FEBRUARY 1977
VOL.THREE. NO.TWO
P
SKIING AND THE ENVIRONMENT
^TURER DRINKING WATER
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
-------
THE GLOBAL
QUEST FOR SAFE
DRINKING WATER
In the United States and in other countries over
the globe the effort to provide improved drinking
water for people is being intensified. In this
country industrialization and the development of
thousands of new chemicals have required the
development of improved technology to assure safe
drinking water.
And countries around the world are striving to
reduce waterborne diseases which kill an estimated
25,000 people daily.
These efforts are reviewed in this issue of EPA
Journal. Also included are a report on the guid-
ance provided to EPA by the National Drinking
Water Council and an assessment of the value of
home water purifiers.
On another subject, the Journal has a thoughtful
article by John Jerome, a contributing editor of
Skiing Magazine, on skiing and the environment.
One of the troublesome problems confronting an
agency like EPA is guarding the safety of employ-
ees who handle dangerous substances in the
Agency's laboratories. A report on steps being
taken to improve laboratory safety conditions is
given by Alvin L. Aim, former Assistant Administra-
tor for Planning and Management, in an interview.
Two nuclear explosions in China last fall aroused
public interest in EPA's nationwide radioactivity
monitoring system. An article in the Journal
describes this system and gives EPA's evaluation
of the health effects in this country of fallout from
the blasts.
Other subjects in this issue include:
Environmental Almanac—a glimpse of the world
of nature and what is happening to some of our
pine trees.
A report on improvements in air quality and a
decline in the amount of wastes being dumped into
the ocean.
An account of efforts being made by EPA
researchers to help reduce the amount of salt used
to help clear highways of ice and snow.
-------
U.S.
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
John R. Quarles, Jr.
Acting Administrator
Marlin Fitzwater, Acting Director of
Public Affairs
Charles D. Pierce, Editor
Staff: Van Trumbull, Ruth Hussey
David Cohen
PHOTO CREDITS
COVER PHOTO
Berko, Aspen, Colo.
Page4-U.N.
Page 9—Earnest Bucci
Page 11-Ron Hoffman*
Page 12-Ernst Halberstadt*
Page 13— Bureau of Reclamation
Back Cover-Al Wilson
'Documerica
COVER: Skier sends snow flying in
Aspen. Colo.
The EPA Journal is published
monthly, with combined issues
July-August and November- December,
.by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. Use of
funds for printing this periodical has
been approved by the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget •
Views expressed by authors do not
necessarily reflect EPA policy.
Contributions and inquiries should be
addressed to the Editor (A-107),
Waterside Mall, 401 M St., S.W.,
Washington,. D.C. 20460. No
permission necessary to reproduce
contents except copyrighted photos
and other materials. Subscription:
$8.75 a year, $.75 for single copy,
domestic; $11.00 if mailed to a foreign
address. No charge to employees.
Send check or money order to
Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C. 20402.
Printed on recycled paper.
ARTICLES
KEEPING YOUR WATER SAFE PAGE 3
An interview with Dr. Andrew W. Breidenbach on efforts
being made to improve America's drinking water.
QUENCHING THE WORLD'S THIRST PAGE 4
A report on the work being done to solve the problems 01
providing potable water in developing nations.
A COUNCIL'S ADVICE PAGE 6
How an advisory group has played a key role in guiding EPA
in implementation of the new safe drinking water law.
UNDERGROUND WATER PAGE 7
Our enormous supplies of underground fresh water need
protection.
ARE WATER PURIFIERS WORTHWHILE? PAGE 8
Some points to think about in buying a home water purifier
device.
SKIING AND THE ENVIRONMENT PAGE 10
by John Jerome
A review of the impact of ski resorts on the environment and
what can be done about it.
SAFETY IN THE LABORATORY PAGE 14
An interview with Alvin L. Aim on steps being taken to protect
employees who work in EPA's laboratories.
MONITORING NUCLEAR EXPLOSIONS PAGE 18
An account of the work performed by EPA to help protect the
Nation from nuclear fallout.
ENVIRONMENTAL ALMANAC PAGE 22
A glimpse of the natural world we help protect.
GAINS ON THE AIR AND OCEAN FRONTS PAGE 23
EASY ON THE SALT by Peter Acly BACK PAGE
DEPARTMENTS
PEOPLE
NATION
INQUIRY
NEWS BRIEFS
PAGE 9
PAGE 16
PAGE 24
PAGE 25
PAGE 1
-------
YOUR
DRINKING
WATER
THIS IS THE BEGINNING1
OF A REVIEW ON SOME OF
THE PROBLEMS
AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR
PROVIDING BETTER
DRINKING WATER IN
THE UNITED STATES
AND ABROAD.
.
m
Zj'\~y
rag
TTg-v-^ ~:>
/'
:'
FURI'R DRINKING WATER
PACil- 2
-------
KEEPING
YOUR WATER SAFE
An interview with Dr. Andrew W. Breidenbach, Assistant Adminis-
trator for Water and Hazardous Materials.
Q. Is our drinking water safe?
A. Generally speaking, yes. There are still about 4,000 instances of
water-related illnesses reported each year, related to microbiologi-
cal contamination. But you have to remember that the means for
assessing how many people get sick because of poor water supply
aren't as developed as we would like. Separating illnesses caused
by water supply from those caused by breathing, food intake, or
other sources is a difficult problem. We do know that the water
that Americans drink is generally good. It compares most favorably
with water supplies in other countries, as well.
Q. Why did Congress pass the Safe Drinking
Water Act?
A. Congress and many others were concerned about deficiencies in
existing systems and about the long-term effects of small quantities
of organics and other contaminants in drinking water, some of
which are suspected carcinogens.
Q. Why aren't the procedures which were used
before passage of the Safe Drinking Water Act
adequate to ensure public health?
A. Looking back over the last 25 years, you can see what has
happened to our country, how much industrialization we've gone
through, the number of organic chemicals which have been
synthesized and brought into our society for use in very beneficial
ways. You can see how the water treatment procedures that were
established in an earlier time period can be very easily outdated,
and become candidates for updating to the technology required to
cope with today's contamination.
But for the most part, existing procedures will be used to solve
today's problems. The Safe 'Drinking Water Act provides the
incentive to apply such procedures as effectively as possible, while
also providing for research into the need for and application of new
technology.
Q. What does the Safe Drinking Water Act
require?
A. Essentially it sets up two programs, the public water supervision
program and the protection of underground sources of drinking
water. The public water supervision program will focus on quality
of water at the tap through the application of the contaminant limits
of the Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations. Later there
will be Revised Drinking Water Regulations, to be based on a
major National Academy of Sciences study of the health effects of
the contaminants we were talking about earlier.
Q. What is the difference between the primary
regulations and the secondary regulations men-
tioned in the Act?
A. Primary Regulations, which go into effect this June, prescribe
monitoring procedures and maximum concentrations for contami-
nants that are health related. They have to do with controlling
arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, nitrates,
silver, radioactivity, and other contaminants where we have informa-
tion that these substances cause adverse effects on human health.
In addition to that we have set standards for coliform bacteria
which are an indication of fecal pollution from mammals in the
water.
The Secondary Regulations are concerned with aesthetic factors
such as taste, odor, and color. Since these are clearly secondary
to public health concerns, they will not be mandatory Federal
regulations. However, we anticipate that a number of States will
adopt them as mandatory. They are important factors in the
public acceptance of drinking water supplies.
Q. Whom will these regulations cover?
A. All community water systems regularly serving 15 or more
customers or 25 or more people. Additionally, non-community
supplies such as trailer camps, parks and recreation sites, roadside
motels, and so on are also covered.
Q. How many water suppliers are there in
America and how many will not be able to meet
the standards?
A. There are about 40 to 50 thousand systems serving residential
communities and perhaps 200 thousand smaller systems that serve
non-residential systems. And as far as how many are not going to
be able to meet the standards, that is very difficult to predict. With
the advent of the monitoring program established under the
Primary Regulations, we will begin to get an answer in the next
year or so.
Q. When will the public see implementation of
the new regulations?
A. The Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations become
effective in June of this year. States and water suppliers are
immediately involved but the public probably won't see the effects
of the program until problems are uncovered.
Q. How will the public know?
A. The Act requires a supplier to notify his customers when
contaminant limits have been exceeded. On that notice, the supplier
of the water will, in addition to saying what contaminant limits have
been exceeded, explain the significance of the problem and also
what he is doing to ameliorate that condition. If customers are
aware of the problem, they are going to have the tendency to
support the changes in treatment that will be required. Knowledge
by the consumer of what he is buying and what he is drinking is a
very important keystone in getting the support that that water
supplier needs to make such changes. Incidentally, suppliers will
also be required to notify their customers if they fail to monitor
their water according to the schedules set forth in the regulations.
Q. Who is going to see to it that water suppliers
adhere to the regulations?
A. The Act is a "shared Act." Any State that wishes to accept
the responsibility for the Safe Drinking Water Program as the
Federal Government defines it in its regulations can apply. This
also makes them eligible for grants to help with the cost of
exercising "primary enforcement responsibility" or "primacy" as
it is called. Following the intent of Congress, our goal is to have
all States accept primacy. We feel that is the best organizational
Continued on page 20
PAGE 3
-------
". . . the provision of adequate supplies
of safe water lias been termed the most
important single factor for improving the
well-being of tin- world's poor majority.
Something like 40 percent of the human
race does not ha\'e adequate an ess to safe
water. Waterhorne diseases are estimated to
kill more than 25,000 people daily. Schixto-
xomitisis and filariasis, the worlds largest
cause of blindness, affect—according to one
estimate—some 450 million people in more
than 70 nations. There are. [economist]
Harhara Ward has said, cities in the devel-
oping world where 60 percent of the children
horn die of infantile xastri/i.s before thev are
five. These and other waterborne diseases
. . . tire the main cause of injanl mortality
in the developing countries and, together
with malnutrition, the main cause of low
adult resistance to disease and early
death."
Kxeerpted from remarks hy former KPA
Administrator Russell \:.. Train delivered before
the I.os Angeles Work! Affairs Forum.
December 16. 1976.
From a nomads' camp in the northern
desert of Africa, a woman leaves her
tent. She carries with her an earthen jar.
balanced on her head. When she finally
reaches the small, mud-banked well, she
must wait patiently while the other women
fill their containers from the only source of
water within hundreds of square miles. They
know that the water will quench their thirst.
They do not know that the water may
contain disease-producing bacteria.
Ironically, the same water that is essential
for sustaining life can also serve as an
important agent for the transmission of
cholera, typhoid, amebic dysentery, infec-
tious hepatitis, and many other diseases.
Lice, mites, and skin diseases spread when
there is not enough bathing water. The use
of common cooking and eating utensils
without adequate cleansing also contributes
to illness.
In parts of many developing countries.
people have to purchase water from vendors
or take untreated water from ponds and
ditches, where it is often contaminated. A
1975 World Health Organization (WHO)
study of developing nations showed that 23
percent of the urban population does not
have access to public water systems within
200 meters of their homes—a distance of
nearly two football fields. Over half of the
remaining 77 percent receive water which is
frequently contaminated. Of the rural popu-
lation. 78 percent spend a "disproportion-
ate" part of the day fetching water. (Of the
remaining 22 percent of the rural popula-
tion, little is known about the quality or
quantity of their drinking water supplies).
It is usually the poor, both urban and rural,
who suffer from such conditions. And in
some cultures, the burden of hauling water
falls disproportionately upon women.
Action on the problem of unsafe drinking
water in developing countries around the
world was recently taken at the UN. Con-
ference on Human Settlements in Vancou-
ver. In the summer of 1976. the Vancouver
conference produced a series of resolutions
calling for a safe water supply in every
settlement in the world by 1990 and recom-
mended that this matter be discussed at the
UN. Conference on Water Resources to be
held in Mar del Plata. Argentina in March
1977. The U.S. delegation strongly en-
dorsed these recommendations.
Victor J. Kimm, EPA's Deputy Assistant
Administrator for Water Supply, was given
Ihe responsibility of heading a task force on
that subject. As a result, Mr. Kimm's group,
the U.S. Task Force on Domestic Water.
has written a paper entitled "Meeting Do-
mestic Water Requirements of Developing
Countries" which has been submitted to
the U.N. Secretariat as a U.S. contribution
for the Argentine conference.
The US. task force included experts and
representatives from the Agency for
PAGE 4
-------
QUENCHING
THE WORLD'S
THIRST
International Development (AID); the De-
partment of Housing and Urban Develop-
ment; the Department of Health, Education
and Welfare; as well as non-governmental
organizations including the International In-
stitute of Environment and Resources for
the Future; and the Bolton Institute.
"The drinking water problems facing de-
veloping nations are huge, but they are
impossible to ignore," Mr. Kimm said.
" For instance, the Pan American Health
Organization examined the deaths of 35,095
Latin American children—all under five
years of age—in a recent study. The results
indicated that the major underlying cause
of death in 29 percent of those cases was
diarrhea! disease. That affliction is closely
related to contaminated drinking water."
Normally, Mr. Kimm's responsibilities in-
volve the administration of the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act of 1974, which established a
program to improve the quality of drinking
water in the United States. But his under-
standing of water supply problems in the
developing nations is not academic. Be-
tween 1962 and 1966 he was engaged in
planning and implementing a variety of
development projects in Latin America.
"Our task force faced a difficult problem
in trying to generalize about the worldwide
water supply problems of developing na-
tions." Mr. Kimm said. "Our ability to
understand the magnitude of the problem is
severely limited due to the lack of consistent
data, although persistent problems can be
seen.
"Water supply improvements are not one-
shot capital investments; they must be prop-
erly operated and maintained if the desired
benefits are to be achieved. Similarly basic
sanitation facilities must be installed and
operated to protect water supply improve-
ments.
"These requirements for ongoing opera-
tions require the creation of stable institu-
tions, ongoing funding, and managerial and
technical skills which are serious problems
in industrialized nations and even more
difficult problems for developing nations.
"Since much of the unserved worldwide
population is among the very poor, each
nation must deal with the questions of
subsidizing some of the costs for those who
can't pay full user charges. Since developing
nations have limited capabilities to subsidize
all types of development projects, they face
very difficult allocation choices, and water
supply activities must get into each nation's
overall development priorities.
"However, the availability of adequate
quantities of good quality water is a prime
prerequisite for many types of economic
developments and can contribute to quality
and productivity of the labor forces. Hap-
pily, almost all developing nations have pro-
grams in water supply and related sanita-
tion. Judging from available figures, the
developing nations currently spend about
$2.7 billion annually toward Shis goal of
which about 15% comes from international
sources as well as associated technical as-
sistance.
"If current expectations for individual serv-
ice connections are extended into the future
a 15-year program to provide reasonable
access to safe water for all human settle-
ments by 1990 could cost $50-$100 billion;
which is two to three times current invest-
ment levels.
"However, these huge figures should not
mask the fact that millions of people could
be provided more healthful water supplies
through modest increases in international
assistance and more efficient utilization of
existing resources."
M-. Kimm's task force has advised that
the U. N. Conference recommend the
following measures:
• That all countries recognize that reason-
able access to safe and adequate drinking
water is a fundamental right of all people.
• That all nations include realistic and
specific goals for expanding and upgrading
water supplies and related sanitation within
their national development priorities.
• That all international assistance pro-
grams give added priority to training, tech-
nical assistance and funding water supply
improvements as part of broader urban and
rural development projects.
The task group is also working with the
Agency for International Development to
develop more specific U.S. commitments
which might be put forth at the conference
should the new Administration choose to do
so.
The paper which Mr. Kimm's task force
submitted on behalf of the United States
does strike a hopeful chord: "Although the
task is enormous, significant improvements
can be made in the provision of safe
drinking water to millions of people through
more efficient utilization of existing re-
sources, increased financial support, more
local participation in planning such improve-
ments and better application of technology
which is appropriate to the place of applica-
tion. Toward this end, the United States will
continue to provide financial and technical
assistance through the Agency for Interna-
tional Development." The U.S. international
assistance program has already provided
about $1 billion directly for water supply
and sanitation activities. Jt is anticipated that
AID will commit $275 million to such
projects between July I, 1975, and Septem-
ber 30, 1978.B
PAGE 5
-------
A COUNCIL'S
ADVICE
On February 26, 1975, Russell E. Train,
then EPA Administrator, addressed the
first meeting of the National Drinking Water
Advisory Council. His directive was firm:
"Your Charter calls, among other things, for
practical and independent advice. . . If you
are not independent, then there is no point
in having you."
To date, there is ample evidence that the
Council has followed that instruction. For
instance the National Journal reported last
summer that ". . . EPA has been praised
by officials in government and industry for
what they perceive as its unique reliance
on its 15-member National Drinking Water
Advisory Council in drafting standards and
regulations. . . They maintain that the
relationship between the agency and the
council has broken the usual rubber-stamp
role of most Federal advisory boards."
With the passage of the Safe Drinking
Water Act on December 16, 1974, Congress
created the Council and required the EPA
Administrator to appoint its membership.
The Act states that in proposing and pro-
mulgating regulations for safe drinking water
activities. EPA must consult with the Coun-
cil. This means, for example, that the Coun-
cil's actions can assist EPA in developing
new safe drinking water regulations. The
first standards under this act for ensuring a
high quality of drinking water for all Amer-
icans go into effect in June. Also, the
Administrator must consult with the Coun-
cil before awarding any demonstration
grants to determine if the project will serve
a useful purpose to improve safe water for
the public for drinking.
Since its inception, the Council's chairman
has been C'harles C. Johnson, often referred
to simply as "C.C." by friends and col-
leagues. Mr. Johnson was recommended as
chairman by the Council members. His
interest in safe drinking water and public
health is long standing. He entered the U.S.
Public Health Service in 1947 as a second
lieutenant, working his way up to Adminis-
trator for the Consumer Protection and
Environmental Health Service. Mr. Johnson
retired in 1971 as Assistant Surgeon Gen-
eral. He is currently the Washington, D.C.
resident manager for Malcolm Pirnie. Inc.,
a consulting engineering firm.
"Everybody on the Council, and I
wouldn't have it any other way, is willing to
speak their part," Mr. Johnson explained.
"I think we are 15 very capable people who
are active in our own professional areas and
interested in sharing our capabilities and
experiences with EPA. We actively get
involved, using a lot of voluntary time to
acquire information which is brought to
Council meetings for discussions. Anything
less than this level of commitment would
soon produce a dormant Council.
"If our meetings produce a consensus, we
pass our proposals on to the Administrator.
A substantial amount of those recommenda-
tions have been incorporated into the activi-
ties and actions of the program people.
"The Council has won far more than it has
lost in terms of a 'yes" or 'no" response.
Our recommendations are in the 70 to 75
percent area of acceptance. And we are
satisfied with that on the whole. After all, if
we knew everything, we'd be EPA and EPA
would be the Advisory Council."
Several specific examples can be cited
where Council activities and recommenda-
tions have contributed to the shaping of
EPA's safe drinking water activities. One
such area has been in public communica-
tions activities, which appeared to the Coun-
cil to be limited in scope. Based upon the
Council's concerns and recommendations.
EPA developed a water supply public affairs
strategy, began developing brochures and
other informational items concerning safe
drinking water, and is in the process of
developing a documentary film for public
television.
C.C. Johnson
Concerning the review of regulations, the
Council examined EPA's proposed primary
standards in detail and recommended spe-
cific actions to be taken.
The Council meets about every other
month, and all meetings are opened to
the public. "The fact that our meetings are
open adds a certain special flavor," Mr.
Johnson said. "I don't think that ail govern-
ment advisory groups have always been
open to the public. There is also a strong
view among the Council that we need to
meet outside of Washington, D.C. periodi-
cally so that we get different viewpoints.
The Act provides that five Council mem-
bers be appointed from the general public,
five from State and local agencies which are
concerned with public water supply and
hygiene, and five from representatives of
private organizations or groups demonstrat-
ing an active interest in the field of water
hygiene and public water. The term of
membership is three years, although the Act
prescribes that the initial appointments be
set up on a staggered basis (five members
serving for one year, five for two years, and
five for three years.)
For additional information on the activities
of the Council, write Patrick Tobin, Execu-
tive Secretary for the National Drinking
Water Advisory Council, Office of Water
Supply (WH-550). Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, 401 M Street, S.W., Washing-
ton, D. C. 20460. •
I'Adl f.
-------
UNDERGROUND
WATER
The Nation's biggest potential supply of
drinking water is nut its rivers, lakes.
and reservoirs. It is water in the .ground,
often overlooked by the public and largely
unused.
The US. Geological Survey estimates that
220 trillion cubic meters of drinkable water
lie within a few thousand feet of the surface
of the 50 States. In a more common meas-
ure of water volume, the acre-foot (enough
water to cover an acre of ground to the
depth of one foot), the Nation's ground
water totals 180 billion acre-feet. That would
fill a tank as big as Lake Superior to a depth
of 8.872 feet, or more than a mile and a half.
This would be enough to supply our needs
for several hundred years at current rates of
withdrawal, says M.S. Bedinger. Survey hy-
drologist.
Four out of every five gallons of water
now used in the United States come from
surface sources: rivers, lakes, and reser-
voirs. Only one gallon comes from wells or
springs, although they supply about half the
population with water for drinking and do-
mestic purposes. Industrial and commercial
uses account for most of the consumption of
surface water.
The ground water supply is widespread as
well as enormous. At almost any point in
the Nation ground water may be tapped for
single-family use. One-third of the country
has ground water enough to supply lOO.(HK)
gallons per day to an individual well.
Fresh water has been found in rock forma-
tions of the continental shelf as much as 60
miles off the coast in some areas. However.
the converse also occurs, with saline water
under many ureas inland. Fresh and salt
water often occur in the same area at
different levels.
In the Southwest and the High Plains
country, where surface supplies are scarce
or highly seasonal, ground water is widely
used, for municipal supplies, for irrigated
farming, and for the operation of mines.
smelters, and other industries. California
pumps more than 18 billion gallons per day
from wells and Texas more than 6.2 billion.
compared to 2.6 billion for the Mid-Atlantic
region and MO million for New Kngland.
In arid regions ground water can mean the
difference between life and death, as many a
Western ballad recounts.
Hven in the well-watered Fastern. South-
ern and Central States, government planners
are becoming more interested in ground-
water development as the cost of treating
surface water increases and land for new
reservoirs and their protected watersheds
gets scarcer and more expensive.
FPA's Office of Water Supply is well
aware of ground water as a potential re-
source that will undoubtedly be more widely
developed soon. Although the Office's most
pressing task is to set nationwide drinking
water standards and encourage States to
carry them out. it is also required by the
Safe Drinking Water Act to take steps to
protect the Nation's ground water.
The Office's Ground Water Protection
Branch, headed by Thomas F. Belk, is
concerned with guarding ground water from
contamination by industrial wastes, salt
water intrusion, and injection practices that
could affect its purity and availability. Regu-
lations have been proposed establishing min-
imum requirements for State programs to
assure this protection.
Ground-water supplies are known as
"aquifers." distinct geological strata that
contain water. When a shaft is dug or drilled
into an aquifer, water flows into it from the
surrounding earth or rock and can be
pumped to Ihe surface. In some cases water
in the aquifer is under enough natural
pressure to spout without pumping: such a
well is called artesian, after Artois. a region
in northern France where many up-flowing
wells were drilled in the 18th century.
Where are the aquifers? How much water
do they hold? How is water withdrawn from
them replaced?
Such questions are easy to answer for
surface waters that can be seen and readily
measured. For aquifers the answers are
harder to get. but hydrologists (geologists
who specialize in water studies) can define
the boundaries of an aquifer and estimate its
storage capacity and flow rate with consid-
erable accuracy, although the measurements
are indirect.
Information about the earth and rock for-
mations under the land surface, test drillings.
data from existing wells, and laboratory
tests all contribute to the h\ drologist's
knowledge of the aquifer.
Some southwestern States have strict regu-
lations to prevent oil and gas wells from
contaminating the aquifers: oil wells must be
sealed off from the aquifers they penetrate,
and close monitoring is required to spot and
promptly repair any leaks. The injection of
water, brine, or gas into an oilfield to spur
production can be done only with careful
safeguards to protect aquifers from harm.
One of the best-known aquifers in the
country is the Fdwards limestone formation
in south central Texas. It contains about
three million acre-feet of high-grade water
(lowing slowly southeastward under the Citv
of San Antonio. Rainfall on its northern
outcrop and drainage from higher land re-
charge it. chief Iv in the winter' months.
More than one million people depend on it
for drinking water. The aquifer discharges
water along its southern and eastern edges
through springs and local streams that main-
tain their flow even in the dry season.
EPA last year declared the Fdwards Un-
derground Reservoir as the sole source of
drinking water for the urea. This action
under the Safe Drinking Water Act brings
the Reservoir under Federal, as well as
State and local, protection rules. No Federal
aid may be given for am project that FPA
determines might contaminate the Fdwaids
Reservoir.
Almost everything men do affects ground
water. The spread of cities, with their
impermeable streets, buildings, and parking
lots, ['educes the natural surface recharge.
On the other hand, water- and sewer-pipe
leaks, cesspools, and septic tank fields tend
to increase the recharge, but not alwa\s with
water of desirable quality. The practice of
deliberate recharge, pumping excess water
and treated wastewater inlo the ground
instead of letting it drain to a stream, is
being tried in many areas where ground
water levels are declining.
The great volume and extent of the
ground water resource make it a factor in all
planning for the improvement and control of
the environment. Under the Safe Drinking
Water Act. FPA is acting to protect this
vital resource. •
PAGF 7
-------
ARE WATER PURIFIERS
WORTHWHILE?
John Harrison's morning coffee didn't
taste good. His evening highball didn't
seem quite right either. And his mother-in-
law, in from the country on a visit, was
complaining again about the city water.
"All that chlorine, ugh!" she said.
"Water's not like that up at the farm."
Wasn't there something in the papers re-
cently about chemicals in drinking water?
Organics. some suspected of causing can-
cer? Tiny amounts, nothing to be alarmed
about, but the authorities were looking into
it.
Then Mr. Harrison recalled a disturbing
detail: chlorine that kills the germs might be
combining with harmless chemicals to form
dangerous ones.
So he bought a home water treatment unit.
There were lots of them advertised in the
newspapers and magazines. Wide range of
prices, from less than $10 to more than
$250. Some claimed the ability to remove
bacteria and organic chemicals; others in-
cluded suspended microscopic particles.
even asbestos fibers. All said they would
remove odors and bad tastes.
Mr. Harrison bought one from the bottom
of the price range: $39.95 plus tax. and
installed it himself. It had a cannister that
mounted under the kitchen sink, copper
tubing hitched to the cold water line, and an
extra faucet for tapping the treated water
that came through the unit.
Did he get his money's worth? We asked
this question of Frank Bell, an engineer in
EPA's Office of Water Supply. Mr. Bell, a
specialist in water treatment, has been field-
ing questions about home treatment devices
for nearly two years.
Mr. Bell said "1 can't tell you if Mr.
Harrison got his money's worth, because
there are three big ifs. I'll take them one at
a time:
"First, if he likes the taste of the water.
and he probably does. Any charcoal filter
will take the chlorine out and improve the
taste of coffee, tea. frozen juice, things like
that. You can get a charcoal filter for less
than ten dollars that you just hold under the
tap and let the water run through into your
glass or coffee pot."
The second big if. Mr. Bell explained, is
maintaining the treatment. No device is
worth the money if its beneficial action
stops while the user thinks it's still working.
Filters get clogged after a while and must
be replaced or rejuvenated. Some can be
"back-flushed" with water to remove the
gunk that has accumulated. Charcoal filters
work by adsorbing chemicals onto the mi-
croscopic, honeycomb surface of the char-
coal. The organic chemicals cannot be
flushed or blown away, but they can be
driven away by heat and the charcoal made
ready again to adsorb unwelcome odors and
tastes. "This can't be done at home." said
Mr. Bell. "The customer will have no way
of knowing when his filter ceases to remove
chloroform or other volatile organics. He
won't know when his filter needs regenera-
tion or replacement."
The third big if with home water treatment
devices lies in their action on bacteria in the
water. All devices t-end to collect bacteria,
he said, and therein lies a danger.
"City water supply operators take great
pains to reduce the bacteria in water. And
they succeed. Your city water is safe to
drink, which means the bacteria count is
below a certain level. No water system in
the world is entirely free of bacteria.
"When you get a few bacteria trapped on a
filter along with the organic material they
feed on, they can multiply tremendously.
After a while it's possible for a batch of
bacteria to break away from the filter and
give you a glass of water with a very high
bacteria count. Chances are you wouldn't
notice; the water would taste all right, but it
might be harmful."
To prevent bacterial build up. many manu-
facturers use silver in their filters. The level
of silver applied doesn't kill the bacteria, but
it inhibits their growth. Silver ions adhere to
the microorganisms and stop them from
growing. This is called "bacteriostatic" ac-
tion, and scientists don't yet fully understand
how it works.
The bacteriostatic action, like filtration, has
a limited time of effectiveness, which will
vary for different devices and different rates
of use. Well before that time is up the silver-
impregnated filter must be replaced.
Any device advertised as effective against
microorganisms must be registered by
EPA's Pesticide Office, since bacteria qual-
ify as pests. Court decisions have held that
merely calling a device a "purifier" implies
an anti-pest claim. Elijah F. Brown Jr., who
heads the Disinfectants Branch, is in charge
of water treatment pesticide registration.
Registrations are issued only for pesticides
that are effective and properly labeled,
which includes instructions for timely re-
placement. At the end of 1976 about 30
home water treatment devices had been
registered as pesticides by EPA. and about
40 applications were under consideration,
Mr. Brown said.
When no bacteriological action is in-
volved—that is, when the device is designed
to remove only non-living substances, dirt,
discoloration, etc.—it does not have to be
registered.
"At the present time," said Mr. Bell, "we
don't recommend the use of home filters
because of the unknowns. It is usually safer
and cheaper to rely on public water sup-
plies."
The Water Supply Office nevertheless
keeps close watch on all water treatment
devices and on their labeling and advertising
claims. The Office is planning a scientific
study of how well the common types of
home water treatment devices succeed in
removing trace organic compounds.
Mr. Bell is drawing up detailed specifica-
tions for the 15-month study that would be
performed by an independent testing labora-
tory under an EPA contract. The study, due
to start this summer, is expected to be the
most thorough and definitive of its kind ever
made. •
PAGE 8
-------
Roger Strelow has resigned as
Assistant Administrator for Air
and Waste Management and
has accepted a position in the
Washington. D.C., law firm of
Leva, Hawes, Symington.
Martin & Oppenheimer.
During his three-and-one-half-
years at EPA, Mr. Strelow
played a leading role in the
administration of programs in
the areas of air, solid waste,
noise, and radiation.
Mr. Strelow joined F.PA in
September, 1973, after having
served as Staff Director for the
Council on Environmental
Quality. His first Agency-
position was as Executive
Assistant to the Administrator.
In January, 1974, he was
named Acting Assistant
Administrator for Air and
Water Programs, and became
head of the Office of Air and
Waste Management the
following April under an EPA
reorganization. His
environmental work with the
Federal Government began in
1969 as an Assistant to the
Secretary of Health, Education
and Welfare.
Three appointments in Region
II, New York, were
announced recently by
Regional Administrator Gerald
M. Hansler:
PEOPLE
•I
George Meyer, Chief of the
Federal Facilities Office. He
had been a sanitary engineer in
the Region's New York
Construction Grants Branch.
He joined EPA in 1975 after
having served with the Public-
Health Service in Boston. He
is a 1965 graduate of the
Polytechnic Institute of New
York with a degree in civil
engineering.
William Mansfield, Chief of the
Municipal Permits Section,
Facilities Technology Division.
He served as a civil engineer
with the Corps of Engineers
before joining EPA as a
sanitary engineer in 1970. He
won a Sustained Superior
Performance Award in 1974.
Steven Dvorkin, Chief of the
General Enforcement Branch.
He had served three years with
the Region's Enforcement
Division, working on air,
pesticides, marine, and
discharge permit actions. He
earned a law degree at New
York University in 1973 and is
continuing graduate study
there. He replaces Thomas
Harrison, new Regional
Counsel in Region V, Chicago.
Peter L. Cashman, Director of
the Office of Regional and
Intergovernmental Operations,
has resigned from his EPA
post to accept a position with
York Research. Inc.. an
environmental consulting firm.
York Research is located in
Stamford. Conn.. Mr.
Cashman's home town.
Mr. Cashman joined EPA in
January. 1975. His
responsibilities included
establishing liaison programs
with the Nation's governors.
mayors and other State and
local officials. He was also in
charge of communicating
Agency policies to the Regional
Offices. From 1973 to 1975
Mr. Cashman served as
Lieutenant Governor of
Connecticut.
PAGE 9
-------
SKIING
AND THE ENVIRONMENT
Skiing is a clean and invigorating sport, a
healthy recreation pursued in scenes of
sublime natural beauty and unspoiled gran-
deur. That environmental damage can result
from it therefore seems almost contradic-
tory. But skiing has tremendous ecological
impact, particularly in its most popular
form: lift-served, downhill skiing that re-
quires installation of substantial ski resorts
as service areas. An awareness of the nature
of that impact can help all skiers cooperate
to keep additional impact to a minimum,
and to understand better the limitations that
their sport may very well have to face in the
future.
Mountain terrain is among the most fragile
in all of nature. Very thin soil, short growing
seasons, severe weather conditions, steep
slopes which can hold neither moisture nor
nutrients—all these conditions make the
very places that we want for our skiing also
the places where we are apt to do the most
environmental damage by our intrusion. It
takes roughly a hundred years for natural
processes to create an inch of topsoil at high
altitude; a poorly designed or poorly main-
tained ski trail can wash out acres of that
topsoil, to a depth of several feet, in a single
spring downpour. The plant life that holds
the soil in place must fight ferocious battles
against uprooting winds, long periods of
killing cold and brief blasts of overstimulat-
ing heal, a water supply that seems to vary
only from too much to too little, destructive
weights of ice and snow, too little atmos-
phere and too much radiation. Every
hundred feet of altitude is the rough equiva-
lent of another day of winter in the annual
growth cycle. Sometimes it seems a miracle
that anything green survives in the moun-
tains at all.
The skier's concern for the environment
must primarily be for that greenery, even
though in ski season it is so seldom in
evidence. In fact, it is the snow that hides
the greenery—the snow that is the primary
signpost of both winter and altitude—that is
the savior of the high-mountain terrain.
Snow insulates and preserves, holds the
water supply in place and releases it gradu-
ally, reflects the sun's radiation back into
PAGE 10
By John Jerome
space so that the killing effects of that
radiation's penetration of thin mountain air
is reduced to safe levels. If it weren't for the
stabilizing presence of the snow we ski on,
the mountains would in summer be rocky
deserts, and would erode away into unski-
able flatness at a much more rapid rate than
they now do.
In view of the precariousness of that snow-
covered environment, it seems almost unfair
to put ski resorts into it. The initial shock of
such an installation—heavy construction,
clearing of mountain forest, provision of
power supply, sewage disposal, and other
"civilized" services—is severe, but it is
relatively controllable. These impacts are
reasonably well understood, and if ap-
proached with care and concern for the
environment can be substantially minimized.
The secondary effect is the one of concern
to the thoughtful skier: a ski resort by
design brings great numbers of people, and
their unavoidable impact, into that precar-
ious high-mountain environment. Again,
within design limits, the effects are controlla-
ble. But the best-designed ski resort in the
world will become destructive to the envi-
ronment if it operates continuously beyond
its design capacity. Not so incidentally, it'll
also be a miserable place to go skiing while
operating at that overload.
The prime responsibility for environmen-
tally sound ski-resort skiing must inevitably
lie in the design and management of the ski
resort itself, about which the consumer skier
can't do a great deal. But the first step a
skier can take to help preserve the skiing
environment is to recognize sound environ-
mental management on the part of the
resort; to ski at resorts where it is practiced
and to avoid those where it is violated; and
to let ski resort management know that
these considerations influence your patron-
age. The following points can help you spot
sound environmental management of ski
areas.
John Jerome is a contributing editor for
Skiing Magazine and his writings cover
everything from snow, mountain geology,
and alpine fauna to trees.
AIR QUALITY. Most ski resorts lie in
narrow mountain valleys where the thin air
is subject to temperature inversions and
temporary stagnations. Everyone loves a
cheerful fire in the fireplace, particularly
after a hard day's skiing, but six thousand
fires in six thousand condominium unit
fireplaces—in a tightly enclosed valley—is
an invitation to emphysema. That's one
place where an individual skier can do
something for the environment, simply by
refusing to contribute to the smoky pall.
Similarly, huge influxes of weekend traffic in
private cars can turn the valley that holds a
major ski area into a smog-filled disaster.
Automobile engines run richer (more gaso-
line, less air) and therefore emit more
unburned hydrocarbons at high altitude; a
tune-up for altitude before your ski vacation
is a good investment as well as a public-
spirited act. Ski resorts and individual skiers
that encourage car pooling and bus and rail
transportation to ski areas are acting in the
public interest. Similarly, use of your car
within the ski resort vicinity should be kept
to an absolute minimum. Cold engines gen-
erate more emissions, waste a great deal of
fuel, and suffer unusually heavy wear, so
short-hop use of your car on a ski vacation
is a particularly bad idea. Most responsible
ski resorts have worked out systems of
shuttle buses or other conveyances to help
reduce unnecessary car use.
Many ski resorts generate their own power
to run the ski lifts—and, in fringe snowfall
areas, to make artificial snow—by means of
hydrocarbon-fueled power plants which gen-
erate noxious emissions. The choice of
power sources is often dictated by short-run
economies, but in the hitherto clean moun-
tain air, any substantial addition of pollu-
tants becomes quickly and distressingly ap-
parent. At best, a responsible ski resort will
use electric power, generation of which
affects air quality far from the sensitive
mountain region. At very least, a responsi-
ble ski resort will make sure it has the
cleanest-burning power sources available,
with adequate emission controls.
All ski resorts use over-the-snow tracked
vehicies for maintenance, snow-grooming,
-------
and rescue work. These entail legitimate
environmental trade-offs: maintenance and
snow grooming help reduce erosion and
other damage to the mountain, and increase
safety—and nobody wants to cause rescue
work to be slowed. But a responsible ski
resort uses quiet, well-maintained service
vehicles, in as unobtrusive a manner as
possible, aware that these vehicles are air
and noise polluters of the worst sort.
WATER QUALITY in the mountains is
inextricably tied to erosion. However long
the skier may want the season to last, and in
spite of anything the ski resort can do about
it. there comes a time each season when the
snow melts and runs down the mountain.
When it does, it causes problems. The ski
resort's primary battle often seems to be to
hold the snow up there on the mountain and
to get it put into the right places on that
mountain—a battle that goes on all season
long. But when the snow starts to go—
melting from parking lots and ski-lodge roofs
as well as from the slopes themselves—it
results in spring freshets, minor flood-stage
washouts, structural damage. Even when
that runoff is well controlled, it can still
cause considerable siltation and deterioration
of stream quality.
The steeper the slope, the faster the run-
off; the faster the runoff, the more abrasive
material that can be earned downstream.
No ski slope can ever be as stable as the
undisturbed mountainside that it was in its
original form, but the responsible ski resort
designer must strive for all the stability he
can achieve. A great deal more is involved
than merely cutting down trees and stringing
ski lifts beside the resulting trail. A properly
drained and landscaped slope will get rid of
its snow load slowly and in gentle fashion.
with minimum damage to itself and to
downslope vegetation, soil, and structures.
An improperly designed slope is simply a
disaster waiting for the temperature rise that
will light its fuse: when the snow starts to
go. it will take most of the slope with it.
Skiers can spot a well-designed slope by the
evenness of the snow-grooming, which
usually indicates a healthy growth of ground-
cover beneath the snow, by water-bars mak-
ing regular hashmarks across the slopes to
divert water into wooded areas where strong
root structures can handle the erosion, and
by drains and culverts to handle the even-
tual runoff.
Mountains generally get a lot of moisture.
and where there is enough snow for skiing,
there should be plenty of ground water in all
seasons. Artificial snow-making can make
inordinate demands on local ground water
supplies, however. Snow-making water is
usually pumped from a nearby pond or lake.
but if none is available the ski resort may
take water from mountain streams. The
requirements are so large that stream flow
can be completely used up in wintertime. A
great deal of that water will be put back into
the stream during the spring melt-off, but at
that time, and at those rates, erosion and
siltation will be massively increased. The
interruption of the natural flow—pulled
down too far during periods of snow-mak-
ing, jumped back up to flood-stage during
C'ontiintc'il on /'«.!,'<' I -
PAGE II
-------
i
1V1
m
C'oiitinitt'il from pit)>f II
the spring — seriously affects water quality in
the area. Downstream water uses can be
drastically altered.
SOLID WASTES represent a tremendous
problem for ski resorts. The thin and rocky
soils that prevail at most ski-area altitudes
are not particularly suitable for septic sys-
tems under the best of conditions, and
almost by definition those soils stay fro-
zen — totally impermeable — during the very
times when usage is heaviest. Most ski areas
arc located too far from municipal systems
to permit hooking in, and the cost of
extensive mountain sewerage to reach those
systems is invariably prohibitive.
The expensive alternative is a self-con-
tained treatment plant for the ski resort, or
in some cases the sharing of such a plant
with a nearby mountain town. This too is a
very expensive course, and great care must
be taken in the design. In more than a few
unfortunate circumstances it has been
found — after the fact — that ambient tempera-
tures at the mountain location are too low to
support the kind of bacterial action neces-
sary to make the treatment plants function.
The only alternative, however, is the even
more expensive and extremely limiting prac-
tice of using holding tanks for solid waste
storage, then hauling the waste by truck to a
working lower-altitude plant. (A sensitive
nose can immediately recognize a ski area
that has been forced to seek this stop-gap
solution.)
NOISE pollution is a peculiar ski resort
problem. The sport of skiing itself—the act
of riding skis over the snow, more or less at
high speeds—is almost totally silent, and
that is one of its principal charms. Yet the
machinery that makes that sport so handily
accessible to millions of Americans can put
up an ambient noise level that comes as a
rude shock. Ski lifts don't have to be noisy,
but too many of them are. The aforemen-
tioned service and rescue vehicles are par-
ticular offenders in the area of noise. The
worst offenders, however, are the snow-
making installations. From the huge com-
pressors—usually mounted well behind the
base lodge but still within audible range—to
the snow-guns themselves, up on the slopes.
which spew compressed air and frozen
water-vapor into the air, snow-making is
consistently noisy. On-slope the snow-guns
represent an unpleasant adjunct to the skiing
day, so ski resorts elect to do most of their
snow-making at night—lower temperatures
make the operation more productive then
anyway. Unfortunately, the disruption that is
thereby removed from the ski hill by day is
turned into a sleep-interrupting nuisance at
night, and a tight little mountain valley that
holds a ski resort in full snow-making
operation can sound like a factory site in full
industrial production. It's a level of noise
pollution that hardly fits anyone's concept of
what the mountains should sound like in
winter.
Surprisingly, few skiers complain, ftrhaps
they realize that there's little the consumer
skier can do about the problem: snow-
making noise is another trade-off, the price
we pay for having consistent skiing in
marginal areas. It is up to the skier to
decide whether he wants to pay the price in
noise irritation—or go a little farther into ski
country, where snowfall is more dependable.
for his recreation. But there are various
snow-making techniques, and some of them
are quieter than others; a responsible ski
resort is one that chooses the quietest and
least environmentally disruptive method.
Skiers might consider making their feelings
known about this to the management of
their favorite ski area—particularly if and
when new snow-making equipment is antici-
pated, or snow-making capacity is being
expanded.
Cross-country skiers and ski tourers pene-
trate some otherwise unviolated countryside.
PAGE 12
-------
and there is some risk of disturbing wildlife
on those forays. It is easy to assume that
both plant and animal life is safely dormant.
beyond serious disruption or disturbance,
during the winter months, but this isn't
necessarily so. Deer, for example, are par-
ticularly vulnerable in winter months. They
don't hibernate, but they do "yard up."
gathering in small areas well back in the
woods where there is a dependable food
supply, and sinking to a very low level of
metabolism. Ski tourers can often ski right
into the midst of such a deer yard, thanks to
the silence of their approach. But if the deer
are disturbed and take flight, they rapidly
burn off more energy than they can readily
replace on the available winter diet. The ski
tourer will go on about his business thinking
he's only momentarily disturbed the deer's
quiet winter existence; yet by merely star-
tling the deer, he may have set in motion a
chain of events that can lead to the deer's
eventual starvation. Back-country skiers
must maintain a firm respect for the flora
and fauna among which they ski. Similarly,
they should take care to carry out what they
carry in, leaving no litter to foul the snow
and the mountains.
Nevertheless, skiing, in and of itself, must
be considered an environmentally benign
recreation. Even the compaction of the
snow that results from the passage of skis
over its surface is environmentally benefi-
cial—within limits—because it helps hold the
snow in place, thus making the spring melt-
off more gradual. The severe environmental
problems that skiing dots cause are the
result not so much of skiing but of the
wildly uneven rates of demand that are put
on ski facilities. The greatest load on the ski
resort sewage system, for example, comes
between four and six p.m.. at the end of the
skiing day, and it comes not from the solid
wastes that one might expect to be the
problem, but from soap and water. It's
caused by all those shower baths, as all
those skiers come down off the mountain
when the ski lifts close for the day. and jump
into the shower to freshen up. If that
demand for sewage capacity could be
spaced out over the entire 24-hour day. most
ski resorts could substantially reduce their
investments in sewage treatment and still do
a more responsible job of handling solid
wastes.
Multiply that unevenness of demand by
the weekend recreation patterns we seem
to be unable to change in this country, and
by the built-in imbalance of the brief winter
season. What happens in miniature during
the skiing day happens more emphatically
during the skiing week. While ski areas
may run at full capacity (or beyond) on
weekends and on some winter holidays,
most of them—particularly in the East and
Midwest— are oniy running at about
twenty to thirty percent of capacity during
the week. The facilities are grossly under-
used in midweek, yet are still often inade-
quate for the heavy weekend and holiday
loads. The skiing industry has been happy
to overbuild in ski lift capacity and in all
other service facilities—to the limits of
capital availability and the removal of envi-
ronmental restraints—to attempt to handle
the overload on weekends. But the envi-
ronmental impact from that overbuilding is
thus much greater than it need be, to solve
a problem that really exists on fewer than
about ninety days a year.
The capacity is still strained on those
ninety days, and there is a considerable
amount of environmental damage as a re-
sult: overloaded lift systems, restaurants,
motels, lodges, condominiums, sewage sys-
tems, parking lots, mountain ecu-systems. It
is skiing's prime dilemma of the seventies,
and it is not entirely an environmental one.
How can the skiers who are already de-
voted to the sport bo provided with ade-
quate facilities without an excessive amount
of additional environmental damage? And
perhaps more important, how can the sport
and industry maintain a healthy rate of
growth—which the industry, at any rate.
feels it must have to survive—with increas-
ing environmental restrictions, and with rap-
idly dwindling areas of mountain terrain that
are suitable for development?
It is an interesting question in skiing's
future. If you are rattling around at mid-
week in an almost-empty ski re-sort, wonder-
ing at the necessity for all that unused
capacity—or if sou are stuck for half an
hour or so in a ski-lift line on weekends.
waiting for the crowd to move on so you
can get onto the mountain to do some
skiing—you might give it a little thought. In
the meantime, the most positive contribution
you can make to help improve skiing's
environment is to restrict your skiing, when-
ever possible, to mid-week. Besides, you'll
have more fun then. •
PAGK 13
-------
Safety In Ihe Laboratory
Alvin L. Aim,* Assistant Administrator for Planning and Management,
explains in an interview what is being done to reduce
the risk of handling dangerous materials in EPA's laboratories.
Q. What sparked the current concern for the
health and safely of employees at EPA's labora-
tories?
A. Last year the General Accounting Office reviewed EPA
laboratories to determine whether laboratory employees were
protected by EPA's occupational health and safety program, and
also whether we had an adequate health monitoring program.
The GAO investigators found that EPA laboratory employees
performed various operations that could expose them to toxic and
hazardous substances. They noted a number of deficiencies in our
laboratories, and they also indicated that most laboratories were not
covered by a comprehensive health monitoring program.
As I indicated in a letter responding to the report, EPA is both
concerned about GAO's findings, and committed to a very strong
occupational health and safety program. Even though our accident
and illness reporting system has not indicated any unusual rate of
harmful exposure, we are very concerned that the potential for
harmful exposure is significant. Because of research work that will
grow out of new statutory authority, the potential for harmful
exposure will be growing. In the past few years, the frequency and
volume of hazardous materials handling in our laboratories has
grown steadily.
Our mission requires that we deal with a wide variety of toxic
substances. We conduct virology and bacteriology studies, cancer
research studies, analysis of pesticides, reference standard prepara-
tion, toxicity studies, emissions testing, and air and water sampling.
Most of our laboratories test potentially harmful substances in
fulfilling their missions.
Q. What have you done to correct the problems?
A. Last summer, even before the GAO report was issued, I
ordered on-site inspections of all EPA laboratory operations. We
used these inspections to identify the extent and nature of problems
in specific laboratories, and to establish priorities for industrial
hygiene and occupational health surveys.
These inspections revealed numerous health and safety deficien-
cies in the 55 laboratories at 40 locations that we visited. About 65
percent of the nearly 500 deficiencies identified were in the
category of poor housekeeping. Over half of these deficiencies
were such things as improper flammable liquid storage, lack of
proper protective clothing and devices, and improper use of
compressed gases.
These items were reported to the laboratories' supervisors, and
most were corrected immediately. About 35 percent of the problems
were caused by deficiencies in the laboratory buildings. These take
longer to correct, but are now being worked on. The reason that
they take longer is that GSA must approve and make new facilities
available for the Agency.
We have begun a series of hygiene surveys in the laboratories to
determine the actual and potential hazards the employees face, so
*See News Briefs, Page 25.
PAGE 14
that protective and preventative standards can be applied and
enforced. The hygiene surveys also assist the occupational health
physician in developing a prevention-oriented health monitoring
program.
We are developing a comprehensive health monitoring program for
all EPA laboratory employees. About 650 employees are now
covered by medical monitoring programs.
In another six months, we expect to have virtually all of EPA's
2,000 laboratory employees covered.
We are asking for designations of laboratory health officers for
each laboratory site. They will be responsible for assuring the day-
to-day observance of approved health and safety procedures. We
are developing an inventory system so that each laboratory will
maintain strict control on the stocking, labeling, dispensing, and
disposal of hazardous chemicals and materials used in the labora-
tory.
Organizationally, we have upgraded the occupational health and
safety program. That program will now report directly to the
Assistant Administrator for Planning and Management and will be
headed by a supergrade official.
We are following up with frequent but unannounced inspections
to assure compliance with Occupational Safety and Health
Administration, (OSHA) and EPA standards and regulations.
I might add that the GAO indicated in their review of EPA's
program that the steps taken indicate a strong commitment by the
Agency to upgrading and improving its occupational health and
safety program.
As far as I am concerned, EPA's program should be a model for
the rest of the government, and not merely meet minimal
standards.
Q. I understand that you have closed some labs.
Could you tell me which ones?
A. First we closed the Pesticides Laboratory at the Denver
Federal Center based upon preliminary information GAO provided
to me and to Jack Green, Region VIII Regional Administrator.
Jack Green took the initiative and has undertaken a number of
corrective actions to bring that laboratory up to standards. As a
result, it has been reopened.
In June the pesticides laboratory at the South Agriculture Building
here in Washington was closed permanently. Its activities were
moved to Beltsville, Md. I ordered the closing of that laboratory
because of overcrowding and numerous facility-related deficiencies.
These are being corrected.
The Region III Laboratory at Annapolis was closed in August.
It reopened in November on a restricted basis.
Q. Do you plan to close any more?
A. We don't have any current plans to close any laboratories. We
are strongly committed to closing any laboratory where there is any
significant health or safety risk to employees.
Q. Are most laboratory employees now covered
by a medical monitoring program? If not, when
will they be covered?
-------
A. About one-third of the laboratory staffs are covered by some
form of medical monitoring. The laboratories in Duluth, Minn.;
Gulf Breeze, F!a.; and Bay St. Louis, Miss.; have had excellent
programs for some time. Other laboratories, including those at
Cincinnati, Ohio, and Research Triangle Park, N.C.; are in th£
process of establishing monitoring programs.
Early this year, we will be issuing guidelines to all laboratories on
basic standards and procedures to be followed in establishing
medical monitoring programs. Also, we will provide professional
occupational medicine and industrial hygiene specialists to assist in
setting up individual programs. We expect that within six months
virtually all laboratory personnel will have had a baseline medical
examination and will be covered by a comprehensive health
monitoring program.
I believe that a health monitoring program is critical both to
protect individual employees, and to assure the laboratory opera-
tions are continually safe.
Q. What are we doing now about training?
A. We have found there are no existing courses relevant to the
needs of our laboratory personnel. The American Industrial
Hygiene Association and the National Institute of Occupational
Safety and Health offer a few courses which are partially relevant.
In cooperation with NIOSH, however, we are developing a
curriculum specifically designed for our laboratory professionals
and supervisors which we will be offering in the spring. First
priority for enrolling in this course will be given !o designated
laboratory health officers and laboratory supervisors. According to
the NIOSH officials, this will be the first course specifically
designed for Federal agency laboratory personnel.
We also have other specialized safety training programs under
development. For example, we have programs for such high-hazard
activities as stack sampling and scuba-diving. This fall and winter
we have been offering through an interagency agreement with the
U.S. Army Special Force a pilot 40-hour course in emergency
treatment of injuries. This year an improved 32-hour version of the
course will be offered at 15 EPA locations around the country.
Q. Can our laboratory operations ever be safe?
A. With the proper precautions, our laboratory operations can be
made at least reasonably safe. There is always an element of risk in
any occupation. In the laboratory, the potential risk may be high
particularly in the presence of flammable, toxic, pathogenic, or
carcinogenic materials. The purpose of our program is to reduce
the potential risk to an absolute minimum, and to eliminate it if
possible. We can do this with the proper use of physical facilities,
protective safety devices and clothing, containment, isolation, and
dilution of hazardous substances in the lab, and above all, through
the use of operating procedures designed to reduce exposure and to
prevent accidents.
If I may use an analogy, driving a car in heavy traffic is a
statistically low-risk activity if the driver is alert, and if the car is in
good working order. If all of these things are not present, the
statistical chance of an accident goes up.
Our challenge is to make our laboratories as safe as possible, and
that challenge we are taking very seriously.
Q. What are the respective responsibilities of the
health and safety staff and line management in
implementing the health and safety program?
A. The primary responsibility for occupational health and safety
within EPA falls on the line managers. The occupational health and
safety staff is responsible for issuing standards and regulations to
meet OS HA and other health and safety requirements. It is also
responsible for collecting information, for monitoring implementa-
tion of the program, and for conducting inspections to assure
compliance.
I view that staff's role as one of providing a prod to upgrade
EPA's health and safety activities across the country. Ultimately.
we have the authority and responsibility to close the laboratories or
take other necessary steps if laboratories pose health and safety
problems. But if the program is to work correctly, the occupational
health and safety staffs role will be one of assisting laboratories in
meeting standards.
Line management has the primary responsibility for providing safe
and healthful working conditions. This line includes Assistant
Administrators, Deputy Assistant Administrators, laboratory direc-
tors and individual supervisors. These people supervise day-to-day
operations of which occupational health and safety is an important
component. In the final analysis, line managers are responsible for
the failure or success of our health and safety program.
Q. What responsibilities do the employees have?
A. Employees have a very significant responsibility to be alert and
observant for their own protection and for that of their coworkers.
They have to be informed about the actual and potential hazards, to
participate in developing and implementing health and safety
procedures, and to identify and report the existence of unsafe and
unhealthful conditions. Their rights and responsibilities are spelled
out in simple language in the OSHA brochure, entitled "About
OSHA Programs," and in considerable detail in the OSHA
Regulation entitled "Occupational Safety and Health for the
Federal Employee." We have distributed this regulation to all EPA
employees.
Q. Are we in compliance with OSHA requirements?
A. The simple answer is no. We have as a matter of policy adopted
all of OSHA's standards and regulations, but we are not in full
compliance primarily because of insufficient implementation. By the
end of this fiscal year we plan to be in compliance with all OSHA
requirements.
Q. Are there any special benefits available to me
if I suffer a job-related accident or illness?
A. Yes. Under the General Employee Compensation Act. you are
entitled to up to 45 days of administrative leave, and you may be
entitled to continuation of pay for certain types of job-related
injuries. Additional information about these benefits can be found
in a pamphlet "When Injured At Work," available from your
personnel office. Detailed information on obtaining benefits is
contained in the "Federal Personnel Manual."
Q. How do you feel about how the Agency has
handled and is going to handle this problem?
A. Frankly, in the past 1 don't believe occupational health and
safety had a high Agency priority. At the working level our
employees understandably were concerned with accomplishing
EPA's mission. Within the Office of Planning and Management, the
function was buried at a fairly low level, which impeded the ability
of some very dedicated and talented people to carry out the
function adequately.
Ithink we now have under way a series of actions that can make
EPA's occupational health and safety program the best in the
government. There is a sense of commitment and purpose. I also
believe there is an awareness by managers and employees that the
Agency has a problem that has to be dealt with aggressively.
My one concern about the future is that the Agency continue the
momentum of this program. Often a concern is raised and a very
vigorous response is initiated but as time passes implementation
tends to drop off as new priorities emerge. I am hopeful that what
has been set in motion will continue to have the strong support of
top management, of middle management, and of EPA employees. If
that level of commitment continues, EPA could have one of the
best, if not the best, occupational health and safety programs in the
government.
PAGE 15
-------
legislation roundup
Lawmakers in Massachusetts and Connecti-
cut will be considering mandatory inspection
and maintenance of automobile emission •
controls when they meet for the 1977 legisla-
tive sessions. Proposed bills provide for
annual inspections by private firms under
contract to the State. Rhode Island's inspec-
tion system, adopted last year, will go into
effect this summer.
Bills requiring deposits on beverage con-
tainers to encourage reuse and recycling
have been filed in Massachusetts, Connecti-
cut. New Hampshire, and Rhode Island.
Vermont already has such a law. and Maine
voters approved a "bottle law" in the
November election. A similar referendum
was narrowly defeated in Massachusetts.
water recharge
Nassau County. N. Y, has called for bids on
a demonstration project designed to con-
serve the supply of ground water on Long
Island. A full-scale (5.5 million gallons per
day) wastewater treatment plant will inject
the treated water into the sandy ground to
prevent the intrusion of salt water in (he
county's wells. An EPA grant of $24.6
million will help build the plant, which will
treat water from Nassau County Sewer
District 3, which serves portions of the
towns of Hempstead, North Hempstead,
and Oyster Bay and the village of Free-
port.
Hudson sampled
Region II personnel have been sampling
bottom silt and mud from the lower Hudson
River to check on the levels of polychiori-
nated biphenyls (PCB's), industrial com-
pounds suspected of causing cancer. Sam-
pling began in mid-December, using a spe-
cially equipped helicopter, at the request of
the N.Y. State Department of Environmen-
tal Conservation.
Primary source of the PCB's has been
General Electric Co. plants at Hudson Falls
and Fort Edward, about 165 miles upriver
from New York City. The company and the
State are jointly sponsoring a $7-miIlion
PCB cleanup program for the Hudson.
toxic oil
Experts from Region III are working to
prevent waste oil containing a toxic chemi-
cal, pentachlorophenol, from entering a
creek that empties into the Delaware River
near the Tinicum National Wildlife Refuge,
the last freshwater tidal marsh in Pennsylva-
nia.
The problem started more than 14 years ago
when a manufacturer of the wood-preserving
chemical disposed of the waste oil by inject-
ing it into the ground at the plant near
Haverford, Pa. The practice was stopped by
State authorities in 1963, but the wastes had
already begun to saturate the soil and enter
Naylor's Run, a small creek only eight miles
from the wildlife refuge.
Region Ill's Emergency Response Branch
supervised the digging of holes and trenches
to collect the oil and keep it from the
stream. Several test wells have been dug to
locate the main underground reservoir of oil.
EPA's mobile treatment unit, a self-con-
tained pumping and filtering apparatus, was
brought in to remove the pentachlorophenol
from the oil. Cleanup operations are ex-
pected to take several months.
deadline upheld
The U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals
has upheld the deadline set by EPA for the
Bethlehem Steel Corporation to comply with
its wastewater discharge permit schedule.
The company had asserted that the mid-
1977 deadline was impossible to achieve and
appealed to EPA and then to the court.
which ruled that the deadline date in the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act was
"intended by Congress to be a rigid guide-
post." Regional Administrator Daniel J.
Snyder III said, "The decision provides us
with a precedent for future cases."
court rulings
A Federal judge has ruled that Region IV
overstepped its authority in setting water
quality standards for. Alabama more strin-
gent than the State had set. District Judge
Frank McFadden said EPA's order to up-
grade all Alabama streams to a "fish and
wildlife" classification was arbitrary and
based, not on Federal law. but on an internal
memorandum that did not go through proper
channels and "does not say what EPA
contends it does."
The court action against EPA was filed by
Associated Industries of Alabama and was
later joined by U.S. Steel Corporation.
Agency attorneys are considering an appeal.
In another court action. Region IV re-
quested and received a summary judgment
against Velsicol Chemical Co. of Memphis,
Tenn., for permit violations. Velsicol was
charged with discharging endrin and hepta-
chlor into the Mississippi River in violation
of the permit. The maximum potential fine
is $3.6 million.
power plant suit
A suit to prevent the startup of a new coal-
fired electric power plant in Gibson County,
Ind., has been brought at the request of
Region V Administrator George R. Alex-
ander, Jr. The suit alleges that the Public
Service Company of Indiana's boiler will
emit five times the allowable amount of
sulfur dioxide. The company has announced
no plans for emission controls at this unit or
at another scheduled to start up in January
1979 at the same plant.
PAGE 16
-------
fine buys fish
Region V recently arranged to turn over a
portion of a river polluter's fine to help
restock the river with fish. A $55,000 settle-
ment was obtained by Region V attorneys
from the Williams Pipe Line Co., Tulsa,
Okla., for damage to the Embarras River in
Jasper County, 111., by a leaking pipeline.
The sum of $24,000 was turned over to the
State Department of Conservation for re-
stocking fish in the river.
The company agreed to halt all pumping of
chemicals through the worst section of the
line until repairs are made. Thereafter it will
upgrade the remaining sections of the pipe-
line.
$25,000 penalty
A civil penalty of $25,000 has been
assessed against the duPont Company for
failing to report production increases at its
chemical plant at LaPorte, Tex., and
thereby violating its discharge permit. The
consent agreement, reached in Federal
District Court Dec. 28, modified the
plant's permit to discharge ammonia
nitrogen.and extended the compliance
deadline by two years, to Jan. 1, 1979. The
company said it was unable to develop the
necessary treatment methods before the old
deadline.
208 seminar
A seminar was held in Dallas Jan. 12-13 to
acquaint State and local officials with the
areawide planning process and the public
education called for under Section 208 of the
Water Pollution Control Act.
joint sewer plan
A joint sewer system serving part of John-
son County, Kan., and Kansas City, Mo..
has been recommended by EPA's Region
VII, after a detailed study and cost analysis.
The Mid-America Regional Council, with
funding by EPA, is now studying the steps
necessary to organize a regional sewer
authority, which would require intergovern-
mental agreements and proportionate user
charges to qualify for Federal aid.
EPA officials believe the regional concept is
the best way to meet the wastewater needs
of the Big Blue River basin, which crosses
the Missouri-Kansas boundary. They esti-
mate that monthly charges to Johnson
County residents under the proposed joint
system would be about half what an inde-
pendent system would cost. They also be-
lieve the joint system would eliminate long-
standing complaints of sewer odors and
esthetic degradation in the Indian Creek
basin in Johnson County.
high-altitude cars
Special legislation to assure that autos oper-
ated in Colorado's high altitude control their
exhaust emissions has been proposed by the
State's Air Pollution Control Commission.
The proposed law would require !he annual
inspection and corrective maintenance, if
necessary, for all cars registered in 10
Colorado counties, including the Denver
area and the "Front Range." where alti-
tudes average a.mile or more above sea
level. The program would start in 1979 and
apply to all cars of the 1977 model year and
later.
This is the first model year for which EPA's
emission standards for carbon monoxide,
hydrocarbons, and nitrogen dioxide specify
tuning for the altitude where the car is to be
sold and used, rather than the altitude at the
manufacturer's plant. Autos are responsible
for about 90 percent of the carbon monoxide
and 85 percent of the hydrocarbons in the
Denver area's air, the Commission said, and
they contribute significantly to air pollution
in other Front Range communities.
fresno aquifer
Region IX is cooperating in a study of the
public water supplies in Fresno County,
Calif, to determine if they need special
protection under the Safe Drinking Water
Act. The area gets most of its water from
aquifers, or underground sources. The study
being made by EPA and other Federal.
Slate, and local agencies will decide whether
ground water is the sole or principal source
of drinking water for the area and whether
contamination of the aquifer would be a
significant hazard to public health.
monoxide boiler-
Regional approval has been given to the
Lion Oil Co. to construct a carbon monox-
ide boiler at its refinery at Bakersfield,
Calif. The unit will have no adverse effect
on air quality, according to Richard
O'Connell, Enforcement Division Director.
permit penalty
Armour and Company has paid a $5,000
civil penalty for violating the wastewater
discharge permit for its meat processing
plant at Nampa, Idaho.
EPA monitoring teams discovered last sum-
mer that the plant was dumping more
ammonia into Indian Creek than its permit
specified, and referred the case to the U.S.
Attorney. The penalty was entered in U.S.
District Court in Boise. The permit called
for the Nampa plant to limit ammonia in its
wastewater to a daily average of 15 pounds
by Dec. I, 1975. EPA found ammonia levels
of more than 100 pounds per day. Regional
Administrator Donald Dubois said low lev-
els of ammonia can stimulate algal growth in
a stream and high levels can kill fish and
other animal life.
In the settlement, Armour agreed to meet
the effluent limitations no later than next
July.
PAGE 17
-------
MONITORING
NUCLEAR
EXPLOSIONS
Two nuclear explosions in the air over
China lasl fall called public attention to
I ho vital I. PA service of providing nation-
wide monitoring of radioactivity in the envi-
ronment and assessing the potential impact
on the American people.
HPA reported that its fallout surveillance
indicated that the first explosion on Sept. 6
would have "onl\ limited adverse health
effects" on the U.S. population. The Office
of Radiation Programs estimated the fallout
could result in three or four extra cases of
tin mid cancer in the United States over
the next 45 years, during which about
3KO.OIH) cases of this disease can be ex-
pected from other causes. Thyroid cancers
aie rarely fatal.
Nevertheless, KPA noted the potential
additional cancer cases dramati/e once
again "the seriousness of atmospheric ra-
diation" and the "need for an end to
atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons."
On Nov. 17 the ( hinese tested another and
more powerful nuclear device in the air.
Kalloui in the United States from this blast
was still being analyzed as this story was
written, but preliminary indications point to
a lower potential health impact than the first
explosion's fallout, according to Dr. William
I). Rovve. Deputy Assistant Administrator
for Radiation Programs. This is because
very little fallout was brought down by rain
after (he second explosion.
A detailed report on the U.S. fallout from
both blasts and their potential health effects
is being prepared and will be published next
month. Dr. Rowe said.
Killing held on environmental radiation is a
function older than KPA. but many people
are unaware of it until some event occurs to
arouse public concern, as did the two nu-
PAC.l IK
Betty Sedinger of EPA 's Montgomery, A/a.,
laboratory removes filter from an ERAMS
air sampler to tesi it for radioactivity. This is
one of 67such monitoring stations through-
out the country.
clear tests in the People's Republic of China.
The Agency's Environmental Radiation
Ambient Monitoring System (ERAMS) op-
erates continuously in all parts of the coun-
try, measuring radiation levels in air. water,
human bone tissue, and milk. (Milk is
monitored in cooperation with the Food and
Drug Administration). Most sampling sta-
tions are located at and operated by State
health departments or local health agencies.
The air monitoring portion of ERAMS
includes 2! stations that normally sample
ground-level air continuously and take radia-
tion readings twice a week. In addition 46
standby stations can be mobilized by tele-
phone for radiation alerts, and all 67 stations
in the network then take readings daily as
needed.
The Chinese test of Sept. 26 was detected
by the U.S. Government and announced by
the Energy Research and l^evelopment Ad-
ministration. KRDA routinely announces
nuclear explosions anywhere in the world.
giving the location of the blast, whether it
was underground or in the atmosphere, and
its approximate "yield" or energy released.
This time ERDA said there had been an
atmospheric detonation, at the Lop Nor test
site in the Mongolian desert, with a yield of
20 to 200 kilotons. (One kiloton equals the
explosive power of I .(XX) tons of TNT.)
Radioactive gases and particles spewed
into the air over China drift eastward with
the prevailing winds across the Pacific
Ocean. As it moves, the contaminated air
mass can be detected and followed for many
days as it travels around the world, although
it is constantly expanding and dispersing.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) in the Depart-
ment of Commerce tracked the cloud of
radioactivity and made daily predictions of
probable path and speed. All of K-PA's air
monitoring stations were operating to detect
fallout when the cloud reached this country
on the fifth day after the explosion. The
EPA readings—augmented by readings from
ERDA facilities and laboratories and by
nuclear power plants reporting to the Nu-
clear Regulatory Commission—showed only
slight increases over normal background
-------
radiation that corresponded to the passing of
the radioactive cloud.
At no time, said Dr. Rowe, were the
increases significant enough to cause EPA
to recommend that States take protective
actions.
Samples of rain and snow taken by the
ERA MS precipitation monitoring stations
also showed no cause for alarm.
The most likely hazard was that rains in
certain localities might deposit enough radio-
activity onto pasture lands to raise the levels
of radioiodine in milk. EPA's milk monitor-
ing system, operated jointly with the Food
and Drug Administration, collected its regu-
lar monthly samples of pasteurized milk
during the first week in October, and then
additional milk samples were collected
through Oct. 29. Special attention was given
to the Northeast, where rains had occurred
while the radioactive cloud was passing. As
expected, some milk measurements showed
increased levels of radioactive iodine. In
Massachusetts and Connecticut, State offi-
cials ordered some dairy herds to be taken
from pasture and put on stored feed.
Altogether, the EPA sampling after the
Sept. 26 detonation included 1.124 samples
of airborne particulates. 293 of pasteurized
milk, and 39 of rainwater. More than I .MX)
radiation measurements were made on these
samples at the Agency's Eastern Environ-
mental Radiation Facility at Montgomery.
Ala. Air filter readings are first made at the
sampling stations, for early indication of
fallout and then are sent to the laboratory
for more detailed analysis. All milk and
rainwater samples require laboratory meas-
urement.
"All these monitoring actions were han-
dled according to long-established proce-
dures." said Dr. Rowe. "We've had a lot of
experience with radioactive air masses,
starting back in the 19?0's, when the United
States was doing tests in the atmosphere.
and since then with tests by Russia. China.
France, and India."
The next Chinese nuclear test was a four-
megaton explosion on Nov. 17. A megaton
equals one million tons of TNT, so this yield
was at least 20 times that of the Sept. 26
test.
Again the contaminated air mass \\us
Hacked as it drifted across the continent.
and EPA's monitoring ssstem swung into
action. This time the Agency announced the
activation of the \umdb\ air monitoring
stations and the milk monitoring network
and informed the public of the predicted
arrival time and path of the radioactive
cloud. EPA issued nine press releases in 16
days after the November blast.
Although the second explosion was
more powerful than the first, the hazard
was again expected to be slight unless
rainfall occurred as the contaminated air
mass moved over the U.S. The bigger blast
produced more radioactivity, but not more
fallout in this case. Dr. Rowe explained.
probably because the harmful products were
carried to higher altitudes where they
avoided being washed out by low-altitude
rains.
Results were as expected: most radiation
measurements were within normal back-
ground fluctuations. "We judged the danger
would be low and would require no action
by individuals," said Dr. Rowe. "and that
proved to be the case."
In addition to concern for possible ground-
level contamination, there was concern for
the high-altitude portion of the cloud, at
40.000 to 80,000 feet, because of some
commercial air traffic in this zone. Special
precautions included placing monitoring
equipment on flights that might pass through
the contaminated air. and some aircraft were
checked for radioactivity on the planes'
metal surfaces. These actions confirmed
that there was no need to reroute (lights or
to wash off radioactive particles from the
planes.
"The fact that the Chinese nuclear tests
had limited impacts here docs not diminish
our concern with the long-term effects of
such atmospheric testing. Dr. Rowe said.
"We will continue to monitor radiation
levels in the environment, and keep our
system flexible, to zero in quickls on areas
of special concern.
"We will also continue to keep the public
informed of the results of our monitoring."
Environmental radiation monitoring began
in 1956—14 years before EPA was estab-
lished—as a Public Health Service function
under the Department of Health. Educa-
tion, and Welfare. The responsibility was
transferred to the new Agency when it was
organized in December 1970.•
PAGE 19
-------
Continued from jwifc J
arrangement between the two levels of government since the
States already have a relationship with their water suppliers.
Primacy expands their role, of course, but the point is that we
want to huild on existing institutions, not create new ones.
The States will have to go to their legislatures in some instances
to get the necessary authority to meet the requirements for
achieving primacy, but we have hopes that the great majority of
States will ultimately accept this responsibility.
Q. What will happen if certain States are unwill-
ing or unable to assume primacy?
A. If a State does not take on the job—and the Act is very specific
about this—HPA must set a program up and implement it in that
State.
Q. How much additional manpower will be
needed on the State level to implement the Act?
A. There will probably he some additional manpower needed, but
there are many people now concerned with water supply at the
State level, county level and community level, and we think that
this existing resource can he made stronger. We are developing
curricula which the States can use to train such people.
Q. When the program goes into effect this June,
will it create added costs for the consumer?
A. Probably, to a greater or lesser extent. If larger systems incur
additional costs and pass them on to the consumer, the per capita
increase will not be a serious concern, probably no more than a
dollar per year. It is in the smaller systems that we expect
difficulty. They have fewer customers to share the cost increases
and. typically, they are the ones which have not kept pace with the
technology required to treat today's water and to meet the new
standards.
The Act takes this problem into account and provides for
variances and exemptions, which give a system time to solve its
technical and economic problems. Whenever this is the case, the
State and the supplier must keep the public informed through
public hearings and other means and also develop a reasonable
compliance schedule. Of course, no variance or exemption can be
granted where the public health would be threatened.
Q. That takes us back to the kinds of contami-
nants to be concerned about. I-'PA has issued
regulations limiting the amount of radioactivity in
til-inking water. Where does this radioactivity
come from?
A. This is mostly natural radioactivity in some areas of the country
but there is also man-made radioactivity as from atmospheric
fallout. For the most part we are concerned with how it impacts
the quality of water. We don't see at the present time any major
problem with radioactivity. We do. however, feel that this potential
danger requires eternal vigilance because the use of radioactivity is
here to stay. Nobody is going to stop using it and when you use it
there is always the possibility of mishaps and contamination. So
vigilance is really the key to that problem.
Q. What does the term "organic chemicals"
mean with regard to safe drinking water'.' Why
must we be concerned about them?
A. That's a big question requiring a careful answer. The science of
chemistry is usually divided into two major parts: inorganic and
organic. Back in the early 1800's when chemistry was in its infancy.
it was thought that "organic" chemicals were all related to and
could only be produced by living organisms and the inorganic
chemicals were not related to living things. Actually, organic-
chemicals are those chemicals which are based on carbon when it
is in combination with a few other elements like hydrogen, oxygen.
nitrogen, chlorine, etc. An infinite variety of these organic
chemicals can be produced either naturally or in the laboratory.
Almost every substance we encounter has some kind of "organic"
chemical in it—food, medicines, plastics, petroleum, and pesticides.
Some of them are hazardous when ingested or inhaled. As our
analytical technology becomes more and more sophisticated we
are finding some of these chemicals in water. Most of the organic
chemicals that are being detected in water are from natural
sources (like humus) and they undoubtedly have been in water
since the beginning of time. However, some of the chemicals are
from man's activities. In addition, there are some chemicals that
are formed in the water in the process of treating it for human
consumption. For example, chloroform and related trihalomethane
compounds are being produced by the reaction of some of the
natural humus with the chlorine that is added to disinfect the
water at the treatment plant.
We don't know precisely yet (and perhaps we never will) what the
significance of these trace contaminants is in terms of human
health risk. Some of them have been shown to be carcinogenic in
tests conducted in animals at higher exposure levels. A few
chemicals that have been detected in some water supplies are
implicated in human cancers from, again, higher levels of exposure.
Then again, some of them merely impart tastes and odors to the
water. Persistent chemicals are of particular concern. Many of
these are chlorinated compounds like pesticides and industrial
solvents, and they are not readily broken down to carbon dioxide
and water by the natural processes that recycle most of the
chemicals in the environment. That means that the likelihood of
human exposure is considerably increased. At any rate, many of
those chemicals are undesirable and unnecessary contaminants in
drinking water, and there are ways of either limiting the contamina-
tion of the water or removing them in the water treatment plant,
and this is what we are trying to accomplish through the Safe
Drinking Water Act and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
Q. Why has it taken so long for the Agency to
establish standards for organics?
A. We did write standards for six organic pesticides in the 1975
Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations. We are now writing
standards for trihalomethanes (e.g.. chloroform) and expect to
propose them in the Federal Register before this interview is
published. The fact that there are so many different chemicals is a
major problem. Although some generalization can be made, each
compound does have an individual personality. The health effect
studies are an expensive and a slow process in which we must use
animals, and then go to the difficult process of transferring that
information into some sort of an estimate of what that means in
terms of human exposure. We also have to be sure that treatment
processes for removal are available, and that those treatments don't
impart new risks to the public.
Q. The chlorine that is used to sanitize most
PAGE 20
-------
drinking water supplies has also been associated
with chloroform, a contaminant considered to be
carcinogenic. Can you elaborate on this situa-
tion?
A. This is really a scientific dilemma. For years we have used
chlorine to kill the bacteria and hopefully the viruses in water
which were suspected of causing disease. But we have learned in
the past year or two that chlorine, in reacting with the natural
organic material in the water will produce chlorinated hydrocar-
bons, such as chloroform (trihalomethanes). Earlier this year, the
National Cancer Institute reported that chloroform caused tumors
when fed to rats and mice in high doses. The possibility of harmful
effects from the presence of very low levels of chloroform in water
must be weighed against the great benefit that chlorine provides.
Transmission of serious disease in disinfected drinking water is now
virtually unheard of. We are developing technical procedures that
would allow us to continue to use chlorine and other disinfectants
without generating harmful amounts of undesirable chemicals. A
great amount of progress is being made in this area.
Q. There have been problems about organic
contaminants in the drinking water supplies of
Cincinnati, New Orleans and some other places.
How do you evaluate the dangers there?
A. We are doing several national organic monitoring studies and
we are reviewing the data on them. In fact, the raw data have
been given to the cities and communities in which the samples
wete taken and some are already taking action. The studies have
identified the existence of certain organic compounds in the water
supplies of some cities. We want to do two things in order to
evaluate this data now. First of all, the National Academy of
Sciences is reviewing the whole organics problem for us to assess
the associated risk.
Secondly, last July we published an Advance Notice of Proposed
Rule-Making on organics, with several options. We have received
public comment on that from all quarters and are now writing
regulations for trihalomethanes in drinking water. The National
Academy of Sciences report is due on March !, 1977. That, in
conjunction with other studies will help us decide what the level of
danger is and what should be done in various cities.
Q. Let's turn to the other major program of the
Act, the Underground Injection Control pro-
gram. What is underground injection and why
should we regulate it?
A. Man uses the crust of the Earth for many purposes. In some
cases, we inject things like steam or other pressurized fluids to
force out a needed resource. This is done, for example, in solution
mining and in oil production. If there is water in the area where an
injection process is operating, one must have some degree of
protection to ensure that the process doesn't impact the quality of
water, even if it is only a potential water supply. Part C of the Act
is fully devoted to underground injection concerns. We have
published our proposed regulations for preventing possible contami-
nation from underground injection so the public, and particularly
the States and affected industries, can become involved in develop-
ing the progiam. We expect these proposed regulations to be
revised and to become final in the spring of 1977.
Q. Just how widespread and serious is the
problem of underground injection?
A. It varies from place to place, from State to State. Obviously,
wherever oil and gas are being produced, protection of ground
water is a concern. In other areas, we find waste disposal wells,
salt water intrusion wells, and so on. There are eight kinds of
wells covered by the regulations, so there are few areas not
concerned to one degree or another. The proposed regulations
define a well as any man-made hole in the ground that is deeper
than it is wide. There are hundreds of thousands of such wells
around the country and if they are used for the emplacement of
fluids—for storage, disposal, or any other reason—they will be
covered by the regulations. So we are talking about a practice that
is truly widespread. As for seriousness, keep in mind that about
half the population of the country depends upon ground water for
its drinking water. Should that source be jeopardized, how would
we ever replace it?
Q. You mentioned that the States have been
involved in developing the Underground Injec-
tion Control Regulations. Are they to have
"primacy" in this program, too?
A. Yes. But the process begins with the designation by the
Administrator of which States are to be covered this year and
which next year. Eventually all will be involved, but not at the
outset.
Here again in this program. State agencies have to meet certain
requirements to be given primary enforcement responsibility. The
regulations governing this aspect of the program have also been
proposed and commented on. The final version will be promulgated
soon. And as in the drinking water program, grants are available to
States that apply, and EPA will conduct the program where any
designated State does not take on the job.
Q. Would people be better off drinking either
bottled water or water treated by home purifica-
tion devices?
A. This is a hard question for me to answer because the quality
of water depends on the site and its desirability is subject to
individual preferences. First, bottled water or home treatment
units can never be a substitute for a safe, adequate public water
system.
However, some citizens object to unesthetic characteristics of
different waters, such as high mineral content, chlorine tastes, and
the possibility of other contaminants, and these people have a
right to resort to home treatment or bottled water. Home
treatment units can be designed to handle a variety of esthetic
water quality problems but they may also present bacterial or
endotoxin problems or they may deteriorate if not properly
maintained. We also suspect they may have limited effectiveness
in comparison 10 the advertising or sales claims that are made for
them. We are currently initiating a research contract to look into
these matters.
The Food and Drug Administration has responsibility for bottled
water control, but FDA bases its standards on the EPA Primary
Drinking Water Regulations. Our own studies in recent years have
shown that bottled water may not be a panacea since it is subject to
a variety of contaminants and to bacterial aftergrowths.
Q. In your opinion, is the Safe Drinking Water
Act itself adequate to ensure safe drinking water?
A. Although the Ac! is a very good piece of legislation, no. In
addition to the legislation we must have the cooperation of the
citizens and people in the country—the State officials, the Federal
officials, the community people—working as a team with the
legislation as a base. If we receive this type of support then we
will have a system which has a great chance of making drinking
water safe. It's best to look upon the Safe Drinking Water Act as
part of a comprehensive legislative/regulatory program to control
contamination of the environment. That program includes the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act, and the Toxic Substances Control Act. With
the collaboration of State and local officials, industry, and the
public, these four statutes offer great hope for the protection of
drinking water and the public health. •
PAGE 21
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL ALMANAC
FEBRUARY
S uttering from n touch ul "cabin fc\er"
one 1-ebruaiA day we decided impul-
si\cl\ id escape llir snowy slush of city
streets ;uid head for an old farm largely
overgrown now with pine trees.
\\c vr ah\a\s Inund ]iines a comforting
reminder that lite endure-, and that the
preen world <>t spring will return as it
alwa\ s lias.
I lie dirt road leading to the I arm was
covered with a blanket of snow. Parking the
cai on the shoulder of the lilacklop we
began slugging through the snow which had
drilled to a depth ol two left in some
hollows.
MliT ahotii a halt mile we came to a
( ur\e in the road through the woods. There
stood a young pine that had been stripped
ol its liatk
I his was tiic sit,, where a few winters ago.
eih folks more interested in seeing than
in hunting deer, we liad placed a block of
salt alter hearing from old-time residents
thai deer loved this substance.
Some animals loiind il promptly and began
giving it vigorous licks. \\ liile we never
ai-tually saw the deer consuming the salt
we did find numerous deer tracks around
the lick, hi a lew months not only had the
salt entirely disappeared hut the ground
beucijth it had been lorn up by angry-
hooves and tin- nearby tree debarked by the
frustrated animals who refused to accept
the fact that the salt supply was exhausted.
liy the time the hunting season came
around in the fall the deer fortunately had
apparently forgotten alxiut the salt.
\\c plunged on through the snow to the
old farm house and found it with icicles
dripping from every eave under the morn-
ing sunlight.
To ease the chill we picked up some logs
from the pile on the front porch and laid
them on newspapers and kindling already
in the fireplace.
Rummaging through our pockets we found
that our only matches had become partly
soaked. Recognizing suddenly that we were
several miles and tons of snow away from
the nearest store, we began to strike the
matches with growing uneasiness.
Finally a spurt of flame ended the sus-
pense. Fire shot up from the kindling and
sent the first faint wisps of smoke curling
through the chimney. Inefficient or not. a
hearthside fire can still provide heat for
those willing to drag up a chair.
Thoroughly warmed, we walked out to the
front porch and inspected the snowscape
outside.
There where the tree line met the meadow
was a grove of Virginia pines, their green
vivid against the background ol snow and
leafless hardwood trees.
The pines are slowly advancing in a field
where we had found mowing the grass was
too much of a burden on our brief week-
ends. Competing with the Virginia pine in
the race to take over the field were some
pitch pine, sumac and thorny locust.
Klsewliere on the farm graceful hemlocks
were clustered on a small island in the
stream deep in the lower woods, and
sweeping over a nearby hillside was a grove
of white pine.
Kven under a dusting of snow the shiny
green foliage of the pines brightens the
drab and bare winter landscape. The softly
waving boughs give protection from the
winter winds and provide cover for chicka-
dees, whitebreasted nuthatches and other
hardy winter birds.
Vl in many areas pines are now endan-
gered by pollution.
(Growers of Christmas trees, lor example.
have become acutely aware that the in-
crease in the number ol coal-burning power
plants might hurt them financially unless
adequate pollution controls are provided.
They have been warned by scientists that
the uncontrolled discharge of sulfur diox-
ides from power plants can deform their
conifers. The problem is caused when the
trees are bathed in arid rain formed when
the sulfur dioxide mixes with rainwater and
is converted to sulfuric acid.
Some owners of Christmas tree farms a
few hours' drive from Washington hied suit
a few years ago against a power company
and were able to collect substantial dam-
ages in an out-of-court settlement. Much of
the evidence in the case had been devel-
oped at a pollution abatement proceeding
brought by KPA against the power plant.
The white pine, the unsurpassed timber
tree for most of this country's early history.
is so sensitive to pollution that doubts have
been expressed as to whether it will be able
to survive in industrial regions in the
future. Meanwhile, it makes an excellent
pollution monitoring device.
The cone-bearing evergreens have been
on earth for an estimated 250 million years.
long before such relative newcomers as the
oaks, elms and hickories. Yet longevity is
no protection against the world's most
destructive animal—man.
Night falls early in February and the jar of
water brought in from the spring may be
frozen when first light appears on the
eastern horizon.
Meanwhile, it is good to crowd closer to
the fire before dashing to bed. In summer
this is the lime when the whippoorwill
would lx- plaintively calling its name over
and over again. Now only the mournful
hooting of an owl is heard.
As slumber approaches, you can hear the
murmuring of the wind in the pines and
their graceful forms are silhouetted in the
pale light of the moon slowly climbing the
nielli sky.—C.D.I'.
PAGE 22
-------
GAINS ON THE AIR AND OCEAN FRONTS
AIR
The National Air Quality and Emissions Trends Report, which was
released recently by EPA, says that fewer Americans were
exposed to unhealthy levels of air pollutants last year. In addition to
the improvement in ambient (outside) air quality, emissions levels of
five major air pollutants also declined over the last five years.
The report examines progress in achieving ambient standards that
were set by EPA in 1971 under the Clean Air Act: primary standards
to protect public health, and secondary standards to protect public
welfare.
The report compares pollutant measurements with primary stand-
ards for long (annual) and short-term (24 hours or less) exposures. It
measures the impact of changes in air quality, which resulted from
emission control plans, and points out the changes in the number of
people exposed to air quality levels above the national standards.
The report examines emission reduction in each oi several
categories of sources that have resulted in ambient improvements
over the five-year period for each major pollutant.
Average national ambient air levels of particulates have improved
about four percent per year. The Northeast and Great Lakes areas
have exceeded this rate of improvement. The West has not followed
this pattern because of regional differences in the nature of the
problem; wind-blown dust is a major factor in some areas, and
around Los Angeles photochemical particles contribute to the
pollution. Neither of these problems responds well to ordinary
paniculate control measures.
Less burning of coal by factories, installation of control equip-
ment by industries and coal burning utilities, and less burning of
solid waste have all contributed to the reduced levels. Production
curtailment by some industries because of economic recession
during 1974-75 also helped cut the amount of particles in the air.
Urban ambient levels of sulfur dioxide have decreased by an
average of 30 percent since 1970.
Carbon monoxide levels in the ambient air are closely tied to use of
motor vehicles. Natonally 75 to 80 percent of the carbon monoxide
emissions are attributed to transportation; in some major metropolitan
areas vehicles may contribute as much as 99 percent. Depending
on the concentration of traffic, the problem may be localized on a
few street corners or it may extend the length of a commuter route.
The control of carbon monoxide is directly related to motor vehicle
emission controls. This is reflected by the seven percent per year
improvement in emissions in California compared to the five percent
figure for the rest of the Nation. California has more stringent
standards on carbon monoxide emissions than those applied to the
vehicles sold in other parts ol the country.
Although levels of photochemical oxidants have been recorded in
California for many years, most parts of the country have less than
three years of data about this pollutant, too short a time to determine
national trends. In California, there has been a general improvement.
Summertime oxidant levels in eastern cities seem to be lower over
the past three years. But no firm conclusions can be drawn from the
limited data.
Insufficient data on nitrogen dioxide ambient levels also hampers
attempts to evaluate national trends. Scattered monitoring shows
mixed results.
Estimated national total emissions of nitrogen dioxide increased 7
percent between 1970 and 1975, but suspended particulates were
reduced 33 percent, sulfur dioxide 4 percent, hydrocarbons 9
percent, and carbon monoxide 15 percent from the 1970 level.
The resulls in the report are based on data submitted to EPA from
the State and local air pollution control agencies. The report was
written by William E Hunt, Jr. (editor), Thomas C. Curran, Neil Frank,
William Cox, Robert Neltgan, Norman Possiel, and Charles Mann,
with assistance from Joan Bivins and Willie Tigs.
Copies of National Air Quality and Emissions Trends Report, 1975,
are available from the Monitoring and Data Analysis Divisba Office
of Air Quality Ranning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711.
OCEANS
("Respite a slight increase in sewage sludge disposal, the overall
I J total of wastes dumped into our oceans has decreased.
according to the Fourth Annual Report to Congress on Ocean
Dumping in the United States, which was recently issued by EPA.
The amount of industrial wastes dumped annually dropped from
over 5 million tons in 1973 to under 3.5 million tons in 1975. Further
decreases can be expected, the report said, as individual dumpers
are phased out and alternate methods of disposal are found
As more municipal waste treatment plants are built, the amount of
sludge—the residue left after sewage treatment—increases and
much of it is disposed oi in the ocean. The report notes thai
pressure to dump more of these wastes in the ocean may be a
major problem in the future.
Under the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of
1972, commonly called the Ocean Dumping Act. ocean disposal of
radiological, chemical, or biological warfare agents, and high-level
radioactive wastes is banned. The only material that the law allows to
be discharged into the ocean without a permit is fish wastes, and
then only when the disposal does not endanger a harbor or other
protected area. Permits for dumping dredged material are controlled
by the Army Corps of Engineers, Permits to transport materials for
dumping and permits to dump all materials except dredged material
are controlled by EPA.
The law provides for both civil and criminal penalties for violations
unless materials are dumped as an emergency action to safeguard
life at sea. The Coast Guard, which is responsible for surveillance of
ocean dumping, reported eight violations of the Act to EPA in
1975. Civil penalties were assessed and paid in six of those
cases, and the other two are still pending, according to the
report.
EPA is trying to find and use the least environmentally damaging
site and disposal method for each waste, said the report, whether it
involves land, air, or water.
The Act authorizes the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis-
tration (NOAA) to conduct research to find ways to minimize or to
end all ocean dumping within five years of enactment. EPA is
requiring all holders of ocean dumping permits to explore and
implement other methods of disposal. The report notes that Philadel-
phia. Pa., and municipalities in the New York-New Jersey metropoli-
tan area must stop dumping sewage sludge into the ocean by 1981.
Those cities are working to meet the deadline Philadelphia has a
sludge giveaway program, and is pursuing land application of
sludge to pastures, strip-mined areas, and marginal land on a trial
basis. The cities in the New York-New Jersey Metropolitan area are
studying land-based alternatives for sludge disposal.
EPA has over $11 million obligated for pilot studies into new ways of
utilizing sludge so that it won't have to be dumped into the ocean.
Copies ol Ocean Dumping In the United States-1976 are
available from EPA's Marine Protection Branch (WH-548), Wash-
ington. D.C. 20460.
-------
INQUIRY
Would you pay more to make sure your drinking water is safe?
Richard kotelh. Acting Director. Water
IVograms Division. Region I. Boston. Mass.:
"I live in Burlington, a small town, north of
Huston and 1 am well aware of the problems
and costs of drinking water. The rapid
growth of this town, from about 3.(XX) in
1940 to 25.(XX) now. put an enormous strain
upon its water supply, which until about five
\oai-s ago came from town wells. A major
highway. Route 128. was built through the
town and the State's over-salting of the road.
and seepage from salt storage areas further
complicated the water problem.
"Our drinking water tasted, smelled, and
looked terrible: doctors were concerned about
its high sodium content and the effects upon
people with high blood pressure and heart
conditions. We were ashamed to serve it to
our guests, and its awfulness was the recur-
lent subject of angry letters to and articles
in the newspaper. When water gets as bad
as ours, everyone is willing to spend money.
After a town referendum. Burlington floated
a bond issue of four million dollars to pay
for improvement of its water supply.
Turlington now has very good water, and
the newspaper no longer runs feature stories
on the horrible state of the town's water."
Robert Burd, Director. Water Division.
Region X, Seattle. Wash.: "Some while
hack we had an interesting controversy
going on here in Seattle about whether our
reservoirs should be covered or not. Seattle
drinking water is of high quality for it
comes from the foothills of the Cascade
Mountains and is mostly snow melt-off. It
requires no treatment other than chlorina-
tion and it is stored in open reservoirs.
When one of them, located near where I
live, was cleaned out. 1 noticed with some
alarm that an old pay phone booth, dead
birds and animals, and various other odd-
ments of unsavory debris surfaced. These
reservoirs are also home for many seagulls.
"So I wrote a letter to the editor, propos-
ing that city reservoirs be protectively cov-
ered, and since I'm an avid tennis buff, !
suggested that this surfacing be made into
tennis courts. But this improvement, which
I'm sure would not have raised Seattle's
water rates by much, was rejected by the
city fathers.
I will be happy to pay more for good
water at any time that the necessity arises."
Roosevelt Rollins, Electrical Engineer. Envi-
ronmental Sciences Research Laboratory,
Research Triangle Park. N.C.: "As far as I
know, Durham's drinking water supply is
safe and I find it csthetically pleasing as
well as good to drink. It comes from Lake
Michie and the city has several treatment
plants. The water charge rates are moderate,
compared to those for other utilities, and I
pay my water bill without complaint. I
would be willing to pay considerably more
for good water, if for any reason I became
convinced that Durham's water supply
needed more sophisticated or better treat-
ment."
Linda Mendez, Secretary. Water Programs
Branch, Region VI, Dallas. Texas: "I like
our drinking water, it tastes and looks good
and as far as I know it is safe and poses no
health danger. I don't know how its cost to
consumers compares to that of other cities,
but I would guess that our water charges are
about average. There is talk about upgrading
Dallas's water treatment system, and a
possible I09£ hike in water rates if this
happens. I will be happy to pay extra money
to ensure good water, and I think most of
the people of Dallas share my feeling."
Dr. Gary (ilass. Senior Research Chemist,
Environmental Research Laboratory-Du-
luth, Duluth. Minnesota: "If you live in
Duluth, you talk about drinking water and
its cost from a special perspective. Our
city's water comes from Lake Superior, and
it has the world's highest concentration of
asbestos fibers. On the average our drinking
water contains about 100 to 200 million
fibers per quart, but in extreme storm
conditions the concentration am go as high
as one-and-a-half billion fibers per quart. In
addition, an EPA study indicates that our
water contains a measurable quantity of
chlorocarbon contaminants such as chloro-
form.
"In one way or another, either in cash or
in effort, most of us have been paying more
for our drinking water. Since June of 1973.
when people were made aware of the pres-
ence of asbestos fibers in their water, and
the possible health danger this posed, many
citizens have installed membrane filtering
systems in their homes at costs ranging from
about SI00 to $300 and with yearly mainte-
nance costs averaging $60. Others go to
firehouses, schools, hospitals, and other
public places to fetch filtered water for
drinking and cooking purposes.
"Reserve Mining Company, the source of
the asbestos fibers, began its dumping of
(aconite tailings into Lake Superior at the
present rate of 67.000 tons a day in the early
1960's; this means that part of Duluth's
population has been exposed to a known
carcinogen for about fifteen years—half the
estimated response time for the development
of asbestos-caused diseases.
"A demonstration water filtration plant
designed to take out the fibers is being
built. EPA paid for the pilot plant study in
1974 that preceded its construction. If
successful, this plant will relieve the indi-
vidual of the burden of securing good
water, but of course it will increase each
household's water bill. I believe that most
people are willing to pay more for 'safe'
drinking water if they are made aware that
"unsafe" water can and does pose a very
real threat to their health."
r if
Richavd KntelK
PAGE 24
Robert Buril
*U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1977 720-156/2 1-3
Linda MencJe/.
Dr. Gary Glass
-------
"briefs
ALM ACCEPTS ENERGY POSITION
Alvin L. Aim, formerly EPA's Assistant Administrator for
Planning and Management, has accepted a position under James
R. Schlesinger, President Carter's chief energy advisor. Mr.
Aim will be helping to develop a National Energy Policy and
to plan a new Department of Energy. His responsibilities will
include building environmental quality considerations into the
new energy plan.
ALLIED CHEMICAL PLANT BARRED FROM FEDERAL CONTRACTS
Allied Chemical's Semet-Solvay Division, Ashland, Ky., has
been placed on EPA's List of Violating Facilities, which pro-
hibits it from Federal contract renewal and makes it ineligible
to receive future Federal contracts, grants or loans. The
corporation was convicted of violating an agreement to bring
two coke batteries at Ashland into compliance with Federal
Clean Air standards. This is the first facility to be listed
for an air pollution violation. Del Monte de Puerto Rico,
Inc., and Star Kist Caribe, Inc., were listed earlier for vio-
lations of the Federal water pollution standards.
EPA BANS DISCHARGE OF PCBs
EPA has issued final regulations which totally prohibit the
discharge of polychlorinated biphenyls into the Nation's water-
ways by certain industrial plants. Plants which use the highly
toxic, persistent compound in the production of electrical
transformers and capacitors, as well as PCB manufacturers,
must meet the standards within one year. Indirect PCB dis-
charges through municipal sewage treatment plants will be
dealt with in "pretreatment" regulations now being developed.
CINCINNATI INFORMATION CENTER ESTABLISHED
A new Environmental Research Information Center for EPA's Re-
search and Development program has been established in Cin-
cinnati under the direction of Robert E. Crowe, the former
director of the Agency's Technology Transfer Staff. Under this
reorganization the information center includes personnel from
the Technology Transfer and Technical Information staffs.
The center was established to improve distribution of infor-
mation about EPA's technology findings.
PAGE 25
-------
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS (A 107)
WASHINGTON. DC 20460
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Return this page if you do NOT wish to receive this publication ( ), or if change of address is needed ( ), list change, including zip code.
EASY ON THE SALT By Peter Acly
Since winter driving can often be
hazardous, we expect highway au-
thorities to do all they can to make icy
streets safe. Their response is usually to
apply large amounts of road salt to melt
the ice and snow. Although this practice
is relatively cheap and may make driving
safer, the widespread use of salt costs
Americans billions of dollars each year in
damages to the environment, vehicles.
and human health.
EPA researchers in Edison, N.J.. have
been examining some of these problems.
Members of the research team, which is
part of the Municipal Environmental Re-
search Laboratory in Cincinnati, Ohio,
believe road deicing techniques could be
modified to lessen the damage caused by
salting.
One problem familiar to car owners is
corrosion. According to a study done for
EPA by Abt Associates of Cambridge.
Mass., rust damage to vehicles costs an
estimated $2 billion annually. A further
$500 million in damage is done each year
to road surfaces, bridges, elevated high-
way structures, and roadside utility equip-
ment such as power, phone, and water
lines.
In addition, annual environmental dam-
ages total another $300 million, primarily
through the addition of large amounts of
salt to drinking water supplies. This can
present a serious problem to people on
low-salt diets by rendering some water
supplies unusable.
Damage is also done to roadside crops
and vegetation. The total dollar damage
is estimated at nearly $3 billion each year.
Another problem is that some materials
added to road salt mixtures may have
severe toxic effects about which little is
yet known.
Salt is usually applied at rates varying
from 400 pounds to 1.200 pounds per mile
Peter Aclv is iin EPA Headquarters Press
Officer.
for each application. That can work out
to over 100 tons of salt per mile each
season on some multi-lane highways, de-
pending, of course, on the severity of the
weather.
Annual nationwide use figures are even
more startling: a 1971 EPA report showed
that highway authorities used over 9
million tons of sodium chloride—familiar
to all as "table salt." and also the most
widely used deicer. About 300.000 tons of
another common deicer, calcium chloride.
were also used. Since that time'the
annual tonnage used has shown a steady
increase, although consumption is now
levelling off.
The reason so much sail is used is that it
is cheap, easily available, and efficient in
getting the job done.
EPA's research has led to the formula-
tion of new techniques and ideas to
' .
Michael While. 4, son of Mr, and
Mrs. Melvin White, plays
with salt stockpiled in Washington, D.C.
Michael's mother is an EPA secretarv.
improve deicing practices. Some of these
are still under development; others have
been accepted and put in use.
The Edison researchers believed that an
effective way to promote improvement in
the methods used to store and apply road
salts would be to increase awareness by
highway officials of the problem. To do
this,they prepared a detailed study of
damage costs, as well as a pair of techni-
cal manuals which present the latest ideas
on how road salts could best be stored,
handled and applied. The manuals turned
out to be instant best-sellers.
The manuals recommend such things as
the constmction of storage sheds to keep
salt stockpiles from being eroded during
wet weather, the training of road crews
on how to avoid excessive rates of appli-
cation, and the development of sound
policies on when and how often salt
should be applied when the snow starts
falling.
EPA research has also led to the devel-
opment of an alternative that could re-
place road salt for use in certain environ-
mentally sensitive areas. This is a hydro-
phobic (water-tepellant) coating for high-
way surfaces.
These hydrophohic substances are semi-
permanent silicone rubber-base liquids
that, when sprayed on a road surface,
prevent the formation of a bond between
ice and the pavement. Although they do
not melt ice and snow, the new sub-
stances allow ice to be broken up easily
and blushed or blown to the side of the
road. Scientists also believe that clearing
roads this way with broom and blower
systems would cause less damage to road
surfaces than now results from the use of
heavy plow blades.
EPA scientists believe that the combina-
tion of better salt handling practices and
the selective use of harmless substitutes
can reduce the annual damage to water
supplies, highway structures, vegetation
and vehicles.*
------- |