Acceleration of applied research
into the control of pollutants, the recy-
cling of wastes, and the development of
non-polluting production processes.

       Improved assessments of trends
of technical and social change and poten-
tial effects  -- first, second,  and even
third-order effects -- on environmental
quality.

       Improved understanding of the
transport of pollutants through the  envir-
onment; their passage through air, water,
and land;  their ability to cross the  vari-
ous interfaces; and the various changes
that can make them innocuous at one
point and  hazardous at another.

       About 70 percent of all the work
we do is essentially engineering oriented.
It employs mainly empirical methodolo-
gies and makes use of existing scientific
knowledge.   About  20 percent of our work
might be  regarded  as basic research in
that it employs the techniques of funda-
mental science; but nevertheless, it is
directed toward the acquisition of new
knowledge and scientific understanding
that we must have for our regulatory and
control programs.  Finally, about  10
percent of our work is for the analysis of
the effects of our technological society on
the environment and the identification of
pollution control methods and control
points in the pollution transport path.  In
many ways, we in EPA research and de-
velopment look at ourselves as a proto-
type of a national effort applied to civil
problems.  Our work involves not only
research and engineering on exceedingly
difficult technical matters, but also very
complicated, interrelated economic,
social, and political problems.  The en-
gineering and scientific solutions we are
looking for not only have to be technically
sound and economically practical,  but
they also must ultimately fit into the
fabric of our society, both politically and
socially.  The overall guiding principle
of our work is that it must serve the pub-
lic interest.

     In addition to performing research in
its own laboratories, EPA, through  grants
and contracts,  supports the  studies of
scientists in universities and other re-
search institutions.  The Agency also
consolidates and  evaluates information as
it is developed throughout the scientific
community to develop the best possible
scientific base for environmental action.

     EPA provides training both in its own
facilities and in universities and other
educational institutions to develop the
skilled manpower needed to combat envir-
onmental problems.  The  largest portion
of EPA's manpower training activities
has been in the water area; some 10, 000
waste treatment plant operators have been
trained.   In addition  to laborers,  solid
waste programs will require supervisors
middle management officials, engineers,
and others in solid waste  management.
Studies also are under  way to determine
the number of trained personnel required
for air pollution control.  In pesticides,
EPA conducts formal and  informal train-
ing to produce  pesticide residue chemists.
Effective pesticides control will require
trained and licensed  applicators;  our
training  needs  in this area are just begin-
ning to be felt.
                                         -27-

-------
       In the headquarters of our Office
of Research and Monitoring we assure the
relevance of our research and develop-
ment programs to the Agency mission
functions, and we  also assure that the
long-term research goals are given pro-
per attention,  along with the immediate
needs.  During the past year, we have
differentiated the research programs of
all of our predecessor organizations and
have reintegrated  them into a new set of
functions that are  output oriented, rather
than disciplinarily or topically oriented.
We have developed and now have operating
the first mode of a research programming
and management system.  Along with the
many projects that we inherited, we ac-
quired 40-odd laboratory  organizations
across the Nation,  and attached to these
40-odd laboratory organizations were
over 100 field and  test sites.  These have
now been organized into the National
Environmental Research Center  struc-
ture which I mentioned above.

       Now for some numbers about our
research activities, which include re-
search,  engineering, development, tests,
and demonstrations.  The research and
technological advancement function in
EPA employs just under 2, 000 people,
and the total budget currently applied to
this work is a little over $165 million a
year.  This program consists of 2, 500
active tasks accomplished by a combina-
tion of in-house contracts and grants
programs and interagency transfers to
other federal organizations. Approxi-
mately one-third of the EPA money and
manpower, exclusive of the construction
grant program, goes into research and
development.  About 70 percent of our
staff are professional scientists and engi-
neers.  We have an exceedingly high
ratio  of professionals to support person-
nel. About 20 percent of  all our people
are at the doctoral level.  Of our $165
million per year,  about $55 million  goes
for in-house work.  The in-house money
pays for the salaries of the people, the
laboratory upkeep, the test equipment,
the purchase of operating supplies and
services, the whole works.  About $67
million of our budget goes for contract
work to undertake engineering,  demon-
stration, and research that we are not
able to do ourselves, as well as "to supple-
ment our in-house activity. About $35
million goes for research grants,  predom-
inantly to universities, scientific institu-
tions, and learned societies.  The re-
mainder  of the money goes for transfers
to other government agencies  that help us
do our job.  If the Bureau of Standards,
HEW, Interior,  or the AEC can do it
better than we can, we will give them the
money and be pleased to do so.

     Inside our headquarters office, our
organization is quite  straightforward. We
have two headquarters offices to deter-
mine what our technical  programs will be
and to  supervise the carrying  out  of these
programs.  They are the Office of Re-
search and the Office of  Monitoring.  The
Office of Program Operations provides
the wherewithal to carry out the program,
i.e., the  gaining and distribution of the
money, manpower and facilities; the
formulation of the program; the designa-
tion of the resources and responsibilities;
and the obtaining of the authorities and
design of the mechanism to do all this.

      The real action in  our program is
at our four field units that I mentioned
previously.  Each of our National Envir-
onmental Research Centers has a speci-
fic theme which determines the major
thrust of its effort.  The activity of the
Research Centers is not confined  to these
themes,  however; they are simply major
areas of  emphasis.  We  are encouraging
all of our research centers to develop
true interdisciplinary, multi-faceted
types of research to provide integrated
approaches to total environmental prob-
lems.  It is the absence  of that integrated
approach that lead  us to the fragmented
and compartmentalized type of environ-
mental control that we inherited.  The
environmental problems have  to be sol-
ved through an integrated, holistic
approach in which all of  the pollutants
within a domain and the total ecology of
that domain are considered.

     Within the Office of Research and
Monitoring, the  Office of Research car-
ries out  the research and development
                                        -28-

-------
functions necessary to achieve a cleaner
environment.  The Office of Research is
divided into four  Divisions.  The two
largest,  Processes and Effects, and
Technology, are  concerned with present
massive  problems.  The other two Divi-
sions, Implementation Research and
Environmental Studies, are  concerned
with avoiding future problems.

       The largest research Division,
Processes and Effects, implements its
programs through all four National Envi-
ronmental Research Centers.  This
division identifies pollutants, including
chemical substances, biological materi-
als,  radiation, noise,  and heat require
investigation.   The unit also determines
pollutant sources and physical and biolog-
ical  paths; conducts research on the
effects of pollutants on man, other living
organisms, and non-living things;  and
models the total ecosystem.  The divi-
sion is subdivided into five branches
which deal with the health  effects of pol-
lutants, the ecological and other non-
health effects  of pollutants,  the movement
and transformation of pollutants,  the mea-
surements, measurement  methods, and
instruments used in assessing pollution
problems and  water supply research.

       The greatest single threat to the
Nation's  health is the 250 million tons of
man-made waste dumped into the air
annually by Americans.  Consequently,
the health effects branch of the Processes
and Effects Division is conducting  a nation-
wide study—the first of its kind—on the
effects of air pollution on humans.  The
Community Health and Environmental
Surveillance Studies (CHESS) directed by
the Research Triangle Park NERC, is
comparing the health of those who
breathe polluted air with that of those who
are not exposed to such pollution,  EPA
scientists and technicians  have the coop -
eration of 38, 000 volunteers.  They hope
eventually to have 200, 000  such volun-
teers who are willing to have their health
monitored.  Communities  have been  sel-
ected with high and low sulfur dioxide,
nitrogen oxide, particulate, and photo-
chemical pollution.  With the cooperation
of school, hospital, and government
officials,  the scientists are seeing how
each pollutant affects a person's short-
and long-term health.

      CHESS is attempting to answer a
host of questions: what effect does  long
exposure  to polluted air have on school
absenteeism?  Is there an increased
frequency of acute and chronic respir-
atory disease in highly polluted environ-
ments?   Do pollutants concentrate in
specific organs and cause their malfunc-
tion? Does the death rate rise  and  fall
in rhythm with a  day's pollution?  Is there
a correlation between heart attack and
high pollution?  Already, some tentative
answers are coming in.

      CHESS is closely related  to EPA's
air pollution standards by providing data
on the health effects of various  levels and
types of pollutants.  It is hoped that the
new air standards will lower  the levels of
pollution in CHESS communities and
improve health and welfare.   CHESS will  .
provide the means of measuring the
amount and effect of those improvements.

      Marked geographic differences in
mortality exist in this country.   A logical
explanation for such differences are the
effects of the environment.   Therefore,
in cooperation with the CHESS project,
the Water Supply Research staff,  among
their other programs, is comparing
morbidity data  with data on drinking water
quality.  Such correlations will not  give
definite answers  but they can develop
leads for  more specific studies.

      Another branch is  studying eutro-
phication, an extremely complicated
process that can  cause whole lakes  to
"die. " We do not thoroughly understand
this process because many factors  can
cause eutrophication.  These factors are
varied,  and correlation between causes
and effects should be identified.  It  has
been found, for example, that every lake
stream,  and river tolerates  pollution
differently , depending on its  physical and
chemical  characteristics. The onset of
eutrophication depends on the water's
temperature, mineral content, natural
aeration,  chemical input, flora and fauna.
                                         -29-

-------
In some lakes, the addition of relatively
small quantities of phosphates could tip
the balance and bring on eutrophication.
In other lakes, for different reasons,
nitrogen might be  the critical variable.
As yet the most harmful pollutants can't
be predicted.  Armed with the predictive
ability, planners will be able to strategi-
cally place and size treatment plants and
to design the best  kinds of treatment to
remove the offending chemical.   In a
related research effort,  the Southeast
Water  Laboratory at Athens, Georgia,
reporting to the National Environmental
Research Center at Corvallis,  is begin-
ning to use an eco-system simulator to
examine how fertilizers, pesticides, and
rural runoff from  industry, fiber produc-
tion, paper processing, poultry proces-
sing, and phosphate mining, all effect
streams and the fish and plants  therein.
The  simulator is an actual water course
for which all variables,  such as aeration,
mineral content, diurnal cycles (sunlight,
temperature,  etc.), and turbidity are
controlled. These factors can be changed
to see how each influences the evolution
of pollutant effects in streams.   The pol-
lutants can also be varied to see how they
effect stream life. In a  similar vein, at-
mospheric models are being developed to
control and abate  air pollution.

       Another  Processes and Effects
Division project of particular note dealt
with the environmental effects of a nuclear
power plant which was submerged in 250
feet of water. The program, handled by
General Dynamics under contract,  showed
that fewer organisms would be killed at
a submerged plant than at a plant located
on the coast.

       EPA's second largest research
division, Technology Division,  develops
the technology necessary to abate and
control air and water pollution,  and to
improve solid waste management.  This
Division is also subdivided into  four
operating branches, which deal  with muni-
cipal environmental protection technology,
applied science and technology,  air pol-
lution technology,  and solid waste control.
The  Technology Division conducts its
programs through the NERCs and their
associated universities.

      Developing technology for water
pollution control of municipal waste wa-
ters is one of the chief concerns of the
municipal technology branch of the Tech-
nology Division.  The number of sewered
communities in the U.S. is just under
13, 000.  These facilities serve only 63
percent of the Nation's population. As
a result, raw or inadequately treated
sewage from millions of Americans flows
into our streams. And, although many
communities have been installing and
improving their waste treatment  systems
each year, it is estimated that waste
loads from municipal systems will in
crease nearly four times over the next
50 years.  In addition to the sewage
wastes, storm drainage systems in urban
areas are a serious problem.  Presently
serving over 14 million square miles of.
urban area, storm drainage systems
discharge, without treatment, the collec-
ted runoff from rainfall and snowmelt
into water bodies.  Significant projects
dealing with municipal water waste during
1971 include the development of methods
for upgrading existing treatment plants,
the removel of phosphorous from lakes
by the  addition of chemicals, the develop-
ment of techniques to control and treat
combined sewer overflows and storm
water discharges, and the development of
engineering methodology for reaeration of
rivers and lakes.

      The pollution load from industrial
sources, agriculture, mining,  and marine
sources is of concern to the applied sci-
ence and technology branch of the Tech-
nology Division.  Pollution from indus -
trial sources is equivalent to the pollution
caused by a population of approximately
400 million.  Because of the "slug"-like
load which is characteristic of animal
feedlot runoff after significant rainfall,
the concentration of organic pollutants
eminating from agricultural sources may
be as high as 100 times that of raw muni-
cipal sewage.  Other forms of agricultu-
ral pollution include nutrients and pesti-
cides,  as well as salts and other pollu-
tants in irrigation return flows.  Already
research and demonstration projects
                                        -30-

-------
funded by grants have found solutions to
many of these pollution problems.

       Another concern of the applied
science and technology branch is pollution
resulting from mining.  An estimated
four million tons of acid from mine drain-
age discharges annually into more  than
4, 000 miles of U.S.  streams. There are
many active grant and contract programs
conducting research and demonstration
projects  on this  problem.  In fact,  by the
end of fiscal year 1972, an estimated 11
States should be participating in solving
this pollution problem.

       The magnitude of the solid waste
control problem is staggering.  The
amount of solid waste discarded by
households and commercial and industri-
al establishments is equivalent to seven
pounds per capita. The situation is com-
pounded by the fact that nearly every
means of disposing of these wastes—buri-
al, burning, deep sea disposal--contri-
butes to pollution.  At the same time,
these wastes have the potential to become
new resources of fuel,  raw materials,
and even animal feed supplements.

       Under the  authority of the Solid
Waste Recovery Act of 1970,  much of the
research handled  by the solid waste tech-
nology branch of the Technology Division
is being conducted by the  contract and
grant mechanism.  For example,  under a
demonstration grant, the  Union Gas and
Electric Company of St. Louis has devel-
oped a system which generates electrici-
ty by burning ordinary municipal refuse.

       Cellulose-containing materials,
such as paper, rags, and grass, consti-
tute  50 to 60 percent of all municipal
waste.  In addition,  millions  of tons of
crop residues and wastes from lumber,
pulp and paper industries must be dis-
posed of annually.  Consequently, the
Technology Division is  supporting a study
at Louisiana State University aimed at
converting the cellulose in these solid
wastes into new, useful products.

       The air pollution technology branch
is the only branch in the Technology
Division which did not have ongoing
programs in the field during 1971.  How- .
ever, through  an intra-agency program
transfer,  research related to the abate-
ment and control of air pollution from
stationary sources will now be conducted.
The major emphasis of this research
will be  related to the desulfurization of
flue gases  from thermoelectric power
plants.

      EPA's third largest research divi-
sion, the Implementation Division, deals
with the development and evaluation of
courses of action which implement envir-
onmental protection.   This division is
concerned with techniques for selecting
environmental standards  and also for
assessing both the benefits and the anti-
cipated costs  of achieving those stand-
ards.  The former almost exclusive
emphasis on technological capability and
economic feasibility is avoided.  Techno-
economic considerations  are weighed
against ecological, environmental, and
human considerations. This division
uses economic analysis to evaluate the
costs and benefits of pollution-generating
activities and of alternate pollution con-
trol methods, and research is being
conducted to refine the analytical tech-
niques used.  Fiscal solutions,  together
with more  effective pollution control laws
for their application,  are being examined
in an effort to make pollution control
enforcement more  effective, to provide
incentives for environmental quality, and
to minimize public funding of pollution
control. The Division also is examining
the complex interaction among population
growth, economic growth,  and technologi-
cal change, in order to avoid pollution
resulting from this interaction.

      Finally, a branch of this division
conducts research  which  helps the Agency
to comment on environmental impact
statements.  For example, one major
undertaking has been to coordinate EPA's
input into the  Southwest Energy Study,
which concerns the construction of a
power plant capability in  or near the Four
Corners area (the point at which Utah,
Arizona, Colorado, New  Mexico all meet).
                                        -31-

-------
       The mission of the Environmental
Studies Division is to explore and develop
strategies  and mechanisms for local and
regional use in environmental manage-
ment.  This exploration involves the eval-
uation of institutional forms, modeling
techniques and methodologies that are
comprehensive in scope.  The evaluation
of institutional arrangements will be per-
formed through projects carried out at
selected regional locations and the test-
ing of models will be done in-house at
the headquarters office.

       The institutions dealt with by the
division's activities will include those in
the economic,  social, governmental, and
environmental systems.  The holistic
approach taken toward the study of these
systems will insure that the total effects
of environmental policy will be consi-
dered.  The basic system forces influen-
cing growth, change, and operation will
be analyzed to see how they might be
affected  so as to bring about desirable
environmental consequences.  Further-
more, the  institutional feasibility of
various policy alternatives and techno-
logical changes will be investigated so as
to reveal the types of social, political,
and economic resistance likely to arise
in response to innovations in policy
making and technology.

       The link to local and regional
environmental managers will be devel-
oped through a network of prototype reg-
ional environmental centers, several
university  environmental studies centers,
and the EPA regional offices.  The  study
findings and methodologies produced by
the division will be made available to
governments, industries,  private citizens,
and institutions at the local and regional
levels.

       Some problems faced by research
during 1971 were  so multi-faceted that all
research divisions became involved.
Such was the case with the controversy
over the use of phosphate versus non-
phosphate detergents.  The public was
aware that phosphate-containing products
caused eutrophication.  But some of the
non-phosphate products also suffered
serious shortcomings,  such as accidental
poisoning of young children by caustic
detergents. In particular,  nitrilotriace-
tic acid (NTA), a major contender to
replace phosphate in detergents, was
believed to cause cancer.  Consequently,
after research on this difficult dilemma,
EPA retreated from its former strong
position against phosphate detergents.  In
October 1971,  EPA Administrator Ruckel-
shaus announced that the Agency's imme-
diate policy would be to depend on the
public's choice of detergent type accord-
ing to the local situation: where there is
no eutrophication problem,  for example,
the housewife  can choose phosphate deter-
gents; where there is a local eutrophica-
tion problem,  however,  she could use a
non-phosphate detergent.  If this latter
housewife has small children,  immediate
EPA policy suggests that she make the
choice herself between the non-phosphate
and phosphate detergent.  Longer-term
EPA phosphate policy, however, would
call for removing household detergents
at municipal sewerage treatment plants
before they could enter a local waterway.
Early in 1972  EPA launched an intensive
National Eutrophication Survey of more
than 1, 000 lakes to identify all bodies of
water which have a potential or actual
eutrophication problem due to phospho-
rus from municipal  sources. After the
survey  is completed, EPA, through con-
struction grants, will assist States and
local governments in reducing phosphates
to the extent necessary.

      It is imperative that EPA's re-
search  be delivered to users and be put to
maximum practical use.  In cooperation
with industry, EPA has published and dis-
tributed data on more than  200 water pol-
lution research and demonstration pro-
jects.   Grants,  contracts, and EPA
research activities generate technical
pollution control reports  on current infor-
mation  concerning air, pesticides, solid
waste,  water  and radiation. These
reports are printed in government publi-
cations and professional journals,  and as
contractor reports.   Reprints are  avail-
able to  other federal,  as  well as State and
municipal agencies,  in addition to  the
public.  In addition,  under the Agency's
                                        -32-

-------
technology transfer program, the latest
available technological data concerning
pollution technology have been incorpora-
ted into four process  design manuals.
Available to municipal and design engin-
eers, these publications deal  with sus-
pended solid waste removal,  carbon ab-
sorption,  phosphorus removal,  and the
upgrading of existing  treatment  facilities.
More manuals will follow.

       What remains to  be learned about
the protection of our environment is stag-
gering.   More research  is needed in  all
areas.  To maximize the benefits from
extra-mural research endeavors, all
grants and contracts are now  being re-
viewed by the research office for  rele-
vancy to EPA's missions and  specific
ongoing programs. There is  temptation
to recoil at the complexity of  the environ-
mental problems facing us.  Yet we can-
not research these problems piecemeal.
They must be considered with the broad-
est possible perspective, taking into
account all environmental implications.
Otherwise,  our  solutions might  cause
still other--perhaps more  serious prob-
lems.

       In closing, I would  like very much
to let you know that we recognize that we
are not alone in this pollution research
and technology business. We must coop-
erate with other government agencies to
carry out this most important task of
cleaning up the environment.  We need
your support, ideas,  and good will.   One
agency cannot do the job alone.  Without
public interest and backing, in fact, the
results of our research and technology
could never be translated into action  pro-
grams for public benefit. So we are
dependent upon the public and upon you.
We know too well.from our experience of
the past year, how  enormous the task is
that lies ahead of us.  Within  our means
to do so, we welcome your participation
and your assistance.  Thank you very
much.
                                        -33-

-------
                DISCUSSION OF THE PRESENTATION BY STANLEY GREENFIELD
Maninger;  You mentioned the use of grants
and contracts to get assistance from other
agencies.  What, in EPA's definition, is the
difference between a grant and a contract?
Is there any essential difference?

Greenfield;  There is a difference in
terms of who can get a grant.  We have
various types of grants ranging from a
typical grant that goes to an educational
institution, the NSF type of grant, where
the overhead is small, where there's no
profit or fee allowed, and the cost share
grant which is assigned primarily to demon-
stration programs, where industry or other
agencies, municipalities in particular, might
enter into an agreement with EPA where EPA
provides a large chunk of the money to dem-
onstrate a new technology in a municipality.
But the municipality has to provide a sig-
nificant share of the money as well.  This
can range as high as 40 or 50% of the
total cost.  The contracts, on the other
hand, are mainly reserved for specific
things that we do with industry, both
demonstration and technology development.
They are the typical type of contracts
where you put out an RPP, where there are
bids involved, where there is a fee in-
volved, etc.  It's the same sort of dif-
ference between contracts and grants that
you find in any government agency.

Eliaaeen;  How do you see the Kennedy bill,
providing something over a billion dollars
to NSF to do research in a whole host of
areas, affecting your agency?

Greenfield;  I see it in many ways devas-
tating not to just my agency but several
agencies.  You face reality and try to
be highly pragmatic about these things.
If this were the best of all possible worlds,
and they indeed were provided this money,
and there was some sort of coordination
capability involved, and the ability to
provide this money did not impact my
research program, so that it indeed was
a complementary program, then I think it
would be highly desirable.  But this is
not the best of all possible worlds, and if
you take a billion dollars and give it to
NSF to do research in the environment, then
the research program in the Environmental
Protection Agency, when it comes up for
review by an appropriations committee, has
a very tough row to hoe.  Now what you face
is the specter of a regulatory agency
which must depend on a high degree of
information to do an adequate job plus a
high degree of internal expertise to keep
it from being led down the garden path by
those it is trying to regulate.  It will
suddenly find itself, I feel, denuded of
its research agencies, namely drifting
closer and closer to those it is trying to
regulate.  Now that's not just EPA;  if you
look at the Kennedy Bill, it in effect
provides the same threat to about 10
different agencies.

Question;  You specifically contrasted
your approach with that which was taken by
NASA, a large system to get the job done.
I assume by this that once you assume
something is doable and reasonable and
needed, that you would then rely on the
carrot and the stick to get perhaps 10,000
independent people to do their share of
the job.  Is that really a reasonable
approach to solving a large overall problem?

Greenfield;  You'd like to have better
Incentives available to you, but we don't
have them now in the regulatory function.
Yet that's the only ability we have.  You
don't have a massive technology implemen-
tation program other than in the construction
dollars for the waste water treatment
plants.  Now that's the only place where
you have the government providing funds to
achieve secondary treatment in many other
plants across the country.  What you do have,
though, in the various laws, is that the
standards become applicable when you've
demonstrated that the technology is available.
The new source performance standards in the
air case are dependent on a demonstrated
control technology, and if you look at the
new water legislation, it has terms like
"best practical" and "best available".  So
that the agency essentially is mandated to
start showing that such a technology is
available, and then it becomes part of the
regulatory function.  The achievement of
this control technology then is picked up
by the state and local governments and/or
the industrial component.  It is a carrot
and a stick.  I don't think that is an un-
reasonable thing to do.  I think the Federal
Government cannot do it all.  There's not
that much money available.  It's got to be
picked up, over the long run, by industry
and its ability to pass on the costs to the
consumer.  Essentially it becomes a choice
on the part of this country, every person,
that they indeed want to pay the cost, both
economic and social, for having a better
environment.  Now, there are
                                           -34-

-------
certain areas where this is taken out of
the hands of choice, and that's in the area
of environmental health effects.  Such
things as ambient air quality standards
are based on not impacting the health of
the country due to air pollution.  As I
said, in the case of the ambient air quality
standards and implementation plans of the
states for the automotive case, no real
consideration is given, in the law, to
the economic consequences.  You will meet
those ambient air quality standards, be-
cause they impact health.  That's the one
area where this is not true.

Question:  In terms of interagency juris-
diction, such as the SST controversy which
appears to be of DOT purview, how do you see
the role of the EPA in something like that
which would have health effect implications?

Greenfield:  I think this is a good example
of utilizing the desires and capabilities
of other agencies.  In this case DOT felt
called upon to examine the impact of the
SST on the environment.  EPA has joined
them but has not contended with DOT that
EPA should have the lead in this case.
DOT has the ability to ultimately play a
role in whether or not a supersonic Trans-
port is developed in this country, whether
there are regulations against the use of
SST's of other countries coming into this
country, etc.  Since DOT has taken the
strong lead to do that research, we're
tickled to just join them and do our part
in it and leave the lead to them.  The
FAA plays the major role in deciding, from
the regulatory standpoint, what ultimately
happens to the SST as far as the impact on
the environment and whether or not you
allow SST's to operate in this country.
However, there is a secondary role that
EPA does play, or will play if the noise
legislation goes through.  In that case
we would be mandated to set standards for
noise and noise control in places like air-
ports.  In this case, we would have to step
back into the question of what was the
impact of aircraft like the SST on such noise
standards.  While we don't know whether
we have a noise bill yet, in one of the
conference committee meetings an amendment
was put in which says that the SST will
not be allowed to operate in this country
unless it meets the noise standards  for
subsonic aircraft.  Since it cannot do
that, if this amendment stood up it would
effectively ban the use of all SST's in
this country, foreign or otherwise.

Question:  Since the thrust of the new water
legislation is related to the practicability
and  availability of  technology, do you
envision a  shift away  from  environmental
effects research and heavier  emphasis on
.technology  and process development?

Greenfield:  No, not really.   I view processes
and  effects as equally important, as a  co-
partner with technology.  If  you  go  into
the  water legislation, in addition to the
technology  aspects,  there is  still a
strong emphasis on understanding  the effect
of water pollution both on  the aquatic
environment and on health.  So there is a
clear  mandate to continue to  understand
processes and effects, particularly  if  you
are  going to talk about standards between
now  and 1985.  You can't go away  from
achieving a better understanding  of  our
impact on the environment if  you  are going
to do  a significant, justifiable, reasonable
job  in setting standards.   I  will admit that
there  is something of  a disagreement going
on concerning the question  of how much  of
the  technology development  can you leave
in the hands of private industry.  I feel
firmly that EPA has  got to  continue  to
play a strong role in  technology  develop-
ment for many reasons, not  the least of
them being  that industry has  not  shown
that much of an interest in producing the
technology  necessary to control pollution.
                                          -35-

-------
                                 ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS

                                      D.  S. Earth
                                      W.  F. Durham
                                      C.  R. Porter
                                      J.  C. Cross
                           Environmental  Protection Agency
                        National Environmental Research Center
                        Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
     The introduction includes a general discussion of environmental  standards with
emphasis on the required scientific information base which must serve as the underlying
foundation for any defensible environmental standards.  The general  discussion also
focuses on the need for setting environmental standards for air, water, pesticides,
radiation, noise and toxic substances in a coherent, coordinated fashion with due regard
for the complex chemical, physical and biological interactions which normally take place.
in the biosphere as well as due consideration for socio-economic factors and solid
waste management practices.  Subsequent sections then provide an overview of present
EPA authorities for setting standards in the subject areas of air pollution, water
pollution, pesticides and radiation.
               INTRODUCTION

     The U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is first and foremost a regu-
latory agency.  Briefly stated the mission
of the EPA is to control environmental
pollution to socially acceptable levels.
This simple statement, upon careful anal-
ysis, turns out not to be simple at all.
In fact the development and maintenance
of an adequate regulatory program is an
incredibly complex matter.  As we shall
see a major research and development pro-
gram is needed as an integral part of EPA
to provide the necessary scientific infor-
mation base to serve as the foundation for
EPA environmental standards and regulatory
programs.

     To determine the need for and requir-
ed extent of a regulatory program to con-
trol a given environmental pollutant an-
swers to the two following fundamental
research questions must be obtained:

     1.  As the given environmental pollu-
     tant is presently introduced into the
     environment and subsequently cycled
     and recycled through the biosphere,
     is it or any of its byproducts harm-
     ful or objectionable to a significant
     portion of either the human popula-
     tion or the environment?
     2.  If the given environmental pollu-
     tant or any of its byproducts is deter1-
     mined to be harmful or objectionable,
     what minimum degree of control is
     necessary to abate the adverse effects
     to socially acceptable levels, and in
     what manner should that control be
     instituted in order to be most effi-
     cient in the sense of having a mini-
     mum impact on the total U.S. economy?

Let us now examine some of the required
scientific information which must be accu-
mulated in order to answer the above ques-
tions for a wide variety of environmental
pollutants and in turn to develop ade-
quate environmental standards and regula-
tory programs.

     First we must precisely define the
environmental pollutants of concern as
well as the adverse effects on man or his
environment which we wish to abate to
socially acceptable levels.  This calls
for a precise definition of sources of
the environmental pollutant of concern as
well as an adequate definition of adverse
effects caused to man or his environment
by various levels of the pollutant.  Since
the pollutant must usually be controlled
at its source we must have an accurate
procedure for determining the degree of
source control which will be required to
reduce the environmental levels suffici-
ently to adequately abate the adverse
effects.  This also implies that we have
adequate measurement methods and suffi-
cient knowledge of control technology to
clearly indicate how the necessary source
control is to be accomplished.  In summary,
then, we must know, or develop an adequate
research program to find out, substantial
information needs in the following subject
areas:
                                           -36-

-------
      1.   Effects
      2.   Measurement Methods
      3.   Existing Environmental  Levels
      4.   Sources
      5.   Predictive Models Linking Source
          Emissions to Subsequent Environ-
          mental Levels
      6.   Control Technology for Signifi-
          cant Sources

      I  shall now give a brief discussion
of each of the above subject areas.

EFFECTS

      The legislative intent in environ-
mental control authorities is believed to
call for the institution of environmental
pollution controls on the basis of needs
for control to protect the health and wel-
fare of the general public and to enhance
the quality of our environmental  resource
while maintaining conditions which enable
balanced economic growth.  With this in
mind, detailed knowledge regarding expo-
sure-adverse health or welfare effect
relationships for environmental pollutants
acting singly or in combination must serve
as the foundation for the application of
any control authority.  Sensitive popula-
tion groups at risk must be identified and
the standards made sufficiently stringent,
with a margin of safety, to protect those
groups.   The firmer our knowledge of
adverse effects, the smaller the margin of
safety will need to be; the smaller also
will be the cost of controls.  Firm know-
ledge helps build an informed public opin-
ion in support of a clean environment. And
in instances where the validity of protec-
tive regulations may be challenged in court,
firm knowledge will obviously strengthen
our case.  Effects research and surveil-
lance must continue after standards have
been promulgated to confirm the continuous
validity and effectiveness of existing con-
trols or else to reveal inadequacies and
the need for revision.

MEASUREMENT METHODS

      Adequate reference or standard mea-
surement methods of required precision and
accuracy must be available for both source
and ambient environmental quality measure-
ments.  Quality control procedures must be
available for all measurement methods,
including sampling and sample handling as
well as analytical and data handling meth-
ods and procedures.  These measurement
methods are necessary adjuncts of effects
research, source definition, environmental
quality surveillance, standards definition
and ultimately enforcement of promulgated
standards.

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY SURVEILLANCE

      Adequate nationwide environmental
quality surveillance networks are essen-
tial to determine and document the envi-
ronmental quality for significant pollu-
tants as a function of time and place.
Such environmental quality levels are of
extreme importance since it is usually
the environmental quality in the vicinity
of a receptor which is most closely asso-
ciated with any adverse health or welfare
effect.  Thus environmental quality levels
indicate the location of the most severe
problem and give a quantitative measure
of the effectiveness of controls as they
are instituted.  Surveillance networks
must adequately cover all geographical
regions ranging from urban to remote rural
locations.  Surveillance network opera-
tions must also be capable of systematic-
ally searching for, identifying and quan-
titating new or newly recognized environ-
mental pollutants which may have potential
adverse health or welfare effects.  Pro-
cedures are being implemented to integrate
Federal, State and local environmental
surveillance networks.

SOURCES

      All sources, mobile and stationary,
present and future, man-made and natural,
of environmental pollutants of concern
must be identified and quantitated.  This
information is essential to develop strat-
egies for reducing existing pollutant
levels and preventing the creation of new
problems.  This source definition effort
must be a continuing one in order to allow
for incorporation of changes resulting
from construction of new industry, appli-
cation of new or modified technology,
phasing out of existing industrial plants,
application of control technology, etc.

PREDICTIVE MODELLING

      In order to determine degrees of con-
trol on environmental pollution sources
which will be necessary to achieve envi-
ronmental quality levels, it is necessary
to have validated predictive models of
adequate sensitivity linking source emis-
sions to subsequent environmental quality
levels.  These models should allow for
influence of source characteristics,
meteorological parameters, physical and
                                           -37-

-------
chemical transformations and removal pro-
cesses such as settling out, precipitation
scavenging, etc.  Additionally, the avail-
ability of adequate validated predictive
models significantly decreases the number
of surveillance stations which must be used
to assess environmental quality.

CONTROL TECHNOLOGY

      Adequate knowledge of available con-
trol technology for all significant sta-
tionary and mobile sources of environmental
pollutants of concern must be available in
order to set appropriate emission standards.
For sources where present control techno-
logy is inadequate to abate adverse effects,
research and development efforts must be
carried out to provide the required impro-
ved control technology.  A modest effort
in research on land use planning as an aux-
iliary control technique is incorporated
into our efforts in this area.

      In summary, once a sufficient amount
of information is assembled in each of the
six key subject areas and published in
appropriate documents, we are then in a
position to select the best available con-
trol option to abate the adverse effects
on health or welfare of a given environ-
mental pollutant or combination of environ-
mental pollutants.  Principal considera-
tions entering into this selection include:

      1.  Severity of observed adverse
      effect on health or welfare and size
      of the critical population at risk.
      2.  Distribution of significant
      sources.
      3.  Time by which controls can be
      effective in abating adverse effects
      4.  Cost-effectiveness of different
      available options.
      5.  Efficacy of available control
      techniques for significant sources.

In general a  concerted effort is made to
utilize that  available control option or
combination of control options which  is
most likely to lead to the abatement  of the
adverse effects on health or welfare  at the
earliest possible time with due regard
being given to economic factors.

      Must we then wait until we have a
basis of information accumulated which will
be acceptable to all and which will serve
as an irrefutable and  unassailable scien-
tific basis for any necessary regulatory
action?  If we adopted that posture,  I sub-
mit that there would never be any regula-
tory actions taken!  Thus, we must normal-
ly be satisfied with a somewhat less than
perfect basis for our regulatory actions.
A very difficult value judgement must be
made by the Administrator, EPA  as to the
adequacy of the scientific basis for any
proposed regulatory action.  In almost all
instances this is an extremely difficult
decision to make.  Economic factors of
major importance are invariably involved.
Thus, a careful analysis must always be
made of cost of control vs. benefits to
be achieved from control.  The decision to
take regulatory action or not is rarely
an easy one.  But it must be made.

INTERACTIONS BETWEEN AND AMONG ENVIRON-
MENTAL POLLUTANTS

      Before proceeding to more detailed
discussions of environmental standards
separately for air, water, pesticides and
radiation it is deemed appropriate to
present some additional general discussion
of the collection of all environmental
pollutants and the need for concern for
protection of the total environment.  In
particular we must exercise great care in
our regulatory programs to avoid control
of a single type of environmental pollu-
tion in a manner which creates an unaccep-
table amount of another type of pollution.
For example, we should not solve our air
pollution problems by creating difficult
•water pollution or. solid waste management
problems.  And of course our solid waste
management practices should not create
difficult air or water pollution problems.
To emphasize these points  I would now like
to present a more detailed example.

      The fundamental objective of envir-
onmental pollution effects researcii is to
develop a family of dose-response relation-
ships for different populations of recep-
tors (man, animals or plants).  When these
relationships are being developed from a
holistic standpoint the general solution
must include the quantitative determina-
tion of the transfer functions associated
with each step in the transport of the
pollutant from its source  to the receptors
where it exerts an effect.

      A simplified schematic diagram of
these complex processes for the case
where the environmental pollutant starts
out as an air pollutant is presented in
Fig. 1.  In general, air pollutants are
emitted from their respective sources and
transported through the biosphere.  The
pollutant-may interact with many recep-
                                           -38-

-------
CO
CO
                                                      AIR RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
                                                        PRACTICES AND POLICIES
                                             AIR TRANSPORT
                                             AND DIFFUSION
MOBILE AND STATIONARY
      SOURCES
                                                                                                                   AQUATIC AND
                                                                                                                   MARINE LIFE
                                                                           SOCIAL AND
                                                                        ECONOMIC EFFECTS
HUMAN HEALTH
  EFFECTS
                                                                                     TOTAL IMPACT OF AIR POLLUTION AND ITS CONTROL ON MAN
                                                                  Figure 1.  Delineation of the principal pathways by which air pollution and its control impacts
                                                                  on man and his environment.

-------
tors, inanimate or animate or both.  The
recycling through these receptors and their
environment is dependent for the most part
on many factors such as the chemical  and
physical form, biological availability, and
toxicity.  If a human health effect is the
endpoint, the interaction of man with his
total environmental exposure would lead to
a dose to a critical portion of man's body
which may be a molecule, a cell, a tissue,
an organ, an organ system or the whole
body.  In addition social and economic
effects in the broadest sense must be taken
into consideration to assess the total im-
pact of air pollution on man.  As a mini-
mum, consideration for social effects must
include an assessment of man's perception
of and reaction to air pollution and the
resulting effects upon his social habits,
mores, attitudes and institutions.  For
economic impact one must consider effects
on weather, vegetation, materials, domes-
tic and wild animals as well as soiling
and general aesthetic effects resulting
in economic cost to man.

      As stated previously, extensive
recycling of the pollutant may occur before
reaching the ultimate receptor.  Also in
many cases, air pollutants undergo complex
temporally and spatially dependent physical
and chemical transformations throughout
the entire process; furthermore, various
concentrating mechanisms can occur.  It
should be emphasized, however, that in
developing an extensive systems approach
for short and long term research planning
to insure that all required effects
research will be accomplished in an orderly
and timely fashion, it is not always nec-
essary to fully understand the details of
each and every mechanism taking place in
the ecosystem.  In many instances an input-
output quantitative analysis may suffice.

      Clearly a similar example could be
presented for the case where the environ-
mental pollutant starts out as a water
pollutant or as solid waste.  The point to
be made is that the effective management
of environmental resources requires a
systems approach which considers all  ef-
fects and interactions of the pollutant
of concern.

      In the remainder of this paper separ-
ate discussions of air, water, pesticides
and radiation environmental standards will
be given.  In a paper of this length it is
only possible to present a broad overview.
Standards for noise and "toxic substances"*
will not be considered here si nee-EPA
does not yet have authority to set them.
However, legislation containing such auth-
ority is now pending before Congress.

          AIR POLLUTION STANDARDS

     It is important to bear in mind that
Federal policy for air pollution control
is based on the need to protect the pub-
lic from the adverse effects of pollutants
on health and welfare and to enhance the
quality of the total environment.

     A brief discussion of each authority
will be given.

CRITERIA AND CONTROL TECHNIQUES DOCUMENTS

     The Administrator, EPA, is directed
by the Clean Air Act, as amended, to pub-
lish air quality criteria and control
technique documents for those air pollu-
tants

     "(A) which in his judgment have an
     adverse effect on public health and
     welfare; " and

     "(B) the presence of which in the
     ambient air results from numerous or
     diverse mobile or stationary sources."

Air quality criteria for an air pollutant
"shall accurately reflect the latest sci-
entific knowledge useful in indicating
the kind and extent of all identifiable
effects on public health or welfare which
may be expected from the presence of such
pollutant in the ambient air, in varying
quantities."  Information on control tech-
niques "shall include data relating to the
technology and alternative methods of pre-
vention and control of air pollution."
The Act states that "effects on welfare
include, but are not limited to, effects
on soils, water, crops, vegetation, man-
made materials, animals, wildlife, weather,
visibility, and climate, damage to and
deterioration of property, and hazards to
transportation, as well as effects on
economic values and on personal comfort
and well-being."
                                               * As  defined  in the Toxic Substances
                                                 Control  Act
                                           -40-

-------
NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
public health or welfare.1
     For those materials for which criteria
and control technique documents are issued,
the Administrator is directed to prescribe
national primary and secondary ambient air
quality standards which are defined as
follows:
     1.  "National primary ambient air
     quality standards shall be ambient
     air quality standards the attainment
     and maintenance of which in the
     judgment of the Administrator, based
     on such criteria and allowing an
     adequate margin of safety, are
     requisite to protect the public
     health."
     2.  "National secondary ambient air
     quality standards shall specify a
     level of air quality the attainment
     and maintenance of which in the
     judgment of the Administrator, based
     on such criteria, is requisite to
     protect the public welfare from any
     known or anticipated adverse effects
     associated with the presence of such
     air pollutant in the ambient air."

     To date criteria and control techni-
que documents have been issued and Nation-
al Primary and Secondary Ambient Air Qua-
lity Standards have been promulgated for
six common air pollutants:  sulfur dioxide,
particulate matter, carbon monoxide, photo-
chemical oxidants, hydrocarbons and nitrogen
dioxide. '"'3 These national standards will
be implemented, maintained, and enforced
by the States in accordance with Imple-
mentation Plans developed by the States
winch must follow specified requirements
and are subject to review and approval by
the Administrator.1^

STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEH STATION/BY
SOURCES

     "The term 'standard of performance1
means a standard for emissions of air pol-
lutants which reflects the degree of emis-
sion limitation achievable through the
application of the best system of emission
reduction which (taking into account the
cost of achieving such reduction) the
Administrator determines has been ade-
quately demonstrated."

     The Administrator is required to des-
ignate stationary source categories and
then publish standards for new sources
that in his judgment "may contribute sig-
nificantly to air pollution which causes
or contributes to the endangerment of
     Standards of performance applicable
to new stationary sources have been es-
tablished for an initial  group of five
categories:15'16 fossil  fuel  fired steam
generators, municipal  incinerators, ce-
ment plants, nitric acid plants, and
sulfuric acid plants.   For each of these
source categories, the standards include
emission limits for one or more of the
following four pollutants:  particulate
matter, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides,
and sulfuric acid mist.

     In some cases standards  of perform-
ance for new stationary sources may be
established for pollutants not designated
for control by state implementation plans
or not designated as a "hazardous pollu-
tant."  For these situations  existing
sources are to be dealt  with by State
emission standards under procedures in
process of being developed.  State emis-
sion standards applicable to  existing
sources in the listed categories are to
be established for any air pollutant cov-
ered by national standards of performance
and not already controlled or destined
for control under national air quality
standards or national  emission standards
for hazardous air pollutants.

NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR STATIONARY
SOURCES OF HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS'

     "The term 'hazardous air pollutant1
means an air pollutant to which no ambi-
ent air quality standard is applicable
and which in the judgement of the Admin-
istrator may cause, or contribute to, an
increase in mortality or an increase in
serious irreversible, or incapacitating
reversible, illness."  The Act requires
the Administrator to publish  a list and
then, subsequently, to promulgate national
emission standards for those  air pollu-
tants deemed hazardous.   These emission
standards must provide "an ample margin of
safety" to protect the public health. They
are applicable to both new and stationary
sources.

     In general, standards will be set by
defining "maximum allowable air quality
levels" at the fence-line of  applicable
sources and then using dispersion models
to back-calculate to those allowable emis-
sions that will ensure that the maximum
allowable air quality levels  will not be
exceeded.  The calculated allowable emis-
sions would then serve as a basis for the
                                          -41-

-------
national emission standards.

     Under this authority, three air pol-
lutants have been listed as hazardous:
asbestos, beryllium, and mercury.17 Nation-
al emission standards for these three pol-
lutants have been proposed18 and have been
the subject of public hearings.19

     It should be noted that the proposed
emission standards for beryllium and mer-
cury were developed by the methods indi-
cated above.  The proposed emission stand-
ards for asbestos were not developed on
this basis because routine, standardized
techniques for sampling and analyzing
asbestos are not yet available.  Thus,
the standards for asbestos are expressed
in terms of required control practices.20

NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR MOTOR
VEHICLES AND AIRCRAFT AND REGULATORY"
AUTHORITY FOR FUELS AND FUEL ADDlTlVES

     Emission standards are required for
any air pollutant from any class or classes
of new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle
engines which in the judgment of the
Administrator "causes or contributes to,
or is likely to cause or contribute to,
air pollution which endangers the public
health or welfare."  Emission standards
are also required for similarly harmful
air pollutants from any class or classes
of aircraft or aircraft engines.

     The effective date for emission stan-
dards must be reasonable.  It must allow
time to develop and apply the requisite
technology.  The cost of compliance within
the set time period must be given appro-
priate consideration.

     Issuance of proposed aircraft emission
standards must be preceded, j_. a_., by a
study of the effects of aircraft emissions
on air quality, and of the technological
feasibility of controlling emissions. The
Secretary of Transportation must be con-
sulted.

     While issuance of aircraft emission
standards is the responsibility of the
Administrator of the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, the enforcement of these
standards is the responsibility of the
Secretary of Transportation.

     With regard to national standards for
emissions from light duty motor vehicles
and engines, it should be noted that the
Act establishes statutory standards for
emissions of carbon monoxide and hydro-
carbons for the 1975 model year (and
thereafter) and for emissions of oxides of
nitrogen for the 1976 model year (and
thereafter).  In accordance with provi-
sions of the Act, the feasibility of
meeting these statutory deadlines has
been under study by the National Academy
of Sciences.

     The manufacture or sale of any motor
vehicle fuel or fuel additive may be con-
trolled or prohibited if the emission
product of such fuel or fuel additive

     "(A)...will endanger the public
     health or welfare," or
     "(B)...will impair to a significant
     degree the performance of any emis-
     sion control device or system" which
     is or may be expected to be in gen-
     eral use.

     Before controlling or prohibiting
the manufacture or sale of a fuel or fuel
additive, the Administrator must consider
an array  of scientific, medical, economic,
and technological data relevant to deter-
mining the need for regulation and to
making findings on the technological and
economic feasibility and consequences of
such regulations.  This includes, for
example, an appraisal of adverse effects
of substitutions if the manufacture or
sale of a fuel or fuel additive is to be
prohibited or, as another example, an
analysis of alternate emission control
devices if the manufacture or sale of a
fuel or fuel additive is to be controlled
or prohibited because emission products
will impair the performance of emission
control devices or systems.

     Early in 1971, the Agency announced
its intention of proposing regulations
concerning the use of alkyl lead as an
additive in motor vehicle gasolines.21
The notice stated, i_.a^., that it was
"...anticipated that regulations will be
proposed which provide for general  avail-
ability by July 1, 1974, of lead-free
gasoline of an octane quality suitable for
1975 and subsequent model year light duty
vehicles..."  It v;as further anticipated
that the proposed regulations would also
call for reduction of the lead content of
the current "regular" and "premium" grades
of gasoline.  Regulations have now been
proposed and public hearings have been
held.

     Aviation fuel  standards are the joint
                                           -42-

-------
responsibility of the Federal  Aviation
Administration and the Environmental  Pro-
tection Agency.  They are to be established
by the Administrator of the Federal  Avia-
tion Administration for the purpose of
"controlling or eliminating aircraft emis-
sions which the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency...deter-
mines endanger the public health."

EVALUATIVE TECHNICAL REPORTS

     As an aid in the judgments and deter-
minations which need to be made, the
National Academy of Sciences is providing
the Environmental Protection Agency with a
series of technical reports which  review
and evaluate current scientific knowledge
of the deleterious effects of significant
pollutants on the human health and welfare
and which specify where further research
is essential or desirable.  Comprehensive
reports have been completed on Fluorides,
Lead, and Particulate Polycyclic Organic
Matter (POM).  A less comprehensive report
on asbestos focused on the need for and
the feasibility of air pollution controls.
Five studies currently (July 1972) well
under way are on:  Chromium, Manganese,
Nickel, Vanadium, and Vapor-Phase  Organic
Air Pollutants from Hydrocarbons.   Studies
just beginning are on copper, zinc, parti-
culates (emphasizing fine particulates),
chlorine and HC1, and selenium.  Additional
pollutants for study by the Academy will be
selected.

     Similarly, there will also be avail-
able, later this year, three comparable
reports on pollutants prepared by  a Panel
on Hazardous Trace Substances of the
Office of Science and Technology.   The
three pollutants under examination are:
Arsenic, Cadmium,  and Polychlorinated
Biphenyl Compounds (PCB).

SUMMARY

     The Clean Air Amendments of 1970 re-
quire for their implementation at  tiie
Federal level a set of coordinated informa-
tion and action inputs and outputs which
is complex and extensive.  Air pollutants
having adverse effects on human health or
welfare must be identified and their air
quality levels quantitated.  All signifi-
cant sources of sucii pollutants must be
inventoried and we must know, or learn,
!iow to control these sources to a  suffici-
ent degree to abate the adverse effects on
human health or welfare.  The next step
is to develop and promulgate, or cause the
development and promulgation of, standards
or regulations which will assure the abate-
ment of the adverse effects in a timely
fashion and with due consideration  to
economic costs.  Finally, the promulgated
standards must be rigorously enforced.

        HATER POLLUTION STANDARDS

HISTORICAL LEGISLATION

     Under the Water Quality Act of 1965,
all States, territories and other affected
jurisdictions were given the option of
preparing water quality standards for their
interstate streams, lakes, and coastal
waters, or of having this done by the
Federal Government.  All fifty states and
four other jurisdictions (the District of
Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the
Virgin Islands) drafted their own stand-
ards, held public hearings on them, adopted
them, and submitted them for Federal ap-
proval, as required by law.   To date, all
water quality standards have been approved,
wholly, or in part.  Notice of approved
water quality standards is published in
the Code of Federal Regulations at 40 C.F.R.
Part 120.

DEFINING STANDARDS

     Each State's standards consist of four
factors:

     1.  The use, such as for swimming,
     aquatic life, drinking water, indus-
     try, or a combination of these, to
     be made of each particular river,
     lake, or coastal  water.

     2.  Criteria—A determination of the
     physical, chemical, and biological
     characteristics which would permit
     the appropriate uses agreed to by  the
     State and by the Federal  Government.
     These are written in specific numeri-
     cal  limits wherever possible and set
     limits on bacteria, dissolved oxygen,
     temperature, pH,  toxic  materials,  and
     taste-and-odor-producing  substances
     in the water.   Narrative  descriptions
     are employed only if more  precise
     limits cannot be  developed.

     The criteria must set physical, chem-
ical,  and biological  limits.  Criteria  are
supplemented by what is commonly referred
to as  the "five freedoms," meaning that
surface water  should be free of:22

     -Materials that will  settle to form
                                           -43-

-------
      objectionable deposits;
    - Floating debris, oil, scum, and
      other matter;
    - Substances producing objectionable
      color, odor, taste, or turbidity;
    - Materials, including radionuclides,
      in concentrations or combinations
      which produce undesirable physio-
      logical responses in human, fish
      and other animal life and plants;
      and
    - Substances and conditions or com-
      binations thereof in concentrations
      which produce undesirable aquatic
      life.

    Minimum recommended criteria to pro-
tect those uses are contained in the
National Technical Advisory Committee „.
(NTAC) report, Water Quality Criteria,
of April, 1968.  The NTAC report is used
as the basis for judging the acceptability
of Federal-State standards.  An example
of some typical numerical criteria recom-
mendations of the Water Quality Criteria
report are:
                              may be a part of or identical  to a
                              State's effluent discharge, permit
                              system.  Pollution originating from
                              vessels and marinas, agricultural
                              wastes, municipalities and indus-
                              tries, dredging, pesticides, acid
                              mine drainage, and other sources are
                              included in varying degrees.

                              4.   An antidegradation statement to
                              prohibit the deterioration of waters
                              in  which existing quality is higher
                              than the water quality standards.

                         ENFORCEMENT OF STANDARDS

                              Once standards submitted by a State
                         have been approved, they become Federal
                         standards and are subject to Federal
                         enforcement.  However, the initial  respon-
                         sibility for enforcement of standards
                         rests with the States.  If a State fails
                         to exercise this responsibility, the EPA
                         Administrator may act.

                              Another enforcement tool is the
                         Refuse Act Permit Program, administered by
PARAMETERS
WATER   QUALITY   CRITERIA

                         LIMITS
ODOR (WATER SUPPLY)
DISSOLVED SOLIDS (WATER SUPPLY)


TEMPERATURE (FRESHWATER)
    MAXIMUM (TROUT SPAWNING)
    DEGREE RISE STREAMS (GENERAL)
FECAL COLIFORM (RECREATION)
pH (WATER SUPPLY)
DISSOLVED OXYGEN (TROUT)
RADIUM -226 (WATER SUPPLY)
ARSENIC (WATER SUPPLY)
DDT (MARINE)
SETTLEABLE SOLIDS (FRESHWATER ORGANISMS)
                         VIRTUALLY ABSENT
                         500 MG/L PERMISSIBLE
                         <200 MG/L DESIRABLE


                         A8°F
                         5°F MAXIMUM
                         200 PER 100 ML
                         6.0 - 8.5 PERMISSIBLE
                         >6.0 MG/L
                         5 to 6 MG/L SHORT PERIODS (PROVIDED WATER
                         QUALITY IS GENERALLY FAVORABLE)
                         3 PC PER LITER
                         0.05 MG/L
                         0.6 |iG/L (A8-HOUR TI^)
                         NOT TO AFFECT NATURAL BIOTA
    3.  An implementation and enforcement
    plan for construction of waste treat-
    ment facilities and the application
    of other abatement measures by cities
    and industries to meet the water
    quality requirements by a certain date.
    The implementation schedule includes
    interim dates to measure progress to-
    wards plan compliance and a final
    date for commencement of the planned
    treatment or control.  These dates
                         the U.S.  Army Corps of Engineers and based
                         on the River and Harbor Act of 1899.  Com-
                         pliance with water quality standards is
                         considered before granting any permit for
                         discharging industrial waste into streams.

                         DISAPPROVAL OF STATE STANDARDS

                              If a Regional Administrator finds
                         some standards adopted by a State are
                         unacceptable or that none have been set by
                                          -44-

-------
a State for an interstate stream, he may
continue to negotiate with the State, or
the Administrator may prepare new or re-
vised standards after holding a standards
setting conference and publishing proposed
standards in the Federal  Register.

STANDARDS REVISION

    Ilith continued advances in the science
and technology of water pollution control,
it is expected that many of the approved
water quality standards will be improved
in order to meet public demands for
cleaner water.  Higher uses require more
stringent criteria.  In each instance it
may be necessary to revise associated
implementation plans.

    It is current national policy to re-
quire all interstate waters to be upgraded
for the higher uses of recreation and the
protection and propagation of desirable
species of aquatic biota.

PUBLISHING STANDARDS INFORMATION

    The Office of Air and Water Programs,
EPA, Washington, D. C. is the primary
resource for Federal-State water quality
standards information.  It publishes sum-
mary reports of those portions of the
individual State standards relating to:
acidity/alkalinity (pH), antidegradation,
bacterial criteria, disinfection require-
ments, dissolved oxygen, dissolved solids,
general stream use designation, mercury
and other heavy metals, mixing zones,
nitrates, oil, pesticides, phosphates,
radiological criteria, secondary treat-
ment requirements, settleable solids,
temperature, toxic substances, and
turbidity.

    Proposed legislation could possibly
extend the federal role of water quality
standards to intrastate waters.  Present
legislation limits the role of federal
government to interstate waters which is
only approximately 14% of the surface
water in the United States.

           RADIATION STANDARDS

PHILOSOPHY OF RADIATION PROTECTION

    The establishment and execution of
existing guidelines for radiation protec-
tion has been based upon an underlying
philosophy in which two factors are of
prime importance.  The first is that there
is some risk to health associated with
any radiation exposure (no threshold), no
matter how small.  For radiation protec-
tion purposes, it is also assumed that
radiation effects follow a linear dose-
response relationship.  The second is
that many developments in modern life
which confer great benefits are also asso-
ciated with radiation (e.g. television,
nuclear power).

    The non-threshold relationship implies
that there is no radiation protection
guideline, no matter how low, which can
insure absolute safety to every individual
in a large population receiving the guide-
line dosage.  Since the magnitude of the
risk is assumed to be proportional to the
dose received, untoward effects would
become manifest at very low dose levels
only if extremely large numbers of ex-
posed individuals were observed.

    Consideration of the extent of bene-
fits associated with radiation makes a
certain degree of risk acceptable.  Thus,
a balance must be struck in each contem-
plated radiation exposure, in which the
benefit outweighs the risk, the radiation
is utilized so that its maximum benefit
will be realized while human exposure will
be limited to the minimum consistent with
these benefits.  The overall public health
philosophy, then, is to attain maximum
advantage from the use of ionizing radia-
tion while minimizing concomitant exposure;
that is, eliminating wherever possible all
unnecessary exposure to radiation.

    Guides for Radiation Protection are
defined as the radiation dose which should
not be exceeded without careful considera-
tion of the reasons for so doing.  In
light of the non-threshold assumption
every effort should be made to encourage
the maintenance of radiation exposures as
far below guides as practicable.

GUIDES FOR RADIATION PROTECTION

    In the United States there are, gener-
ally speaking, three groups of prime impor-
tance promulgating guides for radiation
protection.  They are: (1) International
Commission on Radiation Protection (ICRP),
(2) National Council of Radiation Protec-
tion and Measurements (NCRP), and (3) The
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
which incorporates authorities exercised
by the former Federal Radiation Council
(FRC).

    The ICRP and the NCRP act purely in an
                                          -45-

-------
advisory capacity; that is, their guides
are only recommendations and have no legal
implications unless adopted by entities
having police power or unless given the
force of law by court action.  The NCRP
and ICRP recommendations have been adopted
totally or at least in part by most other
guides-setting groups.

    Regulations issues by the Atomic
Energy Commission (AEC) are not guides,
but are "performance standards" and are
legally binding for all AEC licensees.  By
virtue of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954,
the AEC has transferred part of its li-
censing and regulatory authority to sever-
al agreement states.  The regulations
adopted by the agreement states must be as
restrictive as AEC regulations, and these
in turn must conform to EPA guidance for
environmental radiation levels.

     The Federal Radiation Council, estab-
lished by executive order in 1959, was
given the authority to recommend radiation
protection gu.ides which,when approved by
the President,were binding on all federal
agencies.  By virtue of the President's
Reorganization Plan #3 of 1970,the FRC was
abolished and its functions transferred to
the Environmental Protection Agency.  The
responsibility for development of guides
for radiation protection within the EPA
now rests in the Office of Radiation
Program's  Division of Criteria and Stand-
ards.  As a result of this reorganization,
the FRC guides are now EPA's interim
guides for federal agencies (including the
AEC).  The Environmental Protection Agency
also may set generally applicable environ-
mental standards for radiation under
authority of the Atomic Energy Act, trans-
ferred from the AEC.  Since the EPA has,
as yet, set no new guidelines, the balance
of this discussion will refer only to
guides enunciated by the ICRP, NCRP, and
the former FRC, and to regulations of
the AEC based on these guidelines.

CURRENT RECOMMENDED GUIDES

    Radiation Protection Guides for all
groups vary depending upon whether the
whole body or only a portion thereof is
exposed and whether radiation workers or
the general public is involved.

Radiation Uorkers.  The annual recommended
maximum whole-body dose equivalent for
radiation workers is basically the same
for all four groups; that is, 5 rems per
year.  For long term accumulation of whole-
body dose equivalent the combined dose
should not exceed 5 rems multiplied by the
number of years of age beyond age 18, i.e.,
maximum accumulated dose equivalent =
(N-18) 5 rems, where N is the age in
years.  The same dose limit applies for
the head and trunk, gonads and blood
forming organs.  Table 1 gives values for
other organs of the body.

General Population Groups.  Recommended
Guides for Radiation Protection for the
general population are considerably be-
low those for radiation workers.  One of
the reasons for this stricter limitation
on allowable dose is related to the pos-
sibility of genetic effects from radia-
tion expsosure.  Because the general pop-
ulation contains all of the genetic mate-
rial controlling the viability of the
race, any mutations produced in this popu-
lation would have a far greater total im-
pact than mutations produced in that
small segment of the population which
works with radiation.

    Currently it is recommended by all
guidance groups that the yearly radia-
tion exposure of individuals in the gen-
eral population (exclusive of natural
background and the deliberate exposure
of patients by dentists and doctors)
should be limited to one-tenth of the
permissible occupational levels.  Thus,
for whole-body exposure of individuals in
the general population, the radiation
dose should not exceed 0.5 rem per year.

    Exposure to an entire population group
presents a different problem.  In this
case the entire genetic pool is exposed
to low levels of radiation and genetic
effects are of prime concern.  For popu-
lation groups the guidance bodies recom-
mend the lowering of the individual limit
by a factor of 3 giving an average yearly
whole-body dose limit of 0.17 rems for
population groups.  This is in keeping
with recommendations of the FRC and others
that the average genetically significant
dose to the total population not exceed
5 rems up to age 30 (exclusive of natural
background and purposeful exposure of
patients by practicers of healing arts).

CURRENT AND FUTURE TRENDS

    The current trend in EPA in the pro-
mulgation of guides for radiation protec-
tion is to develop source oriented guide-
lines; that is, specific guides for spe-
cific sources.  This trend was established
by the- AEC when it proposed guides for
light water cooled nuclear power reactors.
In Title 10, Part 50, of the Code of the
Federal Regulations, the AEC proposed
                                          -46-

-------
                                                               TACLE  I


                                                        OCCUPATIONAL  EXPOSURE
BODY ORGAN
Red Bone Marrow
(Blood Forming Organs)
Total Body
Accumulated Dose
(to age n In years)
Head & Trunk
Gonads
Lens of Eye
Skin
Thyroid
Bone
Feet, Ankles;
Hands, Forearm
Other Single Organs
ICRP
5 rems 1n any 1 year
5 rems In any 1 year
5 (n-18) at 3 rem/quarter
- -
5 rems In any 1 year
- -
30 rem In any 1 year
30 rem 1n any 1 year
30 rem In any 1 year
75 rem 1n any 1 year
15 rem In any 1 year
NCRP
5 rems In any 1 year
5 rems In any 1 year
5 (n-18) at 3 rem/quarter
- -
5 rems In any 1 year
5 rems In any 1 year
15 rem in any 1 year
_ _
— —
Hands 75 rems in any 1 year
25 rems/quarter
Forearms
30 rems 1n any 1 year
10 rems/quarter
15 rems in any 1 year
5 rems/quarter
AEC
11/4 rem/quarter
1 1/4 rem/quarter
3 rems/quarter
5 (n-18)
1 1/4 rem/quarter
1 1/4 rem/quarter
1 1/4 rem/quarter
7 1/2 rem/quarter
_ -
— —
18 3/4 rem/quarter
—
FRC
Accumulated Dose
5 (n-18)
at
3 rems /1 3 weeks
30 rems /year
10 rems/13 weeks
Body Burden =
0.1 pgm of Ra-226 or
its biological
equivalent
75 rem/year
25 rem/ 13 weeks
15 rem/year
5 rem/ 13 weeks
-J
I

-------
guides for design and operation which
would limit the quantities and concentra-
tions of radioactivity in the effluents of
light water cooled nuclear power reactors.
The effect would be to limit doses receiv-
ed by individuals and population groups as
a consequence of living near the reactor
site to a few percent of existing overall
guides.

    The basis for this trend is founded in
the general admonition that all radiation
exposure should be held to the lowest
practicable level.  A general guide to
cover many situations must necessarily be
higher to cover all situations than would
be practicable for one specific situation.
If, however, the guides are set for each
particular source or activity the accept-
ability of a given level of exposure would
be determined, based on the lowest practi-
cable level for each level of activity.

    The guides proposed in 10CFR50 are
specifically applicable to light water
cooled nuclear reactors and not necessarily
appropriate for other activities.  The AEC
and the EPA plan to develop numerical
guides on levels of  radioactivity in
effluents that may be considered as low
as practicable for other types of nuclear
reactors and facilities.
           PESTICIDES STANDARDS

    With regard to setting of standards
and enforcing safe usage for pesticides,
the regulation of pesticide usage in food
has been carried out for many years on the
national level by various Federal agencies.
The emphasis given to control of these
chemicals in food is consistent with the
generally accepted relative importance of
dietary intake over other routes of expo-
sure for the general population.

Pesticide Standards in Food.  Rapid changes
have occurred in the last decade in the
areas of pesticide usage, residues and the
levels allowable in and on food.  In 1970,
the President established the EPA to com-
bine and direct environmental problems
including those arising from the agricul-
tural and domestic use of pesticides.  The
EPA now has the responsibility of enforcing
several Federal regulations previously
found in other agencies and continues to
work in close conjunction with the USDA
and the FDA in maintaining control over
all aspects of pesticide use in the
United States.  Legislations pertinent to
the-control of pesticides include-the
Federal Insecticide Fugicide and Roden-
ticide Act (FIFRA) previously under the
supervision of the USDA and sections
of the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act
(FDCA) previously under the supervision
of the FDA.  FIFRA is primarily con-
cerned with the regulation of interstate
marketing of economic poisons and devices
and specifies that no pesticide may be
shipped interstate until it has been
shown to be safe when used as directed and
effective for the use claimed.  The
chemical may not be adulterated or mis-
branded and its use may not result in
residues in or on food or feed in excess
of levels established under Section 408
of the FDCA.

    Section 408 of the FDCA (The Miller
Amendment) provides for the establishment
of tolerances for pesticides on or in
food and feed stuffs in or on raw agri-
cultural commodities.  The word "tolerance"
is primarily a legal term defining the
levels of pesticide residues allowable in
food and feed.  Tolerances are establish-
ed on the basis of the lack of toxicity
of the pesticide to man as evidenced by
toxicological studies.  The U.S. toler-
ance levels, established to protect the
consumer, reflect the maximum residue
allowable on the raw agricultural com-
modity as harvested and shipped inter-
state.  In general, tolerances do not
realistically reflect the residue as con-
sumed but do reflect the level of the  •
parent chemical and its metabolites in the
raw commodity as this is the only means
by which controls can be effected.

    In past times, pesticides were regis-
tered on the basis that no residue would
be present.  This concept was known as
the "zero tolerance" indicating no
residues would remain on the raw agri-
cultural commodity.  In recent years these
concepts have been replaced by finite
tolerance levels because of regulatory
problems which had arisen as a result of
increased sensitivity in analytical meth-
ods.  The EPA is continuing to phase out
the use of the term "zero tolerance" to
be replaced by finite levels, if these
can be established as safe both to the
consumer and the environment.

    Several types of finite "tolerances"
are permitted on food.  A "temporary
tolerance" is permitted for a limited time
to conduct small scale experimental trials
to determine the usefulness of a pesticide
                                          -48-

-------
and possible residues associated with that
use.  "Permanent tolerances" are establish-
ed when it has been demonstrated that the
pesticide residue is safe as evaluated
within the framework of several  toxico-
logical parameters.  "Negligible toler-
ances," usually of a low order of magni-
tude, are established at a level less than
l/2000th of an amount which has  been  demon-
strated to cause no effect on the most
sensitive experimental animal.  Finite
tolerances are established as a  level
ranging from l/10th to l/100th of an
amount which has been demonstrated to
cause no effect under the conditions  of
long-term, usually life time, studies in
experimental animals.  In all instances
the tolerance levels of pesticide residues
in food, established after careful exami-
nation of all toxicological data, are safe
for the consumer.  In addition,  the toler-
ance does not reflect the average residue.
Rather, it reflects the maximum  residue
which in most instances is further reduced
by processing prior to consumption.

    It is most important to note that, in
certain instances, the tolerance level is
set even lower (i.e-« more conservatively)
than toxicological data requires, when
good agricultural practice for pest con-
trol does not require use of the full,
safe tolerance level.

    Presently, the EPA continues to oper-
ate in close cooperation with the FDA to
regulate the presence of pesticide resi-
dues considered as food additives in  pro-
cessed and imported foods under Sections
402, 409 and others of the FDCA.  In
addition, monitoring of raw agricultural
commodities and the total diet as con-
sumed is continually being performed  in
laboratories of the FDA.

    In summary, the regulation of pesti-
cide standards in food is a combined
effort of the EPA and FDA.  Tolerance
levels of pesticides in food are estab-
lished only when it has been established
that such levels are necessary and will
present no hazard to man and his environ-
ment.

Pesticide Standards in Air.  Recommended
maximum levels for various toxicants, in-
cluding many of the common pesticides, in
workroom air have been established by the
American Conference of Governmental
Industrial Hygienists.  These levels  re-
present concentrations to which  a worker
would be exposed for 8 hours per day, 5
days per week without expected harmful
effect.

    Presumably the pesticide content of
air could be regulated under the A1r
Quality Act, if this were necessary^to
control ambient air levels resulting from
manufacturing, agriculture, and other
operations involving pesticides.  However,
no standards for pesticide levels in
ambient air have been set.  Monitoring
stations for pesticides in air are in
operation to assess the need for regu-
lation.

Pesticide Standards in Water.  Recommended
standards for pesticides in potable water
are based upon recommendations of the
Public Health Service Advisory Committee
on Use of the PHS Drinking Water Standards.
These values were devised for that Com-
mittee by an expert group of toxicologists
as those levels which, if ingested over
extensive periods, would not cause harm-
ful or adverse physiological changes in
man.  In the case of aldrin, heptachlor,
chlordane, and parathion, the Committee
adopted even lower than physiologically
safe levels; namely, amounts which, if
present, can be detected by their taste
and odor.

    The limit for the cholinergic
pesticides is established relative to
parathion and is expressed as 0.1 ppm
parathion equivalent.  The hazards from
the chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides
in water results from both direct effects,
because they tend to persist in their
original form over long periods, and in-
direct effects because they may be con-
centrated biologically in man's food
chain.  The values which were selected
as limits for this group of pesticides are,
however, set with substantial safety  ,
factors insofar as they adversely affect
man.  Generally, fish are more sensitive
to this group of pesticides and, there-
fore, may serve as. a rough method for
determining when the chlorinated hydro-
carbon pesticide content of water is
approaching a hazardous level.

    The presently applicable levels were
published in 1968.  However, a committee
of toxicologists has recently reviewed
these standards, and some changes were
proposed.  The major proposed change is
in the level for 2,4,5-T and takes into
account the teratogenic potential of
this material.  The revised standards
should be available in the near future.
                                          -49-

-------
NEW PESTICIDE LEGISLATION                      4.

    The "Federal  Environmental  Pesticide
Control Act of 1971" (H.R.  10729) was
passed by the House of Representatives on
November 9,  1971, and is currently under-
going committee hearings in the Senate.   A
number of proposed amendments which may        5.
very well significantly affect the import
of the final bill are now under considera-
tion.

    This bill, as it now stands, proposes
a number of changes in existing federal
pesticide standard-setting  and control         6.
responsibility and authority.  Probably
the most significant.provision of the new
bill would give EPA direct  control over
the use of pesticides.  (FIFRA provided
control over registration and marketing
but not over use.)  This use control will      7.
be exercised through a new  regulatory
scheme which provides for classification
of all pesticides as for "general use" or
"restricted use."  Restricted use pesti-
cides may be used only by or under the
direct supervision of a "certified appli-
cator" or under such other  restrictions as     8.
the Administrator may determine.  The
Administrator will prescribe standards for
certification of pesticide  applicators,
although the States will have prime respon-
sibility for the actual certification and
supervision of these applicators.  In addu
tion, there are greatly increased penal-       9.
ties for violation of the Act.   The
coverage under the Act is expanded in
scope and will now cover all pesticides
and devices.

REFERENCES

1.  U.S. Department of Health, Education,     10.
    and Welfare:   Air Quality Criteria
    for Particulate Matter, National Air
    Pollution Control Administration
    Publication No. AP-49,  Washington, D.C.
    January, 1969.

2.  U.S. Department of Health, Education,
    and Welfare:   Air Quality Criteria        11.
    for Sulfur Oxides, National Air
    Pollution Control Administration
    Publication No. AP-50,  Washington,D.C.,
    January, 1969.

3.  U.S. Department of Health, Education,
    and Welfare:   Air Quality Criteria
    for Carbon Monoxide, National Air         12.
    Pollution Control Administration Pub-
    lication No.  AP-62, Washington, D.C.,
    March,1970.
U.S. Department of Health, Education
and Welfare:  Air Quality Criteria
for Photochemical Oxidants, National
Air Pollution Control Administration
Publication No. AP-63, Washington,
D. C., March, 1970.

U.S. Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare:  Air Quality Criteria
for Hydrocarbons, National Air Pollu-
tion Control Administration Publica-
tion No. AP-64, Washington, D. C.,
March, 1970.

Environmental Protection Agency:  Air
Quality Criteria for Nitrogen Oxides,
Air Pollution Control Office Publica-
tion No. AP-84, Washington, D. C.,
January, 1971.

U.S. Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare:  Control Techniques for
Particulate Air Pollutants, National
Air Pollution Control Administration
Publication No. AP-51, Washington,
D. C., January, 1969.

U.S. Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare:  Control Techniques for
Sulfur Oxide Air Pollutants, National
Air Pollution Control Administration
Publication No. AP-52, Washington,
D. C., January 1969.

U.S. Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare:  Control Techniques for
Carbon Monoxide Emissions from Sta-
tionary Sources, National Air Pollu-
tion Control Administration Publica-
tion No. AP-65, Washington, D. C.,
March,1970.

U.S. Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare:  Control Techniques for
Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen Oxide, and
Hydrocarbon Emissions from Mobile
Sources, National Air Pollution Control
Administration Publication No. AP-66,
Washington, D. C., March,1970.

U.S. Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare:  Control Techniques for
Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Sta-
tionary Sources, National Air Pollu-
tion Control Administration Publica-
tion No. AP-67, Washington, D. C.,
March, 1970.

U.S. Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare:  Control Techniques for
Hydrocarbon and Organic Solven Emis-
sions from Stationary Sources, Nation-
                                          -50-

-------
     al Air Pollution Control  Administra-
     tion Publication No.  AP-68, Washington,
     D. C., March 1970.

13.  FEDERAL REGISTER, Vol.  36, No.  84,
     April 30, 1971, Part  II,  Environ-
     mental Protection Agency, National
     Primary and Secondary Ambient Air
     Quality Standards,  pp.  8186-8201.

14.  FEDERAL REGISTER, Vol.  36, No.  158,
     August 14, 1971, Part II, Environ-
     mental Protection Agency, Requirements
     for Preparation, Adoption, and Sub-
     mittal of Implementation  Plans, pp.
     15486-15506.

15.  FEDERAL REGISTER, Vol.  36, No.  247,
     December 23, 1971,  Part II, Environ-
     mental Protection Agency, Standards
     of Performance for New Stationary
     Sources, pp. 24867-24895.

16.  U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency:
     Background Information for Proposed
     New-Source Performance Standards:
     Steam Generators, Incinerators,
     Portland Cement Plants, Nitric Acid
     Plants, Sulfuric Acid Plants, Office
     of Air Programs Technical Report No.
     APTD-0711, Research Triangle Park,
     N. C., August,1971.

17.  FEDERAL REGISTER, Vol.  36, No.  62,
     March 31, 1971, Environmental Pro-
     tection Agency, List  of Hazardous
     Pollutants, p.  5931.

18.  FEDERAL REGISTER, Vol.  36, No.  235,
     December 7, 1971, Environmental
     Protection Agency,  National Emission
     Standards for Hazardous Air Pollu-
     tants, Proposed Standards for
     Asbestos, Beryllium,  Mercury, pp.
     23239-23256.

19.  FEDERAL REGISTER, Vol.  36, Mo.  242,
     December 16, 1971,  Environmental
     Protection Agency,  National Emission
     Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants,
     Notice of Public Hearings, p. 23931.

20.  U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency:
     Background Information-Proposed
     National  Emission Standards for
     Hazardous Air Pollutants:  Asbestos,
     Eery Hi urn, Mercury, Office of Air
     Programs Publication  No.  APTD-0753,
     Research Triangle Park, N. C.,
     December,1971.
21.   FEDERAL REGISTER, Vol.  36,  No.  21,
     January 30, 1971, Environmental
     Protection Agency, Regulation of
     Fuel Additives, Advance Notice of
     Proposed Rule Making, p. 1486.

22.   Fisher, J. Bruce, Water Quality
     Standards Define National Goals,
     presented to the American Institute
     of Chemical Engineers, Chicago
     Section, Annual Symposium,  April 13,
     1972.

23.   Water Quality Criteria, Report of
     the National Technical  Advisory
     Committee to the Secretary of the
     Interior, April 1, 1968, Washington,
     D. C., Federal Water Pollution
     Control Administration.
                                           -51-

-------
                             THE DEVELOPMENT OF TECHNOLOGY
                               FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL

                                  Dr. A. W. Breidenbach
                    Director, National Environmental Research Center
                          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                                Cincinnati, Ohio  45268
                                         ABSTRACT

     The status of the Environmental Protection Agency program on technology for
environmental control and the estimated fiscal year 1973 research budget is dis-
cussed for the areas shown below.
                   Technology area
  Research Budget
(millions  of dollars)
                   Municipal wastes                5.7
                   Industrial wastes               3.4
                   Combined sewer overflow         2.4
                   Oil and hazardous materials     2.7
                   Mine drainage                   2.5
                   Water supply                    0.5
                   Solid waste                     2.7
                   Air pollution                  27.7
                   Noise                          pending
     Much technology to control water pollution is available, but achieving the high
water quality standards or no discharge requirements that are being promulgated
requires much more advanced technology than is now available.  Research accom-
plishments as well as research needs are described.  Combined sewer overflows
and urban run-off pose severe problems in pollution control.  Oil spill prevention
and clean-up is yielding to research but is still a young technology, as is the handling
of spills of toxic materials.  Mining effects air, water, land, and noise pollution.
Sealing techniques, treatment of mine drainage, and water recovery are making
progress, but much larger sums of money will be required to solve mine pollution
problems.  Drinking water supply needs research in removal of trace organic and
inorganic materials and in better disinfection.  Distribution system problems require
study.  Innovative methods of handling and disposal of solid wastes are under study,
and urgent solutions are needed.  Air pollution control research centers around
developing clean fuel, combustion improvement, and process modification.  Noise
is new as a program, but many approaches to control are known.  Implementation and
research need urgent attention.
               INTRODUCTION

     The development of any technology
must begin with the setting of a goal.
Within the U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency  (EPA), our goal is to
cleanse and stabilize the environment
to a point where man in his eco-system
now and in the future is not adversely
affected.  To reach this goal, the agency's
mission is to establish standards of
environmental quality, develop and stim-
ulate technology to meet the standards
and enforce the standards through the
legal process.
       Environmental concern, which began
  many years ago, has been compartment-
  alized by being directed against specific
  segments of the environment.  Our first
  national interest was water pollution.
  Essentially, early legislation in this
  area attempted to keep unwanted  sub-
  stances out of water.. A second  concern
  was that of air pollution, and we were
  similarly charged to keep unwanted
  materials out of our air resources.  The
  third concern was about all of the solid
  materials that we throw away each day
  and depend upon a truck to remove and
  deposit at some unknown place.   Still
                                          -52-

-------
later, we became concerned about the
pesticides, notably DOT, that seem to
travel endless routes throughout our eco-
system.  We had, of course, early con-
cern for the effects of nuclear radiation.
We have been studying the effects and
devising control systems for this type of
environmental hazard ever since the ad-
vent of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  Most
recently we have come to appreciate the
hazards associated with noise and the
effect it has on the efficiency and general
welfare of human beings.

     We are now convinced, and rightly so,
that these compartments cannot be con-
sidered independently of one another.  The
interrelationships between various environ-
mental segments must be considered.
Man does not live only on a river or only
in the air.  He is not exposed just to rad-
iation or just to pesticides.  Environmental
insult occurs through all routes:  air,
water, and food.  Man sees it, hears it,
feels it, tastes it, and smells it.  He in-
hales it, ingests it, and exposes his skin
and mucous membranes to it.  He works
in it, plays in it, and sleeps in it.

     We can no longer afford to live with
the success of a large, new, ultra-modern
sewage treatment plant that keeps a nearby
river in an improved condition if the sludge
from that plant is hauled to the ocean and
pollutes the sea water.  Nor can we afford
the electrostatic precipitator that removes
the fly-ash from the stack of a power
plant if the accumulated fly-ash is washed
into a stream to silt the gills of fish or is
placed on an open dump to destroy the
visual environment.

     Let's discuss technology development
in EPA.  Much of the research work I
intend to report on is done at the National
Environmental Research Center in
Cincinnati.  The air pollution research
efforts are mostly performed at Research
Triangle Park.  In the past few years 70
to 80 per cent of our research has been
conducted through research contracts and
grants with outside groups.

     Let's begin with wastewater.
           MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER
           TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY

     In the United States, the sewered
population represents about 70% of the
total population.  About 61% of this waste-
water receives at least conventional
secondary treatment and about 30%
primary treatment.  Wastewater from the
remaining sewered population receives
very little or no treatment.  Although
continuing effort is being made to con-
struct new treatment facilities, with
construction grant support from EPA,
our lakes and streams will not have the
quality of water being demanded by the
public unless these facilities have ad-
vanced treatment capability.  With in-
creasing population mostly in the cities,
conventional treatment cannot remove
sufficient amounts of oxygen demanding
organic materials, plant stimulating
nutrients such as phosphorus and nitrogen,
and many varieties of harmful trace or-
ganic and inorganic materials.  Further-
more, because of water shortages in both
the East and the arid Southwest, a demand
has been created for renovated wastewater
pure enough for agricultural, recreational,
industrial, and even domestic use.       ".

     Advanced Waste Treatment Research
Program efforts have, over the last
decade, significantly improved municipal
wastewater treatment technology.  The
improved methods for removing suspended
solids from treated wastewaters have re-
sulted in the capability for increased
removal of biochemical oxygen demand
(BOD) and for greater protection from the
very poor quality effluent that can result
from occasional upsets of biological pro-
cesses.  The granular activated carbon
process has made possible removing
most of the organic materials that remain
after conventional treatanent.  Carbon
treatment of secondary effluent has resulted
in BOD values approaching zero.

     Several precipitation methods have
been developed for removing phosphorus
to low concentration levels, in some cases
to less than 0.1 mg/1.  These methods
                                           -53-

-------
include adding aluminum and iron salt to
conventional treatment systems and ter-
tiary chemical clarification with lime and
other precipitants.  Although not optimum,
these processes are economically feasible.

   A dependable configuration for carrying
out biological conversion of ammonia to
nitrate has resulted in a significant re-
duction in the long term BOD of effluents.
Both open-tank and packed-bed configur-
ations have been developed for biological
denitrification, the conversion of nitrate
to elemental nitrogen. Although the cost
of open-tank configurations  appear to be
lower, the economics of both configura-
tions should permit their full scale
application.

   Feasibility studies have been carried
out on  a number of physical-chemical
treatment systems aimed  at treating waste
not handled by conventional biological
treatment systems.  The most promising
physical-chemical system combines chem-
ical clarification of the raw sewage by
various means with activiated carbon
treatment.  Building of a 10-mgd plant at
Rocky River,  Ohio, partly supported by
EPA, has been advertised for bids,  and
about 20 additional plants are being
planned.

   Advances have been made in handling
and disposing  of sludges from both the
conventional and new treatment methods.
Top feed filtration and capillary suction
show  strong potential for improving de-
watering of  sludges, and lime stabiliza-
tion appears promising as an alternative
to existing biological stabilization methods.

   The funds available for advanced waste
treatment technology research have varied
considerably;  they reached as high as
14. 3 million dollars in FY 1969.   The
estimated EPA budget for FY 1973 (Table
1) includes demonstrations of technology.
Table 1.  Estimated FY 1973 budget for municipal wastewater treatment technology.
               Category
                       Estimated FY 76
                       budget($1000)
Demonstration of advanced technology to achieve
   non-polluting municipal discharges

Ultimate disposal of sludges

Removal of phosphorus and nitrogen

Instrumentation and process control

Removal and enumeration methods for virus

Upgrading of biological treatment methods and
   development of new methods

Renovation and reuse of wastewater

Development of physical-chemical treatment

Treatability of organic compounds

Destruction of pathogens

Treatment process and system optimization

Removal of inorganic materials including trace elements

Development of small treatment systems

Total
                         $1,380

                            910

                            780

                            530

                            500


                            450

                            300

                            300

                            220

                            200

                            100

                             50

                             40

                         $5,760
                                       -54-

-------
The demonstrations receive the largest
share of funds because of the inherent
expense of plant-scale operation. Ulti-
mate disposal of sludges receive the
greatest emphasis.  Not only is sludge
handling and disposal a significant ex-
pense (40% of the total operating cost for
conventional treatment), but disposal
presents additional potential pollution
problems.  Improved handling  techniques
and disposal methods are urgently needed.
Other areas of high priority are nutrient
removal,  instrumentation,  and process
control.

   In a number of facets of municipal
technology, information is not  available
or is not being developed at an adequate
rate.
• Small treatment systems extending
down to single home treatment.  Much
technology for large treatment plants is
prohibitively expensive for very small
plants.
f Flow equalization.  As  treatment
systems become more sophisticated, flow
equalization becomes more important as
a means to reduce costs.
• Ammonia removal.  Biological nitrifi-
cation is susceptible to upset and in some
locations  is not workable.   Development
of a good  physical-chemical method is
needed.
 • Ozone treatment for organic removal.
Beside its functions as an oxidizing agent,
ozone is a powerful disinfectant that does
not exhibit the toxic after-effects on the
receiving stream biota that chlorine does.
 • Suspended solids removal.
 • Powdered carbon.  Additional work is
needed on a physical-chemical system
utilizing powdered carbon; it has potential
as an economical substitute for biological
treatment at plants with capacity of less
than 1  mgd.
 9 Conventional treatment.  More effort is
needed to upgrade conventional treatment,
especially aspects of pure oxygen technology.
 • Reverse osmosis. A moderate effort
should be continued to develop very new
technologies such as  reverse osmosis.
These could be very important to controll-
ing pollution,  especially in line with the
concept of zero pollutant discharge  and in
the area of wastewater reuse.
 • Demonstration projects.  New technology
is of no value  if the consulting, engineering
community is  not convinced of its feasibility,
and demonstrations show consultants that
a new treatment method does perform.

   Flow diagrams of two very different
practical advanced waste treatment systems
are illustrated in Figures 1 and 2.  Figure 1
represents a system that consists essentially
of biological processes.  Figure 2 represents
an all physical-chemical system that pro-
duces effluent of quality comparable to the
biological system.
                                  HIGH RATE
                   PRIMARY      ACTIVATED SLUDGE
           INFLUENT
            NITRIFICATION
'"
, N '
T
CI2
r

ISINFECTION

^^•M
                                                              EFFLUENT
                   Fig. 1.  Schematic of biological treatment.
                                        -55-

-------
                       LIME
 CHEMICAL
CLARIFICATION
                                             FILTRATION
                                                           Cl,
                                                           NaOH
                                                                AMMONIA
                                                                REMOVAL
                                CARBON
                              ADSORPTION
                                  1
                                      DISINFECTION
                                              EFFLUENT
                       Fig. 2. Schematic of physical-chemical treatment.
           INDUSTRIAL WASTE
         TREATMENT RESEARCH

   The industrial research, development,
 and  demonstration program was initiated
 in 1967 to assist industry by assuming a
 portion of the financial risk involved in the
 development of new waste treatment tech-
 nology.  The waste sources and charact-
 eristics, significant problems,  current
 use, and treatment practices have been
 largely determined.  Present emphasis
 is on (a) completing this data tabulation
 for  all significant water-using industries,
 (b) establishing raw waste loads per unit
 of production,  and (c) defining the current
 economically and technically feasible
 treatment technology.

   Many of the industrial waste  streams
 may be treated using  such presently avail-
 able technology as biological treatment,
 precipitation,  and  carbon adsorption.
 However,  the application of these techni-
 ques is limited by (a) the inability of the
 process to meet high  effluent quality cri-
 teria, (b) their large  space  requirements,
 and  (c) in some cases, by capital and
 operating costs. For a number of indus-
 tries (including metal finishing,  steel,
 pulp and paper, and non-ferrous metal
 production),  research, development,  and
demonstration  projects have been underway
to develop alternative, economical techni-
ques, as well as advanced waste treatment
systems directed toward more effective re-
moval of pollutants and closed loop control.
                  Let me cite some examples of current
               technological developments.
               • Electroplating.  Electrodialysisused in
               electroplating to reduce water consumption and
               recover and recycle metals lost during rinsing.
               Other membrane processes such as reverse
               osmosis are also under investigation as  a
               means of removing metallic contaminants
               from plating wastes and organic materials
               from food wastes.
               • Pharmaceutical plant.  Pure oxygen
               activated sludge treatment used for muni-
               cipal waste combined with industrial waste
               that contains  the high level of organic wastes
               generated by  a pharmaceutical plant.
               • Non-ferrous metal production.  An abate-
               ment system  involving process changes to
               eliminate pollutants, electrolytic recovery
               of copper, and treatment and reuse of rinse '
               water used for copper and brass wire mill
               waste.
               • Metal finishing.  Such processes as
               roasting and electroplating, used to re-
               cover metals from sludges produced by the
               conventional treatment of metal finishing
               wastes.
               • Coke plant.  Ammonia and phenol strip*
               ping, multistage evaporation, and polishing
               by carbon adsorption used for complete
               treatment of wastewaters from a coke plant.
               • Pigment manufacturing.  Ion exchange
               used for full scale  recovery of chromates
               from pigment manufacturing wastes.

                  A total of 3. 4 million dollars has been
               estimated bv EPA  for research  and
                                         -56-

-------
development activities to provide improved
industrial waste treatment technology.
The major industrial segments and the
proposed budget for Fiscal Year 1973 are
given in Table 2.

   Among the highest priority research
items in this critical area are: 1. Com-
pletion of effluent guideline studies to
establish base waste loads,  practical
treatment technology,  and the best avail-
able treatment.  2. Removal and recovery
of toxic metals and chemicals from waste
streams such as those generated in the
metal finishing and chemical industries.
3.  Treatment of high BOD and refractory
organic wastes such as those produced by
the pharmaceutical and chemical manu-
facturing industries.
4. Development of recycle and recovery
systems directed toward the eventual goal
of closed loop control of wastes.

   A number of items should be investigated,
but because of budget and other constraints,
they are not in our present program. We
should be evaluating the acceptability of
present analytical techniques and equipment
for measuring contaminants in actual plant
waste effluents and  modifying existing
techniques  and development of new methods
where necessary to monitor industrial
streams.  We should be encouraging devel-
opment of processes that generate a mini-
mum of solid wastes and pollution abatement
methodology via in-plant control techniques
and process changes.  More effort should
be directed toward waste abatement technol-
ogy  that involves recovery, reuse,  and
closed loop systems.
    Table 2.  Estimated FY1973 budget for industrial waste treatment technology.
                   Category
                Estimated FY73
                budget ($1. OOP)
         Metal finishing

         Steel

         Non-ferrous metals

         Machinery and transportation

         Pharmaceuticals

         Textiles

         Agricultural chemicals

         Thermal

         Petrochemicals

         Petroleum refining

         Pulp and paper

         Food

         Stone, clay, and glass

         Lumber and wood products

         Miscellaneous

         Joint municipal/industrial

            Total
                    $ 89.0

                     325.0

                     119.3

                      44.5

                     150.8

                     451.8

                      38.3

                     309.6

                     344.3

                     121.0

                     486.4

                     520.6

                      77.5

                      92.0

                     154.0

                      50.0

                  $3,374.1
                                        -57-

-------
  COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOWS
  AND STORMWATER DISCHARGE

   The inherent problem with combined
and "nominally" separate sanitary sewers
is at their overflow points.  Solids  and
organic matter deposited during dry
weather and washings from paved and urban
surfaces a-e flushed, without treatment,
by the storm event.  Both the domestic
waste and urban runoff constituents have
proven to be  major pollutants.

   The first solution suggested for wet
weather flow problems is separate  sani-
tary and  storm sewer systems,  EPA has
shown that a  country-wide separation pro-
gram would  cost about $75 billion,  com-
pared with $25 billion for other measures,
and that urban storm water runoff itself is
a significant  source of pollution that sewer
separation does not cope with.  Wet-
weather pollution would be cut by only 50%
and the other  50% would remain in the
untreated runoff. Consequently, the EPA
Storm and Combined Sewer Program has
concluded that sewer separation is not the
logical course of action and  accordingly
has concentrated on investigating alterna-
tive corrective measures, basically of a
treatment or control nature.   Control
facilities such as in-and-off-system stor-
age, flow regulation and routing,  and re-
mote flow-sensing and control coupled with
treatment are applicable solutions. Phys-
ical, chemical-biological, and physical-
chemical treatment methods  are under in-
vestigation.   Because of the intermittent
and variable  nature of storm flow,  our
best current  potential for producing good
quality effluents is with a physical-chem-
ical treatment approach -- screening,
dissolved-air flotation,  high-rate multi-
media filtration, vortex process.
   We have shown reclamation and reuse
to be  feasible,and  our EPA Storm Water
Management Model (SWMM) for system
description and decision making purposes
has proven of immense value.

   The total projects and expenditures
through FY1972  are summarized (Table  3);
the anticipated budget for FY 73 is
$2,435,000.

   Results of demonstration projects
indicate that alternative methods can do
a more effective job than will separation
and at less cost.   Here are some examples
of current technology,  either applied or
under study.
• Stormwater disinfection project,  New
Orleans,  La .  - Massive chlorine contact
basin demonstrates effectiveness and
economics of using and generating sodium
hypochlorite on site for disinfecting storm
flows as high as 11,000 cfs.  Before in-
stallation, swimming beaches were  closed
65% of the time and high coliform counts
prevailed; after installation,  swimming
beaches were open and  coliform counts
were  low.
• Storage/treatment of combined sewer
overflows, Chippewa Falls,  Wise. - A 3.5
mgd asphalt lined  storage basin retains
by-passed combined sewage and returns  it
to wastewater treatment plant for treat-
ment.  During the 1969-1970 evaluation
period,  50 out of 62 river discharges were
eliminated.
• Treating combined sewer overflows by
ultra-high-rate, deep-bed multi-media
filtration, Cleveland, Ohio -  Removals  of
35% and 68% for BOD and SS,  respectively,
have been achieved. Higher removals,
including  30% to 80% phosphate reduction,
could be achieved  by adding appropriate
chemicals.
                Table 3.  EPA projects and expenditures for combined
                         sewer overflows and Stormwater discharges
               	through FY 1972.	
                  Number of    Number of   Grant$   Contract $   Total $    Total
     Category      Grants      Contracts    ($1,000)    ($1,000)     ($1,000)   Project
                                                                             ($1.000)
Control
Treatment
Treatment/
Control
Total
24
10
16
50
25
18
25
68
9,872
7,808
8,827
26.507
4,211
4, 583
4,188
12,982
14,083
12,391
13,015
39,489
40,516
20,162
21,956
82,634
                                       -58-

-------
 • Garland, Texas - Use of friction-
 reducing polymers for increased pipe
 capacity has been demonstrated to be
 one-fourth the cost of relief sewer con-
 struction.
 • Mt.  Clemens,  Michigan - Combines
 flow control,  storage, treatment of excess
 flows and polishing of dry weather effluent
 that utilizes lakes with high-rate screening
 and filtration.  Project will provide a re-
 creational area and a buffer zone between
 industrial and residential areas, and abate
 pollution to the receiving water.
 • Development and demonstration of
 porous  pavement  for storm runoff
 attenuation.
   Lancaster, Pa. - Development and
 demonstration of  "SWIRL" (vortex) flow
 regulator*/solids separator for dual
 application.
 • Minneapolis-St.  Paul,  Minn.,  Detroit,
 Mich.,  and Seattle, Wash. - Remote
 monitoring  of rainfall, flow levels,  and
 quality  together with a centrally comput-
 erized  control console for positive regu-
 lation of overflow structures are being
 employed to utilize unused storage capac-
 ity within the existing sewerage system
 and thus reduce the frequency  and volumes
 of overflows.

   The  Storm and Combined Sewer Pro-
 gram has designated that in FY73 we
 direct the highest priority research to
 1. Evaluate further deep-bed,  multi-
 media,  ultra-high-rate filtration; physical-
 chemical processes including in-pipe
 coagulant mixing  and activated carbon
 adsorption; "SWIRL" (vortex) treatment
 systems; and  helical (spiral) flow regula-
 tion/solids  separation with consideration
 to adapting  these  processes for dual
 treatment of dry and wet-weather flows,
 as well as automated control.  2.  Develop
 further control methods such as "up-
 stream" storage systems to automatically
 regulate discharge for reuse of stored
 water for irrigation, street cleaning,
 sewer flushing, aesthetic and recreational
 ponds,  potable supply, etc.  3. Develop
 and demonstrate new and improved  flow
 measuring devices and instrumentation.
 4. Assess  techniques to modify urban
 land use and apply them to control urban
 runoff.   5. Develop "Monitoring/Manage-
 ment System" for use, updating, and
 dissemination of SWMM and related
models. Specifically, this will provide
continuted promotion of SWMM usage;


 * Mention of a commercial product does
 not imply endorsement by the U.S. Envir-
onmental Protection Agency.
further demonstration and evaluation;
adaptation and tailoring of the model to
meet the requirements of individual
situations; users assistance and training;
a viable economic system for model
transference; and basic methodology for
and ongoing,  effective implementation
program of nationwide applicability.
6. Develop and refine multiple-use con-
cept for combined sewer  overflow treat-
ment and control systems to include
means for optimizing municipal sewage
treatment (polishing, tertiary treatment),
handling dry  weather overloads,  main-
taining greater environmental control by
accepting industrial waste, treating liquid
waste from municipal air pollution control
(APC)  systems, etc.  7. Develop and
effect training and education programs
and manuals  for storm and combined
sewer  technology dissemination.  8.  Eval-
uate and assess the  state-of-the-art  of
combined sewer management and treat-
ment.  9.  Develop new and improved
devices for automatic sampling of storm
and combined sewer flows.  10.  Further
assess and delineate the environmental
impacts of highway deicing.  11. Evaluate
present catch basin  technology; demonstrate
and evaluate  new upstream attenuator/
solids  separator design.  12.  Develop
automatic,  rapid, on-line monitoring de-
vices  for organics in storm and combined
sewage.

   At  the present time program planning
covers all forseeable research gaps.  As
these  plans are  initiated, however,  the
need for further research, not originally
considered,  may arise.
      CONTROL OF OIL AND
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SPILLS

   With over 15,000 spills a year, pollu-
tion of the environment by spills of oil or
hazardous materials is a major national
and international problem.  Oil spill re-
search began in 1967 in response to the
Torrey Canyon incident; EPA didn't attack
the more complex hazardous-materials
spill problem until FY 71.  The potential
hazard of materials with widely differing
properties  -- some are soluble in water,
some sink, some react -- makes the
chemical-type spill a more  difficult
problem.  To date, 14. 5 million dollars
has been spent on oil spill research and
3 million dollars on hazardous spill work.
                                        -59-

-------
   Although present technology enables
 EPA to contain and clean up oil spills with
 the use of booms, skimmers,  and sorbent
 systems in inland and estuarine waters
 where waves are under 2 feet and currents
 are under 2 knots, proper use of  this
 technology is still a significant problem.
 Technology to control spills in the high
 seas (U.S. Coast Guard responsibility)
 must still be developed, as must  method-
 ology for effectively handling spills from
 off-shore platforms.  The technology for
 beach restoration and handling spills on
 land is essentially nonexistent. Finally,
 of the 1.8 billipn  gallons per year of
 "waste oil," 50%  is not now  recovered or
 disposed  of in a known environmentally
 acceptable manner.

   To date,  the only technology available
 for hazardous  materials control,  recovery,
 and restoration is that developed  to handle
 oil spills. Spill prevention, detection,
 and monitoring programs as well as
 countermeasures must be developed.

   Significant developments, however, are
 currently in use or in the final stages of
 development.
 • The JBF Scientific Corporation's Dy-
 namic Inclined Plane oil skimmer that can
 recover 90% of the oil presented to the
 unit in 2-foot harbor-type seas at speeds
 up to 4 knots.
 • System using various sorbent materials
 to pick up spilled oil.
 • URS Research's demonstration that a
 standard  LCM could be modified in 4 hours
 to recover such nonrecyclable  sorbents
 as straw  and many proprietary commerc-
 ial products.
 • The Consultec, Inc. concept of con-
 taining oil slicks by using a seining
 net principle.  A linen material,  appro-
 priately moored in a stream, traps
 floating oil while allowing water to pass
 through the device.  This approach re-
 duces the problems, primarily from
 turbulence,  associated with convention-
 al booms.
 • Rocketdyne's foamed-in-place plastic
 plug for stopping  leaks in ruptured con-
 tainers.
 • MSA Research fabrication of a back-
 pack unit  for producing foamed plastic
 dikes for  containing and  preventing the
 spreading of  spills.
 • The Oil and Hazardous Materials
 Technical Assis-tance Data System's  bank
of current information on hazardous
materials spill control.
 • Midwest Research Institute's tests of
its organo-phosphate detector that detect
certain pesticides in water supplies at the
ppm level or lower.
   Not included in the summary of the
estimated FY 1973 budget (Table 4) is
the construction of the Oil and Hazardous
Simulated Environmental Test Tank
(OHMSETT) scheduled for completion in
August 1973.  This 667- X 65- X 8-foot
concrete tank will be used to test,  evalu-
ate,  and  develop systems for  control and
cleanup of spills under simulated harbor
(2-foot) conditions.

Table 4.  Estimated FY 1973  budget for
          oil and hazardous materials
          spills technology.
   Category
Estimated FY73
budget ($1,000)
Prevention of oil spills       $539

Cleanup and control of
  oil spills                    546

Waste oil handling             152

Chemical identification
  of oils                       170

Biological fate and
  effects  of oil spills          253

Hazardous materials
  spill prevention              200
Hazardous spill
  identification and
  detection                    100

Hazardous spill
  countermeasures            400

Recovery and restora-
  tion of hazardous spills      300
   The most important research in oil
spill control for FY 73 includes developr
ing the Controlled Test Facility (OHMSETT;,
preventing spills and restoration,  handling
waste  oil,  and chemically identifying
spilled oil species.

   In the hazardous  spills program many
of the  same priorities exist, and in addi-
tion, spill identification,  detection, and
monitoring are important.

   Other critical items not now in  the active
R&M program are systems to handle land
spills; data  on the fate and effect of oil
and hazardous materials spills, particularly
on land; work on preventing pipeline spills
as well as both acute and chronic spills
from off-shore oil platforms.  In the area
                                        -60-

-------
of hazardous materials spills control, a
significant effort must be made to devel-
op systems to handle spills of various
classes of compounds.
     CONTROLLING MINE DRAINAGE

   The pollution from mines is a serious
problem.  The influx of acid,  heavy
metals, sediment, and mineralized water
from mining operations has degraded over
10, 000 miles of streams.  Over 4. 5
million acres are disturbed yearly,  and
this  number is expected to increase be-
cause of the demand for power and metals,
etc.  Mining leaves no part of the envir-
onment untouched.  In addition to water
and land pollution, the air is degraded by
dust and burning refuse piles, and noise
from blasting and heavy machinery dam-
ages the ears.  The  mineral industry is
one of the largest producers of solid
waste.  Thus, all the environmental prob-
lems resulting from mining must be con-
sidered,  not just those from one discipline.

   The mining problems can be divided in-
to four general areas:  active and abandon-
ed surface mines and active and abandoned
underground mines.  The technology for
controlling pollution from active surface
mines has made great advances in recent
years, mostly with the development of new
mining methods to reduce pollution during
and following mining.  Better methods of
spoil handling, placement, and stabiliza-
tion  have been developed.  Erosion and
landslides are still a major problem al-
though advances have been made in the use
of erosion control techniques, most of
which have been adopted from other uses
such as agricultural. Further work is
needed in this area.

   Underground mining is the major
challenge.   No new techniques have been
adopted by the industry.   Research and
development projects are being conducted
on mining in an inert atmosphere and on
other new mining methods.

   Mine pollution is  unique in that pollu-
tion  continues to occur decades after the
mine ceases production. Recent surveys,
have shown that over 60% of the polluting
drainage is  from coal mines no longer in
production.   Proper abandonment of mines
is an important consideration in environ-
mental control,  and  the technology for
controlling pollution from long abandoned
mines is desperately needed.  Mine  seal-
ing has long been and still is the most
common method; air sealing to prevent
air from entering the workings is theoret-
ically sound but practically impossible to
achieve; bulkhead sealing to flood the
workings, once considered impossible,
holds promise of being one of the most
effective.  EPA recently developed a
self-sealing seal that may have significant
cost advantages.

   Treating mine drainage is looked on as a
last resort -- used only when pollution
cannot be controlled at its source.  Where
present technology cannot prevent mine
drainage formation, the pumpage from
active mines is treated,  usually by
neutralization.  This process removes the
acidity, iron, aluminum,  and sometimes
the copper and zinc, but does not improve
the hardness or sulfate concentration.  A
water is produced that may be acceptable
for discharging to a stream  but  is not
suitable for domestic or industrial use.

   Research efforts have been aimed at
optimizing this neutralization process to
obtain better removals at lower costs and
to resolve the difficult sludge disposal
problems. Further research has been
conducted to develop treatment processes
that will meet more stringent discharge
standards and produce a water suitable for
domestic  and industrial use.  Many pro-
cesses  have been surveyed; the most
promising are reverse osmosis and ion
exchange.  The reverse osmosis process,
after post treatment and disinfection, will
produce a water meeting drinking water
standards, but because it is a concentrat-
ing process,  the waste stream itself is a
pollution problem.  An EPA research team
has overcome this problem with  a recently
patented process "Neutrolosis. "  In this
process,  the waste stream from  the reverse
osmosis unit is neutralized, and  the
supernatant,  after sludge separation,  is
recycled to the reverse osmosis  unit.
Pilot plant runs have resulted in over a
98% water recovery and only  a small
amount of sludge.  A shortcoming of
several of the ion exchange processes that
appear feasible is disposing of the  solu-
tion used  to regenerate the  ion exchange
resins.

   During FY 73,  the largest funding will
go to demonstrate methods for eliminating
or controlling mine water pollution
(Table 5).  Such projects  shall demonstrate
the engineering and economic feasibility
of abatement techniques that will contri-
bute  substantially to effective and
practical  control.  This program matches
                                       -61-

-------
Federal and State funds, authorized under
Section 14 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act.  Seven projects in five states
are now underway.

Table 5.  Estimated FY 1973 budget for
          controlling mine drainage
          technology.
   C ategory
Estimated FY73
budget($1000)
Treatment of mine
  drainage

Surface mining

Underground mines

New mining methods

Mine drainage
  demonstrations
    $441

      30

      13

     305


   1,720
           WATER SUPPLY
       TREATMENT RESEARCH

   Historically, the major problem that
faced water treatment engineers was
killing the causative agents of waterborne
disease.  This was accomplished by re-
ducing turbidity through the use of  chemi-
cal coagulation followed by flocculation
and filtration, and disinfection, usually
with chlorine.  This process remains the
cornerstone of water treatment practice,
but today many other problems face the
water purveyor in his quest to supply a
safe and esthetically pleasing drinking
water to his customers.  Many water pur-
veyors must provide treatment to remove
organic and/or inorganic trace contami-
nants from the raw water, and many are
faced with the problem of excessive sludge
production caused by the color and turbid-
ity removal unit processes.  More tech-
nology is needed to meet these challenges.

   Alternates  to adsorption on activated
carbon are being sought to remove organic
contaminants.  Adsorbents such as syn-
thetic resins and strong oxidants such as
ozone will be studied in combination with
activated carbon to determine whether  or
not a more effective and more economical
method is available.  Using polyelectrolytes
as the primary coagulant,  in place of tri-
valent metallic ions, will be studied to
determine whether turbidity removals can
be accomplished without the production of
such  great quantities of sludge. In addi-
tion,  eliminating settling may offer
municipalities with relatively clear raw
water a method of turbidity control with-
out a large capital investment.  Methods
for removing geochemical pollutants such
as arsenic and selenium, as well as in-
organic and organic mercury, are under
study because these inorganic contami-
nants may appear in raw waters above the
level of the Drinking Water Standards.
They must be  reduced.   Removing nitrate,
often present in ground waters above
Drinking Water Standards levels, by the
use of ion-exchange resins is also being
studied.

   We have begun studies that demonstrate
the influence of turbidity on the effective-
ness of disinfection of enteric bacterial
and viral pathogens.  Finally, we are
investigating the deterioration in water
quality that occurs  between the water
treatment plant and the point of use at the
tap. This study includes both chemical
and biological changes in water quality.
We will determine whether the change is
the result of water treatment or distri-
bution practice. The fiscal year 1973
budget for this work is  shown in Table  6.

Table 6.  Estimated FY 1973 budget for
          water supply  treatment
          technology.

                      Estimated FY 73
Category
Organic contam-
inant removal
Turbidity removal
budget ($1000)
$93
16
                   Inorganic contam-
                     inant removal            94

                   Disinfection                86

                   Distribution system
                     problems                209
                      A high priority for water treatment
                   technology research for FY 73 is that of
                   organic contaminant removal  (Table 6).
                   In the 1969 Community Water Supply Sur-
                   vey, one of the most frequently reported
                   reasons for consumer rejection of muni-
                   cipal tap water was tastes and odors.
                   Methods,  acceptable to the industry, must
                   be found to remove taste and odor causing
                   materials and to disinfect without accenting
                   these problems.  Because the health im-
                   plications of organic-laden tap water are
                   great,  practical unit processes must be
                   found that will protect the consumer's health
                   and also provide him with an esthetically
                   pleasing drinking water.
                                        -62-

-------
   Many changes, both beneficial and ad-
 verse,  occur during the storage of raw
 water and in underground waters.  Some
 engineering techniques are available for
 preventing any deterioration in quality,
 but we do not have the trained  staff or
 adequate funds to research these problems.

   The  water supply industry is entering
 a new era, one where merely removing
 turbidity and disinfecting are inadequate.
 The goal is to provide the engineering
 know-how needed to cope with  present-day
 problems economically, so that the water
 industry can improve its product and
 thereby upgrade  the quality of the drinking
 water for the American consumer.
     SOLID WASTE RESEARCH

   When we seek the development of
 systems to control environmental pollution
 from solid wastes, we're not limited to the
 ultimate disposal process.  Control may
 also be significantly influenced by source
 reduction, that is, producing less waste;
 improved storage at point of generation,
 which controls flies and rodents  while
 being more esthetic; reduced dust and
 odor  and improved equipment design and
 operating procedures for greater health
 and safety in collection; and improved
 design and operation of processing plants,
 particularly in the area of size reduction
 and incineration.

   Although the refuse  industry has been
 most active in bringing about significant
 management and operational advancements
 since the turn  of the century and govern-
 ment, at many levels,  has been  involved
 in solid waste  technology advancement,
 the state of the art shows a clear need for
 additional  research and development if this
 Nation is to truly face the challenge of
 improving solid waste management and
 increasing resource recovery.

   In the field  of incineration, some
 breakthroughs have occurred. We still
 do not adequately understand  how various
 solid wastes interact under different com-
 bustion conditions.  Of even greater im-
 portance, we are not sure what changes in
 incineration systems will be required to
 safely control environmental  effects of
 combusting future solid wastes.  Reducing
 the size  of the waste and separating out
 the inert and large sized wastes  has been
done for years  but mostly in the  industrial
waste sectors.  Is a modified rock crusher
or an automobile shredder a practical,
economical machine for size reduction
of mixed refuse? Reliable automated
materials separation for municipal refuse
has not yet arrived.
   Well-operated sanitary landfills are an
acceptable and economic method of solid
wastes disposal.  Research is underway to
determine safe and practical ways of in-
corporating various sludges,  industrial
liquids, and hazardous wastes in land-
fills. High groundwater  and poor geo-
logic conditions make many conveniently
located  sites unsuitable for sanitary land-
fills because liquids leached from the fill
may contaminate ground and surface  waters
for many  years.  Research in leachate
production, gas formation, and  kinetics
of gases in soil is required.  Various
natural and artificial liner materials are
being studied  along with methods of
placement to confine the leachate to the
site and provide for its collection and
treatment.  Approximately $800, 000  will
be spent in FY 73 on land disposal
technology.
   Certainly numerous  improvements have
been made in refuse collection and transport.
The systems approach has been used success-
fully in routing; economies of scale are re-
cognized and regionalization is becoming
common;  collection vehicles are improved
and are larger; transfer stations are used
throughout the  country; the bulk containers
and on-site compactors used save space
and labor and have esthetic advantages over
numerous small "garbage" cans.  But there
is need to investigate entirely different,
innovative storage and collection approaches
that would further increase convenience and
perhaps be even more efficient and econom-
ical in the long run.

   Several projects are underway to
develop systems that process mixed muni-
cipal solid wastes and recover materials
or energy.  At  Combustion Power Company
in Menlo Park, California, EPA has
supported pilot plant  research and develop-
ment of the CPU-400 system for the past
four years. This  pilot  plant project is
nearing completion.  Municipal refuse is
shredded  and air classified to remove
metals, glass,  and other heavy materials
of value.  The combustible portion is then
burned under pressure  in a fluid bed.  The
hot gas from combustion is cleaned and
                                        -63-

-------
passed through a turbine that drives a
1500 KW generator.  The present pilot
plant will soon be processing 100 tons of
refuse per day.   This compact system can
be located in the heart of urban areas
where waste generation is high and where
there is great need for electrical energy.
In FY 73. EPA will spend approximately
$1.5 million to conduct research on other
processing and resource recovery projects.

   In response to the need for innovative
solutions  to solid waste management prob-
lems, the research program has taken a
bold look  into the feasibility of using
existing sanitary sewers to transport
ground refuse from the source to treat-
ment and  disposal sites.  Collection costs
currently account for roughly 75% of the
national solid waste bill.  Sewer  transport
could potentially save much of  this  ex-
pense.  We have found that ground refuse
slurries will flow readily in existing
sewers,  but we  haven't evaluated the poss-
ible adverse effects of this on sewer life,
sewage treatment plant operation, and
water use.  A recently initiated research
contract costing $337, 000 over 2 years
will seek  to determine the overall techni-
cal and economic feasibility of transport-
ing refuse through  sewers under  the inter-
disciplinary guidance of the advanced
waste treatment and solid waste research
programs.

   A significant commitment has been
made in the soft science approaches to
solid waste problems.  Economic and be-
havioral studies have been conducted to
determine strategies for reducing the
total environmental impact of abandoned
automobiles and beverage containers.
Other work is evaluating various non-
technological inducements, such  as
Federal purchasing power and  revised
transportation tariffs that would favor use
of salvaged materials.  Future studies
will seek to improve our ability to fore-
cast both the nature and quantity  of solid
wastes as well as to determine the econ-
omic and  environmental consequences of
recovering many of these materials.
Approximately $800, 000 has  been expended
in this area over the past 2 years.   A
$434, 000  program  is planned in FY  73.

   The estimated FY 73 budget for  solid
wastes research is about $2, 700, 000
(Table 7).  There is need for extensive
technology research in solid waste manage-
ment.  Funding limitations, however,
have caused a shift in emphasis during
FY 73 from technology to the "soft"
sciences to point the way in making
maximum use of current technology to
improve conditions.

Table 7.  Estimated  FY 1973 budget for
          solid waste research technology.
  Category
Estimated FY 73
budget. ($1.000)
Disposal technology      $800
 including hazardous
 waste

Resource recovery        900

Processing methods       600

Behavioral and            434
 system studies
     CONTROL SYSTEMS FOR
  PREVENTING AIR POLLUTION

   The primary function of air pollution
research is to develop control technology
for stationary sources -- control that  is
cost effective and protects  the health and
welfare of the population by meeting
ambient air quality standards. To do this,
it is necessary to develop and demonstrate
adequate technology to control pollutant
emissions so that effective new source
performance (i.e., emission) standards
and hazardous pollutant standards may be
promulgated.  Approximately $80 million
dollars has been spent over the past 5
years, and the FY 1973 budget has been
estimated (Table 8).


Table 8.  Estimated FY  1973  budget for
          air pollution control technology.
    Category
    Estimated FY  73
    budget ($1,000)
Sulfur oxides (SOX)       $18,700
  control

Nitrogen oxides (NOX)       4, 500
  control

Particulate control          2, 700

Control of hazardous        1, 800
  and other (other than
  SOX. NOX and parti-
  culate) pollutants	
   The EPA effort in the categories shown
in Table  8 has been aimed primarily at
developing and demonstrating clean (i.e..
                                        -64-

-------
low-in-sulfur) fuels,  new and modified
combustion and combustion-related pro-
cesses, flue gas  cleaning, and certain
supporting studies.

   The efforts in clean fuel activities
relate to mechanical  coal cleaning, chem-
ical fuel cleaning, and coal gasification
research.   Process modifications  are a
significant portion of the investigative
effort because this  particular area of
study is probably the most direct approach
to controlling nitrogen oxide emissions.
Some of the promising techniques develop-
ed include  combustion with excess  air,
recircularization of flue gas in the fuel-
gas mixture, stage combustion,  fluidized
bed combustion,  and  combustor redesign.
Process modification has also extended
into such non-combustion industrial areas
as nitric acid,  smelting,  and coke  plants.
Two demonstrations  of particular signi-
ficance  relate to  coke manufacturing.

   Another important segment of our
research effort in developing control
systems concerns cleaning various gases,
particularly the effectiveness of dry
limestone  injection,  limestone wet scrub-
bing,  catalytic oxidation, and magnesium
oxide processes.  We have evaluated the
dry limestone injection process on a
coal-fired, 150-megawatt boiler at TVA's
Shawnee Power Plant in Paducah, Kentucky,
and are presently demonstrating wet scrub-
bing with limestone in Paducah,  Kentucky,
and Key West,  Florida. The catalytic
oxidation process,  an adaptation of the con-
tact sulfuric acid process,  is expected to
enter the demonstration phase on a 100-
megawatt,  coal-fired boiler at Illinois
Power Company's Wood River Station in
mid-1972.   This  joint EPA  -- Illinois
Power Company  venture, which was devel-
oped by Monsanto, requires no feed  material
and contains no regeneration step. After
removing the particulates,  the flue gas
passes over a catalyst bed  at 900°F to
convert the sulfur dioxide to sulfur trioxide.
The gas containing the sulfur trioxide is
cooled to about 450°F in an economizer
and air-heater section; then, in a packed
tower, the gas is scrubbed with a cool
stream  of  sulfuric acid to remove  the
sulfur trioxide as product sulfuric  acid.

   The magnesium oxide process,  which
is a joint EPA  -- Boston-Edison venture,
is being tested presently and should be
completed  late in 1973.  In this process,
the slurry  of magnesium oxide is used in
the scrubbing circuit, and the resulting
slurry is filtered yielding a cake containing
5% magnesium oxide,  90% magnesium sulfite,
and 5% magnesium sulfate.  This cake is
dried to remove both surface and chemical-
ly bound water and trucked to a sulfuric
acid plant where the solids will be calcined
to regenerate magnesium oxide, which will
be recycled, and to produce sulfuric acid
for  sale.

   Typical of the problems encountered in
the  search for better controls are those
relating to particulate control --  especially
that of fine particulates.  Particulate
technology was recently studied because
the nature and extent of the gaps in the
technology was unclear.  Early it became
apparent that two  of the major unknown
areas were the mass and the size ranges
of fine particles.  Thus, relatively little
is known about important sources of fine
particles,  the actual particle-size range
emitted,  and the collection efficiency of
control equipment in the small  particle-
size range.

   We hope to obtain answers to one or
more of the following knowledge deficiencies:
•   inadequate sources sampling techniques
for collecting and sizing particulates, es-
pecially those 1 micron or  smaller;
•   inadequate control devices for collect-
ing fine particulates;
•   inadequate capability to monitor,
sample,  and size  effluents  from particu-
late sources;
•   insufficient knowledge  of the relation-
ship between total suspended particulates
in the air and specific sources  of particu-
late pollution;
•   insufficient knowledge  of the synergistic
effects of gases combined with  particulates;
0   insufficient knowledge  of the relationship
between the health hazard potential of parti-
culate pollutants  and the chemical composi-
tion of the pollutants as a function of their
particle size;
•   insufficiently precise knowledge of
material damage  caused by fine particu-
late pollutants;
 ^   insufficient knowledge of the influence
of suspended particulate matter on the
behavior of the atmosphere, particularly
solar radiation and weather modification;
and
 •   insufficient knowledge  of the feasibility
of establishing national emission standards
based on particle  size (since the  major
adverse effects of particulate pollutants on
human health and  welfare are associated
with micron and submicron particles).
                                        -65-

-------
        CONTROL OF NOISE

   Noise is not a necessary evil,  and
 noise pollution problems can be solved.
 But like other pollution problems, the
 solution demands a blend of technology,
 public and private action, and healthy
 doses of economic realism.

   One  of the reasons that noise pollution
 has assumed  its present proportions is
 the widely held  and mistaken belief that
 nothing can be done  about noise.  But
 noise can be controlled, and much of the
 technology required for noise control is
 presently available.  By properly apply-
 ing existing technology,  advanced planning,
 and appropriate considerations in design-
 ing vehicles,  machines, and buildings, a
 substantial amount of relief from noise
 could be provided at relatively small cost.

   Today,  three related trends are focus-
 ing attention on noise pollution.  First,
 noise is increasing and affecting more
 people.  Second, the public is becoming
 more concerned about noise.  And,  third,
 acoustical specialists are stepping up
 their efforts to control the  noise environ-
 ment.

   Noise has  penetrated virtually every
 aspect of modern life and,  generally
 speaking, the problem is getting worse.
 An ever-increasing  number of common
 noise sources—motor vehicles, aircraft,
 pov/er tools,  household gadgets--is being
 put into use daily, and new noise  sources
 such as snowmobiles and hovercraft are
 being added.  New highways, new airports,
 and increased numbers of airplanes en-
 sure that noise  will be ever more widely
 distributed.   Protection from this rising
 din is actually decreasing because of in-
 creasing use  of lightweight building con-
 struction and contemporary open-plan
 designs.

   As with other forms of pollution, the
 ideal place to control noise is at the source.
 If the source  is sufficiently quiet, there is
 no problem.   Also,  noise control often can
 be designed into a piece of  equipment so
 that little or no compromise in the design
 goals is required.  Noise control  under-
 taken as a retrofit measure usually exacts
 a heavier toll.

   Traffic  noise is by far the major source
 of noise nuisance.  Aircraft and neighbor-
hood activities also make substantial con-
tributions to environmental noise  levels.
   What kinds of modifications could be
applied to reduce the noise from the
sources, cited?
• Mufflers can control intake and  ex-
haust noises of motor vehicles.
• Some  recently built aircraft,  such as
the 747,  incorporated noise reduction
technology developed in the last few years.
• Residential noise, which includes
voices, radios,  and TV sets,  is  not
usually amenable to source modifications;
however,  modifications to residential
buildings can isolate the noise.
• Mufflers and soundproofed enclosures
could reduce noise from construction
equipment by 10 to 40 dB(A).
• Noise standards established under the
Walsh-Healey Public Contracts Act and
the Occupational Safety and Health  Act
(1970) exert  some pressure on manu-
facturers to  utilize equipment  that  pro-
duces less industrial noise, a  problem
to persons working in the factory or plant
as well as to nearby communities.
• Other engine-powered machinery, in-
cluding such items as lawnmowers and
snowblowers, often could be muffled with
no great  loss in performance  capabilities.

   Because  the desired amount of noise
reduction cannot always be achieved by
good acoustic design at the source,  modi-
fying the noise path between the source and
receiver must be considered.  Rerouting
or relocating noisy sources is one  example
of path modification--usually  best applied
in the planning stages in the cases  of
highways, airports, and trains.  Another
possible  path modification is using walls
and barriers to attenuate sound.

   Under the FY 1973 noise research pro-
gram, the effects  of noise and control
technology will be studied.  The effects
studies may  be further  divided into re-
search related to environmental noise in
the community and its associated human
response and into  economic effects.  The
control technology research is concentrated
in the areas  of exposure dosimetry and
cooperative efforts conducted with  the Air
Force Medical Laboratory at  Wright
Patterson Air Force Base near Dayton,
Ohio.

   Although the FY 72 budget  for noise
research in EPA is minimal,  it in  no
way reflects total  noise program needs
and decisions concerning ultimate operat-
ing responsibilities because certain aspects
of noise abatement needs have not been
finalized within EPA. Congress has not
yet'enacted  the Noise Control Act of 1972.
                                        -66-

-------
   The highest priority research for FY
 1973 is that devoted to developing a means
 of expressing the noise environment at a
 point, in terms of a single number, that
 accounts for the time  variations involved
 over a 24-hour period.  Although a number
 of composite scales exist, most of them
 have been developed to deal with aircraft
 noise only or traffic noise only, and we
 are  left with the urgent problem of devel-
 oping a valid universal scale for commun-
 ity noise from all sources that is related
 in a tested way to the  annoyance response
 of communities of people experiencing
 that noise environment.

   Once a composite noise scale is adopted,
 the noise environment at various points
 in the community (as based on the total
 experience over any given time period such
 as a day, a week, or a year) can be quanti-
 fied.  As a result, "noisiness"  can be
 drawn in terms of the selected composite
 scale, just as  the contour lines on a topo-
 graphic map are lines of equal elevation.

   Although noise contours can  be pre-
 dicted adequately for planning purposes,
 there is no substitute  for measurement
 when dealing with a real airport or an
 existing community, coupled with the va-
 garies of varying atmospheric conditions,
 non-ideal flight paths  of air vehicles, and
 variable operating modes of surface ve-
 hicles.  The application of a suitable
 metric (composite scale) to both the pre-
 diction of noise contours and their
 measurement can provide an invaluable
 two-pronged tool to control the  noise
 environ-.Tient.

   Noise pollution in the community is
 an extremely complex problem, caused
 by a variety  of sources, and measured in
 terms of its differing  effects on people.
 To approach this problem requires syste-
 matic research on
 • measurement and prediction of
 community noise,
 • establishment of noise quality goals,
 • control of the basic noise characteris-
 tics  of the various important sources,
 • community planning for and regulation
 of noise,
 • the effects of noise on people, and
 • improved  noise control technology.

   Specifically, in the field of control
 technology,  research is needed  in the
following areas.
• Transportation noise and noise from
equipment powered by  internal combustion
engines: Highway vehicles are responsible
for the outdoor residual noise level in our
communities, as well as for freeway noise;
aircraft, near airports; recreation vehicles,
in the remote wilderness  areas; and lawn
care equipment,  in the  neighborhood.  In
addition, some of the sources in each of
these general categories represent a
potential hazard of  hearing damage and
most of the sources are often responsible
for single-event noise intrusion in resid-
ential neighborhoods.  Consequently, there
are a variety of noise problems to be
examined and solved within acceptable
economic,  technical, and social constraints.
^ Noise from construction equipment and
operations, building equipment, and home
appliances: When a noise source  has a
significant impact on parties who  derive
little direct benefit from the source,
maximum allowable noise levels should
be established for control.  Most  con-
struction equipment, construction sites,
and certain types of appliances would be
included.  Among the items of construction
equipment  requiring standards are all
machinery powered by internal combustion
engines as well as  tools using impact or
cutting mechanisms, such as drills, pave-
ment breakers,  and saws.  Construction
site noise levels  ought to  be regulated to
ensure that the contractor deploy  and use
his machinery in a  way that minimizes
community noise exposure.  Typical
home appliances  requiring regulation are
electric garden tools (e.g.,  lawn  mowers,
hedge clippers,  edge trimmers),  food-
waste disposers, dishwashers,  air condi-
tioners,  and  shop tools.  Because the
noise of hazardous  tools also serves to
inform the user of their operation,
minimum as  well as maximum levels
ought to be set.
• Noise from industrial plants:   Excessive
noise in existing  industrial plants can be
reduced (to conform to  established criteria
for hearing damage, annoyance,  or speech
communication) by  applying current state-
of-the-art  noise abatement technology;
however,  correcting existing noisy industr-
ial plants costs more in dollars per decibel
of noise reduced  than incorporating noise
abatement  features into the original design
of the plant equipment.
            CONCLUSION

   In all of the technological development
areas we have discussed, the researcher
must consider -- before beginning the
research project -- whether or not develop-
ing new technology is indeed the best way
to solve  the stated problem. We are
                                        -67-

-------
finding increasingly that the institutions
through which we carry out our daily
activities often can present the most
logical and accessible forms for controll-
ing pollution.  Thus, before we begin the
program to remove certain classes of
pollutants from waste streams, we must
often decide whether or not the proper
action would be to prevent them from
getting into the waste stream in the first
place.   After many years of trying to
build devices to be added to existing
pollution producing systems, we are be-
ginning  to consider redesigning the entire
system.  As we move in this direction,
we will  increase the  amounts of long range
research to develop comprehensive waste
management systems for entire communi-
ties, recognizing that the community also
is a system and,  like the environment,
must not be dealt with piecemeal.
        ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

   The author's efforts were those of
compilation of information provided by
the following scientists and engineers of
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency:
John J. Convery, Director, Advanced
Waste Treatment Research Laboratory;
Ronald D. Hill,  Chief, Mine Drainage
Pollution Control Activities,  AWTRL;
Peter B. Lederman, Director, Edison
Water Quality Research Laboratory;
Daniel J. Keller, Physical Scientist,
Office of Program Coordination, OD,
NERC,  Cincinnati;  Gordon G. Robeck,
Director,  Water Supply Research Labor-
atory; John K.  Burchard,  Acting Chief,
Division of Control Systems, NERC-RTP,
North Carolina;  and Robert M. Clark,
Sanitary Engineer,  Office of Program
Coordination, OD,  NERC,  Cincinnati.

   The author would like to extend a
special acknowledgement to Alvin F.
Meyer, Jr.,  Director,and  to Ms.
Elizabeth Cuadra, Deputy for Program
Development, of the Office of Noise
Abatement and Control for their assist-
ance in preparing the section on Control
Technology in Environmental Noise
Research.
                                       -68-

-------
        DISCUSSION OF THE PRESENTATIONS BY DELBERT EARTH AND ANDREW BREIDENBACH
Question:  Does EPA plan to develop stan-
dards on essentially aesthetic matters,
rather than solely on the basis of adverse
affects on health or on other kinds of
things?

Barth:  The answer to that is a clear-cut
"Yes".  It is directed by the Clean Air
Amendments of 1970 that we will do that.  I
was quickly looking for the definition of
welfare, which is in the Clean Air Amend-
ment, I'm sure, that will clarify that.  I
can't find it, but I'll try to give it to
you from memory.  Welfare refers to effects
on soil, water, vegetation, domestic ani-
mals, wildlife, materials, things of econ-
omic value, visibility, climate, and person-
al comfort and well being of individuals.
That just absolutely covers the waterfront.
That's why in my summary I said that we
have to deal with effects on health with
primary kinds of standards and then effects
on everything else, and it truly is every-
thing else, including all of the aesthetic
factors.  So we have the right to do this.
It's just a matter of whether we have the
courage to propose such standards and
actually support them with scientific data.

Ellsaesser:  Everyone has made it clear
that we seem to be lacking in knowledge
and information necessary to support
standards.  Yet we already have standards,
which therefore presumably are not supported
by existing information.  Secondly, you
mentioned that the objective of EPA is to
reduce pollution to socially acceptable
levels.  This seems to go along with a con-
clusion of mine that pollution, like
beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.  It
would appear to me that the type of research
needed here is public opinion polls rather
than technology.  Would you care to comment
on these points?

Barth:  Well, let me try to take those by
numbers.  Let me quickly address the
second point that you made before going
back to the first one.  In fact, we do
have opinion polls as part of the research
effort.  Just one example where it clearly
is a matter of reducing the pollution to
socially acceptable levels is the entire
area of odor pollution.  Here you simply
can't even determine what is an acceptable
level without having human panels, which
are your experts on the measurement methods,
and actually finding out from them how much
of what kind of an odor they're willing to
put up with before they're willing to pay
enough money to have it controlled or to
force other people to pay to have it con-
trolled.  So we are in social aspects of
this.  In one of the later presentations,
when Dr. House speaks on his studies in
Environmental Studies Division, you will
find that he is doing a lot of work in
this area.  So we are in fact going into
that area of research.  With regard to the
first point, I stated in my summary pres-
entation that we will never be able to
fully support on an irrefutable and un-
assailable basis every standard that is
promulgated.  At some point in time we
have to stop, take an  assessment of what
knowledge we have and decide whether or
not a standard is needed, and if it is
needed, what the best evidence we have at
that point in time says that standard
should be.  But that doesn't mean that we
should then be satisfied with that stan- •
dard for all time.  We still have to con-
tinue to do research to determine whether
or not we set the standard too low or too
high.  Maybe it's too restrictive, or may-
be it isn't restrictive enough.  But we've
got to fill in the gaps in the research.
In the criteria documents that I talk to
you about, one of the things that is
focused upon is research needs:  where
do we have to get additional information
to plug the gaps in our state of knowledge
to determine whether or not we must change
our standards five or ten years down the.
road.  Clearly we can't be changing our
standards every month, so we have to have
some kind of a fixed period of which we
will agree we're going back and reevaluate
the state of our scientific knowledge.
In the mean time we are going to take our
research dollars and do our best to plug
the gaps that we know exist.  So we felt
we had enough information to go with the
standards which were promulgated.  But we
feel that we have to continue to work to
get additional information to determine
whether or not the standards we promulgated
were the correct ones.

Ellsaesser:  Would you care to evaluate the
difference between what is socially accept-
able and what is technologically feasible?
The impression given so far is that social-
ly acceptable standards will be more
restrictive than those which you can dem-
onstrate on a technological basis.  It
might work the other way around.  If so,
if the public were willing to allow
pollution levels which were shown to be
harmful, would this be acceptable?
                                          -69-

-------
Barth:  The only basis we have for setting
any kind of standard at all is the legis-
lative authority that's granted to us in
each one of these areas.  We have certain
authorities in air, water, radiation, pes-
ticides, and so forth.  These authorities
are worded differently, and immediately
the question that you get into here involves
a very careful legal opinion, going all the
way to the top, with regard to what is the
intent of Congress in a certain set of
words which it put into the statute.  That
would be the only way we could resolve the
question like that.  The Clean Air Amend-
ments, for example, say you must set
standards that are protective of human
health.  Now this implies that there is a
threshold for the effects of these various
pollutants on human health.  If it turns
out that there is no threshold, then you
can never comply with that Act, without
going to zero pollution, for particular
kinds of pollutants, many of which are
normally found in nature.  So you must
have a statute, you must have legal
interpretations of what that statute says,
and you must have the authority to set
standards.

Question:  There has been a problem, which
it seems to me that EPA has had to face
more directly than some of the other
agencies, concerning the time frame of
operations.  For example, some new tech-
nologies for pollution control are con-
strained to a time frame of only a few years.
Therefore some promising new technologies
languish for support simply because they are
out of time context, for example, a decade
rather than three years.  Does the new
Clear Water Act, which specifically targets
available technology and a 15 year time
frame to 1985, shift the feeling within
EPA of the desirability of supporting
technologies that may take 10 years rather
than a shorter time frame?  My feeling
has been that about three to five years is
the longest time frame you have been able
to operate in.

Breidenbach:  I wish that Stan Greenfield
was here;  I'd like to hear the answer to
that question.  My own feeling is that with
a time frame of 15 years we should have
some degree of relaxation in the kind of
thing we face now.  And I whole heartedly
agree with you that there are two kinds of
research problems in technology.  One is
associated with cleaning up the mess we
are in now.  You have to be able to answer
the mayor who asks, "What will I do with
the eight tons a day of solid waste?" or
"What will I do with the sludge that's
piling up outside that sewage treatment
plant?"  That's on his mind, on the
governor's mind, and on the mind of every-
body that works for both of them.  That
will not be denied.  On the other hand,
there's another kind of research that has
to look principally at our cities in terms
of systems.  We've got to look decades in
front of us and ask the hard questions.
How are we going to handle the inputs and
outputs to that system in 2000 and 2010?
And getting, defending, and using that
kind of money is the hardest thing in the
world.
                                           -70-

-------
                              THE MISSION AND WORK PROGRAMS
                                         OF THE
                          ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES DIVISION OF EPA

                                     Dr. Peter House
                        Director, Environmental Studies Division
                             Office of Research & Monitoring
                             Environmental Protection Agency
                                    Washington, D.C.
                                        ABSTRACT

     The criticality of our immediate environmental problems has led to a high concen-
tration of EPA effort on areas of immediate hazard and concern.   This concentration of
effort may be categorized as directed primarily to short and mid-range approaches for
increasing the effectiveness of operational handling of our environmental problems.

     However, it has also been recognized that a requirement also exists to better
understand the forces which create our environmental problems,  develop means for fore-
casting the long range impact of these forces and devise planning and policy guides
which will help alleviate their adverse impact.  The Environmental Studies Division,
Office of Research and Monitoring, Environmental Protection Agency, has a key responsi-
bility in this area.  Its specific mission involves development of means to help predict
future environmental problems and devise practical planning and policy guidance tools
which will help alleviate these problems.  This paper describes the task structure
developed to approach the BSD mission and the specific work programs and projects
designed to effectively accomplish the mission.
               INTRODUCTION

     The Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) has been undergoing a transition in
its focus on environmental problems.  Much
of EPA's initial effort was in the fireman
category—checking immediate threats to
the environment.  This very necessary
initial effort was directed toward immedi-
ate areas of hazard and concern—setting
pollution standards, enforcement,
providing impetus for the technical and
manpower improvements needed to check
pollution, and monitoring the sources of
pollution and their impact on the
environment.

     The EPA focus on problems of immedi-
ate hazard and concern continues today.
However, it has become increasingly
evident that we will be continually faced
with crises and short-term responses
unless we can more effectively perceive
our future environmental problems and
develop the tools which will enable us to
circumvent or minimize their impact.

     The Environmental -Studies Division
(BSD) of the Office of Research has been
charged with the responsibility of ferret-
ing out future environmental problems,
developing the planning tools which will
assist in alleviating or eliminating
these problems and helping to insure the
practical application of the planning
tools.  Our work is accomplished through
in-house research and an extensive program
of sponsored research.

     The purpose of this paper is to
describe the role of ESD in accomplishing
EPA's mission and the approach we have
taken in meeting our specific responsi-
bilities.  We solicit your guidance and
support to insure that we are providing
practical and effective tools.

   RELATIONSHIP OF ESD TO EPA MISSION

     Exhibit 1 illustrates the functional
and organizational relationships of ESD
to EPA.  We are one of the k Divisions
reporting to the Deputy Assistant Adminis-
trator for Research and Monitoring.  This
office provides the headquarters support
for EPA's research and monitoring function.
The four EPA functions illustrated have
both short term and long range inter-
actions.  The research function provides
guidelines and information which assist
                                          -71-

-------
      EPA Mission
             PROTECTION AND ENHANCEMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
      EPA Functions
Standards
Setting and
Enforcement
Research and
Monitoring
      OR&M
      Organizational
      Structure
Technical & Financial
Assistance to State,
Regional and Local
Jurisdictions to
Reduce Pollution and
Demonstrate Technology
Citizen
Environmental
Information
Dissemination
                           Assistant Administrator
                           for  Research & Monitoring
                              Dep.  Asst.  Adm.
                               for  Research
                           Dep.  Asst.  Adm.
                           for Monitoring
                         Dep. Asst. Adm.
                         for Program Operations
i
-j
to
       Processes & Effects
            Division
    Technology
     Division
   Implementation
   Research Division
Environmental Studies
     Division
                                           RELATIONSHIP OF BSD TO EPA MISSION AND FUNCTIONS

                                                             Exhibit #1

-------
in accomplishment of the other three
functions, and feedbacks from the other
functions assist in establishing research
priorities.

      ESD MISSION AND TASK STRUCTURE

     Our mission is to develop means to
help predict future environmental prob-
lems and devise the practical planning
and policy tools which will help alleviate
or eliminate these problems.  We accom-
plish this mission through three tasks
which conform to the branch structure of
the ESD.

     (l)  Environmental Modeling and
          Methodologies Development

     (2)  Comprehensive Environmental
          Planning

     (3)  Environmental Management

     Our environmental modeling and
methodologies development efforts are
designed to help us better foresee and
understand future environmental problems.
In order to achieve these objectives we
undertake modeling methodology development
and the concommitant data base development
required.

     Our comprehensive environmental plan-
ning efforts are designed to develop the
planning and policy guidance tools to
avert and handle future environmental
problems.

     Our environmental management efforts
have for their purpose the effective
practical communication of information and
assistance in implementation of the
planning and policy guidance tools at the
national, regional, state and local level.

     All three efforts are complementary
and interactive.  The first category of
effort defines and illuminates our future
problems; the second category of effort
derives priorities and problem definitions
from the first and produces the planning
policy guidance tools needed to cope with
key problems; and the third effort insures
the practical application of the tools at
the using level.  The third effort neces-
sitates effective coordination and
communication with the user.  One of the
means devised to insure effective communi-
cation of our results is our yearly
planners' manual.  This manual will include
ESD in-house and sponsored activities as
well as related work in the field.  It
will describe available planning tools,
applications and sources.  While the
manual will be distributed to a wide
range of using agencies, you can be
insured of inclusion on its distribution
through a request to the Director,
Environmental Studies Division, Office of
Research and Monitoring, Environmental
Protection Agency Headquarters,
Washington, D.C.

     In the following two sections we will
describe our work programs for 1972/73;
and illustrate the manner in which the
individual in-house and sponsored
projects support our tasks and mission.

   WORK PROGRAM AND PROJECTS FOR 1972

     Exhibit #2 illustrates our work
program for 1972 by task area and indivi-
dual project title.  I will discuss these
projects briefly.

       MODELING AND METHODOLOGIES
            DEVELOPMENT TASK

     Simulation of Urban Pressures on the
Environment of a River Basin - a project
designed to develop and test a classifica-
tion of various types of cities into a
format usable in an existing systems
model.  The resulting system will enable
urban and regional planners to effectively
utilize specific urban statistics in con-
junction with the model for evaluating
environmental policies and impacts.

     Survey of Modeling and Development
of a Pilot System of Models - this project
examines the feasibility of adapting and
combining a coordinated set of simulation
models into a metropolitan and regional
development forecasting capability.  Such
a capability would enable EPA to better
formulate policy based on effective fore-
casts of changing patterns of national
development.

     Time Allocation of Population Groups -
the distribution of time by population
groups in work, education, training,
recreation, etc., has a direct and complex
impact on man's natural and man-made
environment.  Simulations under develop-
ment need to reflect these impacts in a
realistic manner.  This project is de-
signed to provide a basis for introduction
of such time distributions.
                                           -73-

-------
     Prototype Model for Comprehensive
Environmental Management - a need exists
for performing trade-offs in alternate
production processes and pollution control
strategies affecting residuals released to
the environment.  This project involves
development of a model flexible enough to
assist in such trade-offs and at the same
time serve as a module for introducing
these trade-offs into existing urban
systems models.

     Neighborhood Groups in Land
Development - neighborhood groups differ
in response to pressures to preserve or
exploit natural features within their
boundaries.  This project investigates
the interaction of such factors as socio-
logical, neighborhood density, physical
land characteristics, and proposed land
use on utilization and preservation of
the natural environment.

     Defining Components of the Quality
of Life - environmental policy impacts on
all elements of the Quality of Life--
economic, social, and environmental.
Accordingly, a crucial need exists to
better understand the meaning of the terra
Quality of Life, the interrelationships of
its factors and means for evaluating im-
pacts of environmental policies on Quality
of Life.  A conference was undertaken
involving a wide range of disciplines and
interests to clarify the construct and
derive guidance.

     Modeling and Methodologies
Development—In-House Research - this
effort is directed at coordinating and
integrating the sponsored research in this
category and complementing the work.  A
significant staff effort has been under-
taken in evaluating the state-of-the-art
of Quality of Life Indicators and deriving
useful guidelines for environmental
indicator development.

        COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING TASK

     Comprehensive Plan for Environmental
Quality - one of the projects designed to
improve environmental considerations in
the comprehensive urban planning process
                                       EXHIBIT #2


                     1972 WORK PROGRAM BY TASK CATEGORY AND PROJECT

     MODELING AND METHODOLOGIES DEVELOPMENT

          Simulation of Urban Pressures on the Environment of a River Basin
          Survey of Modeling and Development of a Pilot System of Models
          Time Allocation of Population Groups
          Prototype Model for Comprehensive Environmental Management
          Neighborhood Groups in Land Development
          Defining Components of the Quality of Life
          Modeling and Methodologies Development In-House Research

     COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING

          Comprehensive Plan for Environmental Quality
          Land Use Forms and the Environment
          Promoting Environmental Quality Through Urban Planning and Controls
          Marginal Pollution Analysis for Long Range Forecasts
          In-House Research on Comprehensive Planning

     ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

          University Environmental Studies Sub-Centers
          Regional Environmental Studies Centers
          Prototype State-Wide Environmental Information/Data Center
          National Environmental Studies Center
          EPA Fellows Program
          Environmental Management and Local Government:  Problems and Perceptions
          Environmental Management In-House Research
                                          -74-

-------
through definition of the realtionships
of urban life to its social,  environmental
and ecological elements.

     Land Use Forms and the Environment -
directed at developing effective planning
tools for evaluating the impact of land
use on environmental quality with par-
ticular emphasis on the impacts of
regional growth and change on environ-
mental pollution.

     Promoting Environmental Quality
through Urban Planning and Controls -
a project designed to summarize the urban
planning and development control systems
of the 1960's and recommend promising
modifications and priorities for develop-
ment for the 1970's.

     Marginal Pollution Analysis for Long
Range Forecasts - an analysis of the
changes in pollution resulting from in-
cremental changes in business and residen-
tial land use-designed to provide planning
tools for impact analysis of land use on
pollution.

     In-House Research on Comprehensive
Planning - an in-house effort to develop
a holistic framework for the sponsored
planning studies resulting in a comprehen-
sive planning package for the policy maker
and environmental planner.

      ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT TASK

     University Environmental Studies
Sub-Centers - a project to develop effec-
tive EPA/University ties, establish
distribution centers for models, and en-
hance student appreciation of urban and
environmental issues.

     Regional Environmental Studies
Centers - a project to develop a prototype
of centers for analysis and management of
regional environmental problems.

     Prototype State-Wide Environmental
Information/Data Center - for development
of a control source of environmental in-
formation and data needed to achieve and
maintain a high level of environmental
quality.

     National Environmental Studies
Center - to serve as a laboratory which
can facilitate integration and coordina-
tion of interdisciplinary sciences.
Initial effort is directed toward estab-
lishing preliminary design alternatives.
     EPA Fellows Program - designed to
provide a summer institute for highly
qualified college students addressing
environmental problems of interest to the
EPA Office of Research and Monitoring.'

     Environmental Management and Local
Government;  Problems and Perceptions -
a project to identify and analyze environ-
mental management from the point of view
of both local government officials and
EPA personnel.  The project will include
field surveys and conferences to achieve
a better understanding of the meaning and
implications of environmental management.

     Environmental Management In-House
Research - a series of in-house projects
involving the coordination of sponsored
tasks and supplemental in-house studies.

   WORK PROGRAM AND PROJECTS FOR 1973

     Exhibit #3 illustrates our 1973 work
program, again by task area and individual
project title.  As in the case of the 72
work program we will briefly describe the
projects under each task.

        MODELING & METHODOLOGIES
            DEVELOPMENT TASK

     Model Interaction with European
Researchers - ties will be made with
European researchers, model builders, and
model users in an effort to exchange
research findings and models that might
prove transferable.

     Forecasting of Major Societal and
Technological Events - procedures for
forecasting the probability of certain
major events occuring will be developed
and tested with the assistance of a panel
of experts.

     Liaison with Local Government
Officials and their Computer Support
Staffs - local government environmental
managers and model users will be queried
to determine what types of models they are
able to use and what types of models they
most prefer and need.

     Strategic Environmental Assessment
System (SEAS) - a requirement exists for
estimating the long range impact of poli-
cies, and activities on the environment.
The Strategic Environmental Assessment
System (SEAS) will assist in meeting this
requirement by providing a means for com-
paring the impact of various stresses with
                                          -75-

-------
the capacity of the environment to adjust
to these stresses, and will alert the
policy makers to those stresses which may
produce hazardous or beneficial environ-
mental effects a decade or more into the
future.

     Inputs to SEAS will include popula-
tion, economic, and technological trends.
Output from SEAS will be in the form of
reports and numerical data projecting
interrelated, environmental effects into
the future.  Alternative futures will be
projected to assess the relative impacts
that changing conditions will have on the
environment.  Information on the effects
of pollution, stock depletion and ecologi-
cal imbalances will be provided on a
national scale and for the ten federal EPA
regions in formats found to be most useful
to potential recipients of information.

     Operationalize Components of a
General Environmental Model - complete the
synthesizing, design, programming, and
testing of various components of a general
environmental model.  This will include
such components as internal and external
population flows, transportation (work and
non-work related), and others.

     Develop Data Base for Environmental
Models - make operational the most
efficient methods of developing data for
environmental models from existing sources
and, when necessary, from newly created
sources.
                                      EXHIBIT #3


                    1973 WORK PROGRAM BY TASK CATEGORY AND PROJECT


     MODELING AND METHODOLOGIES DEVELOPMENT

          Model Interaction with European Researchers
          Forecasting of Major Societal and Technological Events
          Liaison with Local Government Officials and their Computer Support Staffs
          Strategic Environmental Assessment System
          Operationalize Components of a General Environmental Model
          Develop Data Base for Environmental Models
          Provision of General Computer Support
          Development of Ecosystem Models
          In-House Modeling and Methodologies Development

     COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING

          Comparison of Ideal and Existing Government Organizations for Dealing with
             Environmental Pollution
          Data for QOL Construct
          Natural Environmental Constraints to Planning
          Limited Resources Study
          Aesthetics in Urban Planning
          Environmental Urban Planning Guidelines
          Natural Environmental Constraints to Planning
          Test Land Use Decision Methodologies at State and Local Levels
          Elemental Causes of Solid Waste
          Air Quality - Mass Transit - Urban Form Relationships
          Evaluation of Research Techniques for Long-Range Forecasting and Planning
          In-House Comprehensive Planning Research

     ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

          National Environmental Management Conference
          In-House Environmental Management Research
                                          -76-

-------
     Provision of General Computer
Support - assure the needed access to
systems analysts, computer operators, and
programming assistance for the ongoing
model building and testing operations of
the division.

     Development of Ecosystem Models -
design and develop models that relate a
number of ecosystem factors together in a
way that highlights the impact of environ-
mental management decisions on the
ecological system.

     In-House Modeling and Methodology
Development - coordinate and integrate
sponsored projects and supplement the
research efforts.

       COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING TASK

     Comparison of Ideal & Existing
Government Organizations for Dealing
with Environmental Pollution - compare
and contrast ideal forms of governmental
organizations for dealing with environ-
mental pollution with existing approaches.
Suggest changes that could be encouraged
over the near and long term.

     Data for QOL Construct - this project
will be aimed at gathering data to support
the QOL construct defined at the QOL
conference.

     Natural Environmental Constraints
to Planning - this will be a feasibility
study.  It is expected to serve as a
basis for a larger study that examines
the regional differences in natural en-
vironmental characteristics and the
consideration they should be given in
land use planning for environmental
quality.

     Limited Resources Study - this
project will study a restricted land area
and investigate how limited resources are
considered in making land use decisions.
Emphasis will be placed on the framework
and methodology that decision makers need
to make the necessary trade-offs in future
decisions related to land development.

     Aesthetics in Urban Planning - the
role of aesthetics in environmental
quality and in the individual's daily life
experience is becoming increasingly im-
portant.  Methodology is needed for
decision makers and planners to incorporate
the importance of aesthetic and cultural
trade-offs into policy and planning
decision making.  This study will define
appropriate measures of perceptual and
emotional responses of population groups
into various qualitative aspects (primar-
ily visual) of the environment that
satisfy needs of people beyond absolute
necessities of life.

     Environmental Urban Planning Guide-
lines"^This is an interagency project,
co-sponsored by DOT and HUD, which will
consolidate the planning and environmental
knowledge gained through research and
practice into a set of guidelines for
planners which may be used on a daily
basis in the field.

     Natural Environmental Constraints to
Planning - this project will utilize the
findings of a feasibility study on the
topic and pursue an effort which will
examine the regional differences in na-
tural environmental characteristics.  This
will be used to develop an output which
will guide the consideration of these
characteristic differences in land use
planning for environmental quality.

     Test Land Use Decision Methodologies
at State and Local Levels - this project
will gather existing and proposed land use
control mechanisms and other techniques,
methodologies and institutional arrange-
ments for making environmentally sensitive
land use decisions.

     Elemental Causes of Solid Waste -
this study will take a fresh and compre-
hensive approach to the urban solid waste
problem by addressing the institutional,
behavioral, political, technical, economic
and other aspects in a systematic manner.
The approach in this study will be to in-
vestigate the above mentioned areas in one
or more "solid waste clean" cities in an
effort to identify the elemental factors
needed to minimize urban solid waste
problems.

     Air Quality - Mass Transit - Urban
Form Relationships - this is a joint effort
with the Urban Mass Transit Administration
and the Office of Environment & Urban
Systems in DOT.  The study will investigate
the implications of introducing mass trans-
it into the existing and developing urban
forms and the subsequent impact of air
quality.
                                          -77-

-------
     Evaluation of Research Techniques
for Long-Range Forecasting and Planning
recent advances in strategic assessment
techniques termed "Future's Research"
permit extension of the time-frame for
analysis beyond that of conventional
mathematical modeling practices.  This
project will review long-range planning
and forecasting techniques and evaluate
their applicability to environmental
problems.

     In-House Comprehensive Planning
Research - to coordinate and integrate
sponsored projects and supplement
research efforts.

       ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT TASK

     National Environmental Management
Conference - to analyze, evaluate and plan
regional strategies for environmental
management.

     In-House Environmental Management
Research - to coordinate and integrate
sponsored projects and supplement the
research efforts.

            ALLOCATION OF FUNDS
                    AND
             RESULTS ACHIEVED

     Having discussed our mission and
work programs we will now describe the
allocation of in-house and sponsored
research funding for 72/73 and review in
more detail some of the programs and
results achieved from the past fiscal
year's efforts.
     Exhibit #k illustrates the allocation
of our research budget for the 1972-1973
fiscal years by category.

     The largest portion of the fiscal
year 1972 research budget—$6%—was
allocated to the Environmental Management
category.  The largest single allocation
within this category was a grant to the
Environmental Development Agency, County
of San Diego.  The ultimate intent of this
collaborative project is to develop a pro-
totype center for the analysis and manage-
ment of the full range of regional environ-
mental problems.  Such centers will assess
the implications of environmental policy
alternatives in terms of all their costs,
benefits, and dis-benefits so as to
facilitate the most satisfactory balance
for the region.

     A principal objective of the project
is the development of techniques for
effective land-use policy and decision
making through improved consideration of
the environmental consequences of these
decisions.  The project seeks to integrate
the efforts of existing environmental
regulatory and planning agencies in accom-
plishment of this objective.

     The project's first priority is to
assist in the refinement and development
of approaches and techniques for land use
and transportation analysis as it applies
to meeting the 1976 air quality standards.
Air quality is the principal environmental
impact to be considered.  However, it is
only one of many sociological, economic and
environmental impacts that will be con-
sidered in the development of such tools.
                                       EXHIBIT #U


                 ALLOCATION OF RESEARCH BUDGET FOR 1972/73 WORK PROGRAMS
Category
Modeling and Methodologies Development
Comprehensive Planning
Environmental Management
1972 Work Program
(1.7 M)
21%
23%
56%
1973 Work Program
(2.3 M)
60%
30%
10%
                                          -78-

-------
     This project, while begun near the
end of the fiscal year, has provided
initial guidance on the role of such
centers in implementing planning tools at
the regional level.

     Approximately 23$ of our budget in
Fiscal 1972 was allocated to the Compre-
hensive Planning category and 21$ to the
Modeling and Methodologies Development
category.  We will briefly describe two
in-house completed projects.  One program
of special interest—within the Modeling
and Methodologies Development category—
is the Quality of Life Symposium held at
Arlie House, Virginia on August 29, 30,
and 31> 1972.  The symposium was organ-
ized and sponsored by the Environmental
Protection Agency in recognition of the
critical interaction of environmental,
economic, and social aspects in EPA
policy development.  Symposium partici-
pants included more than 150 representa-
tives from the Federal government, state
and local government, citizens groups and
professional organizations, research
institutes and universities as well as
representatives from industry.  The
objective of the symposium was to define
the QOL Concept, identify'its components
and develop suggested approaches for its
use in public policy.

     The symposium involved intensive
work sessions and presentations on
methodological approaches and concepts.
The discussions and findings are cur-
rently being compiled and edited for
inclusion in a report on the symposium,
to be published shortly.

     Another in-house research project,
conducted within the Modeling and Method-
ologies category, has been a survey of
indicator state-of-the-art.  This effort
was initiated in recognition of the
fundamental importance of environmental
indicators as practical policy guides and
the need for indicators for modeling and
simulation use.  The initial survey and
evaluation of the state-of-the-art of
indicator development has been completed.
A summary paper of the findings has been
produced and a comprehensive report is
under preparation. •

     As shown in the Exhibit, the 1973
work program is larger than the 1972 work
program and incorporates some changes in
emphasis.  The Modeling and Methodology
category involves twice the dollar
research effort of the Comprehensive
Planning Category.  Findings of the 1972
program have shown that considerably
greater basic methodological and modeling
work will be required to meet the
Division's mission and to provide a more
effective framework for the Comprehensive
Planning developments.  Efforts programmed
within the Environmental Management cate-
gory will be devoted primarily to manage-
ment of the large number of carry-over
projects from the 1972 work program and to
developing and conducting a national
environmental management conference.  The
results of this conference will assist in
decisions on a large number of additional
projects planned under the Environmental
Management Task.

                  SUMMARY

     The previous discussion has attempted
to provide some perspective of our research
efforts.  These efforts represent a portion
of the total EPA longer range efforts to
improve the environment and the Quality of
Life of our nation.

     We solicit your suggestions on
program emphasis and specific projects
which will enhance the effectiveness of
our mission—to perceive future environ-
mental problems and develop the planning
and policy tools which will reduce or
eliminate these problems.
                                          -79-

-------
                      DISCUSSION OF THE PRESENTATION BY PETER HOUSE
Question;  How does your division relate
to the regional laboratories and the
NERC's?

House;  As some of you may know, we are
set up by the Office of Research and
Monitoring to do some of the longer term
type of research.  We have attempted to
respond to a number of need statements
that have come in and generally have gone
through the division directors in Washington
to ask for help on some of the basic data
we've had.  Except for general information
on the mailing lists we have not inter-
acted very greatly because, as you know,
a large number of the laboratories are
responding to the 80$ or 90$ Stan talked
to earlier.  All of that feeds into the
majority of stuff we do, but I think it
was pointed out this kind of research is
not always welcome.

Ellsaesser;  I was interested in your
remarks about urban planning as a means of
controlling air pollution.  In California,
with which I am familiar, there is only
one air basin, which is on the northeast
plateau, that does not have ambient air
exceeding present ambient air quality
standards.  How are we going to solve that
situation with urban planning?  In fact,
if you look at the individual monitoring
stations that exceed standards, some turn
out to be in small isolated resort-type
communities like Fort Bragg, OJai, Palm
Springs, and Indio.  If those stations are
already over air quality standards, how
is urban planning going to help them?

House;  Let me see if I can answer in two
ways.  First of all, remember that the
kind of research we're trying to do is
trying to respond to situations across the
continental United States rather than to
specific areas.  The type of research
we've begun to do in the division for the
last year, which is really all we've got,
is to establish some research baselines.
Some of the questions that the planning
community has asked, and it seems that a
large amount of environmental management
will be either directly related to the
planning functions in regional or local
levels or lean heavily on them, are to see
if we can support the technological retro-
fits that are being put on to polluters of
the environment, to see if institutionally
we can suggest, for example, certain land
use forms that seem to be naturally less
polluting (e.g., so that people don't
have to travel so far or don't have to
bunch so much in a core), and can relate
this to the natural environment in a
topological sense.  This is our carrying
capacity concept that we've got the whole
comprehensive planning branch going toward.
Now, certainly, if you've already got a
situation that's beyond threshold, then
it seems to me that there is going to
have to be a technological retrofit to do
something.  But we certainly can begin to
give some major social-political changes
that might be able to cut down on the
amount actually generated, in the future.

Ellsaesser;  Maybe the answer is that the
standards are already below ambient
background.

House:  That could be.  I have no answer
to that.'  Somebody else might like to
respond to that.  The concept of risk,
the concept of variable standards, all of
these are considered fair game in the
type of research we are looking at.  I
guess if that's what you're asking, that's
a legitimate focus.  We won't be the first
ones to look at it, we being you and I
right now.  I don't think EPA is dead set
on the standards it's got for eternity if
we can demonstrate in some way that a
variable standard is useful.  It's up to
somebody else to say whether it is
politically viable.
                                           -80-

-------
                          ENVIRONMENTAL MODELING-ECOSYSTEMS

                           Dr. Norbert A.  Jaworski, Director
                           Pacific Northwest Water Laboratory
                         U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency

                                          and

                              Dr. A. F. Bartsch, Director
                   National  Environmental  Research Center-Corvallis
                         U.  S. Environmental  Protection  Agency
                                 200 S.W.  35th Street
                                Corvallis, Oregon 97330
                                       ABSTRACT

     Ecosystem modeling is an essential  part of water pollution research.   Such model-
ing is still in its embryonic state for the total-ecosystem approach to environmental
problems, but significant advances have been made in understanding various ecological
systems through the use of models, primarily in the areas of eutrophication, the
transport and effects of hazardous materials, and thermal pollution.  Work must still
be done to more fully describe the individual biological  systems within the environment,
to determine the components of the ecosystem that are germane to a specific model, and
to develop solution techniques for the complex mathematical formulation relating to the
various ecological processes and interactions.  Major investment of time and money also
remains in the verification and application of models to  actual environmental  situations.
              INTRODUCTION

     Man has been attempting to manage his
resources ever since he first cultivated
the soil.  In some instances, he has
become fairly successful at it.  However,
man's change from an agricultural to an
industrial society has made the problem
of managing his resources and protecting
his environment much more complex.

     Many of the ecological processes in
nature move onward in a state of delicate
balance, and, therefore, can be easily
perturbed by man.  Moreover, many of them
have interlocking cause-effect pathways,
and an environmental stress can trigger
a chain of cause-effect reactions which
ultimately elicit profound changes in
the entire system.

     While some of the environmental
stresses caused by man can be analyzed by
simple techniques, others require a holis-
tic approach.  In order that adverse
changes caused by man's perturbations can
be foreseen and proper decisions made,
there appears to be no alternative to
development of a better, if not a full,
ecological or ecosystem understanding of
man's environment.

     Historically, ecological research
has been focused only on parts of the
entire ecological system.  Governmental
agencies that seek to protect the envir-
onment typically have followed this
pattern also.  This partial approach,
while successful in many instances, has
limited the predictive stature required
for solving some of the large scale
ecological aspects of managing resources
and protecting the environment.

     In addition, man's early efforts
were hindered by his inability to syn-
thetically interlock and relate the many
simultaneous interactions.  The number of
cause-effect sequences simultaneously
reverberating through an ecosystem far
exceeds the capability of the unaided
human mind.

     In recent years, with the advent of
the computer, the most promising approach
to this integrative process appears to
be ecosystem simulation via mathematical
modeling.  In this paper are presented a
                                         -81-

-------
brief review of some of the modeling
approaches to environmental problems, an
account of current ecosystem modeling
activities by the U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency (EPA), and a look toward
future modeling activities.
     ECOSYSTEMS-MODELING APPROACH TO
         ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS

     Models with various degrees of com-
plexity have been used in solving envir-
onmental problems for some time.  In the
area of water pollution control, probably
the most famous and most widely used and
misused model of a part of the ecosystem
is the classical Streeter and Phelps
equation^ for simulating the wastewater
assimilative capability of a river.

     A simple relationship developed by
the two investigators in 1925 held that
the net rate of change in the oxygen
deficit in the river is equal to the
difference between the rates of two anta-
gonistic forces:  deoxygenation caused
by bacterial action on the wastewater
discharged to the river, and the rate of
reaeration of oxygen from the atmosphere.
This simple model has been expanded to
include numerous other sources and sinks
of oxygen, computerized, and applied to
estuaries, reservoirs, and lakes.

     While this model reflects primarily
the activities of the bacteria population
which is at the lowest trophic level of
an ecological model, it has been used by
more Federal, state, and local agencies
in evaluating the need for wastewater
treatment than any other model in existence
today.

     Conceptually, models involving more
than one trophic level have been with us
for a long time, as suggested by the
efforts of Lotka2 in his 1924 classical
approach to mathematical biology.  Similar
to a chemical system comprised of several
species, Lotka envisioned the formulation
of mathematical models of biological
growth and changes in terms of differen-
tial equations specifying the rates of
change of the various biological trophic
levels and environmental parameters.

     While considerable advances have
been made in those linking parts (or all
of the three lower trophic levels:  bac-
teria, phytoplankton, and zooplankton)
with the environmental parameters by
Steele (1956)3, parka (1965)4, Brezonik
(1965)5, Chen (1970)6, and others, most
of the efforts can be considered concep-
tual developments.  That is, the efforts
were used to help understand the eco-
system scientifically, including the
interrelationships, and indirectly to
formulate environmental control practices.

     The phytoplankton, zooplankton-
nutrient model developed by DiToro,
O'Connor, and Thomann (1970)7, which has
been applied to the Sacramento-San Joaquin
Bay Delta estuary in California, is
another example.

     A phytoplankton-nutrient model
applied to the Potomac Estuary by Jaworski,
Lear, and Villa (1971)8 n-s one Of the few
examples in which output was used to
determine the allowable nutrient loadings
that can be discharged to an estuary from
wastewater discharges.

     For the higher aquatic trophic levels
of fisheries, a number of models have been
developed9»10»ll and utilized extensively
in  fishery management.  Efforts in ter-
restrial ecosystem modeling have been
undertaken recently.  Examples include a
model of the western pine beetle as
described by Stark (1966)12 and bird
navigation experiments by Hamilton
(1966)13.

     In general, the approach to ecosystem
modeling has been along four lines:

     (1)  biological compartments.

     (2)  food chain-energy flow.

     (3)  trophic level interactions
          and behavior.

     (4)  classification or the "niche"
          analyses.

     Most ecosystem modeling has been
descriptive or qualitative, but with the
current trend toward quantitative and
mathematical formulation.  Because of the
lack of verification and data availability,
there is a considerable reluctance to use
mathematical ecosystem models for today's
environmental problems.  Both the con-
ceptual and mathematical modeling efforts
have been supported by ^n_ vitro simula-
tion studies.
                                         -82-

-------
        ERA'S ECOSYSTEM MODELING
           RESEARCH ACTIVITIES

     While the EPA fundamentally is a
regulatory agency, its environmental
control programs must be scientifically
based if they are to'provide adequate
protection of the environment, be sup-
ported by the citizenry, and prevail  in
court cases challenging their validity.
Consequently, the research programs,
including ecosystem modeling, are of  a
fundamental continuing importance to  the
EPA mission.

     In the overall research program  of
EPA, NERC-Corvallis has a unique role in
creating new knowledge for effective
environmental pollution control under the
theme of "ecological effects research."

     Working through its eight associate
laboratories*, NERC-Corvallis currently
is undertaking ecosystem modeling through
both intramural and extramural efforts.
Brief descriptions of the major efforts
are presented below:

EUTROPHICATION MODELING  (PNERL)*

     Within the National Eutrophication
Research Program steps are being taken to
develop ecological-mathematical models
that will aid in defining and quantifying
the eutrophication process, and which
will provide predictive capability for
lake restoration programs.  Modeling
capability is of utmost importance to
eutrophication research and lake restora-
tion, for only through this approach  can
eutrophication control become a quantita-
tive science.

     Most of the eutrophication effort
in the modeling field presently is being
conducted extramurally, except for in-
house work related to the Shagawa Lake,
Minnesota, nutrient control project.   The
Shagawa project includes a mathematical
procedure based on morphological and
limnological considerations, to combine
data from several sampling locations  and
several depths into one number that
represents the lake both vertically and
horizontally.  The data will be used  in
a preliminary five compartment model
(including algal mass, available phos-
phorus, nitrogen, and additional phos-

*See Appendix A for list of the Associate
 Laboratories and abbreviations.
phorus and nitrogen), which will be used
to predict potential water quality
improvements.

     Lake restoration projects underway
at Notre Dame and Kent State Universities
include mathematical modeling, and a
grant to Washington State University is •
specifically for model development.

     Mathematical modeling efforts by
the University of Notre Dame have been
directed toward the development of a
dynamic predictive water quality model.

     The main objectives of the mathe-
matical modeling section of the Kent
State study of Twin Lakes are:

     (1)  To empirically examine the
          relationships and interactions
          between meaningful compartments
          of the lake ecosystem.

     (2)  To perform an input-output type
          investigation of the flow of
          materials (nutrients) and
          energy in the ecosystem.

     (3)  To provide probabilities com-
          paring the various methods and
          alternatives for reclaiming one'
          of the Twin Lakes.

     Research at Washington State Univer-
sity is directed toward finding a suitable
approach to nonlinear ecological systems
such that bounds may be placed on output
of a continuous model as functions of
parameter variation and goodness of fit.

     A differential equation system
previously developed by Washington State
will be modified to include several addi-
tional important variables.  Behavior of
the system will be explored as a function
of its sensitivity to parameter values
which will lead to the establishment of
a goodness-of-fit criterion.

     This criterion will then serve as a
base for estimating system parameters by
further development of direct search
methods.  Once model output, in terms of
energy, is in reasonable agreement with
that of the real system at Kootenay Lake,
British Columbia, control  theory princi-
ples will be applied to the model.  Results
then will be used in an attempt to regu-
late output of a small-scale laboratory
system.
                                         -83-

-------
     Another potentially valuable tool
for use in modeling the eutrophication
process is the algal assay.  This is
essentially an in vitro simulation of the
quantitative growth response of an algal
test species to the nutrients present in
waters and wastewaters under a standard
set of laboratory conditions.

     In 1968 the Joint Industry/Government
Task Force on Eutrophication recognized
that an acceptable standardized algal
growth test must be developed to cope
with eutrophication problems.  As a result
the "Provisional Algal Assay Procedure"
(PAAP) was published in 1969  .  A compre-
hensive research program was then under-
taken by eight laboratories to improve
and evaluate PAAP, and it is now avail-
able for general use as a highly reliable
test15.

     The algal assay already has been
used in studying several eutrophication
problems.  These have included the
identification of algal growth, the
assessment of receiving waters to deter-
mine their nutrient status and sensitivity
to change, and the assessment of changes
in waste treatment processess on
receiving waters.

     The algal assay presently is being
used at the Pacific Northwest Water
Laboratory as an integral part of a
National Eutrophication Lake Survey to
identify lakes in the United States that
are threatened or suffering from eutro-
phication problems and which can be saved
by appropriate nutrient limitation.

THERMAL POLLUTION (PNERL)

     Ecosystem modeling in the thermal
are.a is directed to (1) prediction of
heat transport and behavior in water,
(2) physical, chemical, and biological
responses to heat, (3) meteorologic
significance of energy utilization and
heat exchange, and (4) potential environ-
mental infringement of thermal pollution
control systems.

     MDst of the thermal modeling work in
the United States is conducted or sponsored
by EPA, TVA, Argonne National Laboratory,
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and Edison
Electric Institute.

     The state-of-the-art for the hydro-
dynamic and heat exchange aspects are much
farther advanced than the chemical-biolo-
gical responses or meteorologic aspects.
Madeling capability has been, and is being,
developed in areas of heat budgets of water
bodies, plume behavior or submerged and
surface discharges into water, heat ex-
change of large hydrologic systems, ther-
mal energy changes in impoundments,
formation and dissipation of lake and
reservoir stratification, turbulent
spread of heat and matter, water loss from
cooling ponds as a function of inlet
temperature, cooling tower vapor plumes,
and environmental cost minimization for
power plant siting and design.

     Much of the past research effort has
developed technology which is now used in
establishing water quality standards,
discharge permit reviews, and adversary
proceedings by and against the Federal
and State governments.  Slowly, a better
understanding of interrelated physical,
chemical, and biological processes is
evolving.

     Two major thermal pollution issues
currently confronting EPA are  (1) the
need for sophisticated predictive capabil-
ity in light of the Congressional and
agency thrust toward "zero discharge" and
(2) the cost of field verification of
analytical and lab-developed models.

     With the past EPA research effort
at about $1 million, the cost of verifi-
cation may run 10-20 times that of the
analytical development, or $10 to $20
million.

OOASTAL POLLUTION (PNERL)

     The National Coastal Pollution Re-
search Program (NCPRP) has underway several
projects related to ecosystem modeling and
several programs planned for the future.
In general, the effort is divided between
estuarine and ocean modeling.  The budget
(FY73) for each is about 200 and 400
thousand dollars, respectively.  This in-
cludes in-house research and extramural
grant and contract money.

(a)  Esta .^rine Modeling

     Estuaries are usually classified
according to the degree of mixing as revealed
in their vertical salinity and velocity
files.  The state-of-the-art for shallow,
well-mixed estuaries is such that ecosystem
modeling is fairly well established.  Here,
models relating plankton response to nut-
rient inputs have been used.  Predator-prey
relations have been studies via Lotka-Volterra
type equations and Michaelis-Menten kinetics.
                                           -84-

-------
     NCPRP is presently supporting a grant
at MIT involving partially mixed estuaries—
which are an order of magnitude more com-
plex than the well-mixed systems.  Here
the dynamics of the system are being in-
vestigated;  biogeochemical terms will be
incorporated in the mass transport equations.
NCPRP is also supporting a grant that has
been investigating the effect of tidal
flats on the overlying water column; a
mathematical model of the system is being
developed.

     The deep fiords of Puget Sound offer
another class of estuaries more complex
than the shallow, partial or well-mixed
systems.  In a grant with the University of
Washington, PNERL is examining the rela-
tion between the water quality of Puget
Sound and PCB distribution.  System
models are an integral part of the grant in
that they are serving as guides to research
as well as being developed as prediction
tools.  Another pending grant with the
University has as its goal the flushing
rate determination of various parts of the
Sound, the retention time in the upper
layer and the response of the biota to the
circulation and nutrient budget of the area.

     NCPRP has completed a state-of-the-
art report which assesses estuarine model-
ing from the viewpoint of estuarine dynamics,
water quality considerations and ecosystem
simulation.  The report has received wide
acclaim and is being used as a textbook
at various universities.

(b)  Ocean modeling

     More effort will be expended in the
modeling of coastal than estuarine systems.
This is in part due to the more complex
nearshore environment and the difficulties
of sampling it and the fact that the
coastal areas are being looked at more and
more as potential dumping sites.  The
estuary is a closed system and relatively
easy to study in comparison with the open
coast which may be influenced by deep ocean
currents and estuarine outflows; as a con-
sequence our knowledge of coastal systems
in much less developed than for estuaries.

     In-house effort this summer consists
of a modeling effort in cooperation with
the Coastal Upwelling Experiment (CUE)—a
multi-university study off the Oregon
coast.  CUE has as its objectives a com-
bined theoretical and field experiment of
upwelling dynamics and the modeling of the
ecosystem response to this phenomenon.  The
National Coastal Pollution Research Program
effort will be devoted to first modeling the
two-dimensional circulation fron the equations
of motion and continuity.  The ultimate
coastal effort, however, will have to con-
sist of multi-level and/or three-dimension-
al models incorporating predator-prey-
nutrient relations, light extinction with
depth, chemical reactions, etc.  This type
of modeling is necessary in order to study
such a vast, complex area but there will
be needed a much more extensive effort than
we are presently capable of performing
under our budgetary and manpower restraints.

     Pending grant work concerns the model-
ing of chemical reactions resulting from
waste discharges in the Los Angeles Bight
both within the ocean water column and the
flux between the sediment-water interface.
A report on modeling of waste effects on
the narrow East coast of Florida has been
released.  In addition, NCPRP is planning
a numerical dispersion model of the New
York Bight area in cooperation with the
U.S. Navy Environmental Prediction Research
Facility at Monterey.  This type of model
will eventually advance to the multi-level
and three-dimensional variety.  As mention-
ed above, NCPRP intends to incorporate
chemical reactions, organic kinetics,
metal distributions, etc.;  again, these
models will not be immediately available
as management tools but will have to be
developed in tune with field and laboratory
work.

LARGE LAKES MODELING (GIL)

     Ecosystem modeling for large lake
systems currently is being initiated as
part of the International Field Year for
the Great Lakes (IFYGL). Initial efforts
will seek to structure a water quality
model of the Great Lakes mainly emphasizing
the eutrophication process.

     Sets of deterministic equations will
be implemented to represent three major
sub-models consisting of hydrodynamic,
chemical-biochemical, and biological sub-
systems.  The modeling effort will be
used to formulate the basis for estimating
the direction of change to be expected
under remedial nutrient control actions.

     The IFYGL program, which is mainly
extramural, will have a field activities
                                          -85-

-------
period of one year with the following
three years devoted to data analysis and
synthesis.  The eutrophication modeling
effort will be mainly extramural at a
total cost of about $200,000.  This effort
is being coordinated with other modeling
efforts of IFYGL through various steering
committees.

     The EPA and other federal agencies
are working with the Great Lakes Basin
Commission on planning models for the Great
Lakes.  A feasibility study of planning
models currently is being completed, and
a decision as to type of modeling effort
to be adopted will be made in the near
future.

GROUND HATER POLLUTION MODELING  (RSKERL)

     The Ground Water Research Program
is attempting to determine the nature of
the subsurface environment so that the
response to the introduction of pollutants
can be understood and predicted.  While
little is known about ground water pollu-
tion, research efforts are being augmented
by the development of drilling and other
procedures to determine such parameters as
oxygen content, redox, degree of saturation,
nutrient availability, and microbiology
of the subsurface environment.

     The products of this research will
have application to modeling and, more
generally, will supply an advancement of
knowledge by which ground-water resources
can be enhanced and protected.

     The time scale of this program is
difficult to determine, but it probably
will span about three years of intramural
and extramural effort.  Coordination with
the Department of Agriculture is underway,
and interaction with the USGS is planned.

MODELS FOR THE LAND DISPOSAL OF WASTE-
WATER
     Although the practice of disposing
of wastewater on the land is as old as
the human race, only in recent years has
there been widespread interest in develop-
ing soil disposal systems on a scientific
basis.

     Such systems now are seen not merely
as disposal systems, but as systems for
wastewater renovation for beneficial
reuse of a valuable resource.  The develop-
ment of soil treatment systems utilizing
hundreds and possibly thousands of acres
unquestionably will have an impact on the
ecology of the area.

     In large land-based wastewater sys-
tems disposal, it is imperative that
models be developed to insure that they
are compatible with the environment and
undesirable impacts are minimal.

     The Water Quality Control Research
Program, which has responsibility for
soil treatment research within EPA, has
initiated the development of an ecological
model for soil treatment or land disposal
systems.  The objective is to develop
a model or models which can be used to
predict the ecological effects of imposing
soil treatment systems on the environment.
A further objective is to design and
operate such systems to minimize any
adverse ecological effects.

     This effort is in its initial phase
at the present time, and involves collect-
ing available information for the formu-
lation of interactions between soil, plant
life, animal life, geological features,
and climatic factors.

     At present the information-gathering
phase of their efforts is incorporated
into other soil treatment activities, and
only a very small expenditure of dollars
and manpower can be identified specifically
for the development of the ecological
models.  An additional effort of four or
five man-years per year will be required
to complete the project and refine and
verify the model.

IRRIGATION RETURN FLOW MODELS (RSKERL)

     This modeling effort is directed
toward answering the question "What will
be the mineral composition and concentra-
tion in water returning to a stream from
a given irrigated area, and how does this
return flow influence the mineral comp-
osition and concentration of the receiv-
ing water?"  Thus, the effort is concerned
with (1) development of procedures for
predicting the quality of return flows
from irrigation, and (2) development of
simulation programs and adaptation of
system analysis techniques to the study
of water quantity and quality on a basin-
wide basis.

     The prediction model will include
both hydrologic and salinity flow simula-
tion sub-models.  The completed model will
be capable of predicting the composition
                                          -86-

-------
and concentration of ions in the drainage
waters and in the soil  profile as a result
of bringing new lands under irrigation
and/or as a result of changes in irriga-
tion management practices on presently
irrigated lands.

     This project is scheduled for com-
pletion in FY-74 with a total resource
commitment for the 4-year project of
approximately $500,000.  The development
of the simulation techniques and collection
of field test data at Vernal, Utah, for
verification of the model is being done
by the Bureau of Reclamation.  Project
data from the Kansas State Board of Health's
Cedar Bluff Irrigation Project and Colora-
do State University's Grand Valley Salin-
ity Control Demonstration Project are
being made available to the Bureau for
further testing of the model.

PESTICIDE RUNOFF MODEL  (SERL)

     Research is in progress to develop
a mathematical model of basin-wide pesti-
cide runoff and a computer program for
numerical simulation of the intrinsic
phenomena.  Conducted cooperatively with
the Soil and Water Conservation Research
Division of the U.S. Department of Agri-
culture's Research Service, this effort
will quantitatively describe pesticide
runoff as a function of pesticide and
soil properties, agricultural practices,
watershed characteristics, and climatic
factors.

     A pesticide runoff mathematical
model will have several important uses:

     (1) It will serve as a predictive
model for assessing the potential
contribution of pesticides in agricul-
tural runoff.

     (2) It will provide a basis for
specifying types, formulations, and
application levels of pesticides for a
given set of cultural, management,
climatic, and soil conditions.

     (3) It will permit pesticide regis-
tration on the basis of regional usage
acceptability.

     (4) It will enable manufacturers
and formulators to tailor pesticide
formulations to regional requirements
for pollution prevention.
     The insight gained by developing
the pesticide runoff model will be
directly applicable in the construction.
of a model describing nutrient runoff
from agricultural land.

     Development and testing of a pesti-
cide runoff model is being carried on
both intramurally and extramurally under
research grants.  The total EPA effort
during Fiscal 1972 has involved about
10.5 man-years and a cost of $500,000.

     If present plans are realized, a
fully verified and nationally applicable
Pesticide Runoff Mathematical Model will
be completed by the end of Fiscal 1978 at
an estimated total cost of $3 million and
64 man-years of effort.

SURFACE WATER MODELS (SERL)

     The research program on the Fate of
Pollutants in Surface Waters is directed
toward inland surface waters with chief
interest in streams.  Detailed models
being developed encompass factors in
three categories:

     (1) The abiotic environment in
which the biological community resides,
and the dynamics of this environment
(including flow pattern, temperature,
and light regimes).

     (2) The intrinsic behavior charac-
teristic of each system component, such
as the different energy utilization
mechanisms of different organisms.

     (•3) The network of couplings, often
referred to as the food web, but more
properly extended to include all types
of influences, only one of which is
consumption.

     Models of various subsystems and
specific circumstances already under
development should be completed during
the next two years.  Sub-systems current-
ly being modeled include:

     (1) Phytoplankton response to
nutrients.

     (2) Water flow and turbulence.

     (3) Aqueous second-order chemical
reactions.

     (4) Aqueous chemical equilibria.
                                         -87-

-------
     (5)  Pood-web dynamics.

     Ultimate development of the detailed
fate of pollutants model will require
several years and successive refinements.
About 17 man-years per year are now
invested in -this effort, but only one
man-year is actually involved,in the
mathematical aspects of the modeling.

     Extramural research, primarily
through grants, accounts for about 50
percent of the program funds.  Subjects
of current extramural efforts are:

     (1)  Fate of pollutant metals in
aoquatic systems.

     (2)  Biological models of mixed
communities of freshwater organisms.

     (3)  Fate of mercury in artificial
stream systems.

     (4)  Deposition of sediments in
turbulent flows.

     (5)  Degradation of pesticides by
algae.

     (6)  Fate of pesticides in aquatic
systems.

     (7)  Simulation of respiration in
slime films.

     (8)  Effect of land use on water
quality and ecosystem metabolism.

     Each of these projects will produce
information about specific sub-systems
or processes that can be used in the
development of more detailed fate of
pollutants models.

AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM SIMULATOR (SERL)

     1t> provide the necessary laboratory
environment required to investigate the
interlocking ecological processes, a
complex research tool called the Aquatic
Ecosystem Simulator (AEcoS) is near
completion at the Southeast Environmental
Research Laboratory.  The simulator will
provide controlled environmental conditions
that are unattainable in field studies
of natural rivers or streams.

     It also will economize on the
resources required for the measurements
needed to characterize the chemistry,
biology, and physics governing aquatic
ecosystems, or to describe the behavior
of a water pollutant.

     The AEcoS facilities center  around
a controlled environmental chamber with
an experimental stream channel 64 feet
long,  18 inches wide,  and 24  inches
deep.  Associated with the chamber are
a control room, a computer facility,
mechanical equipment,  biological  and
chemical laboratories, and electronics
and machine shops.  The completed cost
of the simulator will  be about $1 million.

     The approach to modeling is  somewhat
analogous to the physical model approach
to the study of fluid mechanics.  In the
AEcoS, the main thrust is to  divide the
ecosystem into small sub-systems  that
can be maintained and  studied under highly
controlled condidtions.

     Initially, the AEcoS will be used to
study  the biological response of  a flow-
ing-water ecosystem to varying levels of
nutrients.  Some of the future efforts
will include studies of the transport of
toxic  and hazardous materials, sediment
deposition, interactions of various
trophic levels, and aqueous chemical
equilibria.

M3DF.TS OF TOXIC ORGRNICS IN THE MARINE
ENVIRONMENT (CTERL)

     Ecological studies are currently
underway to estimate the effects  of toxic
organics of several kinds on  estuarine
ecosystems—particularly the  biotic
components of the ecosystem.  These
studies are closely coordinated with
laboratory and field experiments  and, at
the present time, focus on models of
organism populations.  Effects of stresses
on populations of fish, shrimp, and shell-
fish are studied, and the transport, accu-
mulation and biological concentration of
these chemicals are observed.

     As a criterion for effect, the im-
pact of the test chemical on  production
of the organisms is measured.  While pro-
duction can be determined by  several
methods, the initial approach is  to
determine it directly by studying growth
and mortality of the individuals within
a given population.

     The purpose of this modeling study,
which is a one man-year effort, is to
                                          -88-

-------
supplement and validate bioassay data
obtained under controlled conditions in
the laboratory for establishing water
quality criteria, and for registering
pesticides for use in or near the marine
environment.  Mathematical models serve
as basic tools in the design of the studies
as well as in the analysis of the data
and in the interpretation of the results.

     In the past, experimental ecology
rather than model building has been em-
phasized.  It is expected that this
will continue and that model building
will be closely integrated with the
experimental approach to provide a
theoretical basis for experimental
studies, to guide the direction of
research and to interpret the results.

     The chief limitation to the model-
ing program is the degree of sophisti-
cation that can be included in labora-
tory and field experiments.  The need
at present is for physical facilities
to hold and treat populations of
organisms.  Acceptable facilities will
cost about half a million dollars.

MODELING IN ESTABLISHING WATER QUALITY
CRITERIA (NWQL AND NMWQT1

     In  research efforts for establishing
quality criteria in fresh (NWQL) and
marine waters (NMWQL), modeling has
utilized only very simple systems involving
one or two variables to predict the
effect of toxic materials on aquatic
organisms.

     The models are based on the rela-
tionships between lethal and no-effect
concentrations of toxicants in water.
This ratio is expressed as an applica-
tion factor and is used to estimate
no-effect levels for species that have
not as yet been tested.

     For marine environment studies,
models are being used to translate
laboratory findings into field condi-
tions.  This includes the establishment
of baseline conditions in the natural
estuarine system under varying environ-
mental conditions.

     Future efforts in the water quality
criteria research programs are:

1.  Thermal Effects Modeling  (NWQL)
     More complex modeling is antici-
pated in the Monti cello thermal effects
study where temperatures will be ele-
vated at one point in a channel and
allowed to return to ambient tempera-
tures as the water flows through the
channel.  The measured effects will be
related to the channel temperature
gradient and the amount of time that
the organisms spend in each of these
thermal regimes.  The thermal history
of the organisms will be varied, but  •
constantly changing from both day to day
and season to season.

     As an output of this study, it is
anticipated that thermal-biological
models can be developed which can be
used to predict the effects of the vary-
ing thermal regimes, both in the channel
and then translated into the natural
stream.  Once the thermal effects in
all environments can be predicted, it
will add singificantly to the develop-
ment of realistic damaging effect models.

2.  Baseline Simulation in Estuarine
    Systems (NMWQL)

     Future efforts in the Marine Water
Quality Criteria Program will continue
to be in the development of models for
simulating baseline conditions.  It is
anticipated that, when developed, these
models can be quantitatively perturbed
with a variety of man-induced toxic
stresses, thus providing a demonstration
of biological effects.

    FUTURE ECOSYSTEM MODELING EFFORTS

     In the previous section, future
short-term modeling programs were
presented for most of the research
areas.  A longer range program has been
recommended by a recent NERC-Corvallis
Task Force on Ecological Effects Res-
earch as follows:

     "Based on the mandated research
subjects and the recognized needs for
new knowledge, ecological effects
research should favor aquatic problems
(marine, estuarine, freshwater) in the
broad context of investigations across
all environmental boundaries.  The
thrust of most of the research should
be the quantitative understanding of
ecosystems stressed by pollutants and
other insults from human activity.  The
                                         -89-

-------
state of knowledge suggests that much of
this effort must be of a fundamental,
long-term nature to build a body of
ecological knowledge with a pollution-
control orientation.  But fundamental
studies of ecological processes also
can produce new Information that is of
immediate value to environmental pol-
lution control; they should not be
viewed as undirected or unproductive
efforts.  Much of this research, because
the field is so open, can be directed
to specific problems without loss of
effort to develop fundamental  knowledge."

     The Task Force also recommended
research on ecological effects that can
be divided conceptually into six essen-
tial functions which, working together,
can produce the new scientific informa-
tion needed for the development of
technologies and strategies to control
environmental pollution.  The six
functions are:

     (1) Study of sources of ecosystem
stresses.

     (2) Elucidation of ecological
processes.

     (3) Analysis and description of
ecosystems.

     (4) Validation of ecosystem models.

     (5) Projection of ecological impact.

     (6) Development of methodology for
ecological effects research.

It can be readily concluded from the
above that modeling will continue to
be a significant part of the future
ecological studies of NERC-Corvallis
and its eight associate laboratories.

     In relating the future modeling
effort to the overall mission of EPA,
the following general observations are
appropriate:

     1.  Ecosystem modeling is one of
many tools which are being used and will
be increasingly required in the decision-
making process to protect the environment.

     2.  A single "master ecosystem
model" is not likely to meet the
specific needs of all users of predictive
models.
     3.  It is anticipated that models,
ranging from the conceptual to the
simple single reaction through complex
and interacting ecosystems, will be
needed to aid in examining alternative
environmental control programs.  The
nature of the environmental stresses and
the type of management decision required
will most likely dictate the degree of
modeling needed.

     4.  Verification of the models with
reliable data and the development of an
adequate user manual are equally as
important as the scientific development
of the ecosystem models.  The cost of
verification often may be ten-fold
greater than the cost of the model
development.

     5.  To maximize the ability of the
modeling effort, it is vital that
usability of the various models be made
as simple as possible and, moreover, the
output of them easy to interpret.  Too
often, models are developed which
require talents not readily associated
with regulatory or planning agencies
and, thus, the models are misused or
misinterpreted.

     Although most research effort in
the ecosystem modeling will be in aquatic
environments, efforts will be initiated
in the air and terrestrial environments.
It is in these interactions of the air,
water, and terrestrial media that the
total ecosystem approach appears to have
the most utility.  The immediate thrust
areas of ecosystem modeling are (1)
eutrophication, (2) transport effects of
hazardous material, and (3) thermal
pollution.

     In terms of research priorities,
ecosystem models must be developed to
close knowledge "gaps" related to:

     (1) Description of the individual
biological system and its reactions
with the environment.

     (2) Determination of the necessary
components of an ecosystem germane to a
specific model.

     (3) Solution techniques for the
complex mathematical formulations relat-
ing the various ecological processes and
interactions.
                                         -90-

-------
     These points  are arranged in
descending order.   In terms  of resources
it appears that the largest  effort  will
be items (1) and (2).  With  regard  to
solution techniques, it is anticipated
that the software  developed  for hydro-
dynamic modeling and for the space
effort can be applied to ecological
modeling.

                SUMMARY

     Below are presented the salient
aspects which summarize the  present
status and future  of ecosystem modeling
for NERC-Corvallis ecological programs:

     1.  Although  the use of total
ecosystem modeling as a tool in provid-
ing the decision makers a knowledgeable
base is 1n its embryonic state, various
components of ecosystem models have
been successfully utilized,  especially
in the water pollution control programs.

     2.  In recent years the use of
mathematical modeling via the computer
has given man the ability to simulate
the numerous complex and interlocking
processes required for a total eco-
system approach.  While there has  been
some administrative reluctance to
directly use a total ecosystem approach
to environmental problems, significant
scientific advancements have been made
in understanding the various ecological
systems by use of models.

     3.  As part of its "ecological
effects" theme, NERC-Corvallis and its
eight associate laboratories have  been,
and are continuing, to develop and
verify various types of models mainly
for aquatic systems, including rivers,
lakes, estuaries, and the ocean.  The
current major thrust areas of ecosystem
modeling are:

      (1) eutrophication.

      (2) transport and effects of
hazard materials.

      (3) thermal pollution.

     4.  Future NERC-Corvallis activities
will be of a fundamental, long-term
nature, to build a body of ecological
knowledge with pollution-control
orientation.  The ecosystem modeling
efforts will be a key element in under-
standing the interacting stresses of
air, water, and terrestrial  environments.

     5.  A caveat about ecosystem model-
ing 1s that verification is  essential,
and the cost which is often  overlooked
can be ten-fold greater than the cost
of model development.

     6.  Development of ecosystem
models can be facilitated by closing
knowledge "gaps" in:

     (1) the ability to fully describe
the individual biological system and
its interactions with the environment.

     (2) the ability to determine the
necessary components of those parts of
the ecosystem germane to a specific
model.

     (3) solution techniques for the
complex mathematical formulation relat-
ing the various ecological processes
and interactions.

     Finally, while simple and relatively
inexpensive ecosystem models have been
developed and used to solve  grossly
stressed environmental conditions, the
more subtle and insidious environmental
problems will require much more complex
analyses and models at a very much
higher cost of development.

             REFERENCES

1.  Streeter, H. W. and Earl B. Phelps,
     "A Study of the Pollution and
     Natural Purification of the Ohio
     River," Public Health Bulletin No.
     146. February 1925.

2.  Lotka, A. J., Elements of Mathe-
     matical Biology. Reprint, Dover,
     New York, 1956.

3.  Steele, J. H., "Plant Production on
     Fladen Ground," J. Mar. Biol.
     Assoc. U. K.. 35. p. 1-33, 1956.

4.  Parker, R. A., "Simulation of an
     Aquatic Ecosystem," Biometrics,
     24(4). p. 803-822, 1968.

5.  Brezonik, P. L., "Application of
     Mathematical Models to  the Eutro-
     phi cation Process," 11th Conf..
     G.L.R.D.. 1968, p. 16.
                                         -91-

-------
 6.   Chen,  C.  W.,  "Concepts and Utilities
      of an Ecologic Model," J. San.
      Engr. Div..  Proc. A.S.C.E., Vol.
      geTNo.  SA5. October 1970. p. 1085-
      1097.

 7.   DiToro, D.  M., D. J. O'Connor, R.
      V. Thomann,  "A Dynamic Model of
      the Phytoplankton Population in
      the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta,"
      Nonequilibriurn Systems in Natural
      Water Chemistry. Adv. in Chem..
      Series 106,  Am. Chemical Soc.,
      Washington,  D. C., 1971, p. 131-180.

 8.   Jaworski, N.  A., Donald W. Lear,
      and Orterio  Villa, "Nutrient
      Management in the Potomac Estuary."
      Proceedings  of the Symposium on
      Nutrients  and Eutrophication,
      "The Limiting Nutrient Controversy,"
      American Society of Limnology and
      Oceanography. February 19717

 9.   Ricker, W.  E., Handbook of Computa-
      tions for  Biological Statistics of
      Fish Populations, Fish. Res. Be.
      Canada,  Bulletin No. 119, 1958,
      300 pp.

10.  Silliman,  R. P., Analog Computer
      Simulation and Catch Forecasting
      in Commercially Fished Populations
      Trans. American Fish Society, No.
      3, 1969, 560-569 pp.

11.  Paulik, 6. J.  and W. H. Bayliff, A
      Generalized  Computer Program for
      the Ricker Model of Equilibrium
      Yield Per  Recruitment. J. Fish.
      Res.  Bd. Canada, 24(2), 1967,
      249-259  pp.

12.  Stark,  R.  W.,  "The Organization and
      Analyzed Procedures Required by a
      Large Ecological Systems Study,"
      Systems  Analysis in Ecology,
      Academic Press, New York, 1966,
      pp. 32-68.

13.  Hamilton,  W. J., "Analysis of Bird
      Navigation Experiments," System
      Analysis in Ecology. Academic
      Press, New York, 1966, pp. 147-177.

14.  Joint Industry/Government Task Force
      on Eutrophication, Provisional Algal
      Assay Procedure, U. S. Department
      of the Interior, February 1969.
 14. Algal Assay Procedure Bottle Test,  U.
      S. Environmental Protection Agency,
      National Eutrophication Research
      Program, August 1971.


                APPENDIX A

   NERC-CORVALLIS ASSOCIA3E LABORATORIES

 Artie Environmental Research Laboratory
 (AERL)
 College, Alaska

 Grosse  lie Laboratory (GIL)
 Grosse  lie, Michigan

 Gulf  Breeze Environmental Research Laboratory
 (GBERL)
 Gulf  Breeze, Florida

 National Marine Water Quality Laboratory
 (NMrtQL)
 Narrangansett, Rhode Island

 National Water Quality Laboratory (NWQL)
 Duluth, Minnesota

 Pacific Northwest Environmental Research
 Laboratory (PNERL)
 Corvallis, Oregon

 Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research
 Center  (RSKERL)
Ada, Oklahoma

 Southeast Environmental Research Laboratory
 (SERL)
Athens, Georgia
                                          -92-

-------
                     DISCUSSION OF THE PRESENTATION BY FRITZ BARTSCH
Gibbons:  How do you tie this sort of work
to the Internation Biological Program of
NSF?  Are you building in your staff at
Corvallis the talents in law, economics,
and other non-natural science and engi-
neering areas that are requisite to do this
projection of passed or contemplated acts.

Bartsch:  Let me answer the second question
first.  I wish I could say at this moment
that we are building this talent.  You work
for the federal government, I presume, so
I don't need to tell you about the scarcity
of positions with which to begin to build
these kinds of capabilities.  This means
that as we approach more clearly to this
point of need, we will most likely have to
buy this service through grants or contracts.
With respect to your first question, which
relates to the International Biological Year,
is Dr. Glass here?  Will you answer that for
me?

Glass:  Yes.  The answer roughly is .that
we intend to capitalize on the talents,
efforts, and research that has gone on
within the IBP for the last eight years and
to avoid duplicating that as much as possible.
There are a number of centers of excellence
of this type around the country, and we hope
to get plugged into those centers.  We are
using some of the IBP people right now.

Ellsaesser;  It is my understanding that
absolutely pure water is not very beneficial
to any life forms.  I wonder if maybe it is
time to give some thought to minimum levels
of certain constituents as well as maximum
levels.

Bartsch:  I'm somewhat surprised at the
question because I'm not sure that anyone has
ever proposed that we have zero levels of the
natural constituents that occur in water.
Obviously I think that none of us would want
to propose that out in nature we have
absolutely pure water in the chemical sense,
because if we did, I would lose one of my
favorite hobbies, which is pursuing the capture
of salmon by hook and line.

Ellsaesser:  I wonder if our natural pre-
occupation with pollution might not push us
into this position.

Bartsch:  I don't think we are moving in that
direction.  I think the sense in which allow-
able levels of various constituents are viewed
with respect to water is in terms of what we
need in order to support a healthy,
natural, acceptable ecosystem, and at the
same time not interfere with the desir-
able uses to which people wish to put
water.  I think this is the sense in which
we look at water qualities standards
generally.
                                            -93-

-------
        ENVIRONMENTAL MODELING OF HYDROLOGIC SYSTEMS

                    Dr. William N. Fitch
               Office of Water Programs, EPA
                 Crystal Mall #2, Room 1006
                  Washington, D.C.  20460
                          ABSTRACT

     This paper traces the genesis of mathematical modeling
of hydrologic and water quality systems as used in EPA.
Legislation required studies amenable to modeling and
systems analysis techniques.  Models of dissolved oxygen and
of reservoir storage requirements were common.  Estuary
modeling developed with the Delaware River analysis.  Three
hydrologic models are described relative to streamflow
generation techniques giving the underlying theory.  Other
hydrologic models described are those for real tine flood,
real time stormwater routing, snow surveys, flow routing in
a stream network with reservoirs, Monte Carlo analysis, and
reservoir operation optimization.  Water quality models
described are those for dissolved oxygen in free-flowing
streams, tidal rivers, and estuaries.  Currently EPA is
stimulating and supporting the application of mathematical
models by State and local organizations planning for water
quality management in specific basins.
          INTRODUCTION

     The organizers of this
Interagency Conference on the
Environment are to be
complimented for bringing us
together to discuss the topics
which affect all of us.
Coordination and information
exchange are two areas which
receive too little attention.
Many decisions are made without
knowledge of others' efforts.

     As I reflect on the two
areas of my interest—hydrologic
and water quality modeling — it
is apparent that there are many
developments which are not
utilized within the Water
Planning Office of EPA.
Nevertheless, I will speak from my
knowledge of these areas and the
techniques that EPA uses.  I have
not attempted to research
techniques that are not utilized
just for this paper.  Please bear
in mind that I have only been
with EPA or its predecessors for
five years, and the events I
relate are as I understand
them.
                                  -94-

-------
             HISTORY

     Mathematical modeling
techniques have been largely
computerizing of techniques that
were understood previous to the
decade of the sixties.  Within
the last ten years, large and
efficient computers have been
available to those working in the
field.  Large problems can be
studied rapidly.  Even more
meaningful are the changing
requirements resulting from the
enactment of more far-reaching
legislation.

     I started with Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration
in 1967.  Then the Agency was
deep in implementing Section 3 of
their enabling legislation as
well as other Sections.  Section
3 contained three broad
requirements:

     1.  The development of
         comprehensive programs
         for water pollution
         abatement.

     2.  The prerogative of
         determining the need for
         and the value of storage
         for water quality or,
         more familiarly, flow
         augmentation.

     3.  The joint development of
         local planning agencies
         for water pollution
         control.

     Section 3(a) was implemented
by large Federally funded studies
in a number of river basins.  The
most notable example was the
Delaware; some others were the
Susquehanna, Kanawha,
Connecticut, Colorado, Willamette
and Upper Mississippi Rivers.
These efforts were usually in
conjunction with Type I or Type
II studies of the construction
agencies.

     Such studies fall into the
following mold:

     1.  Determine the Hydrologic
         Situation;

         Identify flow
         characteristics of
         streams.  Identify
         reservoir sites where
         multi-purpose
         development is likely.

     2.  Define the Water Quality
         Situation;

         Identify waste sources,
         Determine control
         measures available
         (Remember Tahoe results
         were not available) .

     3.  Analyze the Alternatives
         Avai
yze the
TaEle:
         Remember secondary is
         the highest required
         treatment.  There are no
         nutrient standards.  You
         are not permitted to
         consider limiting
         growth.

         Therefore the
         alternatives become
         tradeoffs between flow
         augmentation and
         advanced waste treatment
         (flow augmentation was
         authorized by Section
     4.  Recommend a Solution:
                                  -95-

-------
         Some reservoirs.
         Advanced wastewater treatment
           (AWT),
         Regional treatment facilities.

      5.  Implementation;

         Actions required:
           Construct reservoirs.
           Build treatment facilities.
     Some of these studies were
notable analytic successes.  The
Delaware study developed estuary
modeling.  Dissolved oxygen
modeling was utilized heavily, and
hydrologic simulation was studied
in detail in the Delaware and
other projects.  I will trace
these developments in later
sections.

     The trouble with this
approach is that reservoir
construction has not occurred.
The Kanawha study called for a
total of 19 reservoirs, none of
which are built to date.  Lengthy
hearings have followed.

     The Delaware study called
for Tocks Island Reservoir and
for regional advanced treatment.
Slowly the AWT is coming about,
but the Tocks Island Reservoir is
not yet underway.  The Deepwater
Treatment Facility has been
delayed.  Philadelphia is still
planning secondary facilities.

     These events do not relate
directly to modeling, but the
repercussions of the failure of
comprehensive programs did impact
the technical area.  For the past
several years, broad Federal
planning has not been initiated.
State planning has been
emphasized instead.  The
technical studies groups have
been reprogrammed into other
areas.

     I do not mean to imply that
there has not been activity in
the past several years, but
modeling has passed from  a
planning operation into an area
of research emphasis.

     With this discussion as
background, perhaps we are
prepared to address the question
of the purposes of mathematical
models.

            HYDROLOGY

FLOW GENERATION

     Throughout the evaluation of
flow augmentation, it is
necessary to define the
streamflow at various points  in
the basin.  The information on
hand is a record of daily
streamflows at gaging sites  (the
historical record).  If new
reservoirs are constructed they
will regulate  or change this
streamflow.

     The first premise advanced
was that the historical gage
records represent past events.
These historical sequences are
not likely to recur.  It  is
erroneous to design projects
based only on the historical
record.  Synthetic records have
the advantage of evaluating
projects on many different
records.  The performance is
assessed under a range of
possible sequences.  Presumably
this is better.

     The general characteristics
of the record represent the only
available statistics concerning
                                   -96-

-------
the gage and the runoff.
Therefore the gage
characteristics were represented
by the mean flow, its standard
deviation, lag-one correlation,
skew and, or course, its
underlying distribution.

     The average monthly flows or
their log transform can b e shown
to be normally distributed, and,
if a normal error term is
assumed, the recursive relation
shown below can be written I/:
Where:
             are generated or
             synthetic  monthly
             average flows in
             month i and i+1
             respectively;

             are average monthly
             historic flows for
             the period of record
             for months j and j+1
             respectively;

             is the historic
             regressions
             coefficient for
             estimating average
             monthly flow in the
             j+lst month from the
             average monthly flow
             in the jth month;

             is a random normal
             deviate with zero
             mean and unit
             variance;

             is the standard
             deviation of monthly
             average flows in the
             j+lst month;
   r.         is the correlation
             coefficient between
             monthly average
             flows of the jth and
             j+lst months.

     Note that monthly average
flows are used.  The purpose is
to produce new but meaningful
sequences of monthly average
flows for use in determining the
effectiveness of alternate
reservoir sites and operating
rules.  Shorter time frames,
i.e., average weekly flows or
daily flows,, may be generated but
their meaningfulness is difficult
to determine both statistically
and when assessing alternate
reservoir operating strategies.  ,

     The relationship above can
be written for several gages in
the basin 2/.

Starting with p gages with a
record on n seasons illustrated
by:
   Ml

   K21
22
   "nl
                          np
and assuming that all records
are complete  and all variables
are normally distributed, the
generated flow  ( 34 ) for the ith
time period can be written as:
x.  = an,
 i    Oi
^..
11  1
        0.0
        2i 2
                          a .E
                           mi m
             .t/l-R^;
Where:
         is  the equivalent of
         the flow matrix
                                   -97-

-------
  a*!    are  coefficients for
         computing  ^

  Ri     is the  multiple
         correlation coefficient
         between x   and the E
         values.

  t      is a random normal
         deviate N(0,l  )

  si     is the  standard
         deviation  of x,.

     The eigenvalues are
determined by the prime
components analysis of the flow
matrix,  (  aji  )  and ( RI )  are
determined by correlation
analysis.

     The flows generated by this
method are correlated between
gages in the  same time frame,
lag-one correlations are
maintained for each gage,  and all
principal moments as maintained.
The weakness  is  that the lag-one
correlations  between gages are
not maintained.

     Consequently,  the lag-one
correlation between sites can be
preserved if  the problem is
formulated by defining normalized
residual flows 3/:
                                        is the  season number
                                        (1 to 12)

                                        is the  standard
                                        deviation  of monthly
                                        average flow
                                        (i.e.,
                                4  .      is the normalized
                                  J      residual  flow

                                The residuals were  shown to
                           be free of cyclic trends Ł/.
                           Then the relation may  be ~"
                           formulated as 5/:
                                     L  = AL  1 + Be
                                      m    m-1     m
                           Where:
                                m
                                A,B
                                L

                                e
           are n by n matrices

           is an n by p matrix

           is an n by 1 matrix of
           random normal deviate
                           Define two matrices as
                                           and
                                                  M-l =
                                        where L is the same as L except each
                                        value is shifted one time frame, thus
                                        forming (M ..) as a Markov lag-one
                                        matrix.  It then follows that:
Where:

     k
                                      A =
denotes the gage
number

is the year number
and    BB =
                                                       MQ - M_
                                   -98-

-------
     This technique broke down
because  ( BBT ) must be solved to
determine B.  Young 3/ showed (BBT)
  to be symmetric and~ evaluated B
bp assuming that it was a lower
triangular matrix.  Mathematical
techniques were used to determine
the elements and this technique
formed the basis of the Numerical
Hultisite Program (NMP) which EPA
uses for generating monthly
average flow sequences.

     The  problem with the
procedure is in the reproduction
of high and low flows.  These
techniques are based on an
assumption of a normalized error
term.  Low flows may be the
result of groundwater discharge
rather than precipation phenomena,
implying that they have a
different underlying distribution,
and thus these flows are more
persistent than predicted by the
model.

     Another approach being used
in several EPA 3(c)  contracts is
the application of the Stanford
Watershed Model to simulate the
runoff-groundwater moisture
balance in order to reproduce
streamflow.  The technique is
entirely different in scope.  The
area under study is characterized
by a grid and precipitation,
soil, and cover information.

     This model requires much
more analysis of data and a more
refined grid layout to predict
flows.  The subdivision of the
area has resulted in a loss of
accuracy in main stem gages.
Care should be taken  in composing
these two approaches.  Flow
generation is a separate
procedure developed for the
purpose of evaluating alternate
reservoir projects.  The Stanford
approach is addressed to the
urban development scene where
forecasts of the effects of
different area development
alternative is attempted.

     EPA developed a program for
determining the quantity,
quality, and water quality effect
of storm runoff.  It is called
the Storm Water Management Model.
In this Section we shall confine
the discussion to its method of
determining runoff quantities.

     The area under study is
subdivided into a number of
catchment areas characterized by
area, slope, and runoff
coefficient.  Preciptiation
records for a storm event are
used to determine runoff
quantities.  The Manning equation
is applied to determine the
runoff hydrograph for each area.
These flows are routed through
the storm sewer system, including
storage and treatment facilities,
and these quantities are
discharged into the receiving
water.  Thus the runoff
hydrograph is also produced in
the receiving stream.
                                  -99-

-------
These three techniques are the
principal models used within EPA.

OTHER MODELS

     Models related to hydrology
and water quality have been
developed by a host of agencies,
consultants, institutions, and
individuals outside EPA.  Brief
descriptions of selected models
follow to indicate their variety.

Real-Time Flood Models

     Precipitation information is
gathered at a number of rain
gages throughout the basin.
These readings are relayed to a
central location during a storm
event.  Routing coefficients have
been developed from past storms,
and these coefficients are used
together with precipitation to
forecast flood crests and runoff
quantities.

     This system was developed to
purpose flood warnings and to
assist in reservoir operation.

     Examples are the Potomac and
Mississippi flood warning
systems.

Real-Time Storm Water Routing

     Precipitation data are
utilized to  route storm water
quantities through a collection
system.  Inflatable dams and
diversion are activated to
minimize storm overflows into the
receiving waters.  The control
system has been installed in
Minneapolis, Minnesota, and is
currently operational.

Snow Surveys
     In the Western States, snow
surveys are performed in order to
estimate potential runoff
quantities.  The purpose is
twofold—flood avoidance and
reservoir management to assure
adequate irrigation water.
Examples are the Intermountain
(Utah) and Canadian Rocky Snow
Surveys.

Flow Routing

     Given the estimated flows at
various points in the system, the
problem is to route these flows
through a reservoir system.
Large bookkeeping programs —
BASIN or the Corps of Engineers
version — were developed.  They
assemble flow information, store
these flows in reservoir system,
account for evaporation or
diversion, make release according
to defined rule curves, and tally
the success ratio of the given
projects.  Success are measured
by maintenance of given flow or
quality constituents targets.

     These programs are only
bookkeeping procedures.  The user
supplies streamflow records
(synthetic or historical),
drainage area ratios, reservoir
location, reservoir geometry and
operating rules, evaporation
rates, diversion quantities, and
the desired flow targets.  The
program operates  the system
according to the specified rules.
The answers are the effectiveness
of meeting the target flows
throughout the basin.
Effectiveness is measured by the
success ratios.

     This does not imply that
routing models are of limited
usefulness.  Without these
                                  -100-

-------
programs the large reservoir
system could not be assessed.
The tremendous number of
comparisions would make it
impossible to analyse one
alternative without computers.
The existence of these programs
made it possible to compare many
different alternate systems
easily.

Monte Carlo Analysis

     An interesting subproblem is
the determination of an optional
configuration of reservoirs.
Monte Carlo techniques are
applied here to randomly select a
number of reservoir sites and
sizes.  The optional
configuration is then determined
by defining it to be the best
answer taken from the Monte Carlo
sample.

     The obvious purpose of this
technique is to minimize the
number of alternatives studied
without seriously missing the
optimal answer.  This was the
thrust of much of the Havard
Water Resources Group's work in
the early sixties.

Reservoir Operating Rules

     Once the area of reservoir
analysis was developed, a logical
step was to attempt to develop
optimal operating rules for one
or several reservoirs.  Many
researchers have critized the
present practice of fixed
elevations designated for each
purpose; i.e.  recreation, flood
control, water quality storage,
or power pool.  A truly
multipurpose facility could be
operated according to some
optimal strategy which
 maximumized the projects  benefit.
 Usually a dynamic programming
 algorithm was developed  similar
 to the one illustrated below 6/.
Z  = min

    S  S   ... S
              n+1
 Where:
    Si    is the  storage  level  in
          the  reservoir at  the
          beginning  of the  ith
          month

    4     is loss  fraction  of
          monetary losses
          resulting  from  a  release
           (dt  ) during the  month.
          Note that  ( dj_ = Sj + Xt -
          S.  .) from continuity.

    X.    is inflov;  during  the  ith
          month and
     *
    Z     is the optimal  (minimum)
          cumulative loss during n
          resources

      The algorithm  for solving
 this problem  was  deduced by
 separation  into


Z = min< minU(-S .,  + S + X )  + •••
           [_   n+1    n   n
    S  AS
     n+1  n
    min
 thus becoming a separable
 constrained objective function
 which can be evaluated by dynamic
 programming.

      Several other authors have
 developed similar algorithms
 which are optimization based on
 either linear or dynamic
 programming techniques.  Power
 operation, flow augmentation, and
 recreation problems have been
                                  -101-

-------
studied for single or multiple
reservoir systems.

     WATER QUALITY MODELING

DISSOLVED OXYGEN

     In the decade of the
sixties, most water quality
modeling has been addressed to
the oxygen resource of the
stream. Traditionally the
dissolved oxygen concentration
has been used to parametrically
define the type of aquatic
ecosystems.  Often water quality
standards are classed as suitable
for warm water fisheries, trout
streams, or scavenger fish.  Fish
are at the top of the aquatic
food chain.  If they thrive, then
other lower organism will also
thrive.

     The effect of organic waste
discharge and flow augmentation
releases were both evaluated by
using the traditional Streeter-
Phelphs formulation.  Organic
wastes concentrations are
expressed parametrically as
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
(BOD).  Then BOD is assumed to
degrade according to a first
order reaction in an aquatic
environment.
Where:

   k.
            dt
is a first order
deoxygenation rate
constant as defined by
stream surveys

is the organic waste
concentration as
                                       expressed in mg/1
                                       ultimate BOD

                                  t    is the time (usually in
                                       days)

                                   Then the oxygen
                              concentration in a volume of
                              water under steady state
                              conditions may be defined by:
                              Where:

                                 C


                                 C
         is the dissolved oxygen
         concentration

         is the dissolved oxygen
         concentration at
         saturation

         is a first order
         reaeration rate constant

         are various sources and
         sinks of dissolved
         oxygen (benthic demand,
         algae
         production/respiration,
         nutrification)
     This basic equation has been
solved by either direct
integration or finite difference
methods depending upon the
formulation of sources and sinks.
Dispersion of pollutants has also
been considered.

     Stream surveys are required
to determine the time of transit
in fresh water between points in
the system in free flowing
systems or dispersion in estuary
systems.  Dye studies of
approximately one month duration
are usually required.  Water
quality data is also needed to
determine the deoxygenation rate
                                  -102-

-------
constant and the magnitude of
oxygen sources and sinks.  Of
course, waste discharge data is
necessary.

     The approach for either
free-flowing streams, tidal
rivers, or estuaries has been to
use the dissolved oxygen equation
as a basin for evaluating the
oxygen resources.  In the free-
flowing, advection is the
dominant transport mechanism,and
the models usually contain flow
rate as an implicit variable
affecting reaeration rates, BOD
concentration, and time of
transit.  Conversely dispersion
dominates in an estuary resulting
in the following formulation for
a nonconservative substance  (BOD)
under study state conditions with
constant coefficients 7/.

      dL _ _, d2L    dL
      S = E ^2 ' U to ' klL

Where:

   E     is the dispersion
         coefficient

   U     is the velocity

   x     is the distance from the
         discharge point  (minus
         implies upstream and
         plus implies downstream)

The general solution of this
expression is:
Where:
          L .
           JJ
       8 = 2E
-v'1
                      Uk E
                          B,C     are  constants evaluated
                                 from boundary
                                 conditions.

                            For  an infinitely long
                       estuary into  which  a  pollutant is
                       being discharged  at a constant
                       rate,the  solution is:
                               L = LQe=
                               L =
        V
for x < 0

for x > 0
                            This equation  may be linked
                       to dissolved  oxygen by writing
                       another  steady  state equation
                       which  links BOD to  the oxygen
                       balance  by first defining
                       Where:

                           D
                                   D = Cg - C
      is the oxygen deficit
      and
dD _ _ d2D     dD   .
S - E T~2 • u to ' k2D
      dx
                                                .
                                                kiL
                       which  integrates  for a single
                       source into
                                 k,
                             D =
                       Where:
                                Vki
                                          W is the mass rate of pollutant
                                            discharge (ibs/day)

                                            This  approach considers both
                                       advection  and dispersion as
                                       pollutant  transport  mechanisms.
                                       However, dispersion  is averaged
                                       over a tidal cycle by taking dye
                                  -103-

-------
and water quality samples at
slack tide.  The model is based
on averaged data,and net seaward
flushing is accounted for in the
averaged transport terms.  Intra-
tidal effects are not reproduced,
as the model is not designed for
that purpose.

     The limitations of either
steady state approach have been
recognized, and more definitive
models have been developed which
reproduce transient phenomena in
both free flowing and estuary
situations.  This development has
proceeded by increments from one-
dimensional  (those noted above)
through quasi-two-dimensional
into full two-dimensional.

     The quasi-two-dimensional
model currently in use is based
on the solutions of the one-
dimensional equations of motion
together with continuity
throughout a system of nodes and
aggregated channels 7/.  The
model consists of a Eydrodynamic
code and a water quality code.
The equations of continuity are
written as:
          dH _  1 d(vA)
          5T    B  ox
Where:

   H
is the height of water
surface above a
reference datum

is the velocity along
the longitudinal channel

is the cross section
area of the channel and
further the equation of
motion
Where:

   F     is the friction
         coefficient

   g     is the acceleration of
         gravity

  |v|     is the absolute value of
         the velocity

     These equations are
transformed and solved by a
modified finite difference
approach.  The solution technique
is affected by numerical mixing
problems which may be resolved by
critical selection of channel
lengths and time step.

     The hydraulic model is
verified by matching observed
tide gage heights and times at
selected points in the network.
The quality program excerpts
velocity data from the hydraulic
model and uses these velocities
to route the pollutants through
the system.  This is the area
where the numerical mixing
problems occur in the averaging
of concentrations in the
channels.

     The model assumes a
vertically mixed consection and
interrelated BOD-DO relationship.
These are defined procedures for
calculating the surface areas and
mean channel depth as well as
criteria for channel length.

     Two-dimensional modeling has
been attempted by Tracer in
Galveston Bay, Leendertse of the
RAND Corporation in Jamaica Bay,
and Hydroscience in Boston
Harbor.  Leendertse approach is
probably the most developed in
terms of hydromechanisms, but the
     ov
     5t
    dv
                         dH
                                  -104-

-------
perfection of these techniques
may be several years away.

     EPA is currently pursuing a
program of planning assistance to
the state and local planning
organizations.  The objective is
to provide verified water quality
models in selected basins.  These
models will be the basis for
evaluating alternate water
quality plans and selecting
courses of actions for water
quality enchancement.

     Ilany of the techniques
discussed here are being applied
and modified to permit the
simulation of transient water
quality parameters as well as
steady-state phenomena.  Also the
concentration of conservative
substance, nutrients, and, in some
instances, chlorophyll A are
being simulated as well as
temperatures and coliforms.

     To date 24 contracts have
been awarded in various basins
for application of specific
existing models.  The estimated
cost of these models is $1.8
million.

     The principal problems as yet
unsolved are reservoir water
quality simulation and nutrient
dynamics.  These two areas should
be studied in more detail before
they can be transfered into the
realm of applied technology.

     In summary EPA has initiated
a modeling program based on the
techniques discussed herein.
There are some limitations to
these efforts, but we are
attempting to apply our knowledge
to solve today's problems.
I/
2/
I/
5/
6/
7/
      REFERENCES

A. Haass, M.M. Hufschmidt,
R. Dorfman, H.A. Thomas,
Jr., S.A. Marglin, and G.M.
Fair, Design of_ Water-
Resources Systems' (Havard
University Press, Cambridge,
Mass., 1962).

M.B. Fiering, Multiyariate
Techniques for Synthetic
Hydrology, J. Hydraulics
Div., Aner. Soc. Civil
Engr., Sept. 1964.

G.K. Young and W.C. Pisano,
Operations Hydrology Using .
Residuals, J. Hydraulics
Div.,Amir. Soc. Civil
Engr., July 1968.

V. Yevjevich, Water Research
(John Hopkins Press,
Baltimore, Md., 1966).

N.C. Matalas, Water
Resources Research, V.3, No.
4, 1967.

G.K. Young, Finding
Reservoir Operating Rules,
J. Hydraulics Div., Amer.
Soc.  Civil Engr., Nov.
1967.

R.V. Thomann and D.J.
O'Connor, Estuarine
Modeling;  An Assessment,
GPO, Feb. 1571.
                                  -105-

-------
            WATER SYSTEM MODEL DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATIONS
                  WITHIN AEC AND NASA LABORATORIES

                              J. R. Eliason
                     Pacific Northwest Laboratories
                             a division of
                      Battelle Memorial Institute
                             P. 0. Box 999
                      Richland, Washington  99352
                                ABSTRACT

     This paper is a preliminary review of water system model development
in the AEC and NASA national laboratories.  Several of the laboratories
have developed models for solving hydraulic and water quality problems as
the needs for such modeling developed.  These models have contributed
significantly to the development of modeling techniques but no interlab-
oratory effort has been made to coordinate the development of unified
water system models.  Several types of models have been developed primar-
ily for determining the transport of conservative and non-conservative
contaminants in the environment.  These include groundwater, river, lake,
estuary and ocean models.  Advanced models are now being developed which
account for interactions and decay of contaminants in the transporting
fluids as well as for accounting for interactions with suspended solids
and soil materials.  Application of these models should result in a
better understanding of the impact that man is having on the environment.
           INTRODUCTION

     This paper is a review of
water system modeling capabilities
of the AEC and NASA Laboratories.
Included are only general descrip-
tions of the models indicating the
type of system they are designed
to model, the input data needed
and a description of the model
output.  Water system models in-
clude groundwater, river, lake,
estuary, and ocean models.  Devel-
opment of these types of models
has been limited to only a few of
the laboratories where specific
studies required their development.

     Water system models are now
being developed, applied, and
evaluated by groups within the
AEC and NASA Laboratories.  These
studies are leading to a better
understanding of the limitations
of models which have been develop-
ed and are leading directly to the
development of models which should
provide the flexibility and
accuracy to answer many of the
critical questions now facing the
EPA.
     Representatives of all of the
AEC and NASA Laboratories were con-
tacted and material on water system
model studies were requested.
Seven AEC and four NASA Laborator-
ies gave a verbal response that
there were water system modeling
studies being conducted and they
would provide descriptions of
these studies.  Three AEC and two
NASA Laboratories have provided
descriptions of their programs.
The responses are included in this
report.  Hopefully, if the other
laboratories have significant
contributions in the water system
modeling field they will have an
opportunity to describe their
programs in the workshop.

       PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS

     The following descriptions of
programs which are being conducted
at the various laboratories are
based on a limited amount of pub-
lished material which was available.
Details on the programs and the
models will hopefully be brought
out in the workshop.
                                  -106-

-------
ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY

     The Center for Environmental
Studies is at present conducting
two projects which involve water
systems modeling:  The Illinois
Water Quality Management Planning
Project; and the Great Lakes
Research Program.

Illinois Water Quality Management
Planning Project. Project Director-
Thomas A. Tamblyn

     The pilot basin project is
designed to serve as a feasibility
test of the process of water
quality management planning in the
State of Illinois and to provide
a model for subsequent basin plans.
The Rock River basin of northern
Illinois was selected as the
demonstration site for the pilot
project.

     The emphasis of this program
is on developing a practical metho-
dology which will be of assistance
to decision-makers in the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency
and designated Area Planning
Offices, and not on mathematical
modeling, as such.  The general
purpose of this methodology is to
assist in the generation and
evaluation of the large number of
alternatives involved in water
quality management planning for a
river basin.  By use of computer
techniques, it is possible to
analyze more alternatives than
would be possible by means of con-
ventional, manual procedures.  The
models used to support the develop-
ment of the pilot basin plan are
also being evaluated in terms of
their potential for general appli-
cation to other river basins
throughout the State.

     The main thrust of the devel-
opment effort is associated with
four distinct but related planning
models:

     1)  A river basin hydrologic
         model;

     2)  A water quality model for
         conservative and non-
         conservative pollutant
         species;
     3)  A socioeconomic/land use
         development model; and

     4)  A wastewater treatment
         facility construction cost
         and scheduling model.

     Since this project is not in-
tended as a basic research program,
every effort has been made to
acquire, codify, and utilize exist-
ing state-of-the-art computational
systems, models, and methods.  For
example, the hydrology-water
quality simulation programs are
based on working models developed
by Wm. C. Pisano and E. E. Pyatt,
Jr., et al,  for the Environmental
Protection Agency.  The emphasis
of the model development activities
associated with this project is on
the implementation of practical,
working tools for use by decision-
makers rather than on technical
sophistication.

     Upon the completion of the
individual modeling tasks, linkages
will be developed to allow the out-
put of one model to act on, or
modify, the input to the other
models.  Once the complete planning
package is operational, it will be
employed to address a number of key
questions that are implicit in the
federal water quality guidelines.
These include:

     1)  What is the change in the
         level of treatment requir-
         ed and in the cost of
         pollution control corres-
         ponding to an increase
         or decrease in the overall
         standard of water quality?

     2)  Given a minimum level of
         treatment at every waste
         discharge, in addition to
         an overall stream standard,
         what is the effect on the .
         cost of treatment at each
         point, and what is the
         overall cost of pollution
         control?

     3)  If budget constraints
         apply, how can the stand-
         ards best be achieved or
         approached?
                                  -107-

-------
     4)  What is the best water
         quality that can be
         achieved with budgetary
         constraints?

     5)  Can a reduction of treat-
         ment cost be achieved by
         changing the location of
         one or more discharge
         points?

     6)  Which pollution control
         program will achieve,
         over a period of time,
         the greatest improvement
         in water quality at mini-
         mum social costs?

     7)  What is the probable
         effect on water quality
         of alternative management
         procedures and policies?

Great Lakes Research Program
Project Director - B. M. Hoglund

     The Great Lakes Research
Program is designed to review and
evaluate models which describe the
physical characteristics of ther-
mal discharges.  Only models that
are available in the literature
and that are considered appropriate
for predicting thermal plumes in
large lakes are being analyzed.
This evaluation includes comparing
model predictions to field data
which is also being collected in
this study.  A report, State-of
the-Art  of Thermal Plume Modeling
for Large Lakes,by Anthony J.
Policastro which describes results
of the study will be presented at
the 1972 Annual Meeting of the
American Institute of Chemical
Engineers, November 26-30, 1972,
New York City.

     In this report, eleven jet
models, thirteen far-field models,
and seven complete-field models
are discussed and compared relative
to major characteristics.  The
characteristics evaluated include:
the method of analytical approach;
dimensionality; buoyancy; ambient
stratification; surface heat loss,
shoreline and bottom effects; dis-
charge position and configuration;
flow-establishment considerations;
and availability of computer
routines.  Significant differences
in modeling approaches exist.  A
brief summary is given of.previous
model comparisons with prototype
field data and laboratory hydraulic
data.  The inadequacy of most of
the comparisons is noted.

     Eight of the most suitable
mathematical models are compared to
field data taken at the Point Beach
Power Station on Lake Michigan.
Plume centerline trajectories,
centerline temperature decays, plume
widths as well as plume areas are
contrasted.  Significant differen-
ces in model predictions and data
comparisons are described.

     Conclusions are drawn from the
model critiques and comparisons and
recommendations are given for
improving prediction capabilities.

OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY

     The Environmental Sciences
Division is involved in several
projects which include the develop-
ment of water transport models.
These modeling programs are current-
ly in progress and no documentation
was available.  The following are
brief project descriptions:

     1)  Unified transport model
         for toxic materials in the
         environment (joint project
         of Environmental Sciences
         Division, Mathematics
         Division and NOAA).  This
         project, which is funded
         by the NSF, RANN program
         on toxic materials, is
         attempting to construct
         a generalized model that
         considers air, water and
         biological transport
         mechanism.

     2)  Aquatic Ecosystem Models.
         Under NSF funding the
         laboratory is cooperating
         with University of Wiscon-
         sin and several Universi-
         ties in New York  (partic-
         ularly Rensselaer Poly-
         technic Institute) in
         developing large scale
         aquatic ecosystem models.
         The models include a modi-
         fication of the Stanford
         Watershed Model designed
                                   -108-

-------
         to transport materials in
         solution from the land-
         scape and into the system
         (Dale Huff, Univ. Wiscon-
         sin) and one-and two-
         dimensional lake circu-
         lation models.  The water
         transport models are com-
         bined with biological
         models of the trophic
         structure of the lake
         ecosystem.

     3)  Aquatic Impact Models.
         In response to AEC needs,
         work is underway to
         develop thermal plume
         models, hydrodynamic
         models (especially of
         estuaries), and biologi-
         cal effects models such as
         the effects of entrainment
         of larval fish on popula-
         tion dynamics.

PACIFIC NORTHWEST LABORATORIES,
BATTELLE MEMORIAL INSTITUTE

     Battelle as a prime contractor
to the AEC operates the research
laboratories on the Hanford Project.
Waste disposal to the Columbia
River and to the groundwater
system from the plant operations
has  lead to the development of
groundwater and surface water
models for the AEC, which describe
the movement and concentration
patterns of wastes in these water
systems.  Battelle also has a
unique use permit agreement with
the AEC which allows Battelle to
utilize the AEC facilities in
conjunction with its own labora-
tory facilities to conduct contract
research.  Under this private con-
tract research side of Battelle,
a significant investment has been
made to develop a coordinated water
systems modeling capability.  This
effort includes the development
of unique field data collection
systems and advanced mathematical
models for simulating transport of
pollutants in groundwater, river,
lake, estuary and ocean systems.
Research programs are now being
conducted for the AEC, EPA, indus-
trial, and municipal sponsors
utilizing these models.  The
following paragraphs are general
descriptions of some of the models.
     Mathematical models for simu-
lating groundwater and radionuclide
movement as a function of time and
space have been developed.  In
addition to the models, a man-
machine interactive computer system
has been developed for use in model
applications.  In total, the
research and development program
represents a management and engi-
neering tool for use in analysis,
decisions and policy formulations
relative to management of ground-
water systems.

     The system is separated into
sequential or parallel components
that can be modeled independently
of each other.  This results in
maximum capability to simulate all
combinations of situations that
may be encountered and in the
capability to modify or refine the
models independently without
having to reformulate the entire
system.  The system is composed of
three major categories of models:
(1) data models;  (2) hydraulic
models; and  (3) water quality
(transport) models.  Data models
calculate input characteristics
required for operation of the
hydraulic and water quality models
from a minimum of field measure-
ments.  The hydraulic models pre-
dict the flow of groundwater in
saturated and unsaturated soils.
The water quality models predict
the movement of the waste through
the subsurface soils.  Although
the model system was inspired by
the need to handle radioactivity,
its utility is generally applicable
to other conservative and non-
conservative parameters.

     The man-machine interactive
computer system provides an effi-
cient means for the engineer to
interact in the problem solving
functions using the previously dis-
cussed models.  The system allows
the engineer to rapidly scan a
large number of alternatives and
use his experience in rapidly con-
verging on a solution.

     The COL HEAT River Simulation
Model developed for the AEC predicts
the fate of heat loads discharged
into a river system.  The formula-
tion is, in general terms, a far-
                                   -109-

-------
field model, primarily because of
the coarse grid normally employed.
However, the model is quite flexi-
ble and has been successfully used
to provide detail of the fine
structure, although this does
require care to be exercised in
selection of the necessary input
operating elements.  Specific cri-
teria do not presently exist for
optimizing grid size, although it
is possible to reduce numerical
dispersion by adjusting the time
step if deemed necessary.  The
importance of this aspect increases
as the step size and the associated
grid spacing is reduced.

     COL HEAT is an efficient model
in an operational sense.  A typical
river run having a basin retention
time (memory) of one month requires
approximately one minute of machine
time for computation of the annual
temperature profile at a selected
number of locations.

     Routine operation of the sys-
tem requires specification of the
following information:

•  River or reservoir dimension
   reduced to equivalent nonparal-
   lel trapezoidal cross section

•  Water temperatures at the up-
   stream end of the reach under
   study and also at the downstream
   end for comparative purposes

•  Stream flow information

•  Meteorological data:  wind
   velocity, mean air temperature,
   dew point, sky cover, incoming
   short wave radiation.

     Special data are required for
the use of the transient flow rou-
tines and certain mixing options.
The model was designed to simulate
the thermal properties of a flow-
ing water body.

     A mathematical water quality
model, EXPLORE-I, was developed by
Battelle-Northwest for the Environ-
mental Protection Agency to serve
as a management tool in the alloca-
tion of water resources in a river
basin.  EXPLORE-I was developed by
combining a number of existing hy-
draulic and water quality models
which have been shown to be relia-
ble in the past.  These models
were identified in an extensive
literature review and were incor-
porated into a single model to
allow the resource manager to ob-
tain an overall perspective of the
synergistic effects of various
allocation schemes.

     EXPLORE-I is capable to simu-
lating a number of hydraulic
regimes in either a dynamic or
steady state mode.  These regimes
are:

•  Streams and rivers

•  Shallow lakes

•  Estuaries or tidally influenced
   river.

The water quality parameters hand-
led by the program include:

•  Biochemical Oxygen Demand

•  Total Organic Carbon

•  Phosphorus

•  Nitrogen

•  Algae

•  Dissolved Oxygen.

     The EXPLORE-I code was suc-
cessfully calibrated and verified
on the Willamette River Basin in
Oregon.

     In addition to the river basin
program, the water quality code was
adapted for use in deep thermally
stratified reservoirs.

     As a result of industrially-
sponsored work, Battelle has devel-
oped models for predicting water
quality changes in coastal waters.
The surface water aualitv patterns
resulting from plant discharges are
influenced by the type and location
of the outfall structure, and the
current field in the receiving
waters.  Because of economic con-
siderations, the hydrodynamics are
considered at two levels of detail:
(1) near-field models, and (2) far-
                                   -110-

-------
field or regional models.   The
near-field model provides  the
detailed water quality patterns in
the vicinity of the discharge
structure where entrainment and the
discharge momentum are important.
In this region, entrainment is the
predominant factor in reducing con-
centrations and temperatures of the
discharged water.  Other effects
are usually considered negligible.
The far-field model provides region-
al current velocity patterns that
are input into a transport model to
predict regional water quality
patterns.  In the far-field model,
dispersion, advective transport,
and chemical, physical and biologi-
cal reactions are all important.

     Battelle-Northwest has recent-
ly developed and verified two near-
field models.  The Baumgartner-
Trent  (EPA-BNW) multi-port diffuser
model, which predicts dilution of a
deep water discharge, was run on
the Atlantic Richfield Company's
diffuser system which discharges
into Puget Sound near Bellingham,
Washington.  The model predicted
the initial dilution would be be-
tween 80 and 95.  A dye release
through the diffuser system indi-
cated a dilution of approximately
80.  The Battelle SYMJET code,
which was developed to predict
dilution and current velocities
near a vertical discharge, was used
to simulate the temperature and
velocity patterns which develop
near cooling water discharges off
the California coast.  Excellent
agreement was obtained between
field measurements and the simula-
tions.  Input requirements for this
model are discharge rate,  depth of
discharge, diameter of discharge,
depth of the receiving water,
salinity and temperature profiles
of the receiving water, and salin-
ity and temperature of the dis-
charge .

     The interface between the near-
field models and far-field models
is critical to the accurate predic-
tion of detailed water quality pat-
terns in the area where regional
and plume effects are both impor-
tant.  The current field produced
by the discharge  (plume) is inter-
preted either from field measure-
ments, physical models, or mathe-
matical model output for the near-
field zone.  The average velocity
over the thickness of the zone is
calculated as a function of loca-
tion.  The current field produced
by the discharge is then added to
the regional current patterns to
produce the net current pattern.
The regional current patterns can
vary as a function of time and
location or be considered steady.
Results of applying this technioue
to predict complex thermal patterns
observed in field data collected
off the California coast have been
excellent.

     Battelle has developed trans-
port models which eliminate the
numerical dispersion which occurs
in many models now being applied
that have used standard finite
difference techniques.  The trans-
port models have been compared to
analytic cases and excellent cor-
relations have been obtained.
Critical input to the transport
models are regional current pat-
terns which are usually complex
and result from combinations of
several current components:

•  Major circulation currents

•  Wind drift currents

•  Tidal currents

•  Littoral drift currents.

     Since each of the current
components is influenced by numer-
ous factors, in themselves varia-
ble, the resultant current patterns
as a function of time are complex
and therefore are difficult to
interpret by analyzing randomly
collected current data.  Complex
mathematical models, which solve
simplified forms of the equation
of motion, have been developed in
an attempt to predict these current
patterns.  Battelle-Northwest has
used two of the most popular models
which were developed by Leendertse
of Rand Corporation and Water
Resources Engineers.  Physical
models have also been used to
determine the complex current
patterns which develop in coastal
waters.  Field measurements of
                                   -111-

-------
currents are critical to all model-
ing programs in that they provide
the data needed to determine the
regional velocity fields in less
complex coastal regions and also
provide the verification data for
the mathematical or physical mod-
els in complex regions.  Simple
relationships are determined from
either one, or a combination of,
field measurements, mathematical
models, and physical models that
relate the velocity fields with
tide stage, wind speed, and season-
al variations.  Each of the veloc-
ity fields which are developed are
additive and the final current
field at any point in time is the
combination of these fields and
the near-field velocity patterns
determined earlier.

     These techniques have been
successfully applied to modeling
the waste transport from discharges
into Puget Sound and Long Beach
Harbor.

JET PROPULSION LABORATORY--CALI-
FORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

     The JPL has conducted studies
in the San Diego County area which
relate to the development of models
for predicting water quality.

Report of Joint Study to Formulate
the Data Management Needs of the"
State Water Resources Control Board

     A study was conducted by JPL
to formulate the data management
needs into a program statement con-
taining the objectives and scope of
the program, a schedule for the
development and implementation of
a data management system, and a
procedure to measure and promote
adherence to the schedule.

     The formulation of a data sys-
tem for the SWRCB involved informa-
tion gathering from numerous
sources.  Results indicated that
many types of data are generated,
collected, and stored in separate
agency offices.  All of these data
are important in conducting a com-
prehensive analysis of water quali-
ty within the State.  To develop
data requirements, the task team
interviewed representatives from
many offices and agencies.  The
information obtained from these
offices was compiled and analyzed,
and from this a description of an
integrated data system was devel-
oped.  Based on extensive JPL
experience in the design, procure-
ment, and operation of computer
systems, a schedule and cost esti-
mates were made, and procedures
were recommended for conducting
the implementation effort.

A Feasibility Study of Prediction
of Land Use Impact on Water Quality
in San Diego County

      A study was performed under
the joint sponsorship of the Jet
Propulsion Laboratory, Civil Sys-
tems Office, and the Integrated
Regional Environmental Management
(IREM) Project of the Environmental
Development Agency  (EDA) of San
Diego County.  The feasibility of
developing a data base and predic-
tive models for evaluating the
impact of San Diego County land use
on coastal lagoon water quality was
evaluated.

      During the course of the stu-
dy, the state of knowledge about
the hydrologic processes and the
pollution sources as they are found
in San Diego County was assessed.
Existing data sources were contac-
ted and appropriate analytical mod-
els were reviewed.  It has been
concluded that additional work in
several areas needs to be accom-
plished before the knowledge base
is sufficient to implement a mean-
ingful model.

      Specifically, evaluation of
the quality of urban and agricul-
tural rainfall runoff for the San
Diego region needs to be accom-
plished.  Additionally, the influ-
ence of subsurface ground water
flow on lagoon waters needs to be
evaluated.  Finally, the biochemi-
cal processes occurring in the sub-
ject lagoons need additional study
before they can be modeled.  For
each of the above tasks, the exist-
ing data base is considered insuf-
ficient to provide the necessary
insight.

      Once results of these studies
                                  -112-

-------
become available, then the imple-
mentation of a rather general pur-
pose water basin model may be under-
taken.

LEWIS RESEARCH CENTER

     Studies of wind-driven current
modeling have been conducted at the
Lewis Research Center.

Wind-Driven Currents in Lake Erie
R. T. Gedney and Wilbert Lick

     The steady-state, wind-driven
currents in Lake Erie are investi-
gated.  A numerical solution for
the mass-transport stream function
and the three-dimensional veloci-
ties as a function of depth and
horizontal position was obtained
and compared with measurements.
The agreement was good.  This
report shows that the currents
depend strongly on bottom topogra-
phy and boundary geometry.

Numerical Calculations of the
Wind-Driven Currents in Lake Erie
and Comparison with Measurements
R. T. Gedney and Wilbert Lick

     The steady-state, wind-driven
velocities in Lake Erie have been
calculated numerically using a
shallow lake model.  The three-
dimensional velocities as a func-
tion of depth and horizontal posi-
tion have been displayed for the
prevailing southwest winds.  The
results show that the velocities
vary greatly from position to posi-
tion and depend strongly on the
bottom topography and boundary
geometry.  For the numerical cal-
culations, a 0.805 km grid size in
an island region and a 3.22 km grid
size in the rest of the Lake had to
be incorporated to represent ade-
quately the Lake. Erie geometry.

     The calculated velocities com-
pare quantitatively very well with
current meter measurements made at
mid-depths in the central and east-
ern basins.  The magnitudes of the
average eddy viscosity used in the
calculations agree with measure-
ments made in the Great Lakes.
Steady currents are shown to occur
usually after two days of uniform
winds.
            CONCLUSIONS

     Although no coordinated AEC-
NASA water system modeling program
exists, it aopears that state-of-
the-art modeling techniques are
being developed within the individ-
ual laboratories.  Need for predic-
ting the impact of facility ooera-
tions on the environment and stu-
dies of the impact of other indus-
tries and municipalities have led
to the model development.  These
models are designed to predict
water qualities in a variety of
water systems and therefore should
be directly applicable to EPA pro-
grams.  Studies being conducted
are also directed at determining
the present state-of-the-art in
modeling which should result in
providing direction to further
model development programs.  Unique
modeling techniques are now being
developed and verified which may
provide the prediction accuracy
required for evaluating proposed
engineering designs of waste dis-
charge systems.  Much work remains
to be done in development and veri-
fication of models which can pro-
vide rapid, accurate, and economi-
cal analysis of pollution transport
in water systems.  The transport of
pollutants in the real world is
extremely complex, and detailed
predictions of these movements with
time are beyond the present state-
of-the-art.  Meaningful predictions
can be made, however, which repre-
sent time-averaged concentration
patterns with models which are pre-
sently being developed.  These
models can include and/or predict
wind-driven currents, tidal cur-
rents, river currents, ocean cur-
rents, discharge-induced currents,
chemical reactions, ion exchange,
radioactive decay, biological reac-
tions, heat loss, dissolved gas,
etc.  Many of the models described
are being used by the EPA although
several of the models are new and
have not been described in the open
literature.  It is hoped that these
models will be discussed at length
in the workshop.  The mathematical
descriptions of the models were
purposely omitted from this review
due to the limited space and time
available.
                                  -113-

-------
                      THE STATUS OF AIR QUALITY SIMULATION MODELING
                                   Warren B. Johnson*
                                Division of Meteorology
                         National Environmental Research Center
                          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                           Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711
                                         ABSTRACT
     The role of air quality simulation modeling in air pollution control activities
is described with reference to the function of other related models.  The major
requirements in the planning and operations areas are discussed.  The formulations,
advantages and disadvantages of five main types of models (Gaussian, fixed-cell,
moving cell, particle-in-cell, and multiple box) are reviewed, as well as the general
difficulties and limitations encountered.  Areas needing more research effort are
indicated.  Current EPA modeling activities with regard to development, evaluation
and application are described.  Finally, program funding levels for outside modeling
research are discussed.
THE ROLE OF AIR QUALITY SIMULATION (AQS)
                  MODELS

The General Need

     Air pollution modeling research
seeks to provide objective tools for the
guidance of decision-makers in such fields
as air pollution control and land-use
planning.  There are those who feel that
such models are unnecessary, and that the
proper course is to control every source
to the maximum extent possible using
current technology.  Although this
approach is appealing in terms of its
simplicity and directness, and will
certainly achieve some air quality
improvement, it has several critical
weaknesses.
*0n assignment from the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration
     Most importantly, the maximum-
control approach also entails maximum
costs.  In the absence of unlimited funds
and supplies of "clean" fuels, etc., the
problem becomes one of how to allocate
the available resources so that they
will do the most good in terms of air
quality improvement.  Questions such as
the following must then be considered:

      What are the relative contributions
      of various current or planned source
      categories or individual sources to
      ground-level concentrations?

   '  What will be the effect of a
      reduction in emissions of one of
      the reactive pollutants involved
      in producing a secondary
      pollutant?

      What air quality improvements can
      be achieved through indirect controls,
      i.e., changes in the source distrib-
      ution in space and time?
                                           -114-

-------
     The only hope for answering such
questions lies in AQS models, which
furnish a scientific basis for decisions
leading to least-cost air quality
improvement.

Relationship of AQS Models to Other Models.

     This paper will only deal with a
small "piece" of a large "pie", the
elements of which are presented in Fig. 1.
This figure illustrates my concept of the
eventual complete process involved in
applying a hierarchy of related models
to help reach a decision on a prospective
air pollution control strategy or land-
use plan.  Of course, many of the
individual models illustrated as part of
the overall system are not yet available,
such as Elements 5, 6, and 8, but even
without them, the loop can be closed and
useful guidance obtained from the system.

     The portion of the work that our
Division is principally concerned with
consists of Elements 2, 3, and 4, which
together constitute what I call an Air
Quality Simulation (AQS) Model, to
distinguish it from the other types of
air pollution models.  As indicated in
Fig. 1, the basic output of an AQS model
is the calculated pollutant concentration
distribution as a function of space and/or
time.   The remainder of this paper will be
concerned only with this area of modeling.

Basic Elements of AQS Modeling

     It is not always recognized by those
not thoroughly familiar with the subject
that Element 2 (Fig. 1) is a major part
of AQS models.  This arises because of
the fact that almost none of the input
variables for the main modules (emissions,
transport and diffusion, transformations,
and removal) are directly observed or
routinely available in sufficient detail.
The submodels in Element 2, then, must
convert, estimate, and interpolate from
available data to provide the detailed
fields of input variables that AQS models
require.  Some of the submodels require
meteorological modeling of processes
that have not yet been well described or
measured.   Difficulties involved in this
and the other areas will be discussed in
a later section.
        REQUIREMENTS FOR MODELS

Planning Models

     The legal requirements for air
pollution control implementation plans
and environmental impact assessments
have intensified the need by control
agencies for objective techniques that
can simulate, with the aid of available
historical data, the pollutant concentra-
tion distribution changes that result
from simulated changes in the emission
distribution.  There are two widely
differing spatial scales of interest for
this application:  the urban scale (1 to
25 km), and the local scale (10 to 1000 m).

     Urban-scale AQS models are needed
for both quasi-stable (CO, SO-, particulates)
and reactive (NO-, 0.) pollutants from
both stationary and mobile sources.  The
time scales of interest correspond to
the averaging times specified for the
air quality standards, and basically
range from one hour to one year.  The
model that has seen the most use here
is the Air Quality Display Model (AQDM)*,
which is part of the Implementation Plan-
ninp.Program (IPP) furnished to the state
control agencies by EPA.  This model
predicts only annual-average pollutant
concentrations.  For this annual time '
scale, Hanna (1971) has shown that
considerable simplification in the
diffusion model is possible while maintain-
ing comparable accuracy.  This is because
the short-term meteorological variability
is averaged out, with the result that
concentrations become mainly a function
of emissions.  Models that calculate
short-term (one hour) concentrations as
well as concentration frequency distribu-
tions at any receptor using climatological
records are under active development and
evaluation.

     Local-scale planning AQS models are
mainly needed for analysis of transporta-
tion-related pollutant sources, particularly
highways and airports.  The emphasis here
is usually on the shorter time scales.
A number of these models are also under
active development and evaluation by EPA
and other agencies.
                                              *TRW Systems Group (1969)
                                         -115-

-------
Operational Models for Emergency Control
     For this application a real-time
model is needed for use during air
pollution episodes to determine what
control actions, if any, should be taken.
The model will have to use forecast input
variables, which will be a definite
limitation on the accuracy to be expected.
The design characteristics of a model
currently under development for this
application include the following:

   (1)  Much more detailed treatment of
        emissions from point sources
        than from area sources, since
        the former are more controllable;

   (2)  Relatively simple and fast-running;

   (3)  Accuracy in predicting changes
        in concentrations much more
        important than accuracy in
        predicting absolute concentration
        values;

   (4)  Inputs:  current concentrations,
        plus 24 one-hour-average predicted
        values of meteorological and SCL
        emission variables on a selected
        grid;

   (5)  Outputs:  3-hour- and 24-hour-
        average concentration predictions
        centered on a time 12 hours in
        advance, suitable for mapping
        and arranged so that individual
        source contributions to the
        concentration can be identified.

       BASIC MODELING APPROACHES

     By far the most frequently used
approach to AQS modeling has been the
semi-empirical Gaussian diffusion
formulation, which assumes that the cross-
wind concentration distribution from a
pollutant plume approximates a Gaussian
form.  This has been partially substantiated
through field experimentation for typical
meteorological conditions and averaging
times on the order of 30 minutes to one
hour.  In its simplest form, the ground-
level concentration from a ground-level
point source is given by
         —9	exp(-y2/2a2)       (1)
         ir a a u   r  '    y
where
     C = ground-level concentration  (g/m  )

     Q = source strength  (g/s)

     u = average wind speed  (m/s)

     y = lateral (crosswind) distance
         from the plume axis (m)

a  ,a   ° lateral and vertical standard
         deviations of plume concentration
         (m)

When Eq. (1) is integrated over y, we
obtain the following basic form for
ground-level concentrations  from a ground-
level line source:
)1/2
                      -1
                                    (2)
                                        -1
In this formulation Q  has the units g m
s'1                  L
     Figure 2 illustrates the basic
concept.  The diffusion parameter a  is
usually taken to be a function of
downwind distance and atmospheric stability
in the form
               a x
                      (3)
where the parameters a and b depend upon
stability.  Because of its simplicity
and short computation times, the Gaussian
formulation is used in most AQS models
for quasi-stable pollutants, such as the
AQDM SO. model (TRW Systems Group, 1969),
and the Stanford Research Institute CO
model (Johnson, et al., 1972; Ludwig and
Dabberdt, 1972).

     The basic disadvantages of the Gaussian
plume approach are
                                         -116-

-------
   (1)  Concentrations are not time-
        dependent in the usual sense
        (the approach is "quasi-steady-
        state" in that the input variables
        are updated once per hour);

   (2)  Spatial variability in the
        meteorological parameters are
        difficult to incorporate;

   (3)  The approach cannot be used  for
        reactive or secondary pollutants,
        because in these cases superposition
        of individual source contributions
        at a receptor is not valid;  and

   (4)  Difficulties are encountered
        when the wind is light and ill-
        defined.

     The so-called Gaussian "puff" model,
which tracks individual pollutant cloud
elements as they move along wind trajectories
and diffuse in Gaussian fashion, was design-
ed to overcome several of these problems
(Rote, et al., 1971).  However, the large
computational requirements for this
approach have not encouraged extensive
applications of the "puff" model.

     There are a number of more recent
AQS modeling developments that can be
classified into the four types summarized
in Table 1.  These approaches have the
following common characteristics:

   (1)  All are adaptable to photoreactive
        pollutants;

   (2)  All are time-dependent; and

   (3)  Diffusion is treated by K-theory
        (concentration flux proportional
        to gradient) in all models that
        include diffusion.

     The basic formulations of each
modeling approach are summarized in the
table, as are the advantages and dis-
advantages.  The definitions of the terms
in the equations are as follows:

   c  = mean concentration of chemical
        species i

   v = vector mean wind
   K ,K  = horizontal and vertical eddy
       V   diffusivities

   x,y,z = component directions

   R. = rate of generation of species i
        by reactions

   S. = rate of emission of species i

   V = cell volume
     i
   v  = vector effective mean transport
   **    wind (includes turbulent transport)

     The Type A models compute concentra-
tions over a grid of cells in three
dimensions, using finite-difference
integration techniques to solve the
classical equations of conservation of
mass, including local change, advection,
diffusion, reactions, and emissions.
For n species or pollutants, there are
n equations coupled through the
reactions term R.

     The Type B models use a Lagrangian
approach, in which a moving "cell" or
"parcel" is advected along a wind
trajectory.  In this way, advection
disappears from the equations.  One
variation of this approach assumes
instantaneous uniform mixing within the
parcel and thus neglects vertical diffusion.
Both versions neglect horizontal diffusion.

     The Type C model is a novel approach
in which pollutant mass is represented by
"particles" which are advected in accordance
with an effective transport velocity that
includes both the mean and turbulent
transports.  Concentrations are computed
according to the numbers of particles
located in each cell of an Eulerian, or
fixed-coordinate, grid at any given time.

     Finally, the Type D models utilize
an Eulerian array of well-mixed cells
that can be quite large and variable in
size to give spatial resolution only where
needed.  One version of this model does
include terms for horizontal diffusion.
This type of formulation is a variation
of the basic finite-difference grid
formulation  (Type A), and thus also is
influenced by artificial diffusion produced
when the equations are integrated.
                                         -117-

-------
     Several of these models are now in
advanced stages of development and
evaluation.  The eventual choice of which
is the best approach for a particular
application will of course depend
heavily upon the relative weight given
to resolution and accuracy on the one
hand, and computational efficiency on
the other.

DIFFICULTIES AND LIMITATIONS OF AQS MODELING
     Boundary conditions are also
particularly troublesome.  The time-
dependent models require initial conditions
and boundary conditions, and because of
computational constraints, extending
these backwards in time or outward in
space is impractical.  The problem is
magnified in locations such as in the
Los Angeles Basin,'where pollutants
travel out to sea and then come back
later in a return flow.
Inherent Difficulties

     One of the inherent difficulties of
modeling lies in the treatment of sub-
grid or local scale effects.  Figure 3
illustrates the diverse range of spatial
scales that must be considered, as well
as the time scales of interest.  The limits
of the latter are reasonably well defined
as one hour to one year, in accordance
with the air quality standards.  However,
the standards make no reference to the
spatial scale.

     The figure shows the range of
concentration averaging area covered by
two types of models:  the Connecticut
regional SO- model (Hilst, 1967) and the
Stanford Research Institute CO urban model
(Johnson, et al., 1971).  In addition,
estimates are shown on the figure of the
ratio R of maximum to minimum concentrations
as a function of temporal and spatial
averaging.

     In the case of CO, which is almost
totally emitted from ground-level sources,
the SRI work showed that hourly
concentrations at a height of 3m frequently
varied by a factor of two to three from
one side of a street to the other, because
of the aerodynamic flow patterns set up
by surrounding buildings (see Fig. A).

     Almost all urban models calculate
concentrations over a finite averaging
area, typically 1 to 2 km on a side
because of computer time constraints.
Hence there is a basic incompatibility
with point measurements that makes model
evaluation difficult.  Achieving spatial
compatibility either requires some form
of spatial average measurement, or else
a microscale analytical or statistical
model that can reduce the averaging
scale of the calculation.  Such models
have the problem of being difficult  to
generalize.
                                         -118-
Submodels for Model Inputs

     Some of the major problems in this
area are the following:

   (1)  Determination of required resolution
        of emissions variables in space
        and time, and specification of
        these variables to this level of
        detail;

   (2)  Specification of wind flow patterns
        as affected by topography, and by
        urban influences under light-wind
        conditions;

   (3)  Specification of mixing depth
        variations in space and time;
        this may be especially important
        in the case of photochemical
        pollutants, since the concentration
        of a reaction product from two
        pollutants whose concentrations
        depend inversely upon mixing depth
        may then depend upon the square
        of the mixing depth.

Main  Modules

     Examples are given below of some of
the important areas needing attention:

Emissions.  A good experimental method of
evaluating emissions estimates on an area-
wide basis is needed.  Pollutant concentra-
tions calculations can never be any more
accurate than the emissions estimates.

Turbulence and Diffusion.  Better data
are needed on the variation of diffusivities
as a function of city structure and
meteorological conditions.

Transformations.  Major uncertainties
include the gas-to-solid transformations,
such as photochemical generation of
aerosols and conversion of S0_ to
sulfates, and the effects of turbulent
mixing rates on chemical reaction rates.

-------
Each of the photochemical kinetics modules
necessarily represents only a simplified
set of reactions.  To get the sort of agree-
ment with laboratory chamber experiments
exemplified in Fig. 5, it is often neces-
sary to depart by as much as a factor of
ten from accepted values of some of the
chemical rate constants.  This weakens the
basic validity of the kinetics modules in
the eyes of photochemists.

Removal.  Surface  removal rates  (deposition
velocities) are  not known for any of the
pollutants; these  could be significant
for  those species  that  react chemically
with the surface.
      CURRENT MODELING ACTIVITIES

     In terms of the three main phases
of modeling activities—development,
evaluation, and application—I feel that
the latter two in recent years have been
the most neglected.  Model evaluation
has seldom been satisfactorily completed
because of the general lack of suitable
data.  To gather more data requires
field programs, which are expensive.
Model applications have certainly
not been extensive, partly because of a
shortage of evaluated models, but also
because of a lack of communication and
understanding between users and model
developers.  This has resulted in many
cases in the failure of an AQS model to
be developed along lines that permit
practical application by a user.

     At this late stage in terms of need,
we cannot afford to neglect any of the
important aspects of modeling.  The current
and planned activities of the EPA AQS
modeling program, as focussed in the
Division of Meteorology, are listed and
discussed below.

Development

     The most active areas of effort,
present or planned, either in-house or on
contract or grant, are the following:

    (1)  Short-term urban models for
        quasi-stable pollutants:  CO,
        SO., and particulates

    (2)  Emergency- control model for SO.

    (3)  Photochemical models for NO. and

        °3
   (4)   Highway models for impact studies
        and transportation plans

   (5)   Airport models for setting and
        verifying aircraft emissions
        standards

   (6)   Urban and mesoscale meteorological
        models for  air quality  prediction

   (7)   Inter-regional transport models

   (8)   Fluid (scale) modeling feasibility
        studies

   (9)   Empirical modeling involving
        analysis of air quality data

   (10) Pollutant removal models

   (11) Studies of effects of atmosphere
        turbulence levels on pollutant
        reaction rates

Evaluation

     Efforts are continuing to evaluate
and verify the developments occurring
from the efforts listed above through
the use of available data.  An extensive
evaluation program is presently nearing
completion in which three photochemical
models  developed by separate contractors
have been jointly tested against a common
data base for the Los Angeles Basin,
supplied by EPA.

     The available data sets, however,
are invariably deficient in several
important respects, which has seriously
hampered most of our evaluation efforts.
Mainly  for this reason, EPA is planning
an extensive, multi-year Regional Air
Pollution Study (RAPS) in the St. Louis
area.  The principal objective is the
refinement and evaluation of AQS models
for general use in determining least-
cost air pollution abatement strategies.
The details of this field program are
still being formulated, but current plans
call for a network of 25 to 30 aerometric
and meteorological stations, along with
supplementary instrumented aircraft and
mobile  stations to support special
experiments.  Full operation of the net-
work should be underway by April 1974.

     In the meantime, other special
experiments of a limited nature may be
conducted in other appropriate locations,
as resources permit, for improvement of
certain particularly weak modeling areas,
such as in the transformation and removal
processes.
                                          -119-

-------
Dissemination and Application

     Although our role 1n modeling
research does not Include the applications
phase, our efforts are clearly wasted 1f
the models we produce are not used.   Thus,
we have a vital Interest 1n orienting
the models toward the user's needs and
capabilities, and 1n doing whatever else
we can to facilitate dissemination and
application.  In this regard, we are
considering the feasibility of a concept
that we have named UNAMAP, for Users'
Network for Applied Modeling of Air Pollu-
tion.  This would simply consist of a
library of models 1n a central computer,
that users could access and run remotely.
Table 2 summarizes the changes in current
procedures that would occur with UNAMAP.

     The basic potential advantages of this
network are that

    (1)  EPA could efficiently carry out
         responsibility for maintaining
         and periodically updating the
         models 1n a timely fashion
         when Improvements are appropriate;

    (2)  The users would always have access
         to a set of models reflecting
         the latest state-of-the-art;

    (3)  The users would not have to
         program any models;

    (4)  The users would need only minimum
         modeling expertise;  and
As indicated, funds for modeling-related
research are about $1 million for both
years.  There 1s no doubt that additional
funds could be used to good advantage
to accelerate program in modeling.

              ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

     I would like to thank my colleagues
1n the Division of Meteorology for sharing
their Ideas in several helpful discussions.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
    (5)  There would be a manageable          (5)
         number of consistent models in
         use, which would facilitate
         review and comparison of control
         plans.

     We presently plan to test this
concept on a limited, trial basis using       (6)
three of the simpler models for quasi-
stable pollutants.

LEVEL OF EFFORT IN AQS MODELING PROGRAM

     Our modeling staff 1n the Division
of Meteorology consists of ten professionals.
Funds available for outside research
contracts and grants in fiscal years 1972 and
1973 are summarized 1n Table 3.
          REFERENCES

Eschenroeder, A.Q., and J.R.
   Martinez, 1969:  Mathematical
   modeling of photochemical smog.
   Report No. IMR-1210, General
   Research Corporation, Santa
   Barbara, California

Eschenroeder, A.Q., and J.R.
   Martinez, 1971:  Further
   development of the photochemical
   smog model for the Los Angeles
   Basin.  Report No. CR-1-191,
   General Research Corp., Santa
   Barbara, California

Hanna, S.R., 1971:  A simple method
   of calculating dispersion from
   urban area sources.  J. A1r.  Poll.
   Cont. Assoc.. 21, 774-777.

H1lst, G.R., 1967:  An air pollution
   model of Connecticut.  IBM
   Scientific Computing Symposium,
   p. 251.

Hotchkiss, R.S., and C.W. Hirt,
   1972:  Particulate transport in
   highly distorted three-dimensional
   flow fields.  Proc. of the 1972
   Summer Computer Simulation Conf.,
   San Diego, Calif., June 1972.

Johnson, W.B., F.L. Ludwig, W.F.
   Dabberdt, and R.J. Allen, 1972:
   An urban diffusion simulation
   model for carbon monoxide.
   Proceedings, 1972 Summer Computer
   Simulation Conference, San Diego,
   Calif., June 14-16.
                                          -120-

-------
(7)   Ludwig,  F.L.,  and W.F.  Dabberdt,  1972:
        Evaluation  of the APRAC-1A urban
        diffusion model for  carbon
        monoxide.   Final Report,  Project
        8563, Stanford Research Institute,
        Menlo Park, Calif.

(8)   McCracken,  M.C., T.V. Crawford,
        K.R.  Peterson, and J.B. Knox,
        1971:  Development of a multi-
        box air pollution model and
        initial verification for the
        San Francisco Bay area.  Report
        No. UCRL-73348, Lawrence
        Radiation Laboratory, Liverrnore,
        Calif.

(9)   Reiquam, H., 1970:  An  atmospheric
        transport and accumulation
        model for airsheds.   Atmos.       t
        Envir. ,  4.,  233.

(10)  Rote,  D.M., J.W. Gudenas, and L.A.
        Conley,  1971:  Studies of the
        Argonne integrated-puff model.
        Report  ANL/ES-9, Argonne National
        Laboratory, Argonne, 111.

(11)  Seinfeld,  J.H., P.M. Roth, and S.D.
        Reynolds, 1972:  Simulation of
        urban air pollution.  Manuscript
        to  be published in Advances in
        Chemistry.

(12)  Sklarew, R.C., 1970:  Anew
       • approach:   The grid  model of
        urban air pollution.  APCA Paper
        70-79.

(13)  TRW Systems Group, 1969:  The air
        quality display model.  Final
        Report,  November 1969.

(14)  Wayne, L.,  R.  Danchick, M. Weisburd,
        A.  Kokin, and A. Stein, 1971:
        Modeling photochemical smog on a
       .computer for decision-making.
        J.  Air  Poll. Contr.  Assoc., 21.
        334-340.
                                         -121-

-------
to
to

(1) PROSPECTIVE
CONTROL ^__
STRATEGY
OR LAND-USE
PLAN
[~soi
[CH/
r 1
]C2) SU!
1 CO*
\ ESI
1 REC
| INI

IRCE "I
tNGESj
AVAILABLE
DATA ON
SOURCES ,
METEOROLOGY ,
AND INITIAL
[CONCENTR.
' T
MODELS FOR
IVERSION AND
'IMATION OF
JUIRED MODEL
'UTS
1
1
DECISION
*
1
1
1
OTHER ~
MEDIA
INTER-
ACTIONS
(


STANDARDS]
(8) OBJECTIVE
... T71MT ITATTfl

* PROTOCOL
l •
[CONTROL]
[COSTS J
1
7) CONTROL
—* COSTS [IMP
MODEL

N


e Frrrrr^l (5) VŁAL™> BIOL- & MAT'LS
C ILIICLIJ EFFECTS MODELS
T
r 1
ADJUSTED
AIR QUAL.
MODEL
OUTPUTS
ACTS]

(M CALIBRATION
(6) SOCIAL & TECHNIQUE
» POLI1
-t IMPAC
MODE1

("DETAILED
1 MODEL
|_INPUTS
/




^ICAL "• T' '
:TS 1
[AVAILABLE]
AIR QUAL.
[DATA J

(3) MAIN MODULES: "OUTPUTS:
'^fSIONS CONCENTRATION CALIBRATION
_,.... ^ "TRANSPORT o> . TVf"Trm"nTTTTnw TN .... rtT-miTni-n f


~l
)
— •••-• y . __„___ ^^^^ JJlulnlJ3UlJ-UlM J.11 — ••• REQUiRLU : — — ~"
DIFFUSION spACE ^D TIME
•TRANSFORMATIONS L J
•REMOVAL
IIR QUALITY SIMULATION (AQS) MODEL
           Fig. 1.  Elements and functional organization of a general systems model  for air  pollution control planning.

-------

HEIGHT
                                       Oz DEPENDS UPON

                                         • TRAVEL DISTANCE

                                         • ATMOSPHERE STABILITY
                        GAUSSIAN

                        VERTICAL

                      CONCENTRATION

                         PROFILE
       LINE
     SOURCE
                                   DISTANCE
       Fig.  2.  Vertical  diffusion according  to  Gaussian formulation.
       C9
       z
       cs
       <
       cc
CC
»-
TH
LLJ
O

o
0
109
108
107
106
10s
104
102
101
in°
AREA AREA AREA
OF A ONE OF A OF THE
CITY SQUARE MAJOR CONTINENTAL
LOT MILE CITY USA
I i
I III 1 1 III 1 III 1 III
f ' ' '
— R » 102
-
— 3-J
_ R * 103
—
_R «J04
1
^_R_« 105"
>
I I
^~^,
1
L_ SRI
MODEL -^.^
1 1
«~^
_-__->-.
V v
\ ^ N
"V l\ 1 \l
X
•^.
CONNECTICUT
MODEL -
X

Xx
\
\ v
X >v \
\ ! \ \
\
N \
\ \
l\ l\
\ \
\ *


^ -
\
\~
\_
/
0
E
- •<
- <
- 1
-<
- 1
\
\
kREA
F THE
ARTH

•— 1 MONTH

•--1 MIN
            10°
10"
108
                                                  10
                         10
10
                                12
10
                                        14
                      CONCENTRATION AVERAGING AREA — m2
      Fig. 3.   Time and space scales  of typical models  (from Hilst, 1967).
                                   -123-

-------
                                                       BACKGROUND
                                                     CO CONCENTRATION
 Fig.  4.   Schematic of  cross-street circulation between
           buildings.
                                              eXPERIMENTAL DATA,
                                              STRICKLER (1970)
                                              PREDICTED VALUES
                                              SEINFELD ET AL. (1971)
              40     SO     80     100     120    140     160    ISO    200
                          REACTION TIME, min
Fig.  5.   Example of  a validation run  of a photochemical
          kinetics module.
                               -124-

-------
Table 1.  Principal types of time-dependent air quality simulation models.


                  A.  FIXED-CELL, FINITE -DIFFERENCE MODEL


Basic Equation;


                                  3c.\    a  /    Sc.\    a /    3c.\
                           + R.(c.,...,cn) + Si   (i = 1,2, ...,n)


Type;  Eulerian (fixed coordinate)

Investigators;  Seinfeld et al. (1972)
                Eschenroeder and Martinez (1969)

Advantages;  Produces urban-wide concentration patterns.
             Physically more realistic than most.

Disadvantages ;  Artificial diffusion is inherent.
                Chemical computations performed in Eulerian frame.

Computer Time Requirements;  Large


                           B.  MOVING -CELL MODEL


Basic Equation;
                 a
          IF ' 3T I Kv TT   + Ri + Si        (1>  Vertically
                   v                                inhomogeneous

         dVc.
           gi = VR.(c.,...,cn) + VSi          (2)  Vertically
                                                   homogeneous
Type;  Quasi-Lagrangian (trajectory)

Investigators;  Eschenroeder and Martinez (1970)—(l)
                Wayne et al.  (1971)--(2)

Advantages:  Traces concentration history along an air trajectory.

Disadvantages:  Difficult to obtain urban-wide patterns.
                No horizontal diffusion or convergence.
                Errors accumulate.

Computer Time Requirements:  Modest
                                   -125-

-------
Table 1.  (continued)


                        C.  PARTICLE-IN-CELL MODEL


Basic Equation;


                       3c.
Type;  Moving particles represent pollutant mass

Investigators;  Sklarew (1970)
                Hotchkiss and Hirt (1972)

Advantages;  No artificial diffusion.
             Effective display of concentration pattern.

Disadvantages;  Discrete mass represented by each particle limits accuracy.
                Large core storage required.

Computer Time Requirements;  Large
                          D.  MULTIPLE-BOX MODEL


Basic Equation;
                         1 + v •  V c  = R  + S
                             /•^      ill
Type;  Well-mixed cell

Investigators;  Reiquam (1970)
                MacCracken et al. (1971)

Advantages;  Sizes and shapes of cells are variable.
             Involves only ordinary differential equations.

Disadvantages;  Neglects diffusion (Reiquam)
                Neglects vert, diffusion (MacCracken)
                Artificial diffusion can be significant.

Computer Time Requirements;  Generally modest.
                                   -126-

-------
           Table 2.  Comparison of current model dissemination and application
                     procedures with those possible under the UNAMAP concept.
                CURRENT

1.  Needs expressed by users (EPA,
    control agencies, etc.)

2.  Establish type and specs, of model
    needed

3.  Develop model

4.  Evaluate and verify model, using
    avail, data plus special experiments

5.  Publish report and send to users-*—
6.  Users program models
7.  EPA make periodic improvements in
    models                           	

8.  Users submit control plans, etc. for
    EPA review, using various and sundry
    models
              PROSPECTIVE
 1.  (Same)


 2.  (Same)


 3.  (Same)

 4.  (Same)
 5.  Program model and put into central-
     computer library, along with data,
     etc.

 6.  Publish users' manual ("cookbook")
     and periodic revisions

 7.  Users access model via remote
     terminals and apply

 8.  EPA make periodic improvements in
     models

 9.  Users submit control plans, etc.,
     for EPA review, using consistent
     set of models
           Table 3'.  Research funds ($000)  for modeling-related research contracts and
                     grants (Division of Meteorology only)*
Model development and evaluation

Supporting studies

                     Totals
Expended
FY 72

  520

  530

1,050
 Budget
 FY 73

  550

  500

1.050
*Does not include funds for airport modeling,  nor  funds  for  laboratory  studies of
 pollutant transformations, both of which  are  supported  by other  divisions.
                                         -127-

-------
                                ATMOSPHERIC MODELING AND
                             ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION NEEDS

                                     Joseph B.  Knox
                                      Group Leader
                               Atmospheric Sciences Group
                                University of California
                             Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
                              Livermore,  California 94550
               INTRODUCTION

     The purpose of this paper is to sur-
vey the atmospheric modeling capabilities
of the National  Laboratories pertinent to
the key present-day environmental ques-
tions.  Dr.  W.  Johnson has, in the compan-
ion paper, highlighted the EPA needs for
atmospheric modeling as (a) providing a
scientific basis for the improvement of
ambient air quality, and (b) the operation-
al use of regional  air pollution models
for the design and  implementation of
measures of control during air pollution
episodes.  The spatial scales of interest
to EPA are stated to be the urban scale
(1 to 25 km) and the local scale (10 to
1000 meters).   The  models reviewed by Dr.
Johnson are air quality models presently
being developed to  calculate the transport
and diffusion of passive and reactive
pollutants assuming the required meteoro-
logical fields of horizontal wind, height
of the mixed layer, horizontal and verti-
cal eddy diffusivities are known or pre-
dicted on an appropriate scale.   Simula-
tion models designed for land use plan
assessment or emission zoning considera-
tions can, of course, be run from histori-
cal information on  a regional scale, or
from information from neighboring airport
weather stations, whereas the operational
use of air pollutant models in a truly
predictive sense (say of tomorrow's
regional air quality) requires mesoscale
meteorological  predictive capability, or
boundary layer predictive capability over
mixed rural, suburban, and urban areas.

     Numerical  simulation models of the
atmospheric boundary layer have been
operational  for about two years, but have
not as yet been adapted to give specific
predictions for suburban or urban areas
that reflect urban  heat island or altered
roughness.  In part the lack of development
of such models is due to the absence of
organized measurements of the complete
urban regional  meteorological networks.
An adequate data base is needed for the
development of coupled hydrodynamical-
reactive pollutant models with predicted
meteorology and the subsequent model  ver-
ification and application.

     When one looks at air pollution
modeling and its development, one does not
see the same flow of logical steps that
was present in the development of large
scale numerical weather prediction,
namely, (a) observation of the weather
dependent variables on a suitable network,
(b) appropriate processing and initiali-
zation of the data for numerical calcu-
lation, and (c) application of numerical
models to the initialized data for genera-
tion of the predicted fields.  Hence, one
might well conclude that the scientific
basis of air pollution modeling, in the
sense described above, is in an early
stage of development.  Faced with this
situation, the practicing air pollution
meteorologist, the planner, the regulatory
agency protecting the nation's air quality
must make evaluations, assessments, and
decisions.  One reasonable course of
action is to use simplified models as
judiciously as possible after calibration
against real world data, or to supplement
simple models with emerging, verified,
more complete air quality simulation
models.  Examples of both of these kinds
of response to air quality questions can
be found today on the U.S. air pollution
scene.  To those engaged 1n atmospheric
modeling, the improvement of the scien-
tific basis of air pollution forecasting
and planning assessments constitutes a
technical frontier.

     Air pollution officials may react to
this situation in many ways.  One possible
response is that if ambient air quality
standards are set sufficiently close to
background, then one does not need to have
elegant simulation models to calculate the
degree of excess pollution in many cities.
The excess is measurable; it merely needs
to be controlled.
                                          -128-

-------
     Historically,  the case  of dramatic
improvement in air  quality in  the city of
London since the enactment of  the Clean
Air Act of 1956 illustrates  the benefits
of controlling particulates.   Figure  1
shows the parallel  decline of  smoke con-
centration in the United Kingdom and  the
smoke emissions as  a function  of time.'
It is reported that a smaller  but signifi-
cant decline in an  average S02 concentra-
tion took place even though  controls  were
only on smoke emissions.  This observed
decrease in SOg surface concentration was
attributed to nonlinear effects associated
with the control of the partlculates  and
their effect on the radiation  balance.  It
should be noted that the improvement  in
air quality in the U.K. in regard to
particulates during the period of the early
1950's through 1968 was achieved in spite
of a ]Q% increase in population and a 17%
increase in gross energy consumption  nation-
wide.!  This case study of air quality
improvement constitutes a clear case  of
benefits from controls during  the period
when planners and air pollution officials
had little recourse to air pollution
simulation models of the character that
are becoming available today.   Since  one
can point to a clear case in which control
technology without recourse to sophisti-
cated models was successful, it is most
pertinent to discuss the role  of atmospheric
and pollution simulation models in the
1970's as an aid to those charged with
environmental protection.

     Today, those charged with improving
our environmental quality are  not only
looking at control  technology, but also
land use planning.   Control  technology
appears promising for the control of
established sources, whereas land use
planning in parallel with emission zoning
has potential for improving ambient air
quality in suburban regions or growth
regions of the country.  These problems,
however, are inherently different; urban
problems are source dominated, whereas the
ambient air quality problems of surburban
and growing areas can well be dominated by
importation.  Hence, there is  a need to
develop a capability for predicting the
maximum source emission in a given air
basin, and its configuration,  in order to
achieve the Federal ambient air quality
standards for both passive and reactive
pollutants.  Once having calculated the
maximum emissions acceptable in an air
basin and their configuration consistent
with ambient air qualities standards,
this can be used as a planning guide.   One
of the roles of air pollution simulation
models would be to do precisely that.   The
second might well be to predict pollutant
concentration frequency distributions  that
are associated with these maximum allowable
source terms.  These frequency distribu-
tions should be compared to those charac-
teristics of the surface contaminant fre-
quency distributions represented in the
ambient air quality standards.  If one
regards air quality simulation modeling
as being in its early development phases,
then certainly our understanding of
factors that contribute to, and determine
the frequency distribution of surface air
contaminants is 1n its infancy.  This is
particularly true if one considers the
complexities of space and time variable
area sources and the time dependent
photochemical reactions or chemical
reactions for various pollutants.  Some of
the major contributions that atmospheric
or air pollution modelers can accomplish
1n the coming years include the develop-
ment of verified tools for air quality
simulation and for developing our under-
standing of the statistical aspects of
air quality data of greater depth than
exist today.  With these tools we might
then progress towards the objective of
growth that would be consistent with
acceptable level of ambient air quality.

     Certainly the current concerns about
environmental protection go far beyond the
local and regional scales just discussed.
There are concerns regarding the impact of
stratospheric aircraft operations on equi-
librium distributions of pollutants on a
global scale and their feedback on radia-
tion transfer and possible climatic change
mechanisms.  It has been deemed by many
prudent to investigate these possible
impacts in detail prior to the operation
of  large scale fleets of stratospheric
aircraft.*   It has recently been proposed'
that the global background level of carbon
dioxide be limited to 420 ppm.  The idea
here is to minimize the probability, based
on  present evidence, that irreversible
climatic change might be triggered by such
levels existing for long lengths of time.
However, to postulate such a grand scale

*Much of the work being done for the DOT-
CIAP from the far wake to global scale
hydrodynamics, dispersion and photochemis-
try summarized in this report will have
important spin-off for EPA.
                                           -129-

-------
of planning on our present state of knowl-
edge of climatic simulation and climatic
change would be probably unwarranted.
Still others are concerned with the manner
in which man's disposal  of waste heat  Into
the atmosphere and other man-made alter-
ations of the terrestrial heat budget
might impact on long term weather changes
or climatic changes.  These Issues and the
scientific basis for evaluating and ad-
dressing them lie in the province of the
atmospheric scientists and modelers.
Hence, in reviewing the capabilities of
the National Laboratories, we shall expand
our scale of interests of environmental
concerns and attempt to identify those
problem areas 1n which atmospheric model-
ing efforts can contribute.  It is perhaps
the role of this reviewer to present such
a 11st of strategic areas of different
scales that are now available for attack
by the atmospheric modeler rather than to
try to enumerate 1n a short space of time
available the detailed activities of
several laboratories.  To this end the
individual laboratory atmospheric science
programs 1n regard to atmospheric modeling
are summarized in the separate appendices
at the conclusion of this report.

              STRATEGIC AREAS

     In the scope of this brief review of
the activities of the AEC and NASA labora-
tories it is not possible to describe  each
program in any detail.  It is, however,
feasible to summarize current strategic
areas for research and application of
atmospheric modeling in the context of
identified environmental problems, that is,
those areas where priority needs and devel-
oping capabilities intersect.  Such a  sum-
mary is given below as a function of geo-
metrical scale.

       Strategic Areas for Research
            and Application of
          Atmospheric Modeling
                for Current
          Environmental  Concerns

Scale        Needed Research and Application

Global    1. Simulation of general circu-
             lation and characteristics of
             past climatic ages.

          2. Study of natural mechanisms of
             climatic change or transitions
             from one climatic state to
             another.
Scale        Needed Research and Applicaton

          3.  Study environmental impact of
             man's waste heat and altera-
             tion of surface boundary
             conditions on large-scale or
             secular climate.

          k.  Verify climate change simu-
             lation models on short term
             periods of natural secular
             climatic changes for which
             observations now exist.

          5.  Application of global pollu-
             tion distribution models to
             interpretation  of monitoring
             data of radioactive materials,
             chemical, or conventional
             trace pollutants and analyze
             trends or secular changes.

Continental  Inter-regional transport of
             pollutants, both radioactive
             and conventional, including
             heavy metals, their dry or
             wet deposition, any chemical
             transformations while airborne
             or depositing on land or water.

Regional  1.  The development of techniques
or           that include air pollution
Urban        modeling for the purpose of
             land use plan assessment and/
             or emission zoning for com-
             parison with AAQS.  (Such
             techniques should utilize the
             fact that the AAQS represent
             frequency distribution char-
             acteristics of the surface
             air pollutant and that models
             employed for this purpose
             should give, among other
             things, the pertinent frequen-
             cy distribution from past case
             studies.)

          2.  Related to the above but dis-
             tinct from it, the maximum
             source strength physically
             consistent with the AAQS
             should be estimated on a
             regional, urban, or control
             district basis, and be avail-
             able for planning purposes.

          3.  Investigation of the urban
             heat budget and parallel      ;
             numerical experiments on the
             hydrodynamics of the urban
             heat island should be under-
                                          -130-

-------
Scale        Needed Research and Application

             taken on a long term research
             basis.  (With the prospects
             for the RAPS data base mate-
             rializing, such research  would
             be timely.)

          4.  Fine scale- or mesoscale
             meteorological prediction
             models to be nested inside
             of continental scale boundary
             layer models; such efforts
             would eventually yield predi-
             ctive products on a scale
             suitable for operational
             numerical air pollution
             prediction.

The following discussion expands on some of
the above strategic areas of research  and
application of atmospheric modeling.

      ROLES OF ATMOSPHERIC MODELING

GLOBAL SCALE

     The findings of a recent conference on
Climatic Change contained the following
salient points:  Evidence extracted'from
the glaciers, icecaps, and marine sediments
indicates that the terrestrial warm period
of the last several thousand years is  in
sharp contrast with the climates of the
past million years.  Further, climatically
warm periods, like the present warm period,
are shortlived, and the end of the present
warm period is near.  Global cooling of
natural origin could exceed in magnitude
changes experienced in historical times.
Anthropogenic factors influencing climate
change have been interpreted to be smaller
than natural  changes, and were judged  to be
masked by natural changes, self-cancelling,
or possibly supportive of natural changes.
It is evident that the history of past
climatic periods as recorded in the ice,
the erosion, and the marine sediments
should be deciphered to provide a data
base for the deduction of the surface
boundary conditions during past climatic
ages.

     With the development of full three
dimensional numerical simulation models of
the atmosphere and simpler two dimensional
climate simulation models over the past
several years, one fruitful area of inves-
tigation is in the numerical simulation of
past climatic periods using the historical
boundary condition data base.  Character-
istics of the general circulation during
these climatic periods could be studied
and compared; hence, the sensitivity of
the general circulation to reasonable
surface boundary conditions would be
explored.  For instance, mechanisms of
transition   from one climatic state to
another studied following some of the
concepts regarding a critical glacial
coverage of the earth necessary for
transition to another stable cold climatic
state.3

     This is but one illustration of the
type of study needed in the area of numer-
ical climatic simulation and studies of
climatic change.  Other topics include:

     (1)  The impact of the waste heat
sources associated with cities, altered
albedo, or alterations in urban heat
balance by aerosols on terrestrial climates
of the future for various levels of growth.

     (2)  The global effects of widespread
volcanic dust or various anthropogenetic
pollutants on climatic change mechanisms.

Many of the atmospheric modeling efforts
recently initiated at the Laboratories in
support of the AEC mission or the DOT-CIAP
(summarized in the appendicies) will yield
experience and capabilities applicable to
these problems.  Numerical simulation models
of physical systems require confirmation by
comparison of the solutions with experimen-
tal data; climatic change simulations are
no exception.  Hence, a comment about
possibilities of verification of such cal-
culations is pertinent.

     Descriptive and interpretative studies
of the response of the general circulation
to large scale anomalies of increased sea
surface temperature in the Central Pacific
have been explored by Bjerknes  (1966),4
during the winter of 1957-58.  Following
extended periods of weak easterly trade
winds, the Central Pacific sea surface
temperature is noted to increase due to a
decrease in the supply of upwelling cold
water.  During the year 1957-1958 this
mechanism is interpreted to have resulted
in an increase of 3 to 4 degrees C over a
large area of the Central Pacific.4  The
atmosphere in response to increased upward
transport of latent and sensible heat in
this region probably experienced strength-
ening of the meridional Hadley circulation
and transport of westerly angular momentum
from low latitudes to mid-latitudes, with
                                          -131-

-------
an intensification of the mid-latitude jet
stream.  The  mean sea level  pressure maps
for three successive winter seasons illus-
trates the secular response of the atmos-
phere described above as reflected in the
mean surface maps, Fig. 2.  The changes
documented by Bjerknes in this study are
marked and significant; this  period of
secular climatic change is a  meaningful
opportunity to test climatic  simulation
models against real data to ascertain if
models produce solutions with characteris-
tics similar to those observed.  Such
investigations for this period, and others
to be identified, would be essential in
the development and testing of climatic
simulation models.

     Part of our environmental protection
program being formulated and implemented
today Includes a global network of monito-
ring stations.  The data base developed
from this new monitoring network will need
interpretation and reduction  to useful
information.  In this regard, the global
models presently being developed for the
Department of Transportation  Climatic
Impact Assessment Program (DOT-CIAP) for
predicting the equilibrium distribution of
pollutants resulting from SST emissions
could be used to interpret background
measurements of air pollutants on a global
scale given appropriate source-sink infor-
mation.  Such models when fully tested on
the natural ozone distribution, on strato-
spheric releases of material  by nuclear
tests, and/or volcanic material should have
a verified capability for making the contri-
butions suggested, namely, providing an
interpretive bridge between global
monitoring information and useful planning
information.  Such a basis of understanding
and availability of useful information on
the global scale would permit one to moni-
tor and to preserve the windows of existence
for various pollutants for man, namely,
that window between background and his
tolerance.  The numerical techniques
developed for the interpretation of global
monitoring data could well be adapted to
the problem of estimating or predicting
inter-basin transfers of pollutants on a
continental scale wherein transfer coeffi-
cients would be evaluated from boundary
layer models.

REGIONAL OR URBAN SCALE

     In order to discuss the use of numer-
ical simulation models of regional air
pollution in land use plan assessment we
reference some recent results in the devel-
opment and initial verification of an air
pollution model  for the San Francisco Bay
Area.5,6  This model uses historical
meteorological data to predict the mean
and surface air concentration in each of
the model cells including transport and
diffusion by the ambient wind field
between the irregular earth surface and
the time and space variable marine inver-
sion layer.  The verification work was
carried out on a 48-hour test period
during July 1968.  Figure 3 displays the
observed hourly average concentrations of
CO  in parts per million during the case
study, as well as the computed vertical
average and computed surface hourly
average CO concentration.  There is very
reasonable agreement between the observed
and the computed surface concentrations.
This information of calculated versus
observed concentrations can also be dis-
played as a log-normal frequency distri-
bution plot,  F1g. 4.  The significant
feature to be noted here is that the
frequency distribution of the predicted
hourly average concentrations on log=
normal paper  parallels the observed.  *'
In addition,  it  is parallel to that
obtained by Larson for the frequency dis-
tribution of  hourly averages of Co  for a   ,
year.  Frank  Gifford, ARATDL-NOAA has
recently noted that several of the
numerical simulation models under develop-
ment at this  time render numerical  solu-
tions which are  "noiser" than the observed
distributions.   A numerical solution  that
is contaminated  with noise will, in general,
not  be able to predict the frequency  distri-
bution of the surface pollutant and,  there-
fore, will have  severe limitations  in
regard to a comparison of predicted fre-
quency distributions to ambient air qual-
ity  standards.   Hence, one criterion  for an
acceptable model  for numerical simulation
of air pollution  is whether the model  is
able  to  reproduce the frequency distribution
characteristics  of  the pollutants involved
and  in the region of interest.  Although
the  testing of the  Lawrence Livermore
Laboratory (LLL)  air pollution model  is
limited  today, it appears at  least  on  the
first test that  this criterion has been met.

      Consider the future when a verified
and  acceptable numerical simulation model
for  air  pollution exists.  The question
then  is, How  can  such an acceptable
numerical  simulation model be employed  in
land use plan assessments?  Given a region
of interest for  planning purposes and  a
                                           -132-

-------
 suite  of  pollutants of  concern, one could
.examine,  for  instance,  the frequency
 distribution  of  hourly  average values of
 surface air concentrations and identify
 the  portion of the distribution which is
 equal  to  or greater than the ambient air
 quality standard involved.  Conceptually,
 the  days  or episodes  involved in that part
 of the distribution could be composited
 into mesoscale or regional weather types.
 The  meteorological fields and air quality
 data from those  days  or episodes would
 constitute case  studies for model calcu-
 lations.   The solutions of such numerical
 modeling  case studies would delineate a
 spatial distribution  of the excess over
 ambient air quality standards in the region
 which  might not  necessarily be defined by
 the  network of monitoring stations.  From
 examining those  excesses and their spatial
 distributions, one could determine the
 degree of control and a location of
 control necessary to  remedy the excess.
 In principle, the same  set of analytical
 steps  could be applied  to forecast
 emission  zonings associated with either
 growth or alternative land use plans for
 the  same  set  of  identified days.  Hence,
 in this matter one could evaluate the
 degree of control necessary for an existing
 situation in  a region of interest to bring
 the  air quality  of that region into line
 with ambient  air quality standards or else
 to assess the excess  of ambient air
 quality standards in  need of control that
 correspond to various land use plans.

     As indicated in  the summary table of
 strategic areas, an additional area of
 investigation would be  the estimation of
 the  maximum source term and its configura-
 tion associated  with  given air sheds for
 composite episodes or poor diffusion
 periods.   Such estimates would be impor-
 tant inputs to regional planning for
 limitation of new sources or for control
 of existing ones.  As previously noted,
 such planning parameters in regard to
 maximum emissions of  different pollutants
 in various air sheds  would be calculated
 prior  to  the  extensive  development of those
 regions.   Effects of  importation from
 neighboring cities or other regions would
 need to be considered along with the non-
 linear effects of controls applied in source
 regions adjacent to the area of interest.

     The  urban heat island effect has been
 a subject of  experimental investigation
 for  several years with  the excess temper-
 ature  in  the  city as  compared to that in
adjacent rural  areas being documented in
a number of locations.  A heat island
circulation superimposed on the ambient
boundary layer flow has been postulated in
which the heat island would physically
lead to an enhanced low level flow into
the city under light wind conditions and a
corresponding outflow above the city.
This presumably could lead to an increase
in the height of the mixed layer over the
city.  The hydrodynamics of the urban heat
island phenomenon is not well known today,
but one can well  postulate release situa-
tions in suburban or rural environments 1n
which the heat island effect could be an
important factor in the near term trans-
port and diffusion of the released material.
Basic research oriented towards public
safety or reduction in hazard from any
accidental massive release of toxic material
should be concerned with better description
and understanding of the transport and
diffusion environment within or into the
urban heat island.  For this reason we have
included urban heat island numerical simu-
lation in the strategic areas for research
and application of atmospheric modeling.

TRANSFER OF TECHNIQUES FROM RELATED FIELDS

     Atmospheric modelers must during the
present period of rapid development be
sensitive to new techniques in areas such
as numerical analysis.  Some recent work
appears to be of great significance in
regard to controlling or eliminating the
phenomenon known as artificial viscosity
and the manner in which it effects numer-
ical solutions.  The technique known as
the "flux corrected transport" algorithms
represents a promising technique for
eliminating artificial diffusion in
finite difference operators of multi-box
models utilizing advective and diffusive
fluxes.  It is our intent that the "flux
corrected transport method" be incorporat-
ed into numerical models at the earliest
possible time for testing and verification.

REFERENCES

1.  Craxford, S.  R. and M. L. P. M.
    Weatherly,"Air Pollution in Towns in
    the United Kingdom, IV. Dispersal of
    Airborne Effluents."  Royal Society of
    London, Philosophical Translations
    Series A; Mathematical and Physical
    Sciences Vo.  269:503-513, 1971.
                                           -133-

-------
2.  Brown, T. L., Energy in the Environment,
    Clarence E. Marie Publishing Company,
    Columbus, Ohio, 1971.
3.  Rudyko, M. I., "The Effect of Solar
    Radiation on the Climate of the Earth,"
    Tellus, Vol. 21, pp 611-619, 1969.
    Bjerknes, "A Possible Response of the
    Atmospheric Hadley Circulation to
    Equatorial Anonally of Ocean Tempera-
    ture," Tellus, Vol. 18, pp 820-829,
    1969.
    MacCracken, M. C., T. V. Crawford,
    K. R. Peterson and J. B. Knox,
    "Initial Application of a Multi-Box
    Air Pollution to the San Francisco
    Bay Area," University of California,
    Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, Report
    UCRL-73994, 1972.
6.  Gelinas, R. J., "Stiff Systems of
    Kinetic Equations, a Practioners View,"
    Journal of Computational Physics,
    Vol. 9, pp 222-236, 1972.
    Knox, J. B. and Rolf Lange, "Surface
    Air Pollutant Concentration Frequence
    Distributions:  Implications for
    Urban Air Pollution Modeling,"
    University of California, Lawrence
    Livermore Laboratory, Report UCRL-
    73887, 1972.
    Boris, Jay P. and D. L. Book, "Flux-
    corrected Transport I. Shasta, A Fluid
    Transport Algorithm that Works," (in
    press, Journal of Computational Physics)
    (1972).
               APPEMDICIES

SUMMARIES OF LABORATORY CAPABILITIES
AND EXPERIENCE-ATMOSPHERIC MODELING.

     The following summaries of Laboratory
capabilities and experience have been
prepared with the view that we are
interested in developing and utilizing
verified numerical simulation models of
environmental and atmospheric systems for
purposes of expanding understanding of
mechanisms and improving our capabilities
of evaluation and essessment.  Experimental
capabilities that contribute to model
verification and/or development are also
included.

ABC LABORATORIES

    Organization                  Appendix

1.  ARATm>NOAA (Air Resources        A
    Atmospheric Transport and
    Diffusion Laboratory) Oak
    Ridge, Term.

 2  ARL-NRDS (Air Resource            B
    Laboratory, National Reactor
    Development Station) Dr. Jack
    Van der Hoven

 3.  ARL-Washington; Director:         c
    Dr. Lester Machta

4.  ANL (Argonne National Laboratory) D

5.  BNL (Brookhaven National          E
    Laboratory)

6.  HASL (Health and Safety           F
    Laboratory-New York)

7.  LASL (Los Alamos Scientific       G
    Laboratory)

 8.  T.TiT» (Lawrence Livermore           H
    Laboratory)

 9.  PNWL (Pacific Northwest           i
    Laboratories)

The atmospheric sciences research synoptic
contained in these appendicies were, in
part, based on presentations at the Divi-
sion of Biological and Environmental
Research October Review, and on other
materials supplied by Program Leaders.
                                          -134-

-------
                APPENDIX A

ARATDL-NOAA. Dr. Frank Gifford. Director

    Mathematical models related to air
pollution problems have been developed
of the following kinds:  1) urban air
pollution concentration models; 2)
buoyant plume rise models; 3) boundary
layer dynamical models.

Urban Air Pollution Concentration
(Air Quality) Model

    An attempt to model the area source
component of air pollution has led to the
development of a simple urban air pollution
model.'>2,3  This model is based on the
principle that the spatial variation of
area source strengths is slow compared to
the cross-wind variation of the point-
source plume concentration pattern, and
so this latter variation can be neglected.
In addition it is shown that the principal
contribution to urban area source concen-
trations is from sources in the immediate
vicinity of the receptor point.  These
facts result in a particularly simple
model of urban air pollution concentrations
which, however, consistently equals or
out-performs for more complex models.  Our
model has been applied to estimating urban
air pollution of nonreacting pollutants on
true scales from 1 hour to the annual
average, to estimating short-term seasonal
and annual patterns of air pollution
concentration in urban regions, and to
time-varying problems such as the CO con-
centration variation due to daily traffic
fluctuations.  Most recently Hanna4 has
made the simple model the basis for an
analysis of the problem of photochemical
smog, with good results.

Buoyant Plume Rise

    A model of buoyant plume rise has
been developed in a series of papers by
Briggs.5'9  This model assumes continuity
and attempts to evaluate the effect of
entrainment into the plume of ambient air.
Depending on the rate of rise of the plume
through the atmosphere (i.e. on down-wind
distance), the plume-rise is controlled
successively by:  1) self-generated
turbulence, near the source; 2) ambient
atmospheric turbulence, farther downwind;
and 3) passive diffusion at great distances.
The resulting plume-rise equations describe
the behavior of plumes from isolated, tall
stacks successfully, over a very wide range
of buoyancy values.  Hanna, °*   using
Briggs  basic plume model, has incorporated
the effect of moisture condensation  for
application to cooling tower plume rise
problems.  Briggs^ 1s considering various
applications to plumes from small sources,
such as foundry cupolas, chemical process
vents, and so on, including plumes with
negative buoyancy.

Boundary Layer Dynamical Model

    In order to evaluate various problems
related to the meteorological effects of
heat dissipation, from the scale of cool-
ing ponds up to the urban scale, a
numerical-dynamical model of flow in the
planetary boundary layer is being devel-
oped.  The goal is a fully three-dimension-
al, time-varying model operating on a
scale of about 100 by 100 km.  This model
will have much in common with several
existing numerical models of the planetary
boundary layer.  In particular, turbulence
will be fairly highly parameterized.  It
will, however, differ from these in that
most numerical detail will be included in
the lower layers, where the phenomena
occur that we wish to investigate.  A
successful one-dimensional version has
been discussed by Nappo.'^

APPENDIX A REFERENCES

1.  Gifford, F. A. and S. R. Hanna, "Urban
    Air Pollution Modeling," ARATDL
    Contribution #37, 1970.

2.  Hanna, S. R., "A Simple Method of Cal-
    culating Dispersion from Urban Area
    Sources," JACPA, Vol. 21, 12, pp 774-
    777, 1971.

3.  Gifford, F. A. and S. R. Hanna,
    "Modeling Urban Air Pollution," ARATDL
    Contribution #63, 1972.

4.  Hanna, S. R., "Analysis of Photochemical
    Smog Using a Simple Dispersion Model,"
    ARATDL, 1972.

5.  Briggs, G. A., "Plume Rise," USAEC
    Critical Review Series.

6.  Briggs, G. A., "Mathematical Analysis
    of Chimney Plume Rise and Dispersion,"
    Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London A 265,
    pp 197-203, 1969.
                                          -135-

-------
7.  Briggs, G. A., "Some Recent Analyses
    of Plume Rise Observations," ARATDL
    Contribution #7, 1970.

8.  Briggs, G. A., "Plume Rise:  A Recent
    Critical Review," Nuclear Safety,
    Vol. 12, No. 1, 1971.

9.  Briggs, G. A., "Discussion-Chimney
    Plumes in Neutral and Stable Surround-
    ings,"Atmospheric Environment,
    Pergamon Press, Vol. 6, pp 507-510,
    1972.

10. Hanna, S. R., "Meteorological Effects
    of Cooling Tower Plumes," ARATDL
    Contribution #48, 1971.

11. Hanna, S. R., "Cooling Tower Plume
    Rise and Condensation," ARATDL
    Contribution #53, 1972.

12. Nappo, C. J., "Status Report on the
    ATDL Planetary Boundary Layer
    Numerical Modeling.Progra," ARATDL,
    1972.
                APPENDIX B
ARL-NRDS
    The work at this branch of ARL is
primarily concerned with experimental
meteorological aspects of reactor safety
and siting.  Examples of recent work
include:   a) the observation of tetroon
trajectories in the boundary layer of the
Snake River Valley and description of the
boundary layer kinematics in a region with
complex terrain; b) execution of diffusion
experiments and their interpretation in
terms of the measured diffusion environment;
c) experiments directed at investigating
the diffusion of pollutants in very light
wind conditions; and d) the diffusion of
pollutants in building wakes.
                APPENDIX C
ARL-Washington
    The Air Resources Laboratory (Washing-
ton) has a long history of contributions
related to:  a) the distribution of radio-
active material in the atmosphere on local,
regional, and global scales; b) study of
global scale transport and diffusion
mechanisms from actual  data regarding
radioactive tracers, and c) the development
of a global model  for estimating the distri-
bution of pollutants released in the
atmosphere.^  Dr Machta has recently
reported that ARL's future research
interests include:  a) regional and global
scale tracer experiments; b) the investi-
gation of air quality trends for the
evaluation of the effectiveness of
emission controls, and c) the evaluation.
and interpretation of data from global
background monitoring stations.

APPENDIX C REFERENCE

1.  Machta, L., "Mauna Loa and Global
    Trends in Air Quality," BAMS, Vol. 53,
    No. 5, pp 402, 1972.   (Presented as
    the 1972 Harry Wexler Memorial
    Lecture.)


                APPENDIX D

ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY

    The Argonne National  Laboratory has in
the past few years made significant contri-
butions in experimental meteorology,
atmospheric modeling, and the development
of assessment techniques to land use plan-
ning.  In experimental meteorology efforts
include:  a) micrometeorological investi-
gations over land and water, and in partic-
ular a study of the heat budget of southern
Lake Michigan; b) the development of micro-
meteorological instrumentation, and c)
comparative measurements of wind, temper-
ature, and relative humidity in rural and
urban areas oriented at description of the
urban heat island phenomena.  In regard to
modeling and as part of an interagency
research effort, the Argonne group
developed a simplified model for estimating
S02 and particulate pollutants over the
Chicago area with published examples of
model performance.

APPENDIX D REFERENCES

1.  Croke, E. J., "Chicago Air Pollution
    Systems Analysis Program-Final Report,"
    ANL/ES-CC-009, 1971.

2.  Cohen, Croke, Hunter, Norco, and
    Roberts, "Long Range Planning in Air
    Resource Management," ANL/ES-CC-008,
    1971.

3.  Croke and Norco, "Federal  Laboratories
    as Centers of Excellence in the
    Environmental Sciences," Contribution
    #24 to the Interagency Conference on
    the Environment, 1972.
                                          -136-

-------
                APPENDIX E

BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY

     The Atmospheric Science Group at
Brookhaven has been studying the transport
and diffusion of pollutants from point and
area sources for a number of years with
many contributions in this area.  Their
present plans include the development of a
plume diffusion model including explicitly
the effects of wind shear, space and time
variable diffusion coefficients, and decay
and removal mechanisms.   Extensive experi-
mental work has been performed to verify
the present BNL plume model for estimating
surface air concentrations at close-in
distances.  Future studies include the
areas of chemical transformations, regional
sulfur budgets including natural sources,
nucleation properties of air contaminates
in their various chemical and physical
forms, and field studies of plume diffusion
over water surfaces.

APPENDIX E REFERENCE

1.  Michael, P., "The Effect of Wind and
    Turbulence Profiles Upon Atmospheric
    Dispersion," Conference on Air Pollu-
    tion Meteorology, Raleigh, North
    Carolina, April 5-9, 1971.


                APPENDIX F

HASL-HEALTH AND SAFETY LABORATORY

     The HASL has the mission of integrated
data acquisition and reporting of data on
atmospheric levels of radioactivity as
obtained from various platforms of obser-
vation including balloons, aircraft, and
surface air monitoring stations.  Reports
are issued quarterly and data is made
available to the scientific community in
as timely a fashion as possible.  The
Laboratory Director has recently expressed
an interest on the part of his organization
to apply their capabilities to problems of
global pollution including heavy metals
and the potential use of freon as a global
tracer.

                APPENDIX G

LLL-LAWRENCE LIVERMORE LABORATORY

     The LLL has engaged in the atmospheric
modeling of various geometrical scales for
over a decade; some of the basic modeling
efforts are:

    1.  ZAM:  The Zonal  Atmospheric Model
(ZAM) is a two dimensional hydrodynamic
model including the water and radiation
budgets of the atmosphere that is designed
for testing theories and mechanisms of
climatic change over extensive periods of
integration.

    2.  2BPUFF:  The 2BPUFF model treats
the long range transport, diffusion and
deposition of small particulate and gaseous
materials originating from volume source of
known pollutant inventory including decay
and dry and wet deposition removal mecha-
nisms.  The model has been extensively
tested against AEC experimental data of
various types.

    3.  The LLL-air pollution model is a
multi-box model for calculating the time
history of the vertical  mean and surface
air concentration of passive or photo-
chemical pollutants in the San Francisco
Bay Area taking into account transient
(historical) meteorological conditions,
complex terrain, and time and space
variable configuration of the marine
inversion surface.

    Some models under development or in
testing include:

    1.  A new Mass Consistent Wind Field
model for purposes of initializing
regional wind data, inversion topography
data  and imposing requirements of kinematic
boundary conditions and three dimensional
nondivergence to drive multi-box air
pollution models for radioactive or con-
ventional pollutants.

    2.  A three dimensional particle
diffusion code to calculate the transport
and diffusion of a puff in a transient
atmospheric boundary layer.

    3.  A global model for calculating the
equilibrium distribution of pollutants
evolving from the emissions of stratospheric
aircraft including photochemistry and the
horizontal eddy, vertical eddy diffusivities,
and mean motion transports as evaluated
from  the observed characteristics of the
general circulation of the atmosphere.

    4.  Alteration of the multi-box air
pollution to treat radioactive pollutants
on a  regional basis and incorporating the
flux  corrected transport algorithm for
                                          -137-

-------
minimizing artificial diffusion effects in
the solution of difference equations.

APPENDIX G REFERENCES

1.  MacCracken, M C. (1970), "Tests of Ice
    Age Theories using a Zonal Atmospheric
    Model",  LLL Report, UCRL-72803.

2.  Crawford, T.V.  (1966), "A Computer Pro-
    gram for Calculating the Atmospheric
    Dispersion of Large Clouds", LLL
    Report UCRL-50179.

3.  Knox, J. B., T.V. Crawford, K.R.
    Peterson, and W. K. Crandall, "Compari-
    son of IB and USSR Methods of Calcul-
    lating the Transport, Diffusion, and
    Deposition of Radioactivity", LLL
    Report UCRL-51054.

4.  MacCracken, M.C., T.V. Crawford,
    K.R. Peterson, and J.B. Knox,
    "Development of a Multi-Box Air
    Pollution Model and Initial
    Verification for the San Francisco
    Bay Area",  LLL Report UCRL-73348.

5.  Dickerson, M.H., "Summary of Research
    Related to Mass Consistent Wind Field
    Analysis for the San Francisco Bay
    Area", LLL Report UCRL-74265.

               APPENDIX H

LASL-LOS ALAM3S SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY

     Newly formed atmospheric sciences
group at LASL has expressed interest in an
integrated experimental-calculational
approach to a number of atmospheric or
environmental problems.  Of immediate in-
terest are studies of the mesoscale fields
of motion and precipitation of the LASL
site and their relationship to data regard-
ing subsurface water transport of various
materials.  Other studies are focused on
the atmospheric science aspects of the
Four Corner Power Plant Complex.

               APPENDIX I

PACIFIC NORTHWEST LABORATORIES

     The PNL has been a major facility for
AEC sponsored research work bearing on
experimental diffusion meteorology, the
structure of turbulence in the boundary
layer, precipitation scavenging in regard
to both its theoretical and experimental
aspects, full scale in-cloud scavenging
experiments using multiple tracers,
determination of washout and rainout
coefficients for particulate material and
gaseous material in the atmosphere, and
deposition of fine particulate material.
The following references summarize some
of their recent contributions.

APPENDIX I REFERENCES

1.  Pacific Northwest Laboratory;  Annual
    Report for 1970 to the USAEC Division
    of Biology and Medicine, Volume II:
    Physical Sciences, Part 2, Radiological
    Sciences. May, 1972.

2.  Pacific Northwest Laboratory:  Annual
    Report for 1971 to the USAEC Division
    of Biology and Medicine, Volume II:
    Physical Sciences, Part 2, Radiological
    Sciences.  May, 1972.

NASA LABORATORIES

     NASA Laboratories providing input to
this summary are listed below.
    Organization
1.  NASA-ARC
Ames Research
Center
2.  NASA-CTSS  Goddard Institute
               of Space Sciences
Appendix

    J


    K
3.  NASA
 4.  NASA
Langley Research
Center

Lewis Research
Center

Marshall Space
Flight Center
    M
 5.  NASA      Marshall Space         N
The author gratefully acknowledges the
cooperation of Dr. Ilia Poppoff for
arranging for the information from the
NASA-Research Centers on atmospheric
modeling and related topics.
                APPENDIX J
NASA-ARC
     Current ARC research includes the
following:  a) the modeling of the
vertical distribution of carbon compounds
in the natural stratosphere and mesosphere,
b) studies of jet engine emissions, c)
the development of plans for high altitude
jet aircraft emissions experiment, d) the
development of an air pollution model for
the immediate vicinity of an airport, and
e) aircraft sampling, data acquisition and
interpretation regarding photochemical
                                         -138-

-------
smog for proposed NSF scope of work with
LLL and the BAAPCD.

APPENDIX J REFERENCE

1.  Whitten, R.C., J.S. Sims and
    R.P. Turoo, "A Model of Carbon
    Compounds in the Stratosphere and
    Mesosphere," presented at The
    Conference on Sources and Sinks of CO
    and Methane in the Atmosphere, August,
    1972, St. Petersburg, Florida.
                APPENDIX K
NASA-GISS
Research at the NASA-GISS is focused
on stratospheric chemistry and global
pollution.  The objective of this program
is to determine the global distribution of
minor constituents of the troposphere and
stratosphere, and the corresponding sur-
face UV levels, produced by the addition
of specific pollutants, including molecular
species and aerosols.  The approach to the
problems is to develop a stratospheric-
troposheric model with coupled photo-
chemistry and dynamics, and to use this
model to calculate the distribution of
minor constituents and the transmission of
UV through the atmosphere.  It is proposed
that a hierarchy of models be developed
spanning the simplest (results in 1972) to
the most complex - a three dimensional
dynamic interaction, model (results in 1976).

                APPENDIX L

NASA-LEWIS RESEARCH CENTER

     The Lewis Research Center activities
emphasize research in aircraft engine
emissions and pollution modeling.  In-house
and grant efforts include:  a)  the deter-
mination of the thermo-transport properties
of jet fuels for a range of temperatures,
pressures, and fuel/air ratios, b)  the
development of computer programs of
pollutant formation of combustors,  and
c) chemical kinetic modeling of the near-
field jet wake.

                APPENDIX M

NASA-LANGLEY RESEARCH CENTER

     During FY-73 the NASA Langley Research
Center is initiating atmospheric modeling
 programs in the following areas:  a)
simulation of coupled atmospheric and
oceanic hydrodynamics on a global scale
including a radiation transport submodel,
land hydrology, and simple atmospheric
chemistry by 1974, b) develop dynamical
thermodynamical models of the boundary
layer with a pollutant dispersal submodel,
c) severe storm simulation model, and d)
a model of airport air pollution.

                APPENDIX N

NASA-MARSHALL SPACE FLIGHT CENTER

     The Marshall Space Flight Center
research activities reflect a long history
of applied research to environmental and
atmospheric problems associated with space
flights or activities.  They include the
study of the rate of rise and final size
of clouds originating from rocket engine
exhaust; the development of a multilayer
diffusion model to predict the concentra-
tions of constituents for the Space Shuttle
Environmental Impact Statement with the
model including the effect of vertical and
horizontal variation in meteorological
inputs for the calculation; studies of the
chemical transformations and removal mech-
anisms of HCL injected into the upper
atmosphere or the stratosphere.

FIGURE CAPTIONS

Figure 1  Smoke concentrations and
          emissions in the United Kingdom.
          	, Average concentration;
          	, emission.1
Figure 2  Average distribution of the
          atmospheric pressure at sea level
          during the winter seasons,
          December to February inclusive,
          of 1955-56 and 1956-57, before
          the East Pacific equatorial
          warming, and 1957-58 at the peak
          of that warming.4

Figure 3  Carbon Monoxide concentrations at
          San Francisco on July 10-11, 1968.

Figure 4  Carbon Monoxide Concentration
          versus Frequency, San Francisco. .
                                          -139-

-------
         •8
         s
                                                 l  .2
                                                   V
                                                 0
                1958  60    62    64   66   68
                             year
FIGURE 1. Smoke concentrations and emissions in the United Kingdom.
           	, Average concentration;	, emission.
                              -140-

-------
                     (00*     i20-      140*     i*Q*      iw*      WO*     140-      120*     KM*

Fio. 2 Avorntfo diHtrilwtion of atmoHphoric pressure at sea lovol during tho winter t^oanonn, DocomlxT i»
Kubrimry inrluHivu, of ll)riA-0(i and 11)50-57, boforo tho  Kant Pacific uijimtorial wanning, and
iho poak of that wanning.
                                              -141-

-------
 CL
 CL
*•  3
8  2
    00
            -Computed vertical average
                I
          6    12
          July 10
                     I
                I
18   00
                                          'bserved
00
6    12    18
   July 11
 (a)  San Francisco
Fig.  3-  Carbon Monoxide Concentrations at San Francisco
         on July  10-11,  1968
      0.03
         0.01     1    10    50    90

               Frequency — %of
           concentration is exceeded
                                      Larsen model cone
                                      Bay area model
                                      surf cone
                                      Observed surf cone

                                      Bay area model
                                      av cone
 Fig. ^.   Carbon Monoxide Concentration versus Frequency,
           San  Francisco
                           -142-

-------
         DISCUSSION OF THE PRESENTATIONS BY WARREN JOHNSON AND JOE KNOX
Question:  Just as in the case of standards,
where the comment was made this morning
that perhaps it is time to set standards in
certain fields without more supportive re-
search, I think it is also time with re-
gard to models that the people in the pro-
grams have some guidance, perhaps defined
on the federal level, that would recommend
a model system for an urban area, for a
larger region, for a continental situation.
Do you see the possibility for some feder-
al recommendation for model development?
There is a wide series of models to choose
from.  I do think it is time that we had
some definitive guidance to people on the
program levels on what is the best model
to use.

Johnson;  I agree with you actually.  This
is one of the reasons behind the UNAMAP
concept, although we'd probably put a clause
in that we wouldn't hold ourselves liable
or something like that, but at least it
would be understood that models in this
computer library had been endorsed, had
been checked by us against all available
data, and that we considered them to be
the best available model for that appli-
cation.  So it is an endorsement.  I think
this really is needed to bring some organ-
ization into the field for the users who
aren't specialists and don't have the re-
sources to fool around evaluating everything
themselves.  On the other hand, this would
not prohibit a group from using another
model, one which they prefer for some
reason.  I don't know what the legal require-
ments will be in this case, but it is
clear to me that there would be require-
ments on them, more or less the burden of
proof, to indicate that the model indeed
does work, that it has been checked against
data, that it has been validated, and so
forth.  I know a lot of the plans are
coming in with models that really have
not been thoroughly tested.

Question;  Would you care to comment on the
use of analog approaches, say wind tunnels
and water tanks?

Johnson;  I think for certain applications
that's practically the only way to go,
particularly for the small scale.  For
certain situations, such as location of
monitoring stations in an urban area or
perhaps considering the effects of stacks,
building effects on stacks, downdrafts
from stacks, and how high does the stack
on a building have to be before you are
out of trouble, the small scale problem,
I think, is probably treated best in the
wind tunnel.  Along these lines we are
trying to develop a very modest facility
at Research Triangle Park to examine these
types of problems.  The water channel is
amenable to other problems, but there is
a basic limitation in the scaling, as I'm
sure you're aware, and it can only get
so large before it becomes non-similar to
the atmosphere.

Question;  If you have the usual validation
of a model, such as I would visualize the
RAPS validation to be, the model being
able to predict the air quality in an
urban area with a large number of sources
present (a situation in which I envision
that many errors would cancel out), could
you then trust the model to give you the
effect of adding an additional point source
in your city?  This is the land use problem
really.

Knox;  Actually, I think there are a couple
elements to model validation, and we didn't
have the chance to explore it fully.  One
point I would like to make is that a very
powerful technique is, "Does the model
reproduce the time history at the receptor
when you have used an average time on your
data that's compatible with the travel time
across the zone in your box?"  I was running
out of time previously, but (thank you for
the question) it turns out that for those
curves I presented, that is exactly the
case.  The time to go across a box with
transport is comparable to the averaging
time used at the monitoring station.  So
those signals are roughly comparable.  If
we had a much shorter observing time at the
monitoring station, we would not have
matched because the averaging  time in the
calculation and observation were not ident-
ical.  The next criterion, which I did have
a chance to discuss, was the capability to
reproduce frequency distributions.  If you
calculate with a noisy model, I'm reasonably
convinced you won't hit.  If you hit, it's
because of a cancellation of errors.  Now
there's one other level of validation, and
that's down at the assumption and model
level.  Indeed, the answer is not does
the end product fit;  that's only one
type of test.  The other thing that's
required is that the assumptions are
correct.  Namely, if you have a power law
                                          -143-

-------
assumption in the mixed layer, is that
reasonably true?  If you have averaged your
terrain over some kind of interval, what
does that do to your calculation?  If
you have errors in height of the mixing
layer and its configuration over the region,
what kind of errors do those produce?
Finally, I would look at the monitoring
station.  I am horribly concerned about
the representivity of monitoring stations
and the purpose for which they are put out.
If you want to document exposure to the
policeman at the intersection, I think you
put out one kind of monitoring station.  If
you want to validate the ability of a model
to calculate air quality in the middle of
a residential area or 500 feet from the
highway, you put out another kind of moni-
toring station.  Tapes with all these
kinds of things mixed up may be misused
unless you very carefully go through and
know which data you're treating, why the
monitoring station was put there, and how
are the data expressed.  Warren,do you want
your two minutes?

Johnson:  I think you did very well on that
one.  I just wanted to add one thing.  What
you mentioned, Paul, I think is more in
the line of what I consider a calibration
in that you're comparing observed air
quality data with predictive values from
the model.  As you indicate, since there
are many elements in a model that can be in
error, they can compensate and you can end
up with a reasonably good comparison when
you have a model which won't transfer to
another city or perhaps to another source
distribution.  But the key, I think, for
instance in our own approach in the re-
gional air pollution study, has been in
designing specific experiments for
evaluating individual submodels as Joe
indicated.  Try to get the pieces right,
and then you'll have the whole right.
That's the approach we hope to take.
                                         -144-

-------
                 THE LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ON AIR QUALITY

                                 Dr. Ronald A. Venezia
                            Chief, Land Use Planning Branch
                                Office of Air Programs
                         U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
                          Research Triangle Park, N.C.  27711
     The growing recognition of the poten-
tially adverse environmental impact of
transportation systems is well documented
by 15 years of Federal legislation.
Legislative history reflects increasingly
stringent corrective policies to minimize
adverse environmental impacts.

     In terms of transportation legisla-
tion, there has been a growing concern
that the planning process itself be truly
"continuing, comprehensive, and coordinated"
and that environmental objectives, includ-
ing air pollution abatement, be given due
consideration.  Moreover, the necessity to
provide a viable alternative to the
automobile through acceptable mass trans-
portation is gaining emphasis in policy
objectives and in financial commitment.
However, Federal expenditures for mass
transit remain meager in comparison to
highway expenditures.  For example, in
1971 Federal highway funding amounted to
over U-l/2 billion dollars, while for the
same period Federal urban mass transit
funding amounted to only 280 million
dollars.

     Federal air quality legislation was
first enacted in 1955 to establish a
national commitment to research for air
pollution abatement.  Research was
expanded in the early 60's to include
the study of air pollution from automo-
biles.  Responsibility for air pollution
abatement remained totally with the
States until the Clean Air Act of 1963,
when Congress authorized Federal interven-
tion primarily in air pollution problems
of an inter-state nature.  In 1965
Congress established national emission
standards for new autos.  The 1967 Air
Quality Act, although significant in the
evolution of air quality legislation, did
not specifically address pollution from
transportation sources.  The most recent
Federal legislation, the Clean Air Amend-
ments of 1970, impacts directly on the
design and operation of transportation
systems through several provisions,
including:  State implementation plans
that, if necessary, must include land use
and transportation controls to achieve
national standards; fuel additive regula-
tions; inspection, maintenance, and
retrofit (installation of additional
control devices) programs for in-use
motor vehicles; grant programs; and
emission standards for aircraft.

     A major concern is the emission
standards provision.  The Amendments
stipulate that new motor vehicles manufac-
tured in 1975 must emit 90 percent less
carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons than
1970 models.  By 1976, emissions of oxides
of nitrogen must be reduced 90 percent
from those of the 1971 model level.  These
reductions must be maintained for the use-
ful life of the vehicle, defined as 5
years or 50,000 miles, whichever occurs
first.

     As stipulated in the Amendments, each
State submitted to the Environmental
Protection Agency -an air quality implemen-
tation plan showing how the national
ambient air quality standards will be
achieved.  Implementation plans include
emissions limitations, compliance time-
tables, and other measures that may be
necessary to attain and/or maintain pri-
mary (related to health) and secondary
(related to welfare) ambient air quality
standards, including, but not limited to,
land use and transportation controls.

     Primary standards must be achieved
by 1975 and secondary standards within a
reasonable time period.  The degree to
which land use and transportation controls
actually will be necessary to achieve and
maintain air quality standards will be a
function of several factors, including:
l) the degree to which the automobile
industry can produce and market a "clean"
car, 2) the time period for which the car
will actually remain "clean", and 3) the
accuracy of vehicle usage projections and
future operating characteristics in urban
areas.
                                         -145-

-------
     The Clean Air Amendments of 1970 and
the Federal Aid to Highways Act of 1970
exhibit a noteworthy mandate for the
interface between the Environmental
Protection Agency and the Department of
Transportation on the question of air
pollution from transportation.  Section
109 of the Highway Act requires the DOT
Secretary, after consultation with the
EPA Administrator, to develop and promul-
gate guidelines to assure that highways
are consistent with State air quality
implementation plans.  Section 210 of the
1970 Clean Air Act Amendments directs that
grants to States for developing and main-
taining vehicle inspection systems shall
not be made unless the DOT Secretary has
certified to the EPA Administrator that
such an inspection program is consistent
with any highway safety program.  Further-
more, this transportation and environment
interaction at the Federal level will
necessarily stimulate the cooperation of
transportation and air quality agencies
on the state and local levels as well as
promote research of transportation-air
quality relationships.

     In addition to specifying transporta-
tion and air quality goals, Federal legis-
lation has mandated the coordination of
single objective programs and policies to
reduce overlap and conflict.  The National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 further
calls for the alignment of all major pro-
posed Federal legislation, plans, and
programs with a national commitment to
improved environmental quality.  For any
proposed Federal action significantly
affecting the environment, a detailed
environmental impact statement must be made
addressing both the short- and long-run
effects.  Effort must be made to minimize
adverse impacts.

     The National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969, the Clean Air Amendments of 1970,
and portions of the Federal Aid to Highways
Act of 1970 represent significant points in
the evolution of legislation aimed at pro-
tecting the environment from adverse
impacts of transportation.  Together,
these Acts establish a framework for the
inclusion of environmental objectives in
the transportation planning process for
the next few years.  With such a complex
task, no single piece of legislation can
be viewed as static.

     The necessity for readapting our
approach is fully contemplated in the
Clean Air Amendments of 1970, which
require the revision of state implementa-
tion plans and air quality standards when
appropriate.

     Mobile sources are significant con-
tributors to the air pollution problem.
More than 92 percent of the carbon mon-
oxide emissions in 11 urban regions
studied1'  was caused by mobile sources.
Mobile sources in these regions also
account for at least 67 percent of the
hydrocarbon emissions; in four regions,
90 percent or more.  Mobile source con-
tribution to nitrogen oxide emissions
ranged from 23$ in one region up to
in two regions.  Passenger cars account
for the greatest percentage of all mobile
source emissions.  Therefore, air pollu-
tion abatement strategies in many urban
areas must clearly concentrate on reducing
auto emissions either by making the autos
"cleaner" or curtailing auto usage.

     The Clean Air Act directs each State
to formulate an implementation plan that
will demonstrate how the air quality
standards will be achieved by 1975.  The
Act provides for a 2-year extension where
"technology or alternatives" will not be
available soon enough to permit full
implementation; this could extend the
compliance date to 1977.  Transportation
controls are being considered seriously
in many states.  For example, the controls
shown in Table I are being either con-
sidered, proposed, or have been adopted.
Thirty-two regions in seventeen states
were granted a 2-year extension to attain
carbon monoxide and photochemical oxidant
primary standards.  However, 13 regions
will achieve the standards through station-
ary source control and/or the Federal
motor vehicle control program for vehicular
emission control.  Therefore, 19 regions
in 12 states must consider some form of
transportation control to achieve the
standard by 1977.  In addition, there are
sixteen regions in 9 states that were not
given an extension and need transportation
controls to meet the air quality standard
by 1975-  In addition to carbon monoxide
and photochemical oxidants, six regions
require transportation controls for
particulates.

     There is no established definition
of transportation controls.  Regulations
governing the operation, parking, and
maintenance of automobiles, and the design
of highways,  comprise the bulk of proposed
                                          -146-

-------
controls.  The following is an example of
the proposed controls:  inspection, main-
tenance, and retrofit; conversion to
gaseous fuels, and improvement of public
transportation.

     By February 15, 1973, States are
required to submit amendments to their
air quality implementation plans which
specify in detail the types of transporta-
tion controls they will use.  Much has been
written about these controls; they are not
discussed further here.3

     Land use controls generally are
distinct from transportation controls;
they take many forms.  They may be
regulations specifying locations where
some types of polluting activities cannot
take place, locations where some types of
receptors may not be permitted, or loca-
tions where source controls are more
restrictive than elsewhere.  (Source
controls include regulations on fuel use,
industrial processes, emission control
devices, and equipment maintenance.)  Land
use controls also include emission density
regulations; these specify the maximum
emissions per acre of lot area, taking into
account location in an air basin and stack
height.  Land use controls need not be
regulations; a government may influence the
location of polluters and receptors through
advice, economic incentives or disincentives,
and wise acquisition and development of
public land and facilities.  Examples of
land use controls are the following:  per-
mit systems for review of new stationary
sources; zoning regulations that segregate
industrial and residential land uses;
restriction, by easement or purchase of
land, of development around atomic energy
installations and airports; HUD require-
ments that low-income housing projects be
located outside areas of high air pollution;
building set back lines that protect build-
ings and occupants from carbon monoxide
concentrations along major highways; and
subdivision regulations that prevent road
grading and land clearance without adequate
provisions to handle fugitive dust.

     Land use controls are not mentioned in
most state air quality implementation plans.
Where they are mentioned, they generally
amount to no more than a permit system to
control, among many other things, the
location of selected land uses that pol-
lute the air directly through stacks or
indirectly through generated traffic and
induced land development.  There are
several reasons why implementation plan
strategies exclude land use controls.
For one thing, the controls are best used
to avoid the creation of future air
quality problems, while implementation
plans concentrate attention on the abate-
ment of existing pollution.  Implementation
planning guidelines force states to quan-
tify the expected impact of each strategy,
but this is virtually impossible to do
with land use controls .that will affect
future development.  There are extra-
ordinary legal problems associated with
the application of land use controls to
existing activities, particularly if
relocation is required.  Enforcement of
emission density regulations requires
substantially different procedures from
those applied to enforcement of source
controls.  Local communities historically
have used land use controls to allow the
air quality in some industrial and com-
mercial areas to degrade faster and
further than the air quality in residential
areas; with the establishment of national
ambient air quality standards, the legal
status of such degradation (or non-
degradation) policies is in doubt.  For
these and probably more reasons, states
have elected to wait-and-see whether land
use controls will be required to meet the
requirements of the Clean Air Act.

     The National Environmental Policy Act,
the Clean Air Act and the Federal-Aid
Highway Act give planners a strong, but
implicit, mandate to incorporate air
quality considerations in the planning
process.  It is here—not in the identifi-
cation and application of land use and
transportation control strategies, but in
determining how air quality relates to all
aspects of community growth—where the
most interesting challenges lie.  Planning,
for our purposes, is the process of
shaping the growth and change of metropol-
itan areas, cities, small communities, and
sparsely populated regions.  Planners
study the physical, environmental, social,
economic, and political ramifications of
development proposals and resource utiliza-
tion practices.  In light of these studies,
they recommend policy to legislators at
all levels of government.  Thus, planning
encompasses many different disciplines and
kinds of activities.

     There are many problems associated
with merging air quality planning into
this concept of planning.  The most
important problem, and the one that will
                                          -147-

-------
be discussed in the remainder of this
paper, is how land use patterns can be
related to air quality.

     The first attempts at air quality
modeling were made in the late 1950's by
the Division of Air Pollution, U. S.
Public Health Service.  These attempts
used Weather Bureau wind summaries and
the IBM computer to calculate mean
monthly pollution concentration distri-
butions for an entire urban area.
Although the absolute magnitude of the
concentrations could not be verified, the
predicted and observed air quality pat-
terns were generally similar for the test.
run using data from Nashville, Tennessee.
Subsequent refinements by Turner, Clarke,
and others allowed the calculation of
twenty-four hour pollutant concentrations
at one-mile intervals and estimates of
point concentrations from multiple sources.

     The St. Louis Interstate Air
Pollution Study in 1966 resulted in the
development of a more sophisticated modi-
fication of Clarke's model which would
calculate long term (annual) pollutant
concentrations.  This program ultimately
became the Martin-Tikvart Model,5 which
found major uses in the late sixties and
early seventies for control strategy
evaluations in various Federal air pollu-
tion abatement activities, such as Kansas
City and Washington, B.C., and evaluation
of emission standards in a model city for
the National Emissions Standard Study.
After further refinement, the Air Quality
Display Model (AQDM)° was developed.  This
model has been used by the Office of Air
Programs as the quickest and easiest model
to apply when there are severe time re-
straints.  However, it does not evaluate
different control strategies and does not
yield cost results.  When tight time
limitations are not a major factor in a
proposed modeling endeavor, the cost-
oriented Implementation Planning Program
(IPP)7 is used by OAP.  Recent improve-
ments have resulted in a streamlined
version, IPP-2, that can determine a
least cost basis for control equipment
selection for compliance with an emission
limitation and use of source contribution
tables for control strategy development.

     There have been 22 modeling attempts
in 17 Air Quality Control Regions (AQCR's)
using the AQDM for sulphur dioxide and
particulates,  and 9 IPP modeling attempts
for 8 AQCR's.   For particulate matter, a
correlation coefficient greater than 0.7
was generally obtained; in areas not
affected by terrain, a correlation of
greater than 0.8 resulted.  The correla-
tion, for sulphur dioxide was at least 0.8
in most cases.

     The Argonne National Laboratory (ANL)
has been under contract to OAP to develop
a land-use computer submodule of the AQDM
system.  The submodule contains provision
for input of land-use data in a standard
format, estimation of spatial emission
patterns, and the computation and output
of air quality displays in standard AQDM
format.  These displays will indicate the
air quality that will result if the pro-
jected land-use pattern in the region is
realized.  This study will also provide
techniques for evaluating the effect of
proposed emission control strategies on
the air quality, given a projected land-
use plan.  It is planned to test this
submodule using data from the Chicago Air
Quality Control Region.  A procedure will
be provided for evaluating land-use based
emission density regulations.

     In this ANL approach, individual
point source emissions are "homogenized"
on a grid basis.  The growth projections
are considered to generate a spatial
emission pattern based on land area.
Individual point source characteristics
are lost in the process, thus some sort
of average emission parameters must be
estimated.  This is necessary because the
exact location and characteristics of
future point sources cannot be predicted.
ANL made air quality calculations based
on this emission projection approach using
the AQDM, realizing that this model handles
point and area sources separately.  Their
analysis indicated the approach was valid,
provided sufficiently small grids are
used in high emission areas. "

     Environmental Research and Technology,
Inc. also has adopted the AQDM grid system
and aggregation methods to land-use
studies of the New Jersey Hackensack
Meadowlands.9

     A pilot program to project air
quality based on a land-use emission
inventory was developed by ANL.  The
objective of this effort is to develop a
system which would project maximum growth
of both controlled as well as uncontrolled
emissions and display the resulting air
quality.  The purpose of the computer
modeling program is to assess the effec-
tiveness of proposed control regulations
                                         -148-

-------
usiy.g zor.ir.g emission density factors in
~ai;-.tai.-.ing air quality, considering the
future growth and development of the
region.  Cook County, Illinois, now has
air quality zoning regulations based on
this concept.
             10
     Planners need to evaluate the envi-
ronmental impact of projected growth
within a planning region.  When urban
development has been projected, it
follows that estimates can be made of the
resulting emissions.•'-•'-  The basic objec-
tive of current air quality modeling for
regional planning has been to calculate
the seasonal and annual average concen-
trations for the pollutants of interest
(sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen
oxides, hydrocarbons, and total suspended
particulates.)  The emission patterns
associated with various possible land uses
are projected for the future.  If the
forecast is to be of real value, the
model must be flexible enough to treat
area sources of various shapes, accommodate
different combinations of emission pat-
terns, and accept local meteorological and
topographical data.

     Unless the regional plan and air
quality model can accurately simulate the
relative air quality impact of various
land uses, i.e., residential, industrial,
recreational, etc., it is not possible to
rank planning alternatives.  Also, if
emission density zoning regulations were
used, it would be impossible to determine
the limits to industrial and other develop-
ment.  Therefore, some greater degree of
sophistication to the model, other than a
proportional increase based on some
economic, demographic, or other factor,
must be developed.  Further, the model
grid size should be small enough to allow
reasonable application of planning
techniques—about 1 to U square kilometers
is considered appropriate.  The averaging
time should be at least seasonal, with some
appreciation of peak values that may occur
no more than once a year.

     The classical Gaussian models, with
the variations by Martin-Tikvart, Hanna-
Gifford, ANL, ERT, and others, have been
tailored to land use planning applications
and have shown fairly good correlation, as
discussed above.  The employment of more
complicated numerical grid-element models,
using conservation of mass procedure, can
accomodate variations in topography,
meteorology, and emission sources.  These
models are more appropriate to micro-
scale urban areas and more accurately
represent the real phenomena, particularly
in the near field of roadways.12  These
models also can handle chemically reactive
materials.  However, it is not yet obvious
that urban planners have need for photo-
chemical pollution predictions.  It is
possible that future, more sophisticated
planning would require modeling of photo-
chemical oxidants for decisions on land
use and development.  Complete validation
of this application of numerical modeling
is still in the research stage.

     There are three types of errors in
non-reactive dispersion modeling:  errors
in the estimates of the emissions, errors
in estimates of meteorological parameters.,
and errors caused by the model not repre-
senting closely enough the transport and
dispersion processes in the atmosphere.
Point source models in general, where
parameters are relatively simple and
understood, are accurate within a factor
of 2.13  Multiple source models are more
inaccurate, up to factors of 3 to U.
Longer term averages tend to be more
accurate.  The most difficult task is to
predict short time averages in local
areas.  However, the recent SRI model for
CO was very successful in predicting low
concentrations (l to l6 ppm) in San Jose,
California, within 3 ppm for 80$ of the
hours.-^  Conservation of mass models
involve the use of coefficients that are
not as well understood as those used in
Gaussian models.  There are still inade-
quate validation data available to assess
their accuracy.  However, they are the
only approach for accounting for photo-
chemical reactions and variable meteoro-
logical conditions.

     A planning area that is surrounded
by a high background ambient air concen-
tration typified by many industrial areas
requires precise modeling; hence the
difference between acceptable alternative
plans and the Federal Air Quality Standard
is small.  Microscale considerations must
be employed to allow for industrial growth
and minimize the receptor impact.

     The Office of Air Programs, EPA, will
soon have an operational computerized data
storage system of some 100,000 point
sources and over 3>000 area sources
located in every county of the United
States.  This program is called the
National Emissions Data System (NEDS),
and, together with the emission factors
                                         -149-

-------
file, will allow ready calculation of
regional emissions for an accurate data
base for Air Quality Modeling.15

     There is considerable research under-
way on models.  However, more is needed
to better accomodate the variations in
topography, meteorology, localized struc-
tures, and photochemical reactions.  Also
needed is a nationwide approach to use the
above mentioned NEDS data on a regional
basis without extensive and expensive
local computer facilities.

     Finally, there must be new instru-
ments developed to measure meteorological
and air quality parameters remotely and
automatically.  The validation of the more
promising numerical models will require
many more measurements if their potential
advantage and precision are to be obtained.
1.
           REFERENCES

State Implementation Plans, submitted
to EPA, GAP, January 1972.
2.  EPA, OAP, Emission Inventory Studies.

3.  Institute of Public Administration
    and Teknekron, Inc., Evaluating Trans-
    portation Controls to Reduce Motor
    Vehicles Emissions in Major Metropoli-
    tan Areas;  An Interim Report, March
    1972.

k.  Environmental Protection Agency,
    Office of Air Programs, Standards
    Development and Implementation
    Division, "Summary of Diffusion
    Modeling for Air Quality Control
    Regions Status Report", Nov. 17, 1971.

5.  Martin, D. 0., and Tikvart, J. A.,
    A General Atmospheric Diffusion Model
    for Estimating the Effects of One or
    More Sources on Air Quality, U. S.
    Department of Health, Education, and
    Welfare, NAPCA (internal document).
    (1969)

6.  AQDM - Nov. 1969, HEW, NAPCA contract
    PH-22-68-60 prepared by TRW.

7.  Air Quality Implementation Plan
    Program - Vol. I Operator's Manual,
    SN-11130, Nov. 1970, EPA contract
    PH-22-68-60 prepared by TRW, Inc.
 8.   Argonne National Laboratory,  Air
     Pollution-Land Use Planning Project,
     Phase I.  Final Report;  July 1971*
     ANL/ES-7.

 9.   Environmental Research and Technology,
     Inc., "Development and Validation of
     a Modeling Technique for Predicting
     Air Quality Levels for the Meadow-
     lands Planning Region, Task 2",
     May 1972, ERT, Cambridge, Mass.

10.   Zoning Laws Study Commission Report
     of Findings and Recommendations to
     the State of Illinois, 77th General
     Assembly, March 1971.

11.   Cruze, A. M. and Bingham, T.  H.,
     Evaluation of Models to Project
     Regional Economic Activity, Research
     Triangle Institute Research Memo
     RM-UlU-723-1, May 1972.

12.   Egan, B. S. and J. R. Mahoney,
     "Numerical Modeling of Advection and
     Diffusion of Urban Area Source
     Pollutants", Journal of Applied
     Meteorology, March 1972, Vol. II,
     P. 312.

13.   Turner, D. Bruce, "Urban Atmospheric
     Dispersion Models - Past, Present,
     and Future", Proceedings of the Semi-
     Annual Conf., Philadelphia, Pa.,
     March 21, 1969, Mid-Atlantic States
     Section, Air Pollution Control
     Association.

lU.   Stanford Research Institute,  Field
     Study for Initial Evaluation of an
     Urban Diffusion Model for Carbon
     Monoxide, prepared under contract
     (APA-3-68(l-69)) for the Environmental
     Protection Agency, June 1971.

15.   Environmental Protection Agency,
     Office of Air Programs, A Guide for
     a Comprehensive Emissions Inventory,
     Feb. 1972.
                                         -150-

-------
                                        TABLE I

                TRANSPORTATION CONTROLS IN STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
                                    February 1972











Illinois/Chicago
Wisconsin/Milwaukee
New Jersey/all
New York/NY -NJ -Conn
Maryland/Baltimore & DC
Pennsylvania/Philadelphia
DC
Virginia/DC
Massachusetts/Boston
Ar Lzona/Phoenix-Tucson
Nevada/Clark-Mohave-Yuma
Ca i if'ornia
South Coast
San Francisco
Bay Area
San Diego
San Joaquin
Sacramento
Texas/all
Alaska/Fairbanks
Oregon/Portland
Colorado/Denver
Washington/Puget Sound
Utah/Wasatch Front
Minnesota/St. Paul
Oh Lo/Dayton





CO
0 rH
•H O
^t-H ^
V) -p
CO C
&H O
LH O




O
O
+
+
0
+
X

X

X
+



o
0
0

o
X
o

CO
c
o
•H
-p
ciQ o
C -H
•H t-i
v; -P
t-i CO
a) CU
ft K



O
0



+
0


+

+
+




O
+


0
o





-p
•H CO
>
K CO




O





+

X

X
X
+
+

o

+



0


T3
C C
CO O
•H
g1^
•H d)
-P CXi
CO (0
ŁŁ
X
+
X

o

+

+
+
+
+
+

+
+
+
+
+

o


0
0
o

rH

<~$
[r t

CO CO
3 e.
O Q)
CU -P
CO CO
o co



o
o

+


+


+

+
+



0

o




d
•r-l
1 ->
CO

f_^
o
O Pi
•H CO
H t:
f> CO
ft EH



O
0

+

+

X
+
+

X
+



0
0


o
X
o
CU
rH
3
tl
CU

O CO
CO CU

Ł* c
f-l CO
o .c
^ o




o




0


+0

+
+



o


o

o






(D CO
CO rH
s o

•a -p
c c
a o
i-i 0
X



o







+

+
+










o = considered

+ = proposed
x = adopted
                                         -151-

-------
                   DISCUSSION OF THE PRESENTATION BY DONALD ARMSTRONG
Ellsaesser:  There is a problem that has
been bothering me for the last couple of
years.  I think that it is crucial to the
modeling effort and to the effort you are
considering too.  The problem is the
apparent lack of correlation between
emission estimates and airborne concen-
trations.  As an example, if you look at
the emission figures for Los Angles, you
find a steady climb up until around 1970,
showing only one dip during the war
years and gas rationing.  On the other
hand, if you look at the airborne concen-
tration data from Los Angeles, you find
essentially no downward trends during
that period.  In fact, if you look at the
war period of 19^2 when the emissions should
have dipped, that is the period when Los
Angeles and the world became aware of Los
Angeles smog.  If you look at the visibility
figures for that period, they show a dras-
tic decline over what they had been a few
years before.  I don't see how the models
themselves are going to resolve this
problem.  It appears to be exterior to the
models.  To me it suggests that there is
something wrong with the way you are
estimating emissions.

Ott:  Part of that is directed toward the
model groups.  Perhaps it would be better
to bring that out at the workshops, be-
cause you're getting into the details of
the validity of the models.

Armstrong:   I would rather, if you could
come to the workshop, discuss that in detail
because the question is very valid.  It
can't be answered very simply because it
involves more than just our application.
It involves Dr. Johnson and his modeling
effort, as well as the basis on which
the standards were set initially.
                                         -152-

-------
                   RESEARCH PROBLEMS AND ISSUES IN THE APPLICATION OF
                      LAND USE CONTROLS TO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                       K.  G.  Croke,  A.  S.  Kennedy,  T.  E.  Baldwin
                           Center for Environmental Studies
                              Argonne National Laboratory
                               Argonne, Illinois  60^39
                                         ABSTRACT

     The relationship between environmental quality,  land use,  and economic development
has raised a series of policy-related research issues with respect to the future direc-
tion of federal, state, and local environmental programs.  Questions regarding whether
land use controls can or should become an integral  part of the environmental protection
program have led to a number of exploratory research efforts sponsored by federal agen-
cies.  This paper describes the general problems addressed by these projects and pre-
sents a summary of the preliminary results of these investigations.
              INTRODUCTION

     In order to evaluate the potential con-
tributions that national laboratories can
make to the research and development of
environmentally-oriented land use guidance
and control practices, it is necessary to
briefly review some of the issues in the
growth of the relationship between land use
control and environmental protection.  This
paper will be confined to a discussion of
the relationship of land use control and air
quality protection programs.

     The legislative mandate requiring some
form of interaction between air quality pro-
grams and land use and transportation plan-
ning has already been referenced in
Dr. Venezia's paper.  This legislation has
in many instances required the federal
Environmental Protection Agency to develop
sets of interpretive guidelines designed to
aid state and local officials in developing
plans which will ensure that their problems
comply with federal regulations.  The major
emphasis of these state plans to date has
been to ensure that sufficient technological
controls would be applied to the major
sources of air pollution within the region
or state to achieve air quality standards.

     Initially, no overt recognition was
given in these plans to the relationship
between the patterns of land use within a
region and the resultant air quality.
Several factors led to the realization that
land use guidance and control may be re-
quired as an integral part of environmental
protection programs if the required stan-
dards were to be achieved and maintained:

1.  Environmental regulations passed in
the early 1970's to achieve air quality
standards were based upon existing emis-
sion sources and locations.   These regu-
lations are subject to obsolescence due
to industrial and population migrations
that radically alter the spatial
emission patterns within a region.

2.  Although federal legislation has
established minimum air quality stan-
dards, no direct provision has been in-
cluded to minimize the future degradation
of air quality in currently "clean"
areas.  The methods of assuring effi-
cient, orderly economic growth in these
areas that is consistent with air quality
objectives are not explicitly addressed
in the federal guidelines.

3.  Application of even the most strin-
gent control technology, particularly  in
the area of automotive emission control,
may not be sufficient to ensure that air
quality standards are attained in many
major metropolitan areas.  Thus supple-
mentary measures involving control of the
demand for urban automotive transporta-
tion may be required to meet certain air
quality standards.

4.  Even if ambient air quality standards
are met in the region as a whole, the
development of special land uses such as
airports and power plants can pose par-
ticularly acute and potentially dangerous
threats to their immediate surroundings.

    These factors give rise to two basic
research questions involving the applica-
tion of land use guidance and control in
the framework of environmental protection.

1.  How can the necessity and potential
effectiveness of controlling land use and
developmental decisions for the purpose
of environmental protection be evaluated?

2.  If such controls are required and
appear to be feasible, how can they be
applied under the legal, administrative,
and planning procedures now employed by
federal and state environmental protec-
tion agencies and state and local
                                          -153-

-------
 agencies  having responsibilities  for land
 use  planning.

 INITIAL RESEARCH ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL/LAND
 USE  PLANNING INTERFACE

      In response to the need for  informa-
 tion regarding  these two basic problem
 areas,  numerous research projects have been
 initiated.   These projects  generally fall
 into two  groups.   The first category con-
 sists of  research aimed at  altering air
 quality models  or air pollution emission
 estimation models,  so that  land use and
 other planning  variables can be used as
 inputs  to project air quality.  Two such
 projects, Argonne's land use/air  quality
 modeling  effort (1971)*  and the Environ-
 mental  Research and Technology, Inc./
 Hackensack-Meadowlands  project (1971),2
 sponsored by the Land Use Planning Branch of
 the  EPA,  had their  major focus in the adap-
 tation  of the federal Environmental Protec-
 tion Agency's Air Quality Display Model for
 the  purpose  of  the  evaluation of  land use
 plans.  Other efforts have  also been made
 by General Electric (1971),3  Stanford Re-
 search  Institute (1972),4 and Argonne
 National  Laboratory (1972a,5  1972b6)  to link
 standard  transportation planning  models to
 emission  and air quality projection models.

      The  second category of study involved
 evaluation of the capability  of the planning
 profession to account for environmental con-
 siderations  in  the  formulation of land use
 plans.  These efforts have  generally  con-
 sisted  of surveys of present  land use plan-
 ning procedures  and institutions  in order
 to evaluate  their present capability  to ex-
 ploit environmental  quality projection and
 control models.   Efforts  in this  area have
 been made by groups  from Alan Voorhees and
 Associates (1971)'  and  the  American Society
 of Planning  Officials  (1970).8  Voorhees
 and  Associates have  published an  air
 quality/land use  planning manual  (1971) and
 the  ASPO  group produced  an  assessment of the
 present land use  planning institutions  in
 their attempts to integrate environmental
 and  land  use planning parameters.

      It is difficult  to characterize  the re-
 sults of  these preliminary research efforts
with respect to the ultimate applicability
 of land use planning  and  control for  envi-
 ronmental protection.  However, certain
 tentative inferences can be drawn:

 1.  While it was  found generally that groups
 responsible for land use planning had been
 sufficiently sensitized to environmental
 issues,  no methods for systematically
 assessing the environmental impacts of
 land use and transportation decisions on
 a routine basis  as yet exist.   Existing
 environmental quality models could not be
 applied  directly in a planning environ-
 ment to  develop  land use policies  and
 plans which  incorporated environmental
 considerations for the following reasons:

 a.   Computerized environmental quality
 models are too complex to be used  on a
 routine  basis;
 b.   Environmental quality models have not
 been adapted to  a planning  environment;
 and
 c.   The  specific parameter  requirements
 of environmental quality models had not
 been successfully matched to general
 planning parameters such as land use,
 employment,  and  population.

 2.   Several  research efforts conducted to
 date have investigated the  feasibility of
 computationally  integrating land use or
 transportation planning models with emis-
 sion and air quality models.   Even though
 considerable progress has been made,  the
 results  of the ANL (1971),6 ERT (1971),9
 and  SRI  (1972)k  efforts have not demon-
 strated  conclusively that traditional
 land use planning and transportation
 models can be successfully  linked with
 the  emission,  transport, and dispersion
 models that  are  now used by environ-
 mental protection agencies.

 3.   The  economic incentives  that induce
 clustering of industries in a  region,
 such as  steel  mills  sited adjacent  to
 water transport  or commercial  buildings
 in central business  districts,  can  en-
 danger air quality in adjacent localized
 areas.   For  example,  it was  found that
 50%  of the industrial  sulfur dioxide
 emissions in the Chicago metropolitan
 area result  from the concentration  of
 industrial complexes  in a four-square
 mile area.   Similarly,  the concentration
 of vehicle mileage  in  the central busi-
 ness  district of the City of Chicago pro-
 duces significantly higher emission rates
 than those found  in outlying areas.  These
 findings would seem to  indicate  that even
 if point-source control technology  can
 safeguard the overall  air quality within
 a region, the tendency of certain eco-
nomic units   to cluster  for reasons of
 locational advantage still endangers
 local air quality.
                                          -154-

-------
4.  Statistical analyses of a Chicago
emission inventory were performed at
Argonne National Laboratory in an attempt
to rank the pollution potential of indus-
tries by estimating the average air pol-
lutant emissions from all industries in
the Chicago area within each given zoning
class.  This study showed that the vari-
ability of emission rates for industries in
the heavy industrial categories was quite
high.  A possible implication of this
finding is that zoning controls or land-
use-based emission controls that exclude
certain standard industrial classes from
environmentally endangered areas cannot at
present be justified on the basis of the
"average" emissions from a given indus-
trial class.

5.  It appears that there is a need for
additional development of dispersion model-
ing, particularly to simulate photochemical
phenomena, fallout, and the effects of topo-
graphical variations.  These methods must be
perfected if the significant impacts of
major changes in urban transportation or
land development are to be accurately iden-
tified and evaluated.  Whether this consti-
tutes the most pressing research need in the
environmental/land use area, however, is
open to question.

PRESENT ANL RESEARCH IN ENVIRONMENTAL/LAND
USE POLICY ISSUES

     Current research at Argonne National
Laboratory is focused on three problem
areas.  The first of these is supported
by the Land Use Planning Branch of the
Environmental Protection Agency and in-
volves an investigation of alternative
classification schemes through which the
air pollution potential of various stan-
dard land uses can be predicted and ranked.
Since zoning classifications proved inade-
quate in explaining the variance of emis-
sions found among industries within the
same category, additional explanatory
variables were explored.  Employment,
process weight, energy utilization, and
acres of land utilized by a variety of
industrial activities were analyzed for
their ability to explain this variance of
emissions.  Preliminary results indicate
that grouping Standard Industrial Classi-
fications (SIC) of industries according to
their average process emission densities
(Ib of emission/acre) provides an effective
device for estimating the emissions asso-
ciated with proposed land use plans.
     A second program that is in progress
at Argonne, sponsored by the National
Science Foundation, involves an attempt
to evaluate the effectiveness of various
environmental transportation system con-
trol policies.  Changes in mass transit
and parking rates in the central business
district of the City of Chicago are being
evaluated as factors influencing commut-
ers to use mass transit systems in place
of private automobiles.  Projected
changes in automotive ridership due to
alteration in these rates and the conse-
quent reduction of emission concentra-
tions  can be estimated using existing
transportation and emission models.  This
study also attempts to estimate the cost
to the mass transit system of supporting
the increased ridership induced by these
changes.  This study should shed some
light on some of the significant rela-
tionships between the economics of urban
transportation systems and air quality in
the urban environment.  Knowledge of
these relationships should also facili-
tate the development of specific economic
policies aimed at reducing transporta-
tion-related air pollution emissions.

     The third effort in progress at
Argonne is directed toward the applica-
tion of air quality models, including a
photochemical model, to evaluate the
impacts of airport operations on air
quality.  Two projects are under way.
One of these is a model development study
sponsored by the FAA (1972).10  The other
is an airport/land use study sponsored by
the Land Use Planning Branch of the
Environmental Protection Agency (1972).11
It is the objective of these projects to
develop an airport air and ground activi-
ty simulation model, using O'Hare Airport
in Chicago as a demonstration site.
Further work is being done to assess the
magnitude of population growth in the
O'Hare vicinity which was induced by the
creation of this major transportation
complex.  The results of these studies
are being combined with the research on
the emission potential of land use and
ground transportation to produce a
methodology for predicting the air quali-
ty impact of airport development.

FUTURE RESEARCH REQUIREMENTS

     On the basis of past and present re-
search efforts in the area of land use
planning and environmental control, we
                                          -155-

-------
are now in a position to suggest some of
the major deficiencies in knowledge which
are likely to constrain the development
of environmental/land use control poli-
cies.  Foremost among these remains the
need for a land use/environmental tax-
onomy which reflects the emission poten-
tial and pollution assimilation capacity
of alternative industrial, residential,
and commercial land uses.  The develop-
ment of such a taxonomy would provide a
foundation for land use control policies,
since these policies must reflect some
objective environmental ranking of pollu-
tion potential in order to justify the
exclusion or segregation of land use ac-
tivities.  Without some performance-
oriented standards to classify industrial,
residential, and commercial land uses, any
locational control over pollution source
clustering would remain a legislatively and
administratively difficult program to
administer..

     The major problems involving the com-
munication of environmental assessment
techniques to land use planning groups
should also have high priority.  Until
such groups become familiar with such
techniques as a regular part of their
planning procedure, the environmental
monitoring of land use plans, federal con-
struction projects, and highway and airport
expansion programs will be extremely
difficult.

     A third area of importance is the
need to assess the economic impacts of
policies that restrict or alter land use
patterns within urban areas.  If the most
economically desirable land use pattern
cannot be realized due to environmental
constraints, the impact on urban land
values and the reduced economic efficiency
resulting from the redistribution of land
usages are likely to be among the more
significant costs of imposing such con-
trols.  If the total costs and benefits
associated with alternative environmental
land use policies are to be evaluated, the
economic impact of this spatial redistri-
bution must be estimated.  The costs of
these policies include not only the impacts
on areas directly affected by environmental
land guidance programs, but also involve
the indirect effects associated with alter-
ations in the pattern of induced growth
that derives from the spatial redistri-
bution of activities.   The siting of a
large airport complex offers one of the
most dramatic examples of a facility that
would be expected to attract large
amounts of related and secondarily in-
duced economic activity contributing to
pollution emissions in the vicinity.

     Finally, a problem area that should
be further investigated involves the de-
sign of legal instruments through which
environmentally-oriented land use poli-
cies can be executed.  The legal  instru-
ments that are now available for the
implementation of environmental land use
policies are still comparatively undevel-
oped.  Even if an environmental/land use
taxonomy were formulated and the costs
and benefits of alternative land alloca-
tions were quantified, questions regard-
ing the legal arrangements required to
effect land use/environmental control
policies will remain.

     The solution to these research ques-
tions would seem to require broadly-
based interdisciplinary research efforts
focused on a series of mission-oriented  -
projects.  Programs such as those des-
cribed in this paper now being pursued in
national laboratories could establish
the precedent for future environmental
research efforts.  Examples of this
prototypical research in other national
laboratories include the Oak Ridge
Regional Madeling Project  (1972)Ya and
the NASA growth monitoring programs
(1972).13  We suggest that national
laboratories working in conjunction with
federal, state, and local environmental
protection agencies and the academic
community can provide an effective mech-
anism for attacking this multifaceted
physical, economic, and societal problem
area.
                                         -156-

-------
 *A. S. Kennedy, et al, "Air Pollution
Land Use Planning Project Phase I."  A
report prepared for the Office of Air
Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, ANL/ES-7 (1971).
 ZR. S. Yunghans, E. B. Feinberg, and
B.  H. Willis, "Air Resource and Land Use
Planning - The New Jersey Approach."
Paper presented at the Conference on the
Relation of Land Use and Transportation
Planning Air Quality Management (Rutgers
U., New Brunswick, New Jersey, 1971).
 3General Electric Company, "Final Report
on Study of Air Pollution Aspects of
Various Roadway  Configurations."  Study
for New York City Contract No. 209624.
(1971)
 4F. L. Ludwig and W. F. Dabberdt,
"Evaluation of the APRAC-1A Urban Diffu-
sion Model for Carbon Monoxide."(Stanford
Research Institute, Stanford, California,
1972).
 5T. D. Wolsko, M. T. Matthies, and
R.  E. Wendell, "Transportation Air Pollu-
tant Emissions Handbook." Argonne National
Laboratory Report ANL/ES-15.  (1972)
 6E. J. Croke, K. G. Croke, and J. E.
Norco, "The Role of Transportation Demand
Models in the Projection of Future Urban
and Regional Air Quality."  Paper deliv-
ered at International Congress of Trans-
portation Conferences  (TRANSPO 72)
(Washington, D. C., June, 1972).
 7A. M. Voorhees and Associates and
Ryckman, Edgerley, Tomlinson and Associ-
ates, "A Guide for Reducing Air Pollution
Through Urban Planning."  A report pre-
pared for the Office of Air Programs,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
(1971)
 8J. W. Reps and V. Curtiss, "The Land
Use Policies."  A paper presented at the
National Conference of the American
Society of Planning Officials  (New York
City, 1970).
 9Byron H. Willis, "Task 3—The Evalua-
tion and Ranking of Land Use Plans for
the Hackensack Meadowlands."  Prepared
for the New Jersey Department of Environ-
mental Protection.  (ERT Doc. P-244-3,
Environmental Research Technology, Inc.,  .
Lexington, Mass., August 1972).
10D. M. Rote, et al, "Monitoring and
Modeling of Airport Air Pollution," pre-
pared for International Congress of
Transportation Conferences (TRANSPO 72).
(Washington, D. C., June, 1972).
nJ. E. Norco, et al, "Air Pollution and
Land Use Planning Aspects of Major Air-
port Complexes."  Report in preparation
for Land Use Planning Branch of U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. (1972)
12"The Environment and Technology Assess-
ment," progress report, Oak Ridge Nation-
al Laboratory, ORNL NSF-EP-3.  (1970)
13"Fourth Annual Earth Resources Program
Review," NASA Report MSC-05937.  (Jan. 1972)
                                         -157-

-------
                               LARGE COMRJTER FACILITIES

                                   John G. Fletcher
                             Lawrence Liverraore Laboratory
                             Liver-more, California  9^550
              INTRODUCTION
     The discussion here will concentrate
on the computer facility of your confer-
ence host, the Lawrence Liver-more Labora-
tory of the University of California (LLL),
since it is most familiar to the author.
Mention will also be made of some of the
facilities of the other national labora-
tories.  These laboratories have had
twenty or more years of experience with
digital computers.  During this time,
they have tried with considerable success
to stay at the forefront of the field,
both .in hardware and in software.  For
this reason, their experience should be of
some general interest.  It is the purpose
of this paper to summarize several aspects
of that experience and to relate them to
current trends .

     Several of the national laboratories,
including LLL, are operated under con-
tracts from the United States Atomic
Energy Commission (AEC).  They are engaged
in research and development in various
disciplines, ranging from environmental
studies to high energy physics to control-
led thermonuclear reactions to chemical
and nuclear explosives.  In much of this
work the most expeditious and economic way
to experiment is by means of simulation
on large digital computers.  It is this
need which has led these laboratories to
acquire some of the largest concentrations
of computing power in the world.  At LLL,
as will be seen, the computers are organ-
ized in such a way that is is not difficult
to add new computers or to delete old ones.
Thus, our experience has considerable
validity even in situations in which only
one or two computers are available; it is
especially valid when the possibility
exists of adding additional computers as
time passes.

          LARGE, FAST COMPUTERS

     The typical computational problem we
encounter is a numerical simulation of a
physical situation, using finite differ-
ence, Monte Carlo, or other such techniques.
These problems are often quite large,
involving arrays of hundreds of thousands
of numbers and requiring tens of billions
of arithmetic operations.  Therefore, we
have always sought to have the largest
and fastest computers provided by current
technology.  In the past, T.T.T. has used
the Univac I, various members of the IBM
700 and 7000 series, and the Univac
LARC.  At the present time, the fastest
available computer is the CDC 7600, of
which we have three; we also have two
CDC 6600's, which are each about one-
fifth the speed of a 7600.  The near
future should see purchase of a still
faster machine, the CDC Star-100.  Except
for maintenance, all these machines
operate twenty-four hours a day, seven
days a week.  Some of the other national
laboratories, for example, Oak Ridge,
currently use large machines of the IBM
360-370 series.

     A 7600 can perform about 20 million
arithmetic operations per second.  In
practice, such a rate cannot be sustained
because of the 'need for instructions which
fetch or store operands, make decisions,
and regulate loops.  The near future will
not likely see any computers basically
much faster than a 7&00, since a new
technology would be required.  One feature
of such a new technology would probably
be a reduction in size, since the speed
of light is currently one limit that has
been reached.  The next generation of
computers will be distinguished by in-
novative organizations which will permit
the 20 million or so arithmetic operations
per second to be sustained without having
to pause for decision making and other
such matters.

     The Star-100 is organized to exploit
the fact that information can be moved
into and out of a computer memory at a
rate comparable to the rate of arithmetic
processing, but that this is possible only
if it is not necessary to keep specifying
to the memory which word is required.
That is, a single address specification
must cause a large block of words to be
streamed between the memory and the
processor.  The Star has a class of
                                         -158-

-------
instructions, each of which operates as
follows:   Three addresses and a count
are specified.  Two of the addresses are
first word addresses of two arrays of
operands; the third address is the first
word address of an array for results.
When the instruction is executed, data
is streamed from the two operand arrays,
corresponding pairs of words are combined
(added, multiplied, etc.) as specified by
the instruction, and the results are stored
in the result array; this process proceeds
until the number of operations specified
by the count has been performed.  Except
for an overhead to get started and to
finish, operation proceeds at the speed
of the arithmetic units.  In fact,
because of the overhead, a Star is slower
than a ?600 if a count of only one or two
is specified.  The Star is called a vector
machine because operands and results are
treated like the multi-component mathe-
matical objects called vectors.  The Star
also uses the streaming mode of operation
for various non-numerical operations, such
as searching byte strings; applications of
this feature should be interesting.

     Another organizational approach to
speeding up computational rates is multi-
processing.  A single computer can consist
of several independent or partially in-
dependent processing units, perhaps
sharing a common memory.  Although each
processor is not able to process at the
rate achievable by a vector machine, all
the processors collectively can achieve
a high rate.  The Burroughs Illiac-IV,
now at NASA/Ames, consists of 6k processors.
These processors can each operate on dif-
ferent data but all must perform the same
kind of operation at the same time; that
is, there is only one instruction sequence.
It would appear that the Illiac-IV is more
difficult to program efficiently than is
a vector machine.  The CDC 8600 is expected
to be something like a multiprocessor
7600, with all processors having independ-
ent instruction sequences, but there being
only about four processors.  For such a
machine,  programming would probably be
more difficult than for a vector machine,
except that one could be content to have
each processor work on a separate problem.
Other manufacturers, such as IBM and Texas
Instruments, will probably enter the
competition for. building the fastest com-
puter.  There is no basis at present for
judging which approach will be the most
successful.
           MEMORY AND STORAGE

     Memory and storage are another im-
portant consideration in rapid computing.
The term memory usually refers to an
information-holding medium which can be
immediately, rapidly, and randomly acces-
sed by processor instructions, while
storage refers to media which are less
directly available to the processor and
which present a significant delay when
accessed.  The memory of a ?600 is about
thirty-two million bits; this is about
the same as the largest machines of the
IBM 360-370 series.  Although the cost
per bit of memory is continuing to decline,
it is not clear that future computers will
be characterized by significantly large
memories; there is a limit to what a
processor can conveniently address.  One
probably can look for organizational
advances, both in hardware and in soft-
ware, which will permit rapid and conven-
ient interchange of information between
memory and storage.

     Storage today usually means rotating
storage, namely drums and disks.  The
LLL 7600's are each supported by two disks;
each disk holds over 5 billion bits and
transfers at 3^ megahertz.  It seems
likely that future disks will be larger
and faster.  The most serious deficiency
of rotating storage is the delay encoun-
tered in accessing selected information.
Part of this delay is due to motion of
the read/write heads radially across the
disk surfaces.  This delay can be removed
(at some cost) by designing the disk to
have one head per recording track; LLL
has a head-per-track disk with a capacity
of 800 million bits.  The other part of
the access delay is rotational latency,
that is, waiting for selected information
to be brought to the read/write head by
the rotation of the disk; it would seem
that improvement in this area will be
slight.  To some extent there is a trade-
off between rotational latency and
capacity, since smaller disks can be
rotated at higher speeds.

     The capacity of rotating storage
seems to be limited to about 10 billion
bits.  Several laboratories have found it
desirable to have a larger fund of infor-
mation on-line, that is, accessible to the
computer without human intervention.  The
IBM photodigital store has a capacity of
over one trillion (lO12) bits.  LASL,
LBL, and LLL have three of only five such
                                         -159-

-------
units in existence.  The recording medium
is silver halide film in the form of small
pieces called chips, each about 1-1/1;
Inches by 2-1/2 inches.   These are stored
in plastic boxes called cells, 32 chips
per cell.  About 5 million bits can be
recorded on a chip, and the storage device
holds 6750 cells; a quick multiplication
yields the one trillion bit figure for the
total capacity.

     Raw film is inserted into the machine
by the operator, ten cells at a time.  One
by one, the new cells are brought to the
photostore recorder, and the top of the
cell is removed.  Each raw film chip in
turn is removed from the cell, brought
into a high vacuum, and written on with
an electron gun.  Between chips, this gun
automatically refocuses itself; also, it
changes filaments sixteen times without
human intervention.  After recording, the
film chip is removed from the vacuum and
placed into a container where it is
successively exposed to developer, stop,
fix, wash water, and dry air.  After about
two and one-half minutes, it is placed
into a cell for storage as a new fund of
permanent, non-erasable information.

     Cells are moved throughout the photo-
store device pneumatically, taking about
five seconds for the longest journey.
They are stored in compartmented trays
from which they are brought to one of two
flying spot units for reading and to which
they return after reading and after the
original recording.  The entire device is
under the control of an internal IBM l800
computer, which not only manipulates the
various pneumatic switches, hydraulic
valves, and mechanical pickers, but also
senses their proper operation.  However,
the selection of which information is to
be read and the supplying of information
to the recorder is made by another com-
puter external to the photostore (such as
a 6600 or DEC PDP-10).  Since, at the
recording densities employed by the photo-
store, film will always have significant
flaws, the 1800 records redundant bits on
the film, constituting an error detecting
and correcting code that can correct
errors occurring as frequently as one
error bit per ten data bits.

     Although there clearly are disadvan-
tages to being unable to erase photostore
information and reuse the chips, there is
considerable advantage in the fact that
information that cannot be erased at all
can never be erased by mistake.  The
photostore makes an excellent archival
storage.  This archival characteristic is
enhanced by the ability of an operator
to remove cells from the device for
storage elsewhere.  The most serious
shortcoming of the photostore is its
relatively slow recording rate of one-
quarter megahertz.  It might seem that
the pneumatic delays would seriously slow •
reading.  However, there are two readers
and a stacking area for cells around each
one.  This permits a long term average
reading rate of 1-1/2 megahertz.

     Experience with the photostore has
been one of steadily increasing use.  A
good historical analogy is the invention
of banking; use of the new facility in-
creased as people built up confidence
that they could really get their money
back.  Similarly, users are beginning to
abandon tape storage in favor of the
photostore.  The photostore users exist
side by side with those still using tapes
and even with extreme conservatives still
using cards.

     Other large capacity stores holding
     or more bits are in production or on
the drawing boards.  The technologies
vary.  Ampex proposes a system using
videotape as the recording medium.
Several approaches use lasers:  One design,
the Unicon, uses a laser to burn a metal-
lic coating off a plastic substrate; such
a device is being installed at NASA/Ames.
Another approach is to use the laser to
generate holographic patterns in a cryo-
genic crystal.  Each of these approaches
has its own advantages and disadvantages,
and it remains to be seen which, if any,
will succeed in a practical sense.  But
one can be sure that the future holds
promise of larger and larger on-line
stores.

         INPUT/OUTPUT OPTIONS

     Having considered processors and
storage, the discussion now turns to
input-output (l/O).  In years past the
importance of this area was often over-
looked.  People were so impressed with
the size, speed, and cost of computers
that they hardly worried about any human
inconvenience in interacting with them.  .
In recent years, the perspective has
become clearer, and it has been realized
that information should be moved into
and out of computers in forms convenient
to the human user.  One of the most
valuable ideas has been interactive,
                                         -160-

-------
multi-programmed time-sharing:  The user
interacts (converses) with the computer
via a suitable interactive terminal,
causing the computer to run his programs
in rotation with the programs of other
users.

     Currently LLL has over UOO tele-
typewriter terminals, mostly Model 33
Teletypes.  These teletypes offer very
good service for a rather low price, and
price is an important consideration when
dealing with hundreds of terminals.  The
major drawback of the Model 33 is a slow
speed of ten characters per second; such
a speed is quite adequate for typed in-
put, but can be very discouraging for
paper tape input and for output.  Another
disadvantage is noise, although this can
be alleviated at some cost.  Therefore
LLL plans to acquire a new class of more
expensive interactive terminals of special
design, informally called KIDS - keyboard
interactive display system.  Each terminal
includes a keyboard, a TV screen, and a
joystick.  Output to the screen is at
5000 characters per second; thus use of
the screen solves both the speed and the
noise problem.  Additional advantages over
teletypewriters are graphical (line
segment) output for drawing pictures,
pointing with a joystick-controlled cursor,
and a larger set of displayable characters
(192 versus 6k).  One shortcoming for
certain purposes is that the output is not
in the form of hard copy which can be
carried away from the terminal.

     Teletypewriters and KIDS are intended
for general and widespread use by technical
personnel.  LLL also has a few very high
quality interactive terminals for use in
connection with problems requiring more
varied display capabilities.  These in-
clude eight terminals of special design
built by Information International, Inc.
and two Line Drawing System One terminals
built by Evans and Sutherland.  Other
national laboratories have display ter-
minals of similar capability.  Argonne
National Laboratory has a hardware/software
display system called Alice, which enables
a highly interactive relationship between
man and computer, enhancing the abilities
of each.

     Non-interactive I/O devices include
such commonplace items as paper tape
reader/punches, card reader/punches,
magnetic tape transports, and impact line
printers.  There are few exotic input
devices.  In fact, about the only exotic
 input device  that comes  to mind  is  the ,
 optical character reader.   At  present,
 these devices are too expensive  and
 limited in capability to be acquired
 without a definite and very demanding
 need.  The Postal Service  uses such
 devices for automated sorting  of mail.

      Non-interactive output can  tend
 toward the less commonplace, however.   At
 LLL there is  a system of TV screens called
 TMDS - television monitor  display system.
 Although they are output only, with no
 associated keyboard or other mechanism
 for interaction,  they are  usually control-
 led by a user at a nearby  teletypewriter
 and in fact enhance the  interactive
 qualities of  the teletypwriter.

      Printed  output volume at  LLL is  very
 high, as might be expected from the num-
 ber of large  computers.   For many years
 the workhorse has been a 500 line per
 second (30 thousand line per minute)
 Radiation, Inc. printer, which is kept
 busy about half the time.   It  operates
 by drawing sparks through  a special carbon-
 backed paper.  This printer is now  reach-
 ing the end of its useful  life and  will
 be replaced by a pair of 15 thousand  line
 per minute Honeywell printers, which  will
 use a white paper.  It is  interesting
 that the Radiation printer has not  been
 surpassed in  speed after seven years.

      Recently, much of the output load
 has started to shift to  an FR80 microfilm
 recorder, which is now generating fiche
 representing  about half  as many pages per
 day as the Radiation printer.   A DD80
 unit drawing  on film, which is then printed
 on a Xerox printer, is currently used for
 graphical output, but this work will be
 eventually taken over by the Honeywell
 printers and  the microfilm recorder.  The
 film produced by the DD80  can  also be
 used directly (not printed); thus,
 computer-produced movies are possible.

      Output,  when appropriate, can be
 generated on  Calcomp plotters, which  are
 quite slow but produce very high quality
 line drawings.  The future of  I/O devices
 definitely includes greater speed,  quality,
 and versatility than is  currently available;
 for example,  it eventually should "become
 possible to generate movies in real time.

       COMPUTER NETWORKS:  OCTOPUS

      It is one thing to  have a variety  of
computer devices; it is another to use
                                         -161-

-------
them effectively.  It was realized some
years ago that the best vay to utilize
the LLL computers was to Join  them to-
gether into a network of computers.  This
network was dubbed Octopus.  Four benefits
have been realized:  First, all terminals
(interactive and non-interactive) can
communicate with all major computers;
this increases the utility of each ter-
minal and reduces the total number of ter-
minals required.  Second, all major
computers can interact with unique equip-
ment (such as the photostore).  Third, a
single data-base is shared among all the
major computers, eliminating the need for
multiple copies and/or manual transport of
information.  Fourth, the possibility
exists for cooperation among the major
computers, such as their working together
on a single problem; it must be admitted
that this last, rather sophisticated,
benefit has not yet been fully realized.
Other laboratories have similarly found
that networking offers advantages.  For
example, at Brookhaven National Laboratory,
the Brooknet System Joins two central
6600's to a number of remote smaller com-
puters.  In setting up such a network,
there are three problem areas:  overall
organization and structure, hardware
interfacing, and software.  In each case,
it has been found that the best motto is:
"Do it yourself."

     There being no precedent for what was
to be done, the Octopus organization had
to be designed in-house.  After one false
start toward a highly centralized organi-
zation, the present scheme was arrived at:
a superposition of subnetworks.  Each
subnetwork performs one function or ser-
vice for the major computers.  The major
computers (7600's, 6600's, Star-100) them-
selves are called worker computers and
have the function of executing programs
as requested by users at interactive
terminals.  Each worker has its own disk
storage, tape transports, card readers,
and line printers and its own connection
to each subnetwork.  Each subnetwork
typically consists of a small computer
(usually a DEC PDP-8 or PDP-11) called
the concentrator of the subnetwork.  The
concentrator is interfaced to each worker
and to whatever storage devices or I/O
gear are appropriate to the function of
the subnetwork.  Typical subnetworks are
those to handle teletypewriters, inter-
computer file transport, and remote
printing.
     This organization has the great
advantage of readily providing for growth
and change.  A new worker can be added by
building a suitable multichannel interface
for it and then plugging it into unused
interface channels on subnetwork concen-
trators.  A new network facility can be
added by acquiring the concentrator and
other gear, building a suitable multi-
channel interface for it, and then plug-
ging it into unused interface channels on
the workers.  Removing out-of-date workers
or subnetworks is even easier.  Another
advantage of the Octopus organization is
that faults in one subnetwork leave the
other subnetworks intact; this is an
especially important consideration when
a new subnetwork is added with its initial
fund of hardware and software bugs.

     The hardware interfaces between the
concentrators and the workers are all
designed and built by in-house engineers.
The continued growth and change of the
network (in response to advancing tech-
nology) makes it feasible to employ a
permanent staff of hardware designers.
It has been found that it is much easier
to have in-house engineers design inter-
faces to adapt each new computer to an
Octopus standard protocol than it is to
have each manufacturer do so.  This
approach has also made possible a much
closer interaction between hardware and
software designers than would otherwise
be possible, resulting in improved overall
design.

     Many of the interfaces between the
concentrators and their peripheral gear
have also been designed in-house.  These
include interfaces to the photostore, a
Data Cell, disk packs, teletypewriters,
KIDS, and binary synchronous lines to
remote reader/printer facilities.  The
one area which LLL has largely been able
to avoid is interfacing to the telephone
network.  This last is the case because
of AEC security requirements, which pre-
clude unrestricted access to computers
processing classified information.  At
present, one 6600 is divorced rom the
Octopus network and operates as a one-
worker mini-network.  During the daytime
hours it operates as an unclassified
machine and does have connection to ter-
minals outside the LLL security fence,
including some connected via telephone
lines.  If and when the need exists, this
unclassified facility will undoubtedly
grow.
                                         -162-

-------
     A brief summary of Octopus facilities
 is now given.  The concentrators of inter-
 active terminal subnetworks handle each
 input character in full duplex mode, an
 input character is printed or displayed
 only because it is echoed back to the
 terminal from the concentrator.  The
 concentrator can do some editing (much
 more with KIDS than with teletypewriters).
 The workers deal with the interactive
 terminal concentrators in units called
 messages (usually one line on input,
 possibly more on output).  All computation
 initiated by the user in the workers is
 by means of a suitable interactive input
 message.

     Computation is always done by a
 program executing on behalf of the user,
 either a program he has written, a program
 shared with other users, or a public
 program.  These programs can request use
 of the non-interactive facilities of the
 network.  They can create, write, read,
 execute, and destroy files of information
 kept on the worker disk.  They can request
 that these files be transported to or
 from another worker computer or to or from
 the central (Elephant) filing system
 (which has the photostore as its principal
 medium); such transport is via the file
 transport subnetwork, which has a PDP-10
 as its concentrator.  User programs can
 request use of a TMDS screen (also part
 of the file transport network).  They can
 request output of files to a local impact
 printer, to the high speed printer (soon
 to be moved from off-line to on-line
 status), or to a remote (from the worker,
 probably near to the user) impact printer
via the remote I/O terminal subnetwork.
 In brief, a user program can, by suitable
 requests to its operating system, make
any legitimate use of network facilities.

          SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT

     We write almost all our own software.
A systems development section of about
thirty programmers is retained for this
purpose.  Fewer programmers would be needed
 if the network were not so large and di-
verse.  Software for a concentrator
 requires usually one, sometimes two,
programmers, while a major computer does
 not require more than half a dozen.  The
term "programmer" is used, although the
members of the systems development staff
also function as-what are often termed
 "analysts".  That is, the same man (or
woman) is invested with the design and the
implementation of his part of the soft-
ware program.  He must, of course, keep
in frequent contact with other programmers
working on the same or related machines
and must adhere to network protocols.
This general approach is regarded by many
outside the Laboratory as dangerous if not
impossible.  However, there seems to be
no Justification for such an attitude,
which is belied by our experience; it
seems to be an attitude founded in an
unreasoning awe of software which can
best be overcome by employing competent
programmers.

     It is this author's opinion that
good software is written by bright, in-
formed people using good sense and that
there is as yet no evidence that there is
a known single best way to do any one
thing.  Much of the computing literature
is highly abstract and theoretical, laying
the foundation for a science in the making.
It is a serious error to suppose that all
of the sophisticated but infant techniques
discussed are ready for universal practical
application.   After all, Isaac Newton did
not start by designing aircraft.  For
example, we have not found that any special
difficulty arises from the "go to" con-
struction or that it is worth while to ,
take the time to prove the correctness of
system programs.  Remarkable success has
been obtained by writing the systems of
the CDC machines in a higher-level language
(LLL-designed LLLTRAN); yet all other
systems (including those for the sizable
DEC PDP-10 and XDS Sigma-7) were written
in assembly language with equal success.
If any subtle management technique has
been employed, it has been to treat the
programmer as a professional who is
allowed to "do his thing" with considerable
freedom.

     The kinds of software principles that
have proven most valuable are ones such
as the following:  (l) Assume that the
user will do anything he can do, and do
not let him interfere with other users or
gain some advantage over them when he
does the unexpected; this attitude, which
is not difficult to apply fully if one
keeps one's mind on it, eliminates any
privacy or security problems.  (2) Never
trust another computer in the network
completely; this prevents hardware fail-
ures or undebugged software in one
computer from interfering with the opera-
tion of other parts of the network.
(3) Keep the  protocols for transmission
                                         -163-

-------
between computers simple and general;
this allows for flexibility in the addition
of new facilities.

     What are the advantages of homegrown
software?  First, the software can often
be generated more quickly; we often buy
the first of a new kind of computer before
the manufacturer has had time to design
software.  Second, commercially-supplied
software is often not prepared for our
needs.  This goes hand in hand with a third
point:  that we have usually implemented
new systems programming concepts well
before they were commercially available;
for example, we have a directory-oriented
filing system.  Finally, commercial soft-
ware is notoriously lax in security
matters and cannot meet AEC standards.

               CONCLUSION

     This paper has highlighted some of
the more unique features of the extensive
computing facilities and capabilities of
LLL and the other national laboratories.
To a large degree, these facilities and
capabilities owe their existence to gener-
ous budgets.  Therefore, it might seem that
what has been discussed here is not rele-
vant to operations which are more modestly
funded.  This is probably not the case.
The price of data processing equipment of
a given performance continues to decline,
and -what today seems prohibitively expen-
sive will tomorrow be the norm.  It is not
now too early to plan for that time.
                                          -164-

-------
                   DISCUSSION OF THE PRESENTATION BY JOHN FLETCHER
Question:  With the IBM film system, what
sort of time delay does it take to get a
piece of film to the reader, and what kind
of transfer rates do you get?

Fletcher:  The time delay, from the time you
decide that you want a piece of film until
it's at the reader, is three to five
seconds because of the pneumatic motions,
so that's pretty bad.  We rely on the
fact that we have a time sharing system,
so that when one user asked for film, he
stops executing his program and somebody
else comes in.  Five seconds later his
thing is available.  We can get several
of these jobs stacked, up at once.  The
way the thing is designed you can get
about four cells around each of the readers,
waiting to go.  Provided that you read
some reasonable number of words out of
each cell, like a couple of thousand,
you can maintain a rate of 1-g million bits
a second of reading steadily over a long
haul.  So that's pretty good.  The writ-
ing rate is much worse;  it's only Ł
million bits a second.  I think that's
the worst feature of the machine.  With
that amount of store, writing into it
through that narrow pipe can get to you.
It hasn't yet, but I think it will.

Watson:  I'd like to mention that Ames
Research Center of NASA also has a trillion
bit memory, laser storage system,/-and the
transfer rate on that is 6.8 x 10  for both
reading and writing.  It is just being
completely debugged now.

Fletcher:  That was the one that used
lasers for burning, in effect, that I
mentioned.  What is the random access?
Do you have any idea?

Watson:  The worst possible time is 10
seconds.  The average time is 0.15 seconds.
                                         -165-

-------
                    MONITORING ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
                    G. Morgan, G. Ozolins, W. Sayers
                    Environmental Protection Agency
                   Office of Research and Monitoring
                         Washington, DC 20460
                                ABSTRACT

     Environmental monitoring produces data that identifies, describes
the interaction thereof, and gives information on the resultant concen-
trations of pollutants in all aspects of the environment.  Data collected
through monitoring activities provide information for assessment of
pollution effects on man and his environment, the development and evalua-
tion of control strategies, and the guidance of future development to
minimize pollution impact on the environment through the use of modeling
and planning.  To meet present and future needs and responsibilities,
Federal, State, and local control agencies, along with the private and
industrial sector, must participate in a cooperative and unified system
for collecting, storing, analyzing, and interpreting environmental data.
The nation's monitoring networks are now undergoing modifications in
order to meet legal requirements both as to extent of geographical
coverage and environmental pollutant coverage at each station.  The
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is expanding its monitoring capa-
bility to include remote sensing,  using advanced techniques already
developed but not presently employed for monitoring pollutants.  In order
to meet the future monitoring requirements at a reasonable cost, new
techniques will need to be developed and made available for routine use.
An integral part of all future coordinated monitoring programs at the
Federal, State, and local levels will be a nation-wide quality assurance
program.
           INTRODUCTION

     The efficient control of
variables affecting environmental
quality requires the use of
reliable and timely information.
Thus, one of the keys to effective
environmental quality management
lies in the ability to continually
monitor environmental character-
istics and provide timely interpre-
tation of the data obtained.  Such
data are essential throughout the
pollution abatement effort—from
initially identifying the problem
and providing direct evidence in
enforcement actions to the day-to-
day operation of pollution control
equipment and programs.

     Pollution monitoring is a com-
plex and difficult task.  Pol-
lutants must be measured not only
in the environment—air, surface
and ground waters, and land—but
also as they are discharged from
the multitude of stacks, outfalls,
and exhaust pipes.  The pollutants
that must be monitored number in
the hundreds;  the types of sources
in the thousands—with each
situation presenting an almost
unique problem in terms of the
combination of instrumentation to
be employed, sampling point loca-
tions, sampling duration and the
like.  The problem is compounded
by the continuous interactions and
transformations of many of these
pollutants as they are discharged
from the sources and as they pass
through the environment.  Repre-
sentative sampling of pollutant
concentrations at the point of
discharge or in the environment
requires an understanding of the
pollutant characteristics as well
as the specific objectives to be
achieved.  Only then can the
appropriate measurement techniques
be identified and employed.

     Environmental monitoring has
been defined as the systematic
collection and evaluation of physi-
cal, chemical, biological, and
                                   -166-

-------
related data pertaining to environ-
mental quality and waste discharges
into all media.  Its main elements
are:

         1.  Field sampling and
measurement of environmental
quality, emissions, and effluents.

         2.  Laboratory analysis
of field samples.

         3.  Operation of technical
information systems and data
analysis.

         4.  Measurement sensor and
technique development and testing.

         5.  Instrumentation and
methodology standardization and
quality control.

Each of the above elements is of
importance, all requiring concur-
rent and substantial effort.

     The monitoring data are used
for a number of specific purposes.
The most important of these are:
(1) establishment and enforcement
of ambient environmental quality
and emission/effluent standards;
(2) evaluation of the effectiveness
of adopted control tactics;
(3) determination of trends and
the study of pollutant inter-
actions, baselines, and patterns;
and (4) assessment of pollution
effects on man and his environment.
In many instances, data gathered
for a specific purpose may also be
used for others, e.g. trend data
are often useful in effects
research studies.

     The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA)  has identified four
basic types of monitoring which
serve to fulfill the above named
needs.   They are:

         1.  Ambient Trend Monitor-
ing—to measure conditions and
trends in the ambient environment
in relation to standards and
guidelines.

         2.  Source Monitoring—to
locate and measure effluents/
emissions and to assess the compli-
ant status of pollution sources.
         3.  Case Preparation
Monitoring—to gather evidence
for enforcement actions.

         4.  Research Monitoring—
to support research activities.

Most of the EPA monitoring programs
are carried out by the 10 EPA
Regional Offices with Headquarters!
guidance and support provided by
the Program Offices and the Office
of Monitoring.

     The collection and timely
evaluation of reliable information
on environmental quality has always
been needed, but now it is essen-
tial with the establishment and
implementation of air and water
quality standards and the resulting
necessity to develop abatement
strategies.  Regardless of the
number of control facilities and
devices installed or the number of
environmental quality management
plans completed, in the final
analysis, program effectiveness can
only be measured in terms of actual
improvements in environmental
quality.  And, this can be achieved
only through adequate monitoring
of environmental quality.

     This paper is intended to
illustrate the specific environ-
mental data needs and how they may
be fulfilled.  The present status
of monitoring programs at all
governmental levels is briefly
described including a summary of
the resources expended.

   EXISTING MONITORING PROGRAMS

     The monitoring of the nation's
environmental quality is a cooper-
ative effort involving Federal,
State, and local agencies.  Almost
every pollution control agency now
operates some type of monitoring
program.  Whereas many programs
are using very simple sampling
devices and measuring only few
pollutants, some are quite compre-
hensive, covering a multitude of
pollutants in various media and
using the  latest instrumentation
including on-line telemetry.
Currently, there are about 100
individual monitoring programs
which in 1971 spent approximately
                                  -167-

-------
65 million dollars  for operations.
Not included  in  this total is an
additional 15 million dollars
spent for technique and instru-
mentation development as well as
the resources spent for monitoring
by the private sector.

     Although still in transitional
stages, a clearer identification
of the relative  roles of State and
local agencies and  that of EPA in
monitoring activities is taking
place.  Increasingly, the State
and local agencies  are taking on
the burden of routine monitoring,
both ambient  and source, of the
pollutants for which standards have
been set.  For example, the six air
pollutants for which air quality
standards were promulgated are now
almost entirely  monitored by the
State and local  agencies.  This is
not surprising since the primary
responsibility for  pollution con-
trol rests with  the States.  EPA's
current monitoring  responsibilities
are primarily to support and aug-
ment the State and  local efforts,
to measure the pollutants for which
standards have not  been set, to
provide monitoring  data for
research, and to collect evidence
for Federal enforcement actions.
EPA's activities also encompass the
tasks that bridge across the
various monitoring  programs, e.g.
information systems (NADIS and
STORET), methods standardization
and quality control programs and
monitoring technique development.
EPA's monitoring budget by category
for FY 1972 is summarized in
Table 1.

 Table 1.  EPA Monitoring Resources, FY72

                  Man Power  Fund ing
                  (man years)(millions)
 Environ. Monit.        519

 Poll. Source Monit.    330

 Infor. Systems        330

 Stand. & Qual.
  Control              35

 Tech. Develop.
$13.1

 10.4

  6.3


  1.9

 11.4
$43.1
                 Environmental monitoring  is
            conducted in two ways—through
            long-term network operations and
            through special investigations.
            The networks are made up of  fixed
            stations where either samples  are
            collected intermittently  (quar-
            terly,  monthly, daily) or where
            instruments capable of continuous
            monitoring are located.  Both
            types of monitoring are employed.
            Currently, there are some 8,000
            long-term trend stations  (of vary-
            ing complexity) and upwards  of
            30,000  locations where samples are
            taken for special purposes,  e.g.
            research, survey, and enforcement.
            Although some of these sampling
            points  have existed for extended
            periods, most are of limited dura-
            tion, shifting as new needs  arise.
            A breakdown of the long-term
            stations is provided in Table  2.
            It is important to note that some
            monitoring of biological matter,
            e.g. human tissue, fish, and
            plants, is also conducted.
                Table 2.
                  Media
             Environmental Monitoring
             Stations, 1972
                    No. of Stations
             Air—Continuous  ,
               --Intermittent

             Water—Continuous
                 --Intermittent
                    EPA
                     10
                    300

                     60
                    840
             Soil—Intermittent   30QO
                               4210
State
 and
Local
   90
 2100

  240
 2000

	NA
 4430
Total
  100
 2400

  300
 2840

 3000
 8640
  Continuous monitoring stations -
 automated stations with instrumentation
 for four or more parameters.

  b
  Intermittent monitoring stations -
 manual, intermittent samplers  or con-
 tinuous instrumentation for less than
 four parameters.


     The monitoring of  waste dis-
charges into air,  water,  and land
has become  increasingly important
and now this type  of monitoring
constitutes  a considerable portion
of the total monitoring program.
Most of the measurements  are
manual, i.e. samples are  collected
                                    -168-

-------
and then taken to a laboratory for
analyses.  The effluents from most
of the major sewage treatment
plants are routinely measured and
reported.  The measurement of
industrial waste waters has
increased substantially as a
result of the requirements of the
Refuse Act Permit Program.  In the
case of air, the emissions from
both stationary and mobile sources
are monitored to support the
development and then the enforce-
ment of standards.  Whereas, the
bulk of waste-water sampling is
conducted by the polluting facil-
ities, most of the source sampling
for air pollutants .is conducted by
EPA and State and local pollution
control agencies.

     In recent years, considerable
work has been done in developing
comprehensive information systems
to handle the vast amounts of data
that are generated and to make them
available to the multitude of the
users in a timely manner.  EPA now
operates systems for air and water
quality data, e.g. National Aero-
metric Data Information Service
(NADIS) and Storage and Retrieval
(STORET), as well as for data from
the radiation and pesticides
monitoring programs.  Whereas
STORET is directly accessible
through remote terminals to EPA
field offices and State agencies,
the storage and retrieval of aero-
metric data are handled centrally
through computer facilities in
North Carolina.  The systems need
to be integrated in order that
field access may be facilitated.
In addition, many State and local
programs maintain their own data
handling systems which will need to
be coordinated and made more com-
patible.

     An important aspect of any
data handling system operation is
the data audit function.  It serves
to ensure data processing system
accuracy and reliability by pro-
viding a means for detecting and
controlling human and machine
errors introduced between the time
raw data are received for process-
ing and the final output document
is produced.
     A basic requirement to a
successful nation-wide monitoring
program is that the data generated
by one activity are fully comparable
to similar data produced elsewhere
and that the accuracy and precision
of all of the data may be
documented.  This necessitates a
very active methodology standard-
ization program and an authorita-
tive and compulsory quality
assurance program.  These
activities have not received
sufficient emphasis in the past,
resulting in the widespread use
of non-standard methods and the
production of much data of ques-
tionable validity.  Currently,
EPA is actively pursuing these
programs to bring about the neces-
sary improvements in data quality.

 REQUIREMENTS FOR MONITORING DATA

     As pointed out earlier,
monitoring data are used in almost
all facets of the pollution abate-
ment effort.  Certain types of
monitoring are required and speci-
fied by statutes, others are
developed in response to require-
ments levied upon the monitoring
programs by the research, the
standard setting, and the enforce-
ment arms of pollution control
agencies.  For example, the moni-
toring of the six "ambient air
standard pollutants" by the States
is required by the  federal regula-
tions governing the air implemen-
tation plans, whereas, the
measurement of the many metals in
the environment is necessary to
provide background  information to
establish future environmental
standards.  The competition for the
monitoring dollar is fierce—
requiring a continual evaluation in
light of changing priorities.

     Prior to the formation of EPA
in December 1970, most of the
environmental as well as source
monitoring was primarily single-
media oriented—measurements made
of a contaminant in air were not
directly relatable  to the measure-
ments of the same contaminant in
water, soil, or biota.  Notable
exceptions are radioactivity and
pesticides for which multi-media
                                  -169-

-------
analyses were in effect.  A prime
monitoring requirement of the
future will be to bridge the gap
across the various media in order
that total environmental appraisals
are possible.  This approach will
permit EPA and other environmental
control groups to identify environ-
mental pollutants, trace them
through the ecological chain,
observing interactions and inter-
relationships, determine dosage to
man and various aspects of his
environment, and finally to
identify where in the cycle con-
trol would be most appropriate.
This implies not only to the
increasing need for comparable
measurement techniques, but also
integrated multi-media monitoring
studies.  The effective control of
many contaminants is dependent on
the intermedia understanding of
their sources, concentrations, and
pathways.

     The collection of long-term
environmental trend data is an
often neglected part of monitoring,
yet it is these data through which
the overall progress being made in
reducing .pollution may be assessed
or, for other contaminants, the
build up of pollution may be noted.
It is only through such information
that effective control strategies
may be developed.  Although certain
environmental quality data have
been collected on a nation-wide
basis for a good number of years,
the ability to discern trends on a
national or even regional scale is
still lacking.  The sparsity of
sampling points and variability in
measurement objectives and method-
ology among monitoring programs
have been the major contributing
factors.

     The need for a "trend network"
is evident.  This does not mean
that a new network of stations is
to be implemented, but that ade-
quate coverage of pollutants and
geographical areas be obtained.
For most pollutants, this may be
accomplished through selection and
designation of trend stations from
existing networks.  Increasing
attention must also be given to
the monitoring of pollutants in
the non-urban or background areas,
where some build up of pollution is
occurring.  Increased atmospheric
turbidity and trace metal concen-
trations are some examples which
are of immediate concern.  The
monitoring of "background" pollu-
tion presents problems of lower
levels of detectability and station
accessibility.

     Currently, the major thrust of
monitoring programs is to obtain
data for determining compliance
with established environmental
quality and source standards.  In
air, there are some nine pollutants
and numerous sources for which
standards have been promulgated; in
water, there are well over 50 pol-
lutants for which water quality
standards have been established.
Enforcement of the regulations
requires the measurement of these
pollutants and sources.  During
the next few years, this type of
monitoring will need considerable
expansion if the necessary enforce-
ment of the established standards
is to be realized.  Adequate
enforcement will require a sub-
stantial increase in the number of
monitoring stations as well as
improved methods of measurement
especially in the area of source
monitoring.  The availability of
automatic in-stack monitors for
certain pollutants would lighten
the monitoring load of the regu-
latory agencies.  The testing of
in-use motor vehicle exhaust is
another area of major importance to
EPA and State agencies.

     The ability to provide current
information during environmental
emergencies is paramount for a
pollution control agency.  Acci-
dental spills and releases and
severe environmental situations
caused by unusual conditions, e.g.
air pollution episodes, require
timely information on environmental
quality in order that projections
may be made and preventive/remedial
actions may be instituted.
Monitoring of these types of situ-
ations place new requirements on
the monitoring programs, e.g.
mobile vans, remote sensing capa-
bilities, on-line telemetry, and
portable instrumentation.
                                   -170-

-------
     The collection of monitoring
types of information through ques-
tionnaires and field inspections
is an integral part of the overall
effort to gain information on
environmental quality.  The mapping
of pollution sources together
with ambient measurements can
provide a good understanding of
the entire pollution problem.
Through material balances and
various engineering calculations,
estimates of pollution emitted may
be obtained.  The availability of
this type of information may not
negate the need for source measure-
ments, but it does serve to allow
various evaluations until such
measurements are made.

     An overriding requirement for
monitoring data now and in the
future is that they be representa-
tive, accurate, and available when
needed.  The need for standardiza-
tion of methods and a comprehensive
quality control program is clearly
evident.   The implementation of
these programs coupled with
improvements in data handling and
analyses procedures will go a long
way toward satisfying the data
requirements of the future.

        MONITORING STRATEGY

     The pollutant and geographic
coverage of existing monitoring
networks is far less than what is
needed.  Many reaches of rivers
and coastlines are not routinely
monitored;  in many large and inter-
mediate cities only a few, if any,
measurements are taken of air pol-
lutants for which ambient standards
have been promulgated.   Some
expansion of monitoring networks
in terms of pollutant coverage and
numbers of stations will be
effected as a result of the air
implementation plans and monitoring
requirements of the proposed water
pollution legislation.   The
sampling of emissions/effluents
will probably exhibit the fastest
growth as more and more source
standards are issued.   Even with
these expected increases, the
funding restrictions at all levels
of government will not allow the
type of nation-wide coverage that
is even minimally required.
     In light of the foregoing,
much of the EPA monitoring effort
will focus on those areas that
need strengthening within the
existing monitoring framework.  The
overall monitoring strategy can
best be characterized by the fol-
lowing five areas of concern and
action:

         1.  Closer coordination
of environmental monitoring pro-
grams at all levels of the
Government—Federal, State, local,
and the private sector.

         2.  Closer coordination
of monitoring activities across
media lines.

         3.  Increased utility and
timeliness of data through com-
prehensive information systems and
modeling techniques.

         4.  Increased accuracy of
data through a strong methods
standardization and quality control
program.

         5.  Improved instrumenta-
tion through research and adapta-
tion of monitoring techniques and
approaches used in other fields.

     Environmental monitoring is
conducted by many governmental
organizations as well as the
private sector.  In EPA alone,
monitoring activities are carried
out by-laboratories in over 50
locations.  In addition, each State
and many local agencies are
involved in monitoring the environ-
ment.  Increasingly, the private
sector, most notably industries,
is making measurements of their
emissions/effluents and monitoring
their immediate environment.  All
of this activity produces vast
amounts of environmental data,  the
utility of which may be broadened
through central coordination  and
the provision of common guidelines
under which environmental activ-
ities are  to be conducted.  The
result will be the ability and
increased willingness of the  data
user to employ data from wherever
acquired and not necessarily  to
undertake  a new monitoring program
to satisfy his needs.  Through
                                   -171-

-------
this action, duplication in
monitoring activities can be
minimized and the utility of the
data base is increased.

     Increased emphasis must be
placed on total environmental
assessment.  Monitoring of all
media on a comparable basis is
necessary to take into account the
"total body burden"—that is, to
how much of a given substance an
individual is exposed whether it
comes from air, water, food, or
land.  The bringing together of
the various single media-oriented
monitoring activities will be
accomplished through the develop-
ment of compatible information
systems, standardization of
measurement methodologies, and,
perhaps more importantly, through
increased multi-media analyses of
the available data.  Specific
multi-media studies concerned with
tracing selected contaminants
through the ecological chain must
be carried out.

     A substantial increase in
data utility and timeliness can be
effected through improvements in
the environmental information
systems.  Most of the systems are
already computerized.  Future
efforts must be directed toward
adapting all systems to a
mutually compatible format and
providing linkages among them.
This will greatly facilitate data
accessibility and timely exchange
among coordinating agencies and
serve to minimize the need for
duplicative monitoring programs.
In certain situations, use of a
single information system by a num-
ber of participating State and
Federal programs will be highly
advantageous.  In this way a com-
prehensive nation-wide analysis of
data on the total environment con-
tributed by a number of programs
could be carried out on a routine
basis.  This approach would also
make possible the operation of an
.early warning network  (composed
of parts of many individual
programs) for the timely identifi-
cation of incipient environmental
problems.
     Greater use must be made of
mathematical models for simulating
environmental responses to waste
discharges.  These models have many
valuable uses. . They serve to
predict the effect of alternative
control strategies on environmental
quality and, thus, facilitate
selection of the most cost/
effective abatement approach.  They
also permit .interpolation of
environmental quality conditions
at locations between monitoring
station sites.

     In large measure, the success
of an environmental pollution con-
trol program rests upon the relia-
bility of the data provided by  .
monitoring activities.  The acqui-
sition of reliable, comparable, and
legally defensible data requires
use of a set of standardized
measurement and calibration pro-
cedures and a dynamic quality
control program.  One of EPA's main
thrusts in monitoring during the
next several years will be to
develop and implement strong
standardization and quality control
programs covering EPA environmental
monitoring activities and those of
State and local agencies and
possibly the private sector.  The
primary areas of concern are:

         1.  The promulgation of
standard methods following suffi-
cient collaborative testing.

         2.  The issuance of guide-
lines concerning methods equiva-
lency determination, instrument
performance specifications, and
sampling procedures.

         3.  Development and pro-
vision of standard reference
materials and samples.

         4.  Intra- and inter-
laboratory quality control
programs.

         5.  Site and laboratory
evaluation and certification.

         6.  Training.

     Although progress has been
made in the quality assurance
                                   -172-

-------
 program, particularly in waste-
 water  analyses, much remains to be
 done.

     An area of major importance is
 the development of new and improved
 measurement systems.  There is a
 long way to go, for example, water
 quality monitoring as carried out
 today  is not drastically different
 from the way it was conducted at
 the beginning of this century.
 Most improvements in methodology
 in the last 50 years have been in
 laboratory techniques, while in the
 air monitoring program, nearly all
 of the instruments installed up
 to 1970 were based on analytical
 approaches developed 10 to 15
 years  earlier.  In addition to
 improving the existing monitoring
 capabilities through research, we
 must also invest in programs
 specifically designed to apply
 existing remote sensing and
 advanced monitoring technology to
 the collection of environmental
 data.  This technology has already
 been applied to monitoring oil
 spills and measuring the degree of
 lake eutrophication.

     These and other monitoring
 responsibilities of EPA are divided
 among  the various organizational
 elements.  The responsibility for
 planning of routine monitoring
 operations is that of the Program
 Offices, e.g. Air and Water
 Programs and Categorical Programs.
 It is also their function to
 develop and maintain the requisite
 information systems.  The operation
 of monitoring networks is carried
 out by the Regional Offices.   The
 Office of Monitoring has the
 responsibility for:

         1.  Coordinating the
 technical aspects of all EPA
monitoring activities.

         2.  Providing technical
 guidance on techniques for improv-
 ing the utility of data for
multiple analytical purposes.

         3.  Designing and imple-
menting an EPA-wide standardiza-
 tion and quality control program.
         4.  Designing and imple-
menting a program for improving
and auditing monitoring data.

         5.  Adapting and demon-
strating improved monitoring
equipment and methods and recom-
mending them to responsible
program offices.

    FUTURE NEEDS IN MONITORING
          METHODOLOGIES

     Currently, some 40 or 50
pollutants are recognized as
candidates for possible control
action in the near future.  These
are made up of inorganic and
organic compounds, organic
radicals, trace metals, and
disease producing organisms.  As
we learn more about the health
effects of these substances,
specifically in the areas of car-
cinogenesis, mutagenesis, tera-
tology, or synergistic effects of
these pollutants, the requirements
for monitoring methods will
increase substantially.

     As the result of technological
changes in the plastic industry
alone, anywhere from 50 to 200 new
pollutants will be introduced into
the environment annually.  Many
of these will require some form of
control and therefore methods for
collection and measurement of
these substances will need to be
developed.  The monitoring instru-
ments will need to be reliable,
specific, compact, and economical
and be able to meet the specifica-
tions established by EPA.  As
evidenced by the following example,
thorough field testing of newly
developed methods and instruments
prior to routine application is
essential.  Two process-type gas
chromatographic-type instruments
for measuring methane and total
hydrocarbons were recently devel-
oped under contract by EPA.  A
six-month field evaluation at the
CAMP stations showed that the
instruments fall short of expecta-
tions because of electronic
problems, lack of stability, or
the requirement for extremely high-
level operators and maintenance.
                                   -173-

-------
  If Federal, State, and local
  agencies, as well as industry,
  are going to purchase specific
  and reliable instruments, it must
  be made sure that they have been
  satisfactorily tested.

       One area which has been gross-
  ly neglected is the development of
  procedures for collecting and
  maintaining the integrity of the
  sample.  There are still many
  unanswered questions on the nature
  and fate of gaseous pollutants
  when they are collected and
  returned to the laboratories for
  analysis.  For example, it was
  discovered that the methods used
  for measurement of N02 were not
  adequate at lower levels.  This
  finding was made possible by the
  development of a permeation device
  for producing known concentrations
  of NO2 in low concentrations.

       The science of collecting
  environmental samples of pesticides
  is a challenging one to any com-
  petent chemist.  Although this
  problem has received attention
  during the past two years, many
  areas are yet to be investigated.
  Comparisons of pesticide measure-
  ments made in air, water, soil,
  and tissue are not comparable.  For
  investigating the transport of
  pesticides and other hazardous
  materials through the environment,
  methods must be developed that are
  equivalent for the various media.

       There is a particular need for
  small integrating instruments of
  the more common indicator pol-
  lutants such as fine particulates
  and sulfur dioxide.   The area of
•  personal monitoring instruments,
  outside of the radiation measure-
  ment field is essentially
  untouched.  In the field of radia-
  tion, personal dosimeters have
  been in use for a long time.

       Over the years, EPA and its
  predecessor agencies have developed
  many of the laboratory procedures
  for measuring pollutants.  Certain
  technology is available in other
  Government agencies that could be
  readily adapted to environmental
  monitoring and which could enhance
  the on-going monitoring programs.
Systems are needed which can be
calibrated and used for routine
separation of various classes of
organic compounds.  Perhaps
through column chromatographic
separation, coupled with mass
spectrometry, many toxic organic
compounds could be identified and
measured.  Such systems are needed.

     There is also a need to
develop reference standards and
reference materials.  Although
recent progress has been made in
air monitoring by the development
of permeation tubes for several
gases, much work is yet to be done.
Delivery systems are needed that
will ensure known and reproducible
concentrations of primary standards
which can be used for calibration,
testing, and quality control.
Standards are needed for testing
of methods for particles in air/
sources and for sediment.  The
National Bureau of Standards is
cooperating in developing some of
these standard reference materials.

     The area of remote sensing is
one that should be emphasized.
There are many advanced sensing
techniques available in other
agencies that are'almost directly
applicable to our needs.  With a
minimum of development and testing,
these techniques could be extremely
useful to this Agency's mission.
The various national laboratories
of other governmental agencies
have a tremendous amount of talent
and have developed methodology
which can be readily adapted to
furnish useful monitoring methods.
In many cases, it has been apparent
that scientists tend to go into
new basic research rather than to
continue to develop those methods
and techniques which are now
available.

              SUMMARY

     In summary, the need for
effective environmental quality
management programs is well
recognized.  Environmental pro-
grams established in the private
sector and at all levels of
government to meet this need must
act quickly to return the environ-
ment to an acceptable level of
                                     -174-

-------
quality.  And once this goal is
achieved, vigilance must be main-
tained to assure that satisfactory
environmental conditions prevail
in the future.  Environmental
management, in the true sense, will
entail the successful prevention
of future problems, rather than
merely the vigorous solving of
problems after they have been
allowed to occur.  That is, manage-
ment is represented by action, not
reaction.  In that management
decisions are only as good as the
data upon which they are based, it
is imperative that complete and
reliable information on environ-
mental quality be continuously
gathered, synthesized, and evalua-
ted on a timely basis.  The
immense size of this task demands
that all environmentally-oriented
programs, public and private, work
in close coordination to meet
their combined data needs in the
most cost-effective manner.  This
will require the expansion and
modernization of existing monitor-
ing systems and closer coordina-
tion among programs than we have
seen in the past.  The overriding
concern by all for the environment
will serve to minimize any other
differences we may share and
significantly enhance the proba-
bility of early success in the full
implementation of a local-State-
Federal integrated environmental
monitoring program.
                                   -175-

-------
                     DISCUSSION OF THE PRESENTATION BY GEORGE MORGAN
Manowitz;  What mechanism do you have for
insuring chat states and local municipalities
comply with your quality control develop-
ments, particularly those state and local
agencies that already have invested in
monitoring equipment?

Morgan:  The question can be restated as
how do we more or less enforce a quality
assurance program on the state or local
agencies?  In many cases they have bought
equipment and they're using methodologies
which have become traditional.  For the
most part we've found that they are quite
willing;  they really want such a quality
assurance program.  It's presently on a
voluntary basis.  They have been partic-
ipating with such a program.  For instance,
there are between 150 and 200 laboratories
now that are participating in a sulfur
dioxide colaborative test.  I believe we
have all of the state labs now participating,
and all of the major local laboratories are
participating also.  They are willing to
return the data back to us on a blind basis,
so that we can evaluate it and send them
the results back.  At first it will be a
voluntary basis.  Later on we hope to have
a compulsory certification process.  This
will give us some mechanism where we can
actually grade the data and the agency that
is producing the data.

Ellsaesser:  Can you give us any examples
in which monitoring has prevented tragedies
from occurring?  In particular, can you think
of any way in which a monitoring system
could have prevented what has been called
the air pollution episode of Costa Rica?

Morgan;  I think, if you are referring to
air pollution episodes, they are meteorolog-
ical phenomena.  Then I won't comment on that
one.  I'm not that familiar with it.  But
certainly monitoring does not prevent
episodes from occurring.  Monitoring can
certainly prevent things from occurring such
as a buildup of radioactivity in the
streams, where you monitor the sediment in
a stream, for instance.  This happened in
the Tennessee River, the discharge from White
Elk Creek. Certainly monitoring has identified
some of the pathways of pollutants such as
lead and cadmium, and we're trying to pre-
vent a national disaster now by monitoring
and determining these pathways and inter-
cepting the pollutant at the most opportune
points in the pathways.

Question;  Your quality assurance program
deals with analytic quality control.  How
do you extrapolate that to the collection
efficiency of the sampling mechanism, so
that the numbers you get actually represent
the environment and not just the ability of
the laboratory to analyze a sample that they
receive?

Morgan;  Your first statement was wrong.
The quality assurance program encomoasses
everything from sampling to the formatting
of the data to the computer, so that it is
in the proper units going to the computer,
a machine readable format.  For instance,
in the air we look at spiking of samples
to the intake of continuous air monitoring
instruments, or you can spike samples going
into a water monitoring continuous instrument.
You are actually then determining the
efficiency of the sampling mechanism, you
are determining the accuracy of the analytical
part of the instrument, and you are seeing
that you have data out in a machine readable
format, so that it can be used in an optimum
format for the person who needs the data.
So it encompasses the entire spectrum.  The
representativeness of sampling is something
that is also part of the quality assurance
program.  This is to produce good guidelines
from our NERC's, from our operating programs,
and to see that the people are trained in
using these techniques.
                                          -176-

-------
                     THE EPA MEASUREMENTS & INSTRUMENTATION PROGRAM
                        Alphonse F. Forziati and Louis G.  Swaby
                         Chief and Deputy Chief, Respectively
                        Measurements and Instrumentation Branch
                           Office of Research and Monitoring
                            Environmental Protection Agency
                               Washington, D. C.  20460
                                        ABSTRACT

     This paper is a brief presentation of the Environmental Protection Agency's
measurements and instrumentation research and development program.  The paper identifies
the present high priority needs, some future requirements and the resources associated
with the program.  The purpose of the presentation is to brief the extramural com-
munity, including other Federal Agencies, of EPA's capabilities and needs in the area
of measurements and instrumentation.  It is hoped that the presentation will allow
interested groups to identify capabilities and expertise within their own programs
which may be applicable to EPA's needs.
     The objectives of the research and
development conducted under this program,
as authorized or required by legislation,
may be summarized as follows:

(A)  To provide measurement techniques and
instrumentation for support of EPA re-
search programs on the causes, extent,
effects and control of pollution.

(B)  To provide measurement techniques and
instrumentation for identification and
quantification of pollutants to assist in
the setting of standards and to determine
compliance with the standards.

     Some of the activities in which
measurement techniques and instrumentation
are required are listed below:

1) EPA as guidance in setting standards.
2) Enforcement officers to detect and
   prosecute violation of established
   standards.
3) Surveillance personnel for monitoring.
4) Physicians to determine the effects of
   pollutants on humans.
5) Biologists determining the toxicity of
   pollutants to plant and animal
   organisms.
6) Engineers studying industrial and
   urban water and air pollution problems.
7) Agriculturists concerned with
   pollution from fanning operations and
   rural runoff.

     The program consists of both in-
house and extramural efforts and is ad-
ministered under four program elements.
Program
Element

1A1010


1B1027



1E1079


1F1084
Title

Instrumentation & Analytical
Methods (Air)

Methods Development for Iden-
tification of Pollutants
(Water)

Pesticides Identification
Methodology

Radiation Methods and
Instrumentation
     The laboratories associated with
the measurements and instrumentation
program are located at Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina (1A1010, 1F1084);
Perrine, Florida (1E1079); Athens,
Georgia (1B1027);  and Cincinnati, Ohio
(1B1027).

     The total resources utilized in
FY'72, planned for FY'73, and projected
for FY'74 are shown in Table I.

     The activities in the last two pro-
gram elements are minimal and will not be
discussed to any extent in this paper.
The reduction of over $1 million from
FY'72 to FY'73, should be noted.  This
decrease is the result of a high level
belief that industry will assume more of
the cost of R&D for instrumentation
                                          -177-

-------
development in the future.

     About 50% of the extramural funds
shown in Table I are not available to
support new research proposals as this
amount is essentially committed for the
continuation of multiple year awards.
Thus the opportunities for new grant and
contract support are quite limited.  Hence
our very stringent requirement that pro-
posals approved for support be very
relevant to the fulfillment of EPA
measurement and instrumentation needs of
high priority.

     At present, the majority of our
needs relate to the detection and quan-
tification of air pollutants.  Thus
program element 1A1010 is considered
first.

INSTRUMENTATION AND ANALYTICAL METHODS
(AIR)

Program Element 1A1010.  The relevant
legislation is the Clean Air Act as
amended 1970.  In summary the Act author-
izes or requires methods and instrumen-
tation development for:

1) Ambient air quality measurements.
2) Stationary source performance measure-
   ments.
3) Mobile source performance measurements
4) Fuel or fuel additive analysis
5) Support of EPA research in health
   effects, welfare effects, control
   technology, etc.

     In addition, pollutants named for
control by the National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAPS) must be measured and/or moni-
tored in ambient air and at sources.

     The Act requires standards to be
promulgated along with a compliance or
reference method and authorizes the
Administrator to require monitoring when
he considers it necessary.  Our program
assumes that in the long run continuous
monitoring methods will be required in
most cases as they are more convenient,
provide the type of data needed to
identify potential problems before they
become episodes and usually require less
expertise to generate reliable data.

     In the meantime, manual methods
involving sampling followed by wet
chemical or laboratory instrumental pro-
cedures are being established for each
pollutant identified for control.  These
methods are usually more readily devel-
oped, thus allowing sufficient time to
collect the data required for estab-
lishing standards within the time frame
set by legislation.  Also, these methods
are at present more adaptable for use in
State and local laboratories.

     To date, measurement methods have
been published for six pollutants
covered by national ambient air quality
standards, for five pollutants from five
sources covered by standards of perform-
ance for new stationary sources, and for
two of the three pollutants designed as
hazardous air pollutants.  Thirty-seven
additional pollutants have been identi-
fied for control in the near future.
The following list identifies the pol-
lutants in groups.
Pollutant

Sulfur Dioxide
Sulfur Trioxide
Sulfuric Acid Mist

Nitric Oxide
Nitrogen Dioxide
Nitric Acid Mist
  SO
  NO
Total Particulate Mass     Par-
  Loading                  ticu-
Visible Emissions          late
Particle Size Distribution
Number of Particulates
Particle Composition
  (general)
Particulate Sulfate
Particulate Nitrate
Method
  of
Control

  a,b
          a
          b

          a.b

          b
Asbestos
Mercury
Beryllium
Carbon Monoxide
Haz-
ardous   c
Air      c
Pollut-
ants
Total Non-Methane Hydro-  Or-
  carbons                 ganic
Specific Hydrocarbons     Com-
Polychlorinates-          pounds
  Biphenyls
Polynuclear Organic
  Matter
Reactive Hydrocarbons(class)
                                         -178-

-------
                                  Method
                                    of
                                  Control
Pollutant                  Group

Hydrogen Sulfide          Odors
Mercaptans
Ammonia & Amines
Organic Acids
Aldehydes
Odor (Human Perception)

Hydrogen Chloride         Halo-
Chlorine Gas              gens
Hydrogen Fluoride

Oxidants

Copper                    Other
Zinc                      Pollut-
Boron                     ants
Tin
Lithium
Chromium
Vanadium
Manganese
Selenium
Arsenic
Phosphoric Acid Mist
Cadmium
Lead
a - National Ambient Air Quality Standard
b - New Source Performance Standards
c - National Emission Standards for
      Hazardous Air Pollutants

     It does not appear necessary to
list the various industry sources to be
controlled but it should be pointed out
that each source presents unique sam-
pling, interference and interfacing
problems.  Methodology and instrumenta-
tion applicable to one source are not
necessarily directly applicable to an-
other source.

     The resources planned for FY'73 and
FY'74 according to categories within
this program element are shown in Table
II.  The categories are listed in order
of priority.  The priority takes into
account the time within which a method is
needed and the apparent difficulty of the
problem.

     A further breakdown  of funds to be
expended on instrumentation, by pollutant
and source, is given in Table III for
FY'73.  The difference, $856 K, between
the totals in Tables I and II represents
funds to be spent on non-instrumental
methods, special equipment, and manage-
ment of the program.

     The status of our current ability to
detect and quantify the pollutants listed
in Table III and of our needs to improve
our capability are summarized in Table IV.

PROGRAM ELEMENT 1B1027

Methods Development for Identification of
Pollutants (Water).  The pertinent sec-
tions of the Water Pollution Control Act
and subsequent amendments are:

Sec. (5):   Authorizes the conduct of
research,  investigations, experiments,
demonstration, and studies relating to the
causes, control, and prevention of water
pollution.

Sec. (5)(d)(B):  Authorizes the develop-
ment and demonstration under varied con-
ditions (including conducting such basic
and applied research, studies and experi-
ments as may be necessary) of improved
methods and procedures to identify and
measure the effects of pollutants on water
uses, including those pollutants created
by new technologies.

Sec. (5)(L)(1):  Requires the Development
of the latest scientific knowledge indi-
cating the kind and extent of effects on
health and welfare of pesticides in water
in varying quantities	revise and add
to such information whenever necessary to
reflect developing scientific knowledge.

Sec. (5)(L)(2):  Authorizes the study and
investigation of methods to control the re-
lease of pesticides into the environment,
including examination of the persistency of
pesticides in the water environment.

     Unlike the Clean Air Act, with the ex-
ception of pesticides, pollutants are not
specifically identified and dates are not
set for the establishment of specific
analytical methods.  Measurement and in-
strumentation methodology is generally im-
plied as necessary in order to meet other
requirements of the Act.  This looseness
of mandate has advantages and disadvan-
tages.  On the positive side, it permits
long range planning and the consideration
of methods applicable to large classes
rather than to specific individual pollut-
ants.  More sophisticated techniques re-
quiring long lead times can be developed.
On the other hand, it is sometimes
                                         -179-

-------
difficult to justify the apportionment of
research funds or to substantiate a claim
for an increase in funds to support addi-
tional research for the identification and
quantification of very important but
neglected classes of pollutants.

     The 90 parameters currently used to
evaluate water quality are listed in
Table V.  Some of the parameters involve
classes of substances, hence include many
individual pollutants, e.g., pesticides,
CCE (chloroform extracts of material
adsorbed on carbon), M6AS (methylene blue
active substances - surfactants), fish
(many species) and so on.  The list would
more nearly approach 300 if expanded to
include individual pollutants of signif-
icance and would rise to 700 if the
recently detected and suspected trace
organics are considered.

     The EPA methods and instrumentation
program for the detection and quantifi-
cation of water pollutants recognizes
that analytical requirements fall into
three categories:  1) Methods intended
for pioneering research laboratories,
standardizing or reference laboratories
such as the National Bureau of Standards,
and for the detection and quantification
of critical, highly toxic pollutants.
These methods are very accurate and in-
volve sophisticated, precise instrumenta-
tion.  Highly skilled, experienced scien-
tists are required to obtain the desired
results.  2) Methods used by research and
control laboratories for the measurement
of water quality parameters when the
highest sensitivity and accuracy are not
required.  These methods meet the bulk of
the measurement and instrumentation needs
of academic, government and industrial
laboratories.  They are included in the
handbook "The Analysis of Waters and
Wastewaters" published annually by EPA.
3) Simplified methods for field use and
the "ruggedized" instrumentation for
continuous monitoring applications under
unfavorable environments.  The current
analytical research program seeks to fill
the methodology needs of categories 1 and
2 and the research aspects of category 3
by means of 12 Research Objective
Achievement Plans (ROAPS).  The ROAPS and
the distribution of resources are listed
in Table VI.

     The objective of ROAP 16 ADN is to
generate methods suitable for use by
scientists in the first category.  It has
 been assigned  to  the  Southeast  Water  Lab-
 oratory  (SEWL)  in Athens,  Georgia,  where
 the  high degree of scientific expertise
 and  sophisticated instrumentation are
 concentrated.   ROAP 09  ABZ is intended to
 meet the needs  of laboratories  in the
 second and  third  categories.  Accordingly,
 it is the responsibility of  the Analytical
 Quality  Control Laboratory (AQCL) in
 Cincinnati, Ohio,  to  fulfill the objec-.
 tives of this ROAP.   The AQCL develops,
 compiles and publishes  the EPA  handbook
 detailing the approved  methods  for  the
 analysis of waters and  wastewaters.   ROAP
 07 AAP involves pioneering research to
 develop  better  methods  of  concentrating
 and  isolating viruses.  It has  been as-
 signed to the virology  laboratory of  the
 Robert A Taft Water Research Center in
 Cincinnati, Ohio,  where the highest EPA
 virological expertise is located.   The
 remaining ROAPS are distributed on  the
 basis of similar  considerations.

      Again, it  should be pointed out  that
 less  than a third  of  the funds  shown
 allocated for grants and contracts  are
 available for new  projects as the major
 portion  is essentially  committed to
 support  continuations of on-going pro-
 jects.

      The status of  the  analytical methods
 and  instrumentation currently under study,
 the  capability  and  limitations  of these
 methods,  and the need for  additional  re-
 search are detailed in  Table VII.

      It  is noted  that the  greatest  need,
 in the water pollutant  detection program,
 is for better methods for  the detection
 and quantification of biological pollut-
 ants, especially viruses.  It is hoped
 that  funds will be made available to  ex-
 pand  this program.

 PROGRAM  ELEMENT 1E1079

 Pesticides Identification Methodology.
 Tasks under this program element will
 develop methodology for the isolation,
 detection, identification, confirmation,
 and quantification of pesticide residues,
metabolites, and other  chemical contami-
nants.  Data developed by  this  program
will  support administrative decisions
 concerning the  registration of  pesticides.
 The data will also be very useful in
 elucidating the action-mechanism of pest-
 icides and their metabolic products.
                                         -180-

-------
Resources for FY'73 and FY'74 are shown
below:
          FY'73
     $(1000)

      180.7
    MY

    9.0
         FY'74

    $(1000)     MY
      250
       11
The funding provided is barely sufficient
to pay the costs of the in-house personnel.
Thus, in FY'73, no funds are available for
the support of research grants or con-
tracts dealing with residue methodology.
Unless additional funds are made available
the situation is about the same for FY'74.

     The work is carried on at the Perrine
Primate Laboratory, Perrine, Florida.
Last fiscal year the laboratory developed
methods for 1) analyzing urine for halo-
phenol and chromium content; 2) determin-
ing animal and human exposure to organo-
phosphorus compounds;  and 3) determining
alkylmercury compounds in tissues. Cur-
rent research is concerned with developing
methods for determining low levels of
aromatic N-methyl-carbamate, 2,4-D and 2,
4,5-T, PCBs and trace metals in human and
other tissues.

     It is hoped to expand this program to
include the development of methods for the
determination of residues of all toxic
substances as soon as funds and manpower
can be made available.  Estimated addi-
tional resources required to implement
this expanded program are $500,000 and 10
positions.

PROGRAM ELEMENT 1F1084

Electromagnetic Radiation Methods and
Instrumentation.
         be  losses  of  personnel  who do  not  desire
         to  move and consequent  reallocation of
         tasks.   Until the  move  is  completed,
         efforts will  remain at  a low level.

         SUMMARY

              In summary then, our  urgent needs  are
         better  methodology for  the characteriza-
         tion of particulate air pollutants and
         reliable methodology for the rapid re-
         covery,  identification  and quantification
         of  viruses and bacteria.  In addition,
         there is a continuing need for transducers
         for the automation of the  many wet chemi-
         cal methods listed in the  EPA manual  for
         chemical analysis  of water and waste-
         waters,  particularly the measurement  of
         phosphate, nitrate, and toxic  substances
         such as mercury, arsenic,  lead, chromium,
         cadmium, cyanide,  and sulfila.
                RESOURCES
                FY'73

           $(1000)   MY
HQ
In-House
Extramural
 50
195.4
  0
 0
9.0
                    FY'74
               $(1000)    MY
 50
200
  0
 0
9.0
Little can be said, with any degree of
certainty, about this program for the
development of measurement and instru-
mentation technology for non-ionizing
radiation as the work is being transferred
from Rockville, Maryland to Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina.  There may
                                         -181-

-------
TABLE I
Program
Element
1A1010
(Air)
1B1027
(Water)
1F1084
(Radi-
ation)
1E1079
(Pesti-
cides)
UNIT
HQ
In-House
Extramural
TOTAL
HQ
In-House
Extramural
TOTAL
HQ
In-House
Extramural
TOTAL
HQ
In-House
Extramural
TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL
FY'72
$(1000)
40
1682.8
3355.0
5077.8
125
1474
1147
3087
0
211
75
286
0
180.7
0
180.7
8631.5
P*
2.0
54
56
5
61.6
66.6
0
10
10
0
9
0
9
141.6
FY'73
$(1000)
50
1637.0
2556.0
4243.0
125
1389.2
1315.8
2830.0
50
195.4
0
245.4
0
180.7
0
180.7
7499.1
P*
2.0
55
57
5
61.5
66.5
9.0
9.0
0
9
0
9
141.5
FY'74
$(1000)
50
1837
3113
5000
125
1515.5
1359.5
3000.0
50
200
0
250
0
250
0
250
8500.0
P*
2.0
63
65
5
66.5
71.5
9
9
0
11
0
11
156.5
*P - permanent positions,  in-house.
                                        -182-

-------
                                        TABLE II
                          RESOURCES PLANNED FOR FY'73 & FY'74
ITEM
PARTICULATES FROM STATIONARY SOURCES
AMBIENT AIR PARTICULATES
EMISSIONS FROM MOBILE SOURCES
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES FROM STATIONARY SOURCES
GASEOUS POLLUTANTS IN AMBIENT AIR
GASEOUS POLLUTANTS FROM STATIONARY SOURCES
TOTAL
FY'73
$(1000)* MY**
939.0
621.0
714.0
237.3
726.0
955.8
4193.1
8.8
9.7
13.2
2.5
10.2
8.6
55.0
FY'74
$(1000)* MY**
1059.0
800.0
805.0
400.2
830.0
1055.8
4950.0
10.0
11.0
15.0
4.0
11.0
10.0
61.0
*Dollars include funds allocated for extramural research.
**MY refers to in-house man-years of effort.   (1 MY,  in-house,  costs approximately
  $25,000)


                                        TABLE III
AIR

CO
NO
X
SO
X
HAPS
HC
HALOGEN
ORGAN ICS
T. MASS*
VISIBILITY*
SIZE*
NON-SPEC.**
INSTRUMENTATION FUNDING ACCORDING TO POLLUTANT AND
(Dollars
AMBIENT
12
120
84
111
93
3
141
13
0
135
350
in Thousands)
STATIONARY
50
129
123
164
.57
140
67
330
131
237
392
SOURCE :

MOBILE
14
0
0
56
79
0
52
81
0
17
156
FY'73

TOTAL
76
249
207
331
229
143
260
424
131
389
898
                TOTAL
$1062
$1820
$ 455
$3337
*Particulates.
**Non-Spec. refers to instrumentation applicable to several pollutants, sampling instru-
  mentation and other non-pollutant specific instrumentation.
                                          -183-

-------
                                        TABLE IV*

R

R
A
N
F
R
A
A
NE

F

R
METHOD
FID-GC

NDIR
Gas Chromatography
FID

Chemiluminescence
Chemiluminescence
lodometric
Chemiluminescent



NDIR
APP
AA
X



X
X
X
X
X
X

X

X
LICA
SS














noN
MS
X

X
X









X
REMARKS
Gas chromatographic separation followed by
flame ionization detection is used to measure
ambient levels of non-methane hydrocarbons
(NMHC), requires skilled operators. For
mobile sources (i.e., light duty and diesels)
FID measures concentrations 0.1 to 120,000
ppm, unequal response to a variety of HC.
Used for heavy duty vehicles. Shows unequal
response to various classes of HC.
GC methods available for batch analysis of
individual HC.
System contains two hydrocarbon detectors.
One measures the NMHC which are initially
removed by a cell containing Hopcalite,
combusted to C02 and H.O. The second
measures the methane which is unaltered .
An improved analytical method is needed
which requires less skilled operators.
OXIDANTS
Photochemically measures reaction of
ethylene and ozone.
Chemiluminescence detection of ozone using
Rhodamine-B adsorbed on silica gel and nitric
oxide in the gas-phase
Wet-chemical technique; interferences by
N02 and S02.
Technique for the simultaneous measurement
of both N02 and 0. involving photolysis of
N0» followed by cnemiluminescent detection
of NO. With the lamp off, ozone alone is
detected. Instrument needs to be field
tested.
Need to simplify and lower cost of
chemiluminescent analyzers.
CO
Modification - traps, filters, and electronic
*R = Reference methods;  A ° Alternate acceptable methods;  NE = New methods currently
 under investigation by  EPA;  NO = New methods being developed by non-EPA laboratories;
 F = Methods needed; AA  - Ambient Air; SS = Stationary Sources;  MS =  Mobile Sources.
                                         -184-

-------


R
A


A


NE







NE
NE
NO




NO

NE
IJJ
F
F




R



METHOD

NDIR
NDIR


Fir after 'iiydro--
genation to CK,

AA after reduction
of HgO to Hg by CO
at 400°F





I" - fluorescence
NDIR - correlation
Electrochemical-Pt
diffusion electrode



Electrocatalytic

In-situ laser
Dispersive IR






Jacob-Hochheiser/
colorimetric


APPI
AA

X



T'
J*


X







X

X








X









ICA1
SS


X





X














X

X
X






X



ION
MS

X



^r
*x










X
X










X








REMARKS
CO
Modification - traps, filters, and electronic
compensation; many reliable models available
commercially; range to 5000 ppm. Interfer-
ences: H-0 vapor, C0_.
GC techniques: useful for both CO and NTC1C;
niore sensitive than IIT^IF.. commercial instru-
ments have poor durability.
Air dryer & charcoal filter in air inlet
system required; HgO pellet cracks; dryer
does not remove all H?0; concentration range
not stable; temp, fluctuations of pellet
chamber caused serious errors ; too much
electronic noise. Can measure CO, TH, and
N>tHC. Interferences: H^O vapor, hydro-
carbons .
Very sensitive; HO does not interfere.
Specificity and sensitivity excellent.
Instrument is small, portable (9 Ibs) ,
inexpensive (less than $1000) ; battery
operated; 0 -• 100 ppm range; excessive drift
is a problem. Interferences: ethylene,
acetylene.
Requires selective scrubbing systems. Inter-
ferences: S0_, NO-, and H-.


Current tasks sufficient; no needs.
New instrumentation to measure concentrations
of CO lower than 100 ppm for 1975 vehicles
needed.
NO
X
Collection of N0? as nitrite followed by
colorimetric determination. Large variation
in % recovery with a change in NO. concent-
ration. Interferences: NO, S0_.
-185-

-------

R


R




A





A

A

A

A
NE





NE



NE







METHOD
Phenol disulfonic
acid (PDS)

Chemllumlnescence




Chemlluminescence





Colorlmetrlc

PDS/solid absorbent

Electrochemical

NDIR/NDUV
Time-Integrated
collection system




Ion-selective
electrode


Chemi lumine s cence







APPI
AA








X





X






X





X



X







-ICA1
SS
X















X














X







'ION
MS



X














X

X


















REMARKS
Manual method that measures N0? colorimet-
rically. Long analysis time (31 hours) :
Interferences: chloride.
Chemiluminescent detection of NO with ozone
using a stainless steel converter of NO..
Most available instruments do not offer
converter flow control. System adequate for
NO levels prescribed for 1976 automobiles.
Indirect method of NO. measurement by thermal
conversion of NO- to NO followed by reaction
with ozone and cnemiluminescent detection.
Metal surfaces such as gold, stainless steel,
and carbon impregnated metals have been used
for conversion ($6,000). Operates at reduced
pressure.
Automatic analyzers that measure NO. based on
the Saltzman colorimetric procedure ($6,000).
Using crystalline lead dioxide as sorbent,
analysis time using PDS method is 6 - 7 hours.
Instruments available which are adequate if
slow response times are acceptable.
Interferences: CO., H.O.
Modification of collection system using
various media e.g. triethanolamine/butanol;
triethanolamine/R salt/sodium hydroxide for
the J-H method. Also impinger liquid
collection and solid state collection offer
N0_ recovery of over 90%.
The nitrite formed in the collection media is
oxidized to nitrate and measured with a
nitrate ion-specific electrode. This
approach needs further investigation.
The original chemiluminescent/ozone analyzer
for N02 is being fabricated to operate at
ambient pressures. These instruments will
receive extended field evaluation. For
stationary and mobile sources, this instrument
has been modified to use atomic oxygen
instead of ozone. In the ozone method the
conversion process of NO. to NO is inadequate.
-186-

-------

NE
NE
NE
NE
NO
F
F
F
R
R
A
A
METHOD
Time-integrated
instrument
Interferometer
Gas cell
correlation
NDIR
Second-order spec-
troscopy, GC, Opt-
acoustics, coulometry,
long path IR



Pararosaniline/
colorimetric
Barium perchlorate
titration
Flame photometric
detection (FPD)
FPD-GC
APPI
AA
X



X
X


X

X
X
,ICA1
ss

X
X
X


X


X


noN
MS







X


X
X
REMARKS
Instrument will collect and store digital data
indicating average concentration for NO. and
NO during a preselected integration period
of up to 24 hours; will store data for up
to 30 days and transfer to data bank.
($1,000 - $2,000).
Uses Raman scattering detection for NO
in-situ analysis. The system has not yet
been demonstrated in a prototype model.
Uses NDIR for NO detection. Designed for
in-situ monitoring.
System using resonance fluorescence shows
adequate specificity and sensitivity.
Application of gas cell correlation techniques
Potentially applicable.
Measurement methods need to be developed and
evaluated; revise or establish new N0»
reference method.
Need for manual method for stationary sources;
e.g. metal and metal finishing, paper, coal
and coke, fertilizer, petrochemical, etc.
Current methods adequate for 1976 vehicle
emission.
SO
X
Very sensitive to SO-; need experienced
laboratory personnel to operate; minimum
detectable level 0.01 ppm.
Adequate for 500 ppm levels of SO- from
selected sources; method unusable for
majority of SO- sources. Interferences:
divalent metal ions.
Measures luminescence of excited S- species;
sensitive and specific for SO ; cost $3,500.
Selectively measures H2s, S02 and CH SH
(0.002-10 ppm) ($6,300).
-187-

-------
         METHOD
                        APPLICATION
                        AA  SS  MS
              REMARKS
NE
   Coulometric
   Colorimetric
Electrochemical
sensor
NE
NE
NE
NO
NO
NO
FPD
Semiconductor
laser diode

Gas-cell correlation
spectroscopy

Fluorescence
Diode IR lasers
UV
   High volume
   Nephelometer
 Scrubbers have limited life,  ($3,000-5,000).

 Barium chloroanilate colorimetric method with
 modification  to eliminate the metallic  ion
 interferences.

 Utilizes semipermeable membrane through which
 S0_ diffuses  into an electrolyte; resulting
 SO- is oxidized, generating current pro-
 portional to  SO- concentration.  The measured
 current is recorded on magnetic tape;
 requires low  maintainence.

 A more selective FPD incorporating a heated
 silver scrubber to remove H_S.  System
 employed for  S02 and HjSO, aerosol.

 For in-situ monitoring. Obviates sampling
 system.

 For in-situ monitoring.
Detector based on S0_ fluorescence;
sensitivity  (0.1-100 ppm).  Needs greater
sensitivity.

Application  of injection  diode  IR laser  tuned
to 8.7 u.  System is expensive  and bulky.

Examines second derivative of UV adsorption
bands.  Mechanical problems with the system
unresolved.

Need  low cost S0_ monitor having sensitivity,
specificity  and long term reliability
($1,000-2,000).

The establishment of standard methods  for
stationary sources emissions.   Deficiencies
of existing  equipment are unsatisfactory
sample conditioning systems and calibration
instability.
                                     PARTICULATES-TOTAL MASS

                                     Accurate and reproducible; collection
                                     efficiency not well defined for particles
                                     with diameters near 0.1 and 100 urn; lack
                                     of short term information; integrates over
                                     24 hours.

                                     Measures total mass of particles in the 0.1
                                     to 1 urn diameter size interval.
                                       -188-

-------
         METHOD
                         APPLICATION
                         AA  SS   MS
                                                       REMARKS
NE
Tape sampler
photometric

Beta guage
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
Capacitance/impact
Acoustical particle
counter
Piezoelectric
microbalance
Dilution tunnel
Transmissometer
Electrostatic
precipatator

Lidar
NO
X-Ray Fluorescence
Provides rapid measurement; interference:
particle color and surface reflectance.

                                 14
Uses a beta ray emitter such as C  ; count
rate decrease is proportional to the
amount of collected particulate material.
Provides rapid measurements automatically;
ambient monitor needs interfacings for
sources emission uses.

Detects impact momentum of aerosol particle
striking a sensing surface.  Measures sizes
above 0.1 urn directly in the stack; high
sensitivity, 10 mg/m ; ($2,000-5,000).

For in-situ measurement of individual particles
above 5 urn; requires sample conditioning;
no commercial equipment available.

Vibration of quartz crystal proportional
to the deposited particulate matter; sensitive;
unequal surface adherence of particulates;
difficult to use as a field monitor; needs
interfacing for source work ($2,000).

Methodogy for diluting vehicle exhaust;
determination by beta-ray absorption technique.

Measures optical density of suspended
particles; high reliability; low cost opera-
tion.  Disadvantage: does not detect particle
mass but some other related parameter.

Measures particle flow rate; system has
little potential as mass monitor.

Optical analog of radar; measures reflection
of light from particles using laser light
source; senses wide concentration range;
if centrally located can be used to monitor
several sources.  Disadvantages:  does not
measure mass directly; expensive; uses
sophisticated research equipment.

Determines amount of elements with atomic
weight greater than 27.

Need automatic instrumentation with 2-4 hour
time resolution; need to measure particulate
mass in the 0.1 to 3 urn range.

Need measurement strategy for a variety of
stationary sources.
                                        -189-

-------

F


A




A




A




NE




NE







NE


NE



A


A



METHOD



Electron microscopy




Light scattering




Impact Ion




Light Scattering




Impaction







Mini-cyclones


Laser doppler
velocimeter


Other methods


Charged particle
drift spectrometry


AA



X




X




X




X




X





















ss



X




X




X









X







X


X



X






MS
X


X




X




X









X

















X



REMARKS
Need test method for fine particulates and
rubber tire and asbestos particulates.
PARTICULATE-SIZE
Gives acceptable indication of particulate
size; tedious and expensive methodo.i.y. In
source work, particles concentrate on filter
making counting difficult; analysis of highly
volatile particulates difficult.
Particle scattered light is stored in a pulse
height analyzer; signal varies monotonically
with size; variation in refractive index
of ambient air can cause error by factor
of 2 to 4.
Provides 4 to 7 stages for size fraction-
ation; no discrimination of particle size
below 0.3 urn; small particle impaction
nozzles tend to plug up when device is used
in stacks.
Annular counters measure scattering at 5°
and 10°; size and refractive index inform-
ation obtained in 0.1 to 3 urn interval;
not affected by variation of refractive
index of ambient air.
For ambient work fractionates 0.05 to 10
urn range particles into ten intervals;
last three stages operate at reduced
pressures to extend lowest limit by a
factor of ten; for source work, sizes
particles into six fractions, range 0.05
to 10 urn; analyzed automatically with beta
guage.
Separate particle sizes down to about 0.5 urn;
permit large sampling; real time
fractionation.
Intersecting laser beams form interference
patterns, mathematical analysis provides
sizing information; real time in-situ data;
lower size limit undetermined.
Sedimentation, gravitation, elutriation,
centrifugation, spectrometric, sieving,
filtration, diffusion, and optical techniques
Rapidly determines particle distribution
from 0.015 to 1.0 urn. Oxidation of
particulates by ozone in discharge severely
limits applicability.
-190-

-------

F




R


A

NE

NE



NE



NE


NE

NE
NE
NO


NO

NO


F

F
METHOD





AA spectrometry


Other

Electric discharge
detector
X-Ray Fluorescence



Ion selective
electrodes


Fluorescence-GC


SEM/X-ray

X-Ray diffraction
Plasma (microwave)
Neutron activation


SSMS

TGA





APPL
AA
X









X

X



X



X






X


X







ICAT
SS





X






X










X

X
X
X







X


ION
MS








X














X













X
REMARKS
Need simple two stage device for separate
measurement of coarse and fine particulates.
For research, time resolution 5-60 minutes;
for routine use, 4 to 8 hours unattended.
PARTICULATE-COMPOSITION
Particulate mercury and beryllium collected
in an impinger solution; analysis by
flameless atomic absorption spectrometry.
Standard methods (chromatograpy , elemental
analysis, IR, UV, MS, etc.) for organics.
Measures Hg, Cd, Se, As, and Pb.

Requires no sample preparation after
filteration of particulate; automated for
routine analysis; moderate equipment cost.
Real time measurements of lead and mercury.
Automated collection and detection system
measures nitrate concentration of particu-
lates; developed for gaseous HF and solid
fluorides.
Fluorescence detector coupled to GC measures
polynuclear aromatic HC in particulate
extract.
Scanning electron microscope/x-ray fluorescence
technique will be developed for asbestos.
Developed for asbestos.
Measurement of Cd, Be, and other trace metals.
Measures elemental content, expensive;
requires long measurement periods; used
only for special analysis.
Spark source mass spectrometer measures
elemental composition.
Thermogravimetric analysis combined with MS
used for detailed analysis of complex
molecular mixtures.
Need standard method for measurement of
asbestos.
Need method for asbestos and rubber.
-191-

-------
*R « Reference methods;  A = Alternate acceptable methods; NE = New methods
 currently under investigation by EPA; NO = New methods being developed
 by non-EPA laboratories; F = Methods needed.
#AA • Ambient Air;  SS ° Stationary Sources;  MS  = Mobile  Sources.
                                   -192-

-------
                                         TABLE V
                      PARAMETERS USED IN EVALUATION OF WATER QUALITY
   Hydrological &
   Meteorological

Volumetric Flow Rate
Velocity
Time of Flow
Depth
Tide Variation
Wind Speed & Direction
Solar Radiation
 Intensity
Air Temperature &
 Humidity
    Physical

Temperature
Specific Conductance
Turbidity
Light Penetration
Color
Odor
PH
Total Solids (Volatile
 & Fixed)
Suspended Solids
 (Volatile & Fixed)
Floating Solids
Sediment
 Concentration
 Particle Size
 Bed Load
         Chemical, Inorganic
   Dissolved Oxygen
   Dissolved Carbon
    Dioxide
   Hydrogen Sulfide
   Minerals:
    Acidity
    Alkalinity
     Calcium
     Magnesium
     Bicarbonate
     Carbonate
     Hydroxide
   Hardness
   Chlorides
   Sulfates
   Dissolved Solids
   Radiochemical
Trace Elements:
Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Boron
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Zinc
 Chemical, Organic

BOD (Immediate, 5-
 day, Long-Term)
COD
Chlorine Demand
Total Organic Carbon
MBAS
CCE
CAE
Cyanide
Pesticides
Oil & Crease
Phenolics
 Nutrients
Organic-N
NH -N
NO^-N
NO^-N
Total-P
Soluble-P
Organic-P
Orthophosphate
Polyphosphates
Microbiological

Coliform, Total &
 Fecal
Fecal Streptococci
Total Plate Count
Salmonella
Shigella
Viruses:
 Coxsackie A&B
 Polio
 Adenovirus
 Echo
 Biological

Plankton
Periphyton
Benthos
Fish
Waterfowl
Wildlife
Vascular Plant
                                          -193-

-------
                                         TABLE VI

                             PROGRAM ELEMENT 1B1027 - $(1000)
FY'73


INORG. CHEM.
OF PHYS. &
ATER
I
125.0
227.1
362.7
51. 6//
G
60.0**
238.9
—
Ł
236.8*
93

TOT
421.8
559.0
414.3
FY'74
TOT
125
800
700
Cat.           ROAP

      HEADQUARTERS

1     16 ADN - IDEM
        CHEM. POLLUTANTS IN WATER

1     07 AAP - DEVELOP METHODS FOR CONC.,      175.0     275.0     —       450.0    500
        RECOV., & IDENTIFICATION OF
        VIRUSES IN WATER

2     05 AED - DEVELOP RAPID METHODS FOR        46.0      40.0     —        86.0    100
        DET. & ENUM. OF PATHOGENS IN
        DRINKING, RECREATION, & OTHER WATERS

2     05 AEF - METHODS FOR DETERMINING         155.0      40.0     13.0     245.7    200
        BIOLOG. PARAMETERS FOR ALL WATERS       37.70

2     16 ACG - IDENT. OF CHEM. POLL'S IN        76.1-      75.0     —       151.1    125
        MUNICIP. WASTEWATER

2     07 ABL - IDENT. OF CHEM. POLL'S IN        59.4      40.0     —        99.4    100
        INDUST. WASTEWATER

2     07 AAT - EVAL. OF INDICATOR ORGANISMS     41.0      40.0     —        81.0     75

1     24 AAP - IDENTIFICATION OF OILS &        117.5      34.0     —       151.5    100
        THEIR SOURCES

2     16 AJA - CHARACTERIZATION OF OILS         50.0      —       —        50.0     50

1     07 ADJ - IDENT. OF TASTE & ODOR           42.0      —       --        42.0     50
        CAUSING COMPOS. & THEIR SOURCES

3     21 ANN - DEMON. OF APPLIC. OF NEW         79.0      —       —        79.0     75
        ANAL. METHODS                          	
                              TOTAL           1645.1     842.9    342.8    2830.8   3000

*Includes funds for contracts for the support of the Analytical Methodology Information
 Center (AMIC), for the development of protocols for the release of chemicals into the
 environment, and for the development of phosphate free detergents.

**A grant to study the light scattering properties of aqueous suspensions.

//Special equipment.

I - In-house, salaries plus costs
G - Grants
C - Contracts
                                          -194-

-------
                                                                TABLE  VII
                                         METHODS  FOR INSTRUMENTAL  ANALYSIS  OF WATER POLLUTANTS
CD
cn
i
          Method

      Low Resolution
      Mass
      Spectrometry
      Infrared
      Spectroscopy
      Nuclear
      Magnetic
      Resonance
      Laser Raman
      Spectrometry
      Resonance
      Raman Effect
      Fluorescence
      and
      Phosphorescence

      High Resolution
      Mass
      Spectrometry
        Application

Identification of moderately
volatile organic compounds
Identification of organic
compounds and functional
groups

Determination of molecular
conformations
Identification of organic
compounds and functional
groups

Identification of organic
compounds and functional
groups

Identification of organic
compounds
Identification and elemental
analysis of moderately
volatile organic compounds
Sensitivity

l-50ng
10-100ng
with Fourier
Transform

Img.can be
improved by
Fourier
Transform &
microcell

0.1-lng
picogram
range
lOng
O.lng
 Interferences & Limits

Requires separation into
mixtures of no more than
2 or 3 compounds. Not
applicable, to compounds
with low vapor pressure.

Compound must be
relatively pure.
Requires separation into
mixtures of no more than
2 or 3 compounds. Lack
of sensitivity is serious
shortcoming.

Fluorescent materials
interfere. Compounds must
be relatively pure.

Fairly selective
Must use pure compounds.
Quenching effects cause
problems.

Requires several hours to
obtain complete spectrum
            Comments

With GC Introduction system
and computerized data reduc-
tion and analysis this is
currently beet tool for
organic identification.

Largest list of reference
spectra of all techniques.
Wide variety of solvent
choices. Sample can be
liquid or solid.
Spectra can be obtained in
aqueous solution.
In experimental stages.
For phosphorescence temperature
must be low and solution clear.
Provides structural information
that is more definitive than
low resolution. Provides
empirical formula for each
molecular fragment.

-------
          Method
        Application
Sensitivity
 Interferences & Limits
                                                                                                               Comments
       Plasma
       Chroma tograph
CD
0>
      Gas
      Chromatography
      High Pressure
      Liquid
      Chromatography
      Mass
      Chromatograph
      Atomic
      Absorption
      Microwave In-
      duced Emission

      X-ray
      Fluorescence
Identification of organic
compounds by molecular
weight
Separation and detection of
volatile organlcs
picogram
range
Separation and detection of
organic compounds in aqueous
or organic solution
Separation, detection
determination of molecular
weight and quantltation of
volatile organics

Elemental analysis (total
element)
Elemental analysis (total
element)

Elemental qualitative &
quantitative analysis
10 picograms
(electron
capture)-,
lOOng (flame
ionization),
20ng (coulo-
metric & con-
ductivity) .

lOng (U.V.)
lug (Refrac-
tive Index)
lOug
lug (flame)
lOng (flame-
less)
lOng
lug-lOOug,
can be im-
proved with
newer methods
of excitation
Compounds of similar
molecular weight inter-
fere, must be calibrated
by compound type
Compounds of similar
polarity
Compounds of similar
polarity
compounds of similar
polarity
Some organic compounds
interfere
Relatively free from
interference

Relatively free of inter-
ference
Operates at atmospheric pres-
sure, has extreme sensitivity,
should be applicable to thin-
layer and liquid chromotog-
raphy. Largely in experimental
stage.

Limited to volatile compounds.
Various detectors and' columns
permit some specificity.
Particularly useful for iso-
lation of polar organic com-
pounds and compounds with low
vapor pressures.

Relatively new technique.
Sensitivity comparatively low.
Applicable to only those ele-
ments that can be reduced to
ground state in flame or
furnace.

Applicable to approximately
30-50 elements.

Elements.from atomic 24 to 53
have best sensitivities.

-------
          Method
        Application
Sensitivity
 Interferences & Limits
                         Comments
CD
-0
I
      Atomic
      Emission
      Spark Source
      Mass
      Neutron
      Activation
      Analysis
      Polarography
      Ion Selective
      Electrodes
      Chemiluml-
      nescence
Elemental qualitative and
quantitative analysis
Qualitative and quantitative
elemental analysis
Qualitative and quantitative
elemental analysis
Determination of electro-
active species
Determination of specific
ions
Determination of oxidation
and ionic states
lOng-lOug
varies
widely with
elements

lOng for all
elements
10 picograms
to 10 milli-
grams varies
widely with
element

lOng (pulsed
technique)
O.lng (ASV)*
lug
Ing
Elements emitting light
of similar wave lengths
Virtually interference
free
Elements of higher gamma
energy when in adverse
ratios and energy is
close to that of iso-
topes of interest

Organic complexing agents
and adverse ratios of
other electroactive
inorganic compounds

Interferences similar to
polarography; mercury
and sulfur are usually
critical
Interferences
polarography
similar to
             Applicable principally to
             non-volatile materials.
             Detects all elements with
             similar sensitivity inde-
             pendent of chemical state.
             Low through-put of samples.

             Applicable in a practical range
             to 40 to 60 elements. Does not
             depend on chemical state. Can
             accommodate various sizes and
             types of samples.

             Shows high promise for
             speciation.
             Good for in-situ measurements.
Shows promise for kinetic
studies, speciation and
titration end-points.
      This table lists only instrumental methods.   Wet chemical methods are described in detail in the 312 page EPA manual
      "Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and  Wastes," published annually.   Anyone considering participating in the
      development of wet chemical methods would find It advantageous to become  thoroughly familiar with the contents of this
      publication.

      *ASV = anodic stripping voltammetry.

      Acknowledgment:  The capable assistance of Dr.  Deran Pashayan, of the Measurements and Instrumentation Branch, in
      preparing the many tables in this paper is gratefully acknowledged.

-------
                                 MONITORING EQUIPMENT

                     I.  SURVEY OF AIR MONITORING INSTRUMENTATION

                                Dr. Craig D. Hollowell
                            Energy and Environment Programs
                             Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
                              Berkeley, California 94720
                                       ABSTRACT

     A brief survey of instrumentation for air pollution monitoring is presented here.
Material for this survey has been obtained from the Instrumentation for Environmental
Monitoring project currently in progress at the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory.  Several
U.S. Atomic Energy Commission and National Aeronautical and Space Agency laboratories
have developed capabilities in the area of conventional air monitoring instrumentation.
Specific instrumentation projects at the national laboratories are discussed in this
paper.
              INTRODUCTION

     Any effort to control air and water
resources intelligently depends upon the
ability to detect and to monitor pollutants.
As better monitoring systems are established,
one will be able to identify build-up areas
for the various pollutants, identify flow
and dispersement patterns, and eventually
learn to predict and avoid serious health
episodes.

     In designing a monitoring system,
several factors must be considered.  At
the core of such a system is the analytical
instrument or technique.  Besides the
analyzer, a system may need some or all
of the following:  sampling probes to
obtain the sample; sampling lines to
transport the sample; conditioning units
to dry, heat, cool, or otherwise pretreat
the sample before analysis; selective
filters to remove gases or particulates
that can affect accuracy or operation;
pumps to move the sample; calibration
devices; and data-handling electronics
such as strip chart recorders.

     Air pollution monitoring systems can
be classified for either ambient air
monitoring, stationary source, or mobile
source monitoring.  They may be of either
the manual or automatic type.  Each
system for ambient air, stationary
source, or mobile source monitoring
is quite unique and must accordingly
be considered individually.
     Manual ambient air monitoring systems
may be of the static type (e.g., sulfation
plates, Pb02 candles) or of the mechanical
type (e.g., gas bubbler devices).  These
systems involve ambient sampling with
subsequent laboratory analysis (usually
by a manual method).

     Automatic ambient air monitoring
systems may be of the type in which a
sample is extracted from the ambient air
and analyzed on site with a continuous
analyzer (e.g., conductimetric instrument)
or of the type in which the continuous
analyzer requires no sampling system
(e.g., correlation spectrometer).

     Manual stationary source and mobile
source monitoring systems are of the
mechanical type.  The laboratory analysis
is usually performed away from the
sampling site.

     Automatic stationary source monitoring
systems may be  (1) the stack monitoring
type in which a sample is extracted from
the stack and analyzed on site;  (2) the
in situ type in which there is no sampling
system, and analysis is by across-the-stack
electro-optical methods;  (3) the remote
monitoring type in which there is no
sampling system, and analysis depends
on monitoring scattered sunlight or
reflected light from a remote point
such as a stack plume; or  (4) the
long-path monitoring type in which
there is no sampling system, analysis
                                         -198-

-------
is by double-ended electro-optical methods,
and monitoring is between two points such
as across the envelope of a plume.

     Automatic mobile source monitoring
systems may be of the type in which a
sample is extracted from the exhaust
system and analyzed on site, usually
with a continuous analyzer, or else of
the in situ type in which there is no
sampling system and analysis is by
across-the exhaust electro-optical
methods.

     It is the purpose of this paper to
discuss the capabilities of the U.S.
Atomic Energy Commission and National
Aeronautical and Space Administration
laboratories in the field of air
pollution monitoring instrumentation.
Discussion here will be limited to
briefly surveying those "conventional"
instruments which have been developed,
are under development, or show potential
for being developed at the AEC and NASA
laboratories.  By conventional instruments
we mean to include those instruments for
on-site analysis using current conventional
analytic techniques, but to exclude nuclear
and X-ray techniques and remote sensing.
These will be discussed in other papers.

    INSTRUMENTATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL

            MONITORING SURVEY

     In June 1971 the Environmental
Instrumentation Group of the Lawrence
Berkeley Laboratory received an NSF-RANN
(Research Applied to National Needs) grant
to carry out a comprehensive survey of
instrumentation for environmental
monitoring, including monitors of air
quality, water quality, radiation, and
biomedicine.  Consideration is being
given to instruments and techniques
presently in use and to those developed
for other purposes but having possible
applications to environmental monitoring.
The results of the survey are given as
(a) descriptions of the physical and
operating characteristics of available
instruments,  (b) critical comparisons
.among instrumentation methods, and
(c) recommendations for producing
methodology and development of new
instrumentation.
     Instrumentation for Environmental
Monitoring AIR, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
Report LBL-1, Volume 1 was published
April 1972.  Volume 1 as initially issued
covers sulfur dioxide monitoring; additional
sections of oxides of nitrogen, photochemical
oxidants, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons,
mercury, and asbestos will be issued before
June 1973.

     Table 1 lists those air quality
pollutants and parameters for which
instrumentation is discussed in the
survey.  Instrumentation of some form
is available for most areas of air
pollution monitoring, and a summary
of the various techniques is shown in
Table 2.  Adequate instrumentation,
however, is not necessarily available
for the various types of monitoring
(ambient air, stationary source, and
mobile source) and in the necessary
configuration (i.e., for continuous,
on-site monitoring).  Current
instrumentation for various aspects
of air pollution monitoring is wholly
inadequate and development of better
instrumentation is certainly desired.
These inadequacies are discussed in
the Instrumentation for Environmental
Monitoring survey.

     The Sulfur Dioxide section contains
descriptive literature for over sixty
commercially available monitors.  These
monitors are classified into thirteen
different principles of operation.  The
strengths and weaknesses of these
principles of operation are discussed.
Information concerning instrument
calibration, sampling, emissions
standards, techniques for controlling
sources, and effects of sulfur dioxide
is also included.

     The final draft of the Mercury section
has been sent out for review and will be
available early 1973.  Descriptive literature
for twenty commercially available instruments
is presented.  Eight different approaches
to mercury monitoring are discussed.  Also
included is information on sources, toxicology,
national emission standards, sampling, and
calibration procedures.
                                         -199-

-------
      CAPABILITIES OF AEC AND NASA

     LABORATORIES IN AIR MONITORING

       INSTRUMENTATION DEVELOPMENT

     The instrumentation survey includes
discussions of those instruments and
techniques developed or under development
at the AEC and NASA laboratories.  We
have drawn from that survey and recent
communications with the national
laboratories to present here the
instrumentation projects at the
various AEC and NASA laboratories.
This information is summarized in
Table 3.  The table indicates the type
of instrumentation, the pollutants or
parameters monitored, and the AEC or
NASA facility where the work is being
carried out.  It can be seen that
instrumentation is being developed
for all areas of air pollution
monitoring:  gases (inorganic and
organic) and participates (physical
properties and chemical composition).

     The national laboratories have
certainly demonstrated the capability
for developing air monitoring instrumentation.
It seems probable that conventional monitoring
instrumentation in all areas will improve
without national laboratory involvement.
However, the rate of the improvement
will no doubt be much greater if the
national laboratories are involved
in a significant way.  The breadth
and depth of analytical capability
within the national laboratories is
probably unequaled and represents a
resource that should not be overlooked.
                                         -200-

-------
                    Table  1.  AIR QUALITY POLLUTANTS AND PARAMETERS


  I.   Gases

        Inorganics

          Sulfur Oxides (S02,  S03)
          Nitrogen  Oxides  (NO, N02)
          Photochemical Oxidants  (03)
          CO
          H2S
          HC1,  C12, Fluorides, etc.
          Ammonium  Compounds (NH3, etc.)
          C02

        Organics

          Hydrocarbons (Paraffins, Olefins,  Aromatics)
          Oxygenated Compounds (Aldehydes, Ketones)
          Sulfur Containing Compounds  (Mercaptans,  etc.)
          Nitrogen  Containing  Compounds  (Peroxyacetyl Nitrate (PAN),  etc.)
          Halogenated  Compounds

 II.   Suspended Particulate Matter

        Physical Properties

          Mass  Loading (Total  Weight of  the  Particles per Unit Volume of Air)
          Opacity
          Size  Distribution
          Velocity

        Inorganics

          Metals (Pb,  Cd,  Be,  Hg, etc.)
          Fluorides
          Nitrates, Sulfates,  Phosphates
          Asbestos
          Mineral Dusts (Silicates,  Silica,  etc.)

        Organics

          Polycyclic Organics  (Benzo [a]  pyrene, etc.)
          Oxygenated Compounds
          Pesticides
          Aeroallergens

III.   Odors

 IV.   Meteorological Parameters

          Temperature  Structure
          Visibility
          Ventilation  and Dilution
          Humidity
          Pressure

          Source:  Instrumentation for Environmental Monitoring AIR
                   LawrenceBerkeley Laboratory Report LBL-1,  Volume I
                                          -201-

-------
                Table 2.  INSTRUMENTAL TECHNIQUES FOR AIR MONITORING
SQ2:  Colorimetric (Reference Method)
      Sulfation Plates and Pb02 Candles
      Conductijnetric
      Coulometric
      Electrochemical Transducers
      Flame Photometric Detection
      Gas Chromatography -
        Flame Photometric Detection
      Infrared Absorption
      Ultraviolet Absorption

Nitrogen Oxides (N02, NO):
      Colorimetric (Reference Method
        of N02)
      Coulometric
      Chemiluminescence
      Electrochemical Transducers
      Infrared Spectroscopy
      Lasers

Photochemical Oxidants (03):
      Chemiluminescence (Reference
        Method)
      Coulometric
      Colorimetric
      Ultraviolet Absorption

Hydrocarbons:
      Gas Chromatography -
        Flame lonization Detection
        (Reference Method)
      Flame lonization Detection
      Mass Spectrometry
      Ultraviolet Absorption

CO:   Infrared Absorption (Reference
        Method)
      Gas Chromatography -
        Flame lonization Detection

Particulates (Mass Loading):
      Gravimetric (Hi-Vol Sampling)
        (Reference Method)
      Beta-Radiation Absorption
      Piezoelectric Microbalance
      Resonant Frequency
      Capacitance

Particulates (Opacity):
      Opacity Light Meter

Particulates (Size Distribution):
      Dry Impingement
      Sedimentation
      Electrostatic Precipitation
      Microscopy (Optical § Electron)
      Light Scattering
      Holography
      Condensation Nuclei Counters
      Light Transmission
Particulates (Velocity):
      Pitot Tubes
      Doppler-Shift Technique

Hg:   Flameless Atomic Absorption
      Ultraviolet Absorption
      X-Ray Fluorescence

Be:   Colorimetric
      Atomic Absorption

Asbestos:
      Electron Microscopy
      X-Ray Diffraction

Pb:   Colorimetric
      Emission Spectroscopy
      X-Ray Fluorescence
      Neutron Activation

Cd:   Colorimetric
      Atomic Absorption
      Emission Spectroscopy

Se:   Colorimetric

As:   Colorimetric
      Neutron Activation
      Atomic Absorption

Ni:   Atomic Absorption
      Emission Spectroscopy
      X-Ray Fluorescence

V:    Colorimetric
      Emission Spectroscopy
      Neutron Activation

Cr:   Emission Spectroscopy

Mn:   Colorimetric
      Emission Spectroscopy

Cu:   Emission Spectroscopy
      Atomic Absorption

Sb:   Colorimetric

Zn:   Emission Spectroscopy
      Atomic Absorption
      X-Ray Fluorescence

B:    (Techniques under Study)

Ba:   Emission Spectroscopy

Sn:   Emission Spectroscopy

P:    (Techniques under Study)
                                         -202-

-------
          CONTINUED:  Table 2.  INSTRUMENTAL TECHNIQUES FOR AIR MONITORING


Li:   (Techniques under Study)

Fe:   X-Ray Fluorescence

S03 :  Paper Tape
      Impinger

Sulfates :
      Chromatography
      Human Odor Panel

Fluorides:
      Ion Selective Electrode

H2S:  Tape Samplers
      Coulometric
      Colorimetric
      Gas Chromatography -
        Flame Photometric Detection

Mercaptans :
      Gas Chromatography -
        Flame Photometric Detection

HC1:  Wet Chemical

   :  Manual Wet Chemical
Polycyclic Organics:
      Chromatography

Pesticides:
      Chromatography

Aeroallergens :
      Chromatography

NH3:  Wet Chemical

C02:  Infrared Spectroscopy
      Gas Chromatography
                                         -203-

-------
                Table 3.  CONVENTIONAL AIR MONITORING INSTRUMENTATION

             [DEVELOPED OR UNDER DEVELOPMENT AT AEC AND MSA LABORATORIES)
     Instrumentation
GASES
  Inorganics
Electrochemical Transducer

Photometric Analyzer

Chemiluminescent Analyzer

Electrochemical Analyzer

NDIR Monitoring System

Heterodyne NDIR Analyzer

Microwave Spectrometers



Solid State Sensors


  Organics
Solid State Sensors

Spark Spectral Analyzer
                              Pollutants or Parameters Monitored




                                 S02, Sulfuric Acid Aerosols


                                 S02

                                 NO


                                 C12 and Cl"


                                 C02
                                 CO, NO,  etc.
                                       Jt
                                 S02, N02, H20, Formaldehyde
                                   and Ammonia
                                 Several Gases
                                 Hydrocarbons
                                 Halogenated Hydrocarbons
                                   and Halogens
Negative Ion Mass Spectrometry   Halogenated Compounds and
                                   Polycyclic Aromatic
PARTICULATES

  Physical Properties
Mechanical Samplers
Transmission Electron
  Microscopy
Scanning Electron Microscopy
Laser Doppler Techniques

Holographic Techniques
                                   Hydrocarbons




                                 Size and Mass




                                 Size (0.01 to 1 p)


                                 Size (0.1 to 100 u



                                 Size and Mass

                                 Size
     Facility
Brookhaven National
  Laboratory - AEC

Oak Ridge National
  Laboratory - AEC

Ames Research Center -
  NASA

Oak Ridge National
  Laboratory - AEC

Oak Ridge National
  Laboratory - AEC

Ames Research Center -
  NASA

Lawrence Livermore
  Laboratory - AEC
Langley Research
  Center - NASA

Lewis Research
  Center - NASA
Marshall Space Flight
  Center - NASA

Lawrence Livermore
  Laboratory - AEC

Oak Ridge National
  Laboratory - AEC
Health and Safety
  Laboratory - AEC
Langley Research
  Center - NASA

Ames Research Center -
  NASA

Los Alamos Scientific
  Laboratory - AEC
Ames Research Center -
  NASA

Lewis Research Center -
  NASA
Langley Research Center
  NASA
                                         -204-

-------
          CONTINUED:   Table 3.   CONVENTIONAL AIR MONITORING INSTRUMENTATION

             (DEVELOPED OR UNDER DEVELOPMENT AT AEC AND NASA LABORATORIES)
     Instrumentat ion

PARTICULATES

  Chemical Composition

X-Ray Diffraction Analysis


Ion Microprobe


Flameless Emission
  Spectrometry

Zeeman - Absorption
  Spectrometry
ESCA  (Electron Spectroscopy
  for Chemical Analysis)
Pollutants or Parameters Monitored
   Mineral and Compound
     Identification
   Trace Elements
   Trace Elements


   Hg, Pb, and Cd

   Elemental Composition
     and Compound Identification
     Facility
Ames Research
  Center - NASA

Argonne National
  Laboratory - AEC

Lewis Research Center
  NASA

Lawrence Berkeley
  Laboratory - AEC

Lawrence Berkeley
  Laboratory - AEC
Langley Research
  Center - NASA
                                         -205-

-------
                                 MONITORING EQUIPMENT

                   II.  SURVEY OF WATER MONITORING INSTRUMENTATION

                                Dr. Sidney L. Phillips
                            Energy and Environment Programs
                             Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
                              Berkeley, California 94720
                                       ABSTRACT

     A comprehensive survey of instrumentation for water monitoring is being carried
out under a grant from the National Science Foundation.  Consideration is given to
instruments and techniques presently in use, and to those developed for other purposes
but having potential applications to water monitoring.  Systems for monitoring water
quality fall into three broad categories:  (1) sensor-type instrumentation used for
on-line monitoring,  (2) on-line instruments other than sensors, and  (3) laboratory
instruments.  Emphasis is placed on instrumentation falling in the first two categories
for this discussion.
              INTRODUCTION

     The use of instrumentation to
monitor water parameters and pollutants
is increasing partly because instrumental
methods often permit water quality data
to be obtained continuously, and partly
because of the sensitivity and selectivity
that may be realized.  Instruments that
function in the field in a continuous
on-line mode are particularly appropriate
because they can provide real-time data,
while instruments with varying levels of
specificity and selectivity are used in
laboratories to measure composition and
concentrations of pollutants in water
samples.  Both types of instrumentation
 - field and laboratory - are included
in this survey.

     The survey relating to instrumentation
used to monitor water quality is still in
preparation at this writing.  The scope
of the survey in terms of the classes of
pollutants is indicated by the preliminary
table of contents shown in Table 1.  While
the survey will include instrumentation
used to measure the parameters and
pollutants shown in Table 1, the discussion
which follows includes primarily continuous
on-line monitors which are or can be
used in the field.  Nuclear, X-ray, and
remote sensing techniques are not discussed
here, but will be included elsewhere
in this symposium.
     This discussion only highlights some
particular projects that have come to our
attention.  Numerous other examples no
doubt exist and will be reported in
due time.

           SYSTEMS DESCRIPTION

     Systems used for monitoring water
parameters may be thought of as including
the following steps:

     A.  Sampling
     B.  Sample preservation

     C.  Sample preanalysis treatment
     D.  Pollutant separation and/or
           concentration
     E.  Premeasurement chemical reactions

     F.  Pollutant or parameter measurement

     G.  Data logging

Instrumentation discussed in this text is
divided into three classes according to
the number of steps required for final
measurement:  (1) sensor-type instruments
which follow steps AFG;  (2) continuous
on-line instruments which follow the
sequence ACDEFG;  (3) laboratory instruments
which follow the entire sequence A-G,
although not always in this order.
                                        -206-

-------
PARAMETERS MEASURED USING
CLASS (1) TYPE INSTRUMENTS

     Instruments in this class are
sensor-type monitors which do not
require the addition of reagents.
Water quality parameters measured
include pH, temperature, turbidity,
conductivity, and dissolved oxygen.
More recently developed sensors
utilize ion selective electrodes
for monitoring of some anions, and
capacitative or optical methods for
oil and grease.  Selected performance
characteristics of systems not
requiring reagent addition are
listed in Table 2 and Table 3.

     The dissolved oxygen sensor is
comparatively new, and is finding
acceptance because of simplicity of
measurement as compared with the
Winkler titration.  There is a
plethora of pH instrumentation,
and the various types cover a wide
range of applications.  One pH
sensor is said to be usable in the
field for a year, without requiring
standardization, in many streams.

     The fluoride-sensitive electrode
forms the instrumental basis for the
analytical method listed in the EPA
manual for water analysis.

PARAMETERS MEASURED USING

CLASS (2) TYPE INSTRUMENTS

     A number of systems with
multiparameter capabilities fall
in this category.  These include
monitoring of such diverse pollutants
as Cu, Cd, cyanide, Cr, and parameters
including pH and conductivity.  Systems
are also available for measuring one
pollutant at a time, and selected
instruments in this category are
shown in Table 4.

PARAMETERS MEASURED USING

CLASS (3) TYPE INSTRUMENTS

     Discussion here is limited to
research efforts in the AEC and NASA
laboratories.  A summary of the activities
in the area of water quality measurements
is given in Table 5.
     The information as shown in Table 5
was obtained from a survey of the AEC and
NASA laboratories developing water monitoring
instruments and techniques.

     I want to conclude by noting that the
information obtained to date in  this Survey
indicates some of the  trends in  water
quality measurements—these trends include
increased sensitivity, resolution and
automation.   Instrumental methods are well-
suited to attaining these objectives, and
this is reflected by the acceptance of
instrumentation for use in monitoring
water quality parameters.

     However, there are numerous kinds of
instrumental  systems,  each having merit  in
a  particular  analysis.  For this reason,
selection of  the optimum monitoring
system is important.   The information
compiled in this survey should be ben-
eficial to those with  responsibility for
deciding on the best available technological
approach to measurements of water quality.
                                         -207-

-------
                                Table 1.
     CONTENTS:  INSTRUMENTATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING - WATER
INSTRUMENTATION
FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
MONITORING
                                CONTENTS
H20
Contents
Dec. 1972
                                                               Mnemonic
  Abstract
  Indexing Method
  Prologue
  Acknowledgment
  Preface
  Introduction to Water Monitoring Instrumentation              H20
    Water Quality Standards
    Study Groups
    Information Sources
    Bibliography
  Metals                                                        H20-MET
  Halides § Cyanides                                            H20-HAL
  Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Sulfur                                  H20-NPS
    Nitrogen/Ammonia, Nitrates,  Nitrites,  Total
    Phosphorus, Phosphates
    Sulfur, Sulfate, Sulfide,  Sulfite

  Biological Parameters                                         H20-BIO
    Biochemical Oxygen Demand  (B.O.D.)
    Chemical Oxygen Demand  (C.O.D.)
    Total  Organic Carbon  (T.O.C.)
    Dissolved  Oxygen  (D.O.)
    Bacteria,  Viruses
  Dissolved Gases                                               H20-GAS
  Pesticides,  Herbicides, Fungicides, Trace Toxic Compounds     H20-PES
  Phenolics                                                    H20-PHE
  Petrochemicals                                                H20-PET
  Oil and  Grease                                                H20-OIL
  Physical Parameters                                          H20-PHY
    Conductivity, Hardness, Salinity, pH, Alkalinity, Acidity
    Temperature
    Turbidity
                                   -208-

-------
               Table 2.   SELECTED CLASS ONE SYSTEMS
    Parameter
Dissolved Oxygen
PH
Conductivity
Turbidity
Temperature
        Range
     0.5 -  50  ppm
     0-14
     mmho-mho/cm
     0-10"  JCU
     0-50°C .
        Accuracy
     1-5% Full Scale
     ±0.1
     ±0.05 - 1% Full Scale
     ±2-5% Full Scale
     ±1% Full Scale
          Table 3.  SELECTED CLASS ONE SYSTEMS QlEWER)
   Parameter
      pCN
      pS
      PF
      PN03
      pCl
  Oil/Grease
  Oil/Grease
  Oil/Grease
  Oil/Grease
Lower Limit or Range
      Low ppm
      Low ppm
      0.1-1000 ppm
      Low ppm
      Low ppm
      >0.1 Inch Thick
      10-200 ppm
         Comments
   S~, I" Interfere
   Hg 2   Interferes
   OH", Fe*3, Si, Al+3 Interfere
   NOa, Cl", HCOa, SO^ Interfere
   Bf, I", S=, CN", SCN" Interfere
   Capacitance Change
   UV Absorption
   IR Absorption
   RI Change
              Table 4.  SELECTED CLASS TWO SYSTEMS
   Pollutant
   Hg
   Cu
   Phenols
   Phosphate
        Range
      2-10 ppb
      Low ppm
          ppm
      2-12 ppm
       Comments
UV Absorption
Electrochemical
Differential UV Absorption
Spectrophotometric
                                -209-

-------
                  Table 5.  AEC AND WSA LABORATORIES
     Instrumentation
Ion Exchange + GLC/MS
Emission Spectroscopy,
  Plasma Excitation Sources
Chemiluminescence
GLC/MS/Computer

Laser-Induced Fluorescence

Microwave Spectroscopy

Differential Pressure

Ultraviolet Sensor

Infrared Sensor

X-Ray Fluorescence

Electrochemical

Ion-Sensing Electrode
Pollutant or Parameter
Hydrocarbons, ppb - ppm
Metals, ppb

Bacteria, 103-10k
  per ml
Oil Spill

Phytoplankton

Hydrocarbons

02 (Respirometer)

02

C02

Metals, ppm

Metals, ppb

(Spin-Off from
  Other Work)
     Facility
Ames Laboratory - AEC
Ames Laboratory - AEC

Langley Research
  Center - NASA
Langley Research
  Center - NASA
Langley Research
  Center - NASA
Langley Research
  Center - NASA
Langley Research
  Center - NASA
Langley Research
  Center - NASA
Langley Research
  Center - NASA
Lawrence Berkeley
  Laboratory - AEC
Lawrence Berkeley
  Laboratory - AEC
Lewis Research
  Center - NASA
                                  -210-

-------
          DISCUSSION OF THE PRESENTATIONS BY A. F.  FORZIATI AND SIDNEY PHILLIPS
English:  How much money is being spent
annually for personal environmental moni-
tors for such things as SOg levels and
N0? levels?

Forziati;  Do you mean devices carried like
a radiation monitor, badges and that sort
of thing?  As far as I know, none.

Cunningham:  What mechanism does EPA have
for evaluating and comparing the relative
merits of new methodologies and instru-
mentation that might be used in monitoring
to those that are presently being used with
a view to replacing them?

Forziati:  You see, I indicated that the
Southeastern Environment Research Lab,
(l have to watch that, they changed their
name) has as their mission pioneering
research in methodology.  It is their
responsibility to do just that.  Anything
new that comes on the market they either
buy it, contract for it, or have a grant.
They compare it and evaluate it in terms
of what they are presently doing.  Too
bad I had to go through the last slide
too fast.  You would have seen that
practically all the methods that were
mentioned as being done in the AEC-NASA
laboratories are also being-done in our
own laboratory.  This is the objective,
to compare them.  Only when it is shown
that they are superior to what we are
doing is it handed over to the analytical
quality control laboratory to make a
standard control method out of it.  We
continue to replace our methods.  I'm not
saying we succeed 100%, but the plan is
set that way.

Altshuller:  We, of course, in Research
Triangle Park do very much the same for
air instrumentation.  We have a research
program for the development of instru-
mentation.  We are obviously interested
in its development to commercialization.
We work it all the way through to finally
assure ourselves that the commercial
prototypes are satisfactory.  After
additional laboratory evaluation, we have
conducted a series of field studies which
are concerned with the quality of the
instrumentation, not primarily gathering
monitoring data but seeing how one instru-
ment compares to another.  Both instruments
which have just been developed and those
which have been on the market for some time
are included to some extent.  Of course,
how much can" be included in the study
depends on the resources we have.

Froziati;  Thank you.  That was Dr.
Altshuller from Research Triangle Park,
and I wish'to apologize to him in making
my statement that the pioneering research
is at the Southeastern Environmental
Research Laboratory.  That's for water.
Dr. Altshuller is the equivalent for air.
I wish to correct that.  Thank you.

Manowitz:  Will BOD continue to be a pri-
mary target in monitoring water quality?
Is there any hope of a substitute tech-
nique or process?
Forziati:  That's a tough one.  As a
scientist I have been trying to fight that
one myself.  I wish BOD had never been
invented, in a way, because instrumenting
that is extremely difficult.  We are
hoping that something like TOC or TOD or
something like that would be substituted.
Now, the engineers are the ones who insist
upon BOD, because it is a better measure of
the pollution load in relation to the
assimulative capacity of the stream.  They
say it's more indicative of what happens
in the stream.  I'm hoping that there
will be a substitute provided for it.  It
is such a crude approximation to what
really happens.  Even though you are
measuring biochemical degradation, it is
not representative of what happens in any
stream.

Question:  Is the survey you are making
strictly a literature survey, or are you
evaluating some of the instruments?

Phillips:  At the present time it's a
literature survey, although it involves
contact, actual discussions with people who
are using the instrumentation to get their
viewpoint, discussions with manufacturers,
and other people who are working and are
involved in the field.  We do not actually
evaluate these instruments experimentally.
                                         -211-

-------
                           REMOTE SENSING FOR
                        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
               John D. Koutsandreas and Robert F. Holmes
                    Environmental Protection Agency
                   Office of Research and Monitoring
                          Washington, D.C.  20460
                                ABSTRACT

     Remote sensing is usually defined as the use of sensors or sensor
systems to detect and measure natural and cultural phenomena from air-
borne or space-borne platforms.  As discussed in the text, this term
takes on a much broader meaning in the Environmental Protection Agency.

     It is the purpose of this paper to outline the role of EPA in
investigating the role of remote sensing in monitoring activities.
Monitoring, as defined, is the systematic collection and evaluation of
physical, biological, and chemical data pertaining to environmental
quality and waste discharges into all media.  The discussion includes a
summary of present EPA capabilities and a review of FY '72 activities.
In an effort to establish the EPA role in remote sensing and the direction
of the EPA developmental thrust, an outline of technology needs and
FY '73 - "74 programs and resource expenditures are covered.  This
includes a discussion of sensors, applications and programs.  The need
for a review of the state of the art and an evaluation of existing
sensors is emphasized.
           INTRODUCTION

     Remote sensing is usually
thought about in terms of sensing
from satellites and/or aircraft,
however, the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency visualizes remote sens-
ing in a broader concept.  Listed
below are a number of areas which
the term remote sensing encom-
passes.

     . Sensing of pollutants from
       satellites and/or aircraft.

     . Sensing of pollutants from
       ground based remote instru-
       ments with the telemetering
       of data to a central point.

     . Sensing of emissions from
       stationary sources as they
       emerge from the stack, and
       long path sensing of
       emitted pollutants.

     . Sensing of secondary effects
       of pollutants on ecology by
       remote means.
     Remote sensing is carefully
defined by the needs and uses to
which the data is to be utilized.
Such sensing is therefore
designed for monitoring to
determine:

     . Changes in environmental
       pollution as a function of
       control measures and as a
       check on compliance with
       pollution control require-
       ments.

     . National pollutant trends
       and variations.

     . Human and ecological
       pollutant effects in spe-
       cialized areas.

     . Global transport of
       pollutants.

     Thus the types, sophistica-
tion, and versatility of remote
sensing instrumentation will vary
widely depending on which of the
                                   -212-

-------
above items are paramount.  The
development and use of remote sen-
sors must be tied very closely to
the monitoring and surveilliance
needs of EPA in order to insure
that valid and useful data result,
especially when the sensors are to
be used for regulatory purposes
resulting in enforcement actions.

     The remote sensor is uniquely
appreciated since it can be used
to detect and record reflected and
emitted electromagnetic radiation
from specific target areas on and
near the surface of the earth in
many discrete, relatively narrow
spectral bands in several regions
of the electromagnetic spectrum.
As a result of physical character-
istics of the environmental phenom-
ena being detected and the trans-
mission characteristics of the
atmosphere, most of the reflected
and emitted frequencies of interest
lie between 0.3 and 14 microns
wave length in the optical and IR
frequencies and from 0.8 to 75 cm
in the microwave bands.  These
bands of electromagnetic radiation
may be sensed and recorded using
one or a combination of several
types of devices, including
cameras with diverse film-filter
combinations and optical-
mechanical scanners.  This tech-
nology affords the environmental
scientist with synoptic and syste-
matic accounting of the properties
of the surface, whether water,
sand, ice or snow, plowed field or
vegetation cover and of the atmos-
phere in terms of the basic
physical reactions of matter to
energy.

     In the microwave region of
the electromagnetic spectrum, a
number of sensors including radio-
meters and imaging radars should
prove useful.  In the infrared
region, spectrometers, radiometers
and line scanning imagers are
under evaluation, while in the
visible to the near IR regions
multiband cameras are being inves-
tigated.  These new technologies
have presented new dimensions for
detecting terrestrial phenomena
from a variety of platforms, and to
deduce meaningful information from
the data.

     Aircraft can provide a very
suitable platform for remote
sensors.  They and the camera have
been extensively used by all
agencies of the Federal Government
and industry.  The platforms that
EPA intends to use will not
necessarily be restricted to the
use of aircraft.  It is antici-
pated that spacecraft, helicopters,
balloons, boats, trucks, cars and
stationary platforms, such as the
roofs of buildings and tethered
buoys, will be utilized.  Thus it
is planned to evaluate all sensors
and platforms, and to implement
their use when it is demonstrated
that they can improve over the
current methods.

     The remote identification of
specific local instances of
pollution has been accomplished for
many years from aircraft through
visual identification and photo-
graphic documentation of sewage
effluents and industrial outfalls.
Recent years have brought forth the
rapid evolution of new instrumen-
tation with the capability of
monitoring regional and global
pollution.  These instruments
include:  (1) imaging scanners
capable of providing a view of the
scene outside the spectral range
of the human eye or photographic
emulsions, (2) imaging spectrom-
eters capable of rapid, detailed
spectral analysis and mapping of
solar or thermal radiation ema-
nating from a body of water,
(3) instruments such as the cor-
relation radiometer which is
capable of eliminating the back-
ground signal through prior know-
ledge of unique spectral character-
istics of the pollutant, (4) micro-
wave radiometers and radar, which
are capable of providing all-
weather day/night capability of
detecting oil spills, (5) pulsed
laser systems which are capable of
remote, detailed analysis of algae
through excitation and detection
of their fluorescence character-
istics, and (6) specialized
instruments such as low light level
imagers which are capable of
sensing bioluminescence.
                                   -213-

-------
        THE POTENTIAL ROLE
        OF REMDTE SENSING

     Remote sensing as an aid in
the detection and monitoring of
environmental pollution has not
been fully assessed at this time.
However, the use and value of
remotely obtained data as a
management and decision tool in
other disciplines is a fact.

     The positive case for remote
sensing in the detection of
pollutants is substantial and gives
impetus to our desire to establish
remote sensing as a management
decision and evaluation tool in
EPA.  Through the use of remotely
obtained data it is possible to:

     . identify heat differentials
       around power plants.

     . identify and quantify radio-
       activity.

     . identify algae in lakes and
       monitor its growth or
       reduction.

     . identify land misuse as it
       relates to cultural growth.

     . identify, map and track oil
       spills and sedimentation.

     . identify and with some
       moderate success, quantify
       pollutants in air.

     . identify secondary effects
       of pollution from improper
       solid waste disposal.

     . measure levels of noise.

     On the debit side, the
development of remote sensors is an
expensive proposition—expensive
and time consuming.  It is also a
fact that in order to utilize
remote sensing properly a certain
amount of specialized experience is
necessary.  In addition, until the
present state of the art demon-
strates the capability of quanti-
fying specific levels of pollution
in the air or water, sensor data
may not be used as admissible evi-
dence in enforcement actions.
     Only through extensive test-
ing and evaluation of existing
sensors and the development of new
sensors can we fully appreciate
remote sensing technology for
assessing environmental degradation
and in implementing air and water
quality standards economically.

       CURRENT RESEARCH AND
       DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

     The principal research and
development capabilities for remote
sensing are located in the Office
of Research and Monitoring and the
National Environmental Research
Centers (NERC's).

    The NERC, Raleigh-Durham  (RTP),
is carrying on a continuing program
in the development of sensors for
detecting particulate and stack
emissions.  Their work includes
extensive work in lasers, corre-
lation spectrometers and mass
spectrometers.  It is their pri-
mary concern to develop highly
automated, highly reliable sensors
capable of detecting gases such as
NO_, SO2 and NH_.  Their work has
proven successful in that reliable
sensors or systems such as chemi-
luminescence, gas chromatography
and integrating nephelometers are
now available to detect ambient
levels of the gases and partic-
ulates.   Table I, Remote Measure-
ment Systems, briefly itemizes a
few of the instruments now avail-
able.

     NERC, Cincinnati, is in the
process of developing automated
in situ sensors for the detection
of pollution.  Their work has led
to a program for utilizing the sen-
sors with a data relay system.
Presently the effort has developed
a sensor system with a data link
to the NASA Nimbus satellite.  The
program provides for the automatic
sensing, recording and transmittal
of 5 - 8 water quality parameters
from the Greater Miami River to the
satellite, where the data is in
turn transmitted via the NASA/Lewis
Lab to NERC, Cincinnati, for near
real-time analysis.  Programs of
this type are intended to demon-
strate the real-time capability of
                                   -214-

-------
                                TABLE I
                       REMOTE MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS
              Sensor and/or Method

              Nepheloneter
              Non-Dispersive IR
              Flame Photometer
              Gas Chromatograph
              Mercury Vapor Spectrometer
              Automated In Situ Sensors

              Chemiluminescence
data relay systems and the poten-
tials of geostationary satellites.

     The NERC, Corvallis, is
utilizing remote sensing in a pro-
ject with Oregon State University
to develop a remote sensing tool
for the evaluation of dispersion
of wastes from existing or proposed
ocean outfalls..-* Photogrammetric
and photo interpretation methods
were used to determine dispersion
patterns, diffusion coefficients,
waste concentrations and near
shore currents.  This study is
unique in that the aerial
photography was used to determine
the position of points and the size
of objects as in normal photogram-
metry and the photograph was
utilized as an energy sensor.  The
amount of light reflected from an
object was recorded on the photo-
graph as the film density of the
image.  The light scattered from
within the sea was measured from
the film with a photo densitometer
and then related to water quality
parameters.

     The findings of the study
show that aerial photography can
provide:

     . An effective tool for com-
       prehensive analysis of the
       dispersion of wastes.

     . Detailed design information
       for evaluating proposed
       ocean outfall sites.

     . Estimated wind velocity,
       sea state water, current
       velocities and diffusion
       coefficients in the near
         Application

         Particles
         CO
         Total Sulfur
         CO, CH4
         Mercury
         pH., DO, Chlorides,
           Temperature^ Turbidity^
         Ozone, NO_

       shore areas.
     During the past year, NERC,
Las Vegas, initiated a remote
sensing program to aid the EPA
Regions.  Their efforts included
remote sensor flight missions
such as:  a study to illustrate
the effects of oil shale
exploitation on the environment;
oil spill and offshore well fire
aerial monitoring; a study to
locate saline springs; low altitude
survey of damage assessment
incurred by a chlorine barge on
the Ohio River; and land use stud-
ies in California.^

     The California flight mission
is an excellent example of a
response to a Regional need and
the utilization of a remote sensor
to help in solving a basic land
use planning problem.  The EPA
Region IX (California-Arizona-
Nevada) , identified a growing
problem regarding deposition of
sediment in the bays and channels
near Newport Beach.  In order to
study the processes of erosion and
sedimentation of the Newport Beach
area, NERC, Las Vegas, acquired
color photography at an altitude
of 8000 feet.  The photography was
interpreted by personnel of the
NERC in an effort to locate areas
of erosion, to determine the
routes of transport and to map the
areas of deposition. These data
were analyzed by the Region which
in turn initiated a program of
corrective measures through the
local government.

     Other Office of Research and
Monitoring programs that are
                                   -215-

-------
utilizing or investigating the
capabilities of remote sensing are
the National Lake Eutrophication
Survey, the Oil Spill Detection
and Prevention Program and the
Oil Spill Surveillance Program.

     The National Lake Eutrophi-
cation Survey is attempting to
identify those bodies of water
which are in a state of eutrophi-
cation or are approaching that
state.^  The primary concern is to
ascertain the eutrophic state of
over 1200 lakes, determine the
source of phosphates and other
pollutants in those lakes and to
reduce the load of sewage treat-
ment derived phosphates entering
the lakes.

     One of the prime requirements
of this program is to determine the
nutrient budget of each individual
lake.  An active task in the pro-
gram is to evaluate whether photo
interpretation can supply the need-
ed data economically.

     The objective of the spill
program is to develop a system for
rapid synoptic aerial surveillance
of potential oil and hazardous
materials spill sources.  The
first task of this program utilized
color, infrared, near ultraviolet,
panchromatic and near infrared
black and white imagery to locate
potential spill areas.  The
second task attempted to determine
the feasibility of using standard
aerial mapping cameras in a multi-
band array to detect and identify
potential spill sources.

     The results of this program
will soon be published in the form
of a manual of operation.  Through
the use of this manual, it will be
possible to implement a comprehen-
sive program for detecting poten-
tial spill areas before an inci-
dent occurs.

     In a parallel effort the
Office of Research is attempting
to establish a sensor system
capable of detecting oil spills as
soon as they occur.  The study
includes an alarm device with a
forward looking IR system and a TV
link that can be positioned on
elevated platforms, bridges or
similar fixed structures.  The
system is based on the use of
ultraviolet fluorescence emission
detection.  It is expected that
when the system is developed, it
will detect and identify the oil
as well as monitor the area
covered by oil on the water.

     Aerial surveillance is being
utilized by the Office of Enforce-
ment and General Counsel, National
Field Investigation Centers (NFIC),
EPA, to provide support to Region-
al enforcement programs.  The
Denver-based NFIC conducted 16
missions during the past fiscal
year, with a total acquisition of
over 50,000 feet of film.  The
programs included flights over
Las Vegas, Houston, Florida and
San Francisco to determine ambient
conditions and locate and document
flagrant pollution abuses.  This
program, like the NERC, Las Vegas
program, is in its infancy, how-
ever, it is expected to expand to
provide a much needed capability
to the Regional enforcement needs.

     TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENTS

     The Office of Research and
Monitoring and the NERC's will pro-
vide for the expansion of research
and development of new sensors and
new applications of existing sen-
sors to meet the needs of the
Regions.  We intend to explore all
available sensors regardless of the
purpose for which they were
originally conceived to ascertain
how they can be utilized for
monitoring; how they can be auto-
mated; and to examine their per-
formance on various platforms.

     Air—In the field of air
quality, accurate measurements are
mandatory for the proper imple-
mentation of the Clean Air Act.
In order to get the maximum return
for Federal, State and local
resources devoted to air quality,
it will be essential to develop
improved measurement techniques,
to optimize the monitoring design
system, and to strive for inte-
grated Federal, State and local
                                   -216-

-------
air quality surveillance networks.

     Research and development in
the application of tuned lasers
for pollutant monitoring over
long paths shows promise for EPA
air programs.  The NERC in
Raleigh-Durham is experimenting
with the tuned lasers for monitor-
ing of pollutant densities over
several miles.^  Lasers also show
promise as tools for character-
izing the size and shape of
particulates in the air.  Having
such a technique would provide a
valuable input to EPA's plans for
controlling particulate emissions
from fossil-burning activities.

     Recent developments in
optical measurement in the
infrared, ultraviolet and even
the microwave regions of the
energy spectrum indicate that we
can expect to have in the mid
to late 70's multi-pollutant
analyzers and tuned laser systems
with sensitivity and selectivity
that should surpass most of the
new, highly accurate chemilumi-
nescent techniques now in use.
It should be recognized, however,
that present methods of monitoring
will be with the Agency in the
near future.

     Land—An area where remote
sensor applications should be
applied is in land use planning
to reduce air pollution and land
mismanagement.  It is clear that
no policy regarding environmental
quality can be meaningful unless
a regional perspective or outlook
and often worldwide view is
obtained.  When dealing with
land use and/or land management
predictive models for future use
and preventive models for future
quality deterioration may be
developed from remote sensor
data.

     Water—The monitoring of
water quality as it is carried out
today is not drastically different
from the ways in which it was
conducted years ago.  Laboratory
techniques have been improved
and automated, however, little
has changed in the field in the
last 50 years.
     The primary sensor needs
for the abatement of water
pollution should be aimed at
designing an early warning sys-
tem so that we can prevent
or at least control water
quality problems rather than
react to problems that could have
been avoided.

     Whatever system is devel-
oped, it should provide for
early detection of emerging prob-
lems.  It should enable the
field man to measure and map
pollution accurately in order
to determine the magnitude of
the problem.

     The state of the art for
the aerial detection and quanti-
fication of pollution must be
extended.  The ability to
detect pollution with a camera
and multi-spectral analysis has
only been started.  Greater
efforts should be initiated to
evaluate the correlation radio-
meter, lasers, IR scanners, and
microwave radiometers.  Along
this line the Office of Research
and Monitoring is interested in
the work being carried out with
lasers and the fluorescence of
algae.  The ability of the
laser to detect and quantify
algae is a very definite need.
Along similar lines the use
of spectrometers and radiometers
for the detection of oil is a
promising field.

     Pesticides—At the present
time there is little use of
remote sensing in the detection
of pesticide accumulation.
However, there are techniques and
sensors that could make the
remote sensing of pesticides a
reality.  An area of promise,
and of prime interest to EPA,
is the use of lasers and ultra-
violet systems to induce
luminescence.  The concept basi-
cally is that laser beams can
induce momentary luminescence and
detect low levels of pesticides
by the recognition of character-
istic signatures.
                                   -217-

-------
     Solid waste—An effort is
needed to design sensors to meet
the special environmental problems
posed by air and water pollution
derived from solid waste.  Pollu-
tion from solid waste differs from
air and water pollution in that it
tends to be more of a local
problem,  Major environmental
effects are caused indirectly by
decomposition products rather than
the wastes themselves.  Sensing
techniques are the same or similar
to those used in the air and water
programs because the pollution
caused by solid wastes is primari-
ly from gases, liquids and partic-
ulates that enter the air and water
for transport.  Typical examples
are (1) stack effluents from an
incinerator discharging particulate
matter and noxious gases into the
atmosphere and (2) leachates from
landfills contaminating ground and
surface waters.  Toxic materials
such as mercury, lead, selenium,
pesticides and PCB are potential
pollutants from solid wastes.

     Table II, Future EPA Sensors
and Applications, summarizes some
of the EPA future development
programs.

     On a limited basis, EPA
intends to pursue the development
of new and improved sensors and
sensor systems.  Certain technolo-
gy and expertise is available in
other Federal Agencies that can
aid in achieving the EPA goals.
It is the desire of EPA to estab-
lish close working relationships
with all cognizant Agencies.  Table
III, Interaction with Other
Federal Agencies, cited the Organ-
izations and Agencies, and their
capabilities recognized as having
a potential interface with EPA.

    FY '73 - '74 PROGRAMS AND
      RESOURCE EXPENDITURES

     The Office of Monitoring is
continuing with a sensor and data
reduction development program in
1973.  Our largest program will
involve the test and evaluation of
platforms, sensors and sensor data
interpretative techniques for
identifying, monitoring and
quantifying pollutants in air,
water and land.  Representative
sensors to be investigated singly
and jointly include the multi-
spectral scanner, IR spectrometer
and radiometer, micro-wave radio-
meter, laser and multi-band
cameras.  Color, black and white,
and color IR film-filter combi-
nations will be tested and evalu-
ated.

     This program will result in
a series of field tests to evalu-
ate platforms, sensors and sensor
data interpretation techniques, a
demonstration of the value of
cohesive sensor programs to
Regional monitoring efforts, and
assist in training Regional and
NERC personnel in the application
of remote sensor technology.

     Our approach will be to
establish a comprehensive funding
effort with universities,
industry and government agencies
to review, test and evaluate the
applications of remote sensors for
the detection of pollution.

     As part of this program NERC,
Las Vegas, will evaluate sensors
and sensor systems and test
state-of-the-art technology in
support of Regional and enforce-
ment monitoring programs.  This
program will include contracts for
design and engineering of special
systems and packages as well as
in-house sensor packaging and
field testing.

     Another program to be under-
taken will be to develop a capa-
bility for emergency response to
acute environmental crises.  This
task will require aerial monitor-
ing and surveillance on a short-
term basis.  It will result in the
establishment of a complete photo-
graphic processing facility, a
false color image enhancement sys-
tem and provide for a data handling
system and quality control pro-
gram.

     In a parallel effort, the
Office of Monitoring will solicit
interagency and contractual
services, technology and experi-
                                   -218-

-------
                                TABLE II
                  FUTURE EPA SENSORS AND APPLICATIONS
    RAMAN LASERS
    PASSIVE MICROWAVE RADIOMETER
    LASER FLUOROMETER
    INFRARED SPECTROMETER
    DIFFERENTIAL RADIOMETER
    DERIVATIVE SPECTROMETER
    FRAUNHOFER LINE DISCRIMINATOR
    ACCOUSTICAL SOUNDER

    PULSED LIDAR
    UV CORRELATION SPECTROSCOPY
    CORRELATION RADIOMETER
    PLASMA CHROMATOGRAPHY
    SPECTROTHERMAL EMISSION AEROSOL
    PARTICLE ANALYZER
    ELECTROSTATIC PARTICULATE METER
    - SO-, NO.
    - OIL, TEMPERATURE, SALINITY
    - OIL, CHLOROPHYLL, ALGAE
    - SO2, NO2, O2, CO2
    - CHLOROPHYLL
    - NO2, SO2, CHLOROPHYLL
    - OIL, TRANSPORT PROCESSES
    - INVERSION LAYER, WIND
      VELOCITY
    - VISIBLE EMISSIONS, SIZE
      DISTRIBUTION, PESTICIDE
      SIGNATURES
    - N02, S02
    - ALGAE AND TURBIDITY
    - PCB, MALATHION
    - COUNT, SIZE AND IDENTIFY
      IRON AND SULFUR PARTICLES
    - PARTICULATES
                                TABLE III
       INTERACTIONS WITH OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS

                 USGS - LAND USE CATEGORIZATION
                        SENSOR DEVELOPMENT
                 NOAA - COASTAL AND ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT
                        PLATFORMS AND SENSORS
                        DISASTER PROGRAM
                 NBS  - STANDARDS AND QUALITY CONTROL
                 NSF  - RESEARCH APPLIED TO NATIONAL NEEDS
                 NCAR - AIR POLLUTION MONITORING  INSTRUMENTATION
                 USDA - LAND USE
                        AGRICULTURE
                        PESTICIDE MANAGEMENT
                 DOD  - PLATFORMS AND SENSORS
                 USAGE- COASTAL AND ESTUARINE
                 NAVY - NAVIGABLE WATERWAYS
                 NASA - SPACE ORIENTED RESEARCH
                        IN SITU AND REMOTE SENSORS DEVELOPMENT
                        ADVANCED FLIGHT FEASIBILITY EXPERIMENTS  (AFEE)
                 ALL AGENCIES
                        DATA HANDLING AND MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES
ence.  This program is designed to
support the critical requirements
of the Agency that require hard to
develop state-of-the-art production
to support ongoing programs.

     There are a number of programs
in remote sensing being performed
jointly by the Office of Research
and Monitoring.  These programs
include:

     . The Regional Air Pollution
Study—This program will make a
detailed study of sources and
transport of pollution, meteorology
and air quality in the St. Louis
region.  Special field studies
involving atmospheric tracers, air-
craft, mobile laboratories and
remote sensing techniques will be
used in conjunction with an exten-
sive network of air quality and
meteorological stations to provide
data for a detailed evaluation.  It
is anticipated that the program
will require at least 3 years to
complete.  Expenditures in the
first year, FY "73, will be over
2.5 million dollars.  It is
                                   -219-

-------
anticipated that the costs will
triple in FY '74.

     . Remote Sensing of Pollutants
and Environmental Quality—This
study will examine the technology
existing and under development for
the remote detection of pollution
in air and water.  The program
will evaluate the data from the
ERTS-A and Skylab Programs.  It
is estimated that the cost of the
study will be approximately 100
thousand dollars.

     . Oil Spill Detection and
Damage Assessment— A comprehen-
sive program is being undertaken
to review the state of the art of
oil pipeline leak detection, oil
spill surveillance and damage
assessment.  This study will
review the current methods of leak
detection and limitations of these
methods.  It will attempt to
develop and demonstrate new tech-
niques capable of detecting acute
as well as chronic leaks.  A
second task of this program is to
review and field test remote
sensing systems to find spill
threats.  It is hoped that the
result will be a comprehensive
system suitable  for field use.
The final task of the program will
be to review the state of the art
of damage assessment.  The study
will investigate equipment, tech-
niques and methods necessary to
produce the best and most complete
information for assessing damage
in the marine environment.  The
expected expenditure of resources
for this program will be more than
150 thousand dollars in FY  '73 and
500 thousand dollars in FY  '74.

      . Marine Pollution Measure-
ments—This program will examine
existing marine methods of field
sampling, in situ sensors, remote
sensing instrumentation and pro-
cedures for sampling estuarine and
coastal waters.  The program will
result in a comprehensive series
of guidelines on instrumentation,
field procedures and remote sen-
sing techniques.  The program will
cost over 100 thousand dollars for
the next two years.
     . Instrumentation _and
Measurement Methods to Determine
Aggregate Opacity, Size Distri-
bution, Velocity Composition and
Mass Loading of Particulates from
Stationary Sources—This study will
review and establish the state of
the art, conduct the feasibility
of new concepts and evaluate the
applications of sensors, both
remote and in situ, to determine
particulate pollution from
stationary sources.  This program
will require approximately one
million dollars in FY '73.  How-
ever, only one-third is expected
to be expended on remote sensor
development.

     In the field of data trans-
mission, the Office of Monitoring
in conjunction with the NERC,
Cincinnati, will test and evaluate
the ERTS-A Data Collection Plat-
forms (DCP).  As mentioned ear-
lier, a program already exists
where the data collection system
of NIMBUS is being utilized to
collect and transmit data.  It is
our plan to install the ERTS DCP's
in similar locations to test and
evaluate their operation under
field conditions.  One such
location is at the Washington, D.C.
Continuous Air Monitoring Program
(CAMP) Station.

     Table IV, Summary of FY '73 -
'74 Remote Sensing Programs, item-
izes the programs' resource
requirements, and sensors to be
investigated.

             SUMMARY

     Remote sensing is a technolo-
gy that will help the Agency ful-
fill its requirement of monitoring
the environment.

     By careful selection of sen-
sors and platforms, we will be able
to perform more effective monitor-
ing.  We would be capable of sur-
veying large areas in order to de-
tect the onset of pollution epi-
sodes as well as performing an
assessment of ambient trends.  It
is felt that if we learn to
recognize and interpret the secon-
dary or tertiary effects of
                                   -220-

-------
                                TABLE IV
               SUMMARY OF FY  '73 REMOTE SENSING PROGRAMS
   Program/Application
__     & Evjiluation_
Air, water, pesticides,
solid waste
_Re c[ i ona 1_ Suppqr t_
Air, water and pesti-
cides

Regional Air Pollution
j5tu
Air
Satellite Sensor Investi-
gations	
Air, water

Oil Spill Detection and
Damac[e_AŁSŁS-snient	
Water

Marine Pollution Measure-
ment^ 	
Laser test
    Sensors

Camera, multi-spectral
scanner, IR scanner, IR
spectrometer, laser,
radiometer, platforms and
systems.

All operational sensors,
selected, developmental
sensors

Camera, automated remote
sensors, data collection
platforms

ERTS-A Skylab
Data collection platforms,
camera, IR scanner, laser,
microwave radiometer

Data collection platforms,
camera, IR scanner, laser,
microwave radiometer
Instrumentation for         Numerous commercial and
Mea^ure_men.t of_ParJ;icles_   prototype instruments
Air
Miscellaneous
Air, water, pesticides,
and solid waste
Laser, UV correlation
spectrometer, multi-
channel IR spectrometer
 Estimated
Requirements

  2.0M
  l.OM
  250K
  100K
  150K
  100K
                              l.OM
  l.OM
                                                           5.60M
pollution recorded by remote sen-
sing that we may establish pre-
ventive programs at optimum sites
and threatened areas, and be in a
better position to evaluate the
effectiveness of specific pollution
control measures.

     Remote sensing is going to be
a valuable tool for EPA to meet
legislative mandates now pending
in Congress. Data uses  include:

     . Abatement of pollution in
       interstate waters.

     . Monitoring of pollution in
       estuarine zones.
                . Establishment of causes and
                  effects of air pollution.

                . Establishment of an
                  environmental surveillance
                  system.

                For all the claims it must be
           remembered that the remote sensing
           is not a panacea.  Much research
           and development is needed to estab-
           lish monitoring programs in:

                . Fate of pollutants in fresh
                  and marine waters.

                . Oil and hazardous materials
                  spills.
                                   -221-

-------
     . Mining pollution.

     . Land use.

     . Agricultural and solid
       waste pollution.

     . Air degradation.

     . Pesticide concentrations.

     EPA cannot provide funds or
manpower for all the research and
development necessary.  Industry
and other Federal Agencies can pro-
vide much needed assistance by
looking at present sensor appli-
cations that have been developed
and asking:

     "Are there any new environ-
     mental applications that this
     sensor can perform; can
     advanced data interpretation
     techniques extract any other
     information?"

                              BIBLIOGRAPHY

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1971,  "Proceedings
Joint Conference on Sensing of Environmental Pollutants, Palo Alto,
Nov. 8-10, 1290 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York  10019.

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Monitoring, 1971, "Proceedings
Environmental Quality Sensor Workshop," U.S. Government  Printing Office.

Koutsandreas, J. D., 1969, "Surveying Earth Resources with Remote
Sensors," Presented at IEEE National Telemetering Conference April 1969.

Mumola, P. B., and Kim, H. H., 1972, "Remote Sensing of  Marine  Plankton
by Dye Laser Induced Fluorescence," Presented at IEEE Conference on
Engineering in the Ocean Environment, September 1972.

Nader, J. S., 1972, Developments in Sampling and Analysis  Instrumentation
for Stationary Sources, Presented at Air Pollution Control Association
June 1972.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Langley Research Center,
1971, "Advanced Applications Flight Experiments," Langley, Virginia.

	, Manned Spacecraft Center, 1970, "Earth
Resources Program Synopsis of Activity," Houston, Texas.

National Ocean Survey, National Data Buoy Center, "Proceedings  Explora-
tory Development Conference," Mississippi Test Facility, Bay St. Louis,
Mississippi.

Remote Sensing Institute, 1972, "Data Collection Platform  Instrumentation
Review," South Dakota State University, Brookings, South Dakota.

Western Environmental Research Laboratory, 1972, "Kansas Rivers Survey,"
Las Vegas, Nevada.


                                   -222-

-------
                               REFERENCES

1.  Nader, John S.,  1971, The "Status of Remote Detection and Measurement
of Gaseous and Particulate Emissions from Stationary Sources," National
Environmental Research Center, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina,
27 p.

2.  Neligan, R.E., 1971,, "The Status of Instrumentation in Air Pollution
Control," Environmental Control Seminar Proceedings, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Bureau of International Affairs, pg. 213.

3.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1971, "Air Photo Analysis of
Ocean Outfall Dispersion," Water Pollution Control Research Series,
16070ENSO6/71, Washington, D.C.

4.  Western Environmental Research Laboratory, 1972, "Newport Bay
Sedimentation Survey," Las Vegas, Nevada, 4 p.

5.  Office of Research, Special Projects Branch, 1971, "National
Eutrophication Survey Program," Washington, D.C.

6.  Stephans, R. K., 1971, "Relevancy of Measuring the Real Structure of
the Atmosphere," Raleigh-Durham, North Carolina.

7.  National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1971, "Remote
Measurement of Pollution," NASA SP 285, U.S. Government Printing Office.
                                   -223-

-------
                          REMOTE SENSING OF THE ENVIRONMENT

                    James D. Lawrence, Jr. and Lloyd S. Keafer, Jr.
                    National Aeronautics and Space Administration
                               Langley Research Center
                             .  Hampton, Virginia 23365
                                       ABSTRACT

     This paper surveys the capability in remote sensing within the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration and Atomic Energy Commission Laboratories emphasizing those
aspects which may be helpful to the Environmental Protection Agency.  The paper discusses
the application of remote sensing and interrogation techniques using various obser-
vational platforms to environmental problems and concludes with a look at future
research needs.
              INTRODUCTION

     As a result of man's rapidly
increasing population, the increased
sophistication of his technology, and his
even more rapidly rising standard of
living, he is now placing demands upon
his environment which have not previously
been encountered.  One of the symptoms of
this demand is the ubiquitous problem of
pollution which may result from man's
industrial operations, from his trans-
portation systems, from his agricultural
practices, or even from his personal
living habits.  The effects of pollution
are felt at geographic scales ranging
from the size of one's eye to the size of
the entire globe; and on time scales
ranging from minutes to possibly
thousands of years.  The effects are of
both social and economic importance.

     Monitoring is one of the keys to
effective management of the quality of
the environment.  Changes in the environ-
ment, desirable or undesirable, natural
or man-made, cannot be determined unless
baselines have been established and
systematic observations are made.
Further, it is not possible at the
present time to predict, with any
certainty, the effects of various control
measures that might be followed in the
alleviation of the problem.  Measurements
of environmental quality are essential
for determining needs, establishing
priorities, and for evaluating the
effectiveness of control and abatement
programs.  As noted by the President's
Council on Environmental Quality in their
second annual report , without valid
environmental data the most important
problems cannot be determined nor can the
effectiveness and success of methods of
attacking them be established.  "Monitor-
ing is not a substitute for action.  But
in the long run, action without the
knowledge provided by adequate monitoring
is more likely to be ineffective."

     Environmental monitoring is one of
the major missions of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), and the potential
role of remote sensing in meeting EPA
monitoring needs has been discussed by
Koutsandreas and Holmes^.  They have
emphasized the need for remote sensing
systems to monitor changes in the environ-
ment associated with the implementation of
control measures, for compliance with
standards, to determine national pollution
trends and variations, to determine
pollutant effects on humans and ecological
systems, and for the determination of the
global transport of pollution.  They have
identified a need for remote sensing
techniques to be cost effective, and for
comprehensive testing and evaluation in
order that remote sensor data can be used
in enforcement actions.  In addition they
have identified a number of technology
requirements for the development of new
sensors and for expanded application of
existing sensors to meet EPA's monitoring
requirements.

     The purpose of this paper is to
provide a brief survey of the capa-
bilities of the NASA and AEC laboratories
in the area of Remote Sensing of the
Environment, to describe the remote
sensing techniques which are currently
available, and to provide an outlook for
future research directions.  An effort
has been made to describe specific
research programs which may meet the needs
                                         -224-

-------
of the Environmental Protection Agency as
discussed by Koutsandreas and Holmes^.

     The research and development work in
remote sensing has followed a certain
logical path which has led to the current
state-of-the-art:

     (a)  Identification of the proper-
ties of the substance or environmental
parameter to be measured that will affect
the absorption, transmission or emission
of electromagnetic energy.

     (b)  Identification of specific
wavelengths in the electromagnetic
spectrum that will yield interpretable
information.

     (c)  Identification of instrument
parameters required to make the measure-
ment.

     (d)  Identification of appropriate
instrument platforms, e.g., aircraft,
balloon, spacecraft, ground-based plat-
forms to be remotely interrogated.

     Remote sensing techniques cannot,
of course, be applied to all environ-
mental monitoring problems; such
techniques, however, can provide very
useful information, particularly when
used in conjunction with more conventional
measurements.  Several specific contri-
butions which remote sensing can make to
environmental monitoring are given below:

     (a)  Remote sensing from aircraft or
spacecraft affords wide geographic cover-
age, and therefore environmental
monitoring on a regional and global basis
can be performed.  While current remote
sensing techniques are generally not as
accurate as conventional methods of
measurement, wide areal coverage by a
single instrument of known precision will
permit investigations of a number of
problems including the dispersal rates
and long term buildup of pollution,
tracing the movement of contaminated air
and water masses for forecasting pollution
levels, and permit studies of the inter-
action of pollution levels and
meterology.  In addition, remote sensors
can assist in determining the proper
location for in-situ sensors and insure
the statistical validity of synoptic
measurements by a network of conventional
sensors.
     (b)  Remote sensing techniques from
ground-based mobile platforms in some
cases can make a valuable contribution to
the monitoring problem.  Violations of
emission standards can be discovered with
"quick look" remote measurements and the
results validated by conventional
techniques for enforcement if legal action
is required.  As in the previous case,
relatively large areas can be covered in
short time spans and valuable assistance
rendered in determining proper locations
for conventional sensors.

     (c)  The measurement and long-term
monitoring of many of the climatic
parameters, including changes in the
global heat budget, appears to be
feasible using space-based remote sensing
techniques.  In addition remote sensing
has a valuable contribution to make in
the verification of numerical models.

     (d)  The remote interrogation of
in-situ sensors is an applications area
with very significant potential.  Near
real-time data can be obtained from
inaccessible areas with substantial cost
savings by using data relay links between
conventional sensors and a data collection
center.

     Remote sensing techniques, on the
other hand, have certain limitations.
Remote sensors based on aircraft and
satellite platforms generally are designed
to measure the total air pollutant
vertical burden in the troposphere, the
upper atmosphere horizontal burden,
secondary effects of water pollution,
thermal surface anomalies and land use
characterization.  The problem of quanti-
tatively measuring water pollutants at a
particular point and the vertical profile
of air pollutants in the troposphere are
not now amenable to solution by remote
sensors based on aircraft and satellite
platforms.

     The environmental measurements made
by remote sensors can generally be grouped
into three classes:

1.  Those that identify a given species or
    verify its existence in the atmosphere,
    oceans or on the land surface.

2.  Those that measure the total amount of
    pollutant over a given area.
                                         -225-

-------
3.  Those that measure the distribution of
    a pollutant along some axis such as a
    line of sight, e.g., radar.

     One should distinguish between active
and passive methods of remote sensing.
Passive methods measure the available
energy emitted or reflected by the medium
being sensed (photography in natural light
is probably the best known example).
Passive systems are generally simpler and
less expensive than active techniques.
Perhaps the best known active sensing
technique is radar which is in widespread
use today.  More recently laser radar
systems have been introduced.  Active
systems have the advantage of being able
to determine to a degree the magnitude of
the return signal by controlling the
emitted energy; they are, however,
considerably more complex.  For a compre-
hensive study of the application of
satellite and aircraft based remoted
sensors to pollution measurement,
reference is made to the report of the
Working Group on the Remote Measurement
of Pollution-*, and to NASA contractor
report CR-13804.

  CURRENT NASA AND AEC REMOTE SENSING
               PROGRAMS

     In this section a very brief summary
of the current environmental remote
sensing programs being conducted by the
NASA and AEC laboratories will be given.

ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION LABORATORIES

     The Pacific Northwest Laboratories,
Battelle Memorial Institute, has developed
and extensively tested an advanced remote
sensing system^ to conduct water surface
temperature and tracer dye test surveys.
The system is an optical mechanical
imaging device operated from a Cessna 310
aircraft, which scans an area normal to
the flight path and 60 degrees either side
of nadir.

     The dye tracer system and the
infrared thermal system are both passive
systems which collect the electromagnetic
radiation emitted by the fluorescent dye
due to solar pumping and the long wave-
length thermal radiation.  Both systems
are combined into one scanner, with the
dye system utilizing photomultipliers for
detectors and the thermal system having a
photoconductive long wavelength, mercury-
cadmium-telluride, detector sensitive to
8-14um infrared radiation.  The temper-
ature sensitivity of the infrared thermal
system is less than 0.5 C and the dye
tracer system is capable of detecting dye
concentrations down to 1 ppb.  Data is
recorded directly on magnetic tape,
computer processed, and isothermal or
isoconcentration plots obtained directly.
The system has been used extensively to
collect detailed information on diffusion
and dispersion of tracer dyes in both
inland and coastal waters.  The type of
data provided by this instrument provides
a basis for evaluating the environmental
impact of proposed projects and in
addition provides a basis for determining
the effects of existing waste discharges.
It should be noted that in order to
quantitatively evaluate the dye-trace
imagery, it is necessary to collect
surface temperature measurements during
each survey.  Future work in this area
will concentrate on the development of
active imaging systems for the detection
of waste materials.  Arc sources are
presently being explored for stimulating
waste materials, and laser sources will
be examined at a later date.

     The Brookhaven National Laboratories
is conducting several studies of the
application of Lidar techniques to atmos-
pheric pollution monitoring.  One concept
which is being studied is the measurement
of NOX, F^O, and a variety of bipolar
molecules over long path lengths using a
laser as an energy source and a high
resolution infrared spectrometer at the
receiving end.  The study at present.is in
the laboratory development phase.  The
laboratory also has an active program
exploring the application of Lidar to the
measurement of power plant plumes to
determine plume depth and scattering by
particulate matter.  The application of
Lidar to the measurement of ozone in the
atmosphere will be examined in the future.

     The Lawrence Berkeley Laboratories is
conducting under National Science
Foundation sponsorship a survey and
technical assessment of environmental
instrumentation.  The study will eventually
result in the publication of separate
instrumentation handbooks for the monitor-
ing of air and water pollution, radio-
activity, and biomedical parameters.
Investigators associated with the labora-
tory are conducting research work to
explore the application of resonance
Raman Lidar techniques to determine the
signature of stack plumes, and conducting
aerial surveys for detecting chlorophyll
                                          -226-

-------
levels to diagnose water eutrophication.
In addition laboratory personnel are
participating in monitoring programs  in
the San Francisco Bay area and the Nevada
Test Site.

     An area in which the AEC laboratories
have had a great deal of experience is the
remote interrogation of monitoring
instruments, computer processing of
transmitted data, and in the dissemination
of such data.  Both the National Reactor
Testing Station and the Savannah River
Laboratory have established measurement
systems which utilize remote interrogation
techniques, and the Los Alamos Scientific
Laboratory is planning to establish a
remotely interrogated measurement system
in the future.

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE
ADMINISTRATION

     Research and development work in
environmental remote sensing is conducted
by the NASA field centers as part of  the

                                       TABLE 1
Earth Observations Program of the Office
of Applications and as part of the
Technology Applications Program of  the
Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology.
Current work encompasses the development
of sensing systems for measurement  needs
in air and water quality and earth
resources as well as the development  of
remote interrogation techniques.  It
ranges in scope from basic studies  of the
radiative characteristics of media  of
environmental interest to flight programs
to develop and test advanced environmental
sensing systems.  In this survey, it  will
not be possible to describe the extensive
program activities being carried out  in
the NASA Earth Resources Program.
Emphasis has been placed on describing  the
remote sensing techniques which have  been
developed or are currently being developed
as part of NASA programs for application
to environmental problems, and the  obser-
vation platforms available.
                           NASA AIR QUALITY REMOTE SENSING INSTRUMENTS
EXPERIMENT
LACATE* - LOWER ATMOSPHERE
COMPOSITION AND
TEMPERATURE
EXPERIMENT
MAPS* - MONITORING AIR
POLLUTION FROM A
SATELLITE
RPff - VISIBLE RADIATION
POLARIZATION
MEASUREMENTS
HSI" - HIGH SPEED
INTERFEROMETER
MEASUREMENT CAPABILITY
• VERTICAL PROFILES OF
TRACE GASES (fy HO},
N^, H^ Cfy, NO^)
• TEMPERATURE PROFILE IN
LOWER STRATOSPHERE
• COLUW DENSITIES OF
TRACE GASES (SC^., NOj,
?%, C% 002, CO )
i
• POLARIZATION CHARACTER-
ISTICS OF SCATTERED
SUNLIGHT
• CHARACTERISTICS OF
AEROSOLS (BY INFERENCE)
• ABSORPTION SPECTRA OF
TRACE GASES
INSTRUMENT FEATURES
• IR LIMB-SCANNED
RADIOMETER
• LARGE TELESCOPE
• COOLED DETECTOR
• IR RADIOMETER
• GAS-FILTER CORRELATION
ANALYZER
• COOLED DETECTOR
• PHOTOPOLARIMETER
• IR INTERFEROMETER
SPECTROMETER
• HIGH RESOLUTION WITH
HIGH SPEED SCAN
MODELING AND
DATA INTERPRETATION
INVERSION OF RADIANCE
VALUES TO CONSTITUENT
PROFILES
INVERSION OF RADIANCE
VALUES TO CONSTITUENT BURDENS
MODELING AND DATA
INTERPRETATION IS
CHALLENGING TASK
EXPERIMENT REQUIRES TRANS-
MISSION AND SOPHISTICATED
PROCESSING OF LARGE AMOUNTS
OF DATA
  *  DEVELOPED UNDER AAE
  ** DEVELOPED UNDER AAFE AND DOT SPONSORSHIP BY JPL
                                          -227-

-------
                                     TABLE 1 (CONTINUED)
                          NASA AIR QUALITY REMDTE SENSING INSTRUCTS
EXPERIfENT
COPE* - CARBON-MONOXIDE
POLLUTION
EXPERIMENT
MJLT i -POLLUTANT
VERSION OF COPE
INSTRUMENT
TUNABLE LASER
HETERODYNE RADIOMETER
LIDAR - KJLTIPLE
WAVELENGTH
LASAR RADAR
^EASUleENT CAPABILITY
COLUMN DENSITIES OF
TRACE GASES - CO, Cfy
COLUMN DENSITIES OF
TRACE GASES - CO, Cfy,
SO^
IMPROVE SENSOR
SPECIFICITY AND
SENSITIVITY
• AEROSOLS AND TRACE
GASES
INSTRJftNT FEATURES ; MODELING A,ND
DATA INIERPRETATION
• NEAR INFRARED
• CORRELATION INTER-
FEROMETER
• INFRARED
• CORRELATION
INTERFEROMETER
• VISIBLE, INFRARED
.• IMPROVED FRONT END
FOR SPECTRAL
RADIOMETERS
• STEERABLE 48" AND
24" FOR GROUND-
BASED LASER RADAR
INVERSION OF RADIANCE
VALUES TO CONSTITUENT
BURDEN
PRESENT SRT EFFORT LIMITED
TO PRELIMINARY DESIGN STUDY
OF EXPERIMENT REQUIREMENTS
PRESENT SRT EFFORT LIMITED
TO EXPERIMENTAL FEASIBILITY
STUDY FOR S02, NOx
THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL
LABORATORY STUDIES OF
SCATTERING CHARACTERISTICS
OF AEROSOLS AND TRACE GASES
   DEVELOPED UNDER AAFE
   DEVELOPED UNDER AAFE AND DOT SPONSORSHIP BY JPL
Air Quality.  The remote sensing systems
currently under development by NASA
specifically for measurement of air
quality are described in Table 1.  The
majority of these sensor systems are being
developed under contract as part of the
Advanced Applications Flight Experiments
(AAFE) program which is concerned with the
development of application experiments
from which future missions and flight
experiments may be proposed.  The program
activity normally consists of the develop-
ment of experiments, whose feasibility has
been established, to the stage where an
engineering model of the apparatus has
been constructed and the experiment
concept demonstrated through ground simu-
lation testing or through aircraft and
balloon platform testing.  The AAFE
program in the area of air quality measure-
ment is supported by an extensive
supporting research and technology program
which has as its objectives the determina-
tion of the spectral characteristics of a
polluted atmosphere, the optical
properties of atmospheric aerosols, the
exploration of advanced sensor techniques,
and the development of algorithims for the
interpretation of sensor data.  The
sensing systems described in Table 1 have
been primarily developed as part of  the
space applications program; however,  all
of the sensors listed, with the exception
of the LACATE experiment for measurement
of the lower stratosphere, can be
utilized from a number of platforms  and
the instruments applied to a number  of
air quality measurement problems.
Generally, when operated from a ground-
based platform they can be used to monitor
local sources.  For example, NASA is
presently working with EPA to explore the
application of Raman Lidar for the remote
measurement of SC>2 and NO in power plant
stack plumes.  When operated from aircraft
platforms, these sensors are capable  of
monitoring air pollutants on urban and
regional scales, and when used aboard
spacecraft they are capable of measuring
air quality on regional, national and
global scales.

     In regard to NASA flight programs,
the sensing systems aboard the ERTS-I
spacecraft were designed for the
acquisition of high resolution multi-
spectral data of the earth's surface  for
a wide variety of earth resources appli-
cations; there are, however, a number of
investigations under way to explore the
                                          -228-

-------
utilization of these sensing systems for
measuring air quality.   As one example,
ERTS-I imagery is being used to determine
the optical thickness of the atmosphere  by
two techniques: the first, by determining
the reduction in contrast caused by the
atmosphere by comparing ERTS imagery with
ground truth intrinsic contrasts; and the
second by using the ERTS absolute measure-
ments of nadir radiance over dark
surfaces.  Infrared spectrometers aboard
the Nimbus spacecraft have been used to
sense trace gases in the atmosphere, such
as methane; and it has been demonstrated
that changes in albedo of the earth over
Los Angeles as measured aboard the ATS-3
spacecraft can be related to the visi-
bility and particle count in the lower
atmosphere.

Water Quality.  The methods available for
the remote sensing of water quality fall
into three broad classes: direct detection
of water pollutants, indirect techniques
predicated on observing secondary effects,
and the remote interrogation of in-situ
sensors.  Because of the spectral
characteristics of water itself and the
fact that most water pollutants do not
have sharply defined spectral signatures,
the number of water pollutants which can
be detected directly are limited.  There
are, however, a number of indicators which
reflect the health of the marine environ-
ment and the possible presence of
pollution.  Chlorophyll, associated with
plankton bloom, for example, may indicate
pollution by sewage or other waste
materials; changes in the emissivity of
the surface may be an indicator of oil.
The remote sensing techniques currently
being explored by NASA for observing the
marine environment and their potential
application are summarized in Table 2.
These sensor systems, like those for
measuring air quality, are being developed
primarily under the space applications
program; most of these instruments,
however, can be utilized from a variety of
platforms.  In conjunction with the
development of these measurement systems
extensive supporting research and
technology programs are being conducted in
signature analysis, and data management.
In regard to applications of the sensing
systems given in Table 2, the multi-
spectral data obtained by the ERTS-I
satellite is being utilized for a large
                                      TABLE 2

     SENSOR/APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE FOR REMOTE SENSING  OF POLLUTION
        I—PRESENTLY AVAILABLE
        •t— UNDER DEVELOPMENT
        :i— POTENTIAL APPLICATION
       • — WITH INKKAHED CHANNEL
OIL
SUSPENDED SEDIMENT
CHEM. & TOXIC WASTES
SOLID WASTES
THERMAL EKKI.IIENTS
RADIOACTIVE WASTES
NUTRIENT WASTES
I.IVINC
ORGANISMS
INTRO. OK SPECIES
HACTERIA
HEDTIDE
HUMAN 4 CHI.. EKK.
1










1
1
2
1


1
•i

I
I
:t
1
:i
1





I
I
1
1
2
1


I
2

1
1
1
1
2
1
!•

1
2

1
1
1
2
2
2


1


1

I

:<








1
2
2
2


2

.1
1








:t


1
2



1





I
1



1






1









1





1





1
2

2


:l




                                 From NASA SP-285
                                         -229-

-------
number of practical water quality measure-
ment problems.  In addition, the NASA
centers are conducting a number of
cooperative programs utilizing aircraft
platforms with Federal, State and Local
agencies and institutions to explore
specific applications of remote sensing
systems to problems in water quality
measurement.

     Another area of effort which is
being explored by NASA is the use of
multichannel transponders in contact with
relay satellites for remotely interrogat-
ing in-situ sensors.  In a joint effort
with EPA, the NASA Lewis Research Center
has a demonstration system operating
daily on the Great Miami River relaying
water quality data to Nimbus IV.  Much
remains to be done in this area,
particularly in the development of sensors
and transponders compatible with telemetry
systems.

Microwave Technique.  Microwave and milli-
meter wave techniques have promising roles
to play in many areas of environmental
sensing.  Compared to optical and infrared
wavelengths, microwave techniques offer
the advantage of being able to penetrate
clouds and inclement weather conditions,
thus providing a potential for all weather
day/night remote sensing of the atmosphere
and the earth surface.  When used for
atmospheric measurement they function in
much the same way as sensors at optical
and infrared wavelengths.  When used for
sensing surface phenomena, microwave
sensors obtain a combined measure of the
surface dielectric properties, roughness
and brightness temperature.  The classes
of instruments being developed by NASA
include a variety of radiometers, and
radar imaging devices.  The areas being
explored for application of these instru-
ments  are  given in  Table  3.  The NASA
effort for developing microwave sensing
techniques encompasses a comprehensive
supporting research and technology
program, the development of flight experi-
ments under the Advanced Applications
Flight Experiments Program, and applica-
tion of microwave techniques to environ-
mental sensing from both aircraft and
spacecraft.  Both active and passive
microwave sensing systems have been
installed in NASA aircraft and their
application to the research areas given
in Table 3 is being evaluated at a number
of test sites.  In regard to spacecraft
application of microwave techniques, both
the Nimbus E and F missions and Skylab
will carry microwave sensing systems for
earth resources applications.
                 TABLE 3

    NASA MICROWAVE SENSORS/APPLICATIONS
                    RESEARCH  AREAS
                ATMOS.  OCEAN
 INSTRUMENTS

 RADIOMETER       X

 SCATTEROMETER    X
 RADAR IMAGER

 RADAR            X
 ALTIMETER
X

X
      TERRAIN
      SNOW AND
        ICE
X

X
       PLATFORMS FOR REMOTE SENSING

     The platforms which are available for
remote sensors encompass mobile ground
platforms as well as aerospace systems.
The gross mission parameters for each of
the platforms are summarized in Table 4.
Airplanes have been used as platforms for
remote sensors for many years, and both
NASA and the AEC laboratories have air-
craft which are used as platforms for
remote sensors.  The aircraft maintained
by the Airborne Sciences Office of the
NASA Ames Research Center, and Earth
Resources Laboratory of NASA Houston, for
example, are excellent facilities for
evaluating remote sensing techniques.  In
addition, NASA has a number of current and
planned application-type spacecraft
programs for evaluating remote sensing
techniques including techniques for
remotely interrogating in-situ sensors,
e.g., Nimbus and ERTS.  The objectives of
these programs and capabilities of the
spacecraft are summarized in Table 5.
                                          -230-

-------
                        TABLE 4

            SUMMARY OF REMOTE SENSING PLATFORMS
PLATFORM
MOBILE
GROUNDBASED
AIRPLANES
BALLOONS
SOUNDING
ROCKETS
EARTH
SATELLITES
OPERATING
ALTITUDE
Surface
Less than
20 km
20 km - 50 km
40 km -
2000 km
200 km -
40,000 km
OPERATING
RANGE
_ _ .
4000 km
4000 km
5 km -
500 km
Global
OPERATING
TIME.
. . _
5 hrs - 8 hrs
24 hrs -
30 days
1 min - 5 hrs
Indefinite
PAY LOAD
WEIGHT
- - -
Less than
5000 kg
100 kg -
2000 kg
1 kg - 200 kg
10 kg -
30,000 kg
                      From NASA SP-285

                      TABLE 5

 SUMMARY OF  NASA EARTH SATELLITE PROGRAMS HAVING
POTENTIAL  FOR  THE REMOTE MEASUREMENT OF POLLUTION
PROJECT
TITLE

Applications
Technology
Satellite









N i ni bu s







Improved
Tiros
Operational
System



Synchronous
Meteorological
Satellite





NASA
NO-
MEN-
CLA-
TURE

ATS










NIM-
BUS






ITOS






SMS







OBJECTIVES

To investigate and flight test technology
common to a number of satellite applica-
tions; to investigate and flight lest tech-
nology for the stationary orbit; to conduct
o carefully instrumented gravity gradient
experiment directed toward providing basic
design information; and to flight test ex-
periments Tor a number of types of satellite
applications on each individual spacecraft.



To develop and flight test advanced sensors
and technology basic to the study of the
atmosphere and provide data for meteoro-
logical research; and to provide global col-
lection and distribution of meteorological
data.



To develop, procure, and launch, on a cost
reimbursable basis for NOAA (Department
of Commerce), a series of operational mete-
orological satellites based on Tiros research
and development experience.


To develop a geostationary satellite system
which will meet the national operational
meteorological satellite system (NOMSS)
requirements as specified by NOAA; to flight
test the satellites in orbil and when checked
out turn them over to NOAA for operational
use; and to continue research and develop-
ment of geostationary satellite techniques as
necessarv to support the NOMSS.
TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION
ATSD& E ATS FAG
Gross Weight, kg 793 930
Instrument Wi, kg 97 272
Investigations Meteorological Com-
munications, stabili-
zation/pointing, and
science experiments.
Power Watts 100 500
Stabilization Gravity gradient Active
Design Life 3 Years 2 Yrs.
Launch Vehicle . Atlas-CenUur Titan-Ill C
Orbit Geostationary Geosta-
tionary
Gross Weight, kg 66Vj
Instrument wt. Kg M7
Investigations Meteorological
Power (Instr), 130 (Solar)
Watts 50 (Nuclear)
Stabiliiation 3 Axis
Design Life 12 Months
Launch Vehicle Thor-Delta
Orbit Circular Polar (1.1 1 Ikm)
Gross Weight, kg 308
Investigations Meteorological
Instrument Wt, kg 99
Power Watts 70
Stabilization 3- Ax is
Design Life 6 Mo- min.. 1 yr. goal
Launch Vehicle Thor-Della .
Orbit Circular (1.463 km)
Gross Weight, kg 243
1 nstrumenl Wt. kg 84
Investigations Meteorological
Power, watts 150
Stabilization Spin Stabilized
Design Life 3 Years
Launch Vehicle Delta - 19U
Orbit Geostationary
                        -231-

-------
                                   TABLE 5 (continued)
Earth
Resources
Technology
Satellites





Earth
Resources
Experiments
Package For
Skylab"A"





Spue
Shuttle












ERTS






EREP








SPACE
SHUT-
TLE











To design, develop and launch a series of
spacecraft into medium altitude orbits for
the purpose of conducting a variety of ex-
periments in the earth resources disciplines.





To develop techniques for selective use of
remote sensing instrumentation capable of
detecting the visible, infrared, and micro-
wave radiation emitted and/or reflected by
the earth and to study the applicability of
these measurements for quantitative
analysis of earth resources; and to perform
correlative studies using ERTS and air-
borne sensors leading to a definition of the
role of manned systems in earth resources
surveys.
To develop a reusable manned space vehicle
to provide an economical means of delivering
payloads to orbit, to provide the capability
of man-controlled in-orbit operations; and
to provide the capability of visiting satellites
and returning satellites from orbit.








Gross Weight, kg 816
Instrument Wl, kg 204
Investigations Earth Resources
Power, Watts 500
Stabilization 3-Axis
Design Life 12 Months
Launch Vehicle Delta-N
Orbit Circular Polar, Sun-
Synchronous 912 km
Gross Weight, kg 975 (total package)
Sensor Weight, kg 420
Investigations Visible, Thermal Infrared,
and Microwave Emissions
from Earth
Power, Watts 170 (Average)

Design Life 8 Months
Launch Vehicle Saturn V
Orbit Circular. 435 km, 50° I nclination
Orbiter Payload 29,500 for Design Mission of
Gross Weight, kg 28.5° Inclination, 185 km alt.
18,200 For Reference Mission
Of 90° Inclination, 185 km Alt.
11,300 For Reference Mission
Of 55° Inclination, 500 km Alt.
Sensor Weight, kg T. B. D.
Investigations T. B. D.
Stabilization ± 0.03°/Sec All Axes
Design Life Orbiter will have 7-30 day or-
bital stay time capability,
shuttle-delivered free-flying
payloads design life T. B. D.
Launch Vehicle Recoverable, Reusable Shuttle
                                   From NASA SP-285
            FUTURE RESEARCH

     In regard to future research
directions for the development of remote
sensing techniques, it is very difficult
to generalize in discussing the various
trace substances - both natural and man-
made - that are of environmental concern.
The development of remote sensing methods
for each constituent poses more or less a
unique set of problems and it is
virtually necessary to consider each
constituent separately.  Clearly, remote
sensing techniques do not exist for
measuring all of the constituents of
environmental concern; and therefore,
development programs either should be
continued or undertaken to explore the
feasibility of measuring those constit-
uents of primary importance.  Such
development programs must consider the
questions that require answers, the
required measurement accuracy, and the
ultimate cost effectiveness of the remote
sensing technique to be explored.  In-
depth studies of the proper mix of
conventional and remote sensors for a
given monitoring application need to be
performed, and a comprehensive data
analysis and management plan evolved.
Reference should also be made to the
potential that remote interrogation
techniques offer for monitoring both air
and water quality.  Relay and telemetry
systems have been developed which should
be exploited.  A general requirement
exists for the development of sensors
which are compatible with these systems.

     In the field of air quality measure-
ment, a number of areas require further
work.  Since the present passive tech-
niques for sensing trace gases in the
atmosphere measure vertical burden, it is
necessary to establish the relationship
between vertical burden and surface con-
centration.  There is general need for
the development of techniques for
remotely measuring the vertical distribu-
tion of trace constituents in the
troposphere.  Much remains to be done in
determining the absorption properties of
pollutant gases in the real atmosphere in
order to interpret the data collected by
sensors that have been developed and to
guide the development of new sensing
techniques.  The microwave region of the
electromagnetic spectrum in particular is
attractive for remote sensing applications;
however, the basic absorption properties
of the pollutant molecules need to be
established in this region of the spectrum.
One fundamental limitation of passive
techniques is the amount of input energy
that is available from natural sources.
The use of active tunable laser systems
to observe the atmosphere may offer a
solution to this problem, and provide a
technique for measuring the vertical
distribution of trace gases in the
                                          -232-

-------
atmosphere.  The exploration of laser
scattering techniques and techniques for
measuring long path absorption of laser
radiation by pollutant molecules is
currently a very active area of research.
Basic knowledge of the resonant scattering
and absorption properties of the pollutant
molecules and advances in tunable laser
technology are fundamental requirements
for further development of the technique.

     The measurement of particles
suspended in the atmosphere represents
another very difficult problem in remote
sensing of the atmosphere.  There is
virtually a complete lack of knowledge
of the scattering and absorption proper-
ties of typical atmospheric aerosol
particles.  The aerosol particles may
have a diverse chemical composition and
may be shaped irregularly, possibly with
a coat of ice or liquid.  There exists
very little knowledge of the detailed
scattering properties of such particles,
and how these properties change with
scattering angle, wavelength and polar-
ization of the incident electromagnetic
radiation.  Since particulate matter
suspended in the atmosphere has a number
of important environmental and health
effects, advances in understanding the
optical properties of particles in the
atmosphere are urgently required.
Finally, the remote sensors which have
been developed or are under development
for atmospheric measurement will require
testing and validation in the near future.
The evaluation and ground truth programs
required will afford both the group
developing the sensor and EPA an excellent
opportunity to jointly evaluate the sensor
and for EPA to assess its applicability to
its monitoring needs.

     The remote sensors which are evolving
for water quality measurement generally
are multipurpose systems which are
applicable to a wide range of problems.
Present techniques have been developed
primarily for measuring surface phenomena
including temperature and roughness,
salinity, pollution effects, and circula-
tion patterns.  There is, of course, a
need for the development of a wide range
of sensors for the direct detection of
specific water pollutants and for measure-
ment of vertical distributions; it should
be recognized, however, that this may be
a very difficult task.
     On the other hand the indirect
measurement of water quality by remotely
sensing indicators, such as water color
and chlorophyll concentrations, is a very
productive area of research.  The data
collected from current aircraft observa-
tional programs, ERTS, and the future
Skylab, coupled with ground truth programs,
will provide an extensive data base for
evaluating remote sensing techniques for
measuring water quality.  The remote
sensing of water quality by active
techniques using lasers to induce fluores-
cence is another area with potential and
should be thoroughly explored.  The laser
radar technique has been used successfully
to measure fluorescence induced in oil and
chlorophyll, and a potential exists for
exciting fluorescence in a number of water
pollutants.  In addition it may be
possible to measure the vertical distribu-
tion of water pollutants using the laser
radar technique.  The successful applica-
tion of this method, however, will require
advances in our basic knowledge of the
interaction of laser radiation with the
pollutant molecules found in water and
advances in tunable laser technology.

                 SUMMARY

     Measurements of environmental quality
are essential for determining needs,
establishing priorities, and for evaluating
the effectiveness of control strategies
and abatement programs.  Remote sensing
techniques have a potential for making
significant contributions to environment
monitoring especially for measurement of
pollution on regional, national and global
scales.  Many of the instruments which
have been developed for space applications
can be applied to local monitoring
problems when operated from aircraft and
ground-based mobile platforms.  The remote
sensing techniques which have been
developed by NASA and AEC laboratories or
are under development have been briefly
described and potential applications to
monitoring problems discussed.  In regard
to future research directions, the need for
increased knowledge of the optical
properties of constituents of environmental
concern to provide a basis for data inter-
pretation and new sensor development has
been emphasized.
                                          -233-

-------
               REFERENCES

1.  Council on Environmental Quality:
      Environmental Quality, Second
      Annual Report, August 1971.

2.  Koutsandreas, J. D. and Holmes, R. F.:
      Remote Sensing for Environment
      Protection, Presented to the
      Interagency Conference on the
      Environment, Livermore, CA,
      October 17-19, 1972.

3.  NASA Langley Research Center:  Remote
      Measurements of Pollution Report of
      NASA Working Group, Norfolk, VA,
      August 16-20, 1971, NASA SP-285.

4.  Ludwig, C. B.; Bartle, R. and Griggs,
      M.:   Study of Air Pollution
      Detection by Remote Sensors,
      NASA CR-1380.

5.  Eliason, J. R.; Foote, H. P.; and
      Doyle, M. J.:  Surface Water
      Movement Studies Utilizing a Tracer
      Dye Imaging System, Proceedings of
      Seventh International Symposium on
      Remote Sensing of Environment,
      May 17-21, 1971.
             ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

     Gratitude is extended to Dr. Morris
Tepper, NASA Headquarters, and to Dr.
Henry G. Reichle, Jr., NASA Langley
Research Center, for their aid in
preparation and review of this paper, and
to the various AEC Laboratories for their
timely information and advice.
                                         -234-

-------
         DISCUSSION OF THE PRESENTATIONS BY ROBERT HOLMES AND JAMES LAWRENCE
Question:  I wonder 1f I could have Mr.
Holmes amplify his statement on the remote
sensing of pesticides.  I am particularly
Interested 1n the limited detection of
such a system and how you are going to relate
to the concentration of pesticides that one
would expect to find 1n the environment.

Holmes:  I think that 1t might be a little
difficult to comment to any great extent on
that.  We are just 1n the Investigation
stages on that, and we have several univer-
sities that have come 1n with requests for
grants to Investigate this.  As I said, It's
a promising field;  I have no real data as to
what extent pesticides can be quantified,
mapped, traced or even Identified.  This 1s
something that I think NASA and various
universities are working on and probably
won't be able to give you any hard facts for
another year, at least, on that particular
subject.

Oakley:  How will NASA set the priorities
for the Items on which 1t wants to spend
money 1n this area?  Do you consult Mr.
Holmes, or do you have a blue ribbon panel?
What procedure do you use?

Lawrence;  Normally the blue ribbon panel.
Most of these sensors that you see go
through what In NASA parlance we call the
API program.  This 1s a program which
takes an experiment of a sensor concept
vhich 1s deemed feasible and develops 1t
through the engineering model phase.  That's
the phase that most of the sensors that I
listed, particularly 1n air quality, are 1n.
These proposals come 1n response to an
announcement for an opportunity to propose.
They're evaluated 1n interagency panels which
Include university people.

Ott;  Do you have any indication of how much
money NASA 1s spending on remote sensing
instrumentation?  I would like to see it
framed in the context of how much EPA has to
spend on conventional sensing.

Lawrence:  I think that would be very inter-
esting comparison-  I think the universal
answer to that might be not enough.  But I
couldn't tell you how much money is being
spent.  It's not an extremely large amount
of money, I can assure you of that.  I
would be very hesitant to give you an order
of magnitude, because these things cut across
many different program areas.  If you are
talking about developing flight hardware,
that's a relatively expensive business.  To
develop engineering models of flight hard-
ware 1s not particulary expensive.  If we're
talking about some of sensors that are
actually are on ERTS or NIMBUS, they
cost a fair amount of money, whereas
most of the ones that I have described
here are not particularly expensive.  I
would hate to give any number off the top
of my head.

Gibbons;  I would be Interested to hear
from either of you about attempts to not
so much acquire the data but to synthesize
It and format it so that 1t 1s usable for
land use planers.

Lawrence:  It's fair to say that there 1s
a very significant amount of work going on
in regard to that in the ERTS program.  It's
one of the things that we do try to pay
a considerable amount of attention to.
That's not my own particular field, so I'm
the wrong one to answer it, but I know
that there 1s extensive activity going on.

Holmes:  I personally am working with the
US Geological Survey in their geographic
program 1n trying to get a coordinated
effort, to try and get at least some In-
fluence of EPA Into the geographic program,
their application of land use and remote
sensing.  We are working very closely with
these people, Bob Alexander in particular.
So there is some effort going into getting
a coordinated national effort in land use
mapping and land use programming.

Hardy;  Do either of you gentlemen have
an opinion as to the future of acoustical
radar in environmental monitoring?

Lawrence:  It's certainly a very attractive
technique, particularly for looking at tur-
bulent scales in the atmosphere.  It's
something I don't know a great deal about.
I can see that there are problems, like in
all of these things, 1n data interpretation.
But from some points of view, it's a very
attractive technique.

Holmes: I can't comment on that at all.
  don't know too much about the subject.
                                           -235-

-------
                             NUCLEAR AND X-RAY TECHNIQUES

                                      W. S. Lyon
                             Analytical Chemistry Division
                             Oak Ridge National Laboratory*
                              Oak Ridge, Tennessee  37830
                                       ABSTRACT

    Nuclear and x-ray techniques provide some of the most powerful analytical methods
available for the examination of environmental pollution samples.  A number of the U. S.
Atomic Energy Commission and National Aeronautical and Space Agency laboratories have
developed capabilities in these areas to the stage where they can now accept assign-
ments from other agencies (such as the Environmental Protection Agency) to perform
specific analytical services.  This paper discusses a number of these proved techniques
that have been applied to environmental problems.  Neutron, photon and charged particle
activation analysis are examples of nuclear techniques already successfully used in
pollution studies.  X-ray fluorescence — induced by x-rays or charged particles — can
provide elemental analysis at low cost.  Electron spectroscopy for chemical analysis can
provide specific chemical Information about toxic elements.  A few specialized tech-
niques are also mentioned:  the use of stable Isotopes in environmental studies, spark
source mass spectrometry for multi-element analysis,and sorption chromatography for the
determination of trace organics in water.  All of these methods are presently being
applied and examples of data obtained from their use are given.
              INTRODUCTION

     An important and useful spin-off
from the Atomic Energy Commission's con-
tinuing research effort has been the
development of a number of nuclear and
x-ray techniques applicable to the analy-
sis of a great variety of samples.  Neu-
tron activation analysis (NAA) is probably
the best known of these methods, but there
are numerous others.  Additionally, the
requirements of the National Aeronautical
and Space Agency necessitated refinements
and Innovations of existing technology to
make possible remote analyses as well as
to perform highly sophisticated examina-
tions of returned lunar material.  Recent
concern about the environment has focused
attention on the concentrations of many
constituents in commercial products such
as fuels and foods, as well as in air,
water, and soil.  The AEC has long been
interested in environmental monitoring and
a large background of Information and
methodology has been assembled.  Thus it
is not surprising to find these labora-
tories generating data on environmental
samples.  The purpose of this paper is to
survey present capabilities of the
national laboratories, other AEC labora-
tories, and NASA installations in the
technologies of neutron and charged
particle activation, x-ray and charged
particle induced fluorescence, x-ray or
particle scattering, and radioactive or
non-radioactive tracers that might be
used or adapted for environmental monitor-
Ing.  In addition present capabilities in
closely related methodologies — but not
necessarily nuclear — that could be used
in such monitoring are also included.
Emphasis is almost exclusively on present
techniques that are available for routine
examination, but some attention is given
to new techniques that may be available
in the near future.  We also discuss some
special capabilities that make possible
very unusual determinations — capabilities
that can perhaps provide answers to very
specific or very special questions.

     In preparing this review we have con-
tacted all the major AEC and NASA labora-
tories.  Some of these installations ex-
pressed considerable interest in contri-
buting material; others, either because of
a present lack of capability to handle
samples or some other reason (such as full
committment to other programs, no interest
in service work, technology not yet de-
veloped to a suitable stage for inclusion,
etc.), declined to contribute.  Thus this.
paper reflects genuine in house capabili-
ty to perform certain determinations, and
perhaps more important, genuine interest
in playing an active part in the analysis
of environmental samples.  Obviously we
could not include detailed descriptions
of the facilities and experiences of
every laboratory; what we have tried to
 ^Operated by Union Carbide Corporation for U. S. Atomic Energy Commission.
                                          -236-

-------
do is give the basic background informa-
tion concerning the major techniques
available, list some typical results
obtained, and try to estimate the types
and numbers of samples that could be
handled — and their costs.  Costs, of
course, are neither easily nor firmly
estimated for a general discussion such
as this.  The numbers given, therefore,
should be viewed as preliminary and
subject to firming-up when specific
details are given as to types, numbers of
samples and to determinations desired.
Specific inquiries to specific labs
should bring more specific answers.

       NEUTRON ACTIVATION ANALYSIS

     Neutron activation analysis is a
highly sensitive, specific, often non-
destructive technique that offers the
analytical chemist an opportunity to per-
form a number of difficult determinations
in a rather straightforward manner.  In
its most useful form NAA requires that
irradiations be made in a nuclear reactor
and one ordinarily desires a high neutron
flux — at least 1012 n-cm~2-sec~1.  It is
not a completely universally applicable
technique since for a number of elements
the sensitivity is rather poor, and for
some there is no sensitivity at all.
Neither is it a method free from errors
and interferences; the experience and
judgement of a trained radiochemist is
required In all but the most routine of
applications.  In short, NAA analysis,
like other analytical techniques, must be
chosen discreetly, applied intelligently,
and its results Interpreted judiciously.

     Almost all activation analyses per-
formed today employ neutrons as the bom-
barding particles; probably 95 percent of
all these neutron reactions involve the
use of thermal neutrons.  In this paper
neutron will be understood to represent a
thermal or 0.023 ev neutron unless other-
wise stated.

     When any element, E, of atomic number
Z and atomic we.ight A is placed in a flux
of neutrons, there is a finite probability
that the element will capture a neutron to
yield a new isotope of the same element
but with a mass one unit heavier.  Thus
an example would be:
59
27
Co + n
60,
26
Co +
                   59
Co(n.Y)  Co
(1)
In Eq. (1) the notation (n,Y) indicates a
neutron is absorbed and a prompt Y ra7 is
                                             emitted.  As we shall see later nuclear
                                             reactions may be initiated by particles
                                             (p,Y) or Y rays (Ytn),  and one may
                                             measure the prompt Y rays as well as Y
                                             rays from the radlonuclide formed.
                                                  If the newly formed nuclide is radio-
                                             active, one may determine its presence by
                                             measurement of emitted radioactive   ,Q
                                             particles or quanta.  In Eq. (1) the   Co
                                             decays by beta emission followed by two
                                             quanta of energy (gamma rays):
                                                  60
                                                  27
                                           Co
                                                       60,
                                               5.26y   28
                                             Ni
                                                                        (2)
                                             60
                                               Ni is stable so the decay chain ends;in
                                             other instances, however, several addi-
                                             tional decay steps occur.

                                                  The production of a radioactive
                                             nuclide is given by the activation
                                             equation:
                                                      Nfa
                                                                    l/2
                                             where
                                             A    = disintegration rate of Induced
                                                    radionuclide
                                             N    = atoms of element irradiated
                                             f    = neutron or particle flux
                                             a    = cross section of element
                                             t    = irradiation time
                                             Ll/2
                                                    half-life of Induced radionuclide
                                                  Inspection of Eq.  (3) indicates that
                                             the amount of A produced (and hence the
                                             sensitivity of any activation analysis)
                                             is a linear function of the amount of
                                             element to be determined, the flux, and
                                             the cross section.  The half-life,
                                             present in the exponential term, deter-
                                             mines the irradiation time.  Obviously
                                             activities with short half-lives require
                                             only short irradiations, whereas activi-
                                             ties of very long half-lives may be im-
                                             practical for use.  Neutron fluxes
                                             presently available range from 10^- to
                                                                 Cross sections of
1016 n-cm~2-sec~1
most thermal neutron capture reactions
vary from 0.1 to 100 x 10~2^ cm2 (0.1 to
100 barns). Assuming lO1^ n-cm~2-sec~l,an
irradiation time of 0.5 T-j/2 or one week,
whichever is shorter, and a reasonable
counting procedure, concentrations of a
number of elements determinable by acti-
vation analysis are shown in Fig. 1.
These values may be either raised or
lowered, depending on what interferences
may be present in the sample.  The
                                         -237-

-------
important point la that the sensitivity
is quite good for a number of important
elements.

     Seniitivitiei for Elements by Neutron Activation.
           ••  
-------
4,000.  With 4,000 channels,hand plotting
or human interpretation of the data is
impractical.  Thus most users have de-
veloped computer programs or modified
others' programs to analyze and interpret
gamma ray spectra.  These programs all
depend upon a library of nuclear Informa-
tion (energies, half-lives, branching
ratios, etc.) and require skill and
intelligence in use and interpretation.
Some of the basic work in developing such
programs was that performed by Gunnick^-
at LLR; Heath2 at the Idaho site has
developed many programs for analysis of
gamma ray spectra, not only for the AEC,
but also for the NASA Lunar Receiving
Laboratory.  Many programs used elsewhere
(e.g. that of Dyer3 at ORNL) are based on
these data.

     A complete Ge(Li) detector system
for computerized data handling will cost
from $30,000 up, and will require con-
siderable programming and experience
before it is ready for samples.  Thus the
available NAA facilities represent
hundreds of thousands of dollars in both
equipment and expertise.

NAA APPLICATION

     Any laboratory with a nuclear reactor
has the potential for NAA.  Many, however,
have only limited interest in using the
technique.  On the other hand, a number of
laboratories have successfully applied NAA
to environmental problems.  Battelle North-
west Laboratories (BNWL), for example, has
an extensive program in examination of
soils, air, water, fish, etc. for trace
element content.  A highly sophisticated
counting assembly employing anti-
coincidence circuitry is particularly
useful for very low level measurements.
Typical of the work done at BNWL are the
results shown in Table 1.  These data were
obtained by sampling the atmosphere at
3.1 Km, irradiating sample, blank, and
standards, and after suitable decay period
counting on the BNWL shielded multi-di-
mensional analyzer.  These data were
obtained by high-sensitivity non-destruc-
tive NAA and are part of a large study on
trace element concentrations in the tropo-
sphere and lower stratosphere.^

     Workers at Los Alamos Scientific
Laboratory (LASL) have sampled a number
of airborne particulates in a joint
program with the U.S.A.F.5  These aerosol
samples were then analyzed by NAA, and
scanning electron spectroscopy.  A number
of pollution sources were sampled includ-
ing power plants, sawmill waste burners,
smelters, gypsum plants, refineries, and
urban centers.  The data from these
experiments provide a useful profile of
trace elements in the atmosphere.  For
example, the trace element profiles of
Irradiated air-borne particulates sampled
in the vicinities of two Arizona and one
New Mexico copper smelters are clearly
different:  Re is the main radlonuclide
seen In the Miami, Ariz, and Hurley, N.M.
samples, whereas the Douglas, Ariz.
partlculate shows no Re.  Miami, Ariz.
and Hurley, N.M. can be easily distin-
guished since Sm is a large component of
the Hurley air partlculate but is absent
in Miami.  This is just one example of
the characterization and source-identifi-
cation of air pollutants possible through
the use of NAA.  LASL Is studying the
impact of supersonic transport on the
environment using similar techniques and
a whole complement of analytical methodo-
logy exists there for application to
pollution problems.

     Oak Ridge National Laboratory has
performed a number of NAA determinations
for EPA.  For example, Table 2 shows data
obtained on coal and fly ash samples
submitted by EPA.  Table 3 shows a typi-
cal bunker oil analysis by NAA.  Data in
both tables were obtained by non-destruc-
tive NAA.  Costs of these analyses are
based primarily on time Involved, but an
average coal or ash analysis as shown
probably costs$100-$300;  the bunker oil
somewhat less.  Coal and ash are two of
the worst matrices with which to work.
ORNL has available fluxes up to SxlO1^
n-cm~2-sec~^ and Ge(Li) detectors with an-
alyzer-computer counting systems for data
processing. None of these three laborator-
ies  is set-up to handle thousands of
routine determinations per month, but
all  have expressed interest in EPA work.
Many of the problems involved in environ-
mental pollution require careful evalua-
tion and development of special activa-
tion techniques; these services are
available at most of the national
laboratories.
                                         -239-

-------
            Table 1.  Trace element concentrations in the atmosphere at an
                      altitude of 3.1 kilometers, September 5,  1967*
Element
Ag
Co
Cr
Fe
Sb
Sc
Zn
Exposed Filters,
Mlcrograms/Filter
0.064 + 0.004
0.33 + 0.03
9.2 + 3.5
960 + 80
0.71 + 0.03
0.24 + 0.01
64 + 5
Unexposed Filters,
Mlcrograms/Filter
0.042 + 0.007
0.16 + 0.04
4.6 + 3.0
380 + 60
0.32 + 0.04
0.09 + 0.03
32 + 11
Elemental Concentration,
Nanograms/Standard m^ Air
0.019 + 0.008
0.15 + 0.05
4 + 4
500 + 100
0.34 + 0.05
0.13 + 0.03
28 + 12






Table 2. Inorganic constituents in EPA
         samples by NAA
Table 3. Trace element analysis of
         bunker oil sample by NAA
Element

Al
Fe
Ca
Mg
K
Na
Ti

Rb
Ba
Mn
V
Cl
Br
Se
As
Sb
Hf
Cs
Co
Sc
La
Sm
Eu
Cr
Ta
Th
U
W
Hg
Zn
Ni
Coal

5.7
18.3
2.2
0.76
1.5
0.23
0.26

—
200
294
247
100
5
40
70
<7
4
^15
20
19
45
—
1
100
<2
25
16
3
<18
—
— —
Ash
Per Cent
1.31
1.44
0.13
0.16
0.3
0.032
0.068
V8/8
3.6
128
27
26
1,646
26
—
14
0.7
—
2
12
3.5
8
—
0.5
13
—
—
1.7
3
1.5
—
— —
yg/g
Fe
Mn
V
Se
Co

11
0.21
89
0.15
0.08

Sc
Cr
U
Hg
Zn
Ni
8 x 10~4
0.7
0.004
0.002*
1.3
62
                                               *Atomic absorption.
                                                     PHOTON ACTIVATION ANALYSIS

                                                    As shown in Fig.  1, there are some
                                               elements — especially  in the low Z end
                                               of the periodic table  — for which neutron
                                               activation has poor or no sensitivity.
                                               Many of these elements are, however, de-
                                               terminable by activation with photons.
                                               To produce photons an  electron accelera-
                                               tor is required, for it is the inter-
                                               action of electrons with higher Z
                                               materials (tungsten or tantalum are often
                                               used) that produce these uncharged quanta
                                               of energy.  The fact that photons are un-
                                               charged makes them like neutrons — able
                                               to completely penetrate samples.  Photon
                                               activation analysis (PAA) has been pri-
                                               marily applied to determination of trace
                                               impurities in metals,  but some data have
                                               been obtained on environmental type
                                               samples.  Generally speaking, PAA has
                                               never filled the need  that NAA has.  An
                                               excellent review on PAA was recently
                                               published" and numerous references to
                                               published work are given therein.  Since
                                               most accelerators have been built for
                                               physics research, chemists have usually
                                               had only limited access to their use.
                                               This, coupled with the expense and
                                         -240-

-------
difficulty of making irradiations (con-
struction of rabbit facilities, flux
monitoring, etc.) has resulted in few
routine applications.  Ricci^ at ORNL has
determined experimental sensitivities for
PAA at the Oak Ridge Electron Linear
Accelerator (ORELA).  Some of these are
shown in Table 4 and indicate the excel-
lent sensitivity for 0, C, F, P, and Cd
in particular.  Recently (August 1972) a
joint paper from the University of Mary-
land and the National Bureau of Standards
reported the use of PAA for determination
of Na, Cl, Ca, Ti, Cr, Ni, Zn, As, Br,
Zr, Sb, I, Ce, and Pt in air partlculates.

     It seems doubtful that PAA will be
available for more than a few special
samples — at least during the next several
years.  Costs should be figured on a time
basis, but should run about $75 a sample.

Table 4. Sensitivities for photon-
         activation analysis at
               the ORELAa
Element
(Target)
O(PbO)
C
F(NaBF3OH)
Mg

P(red)


Ni



Cd






Hg(HgS)
Pb(PbO)

Product
(T1/2)
150(2.1m)
11C(20.5m)
18F(110m)
24Na(15.0h)

30P(2.5m)
29Al(6.6m)
28Al(2.3m)
57Ni(36.0h)


ins
1U3Cd(55.0m)
11LnCd(48.6m)
n s
ii:>Cd(53.5h)
115mln(equil.
Ag(3.1h)
l Q7
iy/Hg(65h)
204mPb(67m)
203Pb(52h)
Sensitivity6
(cpm/yg)
1,120
2,600
5,900
7.05
3.37
1,940
6.43
6.47
48.8
18.8
1.87

37.9
465

5.37
) 9.19
2.74

100
4.87
127
 One T. ,„, max. 2h at 30 kW power.

Counted on top of 3"x3" Nal(Tl).
10
 CHARGED PARTICLE ACTIVATION ANALYSIS
                             3
     Protons, deuterons, and  He parti-
cles from Van de Graaf machines, and
charged particles (C, N, etc.) from
cyclotrons have been Investigated for
analytical purposes.  Charged particles
as bombardants have several fundamental
limitations:  they essentially interact
only at the surface of the sample, and
require high energies to penetrate the
coulomb barrier of the target element.
3He activation in particular has been
used for determination of low Z elements
in tissue and foils, since the coulomb
barrier problem here is minor.  Workers
at Lawrence Radiation Laboratory (LRL)  .
at Berkeley pioneered in 3He activation,
and their work has been extended and
expanded by a number of workers, parti-
cularly Ricci and Hahn at ORNL.  The
latter have developed methods of calcu-
lating 3He activation results and demon-
strated sensitivities for many elements.-
Some applications of this technique in
the environmental and biological field
include determinations of low Z elements
in water, tissue, filters, but again
probably not even on a semi-routine basis.
Several years ago there was considerable
interest in a small 3He cyclotron to be
designed specifically for analytical work.
Were such a cyclotron available, we can
visualize considerable use for It in
environmental problems, not only for
analyses, but also for production of
short-lived radioisotopes of C, N, 0,
etc. for tracer studies.  Both Philips of
The Netherlands and Cyclotron Corporation
of Berkeley, California have such
machines available.  For an excellent
review of charged particle activation we
recommend the article by Ricci.^

   PROTON REACTION AND OTHER PROMPT
       OR SCATTERING TECHNIQUES

     In the techniques mentioned hereto-
fore, one produces a radioactive species
and measures characteristic gamma-rays
from its decay over a period of time after
the irradiation.  In proton reaction and
scattering experiments the measurement is
made simultaneously with the irradiation,
i.e. one measures a prompt reaction pro-
duct.  For example, in the determination
of C and N isotoplc ratios in tissue   C
was determined by measuring the 2.36 MeV
 ?rompt gamma from the reaction
 2C(p.Y)13N, 13C by a 8.06 MeV gamma-ray
from "C(p,Y)13N, and 15N by the
             reaction which gives a 4.43
                                         -241-

-------
MeV prompt gamma-ray.Counting is done
during irradiation, so one need only
Irradiate until sufficient data have been
collected.  The technique has also been
applied to the determination of Li and F
in salt matrices.13

     At present the method is not avail-
able for even a semi-routine operation,
but interest in it could stimulate
several laboratories to provide services.
Proton-reaction analysis has been
suggested as one rapid method of isotopic
analysis, especially for experiments
employing ^C (see below).

          X-RAY FLUORESCENCE

     When electrons are ejected from
inner orbltals of an atom their replace-
ment results in the emission of x-rays.
K x-rays are produced by filling the
innermost or K orbital, L x-rays from the
L orbital, etc.  The energies of K or L
x-rays are characteristic of the element;
thus measurement of these x-rays can be a
unique identification of an element.

     Electrons can be removed from an
atom by a number of means — charged
particles and electrons, as we shall see
later, have recently been used.  But the
most commonly used method employs x-rays
from an x-ray tube, hence the name x-ray
fluorescence analysis (XRF).  X-rays can
also be produced by a radioisotope source
(241Am, 109Cd, etc.) or by beta-particle
induced bremstrallung.  Radioisotope
x-ray spectrometry was the subject of a
1966 review,^ while a general review of
the whole subject was published in 1970.^

     In its simplest form an x-ray
fluorescence analysis system might consist
of an x-ray tube (or radioisotope source),
some type of colllmator to sharpen up the
x-rays, the sample upon which the x-rays
fall, and a detector and electronics to
measure and record the fluorescent x-rays
that are produced.  The Ge(Li) detector
that is used in gamma-ray spectrometry is
also used here, except its size can be
much smaller since we are dealing with
low energy (<80 keV) x-rays rather than
gamma rays.  The Ge(Li) detector can be
manufactured with resolutions approaching
1 keV, and for very low-energy x-rays Si
detectors have been used.  Again one
follows the detector with a multi-channel
analyzer and read-out.

     X-ray fluorescence analysis becomes
less practical as the Z of the desired
element decreases.  Below ^Z = 19 the
method becomes subject to difficulties
that make It advisable to look to other
techniques.  One reason for this is, of
course, the dropoff of x-ray energy with
Z; at lower x-ray energies the absorp-
tion of these x-rays by the matrix
becomes larger and one reaches the point
where losses are quite appreciable.  A
more fundamental limitation is the
fluorescence yield.

     When (say) an L electron falls into a
K level vacancy (created by removal of
the K electron) the energy difference
between the K- and L- binding energies
may be emitted as a characteristic x-ray,
or may be used in an Internal photo-
electric process that results in emission
of an additional electron from the L, or
M, etc. shell; the whole process may re-
sult in many x-ray and electron emissions
(Auger electrons).  The fluorescence
yield (wf) is the fraction of vacancies
that are filled by x-ray emissions and
increases with Z from about Z - 15, Uf •
0.05,to Z - 70, ojf - 0.9.  There is also
fluorescence yield for L x-ray emission.
Another complicating factor is the compe-
tition between photoelectric and Compton
interaction as scattered radiation inter-
acts with the sample and surroundings.
This results in a background continuum
with peaks in the x-ray spectrum.  Pre-
sent and immediate future technology
aims at computer resolution and calcula-
tion of such x-ray peaks much in the
manner previously described for gamma-ray
resolution.

     X-ray fluorescence is rapid, inexpen-
sive, quite sensitive for middle Z ele-
ments, and highly reliable.  It has
already been applied for elemental deter-
minations in a number of environmental
samples.  Goulding, " for example, has
shown its applicability to determinations
in food, vegetation, fish and other aqua-
tic organisms, and air filters.  Figure 2,
taken from Goulding, shows an x-ray spec-
trum obtained from an air filter.   Most
of the major AEC laboratories have XRF
capability, but none is at present en-
gaged in running large numbers of service
analyses.  Interest has been expressed by
several in setting up a facility for such
work if a demand exists.  Costs should be
<$10 per sample; this would include mea-
surement of perhaps 8 or 10 elements.
Six—ten samples per hour per instrument
seems a reasonable sample load estimate.
                                         -242-

-------
     FIITH f F3(0.6ra' Alii FLO'.V /cn'jOTAL KUT. =80.1 pg/era'}
         fil.it.H71 t-HHUBl

                (QUANTITIES (llOTfl) 11 |lg/Cn2)
                                   SCATTif
                son
Fig. 2.  Trace  elements in an air
         filter determined by XRF2

     The ultimate limit of detectability
in XRF depends  upon the magnitude of the
x-ray peak relative to background; this
latter is directly related to scattering
and the magnitude of unwanted "white
x-rays" from  the  x-ray source, and
secondary x-rays  from Interaction of the
fluorescent x-rays with surroundings.
Sparks,17 at  ORNL has under development
at the present  time a double monochromator
system: a compression annealed pyrolytic
graphite monochromator to reduce "white"
radiation from  the target, and a second
doubly curved monochromator placed
between sample  and detector to reduce
scattered radiation.  Preliminary data
indicate this combination can drastically
reduce the background; Fig. 3 shows data
obtained for  Hg with an x-ray tube with
one and both  monochromators in place.
Note that L x-rays are being measured
here.  The Si(Li)  detector has better
resolution than Ge(Li) but much poorer
efficiency as a function of energy.  Thus
one chooses to  measure the 10 keV L x-ray
rather than the 70 keV K x-ray.  The
present detectable limit for Hg appears
to be 0.2  ug/g.   This equipment is still
in the development stage,  but the ulti-
mate goal is  a  completely automated XRF
system with automatic sample changer,
double monochromator, and computer
operated and  corrected data processing
system.  Present  estimate is 18 months to
completion.   Costs should be less than
those estimated previously.

     Radioisotope x-ray sources have
several characteristics that make them
highly desirable  for specific applica-
tions.  First and most obvious is their
simplicity relative to an x-ray tube:  no
power requirement and no large amount of
shielding.  A single x-ray energy is
available without the use of a monochro-
mator when  one uses an x-ray emitting
nuclide  such  as ^Am Or lO^cd.  One can
also make an  x-ray source of a particu-
lar energy  by a secondary technique:
let beta radiation fall on an element
whose characteristic K x-ray energy is
desired.  One immediately obvious limita-
tion of  this  latter method is the very
low efficiency of the process.  Rather
simple x-ray  fluorescence units have
been designed from radioisotope sources
for field use and where only modest
sensitivity is required these units are
quite satisfactory.  In general, however,
they cannot compete with a good tube
system.
                                ORNL-OWG 7I-I4M3
      100 pom MERCURY IN H
     o MONOCHROMATIC Mo K,, WITH Si (Li) DETECTOR
     • MONOCHROMATIC Mo K0 WITH GRAPHITE
     - MONOCHROMATOR BEFORE Si (Li) DETECTOR »10 -
      Mo X-RAY TUBE AT 50ktV-1mA, Z00s«c
                12       14
                   ENERGY (MV)
Fig. 3.  Determination  of  Hg in 1^0 by
         XRF and a monochromator system

CHARGED PARTICLE INDUCED X-RAY
FLUORESCENCE

     Not only x-rays  induce x-ray
fluorescence; electrons and charged
particles such as photons  and alpha
particles can also be used.  The maximum
cross section for a given  target element
is directly proportional to the square
of the charge of the  projectile and
occurs at projectile  energies that are
directly proportional to the projectile
mass.  Electron induced x-ray excitation
                                         -243-

-------
results In a large bremsstrahlung back-
ground.  Charged particle x-ray excita-
tion (CPXE) produces significantly less
background; for example the rate for 50
MeV protons Is about 10  times less than
that for 20 kw electrons.   As discussed
in the section concerned with charged
particle activation analysis, these
techniques require the use of large
machines — cyclotrons or Van de Graafs.
Thus, until recent changes in emphasis
on directions of research, little time or
interest was forthcoming from physicists
or their machines.  This has now changed;
this spring physicists18 at ORNL used
oxygen ions to study La adsorbed on rock
salt by CPXE.  The results from this in-
vestigation are of interest in predicting
behavior of fission products stored in
salt mines.

     A considerable research and develop-
ment effort on CPXE at Brookhaven
National Laboratory (BNL) is expected to
culminate in a routine automated analysis
system by 1974.  Beam lines will be set
up at the RARAF  (Medical Accelerator)
specifically  for  this  purpose.   Gordon
and co-workers  at BNL  have published  a
number of  informative  papers1'»^ on
CPXE describing experiments using a
number of  accelerators and projectiles.
They have  obtained data using cancerous
tissue, soil, air filters, and  biologi-
cal material  as targets.   Figure 4 shows
data obtained using NBS orchard leaves
as the target.  An 8-minute irradiation
at 17.5 nanoamps  with  3.5  MeV protons
was made with the orchard  leaves backed
by 3.5 mg/cm  millipore filter.  The
identifying element symbol and  x-ray
line are shown  along the abcissa.   The
numbers at the  end represent the devia-
tion in ev between the observed and true
x-ray energies.

     CPXE  seems to be  one  of  the most
promising  of the new nuclear  techniques.
The projected BNL CPXE  laboratory  should
be able to handle 50 samples  per 8-hour
day at a cost of ^$107sample.   Perhaps 9
elements could be reported  in each sample.
Thus a low cost of $l/element seems
possible.
     ;'WJl   UKLHflRO LEflVES ON MILLIPORE


K
1
*


-
1
f


-
! 5
r s



f
2
I
1
.
j
Ł


-
a
i
I
* TV *
I
8
|
r
I V
ni



                  It? .00   ZM.OC
                                      "t.OO   SIJ.OO
                                      CHANNEL
                                                                 • .00  MT..T
                                                                                  ..r  :*.••..v
                      Fig. 4. X-ray spectra obtained by CPXE of
                              NBS orchard leaves 2^
                                         -244-

-------
     Certain problems appear universal
in all these x-ray fluorescence techni-
ques, however, and although they are
somewhat akin to similar problems in
activation analysis, they are not iden-
tical.  The main difficulty is the inter-
pretation and elucidation of the x-ray
spectrum — particularly the identifica-
tion of small peaks from minor constitu-
ents.  This ability has not yet been
really satisfactorily demonstrated.  In
NAA two ways exist to by-pass or at least
ameliorate this problem: use of several
gamma-ray peaks from the same radio-
nuclide and/or allowing some components
to decay out before measuring others.  As
demonstrated in Fig. 4 the components
identified are major ones.  The technique
must be tested for smaller components;
for example, Hg is known to be present in
this sample at "\-0.15 Ug/g.  A slight in-
dication of a peak in Fig. 4 to the left
and below the 10.19 keV peak may be Hg.
This problem is under continuing study
at BNL.

           21
     Cooper   of BNWL has just completed
an experimental study of sensitivities of
particle and photon excitation methods of
x-ray fluorescence for analysis of trace
elements in environmental samples.  His
conclusions: results Indicate that low
energy proton excitation techniques do
not exhibit analysis capabilities signi-
ficantly different from those of photon
excitation methods while high energy
alpha excitation is not competitive.
These results are so recent (Aug. 31,
1972) that other workers have not had
time to study them carefully or to
attempt confirmation.

      ELECTRON SPECTROSCOPY FOR
          CHEMICAL ANALYSIS

     A weakness of most nuclear and x-ray
techniques is that they are unable to
present any information concerning the
chemical state of the element in
question.  A method that does provide
such chemical information by an x-ray
technique is electron spectroscopy (for
chemical analysis, ESCA).  ESCA is a
technique whereby one deduces binding
energies of inner core electrons of an
atom — which are sensitive to the chemi-
cal environment — from high resolution
measurements of spectra of photo-
electrons produced by x-rays.  The use of
ESCA has been extended to organic chem-
istry also, with the observation that it
is possible to differentiate spectra
 from the carboxyl carbon atom and  the
 benzene carbon.  Similar observations
 have been made for compounds containing
 nitrogen, oxygen, and  sulfur.

      Because of  the complexity of  the
 equipment fe double focusing iron-free
 magnetic electron spectrometer is
 required) and sophistication of  the
 method,ESCA is presently only being
 applied to a limited extent for  special
 problems.  It does offer the ability to
 elicit otherwise unobtainable chemical
 bonding information by physical  means.
 For example, at  ORNL Hulett^ has  in-
 vestigated the chemical form of  sulfur
 In smoke particles using ESCA.   In Fig.5
 we see the photoelectron spectra of  sul-
 fur on smoke particles, fly ash, and
 (at top) reference sulfate.  The sulfur
 in both samples  exhibits a chemical
 shift.  The coal smoke particles exhibit
 a peak at M.65 ev that is  probably sul-
 fide or a mercaptan; the doublet at
 *v»170 ev is indicative  of two higher  oxi-
 dation species — sulfite and sulfate.
 Resolution of the flyash peak In Fig.  5
 into SO* and SOj is questionable.    The
 possibilities latent in this technique
 are quite apparent and effort continues
 to develop it.

                              ORNL-OWG 71-2663
     175
                  170           165
                -BINDING ENERGY (eV)
           i  i   i   i  i   i
                               i   I  i   i  i
1300
            1315          1320
              KINFTIC. FNFRfiY (»VI-
                                      1325
  Fig.  5.  Photoelectron spectra of sulfur
          on various substrates.^2
                                        -245-

-------
    STABLE AND RADIOACTIVE TRACERS

     The contributions of radioactive
tracer techniques to a better understand-
ing of industrial, chemical, biological,
and physical processes fill a number of
books and reviews.  Strangely, however,
few tracer techniques have been success-
fully adapted as analytical techniques.
Thickness gauges appear to be the out-
standing analytical radloisotope applica-
tion.  Of course 1AC, 32P, 35S and other
radionuclides have provided basic under-
standing or aided in testing many analy-
tical methods.  A general overview of the
subject is available In an IAEA Conference
Proceedings volume.

     Stable Isotopes have been used in
conjunction with NAA or some other
analytical technique for a number of in-
vestigations.  Los Alamos Scientific
Laboratory is now producing 5 Kg/year of
13C and will soon raise this to 40-50
Kg/year.  Their ICONS program will make
13C, ^N, 170, 180 available for ecologi-
cal investigations.  Nitrogen depleted in
1% is now available in large quantities
for field studies such as fertilizer run
off.  Triply labelled C02 (13C and 180)
with its mass of 49 can be used for
atmospheric tracing.  These tracers can
be used only if sensitive, accurate
analytical techniques are available.
Charged particle and neutron activation
can provide such service easily;
mass spectrometry (see below) can also
perform these determinations.  Present
cost of 13C is $60/g; 180, $100/g.

  SPECIALIZED NON-NUCLEAR TECHNIQUES

     The facilities of AEC and NASA
laboratories are obviously not limited
to the nuclear and x-ray techniques
discussed above.  Analytical chemistry
has been an Important adjunct in the
development of nuclear power, and
virtually every modern analytical instru-
ment and technique is available and in
use at these facilities.  It is beyond
the purpose of this paper to discuss the
conventional techniques, but two examples
of highly sophisticated non-nuclear
analytical techniques will be briefly
mentioned since both have been used to
analyze environmental pollution type
samples and both are available to outside
customers for additional services.  These
two techniques are 1) spark source mass
spectrometry (SSMS) for elemental identi-
fication, and 2) sorption, gas chromato-
graphy, and mass spectrometry for identi-
fication of organic impurities in water.

SPARK SOURCE MASS SPECTROMETRY

     Mass spectrometry is one of the most
sensitive and comprehensive techniques of
trace analysis in inorganic systems.  A
mass spectrometer separates gaseous ions
according to their mass-to-charge ratios
(m/e) by the action of electric and/or
magnetic fields and records these ratios
and their relative intensities.  A mass
spectrometer consists of four essential
aspects:  1) the source, which produces
a beam of ions representative of the
sample, 2) the analyzer, in which the
separation is effected either in space
or In time, 3) the detector, where the
resolved ions are detected and their
number is counted, and 4) the vacuum
system, which provides the environment
for all these processes.

     The most useful mass spectrometric
method for general analysis employs the
vacuum spark source.  In this source a
high-voltage radio-frequency discharge
(50-150 kV) is produced between two
closely spaced electrodes of the material
to be analyzed.  In the source region
the two electrodes are sparked resulting
in vaporization and ionization of the
sample constituents.  After acceleration
of the ions into the slit system, the
electrostatic analyzer selects for
transmission ions of a certain energy
range, with no mass separation.  The mag-
netic field separates the ion beam
according to mass-to-charge ratio, pro-
viding mass analysis at the same time.
The ions may be recorded either electri-
cally or photographically.  Spark source
mass spectrometry is a multielement
technique, capable of detecting trace
elements at the parts per billion level,
with applicability to the entire
periodic table.

     Detection limits for most elements
are 0.5 x 10~9 grams or lower.  The data
as recorded by SSMS are generally good to
+502; to obtain a quantitative value one
must use an isotope dilution technique.
Here a known amount of an enriched stable
isotope of the element(s) in question is
added as an internal standard.  Usually
only 3 or 4 "isotope spikes" can be
added in any one determination.  For many
samples, however, elements can be
referenced to one constituent which is
quantitatively known, e.g. to Fe in coal
                                        -246-

-------
ash samples.  The SSMS is an expensive
piece of equipment but most national
laboratories have several available.

     Oak Ridge has performed a number of
special analyses for EPA as well as pro-
vided them with consultation in setting
up new SSMS laboratories.  Lead in gaso-
line has been determined quantitatively
by synthesizing an organic standard solu-
tion containing a known amount of ^OApjj.
Values of Pb ranging from 0.07 to 3 grams
per gallon of gasoline have been deter-
mined.  Isotope dilution has also been
used to determine Hg and Cd in various
matrices including vegetation, soil, gas,
oil, coal, and ash.  Values as low as
0.01 ug/ml are easily seen.

     Bunker heating oil is a heavy
viscous liquid (essentially a solid at
room temperature) and a most difficult
matrlce to work with.  Table 5 lists
typical results from a SSMS analysis of
such a sample.

Table 5. Weight ppm trace metals in
         bunker oil sample by SSMS
Ag
Al
As
B
Be
Bi
Hg
Cd
Co
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Li
0.1
20
0.7
0.05
<0.01
<0.1
0.005*
0.83*
1
1
0.3
20
1
0.03
Mg
Mn
Mo
Na
Ni
P
Pb
Si
Ti
V
Zn
Zr
Se
S
2
1
0.2
1
70
2
3
30
0.3
100
2
0.2
0.02
>100
 "Isotope dilution, + 5%

     Costs for SSMS will run about $150
for a series of quantitative determina-
tions of up to 50 elements in one sample.
For isotope dilution analysis the cost
will be ^$100; at ORNL isotope dilution
can be run for U, Hg, Cd, Pb, Zn, and Fe.

     One important service a SSMS labora-
tory can perform is that of reference
analysis.  The SSMS lab might periodi-
cally check samples that have been
analyzed by other laboratories and other
techniques.  The referee lab concept
seems highly desirable for Cd and Hg
analysis in particular.

     There are, of course, a number of
other spectrometric analytical techni-
ques available for single and multi-
element analysis; to discuss all of
these is beyond the scope of this paper.
Atomic absorption is a widely used
single element technique, emission
spectroscopy a multi-element one.
Recent innovations in the latter techni-
que such as induction coupled plasma
excitation have greatly extended its
range and capability.  Iowa State,
for example, has under development a
highly sophisticated system for multi-
element analysis.  Costs for analysis
using this technique should be quite
reasonable.

      ORGANIC IMPURITIES IN WATER

     A general lack of information exists
about the organic content of water pri-
marily because there is no generally
applicable method for concentrating,
separating, and identifying soluble
organic compounds which may be present
at concentrations less than one milligram
per liter.  A group at the Institute for
Atomic Research, Iowa State University,
Ames, Iowa has recently developed and
demonstrated a system that can solve this
problem.  Simply stated their method In-
volves quantitative sorption of trace
organic compounds on a macroreticular
resin bed followed by selective desorp-
tion using appropriate eluents.  Identi-
fications of the compounds present are
made with a gas chromatograph-mass spec-
trometer combination.  In addition
identification can be confirmed by com-
paring gas chromatographic retention
times and ultraviolet, infrared, proton
magnetic resonance, and mass spectra
with known samples.  In one experiment
water from a series of wells in Ames was
analyzed and a number of impurities
definitely established.^  Table 6 gives
results from one such well.  Concentra-
tions of some of the constituents not
determined at the time of analysis could
have been obtained with additional
effort.  This system is still under de-
velopment but is available for service
work part time.  Charges will be made on
a man-hour basis.  For determinations of
levels of neutral organic constituents
cost would be ^$50; to identify compounds
requested by sender (i.e. DDT) ^$80 or
$40 per compound plus $50 basic charge
for the chromatogram.  A complete analy-
sis of an unknown might run from several
hundred dollars to several thousand.  In
all cases users should first contact
                                         -247-

-------
Ames personnel" for advice concerning
sampling precautions.  The technique
would seem to fill an important need in
environmental analysis.

Table 6.  Neutral compounds in a
          contaminated Ames, Iowa well
Name of
component
Concen-   Std
tration,  dev
  ppb
Acenaphthylene            19.3      1.4
1-Methylnaphthalene       11.0      0.6
Methylindenes (two
  isomers)                18.8      0.8
Indene                    18.0      1.5
Acenaphthene               1.7      0.2
2-2-Benzothiophene         0.37     0.11
Isopropylbenzene       )
Ethyl benzene          )
Naphthalene            )
2,3-Dihydroindene      )  1S
Alkyl-2,3-dihydroindene)
Alkyl benzenes         )
Alkyl benzothiophenes  )
Alkyl naphthalenes     )
                SUMMARY

     A number of x-ray and nuclear tech-
niques are available at AEC and NASA
laboratories for determination of
inorganic constituents in environmental
samples and for organic constituents in
water.  We have indicated typical results
obtained by use of these techniques with
variety of matrices; additional informa-
tion may be found in referenced material.

           ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

     The author would like to express
his appreciation to each of the scien-
tists who supplied him with data and in-
formation concerning his own special
technique.  Space limitations prevent
individual listings just as it has pre-
vented an exhaustive discussion of each
method.  Without this assistance the
task of writing this paper would have
been most onerous indeed.
                                      REFERENCES

 1.  R. Gunnick et al, "Identification and Determination of Gamma Emitters by Computer
     Analysis of Ge(Li) Spectra," LRL UCID 15140 (May 16, 1967).

 2.  R. L. Heath, in Modern Trends in Activation Analysis, ed. by J. R. de Voe, NBS
     Spec. Publ. 312, Washington, D. C., 1969, Vol. II, p. 959.

 3.  A. Houtzeel, F. F. Dyer, "A Study of Fission Products in the Molten-Salt Reactor
     Experiment by Gamma Spectrometry," ORNL-TM-3151 (Aug. 1972).

 4.  L. A. Ranticelli, R. W. Perkins, J. Geophys. Res. 75_, 3055 (1970).

 5.  W. A. Sedlacek, P. R. Guthals, H. L. Smith, "Identification of Aerosols in the
     Southwestern United States Using Activation Analysis and Scanning Electron
     Microscopy," LA-DC 13316 (1971).

 6.  G. J. Lutz, Anal. Chem. 43_, 93 (1971).

 7.  E. Ricci, in Analytical Chemistry Division Annual Progress Report for Period
     Ending September 30. 1971. ed. by W. S. Lyon, ORNL-4749, p. 36 (1972).

 8.  N. K. Aras, W. H. Zoller, and G. E. Gordon, Abstracts of Papers, 164th National
     Meeting American Chemical Society. New York City, August 27-Sept. 1, 1972
     (ACS, Washington, D. C.), NUCL 27.

 9.  S. S. Markowitz, J. D. Mahoney, Anal. Chem. 34, 329 (1962).

10.  E. Ricci, R. L. Hahn, Anal. Chem. 40, 54 (1968).

11.  E. Ricci, in Advances in Activation Analysis, ed. by J.M.A. Lenihan, S. J. Thomp-
     son, V. P. Guinn, Academic Press, London, 1972, Vol. 2, p. 221.
                                        -248-

-------
REFERENCES (Continued)

12.  E. Ricci, Anal. Chem. 43_, 1866 (1971).

13.  R. L. Macklin et al, Nucl. Appl. Ł, 269 (1968).

14.  J. R. Rhodes, Analyst 91., 683 (1966).

15.  K. G. Carr-Brion, K. W. Payne, Analyst Ł5, 977 (1970).

16.  F. S. Goulding, J. M. Jaklevic, "Trace Element Analysis by X-Ray Fluorescence,"
     UCRL-20625 (1971).'

17.  R. W. Gould, S. R. Bates, C. J. Sparks, Appl. Spect. 2Ł, 549 (1968).

18.  M. I. Saltmarsh, A.  Van der Woude, C. A. Ludemann, Appl. Phys. Lett. 21^, 64 (1972).

19.  B. M. Gordon, H. W.  Kraner,  in Trace Substances in Environmental Health — V.
     ed. by D. D. Hemphill, Univ. of Missouri, Columbia, Mo., 1971, p. 419.

20.  B. M. Gordon, H. W.  Kraner, J. Radioanal. Chem. (in press).

21.  J. A. Cooper, "Comparison of Particle and Photon Excited X-ray Fluorescence
     Applied to Trace Element Measurements of Environmental Samples," BNWL SA 4304
     (Aug. 31, 1972).

22.  L. D« Hulett, T. H.  Carlson, B. R. Fish, J. A. Durham, in Determination of Air
     Quality, ed. by G. Mamantov, W. D. Shults (Plenum Press, N. Y. 1972), p. 179.

23.  I.A.E.A., Nuclear Techniques in Environmental Pollution.  Proceedings of a
     Conference, Salzburg, Austria, 26-30 October 1970, IAEA, Vienna  (1971)

24.  G. W. Dickinson, V.  A. Fassel, Anal. Chem. 4.1, 1021 (1969).

25.  A. K. Burnham et al,  Anal. Chem. 44^ 139 (1972).

26.  G. V. Calder, Ames Laboratory, USAEC, Ames, Iowa (private communication,
     Sept. 1972).
                                         -249-

-------
                    DISCUSSION OF THE PRESENTATION BY WILLIAM LYON
Nader;  Are yc»' aware of anybody using the
Raman scattering technique for looking at
molecular composition of particulates.

Lyon;  Not to my knowledge, no.  Perhaps
someone here in the' audience is.  We have
quite a few experts in this field here.
Does anyone care to answer that?

Nader:  We have a contract ourselves with
the Stanford Research Institute to look
at the feasibility of this technique.  I
was wondering if anybody else was doing
any of this work.

Gordon;  I would like to comment on the
interpretation of the orchard leaf analyses.
In the past, when those runs were made, we
had some difficulty with iron, copper, and
zinc backgrounds from scattering in our
collimator system.  All the other analyses
for the other elements were off uniformly
by a factor of two in the same direction.
The differences that were shown were due
to the fact that they were all reported
relative to the NBS iron value.

Rausa;  Do you care to comment on the
availability of standards for calibration
of these instruments at the level of
environmental pollutants that people are
concerned about?

Lyon:  Well, the Bureau of Standards has
put out a number of standard samples,
its orchard leaves is one.  They have a
coal that's out now.  The Bureau of Mines
has some coal and ash round robin type
samples which are perhaps not certified.
Bureau of Standards does have standard
bovine liver.  It has a number of others,
such as the old rock samples which have
trace elements as well as macro-quantities
certified.  The Bureau of Standards
radioactivity section also puts out radio-
active standards.  I really don't know
what all of these are, but I'm sure cobalt
60  and  cesium.

Rausa;  I was more concerned about 'the
gaseous NC^and S02 availability.

Ellison:  The Bureau of Standards is
working on standard samples both for
particulat matter and gases.  The SOg
standard is available.  They are working
on others and will provide them as fast
as technology will allow.
                                         -250-

-------
     NATIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL INFORMATION SYSTEM (STORET)
                         J
                      George F. Wirth
        Chief, Technical Data and Information Branch
               Office of Water Programs, EPA
                   Washington, D.C. 20460
                         i
                            and

                       L. C. Wastler
              Technical Information Specialist
           Technical Data and Information Branch
               Office of Water Programs, EPA
                   Washington, D.C. 20460

                       July 10, 1972
                          ABSTRACT

The National Water Quality Control Information System
(STORET) provides the ability to relate hierarchically
structured data files to the possible alternatives and
outcomes in water quality control decision-making.  The
system is designed to provide information for both
administrative and technical decisions.

STORET presently contains 10 individual files which relate
primarily to identification of wastewater discharges and
ambient water quality.  Use of the system is provided
through remote computer terminals to 10 EPA regions, 8 other
Federal agencies, and 30 States for purposes of common data
usage and prevention of duplication of data-gathering
effort.

Improvements being added to STORET include a River Mile
Index  (RMI) location system which will allow "hydrologic
order" location of "points of interest" and a General Point
Source File (GPSF) which will accept descriptions of all
point sources of pollution.
                               -251-

-------
          INTRODUCTION

     The National Water Quality
Control Information System
(STORET) is a set of information
analysis requirements, an infor-
mation system definition, a data
structure definition, a set of
data collection requirements, and
a set of computerized files and
processing programs.  The system
includes the people and equipment
to make the pieces work together
and fulfill the objective of pro-
viding information for decision-
making in water pollution control
activities.

     The system dates from 1963
when computerized programs were
designed and implemented to store
and retrieve ambient water
quality data.  The acronym
"STORET" was applied to this
system.  In 1969, data files were
created for municipal waste
treatment plant and other water
pollution control program
information.  The name STORET has
been used at various times to
apply to various parts and all of
the system.  This paper will use
the name STORET to mean the
National Water Quality Control
Information System as defined in
the preceding paragraph.

        STORET—OB JECTIVE

     STORET is designed to supply
information for the analysis
requirements of four general
types of decision-making.  These
types are:
Policy Planning and
Evaluation

Policy decisions require
broad scale
determinations of
general improvements in
ambient water quality,
measures of the
effectiveness of
abatement controls on
particular pollution
sources, and measures of
the effectiveness of
major abatement
activities such as
granting, enforcing,
basin planning, or tech-
nically assisting.
Policy planning and
evaluation information
are generally supplied
to the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA)
Administrator, EPA
Regional Administrator,
and State and local
water pollution control
administrator levels.

Program (Operational,
Planning and Evaluation)

Program decisions
require information
regarding pollution
cause and effect
relationships in
specific basins and
regions.  These
relationships are
provided by information
in the form of river
basin models with
identification in
                                   -252-

-------
    priority order of the
    specific causes of
    pollution and
    measurements of improve-
    ments in specific pollu-
    tion sources relative to
    Federal and State pollu-
    tion abatement actions.
    Program information is
    primarily provided to
    program managers in EPA
    Regional, State and
    local pollution control
    offices.

3.  Enforcement

    Enforcement decisions
    require information
    similar to program in-
    formation but contain
    more detail on the
    sources of pollution,
    the organizations
    responsible for the
    sources, and the related
    abatement progress.
    Enforcement information
    is used by Federal and
    State enforcement
    officers for identifying
    the type and priority of
    specific enforcement
    actions.

    This information would
    not necessarily provide
    "legal evidence".  The
    collection of "legal
    evidence" after the
    decision has been made
    to initiate an
    enforcement action is
    generally not considered
         an information-gathering
         activity in this system.

     4.  Legislative Guidance

         Legislative guidance
         requires information
         similar to that for
         policy decisions except
         that it is produced in a
         form to meet specific
         legislative requirements
         at either the National
         or State levels.  In
         general, such informa-
         tion is less technical
         than policy planning and
         evaluation information
         and more related to
         economic, social and
         political objectives
         that define the ultimate
         value of water pollution
         control.  Legislative
         information is used by
         the Congress and the
         general public to
         evaluate the status of
         the Nation's waters.
     The STORET strategy is to
support the above information
requirements at the Federal,
State, Basin, and local levels.
This strategy assumes that a
central information system
serving the Federal Government
and all the States directly is
far more efficient than the use of
individual State systems and
multi-Federal systems.  Two prime
efficiencies result from this
strategy.  First is the
elimination of the necessity for
                             -253-

-------
50 plus individual investments in
computer software and hardware.
Second, and more important, are
the resulting comparable
information outputs that
eliminate confusion at the
Federal, State, and local levels
simultaneously involved in a
basin pollution abatement
program.

     The STORET strategy contains
the assumption that the
Federal/State relationship in
water pollution control
information is a "partnership"
contract and not a "parent-
subsidiary" contract.  Each
"partner" has open access
directly into the system and may
utilize its capability for
proprietary program needs.
STORET is, as a result of this
strategy, an open-ended
information system in that it is
constantly being changed and
improved to meet the requirements
of one or more "partners".

     STORET—AN INFORMATION
        SYSTEM DEFINITION

     STORET is an information
system—not a decision-making
system.  Information, as regards
STORET, is defined as a message
or messages that describe or
affect the assessment of the
alternatives and the outcomes
associated with a particular
decision-making situation.  As an
information system,  STORET
attempts to associate available
data with the alternatives and
outcomes relative to the water
pollution control program.  The
value assessment of the possible
outcomes or the chance of success
of any alternative is left to the
user through the interpretation
of the messages or data received.
An assessment of truthfulness or
factuality and of confidence in
the message or data are provided
in the information system chrough
the currentness of the message
and the identification of the
source of the message.

     STORET, as an information
system, has a definite message or
data structure of water pollution
abatement alternatives and
outcomes.  Incoming data must be
coded to conform to this
structure, and retrieval
capabilities are provided by
logical search rules on these
alternatives and outcomes.

     The system is designed to
provide various levels of
management with specific
pertinent messages that the user
does not already know.  No
assumption is made in the STORET
design that summarized data is
necessarily higher level
management information.  A
missing piece of detailed
information may be what is needed
for a  particular high-level
decision.

    STORET—A DATA STRUCTURE
           DEFINITION

     The most important feature
of STORET is the provision of a
data structure through which
                                   -254-

-------
various files can be logically
searched for a retrieval of
information.  Specifically, the
data structure is a list of names
for messages or data values and
an association of the messages
with water pollution abatement
alternatives and outcomes.

     Every message that enters
the STORET system is assumed to
contain a value  (quantitative or
qualitative), a title (or
description in text), a unit for
that value, and a code number for
"shorthand" purposes.  The title,
unit, and code number of a value
are called a parameter.  The data
structure of STORET at the lowest
level consists of a long list of
such parameters.  An example of a
parameter and its value in a
specific message is: Oxygen,
Dissolved; milligrams per liter;
STORET code 00300; 5.0.

     There are approximately
5,000 parameters identified in
the STORET system with new
parameters added almost daily.
This STORET parameter list
insures that "Dissolved Oxygen"
or any other parameter is
identified by the same designa-
tion throughout all files.

     To provide information from
messages, data are identified
with single parameters and values
and then referenced to other
relevant parameters and values.
Referencing parameter values to
other parameter values is called
hierarchical structuring.  For
example, the latitude of a water
quality sampling station and the
value of a dissolved oxygen
measurement taken at that station
are both parameters.  The
latitude, however, applies to all
measurements taken at that
station.  Therefore, the system
must provide not only common
parameter nomenclature, but it
must also provide hierarchical
parameter structure through which
broad level parameters such as
latitude-longitude determinations
can be related to all other
parameters for which the given
broad level parameter  is valid.

     The highest level of
hierarchical structure of
alternatives for all data con-
sists of some 20 parameters
identifying water pollution
abatement actions.  These 20
actions can be summarized into
five major types.  They are:

     1.  Water use determination
         or measurement of the
         effects of water use;

     2.  Establishment of water
         quality standards
         criteria;

     3.  Measurement of ambient
         water quality;

     4.  Measurement of physical,
         chemical, and biological
         characteristics of
         effluent at discharge
         points; and,

     5.  Specific abatement
         action  (such as
                                  -255-

-------
         construction or planning
         grant, enforcement
         action, technical
         assistance, etc.).

     For the hierarchical
structure of outcomes,
quantifications of the values of
water pollution control are not
defined.  Therefore, the output
parameters and structure provided
are limited to the identification
of the use of the water
associated with the data. To
identify water use parameters and
values, STORET uses the Standard
Industrial Classification  (sIC)
published by the Office of
Management and Budget with EPA
additions to the classification
as used in STORET to identify
activities such as support of
aquatic life, aesthetics, etc.

     Information structured by
alternatives and outcomes as
described above essentially
provides a static information
model.  We must introduce "time
and space" parameter structuring
for all data.  STORET requires
"space" parameters in the form of
geographic locations defined by
latitude and longitude, River
Mile Index (to be discussed
later), State, city, county,
major river basin, and minor
river basin.  The "time"
parameters required are month,
day, year, hour, etc., associated
with the parameter value.

     In summary, the STORET
system consists of a nomenclature
for data and a hierarchical
structure of the nomenclature to
provide an integration of a
variety of data files.
Nomenclature for data is provided
by parameter definitions and
structure for location, time,
water pollution abatement action,
and water use.  The structuring
parameters are required in all
files for system integration.
The file integration capability
is provided through the
information structure or model.
The model provides information
system services rather than mere
computer programming of specific
data collection forms.

     STORET—DATA COLLECTION
          REQUIREMENTS

     STORET contains as of this
date, 10 distinct files.  Two of
these files are not yet computer-
ized.  Not all of the files pre-
sently conform strictly to the
previously discussed model
definition because their
existence and/or collection
techniques predate the model.

     The existing files divide by
type of water pollution action
alternative with the file name
defining the action parameter.
Because files are usually defined
to meet a specific analysis/data
collection requirement, such a
division is almost natural.
     Analysis/collection
requirements generally are set by
organizations within EPA that are
responsible for implementing some
                                   -256-

-------
specific water pollution control
program.  An initial service
request usually starts with, "We
need an information system
service for municipal waste
treatment plant operation and
maintenance inspection," or, "We
want a file for Refuse Act Permit
activity," etc.  The most
significant result of this
approach is that the system
allows for meeting data
requirements of specific EPA
programs while concurrently
making these data available to
other STORET users.  Availability
of the data to other users is
expected to eliminate duplicate
data collection.  Another result
is that data are provided to the
system by "best source" groups;
i.e., permit data collection,
examination, and input to the
system by the Refuse Act Permit
Program staff.

     The files contained in
STORET along with data volumes
and sources are listed below.

1.   Fish Kill Reports

         Contains individual
         pollution-caused fish
         kill reports including
         location, date, number
         of fish, and cause of
         kill.  Only STORET file
         describing effects of
         water use.

         6,397 events reported
         since 1960
    State Conservation
    Agencies; received by
    mail.

Water Quality

    Contains water quality
    measurements and station
    identifications.  Data
    includes location, date,
    depth, and physical,
    chemical, and biological
    measurements in surface
    waters and groundwaters.

-   75,000 stations, approx.
    1/3 active, 2/3
    historical; 200,000
    parameter measurements
    added per week.

    EPA, USGS, other Federal
    agencies. States;
    received by computer
    remote terminal input.

Municipal Waste Treatment
Facilit'y~Inventory

    Contains name, date,
    location, population
    served, treatment
    description, design
    capacity, and effluent
    measurements for
    existing facilities.

    18,200 sewered
    communities, 16,000
    treatment plants; 400
    updates per week.

-   EPA Regions, States;
    originally received by
                                   -257-

-------
    survey now by computer
    remote terminal input.

Municipal Waste Treatment
Implementation~Plans

    Associated with the file
    above on record by
    record basis.  Contains
    descriptions of needed
    new facilities, planned
    implementation dates,
    costs, grants, and
    enforcement actions.

    13,500 discharge points;
    400 updates per week.

    EPA Regions, States;
    originally received by
    survey now by computer
    remote terminal input.

Construction Grants Needs
Assessment

    Contains descriptions of
    needed new municipal
    waste treatment
    facilities by individual
    discharge, planned
    implementation dates,
    costs, and manpower
    needs to operate new
    facilities.

    2,300 municipalities;
    updating by resurvey .

    EPA Regional Survey and
    Municipalities (through
    States); received by
    computer remote terminal
    input.
6.   Contract Awards

         Contains descriptions of
         contracts for municipal
         sewage facilities
         construction by type,
         location, and date.

         10,000 contracts per
         year since 1957.

         Derived by EPA from
         "Dodge" Construction
         Reports.

7.   Industrial Implementation
     Plans

         Contains descriptions of
         needed new facilities
         for industrial waste
         water dischargers,
         planned implementation
         dates, and location.

         11,000 plants; 25
         updates per year.

         EPA from State Program
         Plans; received by
         computer remote terminal
         input.

8.   Refuse Act Permit
Applications

     -   Contains the permit
         applications on a plant
         and discharge basis with
         name, location, use,
         treatment process,
         industrial process, and
         effluent description
         data.
                              -258-

-------
         3,000 plants on computer
         file; 25,000 additional
         plants anticipated this
         year.

         EPA Refuse Act Permit
         Program;  received by
         computer  remote terminal
         input.

9.   Voluntary Industrial Waste
     Inventory

         Not yet computerized.
         Form and  data are
         identical to the Refuse
         Act Permit Application
         with added treatment
         cost and  manpower data.

         5,000 to  be placed on
         computer  file .

         EPA through a mail
         survey.

10.  Federal Power Comm (FPC)
     Survey

         Not computerized.  Will
         be replaced by data from
         Refuse Act Permit
         Program.   Contains name,
         location, date, and
         effluent  data on thermal
         discharges.  Data are
         available on microfilm.

         650 Electrical Power
         Plants.

     -   Federal Power Commission
         with EPA  support.
     The fourth through the tenth
files in this table are presently
a mixture of some specific
abatement action data with some
effluent measurement action data.
Matching data for the same
discharge point from different
files can be difficult in most
cases. The solution now being
implemented to this problem will
be discussed later.

   STORET - COMPUTERIZED FILES
      & PROCESSING PROGRAMS

     STORET uses an IBM 370-155
system for file storage,
retrieval, and analysis.  The
computer system is located in
McLean, Virginia, and is provided
by a private contractor.  STORET
accounts for 80% of the
computer's utilization from 8
a.m. to 10 p.m. Monday through
Friday, and 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.  on
Saturday.  All files are located
on IBM-3330 high speed random-
access disc systems.  The total
current storage volume of STORET
is approximately two billion
alphabetic and/or numeric
characters of data.

     STORET provides retrieval
programs, statistical programs,
and graphic output programs for
analyses and information
production.  Most of STORET's
computer programs are written in
IBM's Programming Language 1
(PL/1) and are provided to users
in a computer library accessed
through IBM Job Control Language
(JCL) commands.
                                  -259-

-------
     Provision of the information
system and resulting analyses can
be described in three levels.
One type of information and
analysis needs fulfillment is use
of STORET by EPA Headquarters
staff.  These requests are
fulfilled by previously published
analyses or analyses performed
via two medium speed terminals
and 25 low speed typewriter-type
terminals located in the
Arlington, Virginia, office of
EPA.

     Standard published analyses
include the annual fish kill
report  (50,000 distribution) the
annual municipal sewage
facilities contract awards report
(5,000 distribution), the
periodic municipal waste
treatment facilities inventory
publications  (5,000
distribution), and other national
assessments such as counts of
waste discharges classified by
treatment category, measures of
certain pollutants in streams
nationwide, and counts of
communities and populations
served by municipal waste
treatment.  Most of these
analyses support policy planning
and evaluation, and legislative
or public reporting needs.

     A second type of information
and analysis needs fulfillment is
the use of STORET by the specific
EPA Headquarters or Regional
program office with a program or
enforcement decision requirement.
To support this information
demand, there are 15 medium speed
and 60 low speed terminals in
Washington and the EPA Regional
offices.  Analyses performed by
individual EPA programs to serve
their own needs include use of
data from municipal sewage
facilities contract awards files
for "Cost of Clean Water" reports
and other economic evaluations;
ambient water quality files for
stream models; problem area
identification for enforcement
consideration; comparison of
ambient  water quality data to
water quality standards criteria
for progress assessments and
identification of priority basins
for resource allocations; fate
and persistence studies of
specific pollutants for technical
and research program direction;
point source data for effluent
permit program decisions; waste
treatment plants construction
implementation plans for
surveillance under water quality
standards; and specific measures
of abatement action program
efficiencies including effluent
analyses of municipal waste
treatment plants constructed with
Federal grants.

     A third type of information
and analysis needs fulfillment is
the use of STORET by the State
pollution control agencies and
other Federal agencies.  To
support this information
requirement, there are 140 low
speed terminals in State and
other Federal offices.  As of
this date, there are 30 States
and 8 other Federal agencies
using STORET via their own
                                   -260-

-------
computer remote terminals.  The
analyses performed by these
groups are similar to those
already mentioned but are usually
limited geographically to a
State, basin, or project area.

     STORET provides a variety of
retrieval programs to all users
for all of its computerized
files.  Statistical programs
exist for all the computerized
files except the Construction
Grants Needs assessment.  The
most complete statistical and
graphic display capabilities
exist on the water quality file
where STORET provides some 15
basic statistical functions and a
similar number of plotting
routines for digital plotter and
high, medium, and low speed
terminal printouts.  More than
100 specific retrieval control
parameters allow data retrieval
and output "tailoring".  STORET
also provides micro-output in
film, fiche, or aperture card
format.

     To assist users in obtaining
their analyses and information,
the Technical Data and
Hi formation Branch provides 12
full time personnel to provide
STORET user assistance.  This
staff is individually assigned to
various groups of users to assist
in formulating information
required for broad decision-
making and to teach use of
retrieval and analytical programs
to users as required.
        STORET RESOURCES

     The resources used to
provide STORET as an information
system are difficult to separate
from the variety of EPA
activities that interface with
STORET.  These activities include
a variety of field, laboratory,
and administrative data
collection and Regional and State
information interpretation and
analysis activities.  These
information interpretation and
analysis studies on STORET data
by non-STORET personnel are very
difficult to differentiate from
other uses and have never been
precisely measured.  Information
interpretation by STORET
personnel, however, is included
in the cost accounting of STORET
as is the computer cost of
placing data in STORET by the
various data collection
activities.

     The resources of the STORET
Information System are listed
below in thousands of dollars.

STORET Information System
($ in thousands).
1971 - $1229.
1972 - $3150,
NOTE:  For years prior to 1971,
the cost of data collection
cannot be separated from the
information system.
     No charge is made to the
non-EPA users of STORET for
computer time using STORET .
                                   -261-

-------
computer programs or files.  In
exchange for EPA computer time,
STORET receives a large amount of
non-EPA collected data at no data
collection cost to EPA.

        STORET-THE FUTURE

     The management of STORET, in
terms of selecting the new
developments and advancements to
pursue, has been performed by:

     1.   Utilizing the STORET
          User Assistance Group
          definitions of
          unfulfilled information
          and analysis
          requirements;

     2.   translating the
          information and
          analysis requirements
          into a data structure
          and data collection
          systems; and

     3.   implementing the
          computer programs and
          data collection systems
          to fulfill the defined
          needs.

     Listening to actual and
potential users has identified
four major shortcomings in the
products from the present system.
They are:

     1.   Frequent inability of
          management to use
          STORET data directly
          for decision-making in
          planning and abatement
          progress assessment.
          This problem is due to
          data output formats
          being insufficiently
          flexible, and in
          several areas, STORET
          data may be partial,
          incomplete, and/or
          outdated due to the
          data collection and
          updating methods.

     2.   Data on sources of
          pollution are not
          easily related to
          ambient water quality.

     3.   There is no
          Headquarters staff
          which, as a matter of
          course, analyzes
          ambient water quality
          data or monitors
          ambient water quality
          against water quality
          standards criteria.

     4.   Data quality control in
          all files is not
          sufficient for complete
          reliance on information
          from STORET.

     Item 1 and associated
aspects, and Item 4, are being
solved by an ambitious computer
programming and data collection
system project called "General
Point Source File" (GPSF).  Item
2 is being solved by a project
called "AUTOMAP" which will
provide a hydrologic ordering
system for all STORET data as
well as greater analytical
capabilities.  Both these
                                   -262-

-------
projects will be discussed below
in greater detail.

     Item 3, although not a
problem from an information
system standpoint, is a problem
in terms of inability to judge
the quality and the necessity of
the large volume of ambient water
quality data now in STOKET.  To
solve problems from Item 3, an
analysis group is to be organized
to measure pollution control
problems and progress.

     In Item 4, three different
quality control problems are
recognized in STORET.  The first
type, enforcement of proper
sampling and laboratory
techniques, is a function of the
Office of Research and Monitoring
in EPA.  The second type, checks
on data for proper identification
of the source and currentness of
the data and protective "locks"
on files to guard against
accidental or unknowledgable data
changes will be improved
radically by GPSF and procedures
being developed for water quality
data input controls.  The third
type, user quality control for
proper use of the information,
should be improved by adequate
documentation on STORET
operations and content.  This
control is being provided by a
new operating manual which is
"open-ended" and quickly updated
by a "mail and insert" system.

     The GPSF project will
accommodate all types of point-
source pollution data.  New
computer programs are being
developed consisting of open-
ended input, file creation, and
retrieval computer programs that
will create and group parameters
via a master parameter list and
structure,  via the new computer
programs, records can be
associated with individual user
and date identification and
provide the needed locks on
input.  For retrieval, a general
select and report generator
program will be available for
choosing parameters, sorts,
summaries, and formats to be
printed.  About 70 percent of the
GPSF computer programming work is
complete as of this date.

     The new file structure
defines a point source of
pollution without regard to type
of discharge (municipal,
industrial; raw, treated;
publicly or privately owned).
These point sources of pollution,
through the mechanism of a common
locator file, can then be related
to the ambient water quality
data.  Within each point source
identification, there are
numerous parameter groupings
which include point source
identification, point source
description, influent and
effluent measurements, operation
and maintenance inspections,
manpower measurements, finance
and grant activity, numerous
waste treatment implementation
plans schedules, and actual waste
treatment facility
implementation.
                                   -263-

-------
     With this set of new file
structures and computer programs,
STORET can present a total '.
information product for any
specific point source of
pollution and eliminate redundant
data collection by EPA and State
programs.  Each program will
collect and enter only that data
which it obtains as a matter of
its mission.  Admittedly, this is
a method that will work only if
each program can be confident
that the data it needs, but does
not collect, will be there to
meet its information
requirements.  To circumvent as
many problems as possible, the
STORET management is assigning
data collection responsibilities,
parameter by parameter, in EPA
and is taking the responsibility
of guaranteeing the monitoring
and timely reporting of the data
collection by each program.

     The AUTOMAP project is
designed to provide River Mile
Index (RMI) coverage for the
U.S., collect location data on
geographic points of interest to
water pollution control, and
provide data for graphic output
through STORET.

     An RMI for a geographic
point identifies the hydrologic
order or stream flow order for
that particular point.  The RMI
consists of a code for a given
stream system and includes
successive mileages up the main
stem and tributaries to any point
desired.  When RMl's become
available for all data in STORET,
a user can retrieve effluent and
ambient water quality data in
stream-flow order and estimate
cause and effect information
simply by reading the data in
stream-flow order.

     AUTOMAP operates primarily
on U.S.  Geological Survey (USGS)
7.5" quadrangle maps to provide
RMI by .the creation of files
describing all U.S. streams in
digital coordinates.  The
resulting files are used to
provide hydrologic locations for
ambient water quality stations,
point sources of pollution, water
quality standards criteria
stations, water quality standards
use zone points, and other points
of interest on the streams from
which water pollution control
data may be derived.

     The present AUTOMAP project
activity covers 30 States where
no RMI data exist.  The majority
of the other 20 States have
available manually coded maps
containing RMI designations.
Most of the 30 States presently
involved in AUTOMAP are providing
notations on USGS maps of the
"points of interest" listed
above.  Digitization and computer
processing is being performed
under contract.

     Computer graphic cathode-ray
tube output is now being
developed for use with STORET
data.  In the meantime, STORET
graphics from AUTOMAP are
provided by CALCOMP plotters and
microfilm reproduction.
                                   -264-

-------
                       NATIONAL AIR DATA BRANCH:  NEDS/SAROAD


                              James R. Hammerle, Chief
                              National Air Data Branch
                       U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
                         Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711



                                       Abstract
     The Monitoring and Data Analysis Division is  charged with  the  EPA  functions of
collection, validation, storage/retrieval,  analysis,  and  publication of air quality
data in the SAROAD system and source emissions data  in  the NEDS  system.
Introduction

     In the recent reorganization of the
EPA Office of Air and Water Programs
(OAWP) the responsibility for receiving,
validating, storing, evaluating and pro-
viding access to both air quality and
source emissions data was assigned to
the National Air Data Branch, Monitoring
and Data Analysis Division, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards.

     This "marriage" of data operations
for air quality and emissions was a
logical development since air quality
information alone is of minimal value
(except for assessing the trend of air
quality improvement) without a compre-
hensive knowledge of the emissions in
the vicinity of the monitoring instru-
ments.  Mathematical, statistical and
ADP methodology for both emissions and
air quality data are complimentary, and
one would expect that in an efficient
operation both air quality and emissions
data would be accessed and evaluated
simultaneously.

Organization of the Monitoring and Data
Analysis Division

     The Monitoring and Data Analysis
Division is composed of three branches,
Source-Receptor Analysis, National Air
Data, and Monitoring and Reports and the
Emergency Operations Control Center.

     As the subject of this report is
the flow of air quality and emission
data from and to the states and through
EPA's regional offices and headquarters,
only the two branches closely associated
with this task are described.

     The National Air Data Branch is
composed of three major sections with
the following general functions:

          1.  Emissions Section

              a.  Emissions data system
                  operations and metho-
                  dology;
    b.   Source  inventory  data
        collection,  validation,
        and analysis;

    c.   Analysis  and reports
        for emissions  data;

    d.   Emission  inventory
        techniques;  and

    e.   Source  test  data  analy-
        sis for development of
        emission  factors  and
        control equipment effi-
        ciencies, and publica-
        tion of emission  factor
        documents.

2.  Ambient Air Section

    a.   Air quality  data  sys-
        tem operations and
        methodology;

    b.   Air quality  data  col-
        lection,  validation,
        and analysis; and

    c.   Analysis  and reports
        for air quality data.

3.  Data Management  Section

    a.   Operation of emissions
        and air quality data
        banks;

    b.   Air quality and emis-
        sions  automatic data
        processing and metho-
        dology;

    c.   Computer programming
        for analysis of data
        as required by other
        Sections;

    d.  Publication of systems
        users  and coding
        manuals; and
                                         -265-

-------
              e.   Updating and bookkeep-
                  ing for systems.

     Approximately 30 persons are in the
Branch with about equal  numbers in  the
Ambient Air and Data Management Sections,
the emissions group having twice as many
as the others, primarily due to the addi-
tional responsibility for emission  fac-
tors development.

     Within the Monitoring and Reports
Branch two of the three  sections provide
support to the Division's role in analy-
zing air quality and emission data.
These functions are:

          1.  Air Quality Analysis  Section

              a.   Develops and evaluates
                  statistical methodology
                  for summarizing,  inter-
                  preting and forecasting
                  trends in emissions and
                  air quality;

              b.   Develops and evaluates
                  statistical and empiri-
                  cal techniques for
                  interpreting and  report-
                  ing the relationships
                  among  emissions,  meteor-
                  ology, atmospheric
                  reactions and ambient
                  air quality; and

              c.   Develops statistical
                  methodology for other
                  components of the
                  Division.

          2.  Trend Analysis Section

              a.   Develops concepts for
                  the National Air
                  Monitoring Strategy;

              b.  Develops concepts and
                  indices for reporting
                  and demonstrating the
                  overall national  pro-
                  gress  in achieving
                  clean  air;

              c.  Prepares and publishes
                  semiannual trend  analy-
                  sis reports summarizing
                  the emission and  air
                  quality improvements
                  resulting from state
                  and Federal implementa-
                  tion of the Clean Air
                  Act; and
              d.  Provides special reports,
                  analysis and interpre-
                  tation of air quality
                  and emission data for:

                  (1)  Specific regional
                       emission and air
                       quality relation-
                       ships; and

                  (2)  Projections and
                       forecasts of emis-
                       sions or air quality.

     The Monitoring and Data Analysis
Division is located in Durham, North
Carolina and accesses the EPA Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina computer by
means of a terminal facility with CRT
display, tape drive, card reader and
puncher, 600 line/minute printer, and
interactive typewriter equipment.

     The funds for the Division are pri-
marily used for contractual assistance in
developing improved emission factors,
statistical methodology research and
development, emission inventory methodol-
ogy development, evaluating air pollution
control strategies through the use of
simulation models, and supplemental data
collection.

     In the context of this paper, a sys-
tem refers to the programs, codes, and
formats associated with data processing.
Following are discussions of the air
quality and emissions data system and
their associated data banks.

National Emissions Data System (NEDS)

     NEDS development was initiated in
late 1971, and all programming for this
system has been done in-house.  Emissions
data are calculated from a knowledge of
required parameters for individual sources
and the application of emission factors
derived from representative source tests.
For this reason approximately 800 source
categories have been defined with asso-
ciated emissions factors for each of the
pollutants considered.  In addition, the
actual control equipment at the source
site must be incorporated into the emis-
sion calculations, as a control efficiency
reducing the estimated emissions.

     The approximately 80 items of data
stored about each point source of air
pollutant emissions comprise the National
                                         -266-

-------
Emissions Data Bank (NEDB).   About the
same number of items are kept for each
area source of emissions-defined in NEDB
as a county (or equivalent).   Thus, there
are about 75,000 point sources which emit
greater than TOO tons/year of any one of
the five criteria air pollutants (S02,
particulates, N02, HC, and CO), and about
3300 area (county) sources in the 55
states and territories.  NEDB is there-
fore composed of two files (point and
area) in which all data is.completely
integrated by source.

     The point and area source data
appearing on the NEDS coding  forms can
be categorized:

          1.  General source  information--
              name, address,  source cate-
              gory, etc.

          2.  Modeling parameters--UTM
              coordinates, stack height,
              diameter, temperature, etc.

          3.  Emissions data—throughput
              rate (for estimating emis-
              sions using emission fac-
              tors), estimated emissions
              and estimation  method, con-
              trol equipment, etc.

          4.  Compliance information--
              compliance schedule and
              status.

     Although the five criteria pollutants
and the hazardous pollutants  are of the
most interest at this time,  the Branch
has expended considerable effort in
determining emission factors  for many
trace elements and compounds  for many
source categories.

     Considering that the initial collec-
tion of data in NEDS format for NEDB
followed three phases which were under-
taken concurrently with NEDS  development:

          1.  Branch personnel coded all
              data available  throughout
              EPA;

          2.  Branch personnel coded all
              data available  in state
              offices; and

          3.  Branch contractors collected
              items not obtained under
              efforts above,
the planned initiation of NEDS operation
in early 1973 will be the last step in an
extensive and intensive effort.

Storage and Retrieval of Aerometric Data
(SAROAP)

     SAROAD development began several
years ago, and all programming for this
system has been done in-house.  Air
quality data are characterized by the
extensive statistical analysis which
reduces a large quantity of instrument
readings to usable statistics.  The State
Implementation Plans indicate a possibi-
lity of over 3000 monitoring stations
becoming operational in the next several
years, each collecting data from a number
of instruments.

     The data stored in the National
Aerometric Data Bank (NADB) are quite
extensive, and the set of coding para-
meters for the various air pollutants is
defined in the current users manual.  In
general, the pollutants include the five
primary pollutants - suspended particulates,
hydrocarbons, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen
oxides, and carbon monoxide, and oxidant.
In addition, a long list of trace elements
and compounds have been assigned codes.
The time periods covered for monitoring
are dependent upon the instruments and
associated procedures and have also been
codified.  Sufficient items to character-
ize the sampling site are also included
in NADB.

     About 7000 sites have been defined
and have submitted data.  In addition,
"old" data collected by state, local, and
Federal agencies have been incorporated
into the National Ambient Data Bank (NADB).
Thus, there are considerably more sites
defined as a result of previous (and,
perhaps, not currently operational) moni-
toring activities.

     As opposed to NEDS, almost all
SAROAD data have been collected by groups
outside the Branch, although considerable
effort has been expended by Branch and
contractor personnel to convert all data
to SAROAD format.  The data in NADB has
been available for some time as a result
of internal processing.

Specifications for NEDS and SAROAD

     The NEDS and SAROAD operations, which
comprise the major efforts of the Branch,
                                         -267-

-------
have the specifications as indicated in
the table below.
          Languages

          Number of Programs

          Max. Core for Programs

          Data Volume, current

          Data Volume, 1  year
NEDS

COBOL

20

150K

3 2314 disks

5 2314 disks
SAROAD

MARK IV, PL 1, FORTRAN

60

200 K

13 2314 disks

17 2314 disks
     Efforts are currently underway to
reprogram the several SAROAD PL 1  and
MARK IV language programs to be compat-
ible with any hardware system.

     Both NEDS and SAROAD use the  same
parameter codes and geographical codes
for states, counties, air quality  con-
trol regions, and cities.  Analysis by
geographical areas can be done through
the developed programs for any one or
combination of these areas.  Users
manuals for both batch and interactive
terminals are now in preparation.

     The setup for accessing data  in
NEDB and NADB by EPA groups will be
comprised of dial-up batch and inter-
active terminals in each Regional  Office,
Research Center, Washington, and Durham.
The NEDS and SAROAD programs, together
with the data of NEDB and NADB, will be
mounted on-line at the NERC-RTP computer
facility; complete instruction of use of
batch and interactive terminals in
reaching the computer will be provided
to each user.  There are no user charges
for EPA terminals.

     The NEDS/SAROAD operations are com-
pletely on-line, with all data (except
for raw air quality data) accessible on
disks without special mounting requests.
Batch requests requiring use of raw air
quality data will necessitate instructions
for mounting of the raw data.

     Currently extensive plans are under-
way for non-EPA users of NEDS/SAROAD--
Federal Agencies, states and local
agencies, universities, research and
contractor organizations, etc.  NEDS/
SAROAD and the data banks will be mounted
in a commercial nationwide telecommunica-
tions and computer network, whose operator
would bring up individual users as
         interest was expressed by the users.
         Charges for computer and access time
         would be made directly to the user by
         the network contractor.  In this manner,
         all non-EPA users would be charged pro-
         portionately to their demand on the
         system, alleviating EPA of the expense,
         bookkeeping, and the billing operation.
         The programs would routinely be improved
         and the data base updated the same as in
         the EPA system.  All statistical and
         engineering analysis would be performed
         on the NERC-RTP computer, thus making
         it the EPA air pollution associated com-
         puter and communications center.

              Thre are two basic methods by which
         states will be able to obtain data, both
         air quality and emissions:

              1.  By requesting punched cards,
                  magnetic tapes, or printouts
                  either from Regional Offices or
                  the National Air Data Branch;

              2.  By accessing the non-EPA system,
                  with three methods of financing
                  this operation:

                  a.  Grants assistance,

                  b.  Predetermined dollar or  time
                      allocation paid by EPA,  and

                  c.  Payment by state for retriev-
                      al and computer time over the
                      amount provided in b. above.

         NEDB Compatible Systems

              Several other systems are being
         developed which are compatible with NEDS
         and which access data in NEDB, thus
         actually sharing the data bank:
                                         -268-

-------
     1.  Compliance Data System (CDS)

              This system is currently
         under development by the Office
         of Enforcement and performs such
         operations as compliance report
         preparation and questionnaire
         generation and deals primarily
         with criteria and non-hazardous,
         non-criteria pollutants.  The
         system is currently being pre-
         pared by contract for DSSE,
         OEGC.

     2.  Hazardous Pollutants Enforcement
         Management System (HAPEMS)

              This system not only pre-
         pares reports, etc., but performs
         enforcement management operations
         (through access of NEDB) for both
         the Regional Offices and the
         Office of Enforcement for
         hazardous pollutants.  The sys-
         tem is currently being prepared
         by contract for DSSE, OEGC.

     3.  Others

              Systems currently in the
         planning stages, such as those
         for Federal facilities and State
         Implementation Plans.

Systems for State/Local Agencies and
Regional Offices

     Currently there is under contract a
plan for developing a Comprehensive Data
Handling System (CDHS) which would pro-
vide ADP service for both analysis of
data and conversion to previously deter-
mined EPA formats.

     Although the Air Quality Data Hand-
ling System (AQDHS) was developed pre-
viously, it will become an integral part
of CDHS.  AQDHS edits and performs sta-
tistical analysis of air quality data in
much the same manner as SAROAD and out-
puts data in the required format for
input to SAROAD.

     The first routines to actually be
developed under CDHS will be analogous
to NEDS as AQDHS is to SAROAD.  This then
will enable state/local agencies and
Regional Offices to process source and
emissions data with output in NEDS format.

     Thus, with AQDHS and the emissions
components of CDHS, other groups will be
able to use their own computerized systems
together with the Air Quality Display
Model (AQDM), and later the Implementation
Planning Program (IPP), in an integrated
in-house operation independent of EPA
headquarters and the National Air Data
Branch.

     The SAROAD system is expandable with
respect to sites, pollutants, methods, and
measurement units.  The extent of data
analysis may also be increased.

     On the other hand, by virtue of the
card identification used in NEDS, card
ID from A001 to Z999 enables almost 26,000
cards of data to be stored for each point
or area source, for each county, and for
each state.  This results in the possibi-
lity of storing almost any information,
26,000 cards worth, associated with the
states, counties, or sources.  Efforts
are currently underway to provide specific
card ID numbers to certain user groups for
data storage in NEDB.  Perhaps each EPA
Regional Office and individual state
wishes 1000 cards of information of their
choosing to be stored on sources (or
counties) within their jurisdictions; the
Branch will then assign, for example,
RC01-R999 and S001-S999 to the Regional
Office and state respectively.  Data on
solid waste refuse could perhaps be
assigned the 1000 cards W001-W999, radia-
tion D001-D999, enforcement  E001-E999,
compliance C001-C999, etc.

     The possibility of the  use of the
NEDB for storage of state, county, or
source oriented data is almost limitless,
and  several groups within EPA are now
making arrangements to avail themselves
of this service.  The Branch does not
intend to develop retrieval  programs for
the  "variable data subsystem" for NEDS,
nor  to validate the specific data stored
therein  (except for A001-A999 assigned to
the  Branch), but only needs  to know the
extent of data and its format prior to
assignment of a block of card identifi-
cation.

Data Flow for NEDB and NADB

     The normal flow of ambient air data,
including meteorological data, is from
state and local agencies to  the EPA
Regional Offices and from there to the
Branch.  Data collected by  EPA itself are
submitted directly to  the Branch.  The
quarterly report, as specified in State
 Implementation Plans,  is the vehicle for
                                         -269-

-------
data submission in SAROAD format (the data
may be submitted all  at once or in segments)
whereas the source and compliance data com-
prise the semiannual  reports.

     The data stored  in NEDB and NADB can
be classified as associated with criteria
pollutants, hazardous pollutants, or,non-
criteria, non-hazardous pollutants.   The
data actually are comprised of source in-
ventory and emissions data, compliance
data, and air quality and site data.
Following are descriptions of both the
initial data base responsibilities and
the data flow:

     1.  Criteria pollutant data base (TSP,
         S02, N02, CO, Ox, HC)

         a.  Source inventory (emissions)
             data.

             The point source data are
         initially entered into the data
         bank by three efforts:

             i.  Codification by the  Nation-
                 al Air Data Branch of all
                 data available in EPA;

            ii.  Codification by the  Branch
                 of all data available in
                 state offices; and

           iii.  Collection and codifica-
                 tion of missing data by
                 Branch contractors in the
                 field.

             The area source data are
        entered into  the bank by the  Branch
        performing all estimates and  cal-
        culations.

        b.   Compliance schedules are
            initially codified by the
            Regional  Offices, keypunched
            and mailed to the Branch  for
            entering  into the bank;

        c.   Air quality data and site data
            have been collected, coded,
            and transformed from state/
            local  formats to SAROAD format
            by both Branch personnel  and
            by contractual  assistance.

     2.  Hazardous pollutant data base (As,
         Be, Hg)

         a.  Source inventory data are
             coded on punched cards or
        magnetic tapes  by  the  Office
        of Enforcement  contractor  and
        mailed to the Branch for bank
        storage;

    b.  Compliance schedules are pre-
        pared in punch  card form by
        the Regional  Offices;

    c.  Air quality and site data  are
        supplied as in  1-c above.

3.  Non-criteria, non-hazardous pollu-
    tant data base.

    a.  Source inventory and compli-
        ance data are prepared the
        same as in 2-a  above.

    b.  Air quality and site data  are
        supplied as in  1-c above.

4.  Quarterly SIP Reports

    a.  The quarterly reports are, in
        effect, the air quality data
        and site descriptions (if
        necessary) for SIP monitoring
        sites.  The data may be sent
        in more frequently than
        quarterly if desired, but
        must be submitted in SAROAD
        format on either coding forms,
        punched cards,  or magnetic
        tape to the Regional Offices.

    b.  Data for all operational
        sites as described in the
        SIPs, beginning with the
        year of plan preparation
        must be submitted.

    c.  Data is entered into edit
        check routine on RO terminals,
        errors corrected, and data
        transmitted to temporary
        storage for validation by
        the Branch.

5.  Semiannual SIP Reports

    a.  Source inventory data for
        the following point source
        emitters of criteria pollu-
        tants are required:

        i.  Those which came into
            compliance with an emis-
            sion-limiting control
            regulation during the
            reporting period; and
                                          -270-

-------
    11.  TKose which were new or
         modified and whose opera-
         tion began in the report-
         ing period (sources
         ceasing operation must
         also be identified).

b.  The National Air Data Branch
    will "dump" all source data
    for both applicable point
    and area sources, either as
    punched cards, magnetic tape,
    or printouts approximately
    twelve weeks before the end
    of each semiannual reporting
    period (dump form must be
    specified by Regional Office);

c.  The Branch will mail the dump
    to Regional Offices for pro-
    vision to states;

d.  States must then update and
    upgrade by completing missing
    items, and return to Regional
    Office on punched cards,
    tapes, or coding forms;

e.  The same procedure is followed
    for semiannual reports as in
    4-c above.

f.  Compliance status data for
    all point sources indicated
    in 5-a-i and ii above must
    be supplied to the National
    Air Data Branch as follows:

      i.  Using CDS the Branch
          will prepare either
          punched cards, magnetic
          taoes, or printouts of
          the compliance "question-
          naire," the same as in
          5-b-i above,

     ii.  The steps in 5-b-i
          through 5-b-iv are then
          followed.

    iii.  If a state elects to
          utilize a preprinted
          compliance data check-
          list for the semiannual
          progress report, the
          Regional Office will
          prepare the questionnaire
          and deliver it to the
          state approximately 90
          days before the end of
          the reporting period.
          The state may submit a
                  tape of their own Enforce-
                  ment Management System
                  amenable to the Regional
                  Office for reporting
                  the information.

     6.  Compliance schedule data for
         HAPERS are developed by the
         Regional Offices themselves
         through direct contact with the
         individual sources.  Therefore,
         the updates will be derived from
         inspections, source tests or source
         reports by the Regional Offices
         who update the file by direct ter-
         minal access.

     7.  Data received by the Branch will
         be validated and analyzed, with
         all summary statistics, all source
         data (point and area, including
         compliance data), emissions inven-
         tory and fuel inventory mounted
         for access by Regional Office
         terminals approximately two weeks
         after receipt by the Branch.  The
         Regional Offices may then provide
         whatever data the states request.

     No data for either NADB or NEDB (ex-
cept for that in the variable data sub-
system) can be entered directly, but must
be stored temporarily prior Branch valida-
tion, thus assuring quality control of all
information provided by NEDS or SAROAD.
In general, no air quality or source in-
ventory/emissions data (other than that
for specific research projects) should be
requested from, collected by, or maintained
in any EPA location other than the National
Air Data Branch.  This reduces requirements
on states, provides a uniform data format,
permits an efficient updating program, and
facilitates the utilization of data by
many users with different requirements.
Any data needs should first be checked
with the bank to eliminate the possibility
of collecting existing data.

     The current status of data in the NEDB,
using 1971 as the base year, is as follows:

          1.  States complete - 13

          2.  States partial - 42

     Efforts are currently underway to
bring the incomplete areas to a level at
which emission calculations using emission
factors can be compared with the emission
estimates stated in the inventory.  The
status of data in NADB, also using the
                                -271-

-------
base year of 1971 is:

          1.  States complete - 18

          2.  States partial - 17

          3.  States with no data - 2Q

     A considerable effort will be required
to collect the air quality data in the 37
incomplete states, to provide a continuous
base from 1971 on which to perform trend
analysis.

Data Validation

     Data validation might be grouped into
the following operations:

          1.  Laboratory validation of
              results;

          2.  Keypunch verification;

          3.  Inspection for coding and
              other gross errors;

          4.  Computer editing for proper
              format, alphabetic and numeric
              requirements, deviation from
              maximum and minimum limits,
              etc.; and

          5.  Computer integrity checks for
              data restrictions.

     In general,  items one through three
should be guaranteed prior to receipt of
data by the Branch (emissions data have
no laboratory validation).  Item four is
performed by the  Branch for emissions
data, and items four and five for air
quality data.

     The Branch restrictions on air quality
data are:

          1.  Data must be representative
              of  a consecutive three month
              period—75 percent or more
              of  the data values  must be
              valid numbers above the
              monitoring instrument minimum
              detectable limit;

          2.  Data must represent an Inter-
              val  of one hour or greater--
              shorter interval  data are
              converted by SAROAD programs
              to  SAROAD format—and there
              must be at least five data
              points in the quarter with
              at least two months being
              reported, and they must pass
              criteria to assure a minimum
              number of samples and dis-
              tribution throughout the time
              interval;

          3.  Data must be representative
              of the conditions of the site
              for the period of time soeci-
              fied; modification of the
              environment in which the site
              is located will  invalidate
              the data; and

          4.  Data less than the minimum
              detectable by the monitoring
              instrument should be reported
              as a zero value.  A value
              approximately equal to half
              the minimum detectable will
              be substituted when calculat-
              ing averages.

      Statistical analysis cannot be accom-
 plished until all necessary data have been
 corrected, entered into temporary storage,
 validated, and moved to the data bank.

      The Branch restrictions  on emissions
 and associated data include:

           1.   Action columns  geographical
               identification, "type" and
               SCC and point/plant identi-
               fication together with year
               must be present;

           2.   The fuels ash and sulfur
               contents must fall between
               prescribed limits.

     Other restrictions are under considera-
tion, as NEDS  is being finalized.

     Following updating from each semiannual
report, the old data base will be filed
for historical analysis and trend deter-
mination.

Computerized Retrievals by NEDS/SAROAD

     Users can obtain the following outputs,
as listings, cards, or tapes,  through
their terminal facilities or from the
Branch; for SAROAD:

          1.  Yearly frequency distribution,
              by site;

          2.  Yearly report by quarters,
              by site;
                                         -272-

-------
           3.   Inventory  of  sites;

           4.   Pollutant  inventory,  by
               site;

           5.   Raw 24-hour data  listing,
               by site;

           6.   Site description,  by  site;

           7.   Raw data  listing  (less
               than 24-hour),  by site;

           8.   Particulate standards
               report (no times  standards
               exceeded  in specified time
               period;

           9.   Sulfur dioxide  standards
               reports;

          10.   Carbon monoxide standards
               report;

          11.   Hydrocarbons  standards
               report;

          12.   Nitrogen  dioxide  standards
               report;

          13.   Ozone standards report;

          14.   Trend plot, by  site;

          15.   Pollutant rose, by site;

and for NEDS (for each source  category):

           1.   Point source  inventory, by
               county

           2.   Area source inventory, by
               county;

           3.   Fuels inventory,  by county;

           4.   Emissions inventory,  by
               county.

     The interactive terminals will  also
enable retrieval  of individual items of
data.

Confidential Data

     Emissions data for  NADB is  not  confi-
dential; however, certain items  of data
for certain sources may  be determined to
be determined to be confidential. There-
fore, NEDB has the capability  for handl-
ing classified data.
     If an individual source or control
agency requests confidentiality of selected
items of data, the request will be for-
warded to the EPA Office of General  Counsel
for a ruling.  Data determined to actually
be classified will be placed in separate
NEDB storage, and confidential clearance
procedures adhered to when utilizing the
data.  It is expected that the only item
which may be ruled confidential will be
the process rate or throughput (both used
in calculating emissions) for selected
source categories or for specific sources.

Publications and Reports

     The various report formats for data
are rather extensive, including raw data
listings for each site and point/area
source.  In addition, monthly, quarterly,
and annual air quality statistics—mean,
standard deviation, geometric mean,
geometric standard deviation, maximum,
minimum, median, and frequency distribu-
tion—are available.  Both air quality
and calculated emissions data in IPP
modeling format are available, together
with gridding and apportioned area
emissions and fuels for strategy modeling.

     The publications of data by the
National Air Data Branch include the
following:

          1.  Trace metals, by site, with
              statistics, annually;

          2.  Total suspended partieulates,
              by site, with statistics,
              annually;

          3.  S02, by site, with statistics,
              annually;

          4.  NOX, by site with statistics,
              annually;

          5.  BSO/BaP, by site, with
              statistics, annually;

          6.  Site inventory;

          7.  World Health Organization  air
              pollution statistics;

          8.  World Meteorological Organiz-
              ation air pollution
              statistics;

          9.  Fuels inventory, by source
              category, by geographic
              area, annually and;
                                         -273-

-------
          10.   Emissions inventory by
               source category,  by
               geographic area,  annually.

     Additional reports and publications
are prepared when necessary or found to
be useful for specific purposes.

Obligations of Regional Offices

     Basically, the EPA Regional Offices
have the following obligations,  with
respect to air quality/emissions data
and the semiannual and quarterly reports,
specifically:

          1.  Identify the ADP personnel
              assigned to provide tech-
              nical assistance to air
              programs, and to maintain
              their proficiency  as NEDS/
              SAROAD users;

          2.  Provide ADP assistance to
              states as required for sub-
              mission of reports in com-
              puterized form;

          3.  Keypunch and/or convert any
              data received from states
              in non-SAROAD/NEDS formats;

          4.  Correct errors found through
              edit check routines;

          5.  Perform field audits to
              assure the quality of emis-
              sion inventories;

          6.  Check air quality monitoring
              sites for proper procedures,
              and to assure the correct
              number and locations to pro-
              vide proper data for trend
              monitoring;

          7.  Supply printouts,  cards, or
              tapes of data from NEDS/
              SAROAD as requested by
              states, and to answer ques-
              tions from the public con-
              cerning data pertaining to
              their respective states;

          8.  Assure quality control of
              laboratories working with
              air quality data;  and

          9.  Make all efforts possible
              to provide up-to-date source
              test results for the improve-
              ment of emission factors.
Future Activities of the National  Air Data
Branch

     In anticipation of the growth and
development of the activities with which
the National Air Data Branch is involved,
the following items may reflect the future
direction of Branch efforts:

     FY 1973

     1.  Completion of NEDS/SAROAD pro-
         gramming for processing and
         analysis of data for summaries;

     2.  Completion of programming for
         remote batch terminals and
         interactive terminals;

     3.  Provision of user training
         for terminals and publication
         of complete user manuals;

     4.  Development of a unified  user
         group, with input to the
         Branch for development of
         programs to service entire
         user group.

     FY 1974

     1.  Programming to provide user
         assistance as required in
         4 above;

     2.  Finalization of nationwide
         non-EPA telecommunications
         and computer operations
         (as previously discussed);

     3.  Increased efficiency of pro-
         grams  through revaluation and
         modification;

     4.  Expanded analysis and validity
         checks for quality control;

     5.  Final  development of associated
         data bases for the NEDS vari-
         able data subsystem (Federal
         facilities, SIPs, etc.).

      FY 1975

      1.  Development of visual  outputs
          (density maps, isopleths, etc.)

      2.  Beginning of bank decentraliz-
          ation to Regional  Offices;

      3.  Increased services to head-
          quarters.
                                          -274-

-------
                                  SURVEY  OF AEC AND NASA
                               CAPABILITIES IN COMPUTERIZED
                                     DATA MANAGEMENT

                                       Norwood Gove
                              Oak Ridge National Laboratory*
                               Oak Ridge,   Tennessee   37830

                                            and

                                       Velvin Watson
                      National Aeronautics and Space  Administration
                                   Ames Research Center
                             Moffett Field,  California 9^035
                                          ABSTRACT

      Existing AEC and  NASA facilities  which could contribute to environmental data
management are reviewed-   These include some of the  worlds largest,  fastest computers,
largest  memory devices and most highly developed data  management  and retrieval  systems
Tables of some AEC and NASA large computers and large  data management projects  are
given.
              INTRODUCTION

      The fact that national laboratories
have  extensive and unique computing
facilities has been highly publicised-
Recently,  an article  in Scientific
American advertized the Illiac IV Com-
puter located at the  NASA Ames Research
Center as "The Fastest  Computer,"
describing it as "capable of solving
complex problems in a fraction of the
time  needed by any other machine."
There is no doubt that  the attributes
of  these extensive computing facilities
can substantially contribute to environ-
mental programs•  The purpose of this
presentation is to show what computing
facilities and data management projects
the AEC and NASA laboratories have that
are applicable to environmental pro-
grams .  However, we do  not attempt to
give  a complete list  of facilities and
projects,  but rather  a  few repre-
sentative examples.

          COMPUTING FACILITIES
      AT AEC AND NASA  LABORATORIES

      Some large computers at AEC and
NASA  laboratories that  could contrib-
ute substantially to  environmental

^Operated by Union Carbide Corporation,
 Nuclear Division for the U- S- Atomic
 Energy Commission.
programs  are listed in  Table 1•  The  CDC
Star 100  and the Illiac IV computers
derive  their great speed by the pipeline
and parallel architecture,  and computer
programs  for these computers must be
specially written with  the architecture
in mind in order to make efficient use
of these  computers••  The other computers
will run  relatively efficiently using
programs  written in the standard FORTRAN
language.
       Table 1- Laxge Cr«putera et ABC and RASA LaboratnrUa
  Illlac IV (f. be opera-
  tional March
  CDC STAR 100 (delivery
  dalea not definite)
  etc 7600
  OK J60/>1




  CDC 66M,


  **eletlve to IBM 5&/C7
NA&A AMI Reseireh Center
(under operational con-
trol of Advanced Reaearch
Projects Agency)

AEC Lawrence Live more
Laboratory

IU&A Leitcley Reaeereh
Center

ABC Lavrefiee Llv*r»ir-
Laboratory

ABC Lawrence Berkeley
Laboratory

HA3A Goddard Space Flight
Center In Maryland

HASA Ooddard Space night
Center In new York

USA Coddard Space night
Cent«r In Maryland

AD: Oal Ridge Rational
Laboratory

RASA Langley Reaeareh
Canter, LLL, LASL, LBL
7 to IV*


'j to JO
                                            -275-

-------
     There are many other NASA and AEC
computers•  The computing experience  and
expertise covers nearly all brands •

     Table 2 shows the location  and
characteristics of large on-line
information storage systems•  Both sys-
tems have software for cataloging,
storing, and retrieving data in  the sys-
tem.
3. Urft OQ-L1M BtortK B;it
-------
  Table 3 •   Estimated Cost to Become A
            Node on the ARPA Network

Initial Cost

     Hardware

          Cost for computer (called IMP)
          to interface between the net-
          work and the Center's computer-
          $45,000

          or

          Cost for computer (called TIP)
          to interface between the net-
          work and the Center's computer
          and 6U terminal ports for such
          devices as 27^1 typewriter
          terminals.  CRT display termi-
          nals, or teletypes-  (Maximum
          transfer rate through the
          terminal ports is 20,000 bits
          per second) - $92,000

     Software

          Cost for program to interface
          between the network and the
          host computer - variable,
          5,000 to 50,000

Yearly Costs

     Maintenance    IMP     $5,000

                    or

                    TIP     $7, 000

     Communication  $l6, 500 fixed yearly
                            cost that in-
                            cludes the
                            first h .9 x
                            109 bits of
                            information
                            transfer
                    and
                        for each 103 bits
                            of information
                            transfer in
                            excels of k .5
                            x 10
    DATA MANAGEMENT PROJECTS AT NASA
          AND AEC LABORATORIES

     One of the first and best scope
display information retrieval systems
was NASA's DIALOG, for which design work
was done by Lockheed Palo Alto Research
Laboratories •  DIALOG combined a simple
user language with a fast retrieval and
display system•  Full Boolean logic was
provided.  An important feature is the
EXPAND option which displays a portion
of the index for user browsing.  This
option reduces the risk of missing
references due to spelling errors or
unfamiliarity with the terminology used
in the data base •  Historically, this
feature is important because it marks a
trend toward display-oriented techniques
and away from typewriter-oriented
techniques•

     At least six large information
retrieval systems are now in operation
that are derived from NASA's DIALOG-
One of these (ENVIRON) is used by EPA-

     NASA also developed a Scientific
and Technical Information Management
System (STIMS) that permits an on-line
user to issue a "transaction request"
to find, modify, or delete any record in
any file in the system •  STIMS has also
been used at several installations, both
in and out of NASA •

     The NASA Lewis Research Center has
developed software for cataloging and
catalog searching of Earth Resources
Technology Satellite data and Earth
Resources Aircraft Program data •  The
software was written for the IBM 360/67
computer and is available on request-  A
demonstration of a catalog search for
Earth Resources Technology Satellite data
will be given at the meeting.  This
system is called NASIS and is further
discussed in Appendix A-

     The laboratories of the Atomic
Energy Commission have a long history of
computer-aided data management.  Some of
the earliest computers were at AEC
installations (CPC,  GEORGE, MANIAC,
ORACLE, 650, 7C4).  People still talk
about these machines and how difficult it
was to write programs for them-  There
is always a detectable trace of nostalgia
                                          -277-

-------
for the days when there was no such thing
as an Operating System and no US-hour
turn-around time.

     Each of the AEC labs has had occasion
to cope with mountains of data - often
pioneering in data management methods.
For example, one of the first inter-
national data exchange projects by
magnetic tape was started at an AEC
laboratory (Sigma Center, BNL) •  Two of
the first computer program exchange pro-
jects were started at AEC laboratories
(Argonne Code Center, ANL, and Radiation
Shielding Information Center, ORNL).
Perhaps many places can claim, with
varying legitimacy, to have been the first
to develop a system for rapid retrieval
and display of important information.
Certainly one of the earliest was AEC's
Nuclear Safety Information Center
(CHORDS - Computer Handling of Reactor
Data for Safety)•

     The earliest data management prob-
lems involved neutron cross-sections-
the basic design data for reactor and
weapon calculations and also for accel-
erator and space vehicle shielding.  Even
today programs involving neutron cross-
sections account for a large part of AEC
computer usage.  Neutron cross-sections
are parameters derived from experimental
study of what happens when neutrons of a
certain energy strike a target of a
certain material-  They are then used in
the calculation of how that material
would behave in a reactor or other
neutron flux environment.

     Neutron cross-sections are extremely
varied—in some cases the variation of
cross-section with energy is so mild that
a few data points or a fitted curve are
adequate for interpolation while in other
energy regions, such as the resonance
regions, the variation with energy is so
rapid that great care is needed for
adequate computer representation.  More-
over, these rapid fluctuations cannot be
ignored in today's safety-conscious
reactor calculations.  Some 500 target
isotopes are of interest with energy
ranges from fractions of an electron volt
up to hundreds of billions of electron
volts .  There are several kinds of
neutron cross-sections (capture, scat-
tering, fission, reaction) and several
levels of precision, evaluation, and
reliability.  To meet this complexity, a
special file format with a hierarchical
data structure was devised•  This
evolved into the now famous ENDF (Evalu-
ated Neutron Data File).

     There is often a need for rapid
modification of cross-section files--
to include new data, to prepare reports,
to make subfiles for computation •  A
system was needed that could handle many
files and permit the user to specify the
file or files he wants to interact with.
Out of these requirements grew a system
at Livermore called MC ( for Master
Control).  MC is interactive; the user
gets immediate response to typed
commands•  MC has proven extremely
versatile and its use has spread from
cross-section files to bibliographic
files and a variety of other types of
data, some classified.

     Other data management problems
appeared-  The effects of low-level
radiation are difficult to measure-
Large-scale experiments involving many
generations are required -  Oak Ridge has
more mice than people -  When a mouse
dies, an autopsy is performed and a
variety of information, both numerical
and textual, is fed into the computer.
The amount of information per mouse
varies greatly and a variety of elaborate
statistical tests are eventually per-
formed on the data-  It is not always
possible to predict which kinds of data
will be important or which kinds of
selections from the main file will be
requested.  Again, a hierarcnical data
structure was devised, which allows
wide variations in the amount and com-
plexity of information in each record •
A computer program (ADSEP - Automated
Data Set Editing Program) was written to
prepare and update files with this
generalized format and a versatile data
selection and analysis program (SADS -
Statistical Analysis of Data Sets) was
prepared to do numerical and statistical
analyses as needed •  Many types of data
can be put into this format - biblio-
graphic, meteorological, personnel,
impact statements, project descriptions.
A wide variety of services are now
available for files maintained in this
format.  These are discussed in Appendix
A under ORCHIS - Oak Ridge Hierarchical
Information System.
                                          -278-

-------
     Today,  the AEG and NASA labs have
impressive capabilities in data manage-
ment.  For sheer data storage and com-
puting power no present system can match
Livermore1s dual-6600-dual-T^OO-photo-
store •  LBL - Berkeley also has a photo-
store (ID12 bit capacity) with retrieval
of any part in a few seconds•  In the
area of data communication, AEC/RECON
now has ten interactive display stations
over the country and once even was
connected via satellite to a display
station at the Conference on Peaceful
Uses of the Atom in Geneva•  A variety of
graphics programs have been prepared as
part of regional modeling projects so
that an area can be easily viewed from
different places or at different times•
Movies of regional development have been
made by a computer combined with a CRT
graphics device •  Large amounts of
environmental data have been processed in
AEC and NASA computers and probably
larger amounts will be processed in the
future•

     A survey of AEC and NASA capabili-
ties in environmental data handling is
being conducted by Zell Combs of the
ORNL-EISO (Environmental Information
System Office).  Preliminary results of
this survey are given in Appendix A •
The EISO is under the direction of G• U-
Ulrikson and A- F- Joseph and is part of
the ORNL Environmental Project directed
by J. L- Liverman and is sponsored by
NSF-RANN-  It is hoped that the attached
list will be amended and improved at the
workshops scheduled with this conference •

                APPENDIX A

AEC and NASA Computerized Information
Systems

     Here are some descriptions of infor-
mation systems •  The list is far from
complete-  A further survey of information
systems is in progress which we hope will
correct errors and omissions in the list-
Many small or local projects are not men-
tioned -  For example, most AEC and NASA
labs have some form of SDI or Current
Awareness system.

         AMES SDI-KWOC
(NAME)         Ames Selective Dissemi-
               nation of Information-
               Key Word Out of Context
(LOCATION)     Ames Laboratory
(CATEGORY)     Reference Retrieval,  SDI
(CONTACT)      John R. Jordan
(DESC)
CDATA)
(REPORT)
(ABBR)
(NAME)
(LOCATION)
(CONTACT)
(COMPUTER)
(DESC)
(ABBR)
(NAME)

(LOCATION)

(CONTACT)

(COMPUTER)
(DESC)
(DATA)
Every week a listing is
sent to each subscriber
of references selected for
his interest profile-
Quarterly a KWOC index is
sent to give the user an
organized collection of
the weekly listings.
Retrospective searching
is also possible.  This is
one of the earliest SDI
systems and was started by
C- R. Sage in 19& .  Its
services are available to
users outside Ames Lab-
Reference tapes purchased
from PANDEX contains some
UOOO items each week•
About 2 million items
available for retrospec-
tive searching.
J. R. Jordan, Datamation,
February, 1970, page 91.

APIC
Air Pollution Information
and Computation System1
Argonne Center for
Environmental Studies, ANL
E. J. Croke,  313-739-5135
IBM 360/75 now; 360/195
coming.
Includes data on S0?,
COp, NO, and particulates.
Used to supply input data
for an Air Quality Dis-
persion Model •

BUD
Battelle UNIVAC Data
Retrieval System
Battelle Pacific North-
west Laboratories
D- E- Deonigi  509-91+6-
2^75
UNIVAC 1108
Retrieval is based of text
match or numerical
criteria-  There is a file
generation phase which
makes an inverted file -
On-line updating-  English
language queries-  Single
hierarchy or sub-fields-
Steam Electric Power Plant
Histories.  Physical
Properties of Isotopes.
Nuclear Power Plant Pro-
jections •
                                         -279-

-------

(NAME)
(LOCATION)

(CONTACT)

(DESC)
(DATA)
(ABBR)
(NAME)

(LOCATION)
(CATEGORY)

(CONTACT)

(COMPUTER)
(DESC)
(DATA)
(ABBR)
(NAME)
(LOCATION)
(CONTACT)
(COMPUTER)
(DESC)
CSISRS
Cross Section Information
Storage and Retrieval
System
National Neutron Cross
Section Center, BNL
Murray D. Goldberg,  5l6-
3^5-2927
Part of a world-wide data
network.  There are two
goals:  (l)  to collect,
organize, and disseminate
numerical results of
neutron physics experi-
ments, (2)  to oversee,
collect, and disseminate
an organized numerical
library of evaluated data
on the interactions of
neutrons with matter .
Neutron cross sections,
scattering data, fission
yields, photon cross
sections, ENDF-
GIRLS
Generalized Information
Retrieval, LASL System
LASL
Data Retrieval and File
Maintenance System
Willard Draisin,  505-
CDC 6600, batch mode
Each field may have up to
20 subf ields .  English
language commands •
Environmental Monitoring
Data radiation levels in
atmosphere, waters, soils
near LASL •

MC
Master Control
LLL
Viktor E. Hampel
CDC 6600, 7600
MC offers a wide  array of
data management and
retrieval services.  It
can read user files with-
out reformatting.
Retrieval is by word or
word stems-  On-line up-
dating.  User-controlled
output format-  On-line
or batch output.  The
user may modify the
command language  on-line-
(DATA)
                                               (REPORTS)
(ABBR)
(NAME)
(CONTACT)
(LOCATION)
(COMPUTER)
(DESCR)
(DATA)
(NAME)
(LOCATION)
(CONTACT)
(COMPUTER)
(DESC)
(DATA)
Requests or profiles may
be saved-  The retrieval
techniques are quite
efficient and suitable for.
either small or large
files.
Nuclear Science Abstracts,
Chemical Titles, Nuclear
Safety Information, NSIC,
American Institute of
Physics, SPIN, Engineering
Index, and many others
V- E- Hampel, J. A- Wade  -
UCRL - 71686 (1969)
NASIS
NASA Aerospace Safety
Information System
C- M- Goldstein, 216-^33-
6660
NASA - Lewis
IBM 360/67, virtual memory
On-line data management
and retrieval system.
Includes a report generat
tor, file load-edit-up-
date-backup.  Wide range
of commands available.
Earth Resources Tech-
nology Satellite Data
Principal Investigators
in Earth Sciences Earth
Resources Aircraft Pro-
gram Data-

ORLOOK
Data and CPU at ORNL; may
be used anywhere there is
a phone and TTY-compatible
terminal.
A- F- Joseph,  615-U83-6672
IBM 360/75
Interactive information
retrieval system-  Search
for any word or character
string.  Multiple files-
Many files may be scanned
by ORLOOK-  At present,
most are bibliographic
files-  Some are:  (l)
toxic materials in the
environment,  (2) environ-
mental law, (3) special
files for toxic metals,
Hg,  Cd, Cr, Mo,  Se,  Zn,
Pb,  Co, Al, Ni,  Fe,  W, As,
Mn,  Mg, Pu, Sn,  Sb,  (h)
energy, (5) thermal pollu-
                          -280-

-------
              tion,  (b) waste technology,
              (7) radion.iclides in the
              food chain.

(NAME)         RECON
(LOCATION)    Data and CPU at ORNL;
              stations at LBL,  LLL, AEC,
              TIC, NSIC, ORNL,  Westing-
              house,  Bettis                   (DATA)
(CONTACT)     N- B- Gove, 615-^83-6323
(COMPUTER)    IBM 360/75
(DESC)         Interactive information
              retrieval program with          (REPORT)
              scope display.  Has imme-
              diate or batch print-out
              options•  Search on
              authors, keywords, country,
              report code, subject code,       (ABBR)
              or CODEN-  Logical combi-       (NAME)
              nations including LIMIT to
              certain years •  There is a
              Related Terms option and an     (LOCATION)
              EXPAND option which dis-        (CONTACT)
              plays terms alphabetically      (COMPUTER)
              close to a specified terra-      (DESC)
              Usually fast (< 10
              seconds).
(DATA)         Nuclear Science Abstracts
              bibliographic data and
              keywords since 1968.
              Other files may be added •

(NAME)         STIMS-RECON
(LOCATION)    NASA-Washington
(CONTACT)     Van A- Wente, 202-962-^796
(DESCR)       Interactive file management
              and retrieval system.
              Handles many files on-line
              update and maintenance•
              Retrieval portion has
              scope display, EXPAND,
              LIMIT,  PRINT, and COMBINE
              options •
(DATA)         NASA-STAR Abstract file
                                              (DATA)
(ABBR)         ORRMIS
(NAME)         Oak Ridge Regional Modeling
              Information System
(LOCATION)    ORNL
(CONTACT)     R. c. Durfee, 615-^83-651*0
(COMPUTER)    IBM 360/91                      (REPORT)
(DESC)         This is a data management
              tool to be used for model-
              ing of large systems •  The
              data base is organized for
              direct access and only          (NAME)
              those cells which change
              with time are updated.          (LOCATION)
              Present plans allow for         (CONTACT)
              many generations, each          (COMPUTER)
with 30000 cells-  Each
cell has a full descrip-
tion and represents, for
example, a small land
area-  Effects of differ-
ent land use patterns is
presently the major pro-
ject.
One area in eastern
Tennessee and one area in
northern Georgia are
currently being studied •
ORRMIS - Oak Ridge
Regional Modeling Infor-
mation Systems, R. C.
Durfee, ORNL-CF-72-1-25•

ORCHIS
Oak Ridge Computerized
Hierarchical Information
System
ORNL
A- A- Brooks, 615-483-1863
IBM 360/75, IBM 360/91
A variety of programs and
services are available for
files written in, or con-
verted to, the ORNL Gen-
eralized Information
Format.  Some of these are
PUBLISH - a report genera-
tor, ADSEP - a file
creation and maintenance
program, SADS - a data
selection and statistical
analysis package, ORLOOK
and RECON - interactive
information retrieval
systems, UGATS - batch SDI
and retrospective search
system, KWIC - index
generator, TRACE - a
family tree processing
program•
At least 100 files, some
private, some public.
Some are mentioned under
ORLOOK-  Most have to do
with environmental
studies•
ORCHIS - Interim Technical
Report, A- A- Brooks,
Editor, ORNL-TM-3727
(August 1972)

Urban patterns study
section
ORNL
R. Taeuber
360/75 - 360/91, any 360 .
                                         -281-

-------
(DESC)        This part of the Health
              Physics Division at ORNL
              conducts sociological and
              economic study of migra-
              tion and other similar
              problems.
(DATA)        Complete 1970 Census data
              with retrieval and analy-
              sis tools, other social
              security data and other
              economic and population
              data-

              APPENDIX B

Concepts and Definitions Regarding Data
Bases

     The following notions and defini-
tions may serve as an introduction for
the non-expert and also give the expert
ample room to find something to disagree
with-

     A data base is an organized or
structured collection of data.  The
largest organizational unit within a
data base is called a file-  Within a
file the largest organizational unit is
called a record•  The file is a
collection of records •  The record con-
tains information about a certain object
or event, such as an experiment, an
employee, a journal article, or a mouse.
A record may be divided into fields•
Sometimes, fields are divided into sub-
fields and sometimes subfields are
further divided into subfields.  Such a
pattern of organization is called a
hierarchical structure.  At the lowest,
or deepest, level of the structure is
the data-  Data may consist of numbers
or text or a combination of both-  Some
files are designed to facilitate finding
records in other files; these are called
access files •  Depending on their design,
access files are sometimes also called
pointer files, inverted files, or index
files.  There are almost as many file
organization schemes as there are files.
Schemes for specifying the breakdown of
a record into fields and subfields fall
into three main classes:  fixed length
schemes, pointer schemes, and delimiter
schemes-  Fixed length schemes are those
that have the same pattern of lengths for
every record in the file •  For example,
in some card image files each record is
80 characters long and may be read with a
Fortran format-  In pointer schemes, the
record contains one or more numbers
which can be found and used in a
specified way to locate the beginning
and end of each field and subfield-  In
delimiter schemes, certain characters or
groups of characters have special mean-
ings and are placed at the beginning or
end of each field or subfield.  There
are many ways to mix these three schemes •
In addition, there is often identifying
information associated with each field.
The various methods for identifying
fields can be divided loosely into two
groups called directory schemes and tag
schemes according to whether or not the
identification is stored with the field.
For example, the Chemical Abstracts
Integrated Subject File uses a directory
scheme in which each record begins with a
sequence of fixed length descriptions,
one for each data field that is present
and which includes a pointer to that
field-  The American Institute of Physics
SPIN tapes use a tag system, in which,
for example, the string i^AUT always
specified the beginning of an author
field •  In directory schemes the
directory may be with each record or at
the beginning of the file or even in
another file -  Usually, the order in
which records or fields appear is not
vitally important.  However, access files
may consist of ordered data elements •
Ordering schemes may be chained, sequen-
tial, or indexed sequential-  There may
be a hierarchical network of access
files.

     The above set of definitions may
form a useful introduction, but be
warned that they are oversimplified and
make data management seem easier than
it really is-  Every data base has its
own unique problems.  Every computer
system has its own unique problems -
Finally, every user has his own unique
problems•

               APPENDIX C

Comparison of Data Management Systems

     A method of comparing various
systems on the basis of cost-effective-
ness is desirable but not yet possible-
For most systems,  it cannot be readily
determined how much it really costs and
how effective it really is.  In most
                                         -282-

-------
labs, computer time is charged at an
artifical rate and programming charges
vary all the way from commercial rates
(20 ± 10 $/hr) to 0 (student-power).
In general, addition of new tasks or
files to an existing system is much
easier than building a new system.  A
purchased system always costs much more
than the price tag but may still be
cheaper than a custom-built one•

     Qualitative comparisons may be made
of various aspects of data management
systems:

          1•  Concept
          2.  Software
          3•  Hardware
          k.  Data Bases
          5•  Services

     Of these, the Concept is the most
difficult to define or discern in any
computer project.  However, it is the
most important part because (a) it is
the slowest to change and (b) it is the
most limiting in the long run•  The term
Concept is used here to indicate the
basic statement of purpose of the
system plus those elements of the design
upon which the whole system is based •
The distinction between Concept and
Software is arbitrary and is made here to
emphasize that some aspects of the
design (for example, the programming
language) are relatively easy to change
and may change every few years while
others are relatively permanent.

     Software, then, includes the details
of the design, the program, and the
documentation-  Hardware includes the
computer, the peripherals, such as
storage devices, and the communication
system, if any,  over which data may be
accessed or entered•  The Hardware con-
figuration is a limiting factor in the
capacity of any system but most labs
make minor hardware changes every few
months and major changes every few
years.  The term Services means simply
the list of things the user can get
from the system, such as retrieval,
numerical analyses, statistics, graphs,
displays, user guides, SDI, and special
indexes.  Again these indicate the
present capabilities but do not
necessarily indicate the future
capabilities •
               APPENDIX D
Abbreviations
     Those abbreviations not explained
in the text are given here •

AEC         Atomic Energy Commission,
            Washington, D- C.
AM.         Argonne National Lab,
            Argonne, Illinois
BNL         Brookhaven National Lab,
            Upton,  Long Island,  N. Y-
CDC         Control Data Corporation
CPC         Card Program Calculator
CPU         Central Processing Unit
CRT         Cathode Ray Tube
IBM         International Business
            Machines, Inc.
LASL        Los Alamos Scientific Lab,
            Los Alamos, N- M-
LBL         Lawrence Berkeley Lab,
            Berkeley, California
LT.Ti         Lawrence Livermore Lab,
            Livermore, California
NASA        National Aeronautics and
            Space Administration
NSF-RANN    National Science Foundation -
            Research Applied to National
            Needs
NSIC        Nuclear Safety Information
            Center
ORACLE      Oak Ridge Automatic Calcula-
            tor and Logical Engine
ORNL        Oak Ridge National Lab, Oak
            Ridge,  Tennessee
SDI         Selective Dissemination of
            Information
TIC         AEC Technical Information
            Center, Oak Ridge,  Tennessee
TTY         Teletypewriter
                                         -283-

-------
    DISCUSSION OF THE PRESENTATIONS BY GEORGE WIRTH, JAMES HAMMERLE, AND NORWOOD GOVE
Ott:  I did not understand whether or not
the regions are using the air quality in-
formation system.  Are there user manuals
that anyone can use or does one need a
long instruction period?  How does the
system implement these questions?

Hammerle:  We have written already the
teletypewriter  time sharing manual.  We
have several Regional Offices actively
using this at this time in draft form so
we can get the bugs out of it.  We have the
batch terminal manual in preparation.
That's for SAROAD.  For NEDS we're just
starting the interactive terminal manual,
and about January 1st we will start the
batch terminal manual, so that hopefully
by February 1st or thereabouts we will
have draft copies of all the user manuals
out to every regional office and, in fact,
to anyone who would like to be a user of
our system.

Ellsaesser:  This question has to do with
the one I raised before about the lack of
agreement between emission estimates and
airborne concentrations.  I was interested
to hear that Mr. Wirth mentioned the same
problem exists for water pollution, which
I am not so familiar with, in that he said
some people did not feel that secondary
and tertiary treatment would result in
cleaner water because of the run-off effect.
In other words, this is an emission source
not presently counted in the emission
inventory.  I think that the same type of
thing is probably also happening in the
atmosphere.  I was wondering if George
Wirth would tell us if he had considered
going to areas which are geographically
and meteorologically similar to make
measurements on rivers which are not people
polluted or industrially polluted to get
background levels or estimates for run-off.
I am interested in asking Dr. Hammerle,
since he is compiling data bases both in
air quality and emission sources, if he
has made any attempts to correlate these.

Wirth:   Well, with reference to the water,
what we've put together is a plan for what
we consider maybe not the final solution to
monitoring in a basin, but a satisfactory
solution in the immediate future, three
to five years, which we call a basin re-
connaisance survey.  You have two problems
in the non-accounted-for pollution load on
a stream:  that which is attributed to
run-off and that which is attributed
essentially to the stream channel condi-
tions.  These pollutants are essentially
deposits in the stream bed which are
stirred up during periods of high flow
and depend on the stream hydraulics for
that particular system.  That's the main
reason why I think it's impossible to
essentially tape what we call a mass bal-
ance, where you take an upstream and a
downstream point with all the sources in
between and then attempt to model the
resultant water quality from the inflow.
Of course you get quite a difference, and
to attribute all this to run-off is
essentially incorrect.  The approach we
are taking is to try to calculate the
run-off effect through coefficients of one
type or another.  We essentially analyze
the area in terms of its development and
probably down to its topographic and
geologic conditions.  What we're asking
for is run-off studies to account for high
density urban areas, industrial areas,
rural areas, agricultural areas, and then
the virgin areas.  Then you would essen-
tially assess your particular basin;
attribute so much of the run-off, based on
these coefficients, to this particular
area; model with the run-off coefficents,
with the point sources, the resultant stream
quality; and then the difference would
essentially be your scour and stirring up
inflow.  It probably will take us a
minimum of a couple of years to get to
that point, based primarily on how well we
can determine run-off coefficients, which
we're looking to research to provide for
us.  I'm familiar with some of those
studies in the past, and it is probably a
more complex problem than we're estimating
right now to come up with the run-off
coefficient.

Hammerle:  As you are probably aware, the
only thing that relates emissions data to
air quality is a dispersion model, and
there are a number of models.  Many states,
in their state implementation plans, did
dispersion modeling,  EPA's internal activity
in dispersion modeling is quite extensive;
you heard Warren Johnson yesterday men-
tioning their activities.  As an example,
the whole air quality control region in
which New York City is located has been
modeled, and we have obtained a correlation
higher than 90$ in that the model predicted
the isopleths and compared them with the
monitoring sites air quality data and had
a very good correlation.  On the other hand
                                          -284-

-------
there are many questions about the models.
EPA is now involved in the regional air
pollution studies in St. Louis.  It's
primary purpose is model verification and
validation and testing.  In addition to our
activities of collecting data for a com-
plete nationwide inventory of emissions, we
are active participants.  In fact, I think
we may be the only ones in EPA not in the
research organization who are actively
involved in RAPS with respect to collecting
the emissions data there.  I think, as a
result of the RAPS effort, the confidence
that the people might have in the model
will be greatly increased.

Ellsaesser:  I agree with you that,  for
small space and time scales, the model is
the only link we have.  But for long period
averages, there ought to be some correla-
tion, particularly at places like Los
Angeles.  If there is a trend in emission
estimates, you would think there would be
a similar trend in airborne concentrations,
over a period of years.  I realize that you
do not have that much data available yet.

Hammerle:  That was a statement.  It is
true.

Wirth:  I think your answer is yes.   We
could go into virgin areas, but then those
coefficients would only be relevant to
virgin areas.  I don't think we could
conclude that that was a particular back-
ground noise in any kind of an area
already developed.  I don't think you
could ever return to the virgin condition,
or expect to, no matter what kind of
controls you put together.

Ellsaesser:  At least you should get a
background different than zero.

Hammerle:  We are not assuming we are at
zero anywhere in the business.  We are at
unknown in many places but not zero.

Ellsaesser:  I hope that is true, but I'm
not sure it is true in the public's mind,
particularly with regard to air pollution.

Hammerle:  That's not correct, because in
the implementation plans they have to have
background measurements anyhow.  They have
defined background levels for most air
quality control regions, so your statement
is not true.  I don't think we have ever
considered any place that was zero.

Gibbons:  Suppose I am working for a differ-
ent agency and writing an environmental
impact statement.  Say I am concerned
about the thermal problems in a river
system and I am worried about the antag-
onisms between thermal effects and
nutrients in the water.  Could I have
access to the data system at RTP through
some interagency agreement?  How accessi-
ble is that data base?

Wirth:  You are with another federal
agency?  That data base is essentially
accessable strictly for the asking right
now.  We operate with all of our states
and about 9 other federal agencies on
essentially a nonreimbursable basis with
that particular agency as long as they're
retrieving and operating under standard
programs in STORET.  That's basically done
on the defined balance of the agreement
that whatever we provide you, you provide
us back in terms of the data and informa-
tion that you may collect that's not
presently existing.  That's primarily how
we work with the states.  It's been rela-
tively successful in terms of volume of
data.  I would say a year and a half ago,
when we had only one or two states on the
system, we were up around a thirty thousand
station count.  We've added 50 thousand
stations to that system for the cost of
providing some computer time, nothing
more.  The water monitoring strategy is
promised on the basis that EPA will not
have a large observational, self-operated
network.  We have about a thousand stations,
at the most, that we directly fund and only
about 500 that we directly operate.  All
the rest of it is through cooperative net-
works for either in-state pollution
agencies or agencies that collect water
data for closely related functions.

King:  My question is addressed to all of
the speakers.  Is any of the data or any
part of the data being stored available
to citizen groups interested in ecology
who might not have access to a government
terminal?

Hammerle:  I can answer that question with
respect to our past activity.  I would say
that prior to six or eight months ago when
our group started to computerize all of
our data and start to develop our system
as I described it today, probably 80% of
all of our activity was in doing exactly
what you have questioned about.  How can
the public get the data, or anybody obtain
data?  We devoted the majority of our time
to providing this data in letter form or
by telephone calls.  Still at this time
anyone calling in, whether it be a citizen
                                          -285-

-------
or person from any other agency, is directed
to the appropriate person in charge of that
data which they are interested in, and we
provide it to them.  I don't know if you are
familiar with EPA's concept in charging for
data that is going to come up in the future,
but basically printouts will be available
and'there will be some predetermined charge
per page or line.  I'm not sure how it's
going to be determined; we do have the
freedom of information directive, and we are
going to conform with that completely.  At
this time we are not charging anyone for
this service.  So anyone can get any data
which we have, except that which I indicated
is confidential in the NEDS file.

Wirth:  I think we are relatively in the
same position with the addition that, for
any federal or state water pollution con-
trol agency, we'll provide the terminal
capability in their offices if they provide
their own terminal.  Our present contract
has a telecommunications network in it,
so we usually have no cost there.  In
addition, as we move on down through the
private institution and the pure private
sector, we essentially operate on the basis
that we serve as the capability allows.
That generally means that we can practi-
cally always make a retrieval or two.  Some
of the very popularly used material we
copy on tapes and essentially add it to
our own library.  You can take it and
mount it wherever you want and take the
data off.  About the only request that
we don't get as far down as usually serving
is the requests from various manufacturers
of equipment in the municipal waste business
that want information for market data.  I
don't think we've got anything in principle
against supplying it.  It's just a matter
of our feeling that it is a relatively low
priority and a rather proprietory use,
so we haven't supplied very much of that.
We've turned a few of those requests down,
but that's about the extent of it.

Gove;  Let me speak to the AEC part, then
maybe Val will have a comment.  I know of
one non-government group that has dialed
in to an Oak Ridge system.  There maybe
more than one.  That's the International
Biological Program.  They dial in from
their sites which are not necessarily on
government installations.  There's another
one which we are currently setting up to let
them do the same, and that's the Southern
Regional Demographers Group.  In addition to
that, of course, we answer a lot of letters
from citizens, some of which might involve
a computer run, although the citizens do
not themselves tie in.  I do not see any
reason why it couldn't be done for citizens
groups.  There's no fundamental limitation.
Some of these systems you can dial into
from the teletype, and the only thing you
need is a password.

Watson:  All of the data that's gathered
by the Earth Resources Program in NASA is
available to all the public.  You can get
it through Goddard, or you get it through
the Department of Interior.  They're
very careful to be sure that no one gets
the data first even.  It has to be in the
public domain before it's distributed.

Manowitz:  Does the air source emissions
inventory data bank contain data from
natural sources?

Hammerle:  We do attempt to store data on
forest fires .  We  are contemplating
including SOo generation from marshes.
When we first set up the system we had
that in.  We decided to remove it tem-
porarily because we just had other things
that we were more concerned with at that
time.  Now we're getting ready to add
some of these things, and that is under
consideration.

Gove;  I just remembered a post script to
the earlier question.  The National Neutron
Cross Section Center has pioneered in
international data exchange, which is
nothing new.  They were among the first
to do it.  I don't know if they have any
direct dialing connections, but they do
send tapes internationally.  So that's
another example of exchange of tapes or
data, at least, to non-government
organizations.
                                          -286-

-------
                     FEDERAL LABORATORIES AS CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE
                      IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES--A CASE STUDY
                              E. J. Croke and J. E. Norco
                           Center for Environmental Studies
                              Argonne National Laboratory
                                9700 South Cass Avenue
                               Argonne, Illinois  60439
                                       ABSTRACT

     Many of the large, multidisciplinary AEC and NASA laboratories have developed,
over the years, into major centers of excellence in most branches of the physical, bio-
logical, and engineering sciences, but both legal and programmatic constraints have
tended to impede other federal agencies, and state and local government from accessing
these facilities.  The relaxation of some of these constraints, combined with the recent
shift of national priorities toward goals that reflect a more acute sense of social
conscience, has focused attention on the question of whether the system of federal
laboratories is a national scientific resource that can provide general scientific
support for all levels of government.  In particular, current EPA interest in the
establishment of regional environmental studies centers suggests the possibility of a
new role for the federal laboratories.

     Recent efforts made by many of these facilities to serve sponsors other than their
parent agencies are indicative of their ability to function in this capacity.  The
evolution of the environmental studies program at Argonne National Laboratory, from its
inception in 1967 with the Chicago Air Pollution Systems Analysis Program to its present
level of diversification, offers an example of how a mission-oriented, interdisciplinary
research center can develop from a core project involving both a federal sponsor and a
local agency of government.  The history of the relatively successful Argonne prograir
provides a number of pragmatic lessons for research institutions that aspire to a
similar role.

     A review of environmental research programs at other AEC and NASA installations in-
dicates that Argonne's experience is by no means unique, and that the federal laborator-
ies can function effectively as environmental research centers in the service of
federal, state and local government.
THE FEDERAL LABORATORIES EXPAND THEIR ROLE

     The research programs conducted by
large federal atomic energy and aerospace
laboratories have always been noteworthy
for their breadth and multidisciplinary
character.  Studies of geophysical and
bio-environmental phenomena have proven to
be as necessary to the two sponsoring
agencies as nuclear fuels technology or
propellant combustion research.  Many of
the AEC and NASA laboratories have there-
fore developed, over the years, into major
centers of excellence in most branches of
the physical, biological and engineering
sciences.  This development has taken place
within a goal-directed framework in which
the synthesis of a variety of professional
disciplines to achieve pragmatic objectives
under fairly well defined time constraints
has been a predominant feature.
     Despite the magnitude and diversity
of the research resource represented by
the AEC and NASA laboratories, both legal
constraints and practical considerations
have, until comparatively recently, tend-
ed to prevent other federal institutions,
state and local government from access-
ing talent and facilities dedicated to
the support of the two highly mission-
oriented, schedule-sensitive parent
agencies.

     For the AEC laboratories, a signifi-
cant change in this situation occurred
in 1967 when the charter under which most
of these institutions operate was expand-
ed to permit them to perform research
work concerned with public health and
safety for other federal and nonfederal
agencies.  Two constraints were, however,
placed on this new freedom:
                                         -287-

-------
1.   Atomic Energy Commission research re-
    quirements retain priority over non-AEC
    service requests.   Specifically, man-
    power, facilities or equipment will
    not be deployed in a way that will de-
    tract from the support of AEC research
    activities.

2.   The AEC national laboratories may not
    compete with private or commercial
    research and development contractors,
    but a laboratory may provide service
    to a non-AEC sponsor when it can le-
    gitimately claim unique qualifications
    to do so.  In practice, this con-
    straint has been expressed as a pro-
    hibition against responding to
    generally distributed requests for
    proposals.  An AEC laboratory may
    submit unsolicited proposals; may re-
    spond to a direct request for a pro-
    posal or work statement (so long as a
    general RFP is not involved); or may
    respond to a direct request for ser-
    vice from a non-AEC sponsor.

    Interagency agreements providing for
the transfer of funds from the sponsor to
the parent agency and thence to the lab-
oratory have proven to be a simple and
generally expeditious means of implement-
ing research contracts when the laboratory
involved is operated for the parent agency
by a university or some other contracting
agent.  The mechanics of such transactions
and the subsequent relationship between
sponsor and laboratory are not significant-
ly different from what is encountered in
programs that involve private research
contractors.  The situation is somewhat
more complicated in the case of laborator-
ies that are staffed by civil service em-
ployees.  The NASA laboratories, in par-
ticular, may not submit proposals to other
sponsors, but may propose programs design-
ed to serve state and local government to
the parent agency.  Funding for the acqui-
sition of hardware and support of ancil-
lary services may be transferred to a NASA
laboratory, but research personnel are
supported by and responsible to the parent
agency rather than to the non-NASA
"sponsor".

    The reactions of the AEC laboratories
to the expansion of their charter have
varied widely, as is reflected in
Table I, which provides estimates of the
sources, magnitude and distribution of
non-AEC funding among the AEC installa-
tions.  The Oak Ridge Laboratory  (ORNL)
has achieved the greatest degree of
diversification, while Argonne National
Laboratory (ANL) has focused primarily on
the environmental sciences and captured a
larger share of the EPA market than any
other AEC facility.  Laboratories having
special missions,  (weapons research, etc.)
have tended to respond least to the
opportunity to diversify.

     The idea that the system of federal
laboratories represents a national scien-
tific resource that can be expected to
provide a high level of technological
support for a variety of federal, state
and local agencies and institutions is an
attractive concept, but, despite sporadic
manifestations of congressional support
and the fairly impressive track record of
a few of the laboratories during the past
5-6 years, it has scarcely been put to
the test as yet.  With the shift of
national priorities toward goals that re-
flect a more acute sense of social con-
sciousness and the corresponding diversion
of funds away from the traditional mis-
sions of the federal laboratories, it has
become increasingly important to determine
whether or not they represent a long-term,
general national research resource or a
comparatively short-lived system of
special purpose institutions.
THE NEED FOR CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE IN
THE ENVTRDNMENTAL SCIENCES
     The national environmental protection
program provides a fairly significant
opportunity to answer this question.  This
program has recently generated substantial
interest in the establishment of national
and regional environmental studies centers
that would simultaneously service state
and local government and advance the
state-of-the-art of regional waste manage-
ment planning and pollution control tech-
nology.  This interest has been stimulated
by the current federal emphasis on com-
prehensive environmental protection plan-
ning and impact evaluation at the state
and local levels.  Such planning entails
the application of comparatively sophis-
ticated data management, policy and strat-
egy evaluation techniques and methodolog-
ies, as exemplified by the 1971 federal
guidelines for waste water management
planning.  The inadequacy of the scientif-
ic and technological resources that are
currently available to most state and
                                         -288-

-------
local agencies (not to mention the federal
EPA regional administrative offices) under-
scores the need for centers of excellence
comparable to those that have supported
the national atomic energy and aerospace
programs.  Neither the academic community
nor the commercial research and develop-
ment sector have entirely 'satisfied this
need, since the former has generally been
unable to mount mission-oriented, schedule-
sensitive programs, while the latter has
all too frequently proven unable to pro-
duce usable results through failure to
communicate effectively with clients and
inadequate follow-up.

     Whether the national laboratories
should undertake to fill such a supportive
role is a policy question that is likely
to be answered only at the highest levels
of government, but the history of their
effort to serve federal, state and local
institutions other than their parent
agencies sheds some light on the question
of their ability to function in this
capacity.  In this context, it is useful
to review the environmental studies pro-
gram at Argonne National Laboratory, which,
under a variety of sponsors, has served
the federal environmental protection pro-
gram and the programs of state and local
government in the midwestern area continu-
ously since 1967.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF NON-AEC SPONSORED
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH PROGRAMS AT~
ARGONNE

     Prior to 1967, Argonne's environmen-
tal research program consisted of a group
of meteorological and life science studies
conducted by its Radiological Physics,
Biological and Medical Research and
Industrial Hygiene Divisions in support of
AEC programmatic goals related to the non-
military uses of atomic energy.  The sub-
stantial impetus given to the national
environmental protection program by the
Clean Air Act of 1967 coincided closely
with the aforementioned broadening of
the Laboratory's charter and led to the
first of Argonne's major non-AEC environ-
mental projects.

     The Laboratory's role as a midwestern
environmental studies center began in that
year with the acceptance of a proposal to
the National Air Pollution Control
Administration (now the EPA Office of Air
Programs) for a project that would unite
the resources of the Laboratory with those
of the Chicago Department of Air Pollution
Control  (now the Department of Environ-
mental Control) in a three year methodol-
ogy development project designated the
"Chicago Air Pollution Systems Analysis
Program".  At that time, comprehensive,
multi-source pollution control systems
planning as it is now practiced was in a
relatively primitive state.  Neither the
planning structure and format nor the
techniques, methodologies and supporting
data bases had been developed.  The
Chicago project proved to be a precursor,
and to some extent a basis, for the im-
plementation planning practices that
emerged within the next few years.  Its  '
objectives were fourfold:

1.   Development of an air pollution data
     management system for the storage,
     retrieval, merging, processing,
     analysis and display of geocoded
     emission inventory, surface and upper
     air meteorology and air quality data.

2.   Development of an atmospheric dis-
     persion model for air pollutants
     emitted by stationary sources.  The
     model was to be capable of replicat-
     ing events that occur on a time
     scale as short as 12-24 hours and
     was not to depend on calibration or
     fitting to measured air quality data.

3.   Development and field-testing of
     strategies and methodologies for the
     control of urban air pollution
     episodes.

4.   Development of methodologies for
     integrating air resource management
     with long-range urban and regional
     land use planning.

     The program was administered for the
National Air Pollution Control Administra-
tion by the Division of Meteorology--an
organization that has survived, essential-
ly intact, in the present EPA.  Although
the Division of Meteorology naturally
placed more emphasis on atmospheric dis-
persion studies than on control strategy
development, the Division management
allowed the Argonne research staff ample
latitude to  conduct a variety of opera-
tions research and systems analysis-
oriented studies and experiments that
were quite unrelated to the meteorologi-
cal aspects of the effort.

     With its national perspective, the
Division of Meteorology insisted that the
Chicago project should be oriented toward
                                          -289-

-------
the development of general, nationally
applicable methodologies rather than tech-
niques and procedures that would apply
only in a Chicago context.

     The Argonne research team enjoyed two
advantages that probably could not have
been duplicated elsewhere at that time.
The first was access to Chicago's comput-
erized  AIRCENS  stationary source
inventories--an annual data base which,
despite some imperfections, captured the
composition,  magnitude and spatial dis-
tribution of the city's sulfur oxide and
particulate producing pollution source
aggregate.  Equally significant for the
project was a two year, computerized
sulfur oxide data inventory derived from
Chicago's telemetered air quality monitor-
ing network.

     The second, and in the long run per-
haps the more important, advantage lay in
the fact that the Argonne research team
was provided with the opportunity to work
closely with the staff of one of the larg-
est and best endowed urban air pollution
control agencies in the U.S.  The project
enjoyed the enthusiastic support of the
director of the department, and the staff
were able to make the most of the freedom
of action available to a public institu-
tion that is part of a relatively strong
city government.  It is easy to pay lip-
service to the concept of the scientist
and the civil servant working cooperative-
ly to attain some socially desirable ob-
ject, but in the case of the Chicago pro-
gram, it proved crucial to the success of
the program.  The city contributed nearly
three man-years of direct effort as well
as an instrumented helicopter and a variety
of other facilities and equipment.  More-
over, the Department of Air Pollution
Control used its authority to acquire data
and implement large-scale field tests that
would have been difficult or impossible
for an Argonne team without official sanc-
tion.  A more subtle, but considerably
more important result of integrating the
control agency into the effort was that
the city personnel--many of whom could pre-
sent very respectable professional creden-
tials—successfully curbed the initial
tendency of the research staff toward
scholarly rather than pragmatic goals.

     The Argonne research staff that were
assigned to the project would, in retro-
spect, have had more than a little diffi-
culty in mustering credentials that relat-
ed to the tasks at hand.  The project
director was an aeronautical engineer
whose prior specialty was rocket propul-
sion system analysis.  In charge of the
atmospheric dispersion studies was a
nuclear engineer who had specialized in
control theory.  The operations research
studies were initially conducted by a
staff computer programmer, while much of
the long-range planning and land use work
was performed by an industrial engineer.
In fairness, it is necessary to note that
the project also included members of
Argonnefs meteorological research group,
whose participation was underwritten by
the AEC, and a staff meteorologist from
the NAPCA Division of Meteorology was
assigned to the Chicago project on a part-
time basis.  Moreover, a professional
operations research analyst eventually
joined the staff and additional profes-
sional assistance was obtained through
consulting arrangements with Northwestern
University and the University of Chicago.
With the exception of the meteorologists,
no member of this team could claim prior
experience in atmospheric dispersion
modeling, air pollution control or urban
planning; however, most of the staff were
in their mid-twenties and early thirties--
near the start of their professional
careers--and were eager to adapt to the
demands of this novel enterprise.

     The results of the Chicago program
were strongly influenced by the (largely
beneficial) tension that inevitably deriv-
ed from an attempt to satisfy both a
research-oriented federal sponsor with a
national perspective and a local agency of
government responsible for surveillance
and enforcement activities.  The fact that
the prime interest of the federal sponsor
was in atmospheric dispersion modeling,
while the local agency tended to focus on
its revenue-producing source certification
and operating permit system presented ah
additional, though by no means insurmount-
able, complication.

     The accomplishments of the Chicago
Air Pollution Systems Analysis Program
have been extensively documented1 and need
only be reviewed briefly here.  They
include:

1.   The development of the APICS air
     pollution data management system.
     This system eventually incorporated
     a complete three-year, geocoded,
     time-series data inventory coupled
     with user-oriented access features,
     several multi-variate statistical
                                         -290-

-------
analysis and data display schemes, a
pollution source simulation and
several steady-state and transient
atmospheric dispersion models.  APICS
became the most important single re-
search tool available to the project.
It was eventually documented in the
form of a user's manual.2

A series of case studies of the
micrometeorology of urban air pollu-
tion dispersion were completed.
These were intended primarily to
support the dispersion modeling ef-
fort, but also focused on the problem
of forecasting episode conditions.1

A diurnal, multiple source activity
simulation model (PLANTSIM) for res-
idential, commercial, industrial,
institutional and public utility
sulfur oxide sources3 was developed.

An uncalibrated, transient atmospher-
ic dispersion model was developed and
subjected to validation testing
against approximately 10,000 hours
of Chicago sulfur dioxide data.3  The
model explained 71% of the variance
observed in 24 hour average concen-
trations at a confidence level of
better than 99.9%.   Skill scores
ranging from .77 to .84 were achieved
when the model was used in episode
control gaming situations.

A method of estimating local, urban
mixing layer altitude on the basis of
data acquired from distant, rural
radiosonde stations and local urban
surface temperature was developed and
codified.  Temperature and air qual-
ity data provided by an instrumented
helicopter were used to test this
methodology.1

Three air pollution episode control
field tests were conducted.  The last
of these was organized as a full-
scale, 48-hour "war game" in which
the administrative, communications,
planning, monitoring and procedural
mechanisms necessary to implement an
actual episode control operation in
Chicago were activated on short notice
from a communications and control
center.  The control procedures and
planning models were subsequently
evaluated, codified and documented
for general distribution.1"5
 7.   A zoning inventory scheme was devel-
      oped, and a methodology for the
      design of an optimum, emission den-
      sity-limited zoning ordinance was
      devised and documented.6

 8.   A demographic-economic growth pro-
      jection model was developed and
      coupled with a library of emission
      factors to generate a projected
      source inventory and future urban
      air quality estimates under the
      constraints of alternative emission
      control programs.6

 9.   A linear programming model reflecting
      the operational and economic con-
      straints imposed on power load shift-
      ing and fuel switching was coupled
      with an atmospheric dispersion model
      to create an optimal power plant
      system episode control strategy de-
      velopment scheme.7

10.   A cost-effectiveness analysis of a
      program to convert Chicago to low
      sulfur fuels was completed.1

      The development of these methodolo-
 gies represented an impressive enough
 flourish of technical prowess, and by the
 end of the $500,000 program the members
 of the Argonne research team could prob-
 ably lay fair claim to recognition as
 professional environmental systems
 analysts.  Nevertheless, an evaluation of
 the program by present standards requires
 more than a listing of the techniques that
 it generated.  In particular, it is neces-
 sary to ask:

 1.   Did technology transfer happen?

 2.   Did the program lead to policy
      evaluation?

      Technology transfer certainly occur-
 red, although much of it was in directions
 not foreseen at the inception of the pro-
 gram.  The NAPCA Division of Meteorology
 received the atmospheric dispersion model
 and a data base that has since been used
 for further urban atmospheric dispersion
 studies, while the episode control studies
 provided a basis for the design and im-
 plementation of the National Emergency
 Operations Control Center in Raleigh-
 Durham, N.C.  The city of Chicago acquired
 a non-computerized atmospheric dispersion
 model; a forecast of future source distri-
 bution and air quality; an episode control
                                    -291-

-------
procedures manual; an evaluation of its
source and air quality surveillance
systems; and a detailed analysis of its
data base; but the Department of Air
Pollution Control was unable, at that time,
to access computer facilities adequate to
exploit all of the methodologies that the
program produced.  The long-range planning
studies proved to be of greatest benefit
to the NAPCA Bureau of Abatement and
Control (which survives under another name
in the EPA) because of their relevance to
the formulation of air implementation
planning requirements.

     There can be no doubt that the great-
est single beneficiary of the Chicago pro-
gram was the Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency.  Scarcely had the
Chicago program been completed, when the
federal air pollution control implementa-
tion planning guidelines that accompanied
the Clean Air Act amendments of 1970 were
promulgated.  The Illinois implementation
plan was prepared by an Argonne research
team that had, for all practical purposes,
spent the previous three years assembling
the necessary kit of planning tools and
acquiring the requisite professional ex-
perience.  Mareover, Illinois' present air
pollution episode control test program is
modeled on the original Chicago "war games".

     In the realm of policy evaluation,
the Chicago program contributed, though
not conclusively, to the formulation of
Chicago's coal sulfur content ordinance.
The cost-effectiveness of a comprehensive
urban fuel conversion program was assessed,
a number of episode source control and
natural gas re-allocation policies were
evaluated, and the air quality studies
influenced, to some extent, the siting of
components of Chicago's monitoring system.
Again, the major impact of the program
was felt when the methodologies and ex-
perience acquired during the course of the
Chicago project were subsequently employed
to formulate statewide emission control
regulations for stationary and mobile
sources.

THE EVOLUTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL
STUDIES CENTER

     The Chicago program left a legacy at
Argonne in the form of a systems analysis
and planning-oriented core group that sub-
sequently formed the nucleus of the
Argonne Center for Environmental Studies.
The program also spawned a series of
federal, state and locally sponsored
methodology development, strategy evalua-
tion and policy assessment programs that
are now in their fourth generation.  It
is worth tracing this genealogy briefly,
since it is indicative of how an environ-
mental studies center can be developed
through gradual process of accretion.

     Figure 1 illustrates the prolifera-
tion of non-AEC sponsored environmental
research activities that followed the
Chicago program.  Some of these, such as
the high energy density battery project
and the fluidized bed coal combustion
project, were first generation efforts
like the Chicago program, while others,
such as the Great Lakes Review sponsored
by the Region V EPA Administrator's office,
were second generation programs that spun
off from concurrent AEC-sponsored work.
The Chicago program was certainly the
most prolific generator of follow-on
studies.  As indicated in Figure 1, it
led to three independent, federally spon-
sored second generation programs focused
on atmospheric modeling, episode control
and environmental land use planning that
were directly descended from the parent
program.

     The Illinois air pollution implemen-
tation planning program was a second gen-
eration effort that was jointly sponsored
by the Illinois Institute for Environmental
Quality and the Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency.  It led, in turn, to
the third generation Cook County,
St. Louis County (Missouri) and state of
Indiana air pollution projects.  An in-
direct outgrowth of the Cook County pro-
ject was the fourth generation, National
Science Foundation sponsored policy eval-
uation program "Environmental Pollutants
and the Urban Economy".

     Another direct outgrowth of the
Illinois project was the third generation,
"Environmental Impact of Ground Transpor-
tation Systems" project--a state-sponsored
study conducted in conjunction with the
Chicago Area Transportation Study and the
Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission.
This effort derives from the transporta-
tion system studies required for the air
implementation plan.  The effectiveness
of the working relationship established
between Argonne and the State of Illinois
during the course of the air pollution
planning program led to three first gen-
eration programs focused on scoping the
statewide wastewater, solid waste manage-
ment and strip mine reclamation problems.
                                         -292-

-------
These, in turn, have resulted in two large-
scale, second generation systems analysis
programs that are expected to yield com-
prehensive wastewater treatment and solid
waste management implementation plans.
The former program has led, in turn, to a
study of the institutional and organiza-
tional mechanisms required to execute a
wastewater implementation plan effectively
in Illinois.

     The EPA-sponsored atmospheric sciences
study that succeeded the Chicago program
has led directly to a Federal Aviation
Administration and State of Illinois spon-
sored third generation program of modeling
and monitoring airport air pollution.
This effort, coupled with the EPA-sponsored
air pollution land use planning program
that succeeded the long-range planning phase
of the Chicago program, resulted in an
EPA-sponsored airport-land use program
designed to evaluate the total direct and
indirect environmental consequences of
siting a major airport installation.

     The Federal air pollution-land use
study also resulted in a spinoff program
to prepare a briefing document for the
recent public hearings of the President's
air quality and water pollution control
advisory committees on the relationship
between land use and environmental
protection.

     The diversification that followed the
Chicago program is not adequately reflect-
ed in Figure 1, because it fails to indi-
cate the fact that the motivation and
objectives of many of the successor pro-
jects were quite different from those of
the parent program.  Thus the Illinois air
implementation planning project, for
example, was dominated by the design and
testing of regulatory instruments, while
the National Science Foundation project
focuses on economic policy evaluation.
The transportation system environmental
impact program is, on the other hand, a
technology transfer and technical assist-
ance effort that is intended to environ-
mentally "sensitize" a transportation
planning agency that has hitherto had
little or no exposure to pollution control
problems.

     That this degree of diversification
evolved from a parent project that was
primarily intended as an applied research
and methodology development effort, is,
perhaps, significant.  The sequence from
research to technique development to
regulatory program planning to impact
assessment to policy evaluation to tech-
nology transfer is a natural course of
development and parallels, in microcosm,.
the general trend of the national environ-
mental protection program.  Any institu-
tion that aspires to provide a full range
of environmental services to federal,
state and local government might reason-
ably be expected to develop along similar
lines from an equivalent interdisciplinary
core group and parent project.

     As one program led to another, and
as the parent agency became more respon-
sive to the demand for environmental re-
search and planning, the need for an
organization to coordinate the growing
Argonne environmental research program
became evident.  The result was the estab-
lishment, late in 1969, of the Argonne
Center for Environmental Studies (CES).
Roughly two thirds of the $1.4 million
annual budget of the CES is derived from
non-AEC federal, state and local sponsors,
while the remainder is based on AEC en-
vironmental programs such as the Great
Lakes Research Program--a theoretical and
experimental study focused on assessment
of the biological and physical conse-
quences of siting large power plants on
the shores of the Great Lakes.  The
laboratory-wide environmental program,
including all scientific divisions and all
AEC and non-AEC sponsored programs for
which the director of CES is cognizant
administrator, involves an annual budget
of about $4 million, and is likely to .
grow as the nascent AEC environmental
research program develops.  Figure 2 pro-
vides a general overview of the Argonne
program as it exists today.

     As state and local environmental re-
search and planning projects have pro-
liferated and the diversification of
programs has progressed, the CES staff
have increased in number and have taken
on a rather more professional cast than
that which characterized the original
Chicago program.  Economists, demographers,
urban planners, civil and sanitary engi-
neers, systems analysts and other
professional specialties have
joined the staff, while the network of
consulting relationships with individual
academicians and midwestern academic
institutions has expanded and coalesced
into a fairly reliable, ready source of
expertise in professional disciplines that
are not normally resident at AEC labora-
tories.  The latter development has been
                                          -293-

-------
facilitated by the good offices of the
Argonne Universities Association (AUA)--
a consortium of thirty midwestern
universities which exercise a policy
review function over Argonne's pro-
grammatic activities.  The result is that
the Argonne environmental research pro-
gram can draw special expertise from one
of the larger pools of scientific manpower
in the U.S.  The program also exploits the
services of commercial contractors and
professional societies, such as the
American Society of Planning Officials,
as the need arises.

PROGRAMS AND PROBLEMS IN OTHER
FEDERAL LABORATORIES

     Argonne's role in support of federal,
state and local environmental protection
programs is by no means unique.  As indi-
cated in Tables II and III, many of the
major AEC and NASA facilities have initiat-
ed environmental research studies since
1971.  In general, the AEC laboratories
have tended to rely on various federal
sources or internal discretionary funds to
support their research programs.  Projects
at the NASA laboratories have, as indicated
above, largely though not entirely, been
subsidized by the parent agency.  With a
few notable exceptions, most of the
laboratories report an acute scarcity of
state and local funding.

     In general, those installations that
have interacted with state and local
government or with regional academic in-
stitutions report that good working rela-
tionships have been established, although
local agencies often lack the expertise
and resources to contribute effectively to
research-oriented programs.  A few of the
federal laboratories indicate that such
inter-institutional programs have occasion-
ally presented publication credit problems.

OONCLUSIONS

     It is risky to extrapolate from a few
data points, but the precedent established
by Argonne, Oak Ridge, Langley Research
Center and some of the other more diversi-
fied AEC and NASA laboratories would seem
to indicate that such institutions can
indeed function as national or regional
centers of excellence in the environmental
sciences, and can be of material assist-
ance to state and local government in their
respective geographical regions.  In this
regard, a number of conclusions might be
drawn from Argonne's experience:
It is almost essential that any re-
search team that aspires to such a
role be granted a break-in period
that entails close and continuous
involvement in the activities of an
operational, state or local environ-
mental protection, comprehensive
planning or resource management
agency.

The objectives of such a consortium
must be clearly defined in terms of
whether the primary mission is basic
or applied research, program plan-
ning, policy evaluation, impact
assessment, technical assistance,
technology transfer, or general
methodology development.

In the early stages of such programs,
the federal sponsor would do well to
practice a policy of active surveil-
lance and intervention, because the
process of achieving a productive
amalgam of the scientific resource
and the agency of state or local
government can take substantially
longer in the absence of firm guid-
ance by an authoritative management
institution.  Once the necessary
direction and momentum has been
established, benign neglect becomes
the optimum policy.

A professional, interdisciplinary
environmental research staff may be
expected to evolve from an essential-
ly amateur research-oriented core
group if, after an initial period of
methodological research, it is given
the opportunity to follow through in
a series of appropriately diversified
applications studies.

Because federal research institutions
are generally neither profit-oriented
nor subject to the proprietary con-
straints that are characteristic of
private research consultants, the
relationship between client and con-
tractor can be substantially more
flexible than is often the case
during the course of federal or state
contracts with commercial firms.
This feature facilitates both a free
exchange of information and the
effectiveness of long-term follow-up
activities.

Federal research laboratories appear
to offer an effective means of bridg-
ing the gap between the academic
                                          -294-

-------
     community and the commercial research
     sector, in that they are able to
     assemble mission-oriented, schedule-
     sensitive professional research teams
     that can draw special expertise from
     the universities or the commercial
     sector as required to meet program-
     matic needs.  In this respect, they
     appear to be well equipped to serve
     as scientific and technical extensions
     of policy making and regulatory
     agencies at all levels of government.

REFERENCES

1.   Croke, E. J., et al., "Chicago Air
     Pollution Systems Analysis Program--
     Final Report," Argonne National
     Laboratory Report ANL/ES/CC-009,
     February 1971.

2.   Chamot, C., et al., "Chicago Air
     Pollution Systems Analysis Program,"
     Argonne National Laboratory Report
     ANL/ES/CC-006, February 1970.

3.   Roberts, J. J., et al., "Chicago Air
     Pollution Systems Analysis Program,"
     Argonne National Laboratory Report
     ANL/ES/CC-007.

4.   Croke, E. and Booras, S., "The Design
     of an Air Pollution Incident Control
     Plan," APCA Journal.  V. 20, No. 3,
     March 197TT

5.   Conley, L., et al., "Isopleth Area
     Tables," Argonne National Laboratory
     Report ANL/ES-8, October 1971.

6.   Cohen, et al., "Chicago Air Pollution
     Systems Analysis Program--Long Range
     Planning in Air Resource Management,"
     Argonne National Laboratory ANL/ES/
     CC-008, January 1971.

7.   Croke, E., Kennedy, A., and Croke, K.,
     "An Energy Allocation Model for Air
     Pollution Episode Control," IEEE
     Conference on Decision and Control,
     Miami, Florida, December 1971.

8.   NASA Information Research Applications
     Office, "Mission Assignments of
     Agencies in Residence or Committed--
     Mississippi Test Facility," NASA-MTF
     Publication, February 1972.
                                         -295-

-------
                                    TABLE I
                 R§D FUNDED BY OTHERS AT 7 NATIONAL LABORATORIES

                       Estimated FY 1972 costs in thousands
                         (no.  of projects in parentheses)

Ames
ANL
BNL
LBL
ILL
LASL
ORNL
Total
DOD

269
(6)
392
(8)
21
(1)
11,280
(23)
6,739
(34)
3,417
(50)
22,118
(122)
HEW

195
(3)
561
(10)
200
(1),

1,489
(7)
5,395
(17)
7,840
(38)
NSF

114
(2)
212
(6)
152
(1)


5,020
(5)
5,498
(14)
NASA

156
(5)
741
(8)
563
(5)

384
(6)
1,761
(31)
3,605
(55)
DOI


811
(2)



1,196
(4)
2,007
(6)
EPA
40
(1)
911
(5)
254
(4)
42
(1)


226
(7)
1,473
(18)
Other
25
(3)
612
(10)
347
(9)

58
(2)
143
(3)
949
(ID
2,134
(38)
TOTAL
65
(4)
2,257**
(31)
3,318
(47)
978
(9)
11,338
(25)
8,755
(50)
17,964
(125)
44,675
(291)
 *Effective as of January, 1972

**Actual year-ending  FY1  72  =  2,746  (A.D.T.)

 Reference:   This  table was  received (July  28,  1972)  from Glenn  K.  Ellis,
 Technology Utilization Officer,  Science  Service Branch,  Office  of  Information
 Services, USAEC,  Washington,  D.C.
                                     -296-

-------
                                              TABLE II

                               NON'-AEC ENVIROMENTAL RESEARCH PROGRAMS
                                                 AT
                                         AEC INSTALLATIONS*
         FACILITY
         SPONSORING OR
  PARTICIPATING INSTITUTIONS
                                                                        RESEARCH ACTIVITIES
Ames Research Laboratory
City of Ames, Iowa
Iowa State Water Resources
   Research Institute
Iowa State University
National Science Foundation
                                                                  1)  Effects of Pesticides and
                                                                     Herbicides
                                                                  2)  Organic Impurities in City
                                                                     Water
Brookhaven National
   Laboratory-
New York University
New York Department of
   Conservation
City of Brookhaven
National Science Foundation
1) Ecology of a Salt Water Pond
2} Disposal of Solid Wastes from
   Sewage Systems
3) Dispersion of Pollen
Los Alamos Scientific
   Laboratory
Department of Transportation (DOT)
National Institute of Occupational
   Health and Safety
State of New Mexico:
   Environmental  Improvement
      Agency
   Health Department
1) SST Atmospheric Studies
2) Calibration of Equipment
J) Air Sampling
4) Voluntary services on
   Technical Advisory Committees
   on Air Pollution and Occupa-
   tional Health
Lawrence Radiation
   Laboratory - Berkeley
Bay.Area Air Pollution District
California Department of Public
   Health
National Science Foundation
California Air Resources Board
1) Environmental Instrumentation
   Studies
2) Aerosol Research Program
Lawrence Radiation
   Laboratory - Livermore
Bay Area Air Pollution Control
   District
National Science Foundation
1) Bay Area Atmospheric Modeling
   Study (pending)
Oak Ridge National
   Laboratory
National Science Foundation
Tennessee Valley Authority
State of Georgia
State of Tennessee
Southern Interstate Nuclear Board
1) Allen Steam Plant Trace
   Element Study
2) Clinch River Pollution Study
3) Strip Mining in Western
   Germany
4) Regional Non-Radioactive Waste
   Management Studies
5) NSF Regional Studies Program
6) Alternate Electrical Energy
   Systems Study
Savannah River
Atomic Energy Commission  - only
Atomic Energy Commission
   Health and Safety
   Laboratory
Atomic Energy Commission  - only
National Reactor Testing
   Station
State of  Idaho
Cleveland, Ohio
Ricks University
1) Idaho Atmospheric Studies
   Program
2) Activation Analyses of Mercury
   and Other Trace Elements in
   the Snake River
3) Activation Analyses of
   Cleveland, Ohio Air Pollutant
   Samples
Battelle-Northwest
   Laboratories
 Washington State  Parks  and
    Recreation  Commission
 Pacific  County Commissioners
 Grays  Harbor Regional Planning
    Commission
 Washington State  Department of
    Conservation
 State  of Oregon
 Washington State  Department of
    Water Resources
 New York Atomic and Space
    Development Authority
 City of  Cleveland, Ohio
 1) Long Beach Peninsula Shoreline
   Land-Use Study
 2) Shoreline Management Guide-
   lines Project
 3) Washington Regional Water
   Supply Study
 4) Oregon Ultimate Needs Study--
   Recreational Water Requirements
 5) Storm Water Extraction,  Storage
   and Redistribution Study
 6) Remote Sensing Systems  for
   Monitoring Surface Water
   Movement and Dispersion
 7) Cleveland Advanced Wastewater
   Treatment Plant Design Criteria
 8) Municipal Wastewater System
   Modeling Program  (Cleveland,
   Ohio)
                                                                     Ohio)

 •Source:   Telephone survey conducted  by  N.  Kostyk, Argonne National  Laboratory, August  1972.
                                             -297-

-------
                                              TABU: III

                              NON-NASA ENVIRONMENrAL RESIiARCH PROGRAMS
                                                 AT
                                         NASA INSTALIATIONS*
         FACILITY
         SPONSORING OR
  PARTICIPATING INSTITUTIONS
                                                                        RESEARCH ACTIVITIES
Ames Research Center
                              Department of Transportation
                              California State Air Resources
                                 Board
                              Bay Area Air Pollution Control
                                 District
                              National Science Foundation
                              Environmental Protection
                                 Agency
                              U.S. Coast Guard
                              Data Buoy Center
                                    1) Stratospheric Modeling
                                    2) Tropospheric Analysis
                                    3) Oil Slick Monitoring
                                    4) Chlorophyll Studies
                                    5) Sedimentation Monitoring
                                    6) Bay Area Atmospheric
                                       Modeling Study (pending)
Goddard Space Flight
   Center
Department of the Interior
Department of Agriculture
Environmental Protection Agency
Corps of Engineers
 1) Earth Resources Technology
    Satellite Program (ERTS)
Langlcy Research Center
Virginia Department of Highways
Virginia Institute of Marine
   Sciences
Old Dominion University
California Air Resources Board
Environmental Protection Agency
 1) James River and Mid-Atlantic
    Continental Shelf Water Circu-
    lation Measurements
 2) Bottom Current Measurement and
    Sedimentation Sampling
 3) Continental Shelf Wave Refrac-
    tion Model
 4) Estuarine Sedimentation and
    Circulation Monitoring
    Feasibility Study (ERTS)
 5) California Laser Air Pollution
    Monitoring Experiment
 6) Microwave Spectroscopic
    Detection of Trace Volatile
    Organics in the Marine
    Environment
 7) The Fate of Oil in l';stuaries
 8) Aerial Photographic Study of
    Wetlands Vegetation
Lewis Research Center
Cleveland Department of Air
   Pollution Control
Environmental Protection Agency
Department of Transportation
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
   Administration
New York University
 1) Trace Elements and Compounds
    in an Urban Atmosphere
 2) "GASP" Lower Stratosphere
    Impact Study
 3) Alternate Power Sources  for
    Motor Vehicles
Manned Spacecraft Center
Houston Mosquito Control
   Department
New Orleans Mosquito Control
   Department
Environmental Protection Agency  •
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Texas Air Pollution Control Board
Federal Center for Disease Control
Eighteen County Regional COG
University of Texas
U.S. Forest Service
  1) Remote Sensing Techniques for
    Regional Land-Use  Inventories
  2) Thermal Pollution  Study
  3) Skylab Land-Use Monitoring
    Study
  4) Sam Houston National  Forest
    Timber Resources Inventory
  5) Remote Sensing Technology
    Applied.to Public  Health
    Problems
  6) Houston Air Pollution
    Abatement
Mississippi Test Facility
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
   Administration
U.S. Geological Survey
Environmental Protection Agency
State of Louisiana
State of Arkansas
State of Mississippi
Gulf Universities Research
   Consort ium
Louisiana State University
Mississippi State University
! Each agency  represented at this
| facility sponsors, directs and
; conducts its own projects.  The
' list of activities in progress at
 MTF is too extensive for  inclusion
 here.  See NASA Information      .
 Research Applications Office, 1972
I
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
California Water Resources
   Control Board
San Diego County (IRUM)
Southern California Edison
  1) Water  Resources Data System
    Plan
  2) Coastal  Lagoon Modeling
    Feasibility Study
  3) Measurement of Air  Pollution
    Over Freeways
  4) Combustion Process  Studies
•Source:  Telephone survey conducted by N. Kostyk, Argonne National Laboratory, August 1972.
                                               -298-

-------
      A GENEALOGY OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE PROGRAMS AT ARCONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY SINCE  1967
  FIRST GENERATION
                              SECOND GENERATION
                                                             THIRD GENERATION
                                                                                          FOURTH GENERATION
GREAT LAKES
RESEARCH PROGRAM
(A EC)


GREAT LAKES
REVIEW
(EPA REGION V)
     NATURAL CO
 IN THE ATMOSPHERE
 	(EPA)	
   FLU1DIZED BED
COMBUSTION OF COAL
	   (EPA)
     HIGH ENERGY
  BATTERY  PROJECT
         (EPA)
                                                                                            DOCUMENT (EPA)
                                                                                            AIR POLLUTION-
                                                             AIR POLLUTION
                                AIR POLLUTION--
                                                              PHASE III (EPA)
 MODELING STUDY
                            AIR POLLUTION STUDY
                                                              AIRPORT STUDY
                                                             ENVIRONMENTAL
                                                               POLLUTANTS
                                                                 AND THE
                                                             URBAN ECONOMY
                                                                   (NSF)
 IMPLEMENTATION
       PLAN
EVALUATION STUDY
       (EPA)
AIR POLLUTION
     CHICAGO AIR
  POLLUTION SYSTEMS
  ANALYSIS  PROGRAM
(NAPCA-AEC-CH1CAGO)
 ILLINOIS STRIP MINED
  LAND RECLAMATION
      STUDY (IEQ)
      ILLINOIS
 IMPLEMENTATION
PLANNING PROGRAM
      (IE PA)
 NATIONAL EPISODE
 CONTROL CENTER
       (EPA)
ILLINOIS SOLID WASTE
TASK FORCE
(IEO)


ILLINOIS SOLID WASTE
PLANNING PROJECT
(IEO)
                               ENVIRONMENTAL
                             IMPACT OF GROUND
                              TRANSPORTATION
                                   SYSTEMS
                                 PHASE 1 (IEO)
                              ST. LOUIS COUNTY
                               AIR POLLUTION
                                   PROJECT
                                (ST. LOUIS CY)
                                                                 INDIANA AIR
                                                            POLLUTION PROJECT
                                                             (STATE OF INDIANA)
                              ENVIRONMENTAL
                             IMPACT OF GROUND
                              TRANSPORTATION
                                  SYSTEMS
                                PHASE II (IEO)
                           ALTERNATIVE ENERGY
                                SOURCES FOR
                              TRANSPORTATION
                                    (A EC)
                                                              NORTHEASTERN
                                                              ILLINOIS PUBLIC
                                                             TRANSPORTATION
                                                             PLANNING STUDY
                                                            (STATE OF ILLINOIS)

ILLINOIS WASTE WATER
MANAGEMENT PLANNING
PROGRAM (IEO)

».

ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN
PILOT PROJECT (IEO)


ENVIRONMENTAL
FACILITIES
CORPORATION
FEASIBILITY STUDY
      METROMEX
        (NOAA)
                                              Figure 1

                                                    -299-

-------
                                                                                        ARGONNE    NATIONAL    LABORATORY
                                                        FEDERAL, STATE  AND   LOCAL  ENVIRONMENTAL  POLICY   EVALUATION   RESEARCH   PROGRAM
                                                        UBK tsactcs
                                             - mmntunn u
- «i»i E naouu. ruanc COMQKP
- CMCACO «*t» TuimntTn met
"
-




-
riaaua. toon
UMOKITAL mucnoi ISL*
ttCOr z orra
orra or rcocuLicnvr
orra or funoun aw
omnoi or MmartLOCT
AIQBC CHtCT CtMBCOl
nrr
CT

ru
ict camoL rmcun


- riOCKAL «VUTd ACMHXTUTKM
-
utnoui. octuac ** ATvmic
.««»
                                                                       -UJ0q«TtiturvtT
                                                                                                                         I Tfd Or PLMMB MD MHLHO
                                                                                                                         . »»m or mm* *• BMIMJ
                                                                                                                         • MQJHI or «• KUJTIB conn.
                                                                                                                                                          OUMIKIT
                                                                                                                                                          ommcvT or i
                                                                                                                                                     -COB COVTT otmtrviT or
                                                                                                                                                     -n. LOUOOMtTT.
CO
o
o
 I
                                                    CtMTTB FW CNWtONICIfTAL STUOC5
                                                        SYSTEMS AJULYS13
                                                        DATA HAHACEMCNT
                                                        PKTSCAL AJO SOCIOCCONONK HOOCLIK
                                                        AM AND WATER QUALITY HOX1TOKMC
                                                        KOOtAU PLANMK AMD MANAGEMENT

                                                    CHERCAL EN6NCERIMC UD CHCMISTRY OTVtSOO
                                                        POUl^DN CONTWt TECWOLOCT
                                                        UfVIKOMIENTAL SAMfU ANALYSIS

                                                    BAOKX.OCICAL AND CNVROHHENTAL RfSCAXH DIVISION
                                                        ATMOSPICRIC SCIENCES
                                                        LIFE SCIENCES
                                                        UO-ECOLOCV
                                                                                                       tuncuncs nvtsm
                                                                                                     COMFUTl* SCIENCES
                                                                                                     *m.ico raoauHMiNC
                                                                                                 CtNTCR FW CDUUTCNAL AFFAIRS
                                                                                                     WHVERSITT UA1SON
              - rucui.
                  C
                  imu
                                     AIR no mra POUI/TK*
                                    cownrot
                                    - IIUOB Bvtt MSI PMJCCT
                                    - 011KB BUD fATTI ITUTT
Ttcmtouofr
MHO AS
-FU»«
-ffcaw
-nXBLAI
OCYfLOHW
VQMUITXIl
JtT WTTUHJ
BMCUAR
rgniruum
                                                                                                      Figure  2

-------
                       DISCUSSION OF THE PRESENTATION BY JAY NORCO
Question:  I'd be interested in how the
Center for Environmental Studies is or-
organized within ANL?  Are you a separate.
unit, or are you spread throughout the
laboratory?

Norco;  The Center is now a separate en-
tity, as are several other divisions in
the laboratory.  Although it is not form-
ally called a division, it is a separate
entity.  I might add, though, that the
organization within the Center is quite
flexible.  Below the director and assistant
director level, it is a highly project
oriented group.  We are not functionally
or immediately organized at this point,
although I think we are facing that be-
cause we're getting so large.

Question;  How many people are active in
the Center?
Norco:  Approximately 50.
40 are on the staff.
Of those, 35 or
Armstrong;  Do you think you will be called
on to give expert testimony in suits?  How
well will it be received for a government
agency to be giving expert testimony that
might be in conflict with a federal
regulation?

Norco;  The answer is that we have been
asked.  I have testified in several hear-
ings in support of the state's implemen-
tation plan.  We have not been involved
in any legal action.  I don't know what
would happen in that case, but I think we
are willing to try it out.  I would also
remind you that we are not federal em-
ployees at Argonne.

Question;  Will the public accept your
testimony as objective in the light of
the credibility gap associated with the
AEC?

Norco;  In the case of air pollution it
hasn't been a problem.  We really haven't
been questioned about our association with
Argonne or the AEC.  We do have programs
in thermal discharges, waste heat dis-
charges, and that has been a problem.  We
think that we are objective.  Unfortunately
I think it's the feeling of our thermal
discharge people that it may not be as
big a problem, really, as some people say
it is.  It's awfully difficult to get the
public to believe that.
                   Question;  Was  your  last  comment  that
                   thermal  pollution is not  a problem?

                   Norco;   We are  looking at thermal discharges
                   in the Great  Lakes.   People on our staff
                   feel that if  there was as much attention  paid
                   to sewage treatment  as there is to waste
                   heat discharges,  we'd be  better off.

                   Comment; I  think you are overstepping
                   your bounds  to  make  a statement like  that.
                   Is that  an official  AEC position ?

                   Norco:   No sir.'
                                          -301-

-------
                       CITIES, STATES, AND NATIONAL LABORATORIES
                       - AN ACCOUNT OF PRODUCTIVE INTERACTION -
                                     N. L. Kostyk
                           Center for Environmental Studies
                              Argonne National Laboratory
                                9700 South Cass Avenue
                               Argonne, Illinois  60439
                                       ABSTRACT

     The manpower and facilities of most of the AEC and NASA laboratories have been
placed at the disposal of state and local governments in joint efforts to resolve
environmental degradation and resource management problems.  Air and water quality,
land use, public health, solid waste management, and natural disasters are only a
few of the categories being researched.  Where programmatic and financial constraints
are not in the forefront, maximum use of these laboratories by all levels of govern-
ment has been encouraged and has produced gratifying results.
INTRODUCTION

     A survey in August, 1972, of the AEC
and NASA laboratories yielded descriptions
of significant cooperative activities with
state and local governments in the field
of environmental protection.  The inquiry
consisted of questions concerning the
nature and extent of the programs, names
of the participating agencies, manpower
and funding levels, if available, and prob-
lem areas, if any.  Many of the programs
are elaborate, requiring extensive utili-
zation of manpower, funding, and physical
facilities.  Some are simple, such as
participation on pollution control boards
and other similar voluntary services.
Either way, the associations are fruitful,
as will be seen in this review which begins
with a discussion of the AEC laboratories.

AEROJET NUCLEAR COMPANY -
 IDAHO FALLS, IDAHO

     The health physics laboratory of this
organization conducts studies of atmos-
pheric and upper atmospheric weather pass-
ing over the site and provides the data
resulting from these studies to the State
of Idaho.  Contractual arrangements for
this program were not disclosed.

     Neutron activation analysis techniques
have been used in a number of joint activi-
ties.  One of these, a project of several
years duration and involving four or five
professors from Ricks University, consists
of identifying trace elements in the upper
Snake River.  Funding for the program is
estimated to be $30,000 to $50,000. Another
activation analysis study, sponsored by the
State of Idaho Department of Public Health,
involves identifying the amount of mercury
in the Snake River and its tributaries.
This program is costing $80,000.  Under a
contract with the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration, activation analysis
techniques were employed to identify par-
ticulate matter in the air of the City of
Cleveland, Ohio.  The estimated cost of
this program was $10,000 to $20,000.

       Relationships with other agencies
were said to be good, but the lack of
funding was cited as a problem.

AMES RESEARCH LABORATORY -
 AMES, IOWA

       Since 1969 the Ames Research Labo-
ratory has been cooperating with Iowa
State University in a continuing program
of analysis of pesticides and herbicides.
Funding for the program, supporting be-
tween one and two manyear periods of
effort, has come partially from the Uni-
versity  and partially from various
professors' projects on a fee basis.

       The water of the City of Ames was,
for thirty or forty years, reputed to have
a slightly "off" odor and flavor during
certain periods of the year.  In an at-
tempt to alleviate this problem, Ames
Research Laboratory initiated a project
to determine the amount of organic impuri-
ties in the city water.  The City of Ames
contributed $10,000 in the early stages
of the program; this was followed by a
grant of approximately $18,000 from the
Iowa State Water Resources Research Insti-
tute.  On July 1, 1972, a National Science
Foundation grant of $140,000 was received
for continuation of the research.
                                          -302-

-------
The Region V office of the federal EPA
was also cited as having an interest in
the program and as having requested
assistance from Ames Laboratory, although
specifics were not named nor was mention
made of funding.

     Relationships with all agencies are
said to be cordial.

ARQONNEi NATIONAL LABORATORY -
 ARGONNE, ILLINOIS

     Argonne's numerous programs in envi-
ronmental studies began in 1967 when its
staff and facilities joined forces with
those of the National Air Pollution Con-
trol Administration (now the Office of
Air Programs, EPA) and the City of
Chicago Department of Air Pollution Con-
trol (now the Department of Environmental
Control) in a multifaceted project known
as the Chicago Air Pollution Systems
Analysis Program.  Funding had exceeded
the $500,000 level at the end of this
three-year study.

     Under the sponsorship of the Illi-
nois Institute for Environmental Quality
(Institute), Argonne has assisted in the
development of an air pollution implemen-
tation plan for the Chicago region.  The
State's funding commitment to this effort
was $203,000.

     The Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency and the Institute provided the fi-
nancial support  ($157,000 and $23,000,
respectively) for development by Argonne
of a statewide air pollution implementa-
tion plan which was submitted to the
federal EPA.

     A program to assess the total envi-
ronmental impact of ground transportation
systems has been under way at Argonne
since March, 1971, under Institute auspices.
This project will continue through Septem-
ber, 1973, with financing in the amount of
$247,600.

     Concurrent with an FAA-sponsored
program to determine the effects of air-
port operations  on air quality, the
Institute has sponsored a related study
at O'Hare International Airport.  The
results of this  $20,000 program and those
of the FAA study will be used by the
State to evaluate sites for proposed
airport  facilities.
     Late in 1971 the Institute requested
Argonne to develop a work program for
water quality management planning in
Illinois.  Following that study, Argonne
was asked to prepare a pilot water quali-
ty basin plan for Illinois and to examine
alternative institutional mechanisms for
administering the implementation of
wastewater treatment plans.  The State
provided $240,000 for these programs.

     Unreclaimed strip mine land is not
likely to remain so in Illinois if the
results of a series of demonstration
projects being developed by Argonne are
ultimately applied to the vast acreage
awaiting attention throughout the State.
Again, the Institute is the sponsor of
this $196,000 program.

     Argonne is assisting the Institute
in development of a solid waste manage-
ment program for the State of Illinois,
at a funding level of $64,000.  The State
has also provided $27,500 for Argonne's
efforts in evaluating the role of a pub-
lic transportation authority in north-
eastern Illinois.

     The Cook County Department of Envi-
ronmental Control sponsored a 12-month
program wherein Argonne provided techni-
cal assistance and consultation services
in order to make Cook County's air re-
source management plan compatible with
those of the Chicago region and the State
of Illinois.  The cost of this program
was $15,400.

     Other technical consultation servi-
ces provided by Argonne have included
development of an air pollution episode
control heating plan (sponsor - Illinois
EPA); computer testing of air pollution
implementation plans for northwestern
Indiana  (sponsor - Battelle) and the
metropolitan St. Louis region (sponsor -
St. Louis County); and technical liaison
and preparation of graphic materials for
an Institute-sponsored conference on
environmental quality.

BATTELLE-PACIFIC NORTHWEST LABORATORY -
 HIGHLAND, WASHINGTON

     This not-for-profit contract research
organization has conducted a number of
projects of both long and short duration
under the auspices of state and local
governments.  Because of the proprietary
                                          -303-

-------
nature of the research, manpower and
funding levels were not disclosed.  A
description of Battelle's environmental
quality assistance programs was provided
in a letter dated August 28, 1972, from
W. H. Swift, Associate Manager, Water and
Land Resources Department, and is copied
below in its entirety:

    "In a program conducted for the Wash-
ington State Parks and Recreation Commis-
sion and the Pacific County Commissioners,
Battelle evaluated the future of the Long
Beach Peninsula seashore.  The program was
specifically addressed to the seashore
benefits and uses of accreted lands.  Phy-
sical benefits, ecological benefits, and
aesthetic benefits were coupled with the
economic aspects to develop a thorough
understanding of a wide variety of land
use alternatives.  Recommendations were
presented relative to economic develop-
ment with preservation of the environmen-
tal amenities.

    "In a somewhat similar program for the
Grays Harbor Regional Planning Commission,
Aberdeen, Washington, Battelle-Northwest
developed a system of "Shoreline Manage-
ment Guidelines," taking into account
physiographic units; ecological considera-
tions; geophysics and hydrology; and vari-
ous land use activities, including recrea-
tion, residential, port- and water-related
industry, and transportation utilities.
The environmental aesthetic considerations
entered strongly into development of the
Guidelines.

    "A regional water supply study for the
Grays Harbor area was prepared for the
Department of Conservation of the State of
Washington.  In addition to providing a
comprehensive water resources analysis
covering climate, river basin characteris-
tics, surface water quality and ground-
water availability, the program reviewed
water conservation in the pulp and paper
industry and others; e.g., municipal
supply and industrial water reuse.  Water
resource development was evaluated and
compared to economic analysis of existing
and projected water uses: population
trends, transportation systems avail-
ability, industrial siting, and agricul-
tural needs.  The work was summarized
with a presentation of a number of courses
of action with discussion of their econom-
ic and environmental consequences.
    "As part of the State of Oregon Ulti-
mate Needs Study, estimates of recreation-
al water requirements were prepared.  As
part of this program, new techniques were
developed for estimation of water-related
recreational demands.

    "In meteorological work for the Depart-
ment of Water Resources of the State of
Washington, Battelle conducted a compre-
hensive study of the potential for extract-
ing and redistributing precipitable water
obtained in those storm systems that sweep
eastward across the Pacific Northwest.
Particular emphasis was placed upon deter-
mining the feasibility of increasing pre-
cipitation on the eastern side of the
Cascade mountain range, with concomitant
snowpack storage of water.

    "Acquisition of surface water movement
and dispersion data is an essential step
in providing the necessary input for fore-
casting the effects of deliberate modifica-
tions to the environment.  In this connec-
tion, Battelle-Northwest has developed
highly sensitive remote sensing instrumen-
tation capable of surveying large water
bodies for determining temperature (sensi-
tivity of 0.1°C) and detection of delib-
erately introduced fluorescent tracing
dyes (sensitivity of <1.0 ppb).  In the
latter case, the remote scanning instru-
mentation allows simultaneous determina-
tion of water transport and diffusion over
large areas and for extended periods of
time.  This work has been done for a
variety of sponsors including the New York
Atomic and Space Development Authority.

    "Battelle-Northwest has developed a
process for treating raw sewage by physi-
cal-chemical means and has provided the
design criteria for the world's largest
advanced wastewater treatment plant
(50,000,000 gpd) to be constructed for the
Westerly District of the City of Cleveland.

    "Battelle-Northwest has recently com-
pleted a program calling for the develop-
ment of hydraulic, water quality and
optimization models for wastewater manage-
ment.  The objective of this program was
the development of an analytical tool
(model) which will permit the design and
control of a practical and efficient
wastewater management system for the
City of Cleveland's Southerly Sewerage
District."
                                         -304-

-------
BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY -
 UPTON, L. I., NEW YOW

     Brookhaven (BNL), in collaboration
with the State University of New York at
Stony Brook and the New York State Depart-
ment of Conservation, is conducting a
long-term ecology study of the Flax Pond,
a state-owned salt water pond on the
north shore of Long Island.  Although
most of the funding ($210,000 for the
first two years) for this project comes
from the National Science Foundation, use
of the pond itself and of the adjacent
laboratory facilities of the University
and the Conservation Department were
cited as indispensable to the success of
the study.

     For more than five years the State
of New York has been sponsoring a study
of the dispersion of pollen.  Brook-
haven's initial activity in the project
consisted of field work only, with analy-
sis being conducted by the New York State
Museum of Science at Albany.  BNL's later
efforts involved intensive development of
specialized collection and analytical
instrumentation.  Funding for the program
has been about $120,000 per year and will
terminate in September, 1973.  Brookhaven
has proposed that the federal EPA sponsor
a continuing and expanded version of this
study.

     A third program, which began early
in 1972 under the sponsorship of the
Town of Brookhaven, is a feasibility
study of a system for the treatment of
sewage effluent which will allow its
recharge to the ground as potable water.
Funding projections for the first three
years of the program are $145,000;
$65,000 and $75,000, respectively.


HEALTH AND SAFETY LABORATORY -
 NEW YORK, NEW YORK

     This laboratory adheres to the pro-
grammati<~ activities prescribed by, and
receive.' all its funding from, the parent
agency.  While it does not cooperate in
specif  : environmental protection pro-
grams with state or local agencies, it
does cooperate with other agencies when
there is the potential of mutually bene-
ficial interaction.
LAWRENCE BERKELEY LABORATORY -
 BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA'

     Under the auspices of the Lawrence
Berkeley Laboratory Energy-Environment
Program, several environmental projects
have been in progress since 1971 for
federal, state and local sponsors.  On
the local level, the laboratory has been
working with the Bay Area Air Pollution
Control District in a program for the
design of and familiarization with instru-
mentation that might be useful to the
environmental protection agencies.  Al-
though there is no active measurement pro-
gram under way, there is close rapport and
a good exchange of information with the
local agencies.  While the exact level of
funding was not disclosed, it was stated
that all support for the program has come
from internal laboratory coffers.

     An extensive survey of environmental
instrumentation is in progress at LBL
under the sponsorship of the National
Science Foundation.  NSF is not the sole
beneficiary of this program, however, as
the Bay Area Air Pollution Control Dis-
trict and the State of California Depart-
ment of Public Health have assumed active
roles and there has been a lively exchange
of information.

     A study of atmospheric aerosols is
currently under way at LBL.  In this pro-
gram the Laboratory is working closely
with the state Department of Public Health,
although funding derives from the Califor-
nia Air Resources Board through a special
act of the state legislature.

     Another area of cooperative endeavors
is that of geothermal energy resource
development, with active participation by
the laboratory and the University of Cali-
fornia at Berkeley.  The University has a
long history of research in this field
under state auspices, but the preponder-
ance of funds for the program, including
those for the laboratory's efforts, come
from federal sources.

     The only weakness cited was that,
despite the interest of the state and
local agencies, the financial resources
are not available to carry the programs
forward as readily as would be desired.
                                         -305-

-------
LAWRENCE LIVERMORE LABORATORY -
 LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

     The Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
(LLL) has had continuing efforts relating
to ecological effects of natural and man-
made radioactivity.  Such studies have
included development of computer models
to predict the atmospheric transport dif-
fusion, and deposition of radioactivity,
the development of associated measurement
systems, and studies of the biological
effects of radioactivity.

     In the late 1960's, LLL researchers
under AEC auspices tested the feasibility
of applying this expertise to pollution
problems on a local level.  These efforts
included measurements of trace element
concentrations in the air above San
Francisco Bay, development of a method to
determine the source and characterization
of non-automotive lead in the air, studies
of the ecological and biological effects
of releases from the Humboldt Bay Reactor,
and development of computer models to
simulate air pollution phenomena.

     Presently, LLL is conducting a varie-
ty of research activities of interest to,
and under sponsorship of, the State of
California and various federal agencies.
Under the Department of Transportation's
Climatic Impact Assessment Program,
Laboratory scientists are developing
numerical models of atmospheric processes
as an aid to understanding the impact on
global climate caused by aircraft exhaust
in the stratosphere.  This 2-1/2 year
program is funded at over $1,000,000.

     The National Science Foundation has
recently funded a joint project whereby
LLL, the NASA-Ames Research Center, and
the Bay Area Air Pollution Control Dis-
trict will develop and verify a numerical
model for conventional and photochemical
air pollution in the San Francisco Bay
Area.  The model will include meteorologi-
cal and topographical data and will be a
useful tool in evaluating land use plans,
studying consistency of local air quality
with air standards, and assessing the
effect of various postulated emission
control standards.  Funding for the two-
year project totals $657,000.*

     Under a $51,300, one-year contract
with the California Air Resources Board,
LLL is designing, constructing, and ex-
perimentally evaluating an x-ray
fluorescence system for rapidly determin-
ing the elemental composition of samples
of airborne particulate matter.

     The Laboratory is also developing an
instrument to observe the presence and
variation in concentration of low quanti-
tative levels of formaldehyde gas by moni-
toring a selected absorption line of the
microwave rotational spectrum.  The one-
year project is funded jointly by EPA and
NASA to a total amount of $97,000.

     In collaboration with the Spokane
Mining Research Center of the Bureau of
Mines, LLL is evaluating materials for
suitability for use in sealing uranium
mines against entry of radon into the
atmosphere.  Initial funding from the
Bureau of Mines is $24,500.

     A one-year, $20,000 project, spon-
sored by the California Air Resources
Board involves the measurement, using neu-
tron activation analysis, of the abundance
of selected trace elements from particu-
late matter collected on filters and
impactor foils by state personnel.

     LLL has been asked by the National
Institute of Occupational Safety and
Health to design, fabricate, calibrate,
test and install four different gas and
vapor respirator cartridge and canister
testing apparatus.  Funding for the
seven-month project will be $75,000.

     Under sponsorship of the AEC's Divi-
sion of Applied Technology, LLL is au-
thorized to conduct feasibility studies
of selected radiation applications to
environmental problems.  The first such
project, currently under way, involves a
technique which may be useful in measuring
asbestos from air filters.

     In addition to these projects, the
Laboratory is conducting research spon-
sored by the Federal Aviation Administra-
tion and Department of Defense relating to
clandestine explosives.  LLL also aids
local law enforcement agencies in solving
problems of interest to them.
    *Here it should be pointed out that,
with the exception of funds for minor
hardware, possibly for computer time, and
for "R § D," salaries for NASA staff and
support personnel always come from the
parent agency.
                                          -306-

-------
LOS ALANDS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY -
 LOS ALAMOS, NEW
     While the Los Alamos Laboratory does
not engage in cooperative environmental
protection activities in the strict sense,
certain benefits do accrue to state and
federal environmental protection organi-
zations through the dissemination of
information, through voluntary advisory
services of Los Alamos personnel and
through reimbursable agreements.
Specifically:

     The results of a continuing pluto-
nium-radioecology study are made avail-
able to state and federal agencies that
are compiling lists of biotic materials.
Data derived from air and water analyses
are made available to interested agencies.
The staff of the laboratory serve on the
state Technical Advisory Committee on Air
Pollution, the state Technical Advisory
Committee on Industrial Hygiene and Occu-
pational Health, and serve in an advisory
capacity on the National Institute on
Occupational Safety and Health.  The
laboratory also advises the state Health
Department and the state Environmental
Improvement Agency on such matters as
calibration of equipment, air sampling,
and filtration measurement.  It also con-
ducts a high altitude air sampling study
in support of the federal Department of
Transportation's supersonic transport
program.
 OAK RIDGE, TENNES

     The Oak Ridge National Laboratory has
an extensive history of service in support
of state and local governments in such
broad areas as health care, crime control,
energy, transportation, and environmental
protection.  Some highlights:

     Neutron activation analysis tech-
niques have been employed in crime studies.
Analytical data on marijuana smoke have
been made available to agencies requiring
such information.  Under the sponsorship
of the National Science Foundation, a con-
siderable effort has been devoted to the
study of alternate methods of developing
electrical energy systems, including the
total societal costs of the energy cycle
from mining to consumption and the con-
comitant environmental impacts.  Another
NSF- sponsored study of the effects of
strip mining, and particularly a report on
strip mining in West Germany, has been  of
value to many states.   In collaboration
with the Tennessee Valley Authority, Oak
Ridge is conducting a study of the  trace
element balance around  the Allen Steam
plant which is expected to produce  results
that will benefit the states.  And, as  a
matter of course, state and local authorir
ties are provided information concerning
the transportation, of spent nuclear fuel
and waste casks.

      In the field of pollution control,
the Clinch River Study  established  the
precedent for Oak Ridge National Labora-
tory's joint efforts with other federal
and state agencies.  This was a five-year
study of the transport  and fate of  low
concentrations of radionuclides released
to the Clinch River from the laboratory
and involved the participation of four
federal agencies (Atomic Energy Commis-
sion, Tennessee Valley Authority, U.S.
Geological Survey, and U.S. Public Health
Service) and three state agencies (Tennes-
see's Department of Health and Game, Fish
Commission, and Pollution Control Board).

      Again under the sponsorship of the
National Science Foundation, a feasibility
study of a regional non-radioactive waste
management system for a 29-county region
in Tennessee and Georgia was conducted.
Agencies participating in this program  in
addition to Oak Ridge National Laboratory
were the TVA, the University of Tennessee,
the States of Georgia and Tennessee, local
governments in the affected region, the
East Tennessee Development District, and
the Southeast Tennessee Development Dis-
trict (including the Georgia-Tennessee
Regional Health Commission).   Lack of
financial support was cited here for the
delay in implementation of the plan.

      Another program at Oak Ridge, spon-
sored by the NSF, is the Regional Environ-
mental Systems Analysis, the purpose of
which is to develop and transmit to the
planning community a scientific method  for
forecasting the environmental impacts of
public and private decisions in such areas
as the selection of lands for airports  or
industrial sites.  State and local govern-
ments have participated actively in this
proj ect.

      Staff of the laboratory serve on  the
Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board and
its Technical Advisory  Committee, offering
recommendations on stack emission
                                          -307-

-------
regulations, air quality standards, etc.
It is doubtful that any direct funding
for such services is received from state
and local governments.  The work with the
Air Pollution Control Board is done be-
cause of Oak Ridge's interest; perhaps
one to two man months per year have been
spent in this particular effort, possibly
for two years.

     The laboratory also cooperates with
the Southern Interstate Nuclear Board
(a 15-state governors board) in the devel-
opment of state and regional nuclear power
policies, and serves as a resource base
for the Southern Growth Policies Board to
help ensure sustained environmental
quality with economic development.

     Oak Ridge National Laboratory oper-
ates an environmental information system
center, data from which are available to
any individual requesting them.  The labora-
tory also conducts a continuing program of
environmental information transfer,
through Workshops and meetings, to respon-
sible city and county officials.  It has
advised the State of New Jersey on energy
utilization and has provided consultation
services to the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico on matters of water quality, land
guidance, and solid waste management.

     The paucity of funding was cited as
a problem.

SAVANNAH RIVER LABORATORY -
 AIKEN, SOUTH C
                                               be observed, therefore, that in the major-
                                               ity of cooperative programs, almost all
                                               of the funding for NASA's participation
                                               comes from NASA itself.  On with the
                                               review.

                                               AMES RESEARCH CENTER -
     The Savannah River Laboratory is not
a national laboratory in the same sense
that Argonne and Oak Ridge, for example,
are national laboratories.  All program-
matic direction and funding come from the
AEC Division of Production.  No coopera-
tive environmental protection activities
per se_ are under way, although there is
a strong element of interaction with the
university community.

     Thus concludes the discussion of the
AEC laboratories.  Before proceeding with
an examination of the interagency activi-
ties of the NASA laboratories, it is
worthwhile to note again that, by law,
all salaries of NASA staff and support
personnel must come from the parent agency.
Transfers of funds to NASA from other agen-
cies are permissible, however, for the
purchase of hardware, computer time, and
"research and development" costs.  It will
 MDFFET FIELD, CALIFORNIA

     The State of California is probably
the major beneficiary of the Ames Re-
search Center's environmental protection
activities.  Work is in progress with the
state forestry representatives toward the
development of an imagery system that
would be useful in combating forest fires.
Ames has already provided imagery assist-
ance to the State during the Big Sur fire
and the recent flooding in California.
None of these activities have been con-
tractually formalized; mutuality of
interests provided sufficient impetus to
undertake the effort.

     A stratospheric modeling program is
under way at Ames, with some funding pro-
vided by the federal Department of Trans-
portation's Climate Impact Assessment
Program.  A tropospheric analysis program
is being conducted in collaboration  with
the State of California Air Resources
Board.  And, as mentioned previously,
Ames is cooperating with the Lawrence
Livermpre Laboratory and the Bay Area Air
Pollution Control District in the develop-
ment of a Bay Area atmospheric dispersion
model.

     Water resource management programs
at Ames include oil slick monitoring,
chlorophyll studies and sedimentation
monitoring, with some funding provided by
the federal Environmental Protection
Agency, the U.S. Coast Guard and the Data
Buoy Center.

     The usual problems of funding, reor-
ganizations , and lack of personnel have
served to keep activity down.  Also, an
apparent rule about not "going operation-
al" has hampered efforts somewhat; feasi-
bility and workability can be demonstra-
ted, but after that, someone else must
carry a project forward.
                                          -308-

-------
GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER -
 GREENBELT, MARYLAND

     The Earth Resources Technology
Satellite (ERTS) program is the environ-
mental protection program at the Goddard
Space Flight Center, where an Operations
Center controls the orbiting observatory
that was launched from California in
July, 1972, and where a data processing
facility collects information and for-
wards it to the Department of Interior's
Earth Resources Observation Systems
(ERQS) data center in Sioux Falls, South
Dakota.  From thence, the data is avail-
able to anyone requesting it.  Other agen-
cies participating in the ERTS program
(in which, incidentally, almost every NASA
laboratory is taking an active role) are
the Department of Commerce (National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration),
the Department of Agriculture, and the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, to name
only a few.  The benefits of the ERTS
program will, in the long run, accrue to
any government or private agency respon-
sible for resource management.

JET PROPULSION LABORATORY -
 PASADENA, CALIFORNIA'

  •  The Jet Propulsion Laboratory—a
Division of the California Institute of
Technology—is operated on a task order
contract from NASA.  In contrast to the
NASA laboratories, JPL must receive full-
support funding from non-NASA sponsors,
since all salaries, as well as R§D funds,
are associated with assigned tasks.  For
several years a Program Office at JPL has
developed and managed programs on behalf
of local, state, and federal sponsors.
The Program Office is concerned with acti-
vities in medical engineering and health
care delivery, public safety and law en-
forcement, transportation, and environ-
mental systems.  Environmental programs
include development of a data system plan
for the California State Water Resources
Control Board.  Half of the financial
support for this program was received
from the NASA Technology Applications
Office, the other half from the State.

     The Integrated Regional Environmental
Management Project  (IREM) of San Diego
County sponsored a six-man month feasibil-
ity study at JPL of coastal lagoon model-
ing so that effects of land use on water
quality could be understood.
     In what was a testing program of a
NASA-developed instrument, JPL collected
data on air pollution constituents over
California freeways.  And, lastly, JPL
has conducted combustion research on
behalf of the Southern California Edison
utility.  The utility provided a man year
of support for this program.

     Problems at the local level include
the often-heard lack of money and the
inability to understand and be willing to
pay for systems approaches and project
management activities.

     In response to a question about fi-
nancial resources, it was stated that'JPL
has a director's discretionary fund (size
not known) to initially support primarily
scientific activities which show promise
but which have no sponsor.

LANGLEY RESEARCH CENTER -
 HAMPTON, VIRGINIA

     At the time of this survey, eight on-
going projects were described, although
the commentator stated that the list could
be doubled or even tripled six months
hence.  A number of proposals, particu-
larly concerning air quality, had reached
the stage of negotiation where preliminary
drafts of agreements were awaiting accept-
ance and finalization.  Five of the cur-
rent projects involve cooperative efforts
with the Virginia Institute of Marine
Science.*

     In a program of water circulation
measurements, Langley Center, Wallops Sta-
tion, and VTMS are using NASA-developed
small drogue buoys to measure water cir-
culation patterns in the James River and
the mid-Atlantic continental shelf.  They
are also using a NASA-developed water
sampler to analyze the effects of Hurri-
cane Agnes.   Funding for this two-year
project that began in January 1972, is as
follows:
    *The Virginia Institute of Marine Sci-
ence is a state agency that began as part
of the Virginia Fisheries Institute.  Then
it became part of the College of William
and Mary and was an extension for graduate
work in oceanography.  Its name and char-
ter were later changed so that it is the
agency now responsible for advising the
legislature on marine matters in addition
to being an educational institution.
                                          -309-

-------
$ 30,000 - NASA Office of Applications
 100,000 - NASA Office of University
            Affairs
  10,000 - Virginia Department of Highways

Funding prospects for future work on this
project were unclear, and there was an
expression of some uncertainty on publica-
tion rights.

     In a project called "Wave Environment
Studies," the Langley Center and VIMS are
making use of NASA's computer and storage
capability for the development of a wave
refraction model for the mid-Atlantic con-
tinental shelf, and parametric calcula-
tions of wave conditions over the shelf
region.  $30,000 was received from the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis-
tration for this one-year, renewable
project which began in January, 1972.
Future funding prospects are unclear;
joint proposals are likely to be submitted
to other potential sponsors.

     NASA-developed microwave spectroscopy
techniques are being used to sense trace
volatile organics in the marine environ-
ment in a two-year program that began in
January, 1972.  The National Science Foun-
dation provided $20,000, and $2,000 of
NASA monies are also supporting the
program.

     The fate of oil in the marine envi-
ronment is being examined through the use
of a NASA-developed gas chromatograph and
mass spectrometer computerized system.
All financial support thus far for this
project, which began in Januarys 1972, has
come from the Langley Research Center dis-
cretionary fund, in the amount of $65,000.
(A joint proposal for the program had been
submitted to the federal Environmental
Protection Agency at a time when EPA had
plans of funding similar studies in three
different geographical areas.  Only one
area was ultimately chosen, however, that
being the Gulf of Mexico with the research
to be performed by the University of
Mississippi.  Nevertheless, EPA did re-
quest that Langley and VIMS prepare the
system and hardware for their area.  It
would seem, therefore, that there is the
prospect of future funding from this
sister federal agency.)

     To a cooperative program of develop-
ment of nested aerial photographic tech-
niques for formulation of texture signa-
tures for identification of wetlands
vegetation, NASA has provided $20,000 of
support; VIMS and the National Science
Foundation have also provided a total of
$30,000.

     Two of the Langley Center's environ-
mental studies programs involve the col-
laboration of Old Dominion University.
A water circulation measurements project
includes the use of NASA-developed small
drogue buoys to measure bottom currents
and of a NASA-developed water sampler to
measure sedimentation caused by Hurricane
Agnes in the Chesapeake Bay.  $5,000 of
NASA monies have supported this program
which began in June, 1972.

     The Center and the University are
also engaged in the assessment of the
applicability of ERTS-A remote sensing
data to the monitoring of estuarine sedi-
mentation and circulation patterns.  This
two-year project began in July, 1972, and
is funded in its entirety by NASA -
$200,000.

     A $21,000 contribution from the NASA
Office of Technology Utilization has
enabled the Langley Center to assist the
California Air Resources Board, using
NASA laser radar, in the measurement of
atmospheric pollution in the Los Angeles
area.  The total financial commitment of
the California Air Resources Board to
this project was $2.2 million.

LEWIS RESEARCH CENTER -
 CLEVELAND, OHIO

     The Lewis Research Center  is assist-
 ing the City of Cleveland Department of
 Air Pollution Control in its air resource
 management program.  The major  emphasis
 of the project is an attempt to under-
 stand the trace element and compound pol-
 lutant sets in this urban center.  Being
 studied are some fifty-five trace ele-
 ments and other compounds in the particu-
 late material, through the use  of a 21-
 station sampling network and an instru-
 mented aircraft.  Similar measurements
 are being made at the Cleveland airport
 in an effort to assess the impact of air-
 craft on the environment.

     Wind tunnel experiments will con-
 tribute to a diffusion model which will
 assist in the data analysis.  New York
 University (under a NASA research grant)
 is building a physical model of the
 Cuyahoga River valley, which is
                                         -310-

-------
approximately 600 feet below the flood
plain and where most heavy industry is
located.  The model, or parts of it, will
be tested in the wind tunnel with appro-
criate source simulation.

     Local schools collaborate in the
effort; students are interested in the
program and assist in tabulating results
and reducing data.  There are also work-
study programs wherein, at the end of the
semester, the students spend time at the
Center.

     The program is about 1-1/2 years
old, with a total expenditure thus far
of $200,000, and all monies have been
provided by NASA.  Approximately eight
man years, including professional and
nonprofessional effort, are allocated to
the project.  The cost of the R § D por-
tion of the program is $120,000 and is
expected to remain the same next year.
Salaries and overhead come from another
NASA source.  Although the City of
Cleveland provides no direct financial
support, it does provide manpower for
the collection of samples.

     Starting this year there is to be an
interagency transfer of funds to NASA
from the EPA Advanced Automotive Propul-
sion Program (Ann Arbor, Michigan) for
research into alternate sources of power
for vehicular movement.  The monies,
again, will be strictly for R Ł D; the
salaries will come from NASA.

     In the Global Atmospheric Sampling
Program (GASP), the Lewis Research Center
is conducting a study of aeronautical
impact  (lower stratosphere) on the globe.
The federal Department of Transportation
and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration are also active in the
program.

     Other environmental protection acti-
vities  include the teaching of an in-house,
graduate-level course on pollution.

     One program with the State of Ohio
was cited wherein the Center, in coopera-
tion with the State Department of Agricul-
ture,  is studying strip mining operations
through the medium of infrared photog-
raphy.
MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER -
 HOUSTON, TEXAS

     The objective of the Manned Space-
craft Center's cooperative programs is
to demonstrate how the application of
remote sensing technology can assist in
the solution of resource management and
public health problems.  The Science and
Applications Directorate has programs in
the area of physical and natural sciences.
In the area of resource management, a
general inventory of land use within an
18-county region was conducted and twenty
major categories of land use were classi-
fied.  This project, which involved the
close cooperation of the Council of Gov-
ernments in the region, ran for about a
year (1971), required about 6 man years
of effort and the expenditure of $60,000
for publications, and was funded com-
pletely in-house.

     Another land use program includes
the development of a data base for com-
paring ERTS satellite data and Skylab
data with the data derived from aircraft.
The ultimate purpose is to develop sys-
tems for monitoring changes in land use.
In a cooperative effort with the U.S.
Forest Service, an inventory is being
made of timber resources in the Sam
Houston National Forest to aid in timber
management.  NASA is funding both pro-
grams, and the Forest Service has staff
located in Houston to participate in this
activity.

     The Center has also assisted the
federal Environmental Protection Agency
in a thermal study of a gas-fired plant.
NASA's efforts in this project were ter-
minated when the plant built a cooling
pond in compliance with an EPA directive.
There were no contractual arrangements
for this joint program.

     On two different occasions the U.S.
Department of Agriculture has had repre-
sentatives located at the Center for work
on the programs of their parent agency.
This provision of manpower constituted
the support for the joint programs.

     Two years ago the Life Sciences Direc-
torate at the Manned Spacecraft Center con-
ducted a feasibility study of how public
health problems could be investigated
and solved through the use of remote sens-
ing technology.  At the time of this
review, the Directorate had twelve
                                          -311-

-------
personnel.  The Directorate is working
with the City of Houston Mosquito Control
District on a study of a mosquito that
carries the encephalitis virus, and with
the New Orleans Mosquito Control District
using false-color-enhanced, multi-band
photography on different plant communi-
ties in mosquito breeding areas.

     An anthrax ecology study is under
way in cooperation with the National
Center for Disease Control.  A remote
sensing aircraft mission produced an
infrared mosaic of the entire epidemic
area (Ascension Parish, Louisiana).  NASA
has spent $50-75 thousand on this study.

     Air pollution and water degradation
problems are studied in conjunction with
the Texas Air Pollution Control Board,
the City of Houston, and the University
of Texas School of Publich Health.

     An intergovernmental treaty between
the United States and Mexico was recently
signed for a program to control screw worm
infestations using irradiated males.  The
Directorate is participating in this
program.

     All projects of the Life Sciences
Directorate are funded by NASA.

MISSISSIPPI TEST FACILITY -
 BATST. LOUIS. MISSISSIPPI

     The Mississippi Test Facility serves
as a base of operations for a number of
federal and state agencies and universi-
ties working on environmental and resource
management programs.  In general, each
agency represented on the site conducts
and directs its own projects, although
NASA will, if requested, conduct projects
for the other agencies.  As always, NASA
provides the salaries for its personnel.
Organizations resident at the MTF, and
examples of their programs are as follows:

U.S. Department of the Interior

 Develop mathematical models of ground-
 water and basins for use in predicting
 future water quality.

 Develop EROS data management systems.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

 Perform chemical analysis of soils,
 crops and animal life for possible
 pesticide content.
 Analyze pesticides for accurate label-
 ing and regulate distribution for
 public protection.

 Enforce water quality standards in
 Lower Mississippi River Basin.

U.S. Department of Commerce

 Manage deployment of oceanographic/
 meteorological data buoys for opera-
 tional and research needs.

 Test, evaluate and calibrate instru-
 ments.

 Develop remote fishery sensing devices.

 Design, develop, install, test and
 operate lower Mississippi River Flood
 Forecast and Warning System.

 Operate data management systems for
 national experiments such as Inter-
 national Field Year of the Great Lakes.

NASA-Manned Spacecraft Center

 Coordinate efforts of the Houston site
 and the Goddard Space Flight Center in
 the application of remote sensing tech-
 niques to the needs of the local envi-
 ronment, to the extent desired by local
 governments and other agencies resident
 on the MTF site.

 Conduct space shuttle testing program.

U.S. Army

 Conduct safety program to improve hand-
 ling, transportation and storage of
 hazardous materials.

     In addition to the abovementioned
federal agencies, the States of Missis-
sippi and Louisiana have representatives
on the site to coordinate their respec-
tive environmental protection programs
with those conducted at the Mississippi
Test Facility.  Also, the Gulf Universi-
ties Research Consortium, Louisiana State
University and Mississippi State Univer-
sity have environmental research programs
under way on the site.
                                          -312-

-------
CONCLUSION
     Clearly, an abundance of expertise,
manpower and physical facilities exists,
in most of the laboratories, to serve the
environmental protection needs of their
localities at least, and even of areas
far beyond those boundaries.  Problems of
cooperation are almost non-existent.  In
the case of the AEC laboratories that are
not strictly mission-oriented, the lack
of financial resources appears to be the
only impediment to more expansive coopera-
tive endeavors; whereas in the NASA
laboratories, the availability of in-house
funding affords greater latitude for
participation in joint efforts.
                                         SOURCES
AEC Laboratories
     Aerojet Nuclear Company
     Ames Laboratory
     Battelle-Northwest Laboratory

     Brookhaven National Laboratory
     Health and Safety Laboratory
     Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
     Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
     Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory

     Oak Ridge National Laboratory

     Savannah River Laboratory
NASA Laboratories
     Ames Research Center
     Goddard Space Flight Center
     Jet Propulsion Laboratory
     Langley Research Center
     Lewis Research Center

     Manned Spacecraft Center

     Mississippi Test Facility
Dr. Robert M. Brugger
Dr. Harry Svec
Dr. Richard Foster
Dr. W. H. Swift
Dr. J. B. H. Kuper
Mr. Edward Hardy
Dr. Jack M. Hollander
Dr. George D. Sauter
Mr. LaMar Johnson
Mr. Harry Schulte
Dr. James L. Liverman
Mr. K. E. Cowser
Dr. B. C. Rusche
Mr. Angelo P. Margozzi
Mr. Bill Scull
Dr. Marshall E. Alper
Mr. Charles H. Whitlock
Dr. J. Stuart Fordyce
Dr. Robert King
Dr. R. Bryan Erb and
Dr. Charles E. Fuller
Dr. Jerry C. McCall
                                          -313-

-------
              Workshop Reports
   These are written versions, sometimes expanded, of
the oral workshop reports presented at the conference.
The discussions, if any, generated by the oral reports
are also included.
                       -314-

-------
                      WORKSHOP 1 - ATMOSPHERIC  TRANSPORT MODELS

                              Chairman:   H.  Moses  (ANL)
         QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION
     Are existing atmospheric transport
models sufficiently sensitive to be used
to effectively evaluate various control
strategies which might be used to effect
compliance with air quality standards?
If not, what improvements are necessary to
make them sufficiently sensitive?  Should
new models be developed for the purpose?
               THE REPORT
INTRODUCTION
     The panel broadened the questions to
consider the application of transport
models to areas other than the evaluation
of control strategies.

     In the deliberations the panel was
divided into three sub-groups:

     1.  Chemical, Physical and Transport
         Processes - J. Knox, Leader;

     2.  Verification Problems - F. Buck
         and T. Crawford, Leaders;

     3.  Application of Models, Including
         the Use of Computer Codes -
         J. Norco, Leader.

     Each sub-group prepared a report
which is presented following this general
summary.  Although there was some overlap
(e.g., they all emphasized model validation)
they do cover the topic assigned to the
individual sub-groups.  They represent the
consensus of knowledgeable individuals who,
in most cases, are intimately concerned
with atmospheric transport models.

     In the background papers presented
at the conference, Johnson and Knox have
described the objectives, nature, and
shortcomings of important urban models
such as the Gaussian, Box, and Integrated
Puff Models.  Discussions for the most
part confirmed the positions of these
authors.  Gaps in our knowledge of a
meteorological nature involving transport
and atmospheric chemical and physical
processes received a good deal of
attention.
METEOROLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS

     The processes which take place in
the lower layers of the atmosphere,
especially the planetary boundary layer,
require a better understanding, and con-
sequently there is a need for appropriate
measurements.  In the last few years, new
instrumental techniques, such as the
acoustic or lidar soundings of the lower
layers, have indicated processes leading
to multilayered structures and their vari-
ations with time which have not been
taken into account in model development.
Further, our knowledge of trajectories
during light wind conditions is meager.
It was pointed out in the workshop that
during light wind conditions, as is usual
during air pollution episodes, surface
winds are often supergeostrophic.

     Additional work is also required on
the physical and chemical processes in-
volving aerosols.  Both field and labora-
tory investigations are required.  These
include aerosol depletion processes such
as rainout, washout, and dry deposition.
It was suggested that wind tunnel experi-
ments would be useful to obtain information
in these areas.

     The special effects of terrain on
airflow, such as those which give rise to
lake or sea breezes and mountain-valley
breezes, require attention.

MODEL VALIDATION

     The consensus was clear that there
is a distinct need for validating current
models.

     To validate a model one must have a
good source inventory as well as reliable
air quality data.  It was recognized that
adequate source inventory data are un-
common and that there is a paucity of suit-
able air quality measurements.  Various
types of air quality data are required.
For long-range diffusion from large point
sources, atmospheric tracer experiments
must be used.  For urban studies, one may
use the data from the air quality networks
set up in recent years by large cities such
as New York, Chicago, St. Louis, and Seattle.
Suitable data sets, however, are unavailable
                                         -315-

-------
 for many areas, thus seriously hampering
 model assessment.  The situation with
 respect  to verification of urban air
 pollution models  is poor.  All too many
 comparisons have  been made between measured
 and calculated values of air quality based
 on a relatively few days using non-independ-
 ent data (data which are autocorrelated) or
 based on a few observations in a variety of
 formats  that do not allow comparisons of
 different tests or models.  Acceptable
 statistical techniques have not been used
 in many  instances.

     In  verifying a model, although values
 of pollutant concentration must be tested
 over the entire range of variation, special
 attention should  be given to high values,
 such as  occur during episode conditions,
 or to locations where values regularly
 exceed state or federal standards.  Of
 course,  the sampling times involved in
 the air  quality measurement and those
 assumed  in the model must be compatible.
 Suitable evaluation procedures would yield
 information on the sensitivity and accuracy
 of the model and  would indicate the con-
 ditions  under which the model works best
 and those under which it is unreliable.

     Model development and evaluation for
 a given  area must be accomplished by an
 iteration process involving the comparison
 of field observation with model calculations
 followed by model modification, and repeated
comparisons of calculated and observed data
 after suitable model adjustments.

     Model assessment is important because
 one must know how good the model is before
 applying it to the problems at hand or be-
 fore suggesting improvements to it'or the
 development of new models.  Even though
 current  models have not been tested ade-
 quately, there was a general feeling among
 the workshop participants that they are not
 sufficiently sensitive for the problems to
 which they must be applied.

 APPLICATIONS OF MODELS

     Although models are being used for
 many purposes, it was pointed out that their
 use by control agencies is rare on a day-
 to-day basis.  There are several reasons for
 this:

     1.  The models are too complicated to
         be properly understood.

     2.  Suitable facilities for their
         efficient use (i.e., user net-
         works) are unavailable.
     3-  The models are too costly to
         handle.

     U.  Their validity is questionable.

Many of these shortcomings could be over-
come by the adoption of the User's Network
for Applied Modeling of Air Pollution
(UNAMAP) as presented by Johnson.

     A summary of the uses of models may
be outlined as follows:

1.  Planning

    a.  Land use

    b.  Transportation

    c.  Facilities - industrial plants,
        sports stadiums, or parks

 2.  Legislation

    a.  Assessment of  the  impact of
        legislation  such as that pertaining
        to  the sulfur  content of fuel  or
        the establishment  of zoning  regu-
        lations.

    b.  Development  of implementation
        plans to meet  air  quality standards.

 3-  Siting  of monitoring stations

    a.  Aid in locating air quality  mon-
        itoring stations.

    b.  Provision of information on  air
        quality in areas between stations
        of  a monitoring network.

 k.  Air pollution abatement

    a.  Forecasting  air pollution episodes.

    b.  Assessment of  the  contribution to
        the reduction  in air quality at a
        given location of  important
        pollutant sources  (e.g.,  the rel-
        ative contributions by public
        utility stacks and neighborhood
        apartment house chimneys).

    c.  Assessment of  the  contribution by
        neighboring countries, states,
        counties, and  cities to  the  air
        quality in a given area.

     It is,  of course,  necessary that  the
model be tailored to the nature  of the
problem.  The type of  model used would
depend on:
                                           -316-

-------
     1.  The source (e.g.,  mobile,  stationary
         point or area source).

     2.  Nature of pollutant (whether it is
         inert, chemically active,  or
         radioactive).

     3.  Terrain characteristics.

     U.  The time patterns of emission.

RELATIONS BETWEEN EPA AMD THE AEG AMD
NASA LABORATORIES

     It was the consensus of the group
that a project or task-oriented inter-
agency committee should be formed which
would be knowledgeable concerning the
facilities, capabilities, and activities
of the AEC, EPA, and NASA laboratories.
Such a committee would be in a position to
suggest what areas would be most suitable
for attack by individual groups and could
aid in developing cooperative areas of
research for the long term (3-5 years).
For a committee to be effective it must
have "teeth";  it must have appropriate
funding or an understanding with the
agencies involved to insure the successful
implementation of its recommendations.  Its
function must be more than advisory.

     With such a group it would thus be
possible to make use of the valuable
facilities and talents of the national
laboratories in attacking environmental
problems.  A panel like our present one
can only point the way;  funds are nec-
essary to make an interagency committee
effective.
     SUBGROUP 1 -
CHEMICAL,  PHYSICAL,  AND
TRANSPORT PROCESSES
         Leader:  J. Knox (T.T.T,)

     This subgroup was rather broad in
scope;  it considered problems ranging
from gaps in our knowledge of transport
to model verification and interagency
cooperation.  The main points discussed
can be summarized as follows:

1.  Gaussian plume or puff models of a
    simplified version presently in use
    can have substantial errors assoc-
    iated (a) with lack of inclusion of
    variable vertical thermal structure,
    which could lead to trapping of the
    plume either above or below the in-
    version, (b) time and space variable
    horizontal and vertical eddy
diffusivities,  and (c) difficulties in
including terrain or land-water relation-
ships.  A clear statement is needed of
the range of validity of the Gaussian .
plume model, errors in applying them
to extended range, and difficulties
associated with representing complex
chemical or photochemical processes in
these models.

It was concluded that proportionate
models may have some limited use and be
of value in central urban cities where
the area source term is reasonably
constant and where pollutants might be
reasonably well mixed;  however, in
suburban areas where pollutant imporr
tation is important and transformations
enroute can occur for certain pollutants,
the proportionate model may be inap-
plicable to land use planning, wherein
the source distribution has to be al-
tered from that present, which is an
essential input to the proportionate
model use.

In regard to verification programs, it
was suggested that independent objective
methods be provided for verifying pro-
posed models or those models included in
an EPA User Center.  Adequate periods
for verification and suitable means of
verification should be explored.  It
was felt that,  before initiation of
the Regional Air Pollution Study (RAPS)
sponsored by EPA, modelers should be
consulted during the design of the
measurement programs so that the data
obtained will be suitable for model
input and verification.  Controlled
laboratory experiments should be
regarded as an important tool in sub-
model verification (e.g., photochemistry)
and as an aid in model development on
a continuing basis.

Numerical simulation models presently
under development should be subjected
to appropriate experimental verification.
One method of verification suggested
was the use of tracer experiments;
however, it was suggested that certain
models, including the mass conser-
vation models and the multi-box models,
will require addition of sub-models to
handle continuous or instantaneous point
source emissions until the pollutant
clouds reach a size which can be
realistically treated using the zones
of the models.

In regard to models presently under
development, concern was expressed about
                                         -317-

-------
    the lack of knowledge of aerosol
    chemistry and physics within plumes from
    power plants and the role of aerosols
    in boundary layer photochemical pro-
    cesses.  Coupled to this concern are
    the problems of gas particle inter-
    action, and chemical transformation of
    material resulting in aerosols which
    could restrict visibility.

6.  Meaningful interaction between agencies,
    EPA and the national laboratories, would
    be aided by development of a verifica-
    tion group which, through the identif-
    ication of gaps or limitations or
    model failures, would serve to pin-point
    specific technical needs.

7-  The formation of project or task oriented
    committees to review periodically the
    state of numerical technique develop-
    ment, modeling progress, etc., on both
    regional and global scales, would aid
    in communicating AEC findings and
    capabilities to EPA problem-solvers, as
    well as identifying new needs.  Such
    committees could aid in developing
    cooperative areas of research in pollu-
    tion modeling of a long term (3 to 5
    years).  If successful, Joint efforts
    could emerge with agreed tasks and
    agreed priorities.

8.  Cooperative areas could include contri-
    butions in instrumentation, shared
    large-computers,  modeling for heavy
    metals, and other pertinent experience.
    SUBGROUP 2 - VERIFICATION PROBLEMS

         Leaders:  F. Buck (EPA)
                   and T. Crawford (SRL)

     The development of urban air pollu-
tion models should be an evolutionary
process which involves development by the
numerical modeler, initial verification,
use of the model, modification, further
checking, etc.  There cannot be a distinct
separation among these  steps  for successful
use.  In this evolutionary process the
modeler has to have an active role in the
design of the verification scheme.  The
following general principles were identi-
fied as important in the verification of
urban air pollution models:

1.  The individual parts of the model
    (i.e., source, meteorology, chemistry,
    etc.) should be checked for consistency.
    There should probably not be adjust-
    ment of any of the independently
    checked parts in order to make the
    final integrated model output fit data.

2.  The time and space scales of the verifi-
    cation data and of the model output
    should be comparable.  Data need to be
    representative.

3.  Verification should be accomplished
    over the complete range of conditions
    over which the model is expected to be
    used.  Particular emphasis should be
    placed on verification under episode
    conditions.  This is a severe test of
    the model and is the most important
    case.

k.  Two types of verification are necessary:

    a.  A detailed check, at several differ-
        ent locations, of all parts of the
        model.

    b.  A check of the complete model in the
        particular area where it is to be
        applied.  This is deemed necessary
        in order to convince the local
        user of its applicability.

5.  The accuracy of the model must meet the
    requirements of the user.  This implies
    that the model developer should con-
    sult with potential users before and
    during the model development.  The
    accuracy of the data used in model
    verification must be at least as good
    as that of the model.

6.  It is assumed here that the physics,
    chemistry, etc. upon which the model is
    based are satisfactory and that an
    analysis of possible numerical errors,
    using analytic solutions where possible,
    has been performed prior to field
    verification.

7-  Upon completion of the verification,
    the limitations of the model should be
    clearly stated, particularly the con-
    ditions under which the model is not
    applicable.

     The current verification situation for
urban air pollution models has been one of
a few checks on limited laboratory data
involving chemical reactions or on a few
days of meteorological data.  The situation
has been one of demonstrating feasibility
rather than the more desirable iterative
one of develop, check, use, modify, etc.,
under a variety of conditions.  This latter
procedure is deemed a necessity.
                                          -318-

-------
  SUBGROUP 3 - APPLICATION OF MODELS,
               INCLUDING THE USE OF
               COMPUTER CODES.                2.

        Leader:  J. Norco (ANL)

CHARACTERISTICS OF ATMOSPHERIC TRANSPORT
MODELS

     Air pollution transport models provide
the methodology for transforming source
emission Information, whether the source be
mobile or stationary, single or diffuse
(area), into an estimate of air quality on
a local or regional basis.  The factors
taken into account in the process are:        3.
1.  Meteorological data which depict the
    present or projected state of the
    atmosphere;

2.  Characteristics of the source or sources;

3.  Characteristics of the emissions,
    including dispersion and chemical
    interactions;

k.  Geographic and topographic factors;

5.  Information on background pollution
    from sources other than those under
    consideration.

In general, models permit the user to
predict, with varying degrees of confidence,
the conformance of air quality with applic-
able standards and the relative contribu-
tion of sources, now or in the future.  Such
a capability is valuable to a variety of
users, including regulatory groups, planners,
and designers.

APPLICATIONS OF ATMOSPHERIC TRANSPORT MODELS

     There are four broad areas of use for
models designed to predict the dispersion
of airborne emissions.

1.  Control Strategy Development and
    Evaluation
    At the heart of an air pollution con-
    trol program are the emission standards
    and limitations which are promulgated
    to achieve air quality standards.  These
    emission standards must be designed with
    several constraints and considerations
    involved, including:  effectiveness,
    fuel availability, technical feasibility,
    cost,  enforceability, etc.  Functionally,
    the analytical results of transport
    models constitute a major input into
    the decision-making process for the
    selection of alternative control strategies.

    Land Use Planning
    Urban and other land use planners must
    face squarely the implications of pro-
    posed land use on future ambient air
    quality.  Selection of urban form and
    land use in the early planning stages
    must now include long-range air pollu-
    tion transport models that allow the
    land use planner to evaluate the air
    pollution impact of alternatives,
    allowing land use decisions to reflect
    minimum air pollution effects.

    Facility Planning
    Major facilities, such as industrial
    plants, highways, sports stadiums,
    power plants, etc., can produce sig-
    nificant degradation of local air
    quality.  The selection of optimum site
    design features and the comprehensive
    evaluation of environmental impacts
    can only be. accomplished through the
    use of atmospheric transport models
    that relate air quality effects to the
    type and scale of facilities.

    Episode Prediction and Analysis
    Reliable forecasts of episodes would
    be of major assistance to officials
    charged with administering emergency
    control measures.  The use of models to
    combine known quantitative emission data
    for a critical area with atmospheric
    forecasts provides control authorities
    with a rational basis for instituting
    preventive measures in time to avert
    an episode, or at least to ameliorate
    its severity.  A warning system based
    upon monitoring readings may be ineffec-
    tive in dealing with an episode before
    it becomes acute.  Retrospective analysis
    of critical episodes via applicable
    models for a given area can provide con-
    trol authorities with information useful
    in refining long-term control strategies.
COMPUTER IMPLEMENTATION OF MODELS

     Two aspects of model implementation
must be considered, software and hardware.
The first is concerned with the programming
language in which the model is written,
while the second deals with the computer and
associated peripheral equipment on which
the model program runs.  The general prac-
tice of model developers in recent years
has been to use FORTRAN IV as the favored
programming language.  Because of the
universal availability of FORTRAN on present-
day medium and large scale computers, its
                                         -319-

-------
use fosters the adaptability of programs       2.
developed on one machine to ready transfer
to another machine at another location.

     With regard to hardware, we find that
most dispersion model programs have been
developed for medium to large computers,
such as the IBM 360/50 class, or larger.
For the most part, the models require only
the standard peripherals:  card reader, line
printer, magnetic tape, and disk drive;  but
some models require a plotter to produce
contours of pollutant distributions.  These    3-
standard hardware requirements also favor
the interchange of model programs between
computer installations and/or organizations.

     Nearly all the dispersion models in use
today are of either the Gaussian or conser-
vation of mass formulation.  The Gaussian
models predominate because of their sim-
plicity and also because their solution has
been reduced to nomographs for standard
cases.  The conservation of mass types are
less used because of the requirement for a
medium scale computer.  There are many
firms and organizations in the U. S. which
c urrently have operating models of one of
the above types.  During the past few years,
dispersion models have been applied to a
wide variety of problems, including air
quality regions, highways, and large           h.
facilities such as power plants and airports.

FUTURE NEEDS IN ATMOSPHERIC TRANSPORT MODELS

    Atmospheric models have been used quite
extensively, particularly in the develop-
ment of emission strategies required by
implementation plans.  The models currently
in use, however, still possess significant
deficiencies which must be overcome.  This
section attempts to identify these needs in
atmospheric models, with an emphasis on the
ultimate users' viewpoint.  The users include
control agency officials, land use or trans-
portation planners, local decision-makers,     5-
etc.

1.  Model developers must be cognizant of
    the applications and uses of atmospheric
    models.  It is important that the model
    developers understand how models will
    be applied and what problems the user
    will be attempting to solve.  Consider-
    ations such as averaging times, air
    quality standards, spatial scales,
    and numbers and types of sources must
    be considered in the development of
    models.  In the past, model development
    has sometime proceeded without due re-
    gard to the ultimate application.
Atmospheric models should be developed
with an appropriate interface with other
planning models which will bear on
estimated air quality effects.  Socio-
economic, land use, and transportation
demand models will be used to forecast
future activities.  These models will
produce results which must be easily
interfaced with atmospheric models to
facilitiate the determination of im-
pact of future plans on air quality.

Atmospheric models are currently at a
relatively high level of sophistication,
at least compared with the training and
ability of the average control official,
planner, or decision-maker to use them
effectively.  If the potential useful-
ness of atmospheric models in the
decision making process is to be ex-
ploited, the models must be designed
and implemented so that their outputs
are easily communicated to, and under-
stood by, these users.  In many cases,
control agency officials have avoided
atmospheric models because they do not
completely understand, or have con-
fidence in, their purpose and do not
recognize their potential value in air
resource management.

More development is needed in the
chemically reactive transport models.
Current models do not adequately
describe the photochemical processes
and concentrations of reaction products.
Existing photochemical models have not
been sufficiently validated, nor are
they readily implementable (user
oriented).  In addition to the photo-
chemical (smog) models, attention
should be paid to chemically reactive
pollutants for which standards are
being developed, such as hazardous
materials.

There is a need for greater sensitivity,
both spatially and temporally.  The
National Environmental Policy Act, for
example, places emphasis on large-scale
facility or activity environmental
impact analysis.  These analyses will
require models that will produce reli-
able results on an individual facility
basis.  In the development of imple-
mentation plans for pollutants other  -
than the five primary pollutants
(particulates, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen
oxides, hydrocarbons, and carbon mon-
oxide), models will be needed to sim-
ulate transport of small pollutant
quantities in the atmosphere over smaller
                                          -320-

-------
    scales (single sources).  These aspects
    will necessitate models of higher
    sensitivity to adequately predict low
    concentrations, and the models should
    provide for the high level of dis-
    aggregation to allow modeling of single
    point sources, highways, urban canyons,
    etc.

6.  There should be some attempt to provide
    increased quality control over atmos-
    pheric transport models, particularly •
    the input data.  It may be feasible
    to establish a standard set of procedures
    and data collection schemes, or possibly
    a national model testing center to pro-
    vide evaluation and certification of
    models based on standard data sets and
    conditions.
 DISCUSSION OF THE REPORT OF WORKSHOP 1

Armstrong:  Do you feel that we might con-
centrate on some of the more promising
models rather than generate more different
models?

Moses;  By all means.  I think the cores of
many of the models are pretty much the same.
They are all continuity models, and whether
they use a box or use a Gaussian distribution
probably doesn't make a lot of difference.
However, though, I'm saying this as an
opinion; I haven't checked out those two
models to see how many differences there are.
My guess is that the errors in the input
data and the errors in the measurements are
so great, there's so much noise in the system,
that a refined model isn't going to make that
much difference.

Ellsaesser;  Was any consideration given to
reversing the model, to taking airborne
concentrations and using the model to cal-
culate the sources?

Moses;  We talked about it, sure.  You see,
you are talking about a chemical equation
where you have arrows going to both sides. If
our  models are any good, then we can go
from the source, and get a good value for
the calculated value.  You can go backwards.
You can take the measured values at some
distance from the source and work back to
see what the source values are.  These are
things we have considered, but whether we
are sly enough to do this in real life, I
doubt.  You might pinpoint the direction.
As a matter of fact, if you have models, if
you have a number of stations, by triangu-
lation you can pick out a culprit, yes.
But you can't pick out the amount that is
emitted in mass per unit time. It would be
a heck of a job.

Question;  Was there any statement by a
representative of EPA as to what the
desired degree of accuracy is in order to
come up with an effective control strategy?

Moses;  We did talk about accuracy, but we
did not come up with any numbers indicating
what the accuracy of SOp should be in so
many parts per million or what the accuracy
of any other pollutants should be within
certain other ranges.

Rausa;  The calculation of the environmental
impact being made-by a particular source
depends not only on the form of the trans-
port model, as you indicated, but also on
the source of emissions model used, on the
interaction model at the recipient point,
and also on the effect model which you
use subsequent to that.  Basically, we have
four models that we are talking about, and
here we've discussed, for the most part,
only the transport model.  Would it be
more cost effective to develop improvements
in the other models rather than in the
transport model?

Moses:  I have been involved in the problem
for the last two months which involved four
models like you're talking about.  What do
you mean by an emission model?

Rausa;  The source itself.  What does the
plant put out?  A lot has been done, cer-
tainly in the nuclear power business, with
regard to what contaminants are emitted.

Moses;  You're presenting a very simple
problem.  I was involved with evaluation
of what comes out of a radioactive fuel
facility.  There we have a whole mix of
fission products;  that's one model.  Then
how the fission products get out is an-
other model, the transport is another
model, and the inhalation is the fourth
model.  We have not considered that in our
meeting.

Rausa;  The question I had really applied
to the water transport model as well.  I'm
a user, and I have to evaluate the adequacy
of the environmental impact statements.
One of the questions is, "Are the models
that have been used by the people who have
written the environmental impact stations
acceptable or not?"  The modeling people
should tell some of us users how accurate'
the models are;  whether they can be
improved;  if they can't be improved in a
short time, how much more money needs to be
                                          -321-

-------
spent in order to improve them in a short
time; and if we have such high degrees of
uncertainty as to what is going on, does
it mean that we have to introduce a
moratorium on various kinds of sources?

Moses:  You are hitting a spot that we are
all very sensitive to, and that's the whole
problem of validation.  Is what we're doing
valid, and how do you validate it?

Rausa:  Decisions are being made now on
environmental impact statements that are
being reviewed by various people.  All the
agencies get a shot at reviewing environ-
mental impact statements that are generated
by other agencies.  What I'm interested in
finding out is what common base do you use
for Judging the adequacy of environmental
impact statements?

Moses;  You have to take the whole, add up
the sum of its parts, then you have a
synergistic effect on top of this.  Each
part is difficult.  If you take one little
piece like the validation of the transport
model, for example, you have an adequate
sample of calculations.  You take your
calculated values, compare them with your
measured values, and by acceptible statis-
tical techniques find out whether or not the
thing works.  Similiarly you have to go
back and check each of the other components
of your overall system.  Now, whether the
impact statements, are valid. . .

Rausa;  But the point is that decisions are
being made right now that they are acceptible.

Crawford;  I want to help Harry concerning
our workshops deliberations.  We considered
transport in its most general sense, from
emission into the atmosphere to chemistry
in the atmosphere to some concentration.  So
we didn't worry about the independent
validation of the various pieces.  We did
talk about some ways of independently verify-
ing what the engineer estimates as his source
emission value.  We also talked about the
value of independently verifying the
meteorological part of the model.  We talked
about the desirability of a feedback loop.
I visualize evolution of models as develop,
check, verify, use, modify, redevelop.  The
models available now were generally developed
to show feasibility and have been checked
against a few days' data.  They have not yet
gone through the evolutionary process.

Moses;  I think your question is absolutely
fundamental.  If the things are not valid,
sooner or later people are going to catch
up with you.  More and more people should
ask those questions, but I don't think
there are any answers.

Rausa;  It might be appropriate to desig-
nate a model, not knowing that it is com-
pletely accurate, but at least if everyone
uses the same model, the inference is what
one comes to the same conclusion.

Moses;  That's bad.

Rausa;  It very well may be bad.  The point
is that we can't wait forever, and we need
to make relative comparisons as well as
absolute determinations.

Moses;  If the model is invalid, is it better
to have many people do things wrong many
different ways or do it all wrong the same
way?

Rausa;  The point is that you can't tell
me if it is wrong or right.

Moses:  But we can find out.
                                          -322-

-------
                          WORKSHOP 2 - WATER TRANSPORT MODELS

                              Chairman:  N. Jaworski (EPA)
         QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION

     Are existing water transport models
sufficiently accurate to realistically
assess the attainment of water quality
standards?  If not, can the existing models
be made sufficiently accurate?  Should new
models be developed?
                THE REPORT

     Evaluating the accuracy of the various
kinds of water quality and transport models
demands a rather thorough consideration of
possible applications.  Therefore, It is
more advantageous to outline the current
capability of the "art" of water modeling.
Perhaps an historical review of the work on
the Potomac River estuary can stand as a
typical example of the evolution of model-
ing.  In the I960's A. Wastier, using "power
spectral analysis" of BOD-DO data, produced
an empirical model which predicted that
waste loading should be limited to 100K
Ibs/day if water quality standards were to
be met.  This effort used seven stations.
In 1965-1967 L. Hetling, using an average
total model, refined the loading limit to
A9K Ibs/day.  This effort was based on
dividing the estuary into twenty-one seg-
ments and considered the transport and re-
duction of BOD and DO.  N. Jaworski in
1969-1970 used 60 segments, tidal variation,
and nutrient budget-agal considerations to
demonstrate that loading should be limited
to A3K Ibs/day.

     In the vast majority of cases, advance-
ment in capability is limited by the
availability of data or field studies rather
than conceptual, numerical, or mathematical
formulations.  The concepts of nitrification,
etc., existed at the time of the early
studies, but the models to be used were
chosen on the basis of field data avail-
ability.  This situation is still universal.

     In order to display the current cap-
abilities, a table of six problem types
and nine model constituents for eight classes
of pollutants has been prepared.  From this
table It can be seen that models have been
used in various types of water courses.
Roughly' 80% of the effort  today has dealt
with one-dimensional river models, while
estuaries have accounted for 15%.  For all
six courses, hydrodynamics appears to be
the area of greatest experience and utility.
The table can be summarized as reflecting
the following order of adequacy of pollutant
simulation:  salts, thermal, sanitary
bacteriology, DOB-DO, nutrients, sediment
transport, hazardous materials, and ecological
considerations.  The table also reflects,
the lack of data in all fields.

     In general, state-of-the-art advance-
ment is obtained either by applying a model
to an increasing variety of case studies or
by refining the number of processes to be
considered for Inclusion into a model of a
single system.  Both of these paths are
expensive.  Progress Is almost always
limited by the size of the data base rather
than conceptual considerations.

     Defining the regulatory "need" for a
research effort to advance the state-of-
the-art for simulating the aquatic environ-
ment is an EPA function.  The diverse
talents within the independent national
laboratories and those of EPA provide a
capability for meeting this need.  It is
recommended that mechanism be developed
to coordinate and implement research pro-
grams.

     The first step in this process should
be an effort on the part of the national
laboratories to understand the regulatory
program and administrative procedures of
EPA.  This background information is
necessary for an appreciation of the goals
of the EPA research program.

     The second step should be the gener-
ation of an inventory of the national
laboratories' capabilities in aquatic eco-
system simulation.
                                          -323-

-------
       A Summary of the State-of-the-Art for Water Quality and Transport Modeling
                    Rivers       Reservoirs &                 Coastal             Ground
                 (one dimen.)     Rivers (2d)    Estuaries     Zones     Lakes    Water
123 123
Hydrodynamics + + + +00
Salts + + 0 000
Hazardous 0 	 0 - -
BOD-DO + + 0 0 + 0
Nutrients 0-0 0-0
Bacteria + + 0 000
Ecological - - - 	 -
123 123 123
+ 00 +00 +00
+ + + 000 000
0-- 0-- 0 - -
+ + 0 000 000
00- 	 0--


___ ___ 0--

1 2
+ 0
+ 0
0 -
+ 0
0 0




3
-
0
-
-
-




,
Thermal + + + + 0 +
Sediments 0 ? ? 0 ? +
+ 0+ 0-- +00
07+ 0 - - ' ? ? ?
0 -
NA
-

1 = Amount of Use
2 ° Adequacy of Models
3 - Data Availability
  DISCUSSION OF THE REPORT OF WORKSHOP 2

MacCracken;  How much more data do you think
we need?  Orders of magnitude?

Reznek:  You have to look at a particular
point of view:  in ground water, orders of
magnitude more;  in a linear model of a
river, we've got that fairly well;  in
ecological systems, there are orders of
magnitude of data around, and we need orders
of magnitude more.
                                          -324-

-------
                             WORKSHOP 3 - LAND USE PLANNING

                             Chairman:  D. Armstrong (EPA)
         QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION

     Given Che complexity of the process
whereby decisions on land use are made in a
large urban area, is the availability of a
valid land use model likely to have a
significant impact on the process?  Can the
cost of developing and applying such a
model be justified?  What can technologists
do to increase the cost effectiveness of a
land use model?
               THE REPORT
QUESTION 1
     Unfortunately there is no a valid land
use model available.  The plans that have
been prepared have not considered the
environmental impacts of air pollution,
noise, water pollution, solid waste, etc.
However, even if there were such parameters,
there is not a tradeoff of relative desira-
bilities of one form of "pollution" versus
another.  If standards are not exceeded,
how can you adequately determine the socio-
economic  alternatives of such subjective
values?  It was stated that a certain
development, Restoh, Virginia, had become
"ugly".  Thus, a comprehensive model would
be unduly complicated, but if limited to a
few sub-models, it could provide planners
with tools that could better describe
the impact of the basic plans and alterna-
tives.  "Significant" would have to be de-
fined, but it would give the public, if
freedoms of information prevails, an
opportunity to learn the real environmental
impact.

     So the answer is a qualified "Yes".
The greatest value of such an effort would
be to generate knowledge of what was going
on and perhaps cause interdisciplinary
coordination among lawyers, politicians,
planners, and technologists that would be
useful in the decision-making process.  One
point that should be emphasized is that the
model should not try to "optimize" the
land use, but rather show alternatives and
impacts.

QUESTION 2

     The cost of such a model would be
justified if it could be related to the
number of people involved and/or the value
in dollars.  People are used to paying an
architect's fee for plans and specifications,
so a half to one percent charge on cost for
a model and plan could be justified.  With
the advantage that could accrue over a
period of years from a good plan, such a cost
would be minimal.  However, much planning is
not properly aggregated, so that much more
actually is spent than realized.  Thus, a
properly coordinated plan could cost less
than is now being spent.

QUESTION 3

     The best wasy to increase the effective-
ness of a model is to honestly state what it
will and won't do.  The public has already
been disillustioned with technologists.
Further, the model should include socio-
economic sub-models and show some "human
concern".  Also, there must be more inter-
face with lawyers and politicians to under-
stand better what the requirements are and
how models are used to assist in making
decisions.  Technologists should become more
involved in the community problems and there-
by gain the confidence of the public, so
that their predictions and forecasts have
validity.  Conferences should be proposed
that will relate technology to "real world"
problem solutions.

ADDITIONAL ITEMS RELEVANT TO A DISCUSSION
OF LAND USE PLANNING

     Selection of alternative transportation
modes is a key element in any land use plan.
Present technology is sufficiently well-de-
veloped so that planners are able to analyze
individual transportation modal systems to
develop system costs, capacity, and individual
(not industry-wide) environmental Impact.
Selection of an option model split for a
given set of requirements is not, at present,
possible on any truly objective basis.

     Technology enables us to define the
environmental degradation due to system noise
and/or exhaust emissions, for example, with
reasonable confidence.  But there is no
accepted methodology for analyzing available
tradeoffs between, among, or even within these
various categories.  Since planning per se
implies consideration of alternatives, this
lack of ability to assess the relative
effects of individual impact severly hampers
the process.
                                          -325-

-------
     Further complications include the lack
of knowledge on the true cost of individual
transportation modes.  The automobile,
for example, represents an average family
investment on the order of $2000 per year.
Most of this is hidden expense;  it is
difficult to imagine people being willing
to spend even 10$ of this cost to provide
public transportation alternatives.  If
this could be done, on the order of 10
billion dollars per year would be available
for alternative modes of transportation.
The availability of such funds would cer-
tainly remove a major constraint for planning
of optimally balanced transportation
systems.  This is not to say that money
alone will solve the problem.  It points
up the need for having all the facts -
environmental effects, needs and costs,
and their relative benefits - before
tradeoffs can be made.  The common denom-
inator  does not presently exist.  Given
that the goal of planning in our society
is to increase the number of options open
to members of society and that the decision-
makers should influence decisions by
incentives or disincentives, the technologist
can provide to the planner the ability to
evaluate the impact of the range of options
and the effect of actions.  This ability
should be based on tools which can provide
for the interaction of, for example, air,
water, noise, seismic, and aesthetic efforts.
At present the uncertainties of approaching
this ability are large, not only in the
capability of models, but also in the scope
of people to consider the available tradeoffs
that society will accept.  In fact, for the
planner without the legal ability to provide
for tradeoffs, the options are exceedingly
limited, and few tools will serve any pur-
pose in land use planning.

OTHER QUESTIONS THAT MIGHT BE ADDRESSED

1.  What will the general characteristics
    of a valid land use model be;  how will
    we recognize one when we have it?

2.  How can models be constructed to provide
    for:

    a.  Adequate inclusion of all facets of
        the dynamics of change;  e.g., soc-
        ial-dynamic aspects, environmental
        aspects, resource conservation and
        economic aspects, etc?

    b.  Provision for tradeoffs between
        environmental factors (e.g., how
        much air quality will you trade
        for so much quiet quality, etc.)?
    c.  Provision for tradeoffs within
        environmental elements (e.g., is it
        more value to protect 10 people
        from noise that will cause permanent
        hearing impairment or to protect 1000
        people from noise that will repeatedly
        disturb their sleep)?

3-  How can working arrangements be structured
    so that people who develop physical
    models will have closer relationship
    with user groups (e.g. urban planners) so
    as to perceive their needs more clear.ly?

k.  How can the immense gap between having
    a comprehensive, long-range plan and
    bringing it into effect in the real world
    be closed?  Conversely, how much control
    is "good"?

5-  How can we place before the public the
    real costs and the real benefits they
    can expect to result from alternative
    options, so that the public's choice
    can be a more informed one?  For example,
    if there is to be a local choice between
    a mass transit system and more and
    bigger freeways, are the real total costs
    per passenger mile of each mode deter-
    mined and presented?

6.  How can we perform planning in such a
    way as to increase the number of options
    (e.g., transport modes, habitation style,
    life style, etc.) open to each individual?

7-  How can we get government agencies to
    work together more effectively, so that
    systems-oriented solutions (e.g.,
    multi-modal transportation systems) are
    not made impossible by institutional
    boundaries?

8.  Is it time to question the custom of
    land ownership by individual human beings
    and consider the ethic of use and steward-
    ship of the land without individual
    ownership?
 DISCUSSION OF THE REPORT OF WORKSHOP 3

Crawford;  Did you consider the role of land
use planning if you are already exceeding
standards?

Armstrong;  We have that problem before us
in those thirty-some cities that are going
to have to consider transportation controls.
Where you have industry which demands, by
its employment, transportation controls, are
you going to ask them to move out?  Or are
you going to prevent parking downtown?  It
                                          -326-

-------
Is not beyond the realm of possibility.
It's a matter of heroic measures that are
going to be taken;  for example, to raise
taxes on parking lots so that there won't
be a place to park downtown.  And that,
in a way, is land use planning.

Ellsaesser;  Robert Chase of the Los Angeles
Air Pollution Control District has said
that he could not meet those standards if
he evacutated the whole basin.  What should
he do?

Armstrong;  lie is not responsible for the
mobile sources in the State of California,
according to the Air Resources Board.  He
Is responsible for the stationary sources.
There are others who do not agree with his
numbers.  It's true, it will take heroic
measures and more years, probably, than
1977 to meet CO and oxident standards in
the Los Angeles basin.  On the 15th of
February, 1973, we'll see what Gov. Reagan
says he will do.  That is when the trans-
portation plans are due, and it Is spec-
ulation, based on our experience with other
states, to say what the State is going to
do.
                                          -327-

-------
                            WORKSHOP 4 - UNIFIED DATA SYSTEM

                              Chairman:  P. Lederman (EPA)
         QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION

     Would it be desirable to combine and
expand existing air and water quality data
systems so as to establish a comprehensive
national environmental data system covering,
for example, air quality, water quality,
solid wastes, noise, radiation, and pesti-
cides in all geographic areas?  What pro-
blems would have to be solved in establish-
ing such a unified system?
                THE REPORT

     The panel believes that before one can
answer the question of the desirability of
a unified data system, one must define the
user community.  This the panel did not
attempt to do.  Several potential user
groups were identified;   included in the
matrix are operations people, researchers,
enforcement officials, federal, state,
local and citizen groups.  Because the
panel was primarily composed of "computer
experts" and the technical community, the
needs of this matrix of interested parties
could not be identified.

     There is a consensus that data files
should be widely available and that needless
duplication should be avoided.  On the
other hand, any stifling of initiative by
imposing excessive restrictions is to be
avoided.  Any systems that are developed
should have sufficient flexibility to meet
unforeseen future demands.

     There is general agreement that a
single, all-inclusive data system should not
be developed.  Such a system would not be
able to meet the great variety of demands,
e.g., enforcement versus health effects
research.  It imposes severe, undesirable
restrictions in that all data would have
to be common in format.   It would, by its
very nature, inhibit system development,
enlargement to new areas, and innovation.

     However, the panel felt that a certain
degree of compatability and commonality is
desirable.  This will enable the user
community to access data banks other than
those developed internally.  To this end
the panel recommends that a mechanism be
established to facilitate data bank access-
ability, interchange, and interface.  This
can, for the present, be as informal as a
user group or as formal as a separate information
agency.  For ease of writing we refer to this
as a "center".
     In order to better reflect overall needs
of such a "center", it is recommended that an
advisory committee be appointed to give
guidance to those responsible for operating
the "center".  The committee membership
should be constituted from experts, not only
in computer technology but also representing
the entire field of environmental disciplines.
This would include, as nearly as possible,
the entire matrix of interested parties pre-
viously alluded to.  The "center" would act as
a focal point for development of a unified
data base access system.  Initially, the
efforts would be simple, but they would be-
come more involved as time passed and needs
developed.  One of the first activities of
the "center" would be to write a scope
statement which would serve to define which
types of data are relevant.  With perhaps
less depth and completeness, the "center"
would also keep track of data systems that
are not quite within scope but are occasion-
ally requested by environmental researchers.'
A suggested sequence of "center" activities
would include:

1.  Collecting information on existing data
    bases, what they contain, and how to use
    them.

2.  Studying cases of overlap, duplication,
    and omission and recommending appropriate
    adjustment in coverage.

3.  Studying data formats and ,veor$raphLcal
    codes  and learning (for example) how to
    determine if a point source in one system
    is the same point source in another
    system.

4.  Making recommendations to bring systems
    a little closer with respect to common-
    ality and compatibility.

5.  Direct search of the appropriate data
    base for some queries, performing and
    acting as a referral center for more
    difficult queries.

6.  Providing cross-fertilization with re-
    spect to techniques, hardware, and software.

7.  Preparing computerized files containing
    reference information on existing data
                                          -328-

-------
     bases,  access methods,  and available
     services.

 8.  Maintaining information on data
     interchange methods,  e.g., what
     programs exist for taking data out of
     system A and introducing that same data
     or subset of it into  system B.  It
     could also make recommendations for
     interface programs.

 9.  Keeping records of all questions
     processed.  These would be useful in
     deciding when to establish a new data
     base.

10.  Developing an interface capability so
     that users can access other data bases
     from remote terminals.   This could be
     either conversational or batch mode.

      The "center" would probably become a
 focal point for communication among the
 various groups which manage information
 systems.  As such, it would be appropriate
 for the "center" to hold  meetings, publish
 newsletters, and perform other communicative
 activities.

      The eventual aim would be to develop
 interface processors so that access to
 most data bases could be attained using
 locally available computer facilities and
 intergrating that data into the current
 needs of the user directly.
 to develop a set of common identifiers.
 They should not restrict the local data
 system developer but should reflect the
 source of the data with respect to (a) lo-
 cation, (b) data quality, and (c) data
 validator.

      Among the obvious problems is the
 Integration of current data banks into any
 such system.  Financial support and respon-
 sibility are others.
                                           -329-

-------
                         WORKSHOP 5 - ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING

                             Chairman:  D. Ballinger (EPA)
         QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION

     Are the current monitoring efforts
sufficient to determine the total exposure
of a typical resident of a large city to
pollutants from all sources (air, water,
food, etc.)?  If not, how could such a
total exposure be determined?
                THE REPORT

     Workshop particants concluded that
current monitoring efforts are not suffi-
cient to determine the total exposure of
a typical urban resident to pollutants
from all sources.  The consensus of the
meeting was that extensive research on
sampling methods, atmospheric dispersion
modeling, and biological damage levels for
the various pollutants would be required
before accurate exposure or effects pro-
jections from monitoring data would be
possible.

     There were strong divergent opinions
expressed concerning the optimum approach
to determining total exposure to man.  One
view was that the soundest way to this ob-
jective was to monitor the urban resident
per se by analysis of (1) autopsy speci-
mens, (2) samples from urban blood banks,
(3) body fluid or tissue samples collected
in hospitals, and (A) statistics on res-
piratory and other pollutant-induced
diseases.  Proponents of this view called
for the development of an omni-dosimeter
that could be worn by scattered urban
residents to record accumulated exposure
to the various pollutants.

     A second view was that major emphasis
should be placed on controlling emissions
at the source, thereby improving the quality
of the urban environment and maintaining
it well below thresholds of damage to man.
General exposure-to-man projections would
be made via dispersion models even if im-
perfect.  Ambient condition monitoring
would be required to affirm that satisfac-
tory conditions were being maintained.

     The middle ground between these two
views held that, during the present knowl-
edge gathering period, research to improve
monitoring should be emphasized;  saturation
measurements are needed to verify improving
dispersion models and to insure improving
compliance with environmental quality stan-
dards.  The emphasis during this period,
which may endure for a number of years,
should include trend analysis and research
to (1) establish damage levels for the
pollutants, (2) identify the critical path-
ways leading to exposure to man, and (3)
identify indicator organisms in the food
chain.  The consensus was that the research
can be conducted on a multlagency basis but
that herioc organizational efforts must be
made to plan and coordinate this very large
and complex program.  This coordination will
require uniformly of sampling, analysis,
and data reporting.  Out of this coordinated
research effort, as new knowledge is gained
on to the fate of pollutants in the environ-
ment and on presently unknown genetic and
carcinogenic effects, an even greater var-
iety of analysis efforts will be needed.
Majority opinion was emphatic on the point
that a systems approach to a coordinated
multimedia monitoring program is essential.

     Specific problems in the overall
monitoring technology that were most inten-
sively discussed included site selection for
urban sampling stations, mobile vs. fixed
monitoring stations, air sampling hardware,
quality control, and documentation of samp-
ling conditions.
                                          -330-

-------
                              WORKSHOP 6 - REMOTE SENSING

                              Cochairmen:  R. Holmes (EPA)
                                           G. Leppelmeier (LLL)
         QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION

Is remote sensing a useful tool for helping
In the evaluation of local and regional con-
trol strategies for the Implementation of
air and water quality and emission stan-
dards, or Is It limited to research areas?
If It Is useful, what remote sensing
techniques appear to be most effective,
and how can they be Implemented?
                THE REPORT

     For the purpose of this workshop, re-
mote sensing was defined as "measuring a
characteristic of a medium by a sensor which
is not in contact with that medium."  By
way of limiting the discussion, only source
and ambient pollution measurements were con-
sidered, and no attempt was made to discuss
regional or global observations.  This
restriction enabled the discussion to focus
on near term applications of remote sensing
as opposed to long term, more speculative
applications.

     In assessing the role of remote sensing
in the much broader context of pollution
monitoring, a matrix was developed to con-
sider possible situations as determined by
factors such as air, water, and land appli-
cations;  ground based vs. aerial platforms;
and source monitoring vs. ambient monitor-
ing.  Specific monitoring instruments and
techniques were graded according to their
degree of development.

     We were asked to answer the question
"Is remote sensing a useful tool for help-
ing in the evaluation of local and regional
control strategies for the implementation
fair and water quality and emission stan-
dards, or is it limited to research areas?"
Our answer is that remote sensing tech-
niques definitely are not limited to
research areas, but are applicable to en-
vironment management problems, both for the
purpose of specific enforcement of stan-
dards and practices, and planning or
strategy evaluation.

     We examined the above - described
matrix of pollution problems and asked if
there was a method or methods either
available or promising which would provide
desirable information.  There was positive
identification of a device or a method for
most of the problems.  By available, we
don't necessarily mean an off-the-shelf,
commerical item but also included tech-
niques we agreed one could make work now
if he wanted to badly enough.  We also
identified techniques that are under de-
velopment or otherwise seem promising, in
order to sense the desirable future trends.

     The answers fell generally into two
classes:  The first class consists of photo-
metry, photography, and related techniques,
including the use of multiple wave lengths
and vidicon Imaging.  The concensus was that
EPA was well into these techniques and that
practical use would continue to expand as
a result of further exploitation by EPA.
The second class consists of what could be
called sophisticated instrumentation, in-
volving multi-wavelength spectroscopy, laser
light scattering or fluorescence, absorbtion
spectroscopy, and so on.  Generally, this
class of techniques is Identifiable in the
NASA and AEC laboratories, where its develop-
ment is independent of EPA's established
priorities and needs.

     In response to the question about how
remote sensing techniques can be implemented,
our recommendation is a general one, namely
that specific steps need to be taken to
apply such research achievements to EPA's
operational problems.  This means explicitly
allocating resources to environmental
problems and, moreover, coordinating the
application of those resources with EPA's
priorities.  We propose that a Joint task
force identify a series of timely problems
where a national laboratory can clearly
demonstrate an ability to provide a solution,
or the measurements or data necessary for
a critical decision.  This would be follow-
ed by detailed project development plans for
carrying out the projects under interagency
agreements.  Actual selection would depend on
the extent of resources allocated by the NASA
and AEC laboratories and EPA priorities.

     In short, techniques of remote sensing
are demonstrably useful.  The underlying
technology generally rests in the NASA and
AEC laboratories, while the identification
of immediate environmental problems rests in
EPA.  The real impact of this technology
will not be obtained without specific mutual
alignment of program goals.
                                          -331-

-------
  DISCUSSION OF THE REPORT OF WORKSHOP 6

Question;  Did I understand you to say that
technical responsibility belongs to EPA and
the expertise belongs in the national labora-
tories in the remote sensing area?

Leppelmeier;  I don't think we meant that;
I certainly didn't.  EPA has the responsi-
bility for identifying the problems and
arranging the priorities for attacking
them.  What seems to be missing, to us any-
way, is some kind of coordination between
what EPA wants to do now, and then the next
thing tomorrow, and the actual devices that
get worked on in the national laboratories.
                                          -332-

-------
                        WORKSHOP 7 - ADVANCED SENSING TECHNIQUES

                               Chairman:   R.  Heath (NRTS)
         QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION

     Do advanced sensing techniques, such
as nuclear activation, x-ray fluorescence,
and mass spectrometry, have a significant
potential in environmental control?  For
what purposes and for what pollutants
could such methods be economically used on
a routine basis?
                THE REPORT

     This workshop was attended by 21
people, representing six AEC laboratories,
three NASA centers, and five EPA organiza-
tions.  Representatives of program manage-
ment from EPA and AEC Headquarters groups
in Washington, D. C., were also in attend-
ance.  To properly assess the significance
of the workshop, most of those in attendance
were professionals directly working in the
development or application of instrumentation
and measurement techniques.  It is important
to note that user groups from regional EPA
field organizations were represented.  This
was considered most significant in that it
permitted dialogue between state-of-the-art
development and the end user.

     After a very stimulating discussion of
problem areas and possible objectives for
the workshop which might be considered in
limited time frame, it was agreed to con-
fine the discussions to the needs in major
analytical areas.  Analytical areas con-
sidered were as follows:

1.  Organic Molecules

2.  Elemental Analysis

    a.  Multielement

    b.  Single Element

3.  Chemical State

A.  Physical State

5.  Biological Assay

6.  Sampling and Sample Conditioning

     With these general problem areas as a
framework for discussion, many practical
aspects of analysis problems facing the
EPA monitoring and surveillance, programs
were aired.  In an attempt to establish
priority areas for the application of ad-
vanced technology, several significant
problem areas emerged.  These included:

1.  Need for improvements in current measure-
    ment techniques.

2.  Problem areas where current techniques
    are unable to provide desired sensitivity
    to meet measurement requirements.
    Specific examples included  (a) deter-
    mination of airborne asbestos fiber and
    (b) biological assay (i.e., identification
    of specific organisms in air and water
    on a realistic time scale).

3.  Need for real-time analysis of complex
    systems(e.g., need for means to deter-
    mine source signatures).
The many stimulating discussions in these
areas led to an attempt to define the
capabilities of the NASA and AEC laboratories
for the development of instrumentation and
measurement techniques.  It was submitted
that the nature of AEC and NASA programs
has produced a capability in this area
which is quite unique.  The application of
new technology to analytical problems has
been a necessity since, in many cases, the
problems did not fall within the framework
of existing technology.  It was pointed out
that the approach to problem solving in the
national laboratories is multidisciplinary
in nature.  A second important ingredient
is the close association of development
teams with basic physical concepts, a
resource found only in large, mission-or-
iented research laboratories.  This leads
to an in-depth view of problems.

     Specific examples of this approach to
the development of instrumentation systems
were presented.  Fred Goulding of the
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory described the
development of an X-ray fluorescence system
for multielemental analysis of deposits on
air filters which has been developed for EPA
use.  This led to many discussions which
were considered to be quite important to the
objectives of this conference.

     Are the sophisticated systems which
seem to be characteristic of national labor-
atory solutions to measurement problems
                                          -333-

-------
realistic and economic?  This led to a
discussion of "true cost";  e.g., initial
high capital cost versus amortized cost
per sample where sample load is high.  It
was also indicated that there was concern
on the part of field personnel that the
national laboratory people might not be
interested in "practical, mundane problems".
Considerable discussion followed which
pointed out that problem solvers do not
view any problem as trivial until it is
solved.

     It was the consensus of the group that
the capabilities and advanced technology
existing in NASA and AEC laboratories could
and should be applied to measurement pro-
blems facing the EPA programs.  Basic pro-
blems appear to be:

1.  Problem definition.

    It was agreed that a fundamental re-
    quirement for problem solving is the
    identification of the true problem in
    sufficient detail to permit the appli-
    cation of new technology.  It was
    agreed that problem statements are
    frequently in the form of prejudged
    solutions.  It was recommended that
    communications at the working level
    must somehow be established and that
    the national laboratory people must
    somehow be included in the problem
    definition machinery.
2.  Funding.

    The reality of funding requirements
    for any role that the existing national
    laboratory capability might have in
    meeting EPA needs was discussed in some
    detail.  It was pointed out that both
    NASA and AEC do identify funding for
    support of technology development in
    the environmental area.  Mr. Butenhoff
    of the Division of Applied Technology
    of the AEC presented a summary of
    programs presently being funded to
    support technology development for
    direct application to EPA measurement
    problems.

It was suggested that a proper framework
might be to recommend that NASA and AEC
support long-range development of instru-
mentation and measurement technology and
that EPA provide support of specific
prototype or special short-range develop-
ment efforts which have a definite pro-
posed end-use or demonstration objective.
     In these discussions, considerable
concern was expressed by all members of the
workshop that an overriding problem exists.
The supposition that unique expertise will
continue to exist in the NASA and AEC lab-
oratories for the development and imple-
mentation of advanced concepts in instru-
mentation and technique is open to question.
The carefully developed, integrated capability
which is considered to be so valuable and
unique appears to be in serious Jepordy.
Contracting budgets in programmatic areas
within NASA and AEC threaten to dissipate
this capability as a management expedient.
Unfortunately, it would appear that this
capability has an administrative tag as a
"service function", which does not permit
it to have much control over its future.
Professionals in this area are most con-
cerned that the real instrumentation
development capability will deteriorate
rapidly if this problem is not recognized.

     It was recommended that the development
of instrumentation and measurement techniques
be identified as an essential role for the
AEC and NASA laboratories in the application
of new technology to meet EPA needs.  It is
recognized that such needs stated by EPA
would be helpful to the AEC and NASA in
budgetary planning.

     In summary, it was the consensus
that the conference, and particulary this
workshop on advanced sensing techniques,
provided a much needed forum for establish-
ing contact points between EPA organizations
and the laboratories of NASA and AEC.  An
informal mechanism was established among
the attendees to disseminate information
and maintain communication in the area of
measurement techniques and program require-
ments.  As a result of this opportunity for
interchange of ideas on the working level,
we feel that a significant step has been
made to establish a base for interagency
cooperation.
 DISCUSSION OF THE REPORT OF WORKSHOP 7

Ellsaesser:  Since you did not mention it,
I wonder if you thought that there was no
need for advanced sensing techniques for
measuring size distributions, compositions,
nucleating properties, and optical proper-
ties of aerosols.

Heath;  No, not true.  There was not enough
time to bring up all examples.

Comment;  I found interesting your statement
                                          -334-

-------
that the use of complex monitoring systems
on a daily, routine basis was too specific
a question to discuss.

Heath:  No, that's not what I said.  I said
that we felt we could not properly answer
that question.

Comment:  I think it should be recognized
that particular applications are the
ultimate goals of the advanced sensing
techniques we are developing.  We have to
collect data with them in the future.  This
is the main reason for developing them.

Heath;  Agreed.  The only question is
whether or not we could answer the question,
"For what specific purposes and for what
pollutants could such methods be econom-
ically used?"  That's a very general ques-
tion, and we do not feel that we could
answer that in any meaningful way.  I
think the answer is categorically "Yes".
                                           -335-

-------
                          WORKSHOP 8 - GLOBAL SCALE MONITORING

                              Chairman:  I. Poppoff (NASA)
        QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION

     Should the national effort in monitor-
ing of pollutant sources, sinks, and accum-
ulations in the biosphere be expanded?  What
are the most important pollutants that
should be measured?  For which of these will
more advanced monitoring techniques have to
be developed?
                THE REPORT

Why Global Monitoring?

1.  To observe long-term climate modification.

2.  To determine background concentrations
    of pollutants for which standards are
    being set.

3.  To quantify global scale transport of
    pollutants.

A.  To understand processes occurring in the
    atmosphere on a global scale.
    measure:  S02, CO, CH,, chlorophyll,
    sediment, thermal plumes.

5.  Ocean vessels - "everything".

6.  Data buoys - air and water temperature,
    pH, salinity, currents, solar radiation,
    wind.
What is needed to establish a global moni-
toring program?

1.  Rationale.

2.  Implementation of international plan-
    ning, coordination, priority setting.

3.  International calibration and standard-
    ization of measurement systems.

A.  More data analysis and modeling.

5.  Funding estimates and cost tradeoff
    analysis.
What should be measured?

1.  In air:  CO, C02, 0., particulates,
    precipitation (pH, trace elements), Hg,
    SO ,  S0_, NO ,  pesticides (of lesser
    importance:  H0S, N«), hydrocarbons,
    CH4).         2    2

2.  Oceans:  biota (phytoplankton),  water
    temperature, turbidity, incident UV
    radiation, air temperature,  pH,  heat
    budget, primary productivity, heavy
    bimetals.
What monitors for global coverage?

1.  10 surface stations planned initially
    for background and future trends.

2.  Glaciers, ocean sediment, loess de-
    posits for historic trends.

3.  Aircraft — CO, CO , SO , NO , water
    vapor (vertical profiles needed),
    particulates, chlorophyll.

4.  Satellites - temperature profiles,
    0-, water vapor, radiation.  Could
                                          -336-

-------
                          WORKSHOP 9 - TRANSFER OF SCIENTISTS

                              Chairman:  C. Maninger (LLL)
         QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION

     Would the temporary interagency trans-
fer of skilled scientific personnel between
EPA, AEC, and NASA be an effective means of
enhancing cooperation in environmental re-
search?  In what specific project areas
would such transfers be most productive?
                THE REPORT
GOAL
     We wish to jointly seek out one or
more effective means of utilizing scientific,
technical and management expertise and
experience for enhancing cooperation in
environmental research among Federal agen-
cies and their laboratories.

OBJECTIVES

     Our objectives are to establish coop-
erative efforts through:

1.  Joint use of facilities and equipment.

2.  Coordination of program development.

3.  Utilization of personnel with particular
    skills and experiences.


DISCUSSION

Common Problems;  The mandate put forth by
Congress in its promulgation of NEPA for
the Federal agencies to consider the adverse
environmental impact of their proposed
actions requires each agency to develop
tools and a data base to evaluate the
potential impacts and the social costs and
benefits thereof.

     Examples of common problems include
such activities as:

1.  Projection and development of tech-
    nology in pollution measurement, abate-
    ment, and control.

2.  Development and specification of methods
    for impact assessment (hazards analysis,
    benefits analysis).

3.  Model development (sources, transport,
    interaction effects).
A.  Data accumulation, processing,  and
    presentation.

5.  Compliance assessment and enforcement.

Approaches:  Several methods for achieving
the desired objectives are presented in
subparagraphs.  They include consideration
of advantages and disadvantages of the specific
approach.

1.  Personnel Transfer.

    a.  Short Term (up to 2 years).

     It has been demonstrated in studies of
the technology transfer process that the
most effective means of transferring knowl-
edge between institutions is through ex-
change of personnel.  The advantages of this
process are that its effects can be syner-
gistic and that benefits accrue to both the
sending and receiving agencies.  By sending
an individual from his own agency to a
different one on a temporary basis, one
achieves a cross-fertilization of ideas
virtually unobtainable in any other way.

     Opportunities for such interagency
personnel exchange should be explored
thoroughly, with an eye to including in-
dividuals involved in R & D, management,
and field (client interface) functions.  No
structured path for such transfers need be
established, but the legal and administrative
complexities involved, (e.g., who pays
salaries, how is overhead handled, patent
agreements, etc.) ought to be explored and
patterns for working them out should be
developed and made known throughout the
relevant agencies, so that they will not
appear as insuperable (and unique) barriers
each time a transfer is desired.

     Beyond the legal and administrative
questions, there are certain costs and pit-
falls associated with the process that ought
to be recognized and accounted for.  Trans-
ferred individuals, first of all, often find
themselves called upon to make significant
personal sacrifices (salary differentials,
moving costs, etc.) and efforts should be
made to ease these burdens.  Management
planning is critical in (1) selection of the
right individuals for transfer, (2) deter-
mining the most effective period of transfer
(from a few weeks through a year or two),
(3) defining the objectives of the particular
                                          -337-

-------
transfer, and (4) assuring that optimum use
is made of the transferee upon his return
home.  A final note:  We urge that personnel
involved in these temporary transfers be
exempted from host agency personnel ceilings.

    b.  Permanent positions (liaison)

     A distinct, but related, form of in-
formation exchange through people is the
assignment, in selected cases, of liaison
officers from one agency or lab to another.
The type of individual required here is
somewhat different from the type who would
take part in a short-term transfer.  He
ought to be more of a generalise, and his
role would be more broadly concerned with
finding out what is going on in the host
agency or lab and communicating it to his
parent agency.  This function might not
occupy him full-time and, to avoid the risk
of his being under-employed, he might have
significant programmatic responsibility
in the host site.  Models for this function
(which ought to be studied prior to imple-
mentation of the concept) include project
officers used by the Armed Services and by
national laboratories in contacts with their
contractors.  Although permanent liaison
posts might exist in various places, the
individuals assigned to these posts ought
to be rotated periodically to avoid loss of
their effectiveness via shifts of loyalty
and simply getting "stale" in their jobs.

2.  Joint Symposia on Selected Topics.

     This approach provides for structured
presentations coupled to discussion periods
with participants actively engaged.  It may
be tied into professional society activities
occurring in the vicinity of national
laboratories.

     The major advantages are that attention
is focused on a specific topic in a finite
time and that large numbers of people are
interacting.  The professional societies
may be a source of free manpower.  The major
disadvantages are that the people are not
brought into contact with the physical
equipment and travel budgets may be strained.

3.  Cooperative Programs without Exchange
    of Funds or Personnel.
     A cooperative program is defined as a
program which is jointly planned in an area
of mutual interest with allocation of specific
tasks by mutual agreement.  All results will
be made available to all members of the
cooperative effort Independent of the de-
gree of contribution.  It is critical that
the protocol be well defined in order for
the approach to be effective.  A major ad-
vantage is that administrative problems with
regard to funding and positions are minimized.

     The approach should be limited to
specific problems of common Interest, such
as Instrumentation.

A.  Internships.

     The internship concept is considered to
be a form of training program wherein tech-
nical or managerial personnel in the agency
having a need are sent to an agency having
an on-going program which can be structured
for the trainee.

     Although it appears on the surface that
the sending agency receives the primary
benefits, the advantages will average out
by transfers in both directions.  In addi-
tion, the trainee can serve the training
agency as a contact upon his return to his
parent agency.
CONCLUSIONS

     The environmental problems requiring
resolution are extremely complex, inter-
disciplinary in nature, and demand effective
resource utilization.  Capability transfer
engendered by the techniques described will
give rise to more effective use of re-
sources allocated.  Precedents have been
set for each approach presented; but past
uses have been carried out on an ad hoc
basis.  They would logically be more
effective if developed to a greater extent.
RECOMMENDATIONS

1.  That EPA field centers explore the ob-
    jective and approaches listed through the
    individuals named by their laboratories
    as liaison for this meeting.

2.  That EPA Headquarters consider requesting
    AEC and NASA Headquarters and/or the
    field centers for a limited number of
    personnel to be temporarily assigned to
    assist in some specially selected area
    of significant need as a means of ex-
    ploring the idea of temporary personnel
    transfer described by this workshop.
                                          -338-

-------
  DISCUSSION OF THE REPORT OF WORKSHOP 9

Question;  Would these temporary transfers
require the use of temporary slots?

Maninger:  No, one of the conditions that
we put in was that these transfers should
not be charged against the personnel ceil-
ing for the receiving agency.  They would
have to be accounted for by the sending
agency.
                                          -339-

-------
           Banquet Presentation
  This is the written version of the talk given at the
conference banquet by Professor Rolf Eliassen.
                     -340-

-------
                               CONFERENCE BANQUET ADDRESS


                               THE NATIONAL LABORATORIES

                               AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH

                                     Rolf Eliassen
                         Professor of Environmental Engineering
                            Department of Civil Engineering
                                  Stanford University
                              Stanford, California  9^305
     We have seen that the main objective
of this conference has been to match the
technical capabilities of the national
laboratories of the AEC and the labora-
tories of NASA with the great technological,
economic and social problems facing the
EPA.  In order to establish a workable
frame of reference, this conference has
placed emphasis on certain factors of the
environmental problems:  monitoring,
measurements, data handling and modeling.
I hope that through your workshops you will
be able to come to a meeting of minds on
the definition of the problems, some
approaches to their solution, and spheres
of potential cooperation.  I also hope that
these conferences will be repeated with
a broader scope of problems to be considered.

     Much time was spent on standards,
their development through research, and
implementation through emission reduction
by the best available and economically
feasible control technology.  As you in
the AEC know, even the most rational of
standards will be subjected to attack by
intervenors of all types, some of whom
might be knowledgeable about the subject,
and many of whom are completely uninformed.
This is where the interdisciplinary nature
of the program of the EPA may find success,
bringing together the social scientist with
basic and health scientists and technol-
ogists.  The AEC is finding a greater need
for this approach.

     Where can the AEC national laboratories
fit into this picture?  First, it might be
well to ask:  where is the money coming
from?  Dr. Greenfield mentioned the level
of research funds in all of EPA is only in
the vicinity of $160 million.  Compare
that with current AEC budgets!  For fiscal
1972, the budget for physical research
alone is $322 million; for biomedicine and
environmental research, $100 million; and
for reactor development about $500 million.
     Look at the magnitude of the AEC .
research programs in another way.  In terms
of people, a rough 1980 target of the total
personnel at the four National Environmental
Research Centers of EPA is 3,000.  At just
one AEC laboratory, here in Livermore, the
budget is about $160 million and there are
over 5,000 people employed.  So the scale
of operations is highly contrasted.  It
follows that EPA has very limited funds
for even its own operations.  The Congress
has mandated that research be the basis for
their standards.  The support of any sub-
stantial segment of the AEC national
laboratories is problematical.

     At the same time, the need for environ-
mental research is great, and the possible
subjects to tackle are enormous.  Further-
more, the multidisciplinary talent and facil-
ities available within the national labor-
atories constitute a great national resource.
The pattern of long term study of complex
projects is what is needed for the solution
of many environmental problems.  From the
discussions at this conference it is evident
that EPA has been directed to adopt the
principle of seeking relevance quickly.
Many environmental problems, such as the
confirmation of modeling with real time
data, the development and proof of the
efficiency of new control processes for air
and water pollution and solid waste manage-
ment, may take up to five years.  The country
needs both the short and long-term approaches.
AEC has long-term experience.  Research should
be coordinated, and priorities considered,
by EPA to assure a rational course of action.

     There is another major difference in
the outlook of research agencies of DOD,
NA~A, and AEC from that of EPA.  In the
case of the first three, the Federal govern-
ment is the customer;  for EPA, state, and
local governments and public are the ben-
eficiaries directly affected by the results
of research.  Many of the public, either
                                         -341-

-------
through the industries whose products they
consume (and whose increased prices they
must pay) or the governments to which they
pay taxes (for implementation of environ-
mental standards), are involved in the
decision process.  This is a fundamental
reason why the NERC's of EPA should have
strong research programs.  The AEC is
being drawn more into the public decisions
process through nuclear power, but this is
not the major thrust of the activities of
the AEC national laboratories.

     If we agree that the national labor-
atories have the talent, the facilities
and the desire to engage in environmental
research, as is evident from the confer-
ence, how do these laboratories get the
funding for the research?  We must ask the
Commissioners and the Joint Committee of
the Congress, together with OMB, to open
some of its budget to environmental
research.  More funding should be available
from the AEC to work on the impact of
energy conversion on the environment.  The
same holds true for NASA, with all of its
resources of manpower and facilities.  EPA
cannot fund even part of the talent avail-
able and needed to solve so many environ-
mental control problems.  At the same time,
there must be close coordination and coop-
eration, and much communication among AEC,
NASA, and EPA staff to assure that relevance
is achieved without duplication of effort.
Personnel of the AEC national laboratories
must get close to regional problems, get
out in the field, get their hands dirty,
and think in terms of limited budgets of
cities, industries and taxpayers.

     Research personnel of the AEC and NASA
are accustomed to thinking in terms of
million dollar instruments and facilities
for research.  Environmental problems
requiring monitoring should involve thousands
of instruments costing hundreds of dollars
a piece—at the most;  the needs are so
large and the monies available so small.
Industry must be able to and be interested
in producing these instruments in large
quantities and make them usable by unskilled
municipal employees, at the same time
obtaining valuable data.

     Many examples of possibilities for
using the talents of the national labor-
atories for development for instruments,
monitoring systems, environmental models
and control processes come to mind.  Most
of you will have visited the prestigious
computer facilities here at the Lawrence
Livermore Laboratory.  These computers
have been programmed to accept the most
complex problems of modern weapons tech-
nology.  Could the EPA not take advantage
of the modeling capabilities and computer
facilities at the national laboratories?
EPA probably will never be granted the
money to build computer installations of
this nature.  Can the classified nature of
tbp data storage banks be protected while
joint usage of the computers takes place?

     Look at a. different subject—the
measurement of odors.  Today's (October 18,
1972) Wall Street Journal has an interesting
article entitled "Environmental Protection
Agency looks for ways to measure bad smells
from industrial plants."  The best technique
that the City of Houston has come up with
is a subjective one.  The article states in
part:

  "In Houston, Victor Howard, the city's
  municipal pollution control director,
  believes a federally prescribed odor-
  detection method could help his city's
  present efforts to upgrade its anti-
  smell enforcement.  That's no small
  thing;  refining, chemical production
  and other industrial activities-are a
  constant problem for the Texas port
  city.

  Houston is currently experimenting with
  its own odor panel, a 12-member team
  positioned at street corners in odor-
  ous neighborhoods, primarily to pin-
  point odor sources.  The panelists,
  who are instructed to eschew personal
  use of strong after-shave lotions and  ,
  tobacco on test days, sniff the air
  once a minute for an hour,, recording
  "slight," "moderate," "strong" or
  "very strong" odors.  "Our first goal
  is to develop consistency," says
  Mr. Howard."

With such a well established expertise in
detecting minute amounts of fall-out, surely
the AEC national laboratories could come up
with a better solution to a pressing pro-
blem, using instruments to give credibility
to standards.

     The same holds true for visibility.
Could the experts in laser or optics tech-
nology devise some precise method of mean-
ing visibility to arrive at a significant
number for each condition?  Subjective
methods prevail now.

     In their addresses before you, yester-
day, Dr. Greenfield and Dr. Breidenbach
mentioned the need to develop control tech-
nology for the control of viruses.  Chlorine
                                          -342-

-------
alone without excessive doses will not assure
the destruction of hepatitis and other human
viruses.  But electron beam radiation of
sufficient dosage will destroy theml  With
all of the capabilities of the national
laboratories for dealing with electron
accelerators, the contribution which their
personnel can make to research on this pro-
blem is substantial.  MIT has made a pro-
posal to EPA to study this phenomenon
utilizing tandem 2 million volt accelerators
to introduce 100,000 rads of high-energy
electrons to flowing sewage.  Preliminary
studies show that virus disinfection
may be accomplished with electron beams at
an operating cost of k cents per 1,000 gal.,
half that of adequate chlorination.  Much
work needs to be done on the side reactions
of organic matter with the oxidants produced
by the high-energy electrons.  Are there any
toxic by-products?  Toxicity studies are one
of the great skills of the AEC national
laboratories.  Their thorough studies of
radiation effects and toxicology provide
experience which the environmental field
cannot afford to overlook inasmuch as
toxicology is such a "hot" issue now.

     Many other areas of mutual interest
have been developed in your workshop
sessions.  It has become evident that there
is a need for cooperation and coordination
in the field of environmental research
among Federal research agencies and that
the public stands to gain from the use of
all the talent which may be directed toward
environmental problems.  The national
laboratories have superb facilities which
the National Environmental Research Centers
of EPA could not duplicate without great
expense.  Records show there is not much
money in EPA for transfer to other agencies,
let alone meet its own goals.  Perhaps a
transfer of personnel and facilities could
take place among agencies to meet the needs
of priority research.  Alternatively, can
the laboratories of AEC and NASA get more
support for environmental research from
their agencies?  This is a question of
paramount importance to all of you and to
the public.

     As a result of this conference, we can
hope that a better understanding of the
environmental capabilities and interests of
each agency will be attained.  We can also
hope that a higher degree of cooperation
will be achieved, directed toward the goal
of relevance to the needs of environmental
control, as coordinated with EPA, the lead
agency to which the overall responsibility
is assigned.  Finally, we can only hope that
the Congress and the Executive Branch will
recognize the need for solving many of the
country's environmental problems through
research, and that funds will be made
available to utilize the great talents of
dedicated scientists, engineers and tech-
nicians available in the existing national
laboratories, along with the National
Environmental Research Centers of EPA.
                                          -343-

-------
Conference Summary
        -344-

-------
                                  CONFERENCE SUMMARY

                  EPA, THE NATIONAL LABORATORIES,  AND THE ENVIRONMENT

                           Wayne Ott, Conference Cochairman
                           Environmental Protection Agency .
                          Office of Research and Monitoring
                                Washington,  D.  C.  20^60
     I wish to extend my thanks to Carroll
Maninger, Co-chairman of this Conference,
and George Sauter, Program Chairman, for
the excellent job they have done in organ-
izing and implementing this Interagency
Conference on the Environment.  We in the
Environmental Protection Agency greatly
appreciate the tireless effort and time
they and their staff at the Lawrence Liver-
more Laboratory have put into the planning
of this conference, and it has been a
pleasure to work with them.

     The goal of this conference has been
to bring researchers and policy makers
from the Environmental Protection Agency
together with their counterparts from
other federal agencies having major re-
search laboratories.  The thematic empha-
sis has been upon research problems in
three important areas:

   1.  Environmental Monitoring
   2.  Environmental Modeling
   3.  Environmental Data Handling

The choice of these three areas does not
imply there are not also many other environ-
mental research areas which would also be
of mutual interest to the conference par-
ticipants.  Our goalj however, was to limit
the scope of the conference to subject
areas which could be adequately treated
in a three-day event.  There are many
topics which can be reserved for future
environmental conferences.

     What have been some of the results of
this conference?

     First and foremost, I think this three-
day conference has demonstrated that such
conferences can provide a vehicle for
communication, in a constructive and coop-
erative fashion, between major agencies of
the federal government.  Too often, I
think, the primary communication between
federal agencies takes place only at the
highest levels of government, where it sel-
dom is possible to discuss mutual areas of
interest at a "working", or "laboratory",
level or to probe into problems with any
detail.  As a result, the possibility of
undertaking joint studies, which could
benefit both agencies, sometimes cannot
be explored in depth.  The participants
at this conference have included not only
those who are concerned with important
policy decisions, but also those who carry
out or direct research projects on a day-
to-day basis.  We in EPA have been for-
tunate to be able to include representatives
from the EPA regional offices, whose
staffs are closest to the problem of con-
trolling environmental pollution, as well
as those from Washington headquarters and
from our four National Environmental
Research Centers.  As a result, the
communication which .has taken place has
involved many different segments from with-
in EPA, as well as many segments of the
national laboratories outside EPA.

     Second, by means of the Conference
Proceedings, we will place in print a use-
ful .synopsis of federal environmental
research program activities in the area of
environmental modeling, monitoring, and
data handling, as wel^. as a discussion of
some of the formidable problems in these
areas.  I realize that this document—
which will contain all the papers presented
at this conference as well as the summaries
of the workshops—only scratches the sur-
face of these environmental topics.  The
plain fact is that each of these topics is
too immense and too complex to be covered,
in any depth, in a three-day conference.
However, the Proceedings will provide an
excellent overview of current levels of
research activity in these areas, and, by
indicating that both EPA and the national
laboratories have mutual capabilities in
these fields, can provide the rationale,
on a technical level, for undertaking
future joint studies between and among the
participant agencies at this conference.
Thus, the conference Proceedings, when
distributed, can result in action well
beyond the events of this three-day
conference.
                                         -345-

-------
     Third, I hope that this conference
has allowed many new contacts and friend-
ships to be established by the participants
from different federal agencies.  The turn-
out has been excellent—both from the
Environmental Protection Agency and from
the other federal agencies—with more than
75 from EPA and 106 from AEC, NASA, DOT, and
other agencies.  I am hopeful that the
opportunity for meeting provided by this
conference will be broadened and expanded
by future visits between the laboratories
and by exchanges of information between
the agencies.  I think there is probably
no better form of communication than direct,
informal, personal contacts.

     For those who may wish to visit any of
EPA's four National Environmental Research
Centers  (NERC's), and I want to extend an
invitation to do so, let me indicate where
they are located.  Figure 1 shows the four
EPA NERC's, along with their "satellite" or
"associated" laboratories, on a map of the
United States.  NERC—Cincinnati and its
associated laboratories have been coded "A";
NERC—Corvallis and its associated labor-
atories have been coded "B";  NERC—Research
Triangle Park and its associated laboratories
have been coded "C";  and NERC—Las Vegas,
the newest of the Centers, which has no
associated laboratories at present, has been
coded "D".  Except for Las Vegas, each of
the NERC's; including its associated
laboratories, has about 400 people assigned
to it.  Also shown on this slide are the
boundaries of the EPA regional offices,
which number 10 in all, and are, in effect,
miniature EPA's without the research
function.  A Regional Office, with a staff
of perhaps 200 or 300 people, represents
EPA In matters of concern to the States,
the cities, and public at large and is
responsible for carrying forward EPA's
regional control efforts.  The Regional
Offices, therefore, are the "cutting edge of
the sword" with regard to the Implementation
of environmental control efforts, and,
because of their closeness of environmental
problems, the Regions are among EPA's most
Important users of the products of environ-
mental research.

     In planning this conference, It was
hoped that EPA would be able to clearly
describe and articulate to the national
laboratories some of the major national
environmental research problems, as it
sees them, and that the national laboratories
would respond by outlining their capabil-
ities to solve them.  I feel that we have
made progress in this direction—an "initial
door opening," so to speak.  I don't think
we can expect more than this.  I firmly
believe that the environment is a very
complex area, with many competing technical
goals—intertwined with social and econ-
omic factors—many different pollutants,
gaps in basic data on the prevalence of
these pollutants, and missing cause-
effect relationships.  All of this is
further complicated by legislative man-
dates, enforcement requirements, public
attitudes, and many other factors that the
national laboratories may not be accustomed
to dealing with on a day-to-day basis.
Thus, we in EPA cannot easily provide a
single statement or a simple "laundry list"
of our research problems, as might be
possible if we were designing a NASA mission
to the moon.  There is, after all, one
moon—with its motion and position fairly
well defined—and the techniques which
are required to get us there can be mapped
out directly.  Furthermore, there are
clearcut measures of our progress toward
the goal.  With the environment, it is not
so easy, because there often are many goals,
many priorities, and many unpredictable
phenomena;  as a result, it often is
difficult to select from among different
objectives, and, once we have selected,
more difficult to map out how we are to
obtain these objectives.  This does not
mean that environmental research problems
are not amenable to conventional research
methods;  It just means that the research
challenge is greater.  I think the nation's
environmental research problem, in terms
of the size of the effort required and the
diversity of skills needed, is easily on
a par with the space and nuclear programs.
I think, however, that if the national
laboratories are really to make an effective
contribution to environmental research,
they must work more closely with those of
us In EPA.  This means becoming more
exposed to the legislation, to the problems
of State and local control agencies, to the
efforts underway in the 10 EPA Regional
Offices, and to the many complex problems
with which we are constantly faced but
which we In EPA do not have the time or
money to explore in detail.  It also means
undertaking joint research studies with
EPA, not studies supported solely by EPA
with the national laboratories acting as
contractors, but studies jointly supported
by EPA and the national laboratories.  I
think our agencies should exploit all
opportunities for visits, exchanges of
Information, interagency seminars, joint
conferences, and, where possible, exchanges
of personnel and facilities.  An example of
the latter is the long-term exchange of
scientific personnel and the use, on a
                                          -346-

-------
remote basis,  of the extensive computer
facilities available at the national
laboratories.

    In summary, this conference has been,
I believe, a landmark conference, in the
sense that it  is the first conference
where a number of federal agencies, each
with their own separate interest, have
joined together to discuss their mutual
interests.  A  major goal has been commun-
ication, and I think we can all agree that
this conference has opened the door for
future conferences of its kind, as well as
cooperative efforts larger in scale than
those which have gone before.
RESEARCH  and  MONITORING  LABORATORIES
                                 A CINCINNATI
                                 B CORVALLIS
                                 c RESEARCH  TRIANGLE
                                 D LAS  VEGAS
                                  -347-

-------
Closing Remarks
      -348-

-------
                                     CLOSING REMARKS

                          R. C.  Maninger,  Conference Cochalrraan
                               Environmental Studies Group
                              Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
                                  Liver-more, California
     During the past three days we have
been given an excellent overview of the
history, the goals and the resources of
the Environmental Protection Agency.  The
EPA representatives have clearly indicated
in practical ways the nature of the problems
faced by EPA and the kinds of effort needed
to attack these problems.  The representa-
tives of the federal laboratories have
discussed a broad range of technology de-
veloped by the AEC and NASA that is directly
applicable to the technical needs of EPA.
As indicated in some of the papers, a
significant amount of environmental research
of direct interest to EPA is already underway
in the AEC and NASA laboratories.  In
particular, the conference paper "Federal
Laboratories as Centers of Excellence in
the Environmental Sciences - A Case Study",
by E. J. Croke and J. E. Norco, gives a
good view of the current roles and boundary
conditions in environmental research for
federal laboratories - particularly the AEC
laboratories.

     For those of you interested in more
detail  on environmental research by federal
laboratories, I recommend the report
"Environmental Research Laboratories in the
Federal Government - An Inventory."  This
is a two volume report on a study made for
the National Science Foundation by the
Policy Institute of Syracuse University
Research Corporation under the direction of
Dr. Albert Teich.  This report, published
in. September, 1971> is a comprehensive
survey of environmental research in labora-
tories of AEC, NASA, Department of Agricul-
ture, Department of Defense, Department of
Transportation, etc.  For each laboratory
surveyed, information is given on personnel,
budget, main missions or functions, extent
of environmental research, description of
physical plant and unusual equipment or
facilities, and other very useful items.

     Another source of information is the
report "Summaries of USAEC Environmental
Research and Development", TED ^065,
September, 1970, USAEC Division of Technical
Information Extension.  This report describes
a wide variety of projects in environmental
research and development funded by the AEC.
These projects are integral parts of the AEC
program to assure that nuclear activities
are conducted with due regard to human
health and safety and to the protection of
the environment.  The categories and fund-
ing levels of environmental research and
development related to nuclear activities
are shown in Table 1.  This research is
conducted in universities and colleges
throughout the U.S. and as AEC in-house
research at the laboratories listed in
Table 2.

     Out of the some U8,000 employees dis-
tributed as shown in Table 2, there are
perhaps 10,000 to 12,000 professionals
engaged in work which is related, or could
be useful in some way, for solving environ-
mental problems.  In fact, according to the
Teich survey, at least 700 to 800 of these
AEC professionals are already engaged in
direct environmental research involving
instrumentation development, modeling,
biomedical studies, data handling, and so
on.

     The National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) has at least eight
major research centers with significant
capabilities in environmental research.
These centers, listed in Table 3> have
developed their capabilities for environ-
mental research by participation in a
number of projects conducted in support of
major NASA missions.  For example, in
space life sciences a budget of $25,500,000
for FY 73 is devoted to biomedical research,
life support and protective systems tech-
nology, and bioengineering technology.
These program elements contribute to under-
standing of healthy human responses to
environmental stresses and generate new
techniques and instruments for measuring
the responses and stresses.  The earth
resources survey programs using both satel-
ites and aircraft are major contributors
to development of remote sensing systems
for ecological and environmental research,
to development of applications of these
systems, and to development of the tech-
nology for handling the masses of data to
be generaged by remote sensing systems.

     This very brief indication of AEC and
NASA facilities and in-house environmental
                                          -349-

-------
activities is intended to illustrate the size
of the resources in those agencies that may
be of interest to EPA.  The nature of the
work that can be accomplished for EPA with
these resources has been presented in the
technical papers and workshops of this
conference.  It is difficult to estimate
the number of professionals who could con-
tribute to environmental research, but a
reasonable guess is 3,000 to U,000 for NASA
and 6,000 to 8,000 for AEC.  It must be
remembered, however, that'the AEC and NASA
can make only a small fraction of these
people available to EPA without Jeopardizing
their main missions.  The size of this frac-
tion is both a matter of Judgment and the
nature of individual laboratories.  It may
vary from 1% to 10$, depending upon circum-
stances.  However, whatever the fraction is,
it will have full access to capital invest-
ments of hundreds of millions of dollars In
laboratories, computation facilities, and1
information banks.

     With these closing thoughts, we want
to thank all of you for your participation.
In particular we want to thank EPA for its
support..  I believe the conference has met
its objectives and has started relationships
both among people and among institutions that
will continue to develop and contribute to
effective environmental research.  Thank
you, good luck, and we hope to see you again.
            Table 1 - The AEC Environmental Research and Development Program
                      Related to Nuclear Activities (in Thousands of Dollars)
             Category
      FY 1969
FY 1970
 FY 1971
 Transport and Fate

 Measuring and Monitoring

 Evaluation of Effects

 Prevention and Control Technology

              TOTAL
                      •8,921*
        3.110

      $70,665
$71,228
 $1^,736

   8,857

  43,002

   U,622

' $71,217
                                          -350-

-------
         Table 2 - Laboratories  Involved in AEC  In-house Environmental Research
Laboratory Total Number of
Employees (1972)
Ames Research Laboratory
Argonne National Laboratory
Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory
Brookhaven National Laboratory
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Hanford Engineering Development Laboratory
Health and Safety Laboratory
Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory
Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory
Mound Laboratory
National Acceleratory Laboratory
National Reactor Testing Station
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Pacific Northwest Laboratory
Plasma Physics Laboratory, Princeton
Sand i a Laboratories
Savannah River Laboratory
Stanford Linear Accelerator
TOTAL
585
M56
3,756
2,621
2,U20
5,600
1,367
93
3,083
U,298
1,850
916
2,131
M8i
1,315
-
7,223
896
1.250
1*8, 1U
% of Employees in
Envir. Research (1971)*
small
10-15
-
15
small
5
-
100
-
<5
-
-
small
6 1/2
35-UO
-
-
small
-

*From A. Teich, "Environmental Research laboratories in the Federal Government - An
 Inventory", Syracuse University Research Corporation (1971)-

 Table 3 - NASA Research Centers with Significant Capabilities in Environmental Research
                       Center
Total Permanent
Employees (1972)
            Ames Research Center
            Goddard Space Flight Center
            Jet Propulsion Laboratory
            Langley Research Center
            Lewis Research Center
            Manned Spacecraft Center
            Marshall Space Flight Center
            Wallops Station Mission
                                       TOTAL
                                          -351-

-------
List of Attendees
      -352-

-------
                                   CONFERENCE ATTENDEES
Albenestus, E. L.
DuPont Savannah River Laboratory
Aiken, S. C.  29801

Alper, Marshall E.
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Pasadena, Calif.  91103

Altshuller, A. P.
EPA, NERC-RTP
Research Triangle Park, N. C.  277H

Apt, Kenneth E.
Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory
Los Alamos, N. M.  87544

Armstrong, Donald P.
EPA, NERC-RTP
Research Triangle Park, N. C. 27711

Ballard, Ronald L.
AEC, Directorate of Licensing
Washington, D. C.  20545

Ballinger, Dwight G.
EPA, NERC-Cincinnati
Cincinnati, Ohio  1+5268

Earth, Delbert S.
EPA, NERC-Las Vegas
Las Vegas, Nev.  89114

Barr, Suraner
Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory
Los Alamos, N. M.  87544

Bartsch, A. Fritz
EPA, NERC-Corvallis
Corvallis, Oregon  97330

Batzel, Roger E.
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Livermore, Calif.  94550

Bell, James W.
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Livermore, Calif.  94550

Bell, Nancie L.
NASA, Ames Research Center
Moffett Field, Calif.  94035

Black, Stuart C.
EPA, NERC-Las Vegas
Las Vegas, Nev.  89114

Bloch, M. Wayne
EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring
Washington, D.C.  20460
Bloom, Stewart D.
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Livermore, Calif.  9^550

Breidenbach, Andrew W.
EPA, NERC-Cincinnati
Cincinnati, Ohio  45268

Broderick, Anthony J.
DOT, Transportation Systems Center
Cambridge, Mass.  02142

Briggs, Benjamin R.
NASA, Ames Research Center
Moffett Field, Calif.  94035

Buck, Francis N.
EPA, NERC-Las Vegas
Las Vegas, Nev.  89114

Buginas, Scott J.
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Livermore, Calif.  94550

Burchard, John
EPA, NERC-Las Vegas
Las Vegas, Nev.  89114

Burckle, John 0.
EPA, OSWMP
Cincinnati, Ohio  45268

Butenhoff, Robert L.
AEC, Division of Applied Technology
Washington, D. C.  20545

Calder, G. Vincent
Ames Laboratory, Iowa State Univ.
Ames, Iowa  50010
Carnahan, Chalon L.
Desert Research Institute,
Reno, Nev.  89507
Univ. of Nevada
Catlin, Robert J.
AEC, Division of Operational Safety
Washington, D. C.  20545

Cearlock, Dennis B.
Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories
Richland, Wash.  99352

Clark-, B. David
EPA, Region IX
San Francisco, California 94111

Clark, Robert M.
EPA, NERC-Cincinnati
Cincinnati, Ohio  45268
                                          -353-

-------
Coleman, James S.
AEC, Office of the General Manager
Washington, D. C.  205^5

Collins, David C.
Technical Services Corporation
Santa Monica, Calif.  90U01

Crawford, Todd~V.
DuPont Savannah River Laboratory
Aiken, S. C.  29801

Cuadra, Elizabeth
EPA, Office of Noise Abatement and Control
Washington, D. C.  20U60

Cunningham, Paul T.
Argonne National Laboratory
Argonne, 111.  60^39

Dalton, Joseph M.
NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center
Greenbelt, Md.  20771

Darling, Eugene M.
DOT, Transportation Systems Center
Cambridge, Mass.  021U2

Davies, Tudor F.
EPA, Grosse lie Laboratory
Detroit, Mich.  1*8138

Deonigi, Duane E.
Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories
Richland, Wash.  99352

Donaldson, William
EPA, Southeast Environmental Research Lab.
Athens, Ga.  30601

Drake, Ronald L.
National Center for Atmospheric Research
Boulder, Colo.  80302

Dunn, Leslie
EPA, NERC-Las Vegas
Las Vegas, Nev.  89114

Duttveiler, David W.
EPA, Southeast Environmental Research Lab.
Athens, Ga.  30601

Eckert, J. A.
EPA, NERC-Las Vegas
Las Vegas, Nev.  89114

Eliason, Jay R.
Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories
Richland, Wash.  99352

Eliassen, Rolf
Dept. of Civil Engineering, Stanford Univ.
Stanford, Calif.  9^303
Ellison, Alfred H.
EPA, NERC-RTP
Research Triangle Park,
N. C.  27711
Ellsaesser, Hugh W.
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Livermore, Calif.  9^550

Engel, Ronald E.
EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring
Washington, D. C.  20460
English, Thomas D.
EPA, NERC-RTP
Research Triangle Park,
N. C.  27711
Enos, H. F.
EPA, Primate and Pesticides Effects Lab.
Perrine, Fla.  33157

Estess, Roy S.
NASA, Mississippi Test Facility
Bay St. Louis, Miss.  39520

Farmer, C. B.
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Pasadena, Calif.  91103

Felix, W. Dale
Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories
Richland, Wash.  99352
Finklea, John F.
EPA, NERC-RTP
Research Triangle Park,
N. C.  27711
Flanagan, Joseph E.
EPA, Office of Noise Abatement and Control
Washington, D. C.  20460

Floyd, E. P.
EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring
Washington, D. C.  20460

Fletcher, John G.
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Livermore, Calif.  9^550

Fordyce, J. Stuart
NASA, Lewis Research Center
Cleveland, Ohio 44135

Forziati, Alphonse F.
EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring
Washington, D. C.  20460

Galegar, William C.
EPA, Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory
Ada, Okla.  74820

Gerber, Carl R.
Brookings Institution
Washington, D. C.  20016
                                          -354-

-------
Gibbons, John H.
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Oak Ridge, Tenn.  37830

Glass, Norman
EPA, NERC-Corvallis
Corvallis, Ore.  97330

Gloria, Hermilo R.
NASA, Ames Research Center
Moffett Field, Calif.  9^035

Goldberg, Murrey D.
Brookhaven National Laboratory
Upton, Long Island, N. Y.  11973

Gordon, Barry
Brookhaven National Laboratory
Upton, Long Island, N. Y.  11973

Gotchy, R. L.
AEC, Directorate of Regulatory Standards
Washington, D. C.  2051*5

Goulding, F. S.
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
Berkeley, Calif.  9^720

Gove, Norwood B.
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Oak Ridge, Tenn.  37830

Gray, Leven B.
NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center
Greenbelt, Md.  20771

Greenfield, Stanley M.
EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring
Washington, D. C.  20U60

Greenwood, L, R.
NASA, Langley Research Center
Hampton, Va.  23365

Gustafson, Philip F.
Argonne National Laboratory
Argonne, 111.  60^39

Guthals, Paul R.
Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory
Los Alamos, N. M.  875^

Hales, Jeremy M.
Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories
Richland, Wash.  99352

Hammerle, James
EPA, National Air Data Branch
Durham, N. C.  27709

Hampel, Viktor E.
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Livermore, Calif.  9^550
Hardy, Edward P.
AEC, Health and Safety Laboratory
New York, N. Y.  lOOli*.

Harrison, Melvin A.
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Livermore, Calif.  9^550

Hauser, Thomas R.
EPA, NERC-RTP
Research Triangle Park, N.C.  27711

Heath, Russell L.
Aerojet Nuclear Co.,  NRTS
Idaho Falls, Ida.  83^01

Hollander, Jack M.
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
Berkeley, Calif.  9U720

Holmes, Robert
EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring
Washington, D. C.  20U60
Hooper, Mark
EPA, Region X
Seattle, Wash.
98101
House, Peter D.
EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring
Washington, D. C.  20k60

Hudson, Robert D.
NASA, Manned Spacecraft Center
Houston, Texas  77058

James, C. E.
EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring
Washington, D. C. 20U60

Jaworski, Norbert A.
EPA, NERC-Corvallis
Corvallis, dreg.  97330

Johnson, LaMar J.
Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory
Los Alamos, N. M.  QTjkk

Johnson, Warren B.
EPA, NERC-RTP
Research Triangle Park, N. C.  27711

Kennedy, Allen S.
Argonne National Laboratory
Argonne, 111.  6014.39

King, James
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Pasadena, Calif.  9H03

Kingscott, John
EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring
Washington, D.C.  20U60
                                          -355-

-------
Kleveno, Conrad D.
EPA, Region V
Chicago, 111.  60606

Kniseley, Richard N.
Ames Laboratory, Iowa State Univ.
Ames, Iowa  50010

Knox, Joseph B.
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Livermore, Calif.  9^550

Kuper, J. B. H.
Brookhaven National Laboratory
Upton, Long Island, N. Y.  11973

Lange, Rolf
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Livermore, Calif.  9^550

Lawrence, James D.
NASA, Langley Research Center
Hampton, Va.  23365

Lederman, Peter
EPA, Edison Water Quality Research Lab.
Edison, N. J.  0881?

Lefke, Louis W.
EPA, NERC-Cincinnati
Cincinnati, Ohio  U5268

Lehr, Eugene L.
DOT, Office of the Secretary
Washington, D. C.  20590

Leppelmeier, Gilbert W.
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Livermore, Calif.  9^550

Lindeken, Carl L.
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Livermore, Calif.  9^550

Lofting, E. M.
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
Berkeley, Calif.  9^720

Lomasney, Edmond P.
EPA, Region IV
Atlanta, Ga.  30309

Ludwig, Francis L.
Stanford Research Institute
Menlo Park, Calif.  9^025

Lyon, William S.
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Oak Ridge,  Tenn.  37830

MacCracken, Michael C.
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Livermore,  Calif.  9^550
Mage, David T.
Chemical Engineering, Calif. State Univ.
San Jose, Calif.

Maninger, R. Carroll
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Livermore, Calif.  9^550

Manowitz, Bernard
Brookhaven National Laboratory
Upton, Long Island, N. Y.  11973

Matwiyoff, Nicholas A.
Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory
Los Alamos, N. M.  QTjkU

MeFarlane, Craig
EPA, NERC-Las Vegas
Las Vegas, Nev.  89114

Michael, Paul
Brookhaven National Laboratory
Upton, Long Island, N. Y.  100lU

Mi Hard, John P.
NASA, Ames Research Center
Moffett Field, Calif.  9^035

Miller, Charles F.
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Livermore, Calif.  9^550

Moghissi, A. Alan
EPA, NERC-Las Vegas
Las Vegas, Nev.  89114

Moore, Elbert
EPA, Region X
Seattle, Wash.  98101

Morgan, George B.
EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring
Washington, D. C.  20460

Moses, Harry
Argonne National Laboratory
Argonne, 111.  60439

Mueller, Harold F.
NOAA, Air Resources Laboratory
Las Vegas, Nev.  89114

Nader, John S.
EPA, NERC-RTP
Research Triangle Park, N. C.   27711

Nelson, D. Jack
EPA, Office of Radiation Programs
Rockville, Md.  20854

Nelson, William C.
EPA, NERC-RTP
Research Triangle Park, N. C. 27711
                                          -356-

-------
Newman, Leonard
Brookhaven National Laboratory
Upton, Long Island, N. Y.  11973

Norco, Jay E.
Argonne National Laboratory
Argonne, 111.  60^39

Novakov, Tihomir
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
Berkeley, Calif.  9^720

Oakley, D. T.
EPA, Office of Radiation Programs
Rockville, Md.  2CJ854

0'Boyle, Charles J.
EPA, Region VIII
Denver, Colo.  80203

Ott, Wayne R.
EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring
Washington, D. C. 20M50

Overstreet, Roy
AEC
Washington, D. C.  205^5

Palmer, Kenneth J.
Department of Agriculture
Albany, Calif.  9^710

Papetti, Robert
EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring
Washington, D. C.  20^60

Pasternack, Bruce
Council on Environmental Quality
Washington, D. C. 20006

Paul, Fred W.
NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center
Greenbelt, Md.  20771

Perkins, Richard W.
Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories
Richland, Wash.  99352

Phelps, Donald K.
EPA, National Marine Water Quality Lab.
West Kingston, R. I.  02892

Poppoff, I. G.
NASA, Ames Research Center
Moffett Field, Calif.  9^035

Rausa, Gerald J.
EPA, Office of Radiation Programs
Rockville, Md.  2085^

Reeves, Mark
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Oak Ridge, Tenn.  37830
Reichle, Henry G.
NASA, Langley Research Center
Hampton, Va.  23365

Reznek, Steven
EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring
Washington, D. C.  20U60

Ricci,. Eugene
EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring
Washington, D. C.  20U60

Risley, Clifford
EPA, Region V
Chicago, 111.  60606

Robeck, Gordon G.
EPA, NERC-Cincinnati
Cincinnati, Ohio U5268

Romanovsky, J. Cyril
EPA, NERC-RTP
Research Triangle Park, N. C. 27711

Rusche, Ben C.
DuPont Savannah River laboratory
Aiken, S. C.  29801

Rusnak, Jerome J.
Denver Research Institute, Denver Univ.
Denver, Colo.  80121

Sauter, George D.
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Livermore, Calif.  9^550

Schleede, Glenn R.
AEC, Office of Planning and Analysis
Washington, D. C.  205^5

Schmidt, William B.
EPA, Region X
Seattle, Wash.  98101

Schoen, Arthur A.
AEC, Division of Operational Safety
Washington, D. C.  205^5

Schuck, Edward
EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring
Arlington, Va.  20U60

Sedlacek, William A.
Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory
Los Alamos, N. M.  &Tykk

Sedlet, Jacob
Argonne National Laboratory
Argonne, 111.  60^39

Shapira, Jacob
NASA, Ames Research Center
Moffett Field, Calif.  9^035
                                          -357-

-------
Shearer, S. David
EPA, NERC-RTP
Research Triangle Park, N. C.   27711

Shu Its, Wilbur D.
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Oak Ridge, Tenn.  37830

Slegel, Sidney
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Oak Ridge, Tenn.  37830

Smith, H. Louise
Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory
Los Alamos, N. M.  875Mt-

Smlth, 0. Glenn
NASA, Manned Spacecraft Center
Houston, Texas  77058

Snelling, Robert N.
EPA, NERC-Las Vegas
Las Vegas, Nev.

Stanley, Richard E.
EPA, NERC-Las Vegas
Las Vegas, Nev.

Stanley, Thomas W.
EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring
Washington, D. C.  20k6o

Stenburg, Robert L.
EPA, NERC-Cincinnati
Cincinnati, Ohio ^5268

Stephenson, R. Rhoads
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Pasadena, California 91103

Swan, Paul F.
NASA, Ames Research Center
Moffett Field, Calif.  9U035

Talley, Wilson K.
Presdient's Office, Univ. of California
Berkeley, Calif.  9^720

Teich, Albert H.
Syracuse University Research Corp.
Syracuse, N. Y.  13210

Tellekson, Merle W.
EPA, Region V
Chicago, 111. 60606
Tenney, Vern W.
EPA, Region IX
San Francisco, Calif.
Tepper, Morris
NASA, Earth Observations Program
Washington, D. C.   205^6

Tompkins, Paul C.
EPA, NERC-RTP
Research Triangle Park, N.  C.  27711

Underwood, Robert L.
DOT, Office of the  Secretary
Washington, D. C.   20590

Vaughn, Burton E.
Battelle Pacific Northwest  Laboratories
Richland, Wash.  99352

Walsh, Gerald
EPA, Sabine Island
Gulf Breeze, Fla.   32561

Watson, Velvin R.
NASA, Ames Research Center
Moffett Field, Calif.  9^035

Wiersma, G. Bruce
EPA, Agriculture Research Center
Beltsville, Md.  20705

Wirth, George F.
EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring
Washington, D. C.   20^60

Wiser, Herbert L.
EPA, Office of Research and Monitoring
Washington, D. C.   201*60

Yusken, John W.
NASA, Ames Research Center
Moffett Field, Calif.  9^035
 it U. ». OOVDtNMINT PRINTING OFPICCi I»T»—74J14I/774I
                                          -358-

-------