United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Off ice of
Public Awareness (A-107)
Washington DC 20460
March 1979
Health and the Environment
-------
New
Research
Directions
An interview with
Stephen A. Gage,
EPA Assistant Ad-
ministrator for
Research and
Development
A/ill preventive health
research be an important
part of the Agency's
R&D in the future?
Yes, without a doubt. During
the FY 1980 budget cycle, the
Office of Research and Develop-
ment developed a major public
health research initiative. The
President's Budget requests
$37 million and 44 positions
for expanding our research both
in health effects of toxicants
and in their environmental
transport, fate, and effects.
The Public Health Research
Initiative is one of the center-
pieces of the Agency's budget
requests. Administrator Costle
and I are going to be pushing
very hard in our Congressional
hearings for this program.
I think that this is a very
important change in the per-
ception of the role of scientific
information in the regulatory
process. There is now a very
clear recognition, by this Ad-
ministration, that we must make
the necessary investments in
good scientific information in
order to avoid future inadequate
regulatory decisions.
Do you anticipate greater
cooperative efforts in the
future with the Mational
Institute of Environmen-
tal Health Sciences and
the National Cancer Insti-
tute, particularly in the
health-related areas?
Yes, we have quite a number
of cooperative efforts going on
already. I'm proudest of a joint
effort that Donald Kennedy,
Commissioner of the Food and
Drug Administration, and I have
undertaken in establishing a re-
search institute for neurotoxi-
cological effects at Research
Triangle Park, N.C. Dr. Ken-
nedy and I have pooled our
resources for this institute to
be located at EPA's research
facility in North Carolina. This
will create a critical mass of
expertise that neither agency
was able to bring together on its
own.
We also are working closely
with the National Cancer Insti-
tute. For the last two years, the
National Cancer Institute has
This interview was conducted
by Charles D. Pierce, Editor,
and Chris Perham, A ssistant
Editor, EPA Journal.
committed $4 million of its
research funding to support
research activities needed by
the Environmental Protection
Agency. In fiscal year 1980, as
part of the Public Health Re-
search Initiative, this institute
will be committing an addi-
tional $15 million in its budget
to support EPA in several areas
where it has the specific exper-
tise that we need.
We also have a number of
other interagency agreements,
through which we work with the
National Institute of Environ-
mental Health Sciences, the
National Institute of Occupa-
tional Health and Safety, and
others. We find that these inter-
agency agreements are very
useful and very supportive
of EPA's work to improve pub-
lic health protection.
Is EPA cutting back on
research in ecological
fields in order to provide
more funds and man-
power for strictly human
health research?
While there have been some
reductions and redirections in
our environmental research, it
will, in fact, be expanding dur-
ing the next fiscal year. We have
had to redirect certain research
from the historical areas of
activity to support toxic chem-
ical control. But this is only
natural, given the general shift
of EPA's concern from the con-
ventional pollutants to the toxic
chemicals.
I'm pleased that we have, in
our Public Health Research Ini-
tiative for FY 1980, a very sub-
stantial increase in research on
environmental transport, fate,
and effects, as such research
relates to reducing the threat of
exposure to humans. We felt it
was critical for EPA with its
unique responsibility to address
the environmental routes of ex-
posure through a substantial
expansion of our efforts in this
area.
Would you describe some
of the assessment groups
now functioning to sup-
port EPA regulatory
actions?
The Agency has just approved
our proposal to establish an
Office of Health and Environ-
mental Assessment, which will
be built around two successful
groups now in operation, name-
ly, the Carcinogen Assessment
Group, and the Environmental
Criteria and Assessment Office
located at Research Triangle
Park.
We will be expanding the
efforts of this new office beyond
carcinogenic assessment and air
quality criteria development,
respectively, to include risk
assessments For other media,
especially water. The new office
will ultimately have a respons-
ibility for reproductive effects,
for chronic effects, and for ex-
posure assessment.
The new health office also
includes a second Environmen-
tal Criteria and Assessment
Office in Cincinnati. That office
will focus primarily on the prep-
aration of water quality criteria
documents, a responsibility that
has grown greatly in the past
year as the Agency has been
attempting to comply with the
consent decree for toxic
pollutants.
Are you recruiting nation-
wide to find somebody to
head this office?
Yes, we will be establishing that
office and all of its components
just as quickly as the Agency's
order is signed, and will be re-
cruiting the best people we can
find.
Isn't exposure assessment
a new tack for the Agency
—a new way of using our
resources? In the past we
have tended to look at
the media such as air or
water just one at a time.
Very much so. I think the
Agency has suffered from taking
a narrow viewpoint. We need to
focus on the overall effects of
a pollutant as it affects humans
in several ways. This compre-
hensive approach is not only
more efficient use of the Agen-
cy's scarce resources—people,
time, and expertise—but also
provides more public health
protection by truly assessing
the total impact of the environ-
mental toxicants on human
beings.
12
EPAJOURNAL
-------
.Would you comment on
your efforts in recent
months to make R&D
more responsive to the
program offices? For ex-
ample, I understand you
were recently in Chicago
discussing plans to help
support our enforcement
program.
For the past year we have been
working very hard to develop a
mechanism to provide for joint
planning of the research that we
perform in support of regulatory
activities. We carried out a pilot
study involving the establish-
ment and monitoring of five re-
search committees in substan-
tive research areas—pesticides,
inhalable participates, mobile
sources, industrial wastewater
control, and drinking water. The
success we had with these five
pilot committees has encour-
aged us to expand this method
of joint planning. The regula-
tory control offices are support-
ing our expansion of the concept
to include all of the research
activities that we conduct for
the Agency.
To support the Agency's en-
forcement efforts, we have
taken a somewhat different
approach. We have established
a task force of some of our key
people, who are working with
the Office of Enforcement and
the Regional Enforcement Of-
fices, in the four highest priority
enforcement areas—power
plants, steel, pulp and paper,
and chemicals. Although this
effort is just getting underway,
we have already given Regions
3 and 5 considerable assistance
in case preparation for the four
key industrial sectors.
How has the Zero Base
Budget process affected
your programs?
Zero Base Budgeting has pro-
vided net benefits for the Office
of Research and Development.
The largest positive impact so
far is the Public Health Re-
search Initiative which I men-
tioned earlier.
On the other hand, there have
been some reductions in certain
programs. The air ecology pro-
gram has been converted from
an in-house program to a pri-
marily extramural program. The
environmental management re-
search program was terminated
through the ZBB process.
Smaller cuts in our water ecol-
ogy program have for the most
part been offset by increases in
the toxic substances ecology
program. So, on balance, over
the last two years we have ben-
efited budgetarily and have
about held our own in person-
nel. Given the high priorities of
the Agency to develop major
efforts in toxic substances and
hazardous waste regulation, I
think that the ZBB process has
dealt fairly with us.
Will the laboratories be
reflecting the changes you
have just mentioned?
Are we going to close
some down and open
others?
No, we have no plans to close
any of the laboratories. We have
to keep looking continually at
how we can effect economies in
the laboratories. It is likely that
there will be some redirection
in some of the laboratories. The
Zero Base Budget process for
FY 1979 did necessitate some
reductions-in-f orce at three of
our laboratories. Reductions at
the Robert S. Kerr Laboratory in
Ada, Oklahoma, are essentially
complete, and we will soon be
initiating the reductions in the
Las Vegas and Corvallis lab-
oratories.
But I would say, in all three
cases, the laboratories have not
been substantially harmed by
these reductions. In fact, they
probably have an enhanced abil-
ity to compete for resources in
the future.
With fixed personnel ceilings
for the last five years, we have
not really had the opportunity to
think about establishing new
laboratories. Our concentration
is more on how best to use the
laboratories and the scientists
and engineers that we do have
more efficiently.
Are you satisifed with the
performance of EPA's
laboratories?
In general, yes. We do face
mixed performance. As in any
organization with fifteen quite
different components, we ex-
pect some variation in perform-
ance. We have undertaken seri-
ous efforts to improve perform-
ance through peer review, at the
laboratory level, and program-
matic review by the Deputy
Assistant Administrators and
myself. And I think the combi-
nation of these review tech-
niques will upgrade the general
performance, and bring some of
the less satisfactory perform-
ances up to acceptable levels
within the coming year.
Could you explain what
you mean by peer review,
and how this is a change
in the way things are done
in the R&D program?
Many of our scientists do pub-
lish their work. However, many
reports that we and our contrac-
tors prepare are not published
and do not receive the careful
scrutiny from scientists outside
of the Agency. This is in part
because of the fast timetables
required for much of the re-
search that we conduct in sup-
port of the Program Offices.
However, what has developed
is a massive body of "grey"
literature, which has not been
carefully reviewed by the best
scientists in those areas.
I'm working with our labora-
tory directors to develop ways
in which we can get a larger
fraction of our EPA reports and
papers reviewed by scientists
outside the Agency before pub-
lication. This will be a source of
strength for us in the future,
rather than just another burden
placed upon the researchers.
It's absolutely critical in
terms of improving the credibil-
ity of the Agency, not only to
conduct research, but to take
regulatory decisions based on
those research results.
Do you have any plans for
major reorganization of
the Office of Research
and Development?
My view of organizations is that
they must constantly adapt to
the changing environment—
both external and internal.
There is no more dynamic or-
ganization than the Environmen-
tal Protection Agency, which is
perennially faced with changing
priorities and requirements. We
have made several evolutionary
changes during the past year in
establishing the Office of Re-
search Program Management
and the Office of Health and
Environmental Assessment.
We now have under serious
discussion a proposal made by
some of our laboratory directors
to realign their reporting rela-
tionships to the Deputy Assist-
ant Administrators. Such a re-
alignment would represent, in
my estimation, only a modest
evolution in the organization,
and thus have minimal impact
on morale and productivity. On
the other hand, it should help us
immensely in integrating our
research planning and imple-
mentation in health effects; en-
vironmental transport, fate, and
effects; and environmental con-
trol measures.
Is it possible that our
scientific knowledge of
health and environmental
problems has gotten
ahead of our ability to
solve them? For example,
we have learned to detect
chemicals in parts per
million, although we're
only beginning to (earn
how to protect ourselves
from these dangers.
FDA Commissioner Kennedy
has put it very well. He says we
have become embarrassingly
good at identifying chemicals in
the environment and workplace.
I agree with that view. I would,
however, rather know what is
there with the new analytical
techniques that we have devel-
oped in the past decade than
not know. I fully recognize that
it takes time to develop the rest
of the information and, in some
instances, the institutional
framework, so that one can map
out an intelligent regulatory
course.
I do not think that ignorance
is bliss. We are probably going
to be faced in the future with
knowing about a lot of problems
before we are able to devise
and implement solutions.
Is EPA approaching a risk-
benefit formula to use in
dealing with environ-
mental carcinogens?
In the area of carcinogen as-
sessment, we are in fact follow-
ing the Agency's interim guide-
lines, established in 1976,
which stated that we would pro-
vide risk and benefit analyses,
as part of the regulation of car-
cinogenic materials. That's
complicated somewhat by the
fact that we regulate carcino-
gens under at least seven major
MARCH 1979
13
-------
pieces of legislation, with quite
a wide range of regulatory re-
quirements. For example, Con-
gress did make it explicit that
risk and benefits are to be con-
sidered in regulating pesticides
and toxic substances, namely,
products which supposedly
have beneficial uses in com-
merce.
On the other hand, some
provisions of the Clean Water
Act are driven solely by tech-
nology considerations, and
some provisions of the Clean
Air Act are driven solely by
health protection considera-
tions. We do conduct economic
impact analyses of each of our
regulatory proposals, but are
not always able to calculate the
benefits. Thus, it is difficult to
do a strict economic balancing
of the risk and benefits under all
of our regulations.
What research is EPA
doing in the genetic re-
percussions of environ-
mental contaminants?
As I mentioned, we are estab-
lishing an assessment group on
reproductive effects, as part of
the new office of Health Assess-
ment for genetic effects. We
already have set up a working
group with Dr. Gary Flamm,
who is on loan from the Food
and Drug Administration, to
provide guidelines for muta-
genic risk. We’ll be looking at
other aspects of genetic risk in
the future. In addition, we do
have under way in our health
effects laboratories research on
the ways toxic chemicals threat-
en genetic health and on quick
and reliable screening tech-
niques to identify genetic risks.
How much of EPA’s R&D
work is in the physical,
hard sciences, and how
much is in the softer
sciences, such as
economics?
At this point nearly all of our
research and development is in
the area of the physical, biolog-
ical, and medical sciences. We
do have a very small research
component oriented towards
attempting to determine the
economic benefits of pollution
control measures, such as the
study we’ve funded at the Uni-
versity of Wyoming. But the
bulk of the work on economic
impacts of regulation is done in
either the regulatory program
offices, or by the Office of Plan-
ning and Management.
Is there a promising fu-
ture at EPA for young
scientists just getting
out of college?
I would say that a young scien-
tist, who could find a position
with the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, would have a very
exciting future. We have, how-
ever, few openings for research-
oriented scientists each year in
our research laboratories, be-
cause of the personnel limita-
tions that we have faced for five
years.
There are, of course, a num-
ber of new positions in the toxic
substances area, but those will
be oriented towards regulation,
as opposed to research.
I assume that EPA prob-
ably gets quite a sub-
stantial number of
applications, despite the
difficulties of getting a
position?
Yes, we get many applications.
Each one of the new entry-level
positions are very highly con-
tested. We’re able to attract a
high caliber of young scientists
into our laboratories. In many
instances, the new people com-
ing in are carrying a substantial
portion of the workload and are
providing a large fraction of the
new and exciting ideas.
I noticed Secretary of
Energy Schlesinger is
saying now that there
should be more emphasis
on the use of natural gas,
indicating that the coun-
try may slow up a little
bit in converting to coal
as a major source of
power. Does that have an
impact on our research
program?
No, I think that the increased
use of natural gas, within the
United States, will be a fairly
short-lived phenomenon, on the
order of a few tens of years.
Therefore, we must increasingly
turn to other forms of energy
and conserve natural gas. I think
that the use of coal will con-
tinue to expand. This, in turn,
will put a great deal of stress on
the environment if we don’t do
everything we can to minimize
The environmental impacts as-
sociated with coal production
and use.
In one of your recent
speeches, you seemed to
be sympathetic to the
soft energy paths, en-
dorsing the uses of wind-
mills, solar energy, and so
on, and I wondered if this
is your personal view, or
official EPA policy?
EPA does not have an official
policy in this area. I can point,
however, to a number of exam-
ples where the Agency’s poli-
cies are reflecting what I person-
ally feel is a growing awareness
that large, complicated tech-
nological solutions to society’s
problems are not the only, or
even the best, route that could
be followed.
I think that the new policy
shifts in water pollution control,
emphasizing land application of
sewage sludges and partially
treated municipal wastewater,
are a clear recognition of the
fact that the huge commitment
that society is making to pub-
licly-owned wastewater treat-
ment plants also entails large
future obligations.
These obligations are in the
form of maintenance and oper-
ating expenses which will, in
time, become very burdensome.
The softer paths, to use your
term, such as land application,
can capture the nutrient value
that exists in the sludge or
wastewater, without requiring
large capital and operating
costs. That’s an excellent ex-
ample of the softer technology
path.
I focused on the energy alter-
natives in that particular speech
because I was trying to high-
light, from four years of experi-
ence with pilot energy studies
conducted by the Committee on
Challenges of Modern Society
(the civilian arm of the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization),
some lessons which I thought
the representatives of the coun-
tries involved should know. The
pilot studies taught that alter-
native energy systems such as
solar and geothermal could play
a very significant role in the
future of not only the develop-
ing nations but also of the highly
industrialized nations.
We understand that R&D
is starting to look fifteen
and twenty years into the
future, regarding research
needs. With this new per-
spective, what critical
environmental problems
do you see on the horizon’
In our efforts to develop a solid
analytical basis for the Re-
search Outlook—our five-year
research plan—we are attempt-
ing to identify future develop-
ment patterns and their possible
environmental consequences.
We see two types of pressures
which could have great influ-
ence on environmental quality.
The first of these is driven by
both increases in human popu-
lations, and in their expecta-
tions for affluence. This pres-
sure will mean greater demands
for food, housing, energy, min-
erals, etc. These increased de-
mands, around the world, could
hold many implications for the
environment. For example, an
aggressive food production pro-
gram might have to rely even
more heavily than is now the
case on chemical fertilizers and
pesticides. And we’re quite
familiar with the environmental
damage they’ve caused.
Pressure on the biological
resources in the sea could in-
crease to a point where major
ecological balances could be
disturbed. Demand for timber,
for housing, could lead to mas-
sive deforestation and associ-
ated climatic changes, especi-
ally in such sensitive areas as
the Amazon.
The second type of pressure
derives from the development
of new technologies, which are
just now emerging. It’s hard to
predict in advance what the
nature of all these technologies
are, of course, and even more
difficult to identify what their
environmental impacts might
be. And I’m speaking of tech-
nologies in a very broad sense
—weather control, deep ocean
mining, advanced energy sys-
tems, or genetic engineering.
In fact, in the area of genetic
research, we could find very
dramatic advances, which could
improve human health, change
industrial processes quite fun-
damentally, or endanger human
health and the basic ecological
EPA JOURNAL
-------
systems upon which life
depends.
We’re going to have to moni-
tor both of these pressures very
carefully, and attempt to an-
ticipate the nature of the envi-
ronmental problems that we
might face in the future, rather
than wait until those problems
overtake us, and then react to
them after possible irreversible
damage is done.
When you leave your post
as Assistant Administra-
tor for Research and De-
velopment, some time in
the future, what do you
want to be remembered
for, and what do you hope
to have accomplished?
I’d like to be remembered for
two things. First, improving the
quality of the science and engi-
neering done by the Agency
and, second, building the in-
stitutions which facilitate the
performance of higher quality
work.
I believe fundamentally in the
scientific ethic, which is built
in part on the idea that only
quality science can survive the
scrutiny of the scientific peers.
We have to make that idea one
of the operating principles of
the Office of Research and De-
velopment and of the Agency.
As the research component of a
critical Federal regulatory
agency, we do not have the
option of isolating ourselves
from the broader scientific com-
munity. Quite to the contrary,
we must, in fact, be aggressive
in seeking out the best scien-
tific criticism we can find any-
where. We’re making progress
in building our scientific credi-
bility but we still have much
to do.
An important aspect in im-
proving our science is creating
a truly professional environ-
ment throughout the Office of
Research and Development. We
have many laboratories and
specialized instruments, but we
still have much to do in building
our human institutions—we
need a cadre of highly profes-
sional and committed scientific
managers, who are excited
about their work. We have some
outstanding examples of that
type of individual now, but I
would like to leave behind a
stronger heritage of profession-
alism and performance. D
The Team
Leaders
and Laboratories
Dr G ige has four Deputy As
i.stant A do in strators tc aid in
he direction of the Office of
Rese t id 0 vt toomeot.
The, h Jo i iage the Office S
,752 employees id the 314
in annualbudge ‘he
. .
npmen has 5 major ‘abora-
to ‘ies and ume’o field
sta’ons that are devc ed to
sc ,entific study. Approxirriately
one out of every five EPA
ernn/oyees works in these ‘abs
He is responsible for planning
and evaluating the research and
development program related to
the control of pollution from
community and agricultural
sources; determining the na-
ture, fate, and interaction of
pollutants in air and water;
providing safe drinking water
supplies, and planning and im-
plementing community environ-
mental management systems.
He also oversees development
of incentives for environmental
cleanup, methods for integrated
environmental planning and
analysis, and plans for the dis-
posal and management of haz-
ardous and other waste mate-
rial.
Dr. Murphy joined the Fed-
eral Water Pollution Control
Administration, an EPA prede-
cessor agency, at its Edison,
N.J., laboratory in 1967 as a
biologist, later becoming Chief
of the Oil and Hazardous Mate-
rials Research. In 1971 he was
appointed Special Assistant to
the Assistant Commissioner for
Research and Development at
the Federal Water Quality Ad-
ministration. He was Chief of
the Program Development
Branch of EPA’s Office of Re-
search and Monitoring in
1972 and 1973, and Director of
the Nonpoint Pollution Control
Division in the Office of Re-
search and Development from
1973 to 1975, when he as-
sumed his present post.
Dr. Murphy received a B.A.
from Knox College, Galesburg.
III., in 1959, and M.S. and
Ph.D. degrees from Yale Uni-
versity in 1964. He has taken
law courses at Seton Hall and
George Washington Univer-
sities.
There are four laboratories
attached to the Office of Air,
Land, and Water Use. They are:
Environmental Research
Laboratory, Athens, Ga.
Director: Dr. David W.
Duttweiler
The mission of the lab deals
with identifying and tracing the
movement of pollutants through
soil and water and the subse-
quent changes that take place.
Agricultural and silvicultural
sources of pollution. and en-
vironmental systems to control
them, are studied. The staff de-
velop models to help judge the
environmental consequences if
a contaminant reaches certain
portions of a water-soil system.
They develop management
techniques that could be ap-
plied to an entire river-basin
to achieve water quality objec-
tives. The staff also work on
methods for assessing environ-
mental exposures to toxic
chemicals.
Robert S. Kerr Environ-
mental Research
Laboratory, Ada, OkIa.
Director: William C.
Galegar
The staff of the lab conduct re-
search, development, and dem-
onstration activities on ground-
water, natural systems for
treating wastewater, irrigation,
the petrochemical industry, and
the treatment of combined in-
dustrial or mixed industrial and
municipal wastes. This research
provides basic data for the
establishment of guidelines,
standards, and criteria. The lab
personnel also develop social,
economic, and institutional
assessments of technological
developments.
Environmental Sciences
Research Laboratory,
Research Triangle Park,
N.C.
Director: Dr. A. Paul
Altshuller
The mission of the lab is to
determine the effects of air pol-
lution on the atmosphere, and
any subsequent efforts on air
and water quality and land use.
The staff develop techniques.
methods, and instruments to
identify and measure pollutants
and toxic substances in the air,
in addition to studying pollutant
transport and fate, resulting in
air quality simulation models.
The scientists assess the effects
of pollution on weather and cli-
mate, and develop mathemat-
ical models to relate pollution
emissions to air quality and to
forecast potential pollution
crises.
Municipal Environmental
Research Laboratory,
Cincinnati, Ohio
Director: Francis T. Mayo
The lab’s mission is to find
ways to prevent, control, and
treat pollutants that affect com-
munities. This includes devel-
oping cost-effective methods of
providing safe drinking water,
community environmental man-
agement, solid and hazardous
waste disposal, and wastewater
treatment. The staff work to
find new and improved technol-
ogy for collection, transporta-
tion, processing, and disposal
of solid and hazardous wastes,
with recovery of valuable re-
sources. They also seek alter-
native solutions for pollutants
that affect several media, such
as air and land or water.
Dr. Thomas A. Murphy
MARCH 1979
-------
He is responsible for the re-
search that documents the
health risk to people and the
impacts on the ecology of pol-
lutants moving through the
environment. The research con-
ducted adds to the necessary
scientific foundation for health-
protective regulatory decisions.
In order to formulate control
strategies for pollution the
Agency must be informed about
subtle changes in human physi-
ology that may develop into or
worsen illness, as a result of a
contaminant that reached peo-
ple through air, drinking water,
or food.
The ecological effects
research and health effects
research complement one
another; the first investigates
the impact of disturbances and
contaminants on the whole
environment and the second
determines how these ecolog-
ical changes and contaminants
affect people. Since the effects
of pollution can move up
through the food chain to peo-
ple, the ecological research
supports preventive health
studies. The results of these
studies are used in developing
water quality standards, effluent
guidelines for toxic and hazard-
ous materials, ocean discharge
criteria, secondary air quality
standards and dose-response
relationships for pesticides and
other toxicants.
Dr. Murray was most re-
cently Director of the Technical
Services Division in the Office
of Pesticide Programs, a post
he assumed in 1973. He joined
the Agency in 1971 as Staff
Director of the Hazardous Ma-
terials Advisory Committee,
and served as Acting Director
of both the Criteria and Evalua-
tion Division and the Tolerance
Division while in the pesticide
office. Dr. Murray has served in
numerous positions throughout
the Federal Government since
1952, including the President’s
Cabinet Committee on the En-
vironment and the Federal
Committee on Pest Control. He
earned a B.S. degree from
Juniata College in 1950, and
M.S.and Ph.D. degrees from
the University of Maryland.
There are six laboratories
attached to the Office of Health
and Ecological Effects. They
are:
Health Effects Research
Laboratory. Research
Triangle Park, N.C.
Director: Dr. F. Gordon
Hueter
This laboratory performs
studies of problems in air pol-
lution, non-ionizing radiation,
environmental carcinogenesis,
and the toxic effects of pesti-
cides and chemicals. The staff
develop and revise air quality
criteria documents for pollu-
tants that are governed by exist-
ing or proposed ambient air
quality standards. The research
staff work to identify the health
effects of environmental pollu-
tants. They provide data to
assist in regulatory decisions
on the registration of new pes-
ticides and review of others
now in use. They also conduct
health-related studies of haz-
ardous and toxic materials,
including the biological effects
of microwaves.
Health Effects Research
Laboratory, Cincinnati,
Ohio
Director: Dr. R. John
Garner
The staff conduct field and
laboratory studies of the effects
on human health and welfare of
auto emissions, drinking water
contaminants, pollution in
swimming and shellfish-grow-
ing waters, wastewater treat-
ment plant effluents, land treat-
ment and disposal of waste-
water and sludge, as well as
other pollutants that reach peo-
ple through more than one
media. They develop models
and test systems to predict
mutation and cancer threats.
The research identifies and
describes the harmful effects
possible from exposure to
chemical or biological agents
found in the environment.
Environmental Research
Laboratory, Corvallis, Ore.
Director: James C.
McCarty, Acting
The mission of the laboratory
is to determine the effects of
pollution on terrestrial, fresh-
water, and marine ecosystems
linking air, land, and water, as
a basis for setting criteria and
regulations. Studies include:
air pollution impact on plants,
animals, and ecosystems; the
social and economic effect of
water pollution on aquatic
plants and animals; how best
to restore dying lakes; defining
wetlands and determining the
effects of pollution on them;
assessing the effects of water
pollution from runoff, and find-
ing ways to improve water san-
itation and conservation in re-
mote Alaskan Communities.
Environmental Research
Laboratory, Duluth, Minn.
Director: Dr. Donald I.
Mount
The laboratory staff conduct
research on the biological and
chemical effects of pollution on
freshwater ecosystems, espe-
cially the impact on aquatic life.
They study the effect of toxic
substances on freshwater bio-
logical systems. This lab has
the primary research responsi-
bility for describing the fate and
effects of pollutants that enter
the Great Lakes. The staff also
study the effects that fuel
cycles used to produce energy
can have on freshwater ecosys-
tems.
Environmental Research
Laboratory, Narragan-
sett, R.l.
Director: Dr. Eric D.
Schneider
The laboratory provides a re-
search base for Agency deci-
sions relating to the use of the
oceans, by studying the impact
of pollution on marine ecosys-
tems. The staff study the chemi-
cal and physical behavior of
pollutants in ocean life systems,
and general and specific re-
sponses of marine organisms
to environmental stress. They
find ways to monitor the build-
up and movement of pollutants
in ocean systems, and to deter-
mine the impact of pollution
incidents.
Environmental Research
Laboratory, Gulf Breeze,
Fla.
Director: Dr. Thomas W.
Duke
The staff conduct research on
the exposure-effects relation-
ships of hazardous pollutants
on marine, coastal, and estu-
anne ecosystems. This infor-
mation is used by EPA’s pes-
ticide program and by the
Agency in setting water quality
criteria to protect human and
aquatic health in those areas.
They especially study the
coasts and estuaries of the
South Atlantic and Gulf of
Mexico, for the impacts of
petroleum extraction on the
marine populations.
l —Jw
Dr. Steven R. Reznek,
Acting Deputy Assistant
A dministrator for Energy,
Minerals, and Industry
He is responsible for directing
research to assess the environ-
mental and socio-economic im-
pacts of energy and mineral
resource extraction, processing,
conversion, and use. The pro-
gram develops and demon-
strates ways to control the
effects of mining, energy pro-
duction, industrial processing,
and manufacturing. He directs
research to identify and evalu-
ate alternative systems for
producing goods and energy,
Dr. William B. Murray,
Ac ”igDeouty Assistant
drn ii i ,sti ‘Or 101 Health and
c’ gn a’E fects
4
16
EPA JOURNAL
-------
as well as ways to conserve the
resources that are available.
This office coordinates research
activities within EPA and
among other government agen-
cies relating to the environ-
mental aspects of resource
mining, processing, conserva-
tion, and use.
Dr. Reznek came to EPA in
1971 as a staff member in the
Technical Assistance Branch of
the Office of Water Programs,
dealing with groundwater hy-
drology and the transport of
chemicals in water. He worked
in the Office of Research and
Development from 1971 to
1973, planning and managing
the air pollution control pro-
gram and coordinating research
work with the Air Program
Office. He helped create major
EPA regulations on ambient and
stationary source monitoring
equipment, lead content in gas-
oline, and non-deterioration of
airquality. In l974hewasa
researcher in the Center for
Environmental Studies and lec-
tured on formulation of environ-
mental policies in the Civil and
Geological Engineering Depart-
ment at Princeton University.
From 1974 to 1976 he was Di-
rector of Program Coordination
with the National Commission
on Water Quality.
Dr. Reznek received a B.S.
and Ph.D. in physics from the
Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, where he was also
employed as a research associ-
ate in 1968 and 1969. He was
a research fellow at the Univer-
sityof Bristol, England in 1969
and 1970.
There are two labs attached
to the Office of Energy, Min-
erals, and Industry. They are:
Industrial Environmental
Research Laboratory,
Research Triangle Park,
N.C.
Director: Dr. John K.
Burchard
The staff of this lab work to
assess the environmental im-
pact of energy production and
industrial processes. They de-
velop timely and cost-effective
techniques and process modi-
fications that will conserve
energy and help industries to
meet environmental quality
standards for air, water, solid
waste, thermal discharge, and
pesticides. The activities of
the lab staff also support the
Agency’s enforcement and
regulatory activities.
Industrial Environmental
Research Laboratory,
Cincinnati, Ohio
Director: Dr. David G.
Stephan
The lab staff is concerned with
finding ways to prevent, con-
trol, or abate the pollution
associated with the extraction,
processing, conversion, and
use of mineral resources, and
general industrial activity. They
work on closed-loop systems to
eliminate waste discharge, and
ways to change industrial proc-
esses so that less waste is pro-
duced. The staff look for cost-
effective techniques for remov-
ing and disposing of pollutants.
The staff seek improved meth-
ods for preventing, containing,
and cleaning up spills of oil and
hazardous materials.
He is responsible for Agency
programs in development of
environmental monitoring tech-
nology and systems, and
technical support to the
Agency’s operating functions.
This includes the development
of measurement techniques and
equipment as well as the appli-
cation of monitoring systems,
including sample analyses,
which assess the pollution that
people are exposed to.
Trakowski is responsible for
quality control to assure that
Agency data are statistically
valid and legally defensible.
Trakowski served as acting
Assistant Administrator for
Research and Development
from May to December, 1974,
directing and conducting EPA’s
research, development, and
demonstration programs. He
joined the Agency in 1971 as
Deputy Assistant Administrator
for R&D Program Operations,
and managed the resources
needed to accomplish environ-
mental research. In 1973, he
was appointed Deputy Assistant
Administrator for Environmen-
tal Engineering, taking over
the research into pollution pre-
vention and control technology.
From 1964 to 1971 Trakow-
ski was Vice-President of the
Wolf Division of EG&G, Inc.,
where he was Director of Cor-
porate Development, Project
Director for the design and
operation of the NASA National
Space Science Data Center, and
directed EG&G’s environmental
control program. For 21 years
he was with the U.S. Air Force
as an engineering and scien-
tific officer in geophysical and
environmental technology,
pioneering certain develop-
ments in atmospheric remote
sensing and data analysis
systems.
Trakowski obtained a B.S.
from the Massachusetts Insti-
tute of Technology and
Master’s level training from the
Air Force Meteorology School.
He has had extended schooling
in engineering, research, and
management.
There are three laboratories
attached to the Office of
Monitoring and Technical
Support. They are;
Environmental Monitoring
and Support Laboratory,
Research Triangle Park,
N.C.
Director: Dr. Thomas R.
Hauser
This lab provides monitoring
and analytical support to EPA
air programs and other air
pollution control organizations.
The staff operates the quality
assurance program for ambient
air and stationary source meas-
urements and provides
analyses, evaluations, and new
monitoring developments for
air pollution control. It analyzes
samples from air quality moni-
toring networks such as the
National Fuel Surveillance
Network. The lab supplies rapid
response and special tech-
niques of air sampling as
needed for emergency situa-
tions or enforcement actions,
and evaluates commercial air
monitoring equipment. The
laboratory staff conducts the
EPA Fuels and Fuel Additive
Registration Program.
Environmental Monitoring
and Support Laboratory,
Cincinnati, Ohio
Director: Dwight G.
Ballinger
This lab develops tests to iden-
tify and measure major pollu-
tants and quality characteristics
in water. The staff develops
monitoring techniques to detect
viruses and microorganisms of
health significance in drinking
water, ambient waters, and
municipal wastes, as well as
ways to measure the effect of
waste discharges on receiving
waters. It prepares official
test methods and provides ma-
terials to evaluate and main-
tain the quality of water mon-
itoring data from laboratory
testing. The lab provides tech-
nical support of water and
waste monitoring programs at
EPA and other pollution control
agencies.
Environmental Monitoring
and Support Laboratory,
Las Vegas, Nev.
Director: George B.
Morgan
The staff of this lab develop
monitoring methods and sys-
tems that assess human expo-
sure to pollution by studying
the movement of pollutants
through the atmosphere and
their final disposition. The lab
develops sophisticated mon-
itoring and analytical capabil-
ities for lab and field studies,
and conducts quality assurance
for radiation and biological re-
search. It provides aerial sup-
port for the Agency and devel-
ops monitoring systems for
contact and remote sensing,
especially for environmental
emergencies or pollution spills.
The lab also conducts radiolog-
ical surveillance and studies
human exposure to radiation
from past and present nuclear
testing. 0
Albert C. Trakowski
P ’uty Assist r t Administrator
or Monitoring and Technical
Support
MARCH 1979
-------
Research,
Environ-
ment and
Health
\r iitervew with Dr.
F’n;p Hdrluier, Presi—
‘ent, National
Academy of Sciences
Dr. Philip Handler has
served as President of
the National Academy of
Sciences since 1969. The
author of more than 200
articles in the field of
biochemistry, he also is
editor of Biology And The
Future of Man and co-
author of Principles of
Biochemistry. He has
served on numerous sci-
entific panels including
the Surgeon General’s
Committee on Environ-
mental Health Problems,
the President’s Comm is-
sion on Heart Disease,
Cancer and Stroke, and
the President’s Science
Advisory Committee.
After receiving his Ph.D.
from the University of
Illinois, he taught from
1939 to 1969 at Duke
University School of
Medicine, where he was
Chairman of the Depart-
ment of Biochemistry. He
is the recipient of many
honors here and abroad
for his contributions to
science.
Environmental illness
seems to be partly due to
geography. Stomach
cancer, for example
is common in Japan
but rare among second
generation or Nisei Jap-
anese in this country. Do
you believe there should
be more funding and em-
phasis on unraveling this
puzzle?
My answer is an unqualified
“yes.” But let me explain. It is
the conventional wisdom of our
time that perhaps 80 or 90 per-
cent of all cancer is somehow
environmentally related.
Whether that is true is more
than I know.
Ten years ago, it seemed
equally true that much cancer
was due to a form of virus in-
fection—viruses which we
either pick up from the environ-
ment or are with us from birth.
Indeed, that was so firmly be-
lieved that there’s a special
building out at NIH which was
built for the isolation of such
viruses.
That belief was just as firmly
held then as the current envi-
ronmental theory is held today.
I don’t know what it will be 10
years from now. Having stated
that caveat, let me note that
there is little doubt that the pat-
tern of distribution of various
forms of cancer varies greatly
around the world, and varies,
rather considerably, even inside
the United States.
The best single evidence that
these are not the genetic herit-
ages of the people who have
concentrated in any one region
is the phenomenon that you
mentioned; namely, that there
is a high incidence of gastric
carcinoma in Japan. It’s smaller
in Japanese in Hawaii, and
Nisei Japanese are like all the
rest of us here in the United
States. But I remind you that
the incidence of gastric car-
cinoma in the United States in
the 1920’s was as high as it is
in Japan today.
Do they know why?
No sir. We did something right
and we haven’t the faintest idea
what it is.
There’s something about the
way we live, the way we eat, or
something that is different than
it was in the ‘20s.
What all that says is that the
prevalence of gastric carcinoma
is determined by something
other than our own inherent bi-
ology. And it’s extremely im-
portant to find out what that is.
The incidence of primary
carcinoma of the liver is very
high in Central Africa—higher
than anywhere else in the world,
as far as I know. And it seems
important to find out why be-
cause it is not true of those of
their descendants now living in
the United States.
I know of no reason to be-
lieve that these differences
should be ascribed to the in-
fluence of man-made materials.
The peak incidence of every
form of cancer but carcinoma of
the lung happens somewhere
outside of the United States in
relatively primitive societies.
There is surely no reason to
think that in Central Africa, the
primary cause of liver cancer is
some man-made chemical. It’s
due to the environment, using
the word in its broadest sense.
The currently fashionable
thinking is that however cancer
is occasioned, whether there be
a virus or an environmental
chemical that really does it,
once the neoplastic transforma-
tion happens, a genetic change
has occurred in the cells that
are involved. The genetic con-
trols that previously maintained
the cell in its differentiated and
nondividing form have been
lost. The cell de-differentiates
and becomes a relatively prim-
itive cell and grows without
constraint. That’s a genetic
effect, if you will, in the life of
that cell.
And it perpetuates itself in
the absence of whatever that
initial insult was. It is important
to know, someday, both what
the initiating insults are and just
what that transformation is. At
this moment, no one can de-
scribe it in satisfactory terms.
It is of interest, though, that
the initial insult needn’t be due
to manmade activity.
When Jim Neil was looking
around the world for the in-
cidence of chromosomal dam-
age, chromosomal breaks, ab-
normal bizarre chromosomal
structures, the population which
showed the most striking and
most frequent chromosomal
damage was in the Central
Amazon valley—people still
living very close to nature, as
close to the savage state as any-
where on earth at this moment.
They showed more chromo-
somal difficulty than any other
population he found. He has no
idea why. Again, one has reason
to think that it is due to some-
thing in their environment,
using the word “environment”
in its broadest sense, but not
the man-made environment.
And, again, it is imperative
that we learn, one day, what
that is about.
There have been recent
efforts to impose new
Government regulations
on science and medicine
such as prohibiting some
kinds of DNA research.
Do you think these regu-
lations are needed?
I have insisted, from the very
beginning, that no regulation of
research with recombinant DNA
and no legislation was needed,
for several reasons.
The principal one is that the
risks were utterly imaginary.
They were all in the realm of
science fiction without a scrap
of evidence that indicated there
was any reason to believe in
their reality. The people who
called the whole matter into
question were the most knowl-
edgeable scientists so engaged.
It was they who said, “Let’s
stop a moment and consider
what we’re doing.” They did
stop. They did think. And when
they completed their analyses,
they said, “Well, there seems
no basis in reality for our con-
cerns. Those concerns were real
concerns of the moment. But
now that we’ve thought them
through, we can’t see that they
have any substance.”
Hundreds of such experi-
ments have been performed in
the United States and else-
where. There’s hasn’t been a
single untoward incident. It all
seems a bizarre and strange
episode to me.
The organism with which all
this work is done, Escherichia
coli, is about the most helpless,
innocuous organism known to
man. It cannot survive except in
a laboratory under carefully cul-
tured conditions. If you put it in
water, it dies.
18
EPA JOURNAL
-------
More to the point, we have no
regulations with respect to
guarding what happens every
day in every hospital in the
whole world where doctors,
nurses and technicians minister
to individuals who are, indeed,
infected with genuine, infec-
tious, dangerous organisms,
real pathogens.
Technicians draw blood and
culture it. Nurses and interns,
residents and attending physi-
cians are all in contact with
people who are infected with
genuine, virulent organisms.
And yet their infection is ex-
tremely rare.
The rationality of all this has
been lost on me. And lam de-
lighted that the Congress has
avoided passing legislation to
protect us against hazards that
no one can show to exist.
How do you feel about the
occupational safety regu-
lations further applied to
university laboratories as
compared to industry la-
boratories? Should they
be the same?
I think it’s time to study that
question rather than to give you
an answer. It’s a legitimate
question. I don’t really know
what the answer is at this time.
The OSHA regulations, which
were intended to protect the
workplace, are appropriate, for
example, in a factory that’s
making benzene or using ben-
zene as a solvent day after day
after day.
It’s rather another thing to try
to understand how best to saf e-
guard those who work in a lab-
oratory that never does the
same thing twice. The shelves
of the stockroom in my bio-
chemistry department must
have contained at least 50,000
different chemicals.
We would use some of them
in microgram quantities and
some in gallon quantities. And
we never did the same thing
twice. Prescribing how life
shall be conducted underthose
circumstances seems to me to
be a reasonable question but for
which, as yet, I haven’t heard
quite acceptable descriptions.
l think what is required first
is a careful examination of
those, with some retrospective
understanding of what hazards
there may have been all the
while. And then ask, “Well,
how can you minimize those
hazards without making it im-
possible to work in those lab-
oratories, or so inordinately
expensive as in effect to make
it impossible?”
You were very successful
when you were in the
Duke University School of
Medicine Department of
Biochemistry in hiring
women for research. Can
you comment on this
latest NAS study of em-
ployment trends for
women and minorities in
science in the 1970’s?
Rather briefly, what it says is
that, because of the internal
dynamics of our own country,
the altered aspirations of
women and minorities, ever
larger numbers of women and
minorities are seeking advanced
education in science. And it is
clear that, as they leave school,
they may have an advantage
over a young white male in
getting the first step on the em-
ployment ladder.
Asa sociological phenom-
enon, what is clear is that they
get up onto the first rungs of the
ladder easily, but they climb the
rest of the way with much more
difficulty than their white male
colleagues. I have a second
comment which relates to a per-
haps more subtle phenomenon.
The truly important contribu-
tions to science are made by a
relatively small number of peo-
ple. Those who have compiled
‘scientific family trees’ are al-
ways struck by the fact that with
surprising frequency, the people
who do important science were
trained in the laboratories of
other people who did important
science.
The word science means
many things. The habit of mind,
of taking a broad view, of ask-
ing yourself what is the most
important unsolved problem
which may be amenable to
attack at this moment, is a habit
that must be inculcated young.
It is awfully easy to find all
kinds of other scientific busy
work to do. Useful busy work,
but not great science. It makes
its contribution: it’s needful
that it be done. But the great
science is done by those few
people who, when very young,
got into this way of life.
That process is not incul-
cated in graduate school, for-
mally, by going to lectures. It is
not what happens even in the
laboratories of distinguished
scientists. It happens in the
camaraderie of the laboratory.
It happens at the end of the day,
while drinking a glass of beer.
It’s what happens during the
relaxed off-moments, not in for-
mally structured seminars, but
in the informal kind of seminar.
From what l.have been able to
see so far, relatively rarely do
the young women in the labora-
tory as easily participate in that
aspect of the life of the labora-
tory as their male peers do.
But it happens. The young
ladies aren’t quite as comfort-
able and they aren’t quite as
welcome. They are dealing with
male mentors, in the main.
The male mentors, having been
20 years older, or more than
that, have lived a different life.
And they are not quite yet
wholly comfortable with the
young ladies in their shops. In
consequence, the easy give and
take by which, socially, there is
imparted the very best of what
makes for good science is not
quite as available to young
women as to young men even
now.
I don’t mean that there are
no important women scien-
tists. Far from it. As a gross
statistic, there is a bridge that
We surely do have
a handful of horror
stories in which
certain chemicals
have been handled
rather cavalierly
and done undis-
puted harm to rel-
atively small
groups of people.
No one has a
license to do that,
or should have.
only a few have crossed. The
process is very subtle. My most
cherished experiences as a
graduate student were in Far-
well’s Soda Shop just across the
street from the chemistry build-
ing at the University of Illinois.
In the middle of the morning
and the middle of the afternoon,
the great and the near-great of
the chemistry department could
be found there having a Coca
Cola or coffee.
The banter around those
tables was much more impor-
tant in making me what I be-
came than what happened in the
classrooms. And so there’s a
barrier; an invisible but func-
tioning barrier, which is still
there, because of which the
number of women elected to
this Academy will still be a
small fraction of the total for
some years to come.
How would you say the
United States ranks in
scientific research now?
The usual thing that one does in
response to such questions is to
point to the Nobel Prizes; they
are self-evident.
In the aftermath of World
War II, only one nation came
through whole, and that was
ours. With the stimulus of the
atomic bomb and later, the
stimulus of Sputnik, the Amer-
ican people, through their Gov-
ernment, invested in science in
a way no people in the world
had ever previously invested.
And with that, we built the
most remarkable, the most ex-
citing and the most successful
scientific enterprise the world
has ever known. We’re still rid-
ing on that crest. There is no
field of science for which I
would say, the quality of such-
and-such of some other country
is decidedly better than the
quality here. There is no such
country, no such field.
But there surely is develop-
ing competition. As there
should be. The magnitude, the
number of people and the
amount of money for science in
the totality of western Europe
is now approximately equal to
that of the United States. And
the quality of their work is rising
very, very rapidly.
We know that in the Soviet
Union, they have made an enor-
mous investment in science.
MARCH 1979
-------
Their fusion research, for a
while, was ahead of ours. I
doubt that it is any longer. They
are very good at some forms of
chemistry and have done well
at it. They do great mathe-
matics. They have cultivated
mathematics in the Soviet Un-
ion. It’s an old tradition which
was never broken. In the whole
of biology and biological sci-
ence, they are still way behind
us and have a long distance to
go. But to get there, they’re
making immense investments,
of a kind we never made, in the
ability to do biology tomorrow.
And I assume it will pay, and
that in due time, they will take
their place on the world scien-
tific scene. So far, the return on
their investment is not as good
as the return on ours. We have
a tradition that young scientists
shpuld go as fast as they can
go. They have no such tradition.
They still have large institu-
tions, where the nature and
pace of research is heavily
dominated by their leadership.
We don’t do that. They are be-
ginning to understand that
that’s a problem for them.
Japan is rather a different
matter. Japan uses its money
differently. The Japanese popu-
lation is one half ours, and they
have the same number of sci-
entists and engineers per mil-
lion that we do. So they have
a scientific engineering labor
force half the size of ours.
But they do no military R&D.
And they don’t put nearly as
much money into basic science
as we do because they’ve been
using our basic science. There-
fore, they have concentrated
their technical force on applied
R&D,—an enterprise which
therefore comes out as big as
ours.
If you discount our basic sci-
ence. and you remove military
R&D, then the size of the re-
search endeavor in this country
isn’t much different from that
in Japan, excepting theirs is
largely employed to drive their
domestic economy.
The argument is some-
times made that nature,
itself, is a major pol-
luter: dust from volcanic
eruptions, hydrocarbons
from vegetation, natural
radiation, and so forth.
And therefore we should
keep things in perspective
and accept manmade pol-
lution with more equa-
nimity.
What is your reaction to
that point of view?
It’s a half truth. Man has not
simply taken the world as it
was given to him.
If one drives around Ger-
many, France, Italy, or takes a
boat ride up the Thames, one
is impressed by the beauty of
the landscape and what seems
to be the quality of the natural
surroundings. You must under-
stand that it isn’t. That’s a man-
made surrounding. The whole
of what one sees has been re-
worked by man’s activities. And
we like it rather more. Thus, we
don’t have to take nature as
given, in an aesthetic sense, or
for food and timber production
—but on the other hand we
can’t control volcanoes.
We can hope to discover
what the natural environmental
contributions to cancer may be,
and minimize those if we can.
I don’t know of any Americans
who would decide not to live in
Denver because the radiation
background is twice that of
what it is in Washington.
I am unaware of anybody
who refuses to work in Grand
Central Station because the
radiation background inside is
higher than is permitted on the
outside of a reactor.
Natural radiation?
Yes. The radioactive po-
tassium in the granite. We
accept those hazards. But if
they are responsible for some
fraction of carcinogenesis, we
may never know. It is intrin-
sically extraordinarily difficult
to find that out. For example,
there are no data that say that
people who live in high alti-
tudes have more cancer than
people at low altitudes, except
for suggestive data concerning
skin cancer. Nevertheless, we
don’t have to run down into lead
mines to escape, because the
risk, however real, seems very
small. On the other hand, there
is no need to accept unneces-
sary, unwarranted abuse of na-
ture by man.
We, here and everywhere
else in the world, took the
natural environment as what,
in economic terms, is a ‘free
good.’ And I suppose if we had
it to do all over again, we would
do it all over again. It made
possible the very rapid devel-
opment of our economy with
immense benefit to the quality
of life for the most of us.
My mother was one of nine
siblings in southern New Jer-
sey, all of whom had typhoid at
the same time. That three-holer
was probably the culprit. I see
no reason to accept that as a
state of nature. The natural en-
vironment is hostile.
We have learned how to curb
natural hazards fairly well, and
mold much of the Earth to our
own ends. That makes it pos-
sible for four and a half billion
people to live on the face of the
earth, but it doesn’t give us a
license to pollute.
At the bottom
of much current
environmental
concern is the
American phobia
against cancer. Not
because cancer is
an important
statistical cause of
death, but because
of our horror of
this way of dying.
As a SC eflt S , do you
think that totai e imira
ho a of pohution. as a c -
posed by some persons
is a fe sibk oa
It’s not feasible, necessary or
even desirable. What is cer-
tainly true is that it would be
extraordinarily expensive.
There is no way to do that
without investing an immense
fraction of our total economy
in the effort.
And I cannot see that there
would be any payoff. In your
first question, you spoke of
“environmental illness.” The
magnitude of “environmental
illness” is unknown to me. I
have yet to see any studies that
persuade me that we know what
that magnitude is, not even
‘ballpark’ figures that one can
trust. I do not know what the
health consequences of air pol-
lution have been. I do not know
whether the people of New York
who have invested heavily in
reducing the level of sulfur
oxides in their ambient air have
bought any health protection
whatever from that action.
Environmental questions
deal with conservation, with
which no one can quarrel,
aesthetic practices to see to
it that the world we live in is
attractive and pleasing to us,
and health protection against
noxious materials. Our height-
ened concern with respect to
manmade chemicals arises
out of the fact that the rate of
introduction of new chemical
species into the economy in the
U.S. since World War II has
been prodigious. Admittedly,
for most of them, we have little
understanding of what the po-
tential for good or ill may be in
the environment.
We surely do have a handful
of horror stories in which cer-
tain chemicals have been han-
dled rather cavalierly and done
undisputed harm to relatively
small groups of people. No one
has a license to do that, or
should have. And so we have
been attempting to achieve
“protection of the environ-
ment,” which really means pro-
tection of ourselves, to seek
wise regulatory practices de-
spite a background of ignorance
and lack of raw data for under-
standing.
Given all the attention we
have paid to air pollution and
20
EPA JOURNAL
-------
water pollution in the last dec-
ade, the fact remains that if
you would like to state with’
confidence what contamination
of water and air has done to the
American people, you would be
hard put to give numbers in
which anyone has any reason
for confidence.
We can be sure that none of
the pollutants are good for us.
Therefore, minimizing them is
intrinsically good since there is
no excuse for their presence in
a positive sense. But the amount
of effort that should be directed
into reducing that presence, the
goals to be established for that
reduction must reflect, some-
how, the magnitude of risk to
which we’ve been exposed and
how far we would like to reduce
it.
Unhappily, matters become
murky at that point. And we are
unable to formulate that prob-
lem very well, largely for lack
of data. Until recently, we had
no motivation for gathering
such information and nobody
would either pay for or do the
necessary research.
Secondly, the scientific prob-
lems haven’t held great intellec-
tual attraction. This was epit-
omized by a friend, whom I
shall not name, at a meeting of
the President’s Science Advi-
sory Committee about 10 years
ago, who said, “I’ve been look-
ing at the stars too long to start
looking down sewers now.”
That more or less character-
izes the attitudes of our most
talented scientists. Environ-
mental pollution was not a
natural lure for the scientific
mind and society was unwill-
ing to put money into such
research until recently.
But we will have to justify
the actions necessary with re-
spect to those pollutants that
will require great expenditures,
and not on a merely one-time
basis. And that can only be done
by expanding the data base,
which means spending enough
money to acquire reliable data
that might help.
At the bottom of much cur-
rent environmental concern is
the American phobia against
cancer. Not because cancer is
an important statistical cause
of death, but because of our
horror of this way of dying. If
cancer were to be abolished to-
morrow, the increase in life
expectancy of Americans would
be rather small—the statistical
increased life expectancy.
Why is that?
Because it’s a disease of older
people even now. The number
of young people who die of can-
cer is very small.
We would like to reduce the
incidence of cancer. That’s a
clear national goal; it’s been
expressed again and again, not
only in expenditures through
EPA and OSHA but through the
National Institutes of Health,
one-half of whose budget goes
to the cancer program, deliber-
ately thrust upon the NIH by the
Congress and several Presi-
dents.
That’s what the American
people want. Therefore, we
should assist them in getting
it. And to do that, it becomes
imperative to understand the
low dose end of the dose-
response curve for carcin-
ogens. The problem is not can-
cer due to inadvertent acci-
dental large-scale exposure to
carcinogens, it is chronic expo-
sure to very low dose levels,
the consequence of which is
not known.
It is surely time we explored
the low level end of that dose
response curve with experi-
ments done on a large enough
scale to know what to believe.
Usually we test 50 or 100
rats at the maximum dosage
that will not kill them acutely,
and then we reason from the
results. Then, the argument
holds that chemicals are rather
like radiation. A single ionizing
event happens to hit the right
cell in the right place and trig-
gers off the neoplastic transfor-
mation. And for radiation, that
seems true.
If you irradiate enough ani-
mals, there will be some for
which a single ionizing event
will have done it. And maybe
that’s responsible for part of
the background rate of cancer
which Americans have always
known.
If you examine a list of a
half a dozen carcinogens and
look at their chemistry, arsenic,
butter yellow, methylcholan-
threne, vinyl chloride, saccharin
if it’s true—chemically, they
are so different, it is fantastic
to think that they operate by
doing the same thing.
Butter yellow is a
carcinogen?
Yes, sure. Butter yellow isn’t
used anymore to color butter,
but it used to be. It caused liver
tumors; that was discovered in
the ‘30s.
But I cannot imagine that
these diverse compounds oper-
ate by an identical molecular
mechanism by which they
cause whatever they cause.
Cancer is the ultimate expres-
sion of what must be many dif-
ferent cellular reaction mech-
anisms. If that be true, it does
not follow that necessarily, for
all of them, the dose response
curve goes through the origin.
We are surely aware, now,
that all cells contain very effec-
tive mechanisms for repairing
damage to the DNA, such as
the enzyme that Arthur Korn-
berg discovered.
If we have DNA repair mech-
anisms, and if carcinogenesis
is the result of a mutagenetic
change in DNA, presumably
we can compensate for some
amount of mutagenesis. If so,
very low doses would have no
untoward consequences. I
would like to know for at least
a few chemicals, once and for
all, and stop the argument.
What’s your reaction to
the argument that if pol-
lution controls become
too strict, major in-
dustries will move from
America to some devel-
oping country?
I guess it’s a half-truth, again.
There are other countries anx-
ious for such development, all
too eager to repeat our mis-
takes. In a country where mean
life expectancy is below 45,
repeating our mistakes may
look charming.
That there are such places, I
wouldn’t doubt. That American
companies will walk away from
large investments here and seek
that opportunity abroad, re-
mains to be demonstrated. I’m
a little skeptical.
This interview was conducted
by Truman Temple, Associate
Editor of EPA Journal.
That isn’t the kind of thing
that’s drawn Americans to go
outside this country. American
companies have gone abroad
for cheap labor costs time and
again.
Environmental costs are
costs, and if manufacturers
could escape them to be more
competitive, they would. But if
they have to write off a huge
capital investment at home in
the doing, they will think twice
about it.
The other side of that ques-
tion is I would think more than
twice before forcing any com-
pany into making that choice. I
certainlywouldn’t do it unless
I were absolutely convinced
that the risks to be mitigated
are real and of a magnitude
commensurate with what you
are about to do.
Are there any laws that
you would suggest we
still need in the environ-
mental area?
We are having problems enough
existing with the ones we have.
I don’t know whether the bat-
tery of them is complete, but,
certainly, we have yet to learn
to live with the measures con-
cerning water pollution, air
quality, surface mining with the
Toxic Substances Control Act,
and so forth.
That’s a good deal for us to
digest and learn how to live
with and implement wisely.
There’s an ironic aspect to all
of this. As one examines the
current scene, you come to the
conclusion that every regula-
tion and every act was certainly
put on the books with great,
good intention, that every one
actually may be commendable;
it isn’t their individual nature
which is a problem. But collec-
tively, they may be imposing a
burden we don’t know how
to live with. That’s a political
judgment; not a scientific judg-
ment. Likewise, here at the
Academy, our business is to
help the country go down a path
in which we expand the knowl-
edge base so that we under-
stand as fully as possible what
the risks are and how we might
minimize those risks and what
the consequences would be if
we didn’t. The political machin-
ery must take it from there. fl
MARCH 1979
21
-------
Personal
Pollution
Monitoring
E P1 scientists are evaluating the
usefulness of personal air pol-
lution monitors, some of which can be worn
as necklaces or wrist bands.
The Agency recently held a symposium
on portable monitors at Chapel Hill, N.C.
Purpose of the symposium was to acquaint
environmental managers and researchers
with the advantages of using personal air
monitors as supplements to fixed-station
monitors such as those placed along streets
or attached to buildings.
Approximately 35 reports dealing with
the development and capability of personal
physiological and air pollution monitors
were presented at the meeting by repre-
sentatives of the Federal and State Govern-
ments, private industry and research firms.
Congressman George E. Brown, Jr.,
Chairman of the House Subcommittee on
Environment and the Atmosphere, told the
conference that the demand “for personal
monitors is going to skyrocket and the tech-
nology is going to have to respond to meet
that demand.”
He said that while the rate of advance in
the technology of monitoring devices has
been swift, “this is a technological initiative
which has not reached its peak.” He called
for the development of wrist monitors that
measure the amount of any pollutant in the
air and then store the information.
The Congressman said there is a need to
determine more precisely at what point
pollutants affect human health. He added
that personal monitors might help solve
this problem.
Dr. David Magee, senior scientific ad-
visor at EPA’s Environmental Monitoring
and Support Laboratory at Research Tri-
angle Park, N.C., said that “numerous
studies have called attention to the need
for greater use of personal monitors.
“In downtown San Jose, Calif., for ex-
ample, researchers have found that pedes-
trians breathe carbon monoxide at levels
60 percent higher than levels shown on the
nearest fixed monitors.
“On the other side of the country, in
Boston, pedestrians were exposed to levels
about 40 percent higher than those re-
corded at fixed stations.”
He noted that in similar studies people
in both urban areas and small towns in
South Carolina and Connecticut received
higher exposures to particulates (mainly
because of indoor pollution) than those
recorded at fixed locations.
“All of this points out the need for a
device capable of accompanying people on
their daily rounds and sampling the air in
their own immediate breathing zones.”
Some of the personal monitors now
available were displayed at the symposium.
Most of the devices use sensors which re-
spond to environmental conditions.
Among the environmental jewelry dis-
played at the workshop was a pendant
which senses polluted air, warns the wearer
with a buzzer and includes a mask and 10-
minute supply of oxygen.
Speakers at the meeting noted that these
devices could be especially useful to peo-
ple with a variety of lung or heart problems
who need to know when they are in danger
so they can seek prompt medical help.
Cost of these monitors ranges “any-
where from a dollar up,” according to Dr.
Magee. The cheapest devices are small tubes
with chemical absorbents.
Among those making a presentation on
the more developed devices were Dr.
George S. Malindzak, chairman of the De-
partment of Physiology at Northeastern
Ohio Universities’ College of Medicine and
Mary Ann Scherr, Professor of Art at Kent
State University. Mrs. Scherr is a designer
of jewelry containing personal monitors.
The symposium was sponsored by two
EPA laboratories at Research Triangle
Park, N.C., the Health Effects Research
Laboratory and the Environmental Mon itor-
ing and Support Laboratory.
These laboratories conduct monitoring.
human studies and biological research to
determine the health effects of exposure to
air pollutants, pesticides, toxic substances,
and non-ionizing radiation. D
This silver pendant contains a photocell
that senses air pollution and alerts wearer
with an electronically triggered sound
device. The monitor also contains a small
oxygen mask and a 10-minute supply of
oxygen to allow the wearer to escape to
safety.
22
EPA JOURNAL
-------
v
I
ir
-------
N early a dozen major environmental
research and development projects in
Egypt are being supported by EPA under its
Scientific Activities Overseas (SAO) Pro-
gram. Since 1973, the Agency has obligated
more than $7.2 million in helping Egypt deal
with its many environmental problems while
allowing EPA scientists to learn from unique
environmental or pollutant exposure
situations.
EPA’s projects in Egypt have so inter-
ested the International Communication
Agency (formerly known as the U.S. lnfor-
Lending a Hand
in Egypt
By Truman Temple
mation Agency), that it dispatched a film
crew there in January. The team, headed
by Robert Butler, producer and director of
ICA’s TV and Film Service, will be inter-
viewing scientists in environmental proj-
ects including those dealing with phosphate
mines near Luxor, reuse of process water at
a poultry processing plant in Alexandria,
the Aswan dam, and studies of wastewater
treatment at the Moharrem-Bey Industrial
Complex in Alexandria.
The EPA projects in Egypt are funded by
credits built up over the years in Egyptian
currency, chiefly from United States ex-
ports of agricultural products under the
Public Law 480 program. At one time EPA
was assisting half a dozen countries in en-
vironmental research under this type of
funding, but the work is now concentrated
in Egypt, Pakistan and India. Interestingly,
two other nations, Poland and Yugoslavia,
EPA JOURNAL
24
-------
found the programs formerly financed by
this type of funding so valuable that they
have created special funds of their own to
carry on the work.
The program in Egypt is directed by
EPA’s Office of International Activities,
headed by Alice B. Popkin, Associate Ad-
ministrator. Individual projects are super-
vised by staff members of the Office of
Research and Development, the Office of
Air, Noise and Radiation, and several
Regions.
“I’m encouraged by the usefulness of
this program in Egypt,” declared Mrs. Pop-
kin. “Not only are these scientific studies
of local conditions of direct concern to the
Egyptian people, but they also are broaden-
ing our own knowledge of similar environ-
mental problems we encounter in the
United States.”
If one looks at a map of Egypt, it is im-
mediately obvious that the EPA-sponsored
research extends throughout the length of
the land. Several projects are under way in
the north along the shores of the Mediter-
ranean. One study has been analyzing
desert ecosystems since 1975. Its overall
purpose is to improve land management in
areas now hard-pressed to produce food,
fiber, and basic minerals, according to Dr.
Norman R. Glass, EPA project officer. Sev-
enteen staff members of five Egyptian uni-
versities, aided by 40 research scientists,
are involved.
Dr. Victor J. Cabelli, of EPA’s Health
Effects Research Laboratory in West Kings.
ton, R.l., is project officer for additional
studies at Alexandria looking into illnesses
associated with swimming at polluted
beaches there. Thousands of individuals
have been interviewed by public health and
social workers to correlate information on
their exposure and any subsequent illness.
Scientists also have tested water quality,
and the collected data are being used by
the Egyptian government in the design of a
new sewage disposal system for the city.
The results of this study, when added to
similar ones in the United States, are being
used to develop water quality criteria which
may have world-wide applications.
Population and industrial growth have
made increasing demands on scarce water
resources in Egypt. A study of the potential
for water recycling and reuse is under way
in Alexandria at a modern poultry proc-
essing plant. The EPA project officer, Jack
1. Witherow of the Ada, OkIa. Research
Laboratory, explains that the poultry indus-
try in Egypt is encountering a unique prob-
lem because new plants and farms will be
located in remote areas as part of an overall
plan to renew the deserts. The shortage of
water and the need for large amounts of it
in this industry make the study of pressing
importance. Scientists at Alexandria Uni-
Truman Temple is A ssociate Editor of
EPA Journal
Doc”ors c
versity are evaluating the process water
characteristics and will focus on a multiple
water reuse system.
August Curley of EPA’s Health Effects
Research Laboratory at Research Triangle
Park, N.C. is project officer for three stud-
ies. In one, researchers at Alexandria Uni-
versity are seeking to determine the safe
use of insecticides and to study their
effects on animals, fish, poultry, insects
and plants. Another study by the Regional
Radioisotope Center in Cairo is investigat-
ing the health hazards of pesticides that are
important to both Egypt and EPA. The third,
being carried out by the Plant Protection
Institute in Cairo, is monitoring levels of
various toxicants in the environment such
as water, soil, and agricultural products
before and after aerial and ground applica-
tion of pesticides.
Curley, who helped organize an interna-
tional symposium last November in Egypt
on the hazards of pesticides to the environ-
ment and human health, said there is an
increasing use of chemical pesticides in
that country to protect crops. “Coupled
with this trend,” he added, “are reported
instances of indiscriminate use of pesti-
cides, leading to contamination of food
crops and the immediate environment. In
Egypt, as in our country, there is a growing
and continuing concern about the hazards
of pesticides to human health, not only to
field workers and pesticide applicators, but
also to the health of the people generally
exposed through contaminated food, water
and air.”
The rapid growth of industry in Egypt in
recent times has made air pollution an im-
portant public health concern. Taking ad-
vantage of 13 air monitoring stations
already in operation in Alexandria, a team
of researchers under direction of the Egyp-
tian Department of Occupational Health
?eck an ‘- vptian girl for signs t s ,IS OSom S ‘ S ?a/IS.
MARCH 1979
-------
has been sampling ambient air pollutants
and examining persons suffering from
chronic respiratory diseases. Dr. Carl G.
Hayes of EPA’s Health Effects Research
Laboratory in Research Triangle Park is
project officer. The purpose of the investi-
gation is to help define the relationship
between the pollutants and disease. Since
Alexandria is the second largest city in
Egypt and contains about a third of all in-
dustry in that country, the project is of spe-
cial significance in public health.
During the past decade, fish production
in Lake Mariut. which lies just southeast of
Alexandria, has declined by about 75 per-
cent, due primarily to the discharge of in-
dustrial wastewaters from the adjacent
Moharrem Bey Industrial Complex. In addi-
tion the lake has ceased to be an important
recreation area because of its offensive
odors and unsightly algal growth. The lake
is economically important as a source of
food, and Egyptian scientists and engineers
now are investigating a number of alterna-
tives for treating the industrial wastewater
pouring into the lake. According to Dr.
James D. Gallup of the Effluent Guidelines
Division, the EPA project officer, the
industries include food oil and fat produc-
tion, paper reprocessing, textile finishing,
yeast and starch production, and other
facilities. The alternatives under study in-
clude pretreatment of effluent before dis-
charge to the lake; in-plant modifications,
and combined treatment of both industrial
and municipal wastes in the city’s sewage
treatment plant. The study thus is laying the
foundations for a comprehensive and far-
reaching restoration of an essential
resource.
The rapid rate of industrialization and
agricultural development in Egypt to pro-
vide her millions with food, jobs and con-
sumer goods ironically has polluted some
of those very sources of food. Inland,
changes in Nile River drainage patterns
have led to salinization of lakes that for-
merly produced high yields of freshwater
fish. Under this program, Egyptian scien-
tists are now investigating the impact of
pollutants on saline waters to determine
how marine life is being affected. The proj-
ect officer, Dr. Gerald E. Walsh of EPA’s
Environmental Research Laboratory at Gulf
Breeze, Fla., describes three geograph-
ically distinct study areas in the project,
each with its own laboratory for research
into specific problems.
The first includes Lake Quarun and Wadi
El-Rayan in the Western Desert about 65
miles southwest of Cairo. “Lake Quarun,
the world’s oldest artificial impoundment,
was begun over 5,000 years ago by shunt-
ing of Nile River water to a large natural
depression,” Walsh explains.
“At that time, its impounded water was
used to irrigate crops during the dry sea-
son. Lush vegetation grew in the newly-
watered area, and the site was used as a
vacation resort by the pharaohs. Now, the
lake is as saline as the ocean and cannot
be used for crop irrigation, but marine fish
and shrimp, introduced from the Mediter-
ranean, grow in it.” The current project is
aimed at increasing the yield of fish by
application of sound fisheries management
practices. It also is investigating the effects
of pesticides that enter the water as agri-
cultural runoff.
The second area is a fishing village on
the Red Sea named Al-Ghardaga. A labora-
tory there is studying the effects of pollut-
ants on marine biota and also the ecology
of reefs. Data obtained will be used to esti-
mate the impact of pollutants on marine
life, and also to set water quality standards.
The third area embraces the Mediterranean
coast of Egypt, where a branch of the Insti-
tute of Oceanography and Fisheries is mon-
itoring and analyzing water conditions and
relating them to marine life.
Further to the south, an EPA project is
looking into another environmental ques-
tion involving radiation from phosphate
mining and manufacturing. The project offi-
cer, Richard J. Guimond of EPA’s Office of
Radiation Programs, explains the situation
this way:
“Historically, the Egyptian phosphate in-
dustry was quite small because of the great
fertilizing effect of the Nile floods. How-
ever, the halt to the annual flood increased
the country’s need for fertilizer. Further,
fertilizer is considered a good export prod-
uct for the country. As a consequence, the
industry is growing in Egypt.”
Phosphate mines are located along the
Nile near Luxor, known as the Valley of the
Kings; along the Red Sea to the east, and in
the central desert west of the Nile. Manu-
facturing facilities are located around Cairo
and Alexandria. Egyptian scientists are
especially interested in studying operations
because phosphate is radioactive, environ-
mental-controls now in use are poor, the
facilities are near heavily populated areas,
many workers are employed in the indus-
try, and phosphate production is expected
to increase. Guimond also noted that infor-
mation acquired on the exposure of thou-
sands of Egyptian workers could help EPA
in evaluating health risks to the U.S. popu-
lation from phosphate.
Near Egypt’s southern border where the
Nile encounters the famous and controver-
sial Aswan Dam, EPA is sponsoring a broad
study of how the dam has affected the
re9ion, for ill and for good. The project
officer, Dr. Walter M. Sanders of the EPA
Environmental Research Laboratory in
Athens, Ga., explains that the study is
examining the effects of the Aswan project
“along the lines of hydrology, water qual-
ity, aquatic ecology, public health, agricul-
ture, and social implications.”
The Aswan is a major force in Egypt’s
life. It has created one of the largest reser-
voirs in the world. It provides about half of
the nation’s electric power. It causes 100
million metric tons of silt to be deposited
annually in Lake Nasser Reservoir. Because
the dam is in an arid region, evaporation
losses cause the Nile to increase about 10
percent in salinity as it passes through the
reservoir. Lake Nasser Reservoir shows a
high rate of algal production. At the same
time, food fish production has increased
therefrom 750 metric tons in 1966 to
20,600 tons in 1978 The city of Aswan a
few miles north of the dam has mush-
roomed from 30,000 to 620,000 between
1960 and 1976. The impact of industrial
and domestic waste discharge and farm-
land drainage have become evident not
only in the main river but in its irrigation
canals and drains.
Egyptian scientists in the EPA project
are studying how the Nile’s ecology is
changing. They are determining water qua I-
ity characteristics above and below the lake
and comparing them with earlier data be-
fore the dam was built. Researchers also
are developing a water resources model,
and seeking to predict future trends in
water quality and how they will affect the
region. Later they will propose a compre-
hensive river plan on how to manage this
vast water resource most effectively.
The public health survey completed by
the project staff of over 15,000 rural Egyp-
tians located in 41 villages from Aswan to
the Mediterranean showed an average drop
of about 50 percent in the overall preva-
lence of schistosomiasis (snail fever dis-
ease) since 1937. The current prevalence
in the north central delta is 42,1 percent,
in upper middle Egypt 26.7 percent, and in
the Aswan region 4.1 percent. The survey
showed that infections were significantly
lower in populations obtaining their do-
mestic water from protected sources.
The Aswan Dam has regulated the water
flow in the river so that there is a continual
supply of irrigation water year-round. The
agricultural studies have found that this
increase in use of water has caused the
water table to rise. Where the table once
lay about 250 centimeters or more than
eight feet below the Earth’s surface, it now
lies only 40 to 70 centimeters down (about
16 to 28 inches) in large areas where tile
drains have not been installed. These un-
drained soils are increasing both in salinity
and alkalinity, causing a decrease in crop
productivity.
From Alexandria south to Aswan, from
the Western Desert eastward to the shores
of the Red Sea, EPA scientists have joined
with their colleagues in Egypt to help that
nation cope with its many environmental
and health-related questions. There is no
question that both countries are finding un-
expected rewards in the experience, both
in environmental knowledge and in inter-
national cooperation.D
26
EPA JOURNAL
-------
Hunting
Pollution in the
Great Smokies
By Charles D. Pierce
#4 TUW &ps or a three-mile round trip on an easy-graded surface will take you away from the sights, sounds,
and smells of your everyday world, along one of America’s loveliest streams. You will be walking into one of
- __________________ the last great wilderness areas remaining in the East
S o reads a National Park Service sign
as one enters the Ramsey Cascade
area of the Little Pigeon River in the Great
Smoky Mountains National Park.
impact of pollution on the relatively iso-
lated areas of the world.
This quest was part of an international
effort known as the Man and Biosphere
A ’my Cross, an EPA scientist, gathers vegetation samples in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park
A small group of scientists from EPA
and the National Park Service trod this path
last spring on their way to key monitoring
tests, one step in a global effort to find the
k
% .
c..
MARCH 1979
27
-------
Vegas, Nev., sets up monLorin 5 j ‘quipment.
Program, established by the U.N. Educa-
tional Scientific and Cultural Organization
in 1971.
Under this program the Great Smoky
Mountains National Park was designated
as one of 117 biosphere reserve sites, pris-
tine areas which have been designated at
various locations around the world.
An important goal is to use these re-
serves as a record of the environment in its
natural state and to monitor these areas to
measure global pollution fallout that might
be masked in more heavily polluted areas.
Monitoring and sampling performed by
the EPA-National Park Service team last
spring and on a preliminary visit in 1977
have discovered evidence of relatively high
concentrations of lead in the park.
While the source of this lead has not
been determined so far, EPA scientists be-
lieve there are two main possibilities:
The lead particles were borne by wind
from either the heavy auto traffic in the
park or industrial and urban sources out-
side the Great Smokies.
Pierce, Editor of EPA Journal, accom-
panied the scientific team on their journey
into the Great Smoky Mountains National
Park.
Some lead is also found from natural
sources. The results of testing for other
types of pollutants are still being analyzed
and assessed. Additional monitoring in the
park will be undertaken this spring.
The scientific team investigating the
health of the Great Smoky Mountains
National Park carried heavy monitoring
equipment by back pack because even
horses or burros couldn’t climb the
heavily forested 60-degree slopes that led
to some of the isolated sampling sites.
The team members, led by Dr. G. Bruce
Wiersma of EPA’s Environmental Monitor-
ing and Support Laboratory at Las Vegas,
Nev.. were often drenched in sweat as they
climbed up root- and rock-studded trails
and steep banks.
However, occasional torrents of rain
helped cool the climbers. At some points
the downpour was so heavy that the group
had to huddle under tarpaulins, wait till the
storm passed and then slog on along trails
which had been transformed by rain run-off
into swiftly flowing rivulets.
It is water vapor from the frequent rains
and natural emissions from vegetation that
give the park the haze responsible for its
name, Great Smoky.
The group crossed and re-crossed the
roaring and foaming Little Pigeon River on
crude log bridges as they scrambled their
way to the monitoring sites under a drip-
ping canopy of towering trees.
In addition to giant hemlock and tulip
poplars and a rich variety of other trees,
the park has a wealth of shrubs and wild
flowers. Waves of Wake Robin (red tril-
lium) bloomed in shady areas.
The animal life includes salamanders
in many different sizes, shapes, and colors;
a dazzling variety of warblers and other
song birds, wild boars and black bears.
The air pollution monitoring equipment
set up in the park by the team at exposed
sites was placed in a tepee-like construc-
tion of steel rods specially rigged with
barbed wire to discourage intrusion by the
inquisitive bears.
Drinking water taken from the park’s
swift flowing streams had to be treated to
kill the bacteria left by the wild boars which
wallow in the headwaters. The boars in-
vaded the park after escaping from a flea r-
by hunting preserve.
The team of scientists visited 10 re-
search blocks in the park, each about one
square kilometer in area, where they took
multiple samples of air, water, vegetation,
soil, and forest floor litter. Approximately
1,200 samples were taken.
The soil, forest floor litter, and vegeta-
tion samples were placed in plastic bags
and carried out in back packs. The re-
searchers used plastic gloves to avoid
contaminating the leaves and other plant
material collected.
Plants gathered included such varieties
as New York fern, witch hazel, asters,
moss, mountain laurel, dogwood, and
rhododendron. In some cases the moss
was gathered from the logs of huge Amer-
ican chestnut trees, which had been killed
by a blight many years ago and are still rot-
ting on the forest floor.
In addition to bottling samples of the
water from the park streams for later anal-
ysis, the team left rain gauges at some of
the sampling sites to compare findings with
those obtained from air filters.
At most of the air sampling sites, filters
were tied around trees and air was drawn
through them by battery-operated pumps.
Four filters were used at each site.
In order to determine the size, distribu-
tion, and composition of metallic air-borne
particles in the park, the monitoring plan
provided for one filter to be analyzed
by scanning electron microscopy at the
University of Iowa, one by conventional
atomic absorption methods at the “clean”
laboratory facilities at Carnegie-Mellon
University in Pittsburgh, and one by x-ray
fluorescent spectrometry at the Environ-
mental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
at Las Vegas. The fourth filter was provided
in case of damage or loss to one of the
continued to inside beck cover
4
- , - .
- lu
/
Dr. oruce vv iersrua in cr# -t £ i, onmental M w ii Supptit uu’ atc c.
28
EPA JOURNAL
-------
other three or in case a more extensive
analytical examination was required.
Water samples were analyzed at EPA’s
Environmental Research Laboratory in
Athens, Ga.
Of the 10 sampling sites chosen, four
were on the north slope (Tennessee side) of
the mountain range at various high and low
altitudes in mixed hardwood forests. An
additional four were on the south slope
(North Carolina side) at corresponding ele-
vations and in the same type of vegetation
as those on the north exposure.
The final two sites were high elevations,
one on a mountain top and one in a natur-
ally cleared area known as a “bald.”
All of the sampling areas were at least
three miles from the nearest heavily trav-
eled roads.
Although the high altitude air sampling
sites were protected with barbed wire, EPA
scientists found that a bear cub had gotten
through the wire at one location and turned
over the batteries and pump. However,
even in this overturned position, the equip-
ment continued to function properly for an
eight-hour period.
In addition to Dr. Wiersma, members of
the science team participating in the Great
Smoky Mountains monitoring expeditions
were Kenneth Brown and Amy Cross, both
of the EPA Environmental Monitoring and
Support Laboratory at Las Vegas, Dr. Sue
Bratton, a Park Service ecologist stationed
at the park, and Don Kilgore, a Park Service
seasonal technician.
While the project is being conducted
under an interagency agreement with the
National Park Service, a number of other
organizations are also contributing consul-
tation and analytical support.
Biosphere Reserves such as the Great
Smoky Mountains National Park were iden-
tified to: provide a permanent record of the
natural state of the environment; ensure
undisturbed areas from which background
data on pollutant levels could be obtained;
serve as early warning sites for more dan-
gerous buildups in higher impact areas,
and provide repositories for natural
sources of genetic pools of animal and
plant species.
These reserves will be key units in the
Global Environmental Monitoring System
now being set up as a result of proposals
by the U.N. and several other international
-*
1’ ‘
groups. D
------- |