United States
Environmental Protection
Office of
Public Affairs (A-107)
Washington DC 20460
Volume 11
Number 1
January/February 1985

Taking a
Global  View

a  Global
As the recent disaster in Bhopal,
India, has illustrated, protecting
health and the environment are
worldwide concerns. This  issue
of EPA Journal takes a global
  The issue begins with an
article by former EPA
Administrator Russell E. Train
who explains why it is
necessary for all countries to
take steps to ensure the
ecological integrity of Lhe  planet.
Train is now President of the
World Wildlife Fund-U.S.
  In the next article, Fitzhugh
Green, EPA's Associate
Administrator for International
Activities, explains how the
agency is involved in global
environmental protection efforts.
In an interview, Jack McGraw
explains EPA's concerns in the
aftermath of the Bhopal tragedy.
He is head  of EPA's task force on
the subject  and Acting Assistant
Administrator for Solid Waste
and Emergency Response.
  An international oilman,
Robert 0. Anderson, Chairman
of Atlantic Richfield Company,
discusses the attitudes of
multinational corporations
toward the  environment. Another
article presents the conclusions
of a report  by The Conservation
Foundation  on whether U.S.
pollution controls are forcing
companies  to locate their  plants
in countries with less stringent
environmental rules.
  An industrialist and an
environmentalist give their views
on whether the U.S. adequately
controls the overseas sale of
pesticides that are banned in  this
country. Commenting are Jack
D. Early, President of the
National Agricultural Chemicals
Association, and Edith D.
Meacham,  International
Pesticides Coordinator for the
National Audubon Society.
   EPA's cooperative
environmental ventures with the
People's Republic of China are
featured  in  an article by Gary R.
Waxmonsky, coordinator of the
agency's program with China.
   Natural and manmade forces
           Sunset over the Atlantic Ocean:  "The environment is global, with one ocean ol water and
           one canopy of air, and therefore must be cared lor as one entity/'  - Fitzhugh Green, EPA
that affect the earth's climate are
explained in an article by Walter
0. Roberts of the National Center
for Atmospheric Research. The
need to preserve the diversity of
species that inhabit the planet is
discussed by Peter H. Raven,
Director of the Missouri
Botanical  Garden. He headed a
special study of the problem.
  Shifting to domestic concerns,
the Journal includes an article by
U.S. Senator Lloyd Bentsen
about the environmental  issues
facing this Congress. Bentsen is
the new ranking minority
member on the Senate
Environment and Public Works
  Courtney M. Price, the
agency's Assistant Administrator
for Enforcement and Compliance
Monitoring, reviews
environmental enforcement for
Fiscal Year 1984. Susan Tejada
of the Journal staff profiles a day
in the life of an EPA criminal
investigator. Jack Lewis, also of
the magazine's staff, reports on
one state's progress in dealing
with asbestos in schools.
  In the fifth article in a series in
the Journal by EPA's regional
offices, Rowena  Michaels, public
affairs director in Region 7,
reports on the start-up of EPA's
mobile incinerator in southwest
Missouri to help solve the
problem of soil contaminated by
  Concluding the issue are
Update, which summarizes  recent
developments at the agency,
and EPA appointments.  , !

                               United States
                               Environmental Protection
                              Office of
                              Public Affairs (A-107)
                              Washington DC 20460
                              Volume 11
                              Number 1
                              January/February 1985
                          SEPA JOURNAL
                              Lee M. Thomas, Acting Administrator
                              Josephine S. Cooper, Assistant Administrator for External Affairs
                              Jean Statler, Director, Office of Public Affairs

                              John Heritage,  Editor
                              Susan Tejada, Associate Editor
                              Jack Lewis,  Assistant Editor
EPA is charged by Congress to
protect the nation's land, air, and
water systems. Under a mandate of
national environmental laws, the
agency strives to formulate and
implement actions which lead to a
compatible balance between human
activities and the ability  of  n;ituml
systems to support and  nurture life.
  The EPA Journal is published by
the U S  Environmental Protection
Agency. The Administrator of EPA
has determined that the publication
of this periodical is necessary in the
transaction of the public business
required by law of this 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
A Perspective on
World Environmental
by Russell  E. Train

Thinking Globally
at EPA
by Fitzhugh Green  4

The Aftermath
of Bhopal
An  Interview
with Jack W. McGraw

Does Industry Have  a
Global Environmental
by Robert 0. Anderson 8

Industrial Flight:
Myth or Reality?
by H. Jeffrey Leonard 10
Is It Safe to Sell
Banned Pesticides
Two Views  11

EPA and China
Seek Environmental
Answers Together
by Gary R.  Waxmonsky
A Weather Report
for the Future
by Walter 0. Roberts
Why Every Species
by Peter H. Raven  18

Environmental Issues
Facing the 99th Congress
by Lloyd Bentsen  20
                                                             An Enforcement
                                                             Status Report
                                                             by Courtney M. Price
EPA Diary: A Day in
the Life of a
Criminal Investigator
by Susan Tejada

Asbestos in Schools:
One State's Answer
by Jack Lewis   27

Regional Report:
Destroying Dioxin with
EPA's Mobile Incinerator
by Rowena Michaels  29

Update: Recent
Agency Developments 30

Appointments at EPA 32
                              From cover: Photograph of the
                              earth, taken from space on the
                              Apollo W flight. NASA photo.
                              Design Credits: Robert Flanagan:
                              Ron Farrah
The annual rate for subscribers in
the U.S. for the EPA Journal is
$20.00. The charge  to subscribers in
foreign countries is  $25.00 a year.
The price of a single copy of the
EPA Journal is $2 00 in this country
and $2,50 if sent to a foreign
country. Prices include mail costs.
Subscriptions to the EPA Journal as
well as to other Federal
Government magazines are handled
only by the U.S. Government
Printing Office. Anyone wishing to
subscribe to the EPA Journal should
fill in the form at right and enclose a
check  or money order payable to
the Superintendent of Documents
The requests should be mailed to:
Superintendent of Documents
GPO, Washington, D.C. 20402.
                              EPA JOURNAL Subscriptions
                                 Name-First. Last
                                                Please Print

                                   i   1
  Company Name or Additional Address Line
                                                i  ;   i  i   1
  Street Address
                           .. i.  I  1  I   1  1
                              Zip Code
 I	(Payment enclosed
   (Make check payable to Superintendent of Documents!

 I	iCharge to my Deposit Account No

A  Perspective  on
World   Environmental
by Russell E. Train
   Since cleaning off my desk at EPA in
   1977, I  have worked to gain an
improved understanding of America's
role in the biosphere, the thin film of
land, air, and water that is home to all
life on Earth. Viewing the environment
from a global perspective is not easy. We
perceive the world through
senses—vision, hearing, smell—that can
encompass an outfall or stack, perhaps
even a wastewater treatment facility or  a
petrochemicals manufacturing plant. But
the Earth is so large that it defies
sensation,  and therefore comprehension.
Similarly, the demands of everyday life
cause most people to focus on
time-scales of days or, at the most, years.
But life on Earth is 3,500 million years
old, a period so great that few can see
how today's events relate to the vast
sweep of time.
  Furthermore, the interactions of
humans and other living things that
determine  environmental  quality are so
complex that we have not yet developed
models of  global ecological and
economic processes adequate for many
of the decisions society must make. And
the pool of information on which those
decisions are based is uneven and
incomplete. Many regulators have
experienced the frustration of trying to
obtain comprehensive data on, say, the
discharge or effects of a domestic
pollutant. Multiply that by the whole
range of environmental issues
worldwide, the diversity of languages,
the varied  systems of government, and
the inability of some nations to collect
even basic environmental information,
and one can appreciate the difficulty of
understanding the status and trends of
the global  environment.
  But despite these obstacles, we cannot
afford to ignore the ecology of our
planet, because available  scientific
information, theory, and common sense
all tell  us that the biosphere is
undergoing changes at a rapid and
accelerating rate. Some of these are

already serious, others are likely to
become profound problems in the next
century, and one may not occur at
all—but will be devastating if it does.
  The acceleration of environmental
impacts is not new. The arrival  of the
first Americans from Asia perhaps 15,000
years ago led to the extinction of many
large mammals. The invention of
agriculture some 10,000 years ago in
Asia Minor and Southeast Asia  led to
permanent settlements and written
records, achievements that further
stimulated population  and technological
growth. Still, progress and its
environmental impacts were sufficientiy
gradual that the Earth  could
accommodate many of them. Not only
was per capita impact small;  for almost
all of history, there have been relatively
few capitae.
  By the year 1 A.D., the world's human
population had reached perhaps 300
million, and more than 1,500 years would
pass before it doubled. Now the total is
4,800 million, and the  doubling  time is
just 40 years. In the year 2000, the Earth
will be home to 20 times as many people
as in the year one, and most of them will
be doing  everything in their power to
achieve a standard of  living
unimaginable in previous times.
Accelerating technological innovation will
allow some to acquire the material goods
they desire. But in the process,  by
serving their own immediate needs,
people in affluent industrialized and
poorer developing  nations alike will
degrade the global environment.
Although thousands of people worldwide
are fighting heroically to maintain
environmental quality in the face of
growing population, rising aspirations,
and proliferating technologies, the task is
rapidly growing more difficult.
  Fortunately, environmental awareness
is changing in our nation and worldwide.
When the U.S. was young, most
Americans accepted the disappearance of
forests and game animals, for there
would always be  more "further west."
Later, we viewed  belching smokestacks
and polluted rivers as signs of economic
vitality. But it became harder to accept
environmental strains that have become
obvious in recent decades. The new,
more productive methods of  raising
crops led to pesticides in mothers' milk
and declines of ecologically and
commercially important species in
Chesapeake Bay.  In the lower 48 states,
we even came perilously close to  losing
the bald eagle, the symbol of our  nation.
  The American people responded with
the National Environmental Policy Act,
the Clean Water Act, the Endangered
Species Act, and other needed laws. We
created new institutions such as EPA and
the Council on Environmental Quality to
watch over and protect our land, air,
water, wildlife, and people. While serious
new  problems, such as toxic waste
dumps and ground-water contamination,
are still taking shape, an admirable job
has been done in  slowing and even
reversing environmental degradation in
the U.S. Nevertheless, Americans  and
citizens of  other industrialized nations
consume a disproportionate share of the
Earth's resources  and  produce a
disproportionate fraction of humankind's
environmental impact.
  In less developed nations, where more
than  90 percent of the world's population
growth is occurring, people, companies,
and governments are striving to repeat
our remarkable economic success. Many
are unable to build or cannot afford to
pay for the environmentally protective
institutions that could  spare them from
the environmental problems we have
begun to cure. In  many tropical areas,
the land cannot support sustained
agriculture of the  type that makes the
U.S. the world's greatest food producer,
so attempts to imitate our pattern of
economic development will be far more
environmentally destructive.
  Moreover, the tropics harbor most of
the world's biological diversity, the
variety of ecosystems, species, and
genotypes  that has evolved over many
millions of years.  In coming decades, as
people, agriculture, and industry spread
throughout the tropics, cutting the
forests, damming the rivers, and
industrializing the coastlines as they go,
the biosphere will lose a major fraction
of its wealth of life. No comparable loss
of species  has happened in 65 million
                                                                                                      EPA JOURNAL

years, since dinosaurs last walked the
  As described so well in the "Biological
Diversity" chapter of the  1980 Council on
Environmental Quality Annual Report,
extinction of these genetic varieties,
species, and ecosystems will  be a
permanent loss of wealth to humankind.
Without intending to do so, we will be
losing myriad  future sources of food,
medicines, energy, and industrial raw
materials essential to our well-being. We
will be increasing soil erosion, drought,
and flooding, diminishing the ability of
natural ecosystems to break down the
increasing load of chemical pollutants,
and running the risk of altering climate
over large areas.
  A growing concern among
environmental scientists is the alteration
of the Earth's biogeochemical cycles, the
ecological processes by which organisms
regulate the movement of chemical
elements through the land,  air, water,
and biota. Perhaps the most serious
problem on the horizon is the risk of
changing global climate by  accumulating
atmospheric "greenhouse gases," such
as carbon dioxide, certain
chlorofluorocarbons, and methane. These
gases will cause global warming and,
almost certainly, changes in the patterns
of rainfall.
  Although the rate and amount of
warming are as yet uncertain, they would
be very damaging to agriculture in many
nations, including the U.S. Ironically,
global warming might well  benefit
agriculture in those few nations where
crop production is currently inhibited by
low temperatures. It would also cause
some melting  of polar ice caps, raising
the world's sea level enough to inundate
the lowest-lying coastal areas.
  Global climatic changes will also be
disastrous for biological diversity,
because development is rapidly
fragmenting once-continuous ecosystems
into "islands." Few animals or plants can
move among the remaining habitat
islands across urban, industrial, or
agricultural landscapes. Nor can they
possibly evolve quickly enough to adapt
to rapidly changing climate. As a result,
many of our remaining species in parks,
reserves, and other habitat islands will
  Carbon dioxide is increasing because
of growing worldwide use of fossil fuels
and the destruction of tropical forests,
and chlorofluorocarbon levels are rising
due to the growth  of refrigeration and air
conditioning. The source  of increasing
methane levels is uncertain. Although
some greenhouse gases are increasing at
more than one percent per year, serious
effects of these increases may still be
decades away.
  While loss of biological diversity and
climatic change are the most probable
major threats to global environmental
quality, there is another so horrendous
that many consider it "unthinkable," and
choose not to think about it. Nuclear war
generally was  not considered an
environmental issue until the 1983
"World After Nuclear War" conference.
Its participating atmospheric scientists
and ecologists revealed that dust and
soot from nuclear detonations and
subsequent fires could envelop the world
in a black cloud. The cold, dark "nuclear
winter" would be a devastating
environmental trauma, interrupting vital
"ecosystem services" and causing
extinction of great  numbers of species,
conceivably including Homo sapiens.
  Yes, from a global perspective,

environmental challenges facing us are
very serious. Ignoring them will not make
them go away. But nuclear war is not
inevitable, nor are global loss of
biological diversity or climatic change.
We can ensure the ecological integrity of
our planet, our survival, and well-being,
by improving our understanding of the
ecological, economic, social, and political
causes and consequences of these
problems, and by dealing with them
before it is too  late.
  We must understand that people
everywhere  seek to better their lives.  As
noted in a remarkable document called
the World Conservation Strategy,
published by the International Union  for
Conservation of Nature and Natural
Resources, we can maintain
environmental quality only by
encouraging development that is
sustainable and environmentally sound.
Individual, corporate, or national
behavior appropriate for an uncrowded
world may not  be  acceptable when the
ever-increasing numbers of people are
dependent on ever-decreasing natural
resources, i.e., when our margin of safety
is steadily shrinking.
  There are  two ways that we can help to
avoid the environmental problems I
mentioned above.  First,  our nation is  still
the greatest contributor to global
environmental changes. We can provide
strong incentives for individuals and
corporations that find innovative ways to
prevent environmental damage. By
protecting our own environment, we  can
set  an example for other nations that
look to us for leadership.
  Second, we can  provide expertise and
economic assistance to nations trying to
protect the environment while
developing their resources. In a world
where interconnectedness between
industrialized and developing nations is
growing steadily, helping them is the
soundest way to protect our own vital
  Environmental protection is not  only
the  responsibility of government.
Although short-term perspectives may
differ, individuals, professional societies,
public interest organizations, and
industries must work with governments if
we are to avoid the environmental
problems that threaten our survival and
well-being. Anyone who has devoted
mind  and heart to this task knows that it
is certainly not an easy one. But I have
great faith in our ingenuity, wisdom, and
resolve. If we choose to  maintain the
ecological integrity of the Earth, we will

                                    Thinking  Globally
                                                  at  EPA
                                               by Fitzhugh Green
   People often ask, "Why is EPA, a
   domestic agency, engaged busily in
many parts of the earth?" The short
answer is that the environment is global,
with one ocean of water and one canopy
of air, and therefore must be cared for as
one entity.
  In  1970,  EPA's first Administrator,
William  D. Ruckelshaus, established a
program of international activities. The
rationale then and now is twofold:
enlightened ecological and economic
  On the first point, Ruckelshaus insisted
there is  ultimately no sense in cleaning
up the air and water unless the rest of
the world does so too. Therefore,  he
directed EPA to keep other nations
informed of our regulations, standards,
and scientific findings so that the
environmental movement could spread
far and fast. At the same time, he
directed the agency to watch the
progress of environmental ministries
abroad to be sure EPA could, in turn,
profit from  their management
techniques, control technology, and
  On the second  point, Ruckelshaus
wanted to  ensure that American
manufacturers who complied with the
new laws and regulations at home did
not suffer unfair commercial competition
from foreign-based companies which
were unregulated. He was determined, in
short, that EPA work with other countries
to avoid "pollution havens" where it
would be legal to poison the air, water,
and land with waste byproducts.
  Additionally, Ruckelshaus agreed with
Maurice Strong, the great Canadian
environmentalist  and industrialist, who
said: "A country which fouls the air and
water of neighboring nations that  are
downwind, or downstream, is
committing ecological aggression."
  Congress agreed to some extent with
these goals. For example, Article  115 of
the Clean Air Act focuses on
transboundary air pollution. The Toxic
Substances Control Act and the Resource
Conservation and Recovery  Act require
that EPA inform other nations, through
the U.S. State Department, before
shipments of toxic chemicals or
hazardous  wastes are made. Then the


receiving country can decide how to
handle the dangerous imports in
accordance with its own procedures.
  Neither of these goals will be—or can
be—totally achieved. But they provide a
kind of north star by which the agency's
activities in the international community
can be kept on course. They encourage
EPA to be alert for "bargain-rate"
learning experiences. For example, when
other countries or organizations stage
professional meetings on a topic like  acid
rain, EPA can  piggyback the efforts of
others and avoid duplications, or enlist
others in bilateral research  or
consultations  on common targets. Or
EPA can join with multilateral groups to
harmonize approaches to setting of
standards on pollutants or protecting
some specific  vital aspect of the
environment,  such as the ocean or ozone
  EPA's international goals  clearly
coincide with those of a number of other
nation states.  Since 1970, when  only a
handful of EPA-type agencies existed,
nearly every country has now set up
some sort of governmental  mechanism
to protect human health and
environment. EPA has entered into
cooperative bilateral projects with many
of these. With West Germany, the Soviet
Union, the People's Republic of China,
Japan, the Netherlands, and France there
are formal agreements. With our next
door neighbors Mexico and Canada there
are daily, continuing contacts between
environmental agencies. Multiple,
complex, and difficult transboundary
discussions of the issues run the gamut
from acid rain to  untreated sewage to
at-sea incineration.
  Numerous multilateral organizations
have embraced the environment as a
vital responsibility. They include United
Nations units such as the World Health
Organization, the U.N. Environment
Program (started  by Maurice Strong after
the Stockholm Conference in 1972), and
the Economic Commission for Europe;
also, there are the 24 members  of the
Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development, the European
Economic Community or "Common
Market," and even NATO, which has an
ecologically oriented group called the
Committee on the Challenges of Modern
Society. EPA pursues active and
supportive programs with all of these, as
well as with the U.S.-border standing
bodies: the U.S.-Canadian International
Joint Commission, created in the 1909
Boundary Waters Treaty with Canada,
and the International Boundary and
Water Commission with Mexico.
  Drawing on substantive input from
technical  experts  and top management,
EPA offers U.S. policy positions to the
State Department in preparation for
international negotiations on
environmental matters. With the State
Department we jointly determine the best
strategy for achieving U.S. environmental
  EPA suffers no  lack of employee
interest in the challenging work needed
to accomplish the two goals set by
former Administrator Ruckelshaus.
Indeed, during the 14 years since EPA's
inception, not one employee has refused
an overseas mission of any sort. With
this evident dedication, it is not  surprising
that EPA operatives are liked and
respected in  many corners of our planet.
It is certainly thanks to their knowledge
and drive that America stands today as a
leader of the environmental movement
throughout the globe. D
                                                                                                         EPA JOURNAL

                                      The  Aftermath  of Bhopal
                                       An interview  with Jack W. McGraw
What are EPA's reactions and plans in
the aftermath of the chemical disaster
in Bhopal, India? EPA Journal asked
Jack McGraw, who heads an agency
task force on Bhopal, for answers to
these questions. McGraw has recently
been named Acting Assistant
Administrator for Solid Waste and
Emergency Response at EPA. The
interview follows:
     In the wake of the Bhopal tragedy,
many people have asked the
question—could the same kind of
catastrophe happen in the United

     Yes, it could happen here, but the
probability is low. The rea! issue is what
to do to prevent such an incident from
happening,  and how to look at the
resources that we would need and the
systems that it would take to respond to
such an incident if one should occur.

     What  has been EPA's official
response to the Bhopal situation?

     EPA at this time has not  played any
direct role in response to the Bhopal
tragedy. However, we  had continuous
inquiries from the news media, from
Congress, from private citizens, coming
into all parts of the agency—the Office of
Public Affairs, the Congressional office,
the Office of Research and Development,
the Office of Pesticides and Toxic
Substances, the Office of Air and
Radiation, the Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency  Response, and the regional
offices. As each element of the agency
had only a piece of the information, it
was essential to consolidate and share
the limited amount of data that was
available. So, Al Aim (EPA Deputy
Administrator at the time) appointed  me
to organize  the agency components that
would have a role if and when a
Bhopal-type tragedy ever occurred in the
United States. My assignment was to pull
together a group within the agency to
organize and consider the information, to
determine what technical support was
available, should it be  requested by the
Indian government, and to develop a
course of action. This involved resources
from EPA and other federal agencies. A
task force has been established to deal
with all of these problems. Jim Makris of
the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response is the Project Leader.

     What other federal agencies are
involved in the official response of the
U.S. government to the Bhopal tragedy?

     EPA chairs the twelve-agency
National Response Team; the  U.S. Coast
Guard is the vice-chair. The agencies
most concerned with this kind of incident
are the Department of State, the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, the
Department of Transportation, the
Department of Labor (the Occupational
Safety and  Health Administration), the
Department of Defense, the Department
of Energy, and the Department of Health
and Human Services. Right after the
accident, we called a meeting of the
National Response Team. We are now
reviewing the authorities, regulations,
programs, and expertise these other
federal agencies might have that would
be valuable in the event that we had  to
respond to  a domestic incident or to
provide technical assistance to the
government of India.

     Does EPA have authorities to deal
with toxic chemicals and their storage?

     Yes. Although we still do not know
exactly what caused the Bhopal incident,
EPA has a variety of regulations dealing
with storage and handling of toxic
materials. These authorities are
established under TSCA (Toxic
Substances Control Act), RCRA (Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act), CERCLA
(Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act), and the Clean Air Act either to
prevent or to respond to an incident of
this kind.

     Is our government prepared for
accidents like the one in Bhopal?

     Although it would be virtually
impossible to assure no  loss of life and
injury should an accident like that occur
suddenly and without warning, local,
state, and federal agencies have a variety
of response capabilities that would come
into play. Beginning with the local police
and fire departments and the local Red
Cross and expanding rapidly to include
county and  state emergency services
organizations, local  health services, and
emergency  response programs of the
Federal Emergency Management Agency,
the Department of Health and Human
Services, the Public Health Service, the
Department of Transportation, the
National Weather Service, and EPA,
assistance to the injured and
evacuees would be rapidly mobilized.

Similar responses have been made to
deal with the Texas City chemical
explosion  in 1947, the chlorine barge
sinking on the Mississippi in 1962, the
more  recent chemical spills following
train derailments in Florida  and
Louisiana, and fires in New Jersey—and
of course after the  accident at Three Mile

     What would be EPA's specific role?

f\  EPA would provide emergency
technical support, including monitoring
teams to advise public safety authorities
on current and potential dangers and
effects of the chemical involved, and
would work with other agencies to
determine the cause of the problem, any
violations  of regulations, and steps
needed to prevent future accidents. Our
On-Scene  Coordinator and Environmental
Response  Team~would be there as soon
as possible. The Regional Response
Teams, which include the relevant federal
agencies as well as state agencies (and
local agencies as required) could be
assembled to assist in the coordination.

     A minor methyl isocyanate leak
occurred in Middleport, N.Y., in
November 1984. How well did emergency
response procedures work in that case?

     It depends on  your point  of view.
The fact that it happened at all would
raise concerns. But  looking  at it in terms
of emergency response, our review
showed that the company involved was
very responsible. It  immediately notified
the local government, and also assisted
in evacuating a school that  was in the
pathway of the air  plume. There were no
injuries. Obviously,  local and industry
officials and the public responded in a
very positive manner.

      What steps has EPA taken with
regard to  methyl isocyanate (MIC)
production at Union Carbide's Institute,
W. Va., plant?

      Our  Region 3 office, in conjunction
with OSHA (Occupational Safety and
Health Administration), conducted a full
multimedia environmental inspection of
the Institute plant.  The investigation of
the findings is continuing. Other EPA
specialists are also examining the plant
and its operation. In addition, the State of
West Virginia is also actively reviewing
the plant. At this time, MIC is not being
produced at the Institute plant.

      What is a multimedia
environmental  inspection?

      The agency regularly inspects
facilities  for compliance with laws,
regulations, and requirements. In a
multimedia inspection, the various
program criteria are consolidated and all
relevant  elements of the facilities are
reviewed. The inspection may be specific
or general in nature depending on the
overall objective. For example, it may be
directed  at the potential for air releases
only or it may also include water
releases, solid and hazardous waste
handling practices, ground-water
problems, and certain manufacturing
practices if they involve hazardous

      We understand that methyl
isocyanate is transported to other Union
Carbide plants from Institute. Has EPA
taken any steps since Bhopal to  inspect
these other sites?

     There are a number of other places
that use  methyl isocyanate, particularly
the Union Carbide site in Woodbine,  Ga.
Our Region 4 office conducted a
thorough multimedia  inspection there.
We've also completed environmental
inspections at two production facilities
that use  MIC in Region 6. All other EPA
regional  offices are now reviewing
similar facilities. I would like to note that
Institute, W. Va., is the only place in the
United States where MIC was actually
produced by Union Carbide. At the other
locations, it is used in the production of

      Many communities would like
more information about hazardous
chemicals in their vicinity. Could you tell
us something about the recently adopted
"Hazard  Communication Standard,"
commonly known as the "Right-to-Know

     There is a "Right-to-Know Law" for
employees covered by OSHA, which  will
be fully effective in late 1985. Employees
are entitled to know what kind of chemicals
they are dealing with in their workplace
environment. There are a number of
state laws, around 16 I believe, that go
beyond the workplace and apply to local
communities. These state laws entitle
local officials and the general public to
know what chemicals are being used or
produced and the potential risks from such
chemicals. But there is no federal law at
this time which deals with the  "Right to
Know" beyond the workplace.  There
have been several bills presented.
Chairman Anderson of Union Carbide
was asked during the hearing in  Institute,
W. Va,  what his position was on  such
laws, to which the industry as a whole
had previously objected. Anderson said
that he would take another look at such
bills, indicating that Bhopal had changed
a lot of people's attitudes about a lot of

     Will EPA representatives be going
to India to help in the investigation  of
the cause of the Bhopal tragedy?

     The Governor of West Virginia and
several members of the  state's
Congressional delegation have asked
EPA to send a team to investigate the
causes of the Bhopal incident. We're
working closely with the State
Department in connection with this
request. However, at this time India  has
not requested or agreed to our sending
such a team. We  have written to the
Department of State regarding such
negotiations with the Indian  Government
about an EPA team. We do not yet have
an official invitation from the Indian
Government to send such a team.
  On the other hand, we have worked
closely with the Department  of Health
and Human Services on a  request from
the Indian Government to  send a team
from the Centers for Disease Control.
CDC did send four medical experts to
evaluate the impact on the human health
situation, which was India's primary
initial concern.

     What is EPA doing to help  prevent
tragedies like the one in Bhopal?
     EPA has two basic roles. One is our
responsibility for developing and
implementing our programs to prevent
such tragedies. The RCRA program, for
example, has very specific rules for how
                                                                    EPA JOURNAL

you can store, dispose, and even
transport the highly toxic wastes
generated during the production of such
chemicals. The other key role, in
conjunction with other appropriate
agencies, is to continue to assist
in the development of contingency
plans for state and local communities
and to provide training  and technical
guidance so that, if necessary, proper
evacuation and procedures for protection
of fife could  be carried out.

     What steps has the U.S. taken to
cooperate with other countries in
emergency response?

     The United  States aggressively
pursues cooperative agreements with its
neighbor countries in the area of
emergency response. For example, there
are viable joint contingency plans with
Canada, Mexico,  and the Caribbean area.
In addition, the United States participates
in emergency planning  projects  through
several international organizations, such
as the United Nations, NATO, and the
World Health Organization. These efforts
ensure that we have direct access to the
most recent developments in emergency
response and that we are meeting our
responsibilities to provide assistance
where we can to help others when
environmental emergencies occur.

     Is there anything that you'd like to
add, based on your experience with the
Bhopal emergency?

     I think the big question is, where do
we go from here? Once we know what
caused the tragedy, we can evaluate our
own environmental regulations and look
at our response programs to see  whether
or not we could prevent such an  incident
from happening here and assure  the
highest capability of response. An
incident such as this certainly raises our
consciousness about the importance of
EPA's job, and reminds us that we're
specialists who deal with real-world
situations. Our regulations have a direct
impact on the actual lives of people in
communities where those regulations
apply. What's more, Bhopal underscores
the need to lay out a strategy for making
certain that we do have the necessary
statutory authorities to be able to prevent
and deal with such emergencies here in
the United States. D


Does  Industry  Have  a
Global  Environmental
 by Robert 0. Anderson
In 1972, the landmark United Nations
Conference on the Human Environment
was held in Stockholm,  Sweden.
Another global environmental
conference was held at Versailles, near
Paris, last November. Attended by many
industrial leaders,  the Versailles
conference was called the World
Industry Conference on Environmental
Management. Then-EPA
Administrator William D. Rucke/shaus
was a keynote speaker at the
November conference.  Robert 0.
Anderson, Chairman of Atlantic
Richfield Company, attended both the
 1972 and the 1984 conferences. In this
article, he discusses what has been
happening to the environmental
attitudes of multinational corporations
since the Stockholm conference and
reports on principles of environmental
protection agreed on at the Versailles
conference.  The oilman has frequently
spoken out on environmental issues.

    Progress is usually measured in
    decades, but for the world
 environment a  12-year span seems more
 appropriate. This is the time that elapsed
 between two conferences that are
 perhaps among the most significant in
 the history of the global environmental
 movement—Stockholm in  1972 and
 Versailles in  1984.
   The United Nations Conference on the
 Human Environment took place in
 Stockholm in June 1972. The two-week
 gathering of 1,200  politicians and officials
 from 114 nations provided the
 opportunity for what was really one of
 the first major discussions of a  range of
 worldwide environmental problems. A
 remarkable series  of plans and
 agreements was formulated at that time
 for international cooperation in pollution
 control. Among the major nations, only
 the Soviet Union stayed away.
   The Versailles meeting, held last
 November, gave those of us long
 involved  in the environmental movement
 an opportunity to see how far we had
come since Stockholm. In that sense, the
convening of the World  Industry
Conference on Environmental Management
(WICEM) by the International Chamber of
Commerce and the United Nations
Environment Program was an entirely
hopeful event. And this time the Soviets
  At Stockholm, the two great spiritual
leaders of the world environmental
movement, Barbara Ward and Rene
Dubos, reminded us that "man must
accept responsibility for the stewardship
of the earth. The word stewardship
implies, of course, management for the
sake of someone else."
  Barbara added to that very  inclusive
notion the further important thought that
we all serve not one, but two
countries—our own and the globa)
community. That was the mood of
Stockholm and, as we discovered, the
mood of Versailles as well.
  For  me, a key aspect of Versailles was
a strong recognition—far less obvious at
Stockholm—that the problems we face in
the environment will not be solved by
government alone, but require a full  and
close cooperation between the public and
private sectors. For its part, industry
appeared to acknowledge and support
this notion of a quasi-public role that is
incumbent upon it in the environmental
area, as in many other social  areas, and
that transcends its purely economic
  In many respects, business today
seems far abler to lend a hand in social
causes than 12 years ago. Given the
chance, the market economy  has done
reasonably well since Stockholm. The
laws of supply and demand still work
well, even with oil, as anyone who has
watched prices at the gasoline pump
lately will have to admit.
  In fact, the idea of free competition has
not only maintained itself in the
traditional capitalist nations, but is also
gaining adherents in surprising quarters.
The market-oriented reform effort
underway in China is the most notable
example, but the USSR and other
Communist countries are also slowly but
surely coming to acknowledge the simple
effectiveness of market enterprise.
  But as the free market's traditional
message spreads, how receptive have its
practitioners been to a note of
reciprocity—the idea that business has a
social responsibility that goes beyond the
obligation to produce a sound product at
a fair price? How willing are they to
respond to the idea, for example, of
private  business firms helping to clean
up a mess that someone else might have
  For the  most part, the modern
multinational company has been
understandably loath  to accept
responsibilities that lie outside the
economic purpose for which it was
created. I  suspect this is as true of
industrial  enterprises  in socialist
countries  as it is of companies in the
Western democracies.
  To be fair, there are decided limits to
the social efforts we can expect of
business.  In part this is because in many
cases businesses can't act. Either the
social problem is beyond their
competence, or they have no legal right
to  interfere.
  The most critical impediment to a
consistent business social involvement is,
of  course, the unpredictability of the
market  itself. A down year dampens
social enthusiasm in the most
activist-minded  company. Under such
circumstances, no prudent manager can
afford to commit time and money heavily
to  general causes, no matter how worthy.
After all, business's power to do good in
the world depends first upon its capacity
to  do well.
  The message from Versailles,  however,
is that despite these obstacles, the
business community increasingly
recognizes its duty and opportunity to
make a major difference in some very
difficult social issues, certainly including
the environment. A simple line of logic
leads many of us to the same
conclusion: if we in business don't agree
to help voluntarily, our help will be
commandeered by government, and,  in
my opinion, rightly so.
  But it's  easy to make a virtue of
necessity in the case of the environment
and in the face of the range of potentially
catastrophic social problems that beset
the globe. It stands to reason that to be
effective,  solutions devised must involve
the skills, talents, and energies of all our
institutions, certainly including those of
business, or they simply won't work.
  Rather than being dragged into it, I
think we in business should proffer our
help in the spirit of mature cooperation
that as much as anything else
characterized the entire Versailles
  Certainly we recognize that
constructive engagement by the private
sector will help us make sound use of the
assets we hold  in trust. Besides, it offers
a clear opportunity for business to do
something it likes to do anyway—reduce
and limit  the need for government action
                                                              EPA JOURNAL


 in areas where political action is often
 the wrong choice. Government energies
 can then be focused where appropriate,
 while business can produce new wealth
 and  raise living standards—our
 fundamental task.
  At Versailles we once again took a
 close look at the world's environmental
 problems, and found them solvable. The
 12 years since Stockholm seem to have
 produced a rough consensus on the
 question of who will do what to advance
 this great task. The answer we arrived at
 is obvious but momentous: we will all  do
 our part, according to a division of labor
 that has been taking shape over the last
 dozen years and now appears firm and
  Toward this end, the WICEM conferees
 unanimously adopted nine broad
 principles governing this cooperative
 movement, amounting to a kind of
 Magna Carta of global environmentalism.

 1. Care for the human environment is a
 common responsibility and must be
 considered in all activities, including
 industrial activities. Mankind must
 continue diligent efforts to understand
 the natural environment, especially to
 anticipate the consequences of industrial
 and other human activities. All elements
 of society must take action to minimize
 known adverse impacts on the human

 2. Industrial activity should take into
 consideration related economic and
 social responsibilities. To survive,
 industry can ignore neither economic nor
 social reality.  Industry must practice
 good citizenship as well as any other
sector of society—even in areas of social
responsibility not directly linked to its
commercial purpose.

3. Sustainable economic  development is
a desirable international  goal. Economic
development can improve the quality of
life by reducing or eliminating poverty
and thereby serving human dignity. In
some parts of the world,  development is
the sole hope for maintaining life itself;
other parts of the world can't ignore this.
Sustained development will prevent  •
economic and social disappointment as
well as damage to the environment.

4. Scientific and technological
information is vital to environmental
planning. Government and industry must
share information about resource use
and environmental protection.
5. Governments should expand the
adoption of common goals in addressing
environmental concerns.  Different value
systems guide environmental policies
affecting industrial development
throughout the world. But global
environmental protection  is a common
responsibility. Governments must
therefore respect environmental
precautions  in other states and not
attempt to solve their own problems by
exporting pollution.

6.  Governments should deal
evenhandedly with all industrial
enterprises.  Governments should not
establish environmental standards for
certain enterprises less rigid or
demanding than for others. Standards
should be uniform for all  enterprises,
regardless of ownership or social

 7. Cooperation is more efficient than
 confrontation in addressing
 environmental concerns. Government
 must impose requirements on industry to
 protect citizens' physical environment.
 Industry  must meet governmental
 requirements in the most economic
 manner possible. Hostility between the
 two sectors usually produces the most
 expensive and  protracted approach to
 problem-solving.  Cooperation witl
 accomplish the most widespread
 environmental  improvements.

 8. Governments and developers should
 address environmental issues as early as
 possible  in the economic planning
 process.  Experience has shown that
 development requires complex
 interdependent actions related to public
 policy and national strategies.
 Environmental  and resource
 considerations, as well as technological,
 economic, and marketing concerns,
 should therefore be factored into
 development plans at the outset. Tardy
 recognition of environmental  impact can
 result in costly  delays and damage.

 9. Industry and government, separately
 or cooperatively,  should promote
 awareness of environmental issues.
 Ignorance is the worst enemy of a
 healthy environment.  In many nations,
 industrialized and undeveloped alike,
 delayed acknowledgment of negative
 environmental  impacts has caused damage
 due chiefly to lack of information and
 understanding. Industry and government
 can both contribute effective educational
 and informational programs for the
 general good.
  We believe these principles  offer a
constructive and hopeful framework for
effective international  action on the
environment, and certainly a most
suitable test by which to measure the
reality of the new cooperative era that we
hope we  have entered. All the signs of
cooperation are there—initiated at
Stockholm in 1972, and brought to a
fuller, richer development at Versailles
last November. The compromises and
adjustments that were implicit at both
conferences are difficult but far from
impossible, for  industry as well as
government. Together, I am confident
that we can fulfill  the Dubos-Ward recipe
for stewardship and yet retain the
essential  self-interest that is at the heart
of the effective  corporation. We have
begun  the effort. It only remains to carry
it through to a successful conclusion. I  }

Industrial  Flight:     Myth   or  Reality?
                                                   by H.  Jeffrey Leonard
   Some critics of federal environmental
   laws have argued that these laws
impede new domestic industrial
development and erode the competitive
position of American industry. Others in
business and government have
contended that the costs of complying
with environmental regulations adversely
affect the ability of U.S. firms to compete
at home with imported products and
overseas in foreign markets. These critics
have advanced the "industrial flight"
argument, namely that U.S.
environmental regulations are pushing
firms out of the United States and other
industrialized countries to developing
nations that evidence less environmental
  Have environmental regulations caused
an exodus of U.S. firms abroad? Must
these regulations be rolled back to ease
pressures on  U.S. companies to relocate
industrial facilities overseas? The short
answer is "no."
  Since 1979, The Conservation
Foundation has monitored key U.S.
industries to assess whether, in fact,
there is any indication that environmental
regulations actually have pushed large
numbers of U.S.-based industries abroad
and have thereby'negatively affected the
U.S. industrial base, Investigation of
recent overseas investment and foreign
trade patterns by U.S. manufacturing
industries  from 1970 to 1982 shows that
environmental regulations have not
caused a significant exodus of U.S.
industries. Indeed, overall investments
abroad by U.S. industries have increased
faster in manufacturing industries with
low pollution-control  costs than they
have in those industries bearing the
major burdens of environmental and
workplace-health regulations:
mineral-processing, chemical, and pulp
and paper companies.
  Nevertheless, industry-by-industry
studies by The Conservation Foundation
do indicate that a few troubled industries
producing certain types of chemicals and
processed minerals have been more
susceptible than most to relocation
pressures  as a result  of environmental
regulations. These industries tend to fall
into three  categories.

1. Manufacturers of some highly toxic,
dangerous, or carcinogenic products
have not yet been able to develop safer
substitutes or to adapt their technologies

to meet environmental, workplace,
health, and consumer standards easily.
For these few industries, pollution
standards and rules on  health in the
workplace have led to declining
production in the United States and
increasing production overseas.
  In particular, U.S. production of
asbestos, arsenic trioxide, benzidine-
based dyes, certain pesticides, and a few
known carcinogenic chemicals has been
disrupted or halted by strict regulations
and growing public awareness of the
dangers of these substances. In cases
where domestic demand for these
products has not declined as quickly as
has domestic production, some U.S.
companies have produced these
substances abroad, importing them, or
products derived from them, into the
United States. Other U.S. companies
have purchased these substances from
foreign producers.
  Often, however, this has proved to be a
temporary situation, since consumption,
as well as production, of hazardous
substances can be  restricted or banned.
Most  benzidine-based dyes and the
pesticides lindane,  DBCP, and dicofol are
examples of products whose U.S.
imports first rose after regulations and
public concern disrupted U.S. production,
only to decline dramatically when the
uses of these substances were halted or
severely curtailed.

2. In some  basic mineral-processing
industries (for example, copper, zinc, and
lead processing), international dispersion
has occurred  as a result of environmental
problems in combination with other
changing locational incentives (raw
material availability, other nations'
requirements that minerals be processed
in the country where they are mined) and
economic problems (low prices, high
interest rates, recession).

3. Finally, chemical companies may have
shifted production  of a  small number of
chemical intermediates—that is,
chemicals needed for the manufacture of
other products—overseas, in part
because of pollution, but more
significantly because of regulations on
health in the workplace. In effect,
environmental regulations may have
increased, at least slightly, the trend
toward worldwide  purchasing of
intermediate organic chemicals. Whole
industries have not necessarily fled the
United States, but  large U.S. chemical
companies apparently have  been going
abroad to produce or purchase a few
intermediates needed for chemical
production within the United States.
  This appears to have been the case for
butadiene, thiourea, and several dozen
low-volume intermediates in the
benzenoid group. However, assessing
how influential environmental
considerations have become  in any given
instance is difficult  for several reasons:
world trade in intermediate organic
chemicals would have grown rapidly
even without workplace-health and
antipollution regulations; many large
chemical companies have increasingly
sought to build large facilities to supply
their regional or even worldwide demand
for certain intermediates, and a large
percentage of international trade in
intermediates takes place as intra-
company transfers  across borders.
  The most significant aspect of these
findings is that no examples of industrial
flight can be identified among industries
where demand is expanding and U.S.
producers are enjoying technological
superiority. Relocation of an industrial
facility abroad has  been only one of a
number of possible responses for the
high-growth firms as they have faced
growing regulatory costs and
environmental restrictions at  home.
Technological innovation, use of new raw
materials or  substitute products,
reclamation of waste materials, tighter
process and  quality controls,  and other
adaptations generally have proved better
responses than flight for many firms.
  The industries producing polyvinyl
chloride (PVC) and  acrylonitrile are two
notable examples where intense
regulatory pressures and adverse
publicity have not prompted significant
movements by U.S. producers to other
countries. Ultimately, the rapid expansion
of domestic demand for these two
chemicals and the concomitant incentives
to invest in new technological
developments have given these
industries cushions to weather the
onslaught of new regulations and public
  Most industries that have responded  to
environmental regulations  by transferring
production overseas no longer are
dynamic forces within the U.S. economy.
More substitutes for harmful  dyes,
arsenic, highly toxic pesticides, and even
asbestos are being, and will continue to
be,  introduced. In such cases, relief from
the  standards for pollution cleanup,
health in the workplace, and  consumer
safety that are speeding the
obsolescence of hazardous industrial
materials would not just increase worker
and public health hazards.  It would  also
remove an important incentive for
technological progress and would be
counterproductive to the long-term  goal
of strengthening the U.S. industrial  base
through technological innovation.  [J
                                                                                                          EPA JOURNAL

 Is  It  Safe  to  Sell  Banned  Pesticides  Overseas?
 Two  Views
 What happens to pesticides that arc
 banned in the United States?  Some,
 although denied registration, continue
 to be manufactured for export to other
 countries which  often have different
 environmental standards than those of
 the United States.
   EPA devotes particular attention to
 assisting developing nations in making
 informed decisions about the  pesticides
 exported to them. The agency does
 this in several ways. It notifies the
 government of the importing country of
 the first export of an unregistered
 pesticide in any given year. Whenever
 EPA takes  a major regulatory  action,
 such as a cancellation or suspension of
a pesticide's registration,  the agency
notifies all countries worldwide. EPA
also provides technical assistance
through several international
organizations to help other countries
develop pesticide regulations. In
addition, EPA works with the U.S
Agency for International Development
to provide EPA expertise  to projects in
developing countries designed to
improve pesticide use and safety.
   Some unregistered pesticides which
are expo/tec/ return to the U.S. as
residues on imported foods. EPA
protects the American consumer by
setting tolerance levels, or allowable
residues, on a/I foods and has initiated
a policy of revoking tolerances
whenever the agency cancels a
  Is enough being done to ensure
safety in the export of unregistered
pesticides? EPA Journal asked two
authorities to address this issue. Jack
D. Early,  President of the National
Agricultural Chemicals Association,
defends American practices relative to
those of other pesticide-exporting
nations. Edith D. Meacham,
International Pesticide Coordinator for
the National Audubon Society, says that
more could be done to protect buyers
of unregistered pesticides. Their articles
                  by Jack D. Early

     When a farmer in Burma sprays an
     insecticide on his rice, chances are
that the product did not come from the
United States. In fact, U.S. exports of
agrochemicals contribute only 15 percent
to the total amount of agrochemicals
used outside the U.S., most of which go
to countries with established and
experienced regulatory systems for
managing plant protection products.
  What is poorly recognized is that many
chemicals used by farmers in less
developed countries often come from
sources within their own country or
could come from indistinct outside
sources that reportedly do not meet
certain quality standards or health and
safety criteria which are accepted by the
established industry. Developing
countries import mostly the older,
commodity pesticides, that is, those
products that are no  longer protected by
patent. Many of these older compounds
are manufactured very cheaply by some
developing countries for use  locally and
for export to other less developed
  The older compounds include
chlorinated hydrocarbons, such as DDT,
which are no longer manufactured in the
United States. Remember, nearly all uses
of DDT are cancelled in this country.
However, certain nations value these
products even though they are cognizant
of the reasons why they are not
registered for use here. For instance, in
an official statement, the Government of
Burma said: "...in many other countries
the use of chlorinated hydrocarbons is
being restricted because of their
persistent nature. The official position
here  is that these insecticides are
effective, cheap, and, if used  properly,
are no more hazardous than other newer
and more expensive insecticides."
  We should know that in recent years,
field research has shown that insecticides
like DDT, aldrin, and dieldrin, etc., do not
persist beyond one growing season  in
tropical agriculture.
  Ali crop protection chemicals are, to
some degree, toxic and can be hazardous
if not used according to label directions.
Knowing this, responsible companies
take great effort to alert farmers to
product safety via labeling, and most
often train farmers to apply them
properly and safely.
  However, there  are many situations
where a "bootleg" or counterfeit
chemical that has been manufactured or
purchased by an exporter strictly for
opportunistic sales may be imported into
a country. For such products, there are no
health and safety  data; there is no
assurance the product is not
contaminated and unsafe or even  is
efficacious;  there  is no education
program,  and there is  no follow-up to
assure safe  and proper application. This
creates great concern for the American
agrochemical industry.
  In the United States, the manufacturer
of any product that is not registered for
sale in the U.S., but is produced for
export, must, by law, notify the
government of the importing country of
its intent to  ship that product to that
country. The importing country must
then acknowledge to the exporter that it
has received the notification and
attendant chemical information. The
exporting company then notifies EPA that
the acknowledgment  has been received
and the product is shipped. No other
country in the world has such a
requirement. In Burma, for example, or in
any other country, the rice farmer who is
using the  insecticide must depend upon
his government to exercise judgment and

place regulatory constraints on
importations of potentially hazardous
products. The  National Agricultural
Chemicals Association supports the
institution of appropriate regulatory
mechanisms in all countries. Unless
governmental  discretion, based on
correct information, is exercised to
guarantee good quality and well-tested
products at some point in the registration
process, then it is easy to see how poor
quality, untested, and potentially
dangerous products can find their way
down to the rice paddy. The farmer who
desperately  needs pest control to make a
living is not  in a position to make such a
  But despite proper precautions, there
are some misused agricultural chemicals.
U.S. agricultural chemical companies are
working hard to eliminate or at least
significantly reduce  misuse in developing
  As a case in point, the Inter-American
Institute for  Cooperation on Agriculture
of the Organization of American States
invited the pesticide manufacturers'
international association to present its
position on registration requirements and
labeling to government authorities. Four
regional registration harmonization
consultations encompassing all countries
of Latin America and the Caribbean  were
held. As a result, labeling requirements
will require a uniform format to include
additional  human and environmental
safety and disposal information where
it was lacking. An international color coded
band,  identifying the toxicity category of
the product, is added to the label. Users

 anywhere can visibly determine, by the
 color band, the toxicity level which, on a
 relative scale, indicates the possible
 severity of effect should exposure occur.
 The initiative in this  hemispheric effort
 demonstrates that leadership is being
 provided by established industry as well
 as by the governments of Latin America
 and the Caribbean. This effort sets an
 example for the rest of the world  to
  The industry believes that sovereign
 governments must make their own
 decisions according  to their local
 agricultural needs  and environmental
 situations.  It further  believes that
 governments should be provided  with
 whatever information they need to make
 the best decision for their local
 conditions and circumstances. Regulatory
 requirements that insist on making
 available only high quality, well-tested,
 and appropriately packaged and labeled
 products to farmers are a must.
   The United States pesticide industry
 does and will continue to support
 responsible efforts to assure that its
 products are used safely. The farmer
 deserves it.
   Pesticides are and will continue to be
 essential in developing countries if
 agricultural production is to be
 maintained and increased in the future. A
 report of the Food  and Agriculture
 Organization {FAO) predicts that the
 ranks of the underfed will increase from
 435 million in 1980 to  550 million  in 2000.
 "Clearly, there must be greater progress
 in both food production and distribution
 than that achieved to date," says Mark
 Lynch, the Irish official who wrote the
 FAO report. At the  same time, safe,
 effective chemicals must  be made
 available for agriculture. All countries
 must mandate that only high  quality and
 safety-tested products be provided to
 their farmers. Further, any imported
 product  that does not  meet these
 standards should never be  taken off the
 dock. Farmers deserve  this protection.
 Our American industry will do its best to
 see that its  products meet the test of
 time. D
            by Edith D. Meacham

    Developed for military purposes during
    World War II, pesticides became a
major factor in world agriculture in the
early 1950s. In the  United States,
chemical control of insects meshed
perfectly with post-war economic and
technological advances  and rapidly
became an important part of the U.S.
food production  system. Farmers began
relying more and more  on chemical
control because  it provided a  cheaper
means of reducing crop losses to pests.
Such reductions  meant that the farmer
could receive more credit, and could
greatly expand his operation.
  However, as pesticide use increased,
problems developed. Insects became
resistant to insecticides. Secondary pests
became major pests. Pesticides were
found to cause health and environmental
problems. In  response to these and other
environmental problems, EPA was
created  in 1970.  In  1972, the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide
Act gave EPA a mandate to regulate

  Despite this strengthened regulatory
authority and increased public
awareness, the  use of pesticides
increased every year until 1981. Now, in
response to a slowing of anticipated
expansion and  growth  potential, the
chemical industry is seeking alternative
markets, one of which  is the export
  Post-war use  of chemicals to control
pests was hailed as an important
breakthrough in the industrial world,  but
in developing nations the effects were
even more profound. These countries
rely on their agricultural output to feed
their people and to establish a position in
world trade. For them,  pesticides
promised substantially higher yields in
export and food crops. Pesticides are
also  used to control disease-carrying
pests, thus promising to free millions of
people from the threat of diseases  such
as malaria, yellow fever,  and sleeping
  Pesticides initially controlled pests and
increased yields. However, the same
problems which developed in industrial
countries, such  as  resistance, secondary
pest  resurgence, and health and
environmental effects, also surfaced in
developing nations. Many of these
countries lack the scientific, institutional,
                                                                                                             EPA JOURNAL

and financial capabilities to regulate the
use of chemicals. Proper precautions in
use, application, and storage are seldom
taken, resulting in poisonings,  resistant
pests, and resurgent secondary pests.
The use of broad spectrum insecticides in
the Sudan Gezira demonstrates many of
the problems that can result from
improper pesticide use.
  The Sudan is the largest nation in
Africa. Most of its people live in rural
areas and practice subsistence
agriculture. The only commercial
agriculture in the country takes place in
the fertile Gezira plain. This area has long
been the mainstay of the Sudanese
economy because of the huge  amounts
of cotton produced there yearly:  45
percent  of total world production of extra
long staple cotton in the early  1970s. The
banking system is geared primarily to
financing of foreign trade in cotton; and
the cotton crop, which is almost the sole
contributor to the country's foreign
exchange, allows much needed manufac-
tured goods to be imported. A disaster  for
the cotton industry is a disaster for the
government, which suffers from a
chronically unfavorable balance of trade
and a growing  national debt.
  In the early 1950s,  DDT was  used in the
Gezira to control a longtime pest, the
cotton jassid. Control of this pest and the
use of fertilizers substantially increased
yields, but by the 1960-61  season neither
DDT nor endrin, another pesticide, was
effective against the  jassid. Even worse,
the cotton whitefly, a relatively
unimportant pest, suddenly became a
major problem. Before the use of
broad-spectrum insecticides, the
whitefly's only significance was its
transmission of leaf  curl virus, a disease
that was controlled by cultural and
sanitary practices. However, resistance to
various insecticides  and the elimination
of natural enemies led to greatly
increased whitefly populations. These
pests now cause extensive feeding
damage and can ruin a cotton cup with
honey dew  deposits. Since DDT was
ineffective against the whitefly as well as
the jassid, a new chemical, dimethoate,
was adopted widely. The situation was
further  complicated  in 1963 by severe
eruptions of the American bollworm
which was resistant  to dimethoate.
   These massive infestations of resistant
and resurgent pests  brought the number
of insecticide sprays from one in 1960-61
to twelve in 1981. Production costs,
aggravated  by the oil crisis in the early
1970s, rose  600 percent between 1972
and 1981. The culmination of these
events came in 1981 when control of the
whitefly completely failed. The bill for
pesticide imports was the highest ever,
yields plummeted, and the cost of
controlling pests consumed 85 percent of
cotton revenues. For a country that relies
almost totally on one crop for its foreign
exchange, as many developing nations
do, such situations can spell economic
  But the Gezira was not just in trouble
economically. Numerous applications of
insecticides had also taken their toll on
the environment. High levels of DDT
were discovered in fish, birds, and
human milk. Mosquitos  were becoming
increasingly resistant to the insecticides
that previously  had kept them under
control. Biological predators that had fed
on some of the pests were decreasing in
numbers, if not vanishing entirely.
Poisoned fish, birds, and even farm
animals became a familiar sight. Finally,
in  1981, actions began to reverse the
situation and, in effect, to "rescue" the
Gezira from  its  pesticide-caused
problems. DDT was banned, and with  the
help of the Food and Agriculture.
Organization of the United Nations, the
Sudan has begun a long-range program
of integrated pest management for the
Gezira. A balance will be sought between
using natural pest-eating predators
and  non-harmful pesticides to bring back
the area's agricultural economy.
  The story of the  Gezira is not an
isolated incident. Similar problems have
occurred, and are occurring, in a number
of other countries that do not have the
available expertise and the ability to
properly regulate the use of imported
  Attempts to assess and to act on the
respective  responsibilities of importing
and  exporting countries and the pesticide
industry have progressed fitfully. A
successful  1975 lawsuit against the
Agency for International  Development
(AID) marked one of the first efforts to
acknowledge government responsibility
for hazardous exports. AID, whose
pesticide exports were valued at $17.5
million between 1969 and 1974 and
included many banned, restricted, or
never-registered products, agreed to
develop a generic Environmental Impact
Statement for its programs involving
pesticide use. Environmental
considerations have been a component
of AID pest management programs ever
since. In addition, the World Bank
recently pledged not to finance projects
that would severely damage the
  In 1978, Congress addressed the
hazardous  exports issue  in  amendments
to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and
Rodenticide Act. The amendments
require that the purchasers of such
products sign a statement
acknowledging their awareness that the
product is not registered for use in the
United States. EPA then notifies the
government of the importing country that
unregistered products are  being shipped.
However, the timing of the notification
scheme often does not permit the
appropriate official of the importing
country to reject the shipment  if he
wishes, since shipments often arrive long
before the information  is in his hands.
EPA also transmits information about
cancellations and suspensions  to foreign
governments and appropriate
international organizations.
  The United Nations and  the Food  and
Agriculture Organization have both made
considerable efforts to  solve the
problems of hazardous exports. In 1983,
the U.N. General Assembly
overwhelmingly passed Resolution
37 137 which calls for stringent
restrictions on the export of banned or
severely restricted products and for the
development of an easily understandable
list of these products. The  United States
was the only nation to  oppose  the
  The Food and Agriculture Organization
has recently issued a draft Code of
Conduct on the Distribution and Trade of
Pesticides.  In its present form, the Code
would establish a system of informed
consent for countries importing banned
or restricted products. The Code also sets
up standards for labeling,  advertising,
safe use, and regulatory activities. In
general, it offers the opportunity to set  a
worldwide  minimum standard for
importing and exporting countries and
for the pesticide industry.
  Implementation and enforcement  of
the FAO Code in the years ahead will be
crucial to many countries.  It is estimated
that pesticide use in developing countries
will quadruple in the next  two decades.
The establishment and  maintenance of
adequate controls over their use will
become increasingly critical as chemical
companies search for more and more
new markets and developing nations
struggling to increase their own export
trade  and to feed their  ever-increasing
populations accept the  offers of "quick
fix" solutions. While such  solutions  offer
the temptation of immediate profits to
the exporters and high  yields to the
importers, they will ultimately sacrifice
both long-term economic gains and
environmental and human health for the
developing countries involved.
  To avoid such dire results, all
governments must work with each other
and the chemical industry  to ensure that
an increase in pesticide use does not
create an explosion  of harmful problems.

EPA  and  China  Seek
Environmental  Answers  Together    bY Gary
   Halfway around the world from their
   normal business environment and
trappings, an EPA senior management
team headed by then-Deputy
Administrator Al Aim met in mainland
China last year  with their counterparts in
the People's Republic of China's
Environmental  Protection Bureau. The
Bureau is in the Ministry of Urban and
Rural Construction and  Environmental
Protection (MURCEP for short).
  The group went to China last
September to review the previous five
years of cooperative efforts under the
Environmental  Protection Protocol
between the United States and the
People's Republic of China (PRO and to
look at the possibilities  of broadening the
working  relationship between
environmental  research scientists from
both nations. The nine-person U.S.
delegation also included EPA Associate
Administrator Fitzhugh  Green, Assistant
Administrators  Bernard Goldstein and
Milton Russell;  Erich Bretthauer, director
of EPA's Office  of Environmental
Processes Research; Chieh Wu, a
Chinese-American engineer from
Bretthauer's office; myself; a
representative of the National Council for
U.S.-China Trade; and a staff counsel to
the House Energy and Commerce
Committee in the U.S. Congress.
  One of 21 cooperative science and
technology programs operating between
China and the U.S., the Environmental
Protection Protocol dates from February
1980. Under its three substantive
components, the Protocol provides for
scientific exchange in various areas of
health effects, control technology, and
processes effects research.
  The Aim delegation paved the way for
continuation of U.S.-Chinese cooperation
in environmental protection in the years
to come. In a brief ceremony in the EPA
Administrator's office on November 29,
1984, William Ruckelshaus and  Chinese
Ambassador Zhang Wenjin signed and
exchanged documents extending the
U.S.-PRC Environmental Protection
Protocol for a second five-year term,
effective February 1985. Ruckelshaus
and Ambassador Zhang spoke highly of
the progress the two sides had made in
working together and of the prospects
for future joint  research.

Lung Cancer Study

The first two-year period of EPA's
cooperative relationship with China was
a time of getting acquainted and defining
mutual interests. The first significant joint
effort began in September 1982. Former
director of the EPA Office of Health
Research, Dr. Roger Cortesi, and two
scientists from the agency's Health
Effects Research Laboratory at Research
Triangle Park (RTP), Drs. Robert
Chapman and Judy Mumford, visited the
Chinese capital city to finalize the scope
and design of an interdisciplinary study
of the influence of domestic fuel
combustion on the development of lung
cancer. The study site, a remote county
in southwestern China, has one of the
highest lung cancer mortality rates in the
country. Curiously, the incidence of the
disease among women is as high as
among men, though very few women  in
the area (and throughout China) smoke.
EPA scientists from RTP returned  to
China in November 1983 to assist in
setting up analytical and sampling
equipment previously shipped to China
and in collecting coal, wood, and
particulate samples on-site.  Five Chinese
specialists spent two months in the
U.S. last summer to assist in analyzing
the samples and to help plan the
epidemiological portion of the study.
Their colleagues from RTP will return to
China  later this year.
  The lung cancer study is in many ways
a model of mutually beneficial bilateral
cooperation. The Chinese are exposed to
sophisticated technical know-how,  obtain
a limited amount of advanced hardware,
and can expect to derive a scientifically
sound response to an urgent public
health problem. EPA's health research
effort, in turn, gains access to a large,
stable population exposed to a limited
range  of risk factors of great interest. The
Chinese will perform the extended
sampling and  monitoring work, which is
inherently long-term and otherwise quite
expensive. Also, this project is expected
to generate new, improved bioassay and
sampling methods which may prove
quite valuable to subsequent research in
both countries.
  While cooperation on this
environmental health problem has
proceeded apace, joint progress in  the
area of pollution control technology has
proven elusive. Even in this  capital-
intensive sector of environmental
research and development, however, the
potential for meaningful cooperation
exists. Accordingly, last September in
China, the EPA delegation advanced new
proposals, including the full-scale testing
of an innovative pollution control device
on an  uncontrolled facility in China, and
a joint field demonstration of deep mine
storage of hazardous waste. It remains
for the two sides to define a mutually
beneficial program by correspondence.
  The third area of Sino-American
environmental cooperation — processes
and effects research—holds  perhaps the
greatest  potential for both sides. Late in
1983, a delegation of eight Chinese
scientists and  administrators visited
several EPA Office of Research and
Development  labs and developed
preliminary cooperative programs in
several project areas. Field work in the
first of these, a tracer study  of
medium-range atmospheric  transport and
dispersion, began in the summer and fall
of 1984.  Active preparations are
proceeding for a joint field and
laboratory study of the conversion  of
sulfur dioxide to sulfate, with special
                                                                                                       EPA JOURNAL


attention to the influence of aerosols.
Both efforts are managed on the U.S.
side by Dr. William Wilson  of EPA's
Atmospheric  Sciences Research
Laboratory at RTP. The agency's
Environmental Research Laboratory in
Athens, Ga., recently sent director Dr.
Rosemarie Russo and branch chief
George Baughman to finalize plans for
joint studies on modeling of water
pollution fate and transport. Similar
planning meetings are scheduled in the
near future on topics of aquatic
toxicology and pollution mechanisms in
soil and ground water, involving the EPA
labs in Duluth, Minn., and Ada, Okla.,
  U.S.-Chinese cooperation in
environmental processes and effects
research offers EPA an excellent
opportunity to field test and validate
models on which some agency standards
will be based. At the same  time, the
Chinese will have an opportunity to
develop a modeling capability to meet
their own pressing needs.

Acid Rain

Anticipating continued  heavy reliance on
high-sulfur coal in the coming years of
economic growth, environmental
researchers in China  have become quite
concerned with the acid rain problem. A
team of Chinese specialists spent three
weeks in the  U.S. last fall discussing acid
deposition research and regulatory issues
with specialists in universities  and
government agencies around the
country. These discussions  will be
continued through correspondence as
both sides work toward some  mutually
viable form of cooperation  on  this
pressing global problem. One  promising
avenue is the possibility of  China joining
the U.S.-sponsored Global  Trends
Network for acid deposition monitoring.
EPA and the National Oceanic  and
Atmospheric  Administration would
provide the hardware and quality
assurance guidelines for one or possibly
two monitoring stations; the Chinese
would provide vital additional  data points
on global acid deposition even as they
enhance their own monitoring and
quality assurance capabilities.
  As a developing country  embarked on
an ambitious program of accelerated
economic growth through economic
decentralization, China is faced with the
problem of obtaining maximum
environmental quality at minimum cost.
At the September meeting  in China, the
U.S. delegation proposed an exchange  of
information and experience in
incorporating pollution control
considerations into the early planning of
major energy, industrial, and  municipal
construction projects. American
engineering firms with experience and
expertise in this area would supply the
substantive contribution from the U.S.
side. Besides enhancing commercial
opportunities, this initiative would
convey to the Chinese the public private
sector partnership which has  proven  so
important to this country's environmental
well-being. The Chinese agreed to the
proposal in principle,  but also suggested
cooperation in more general areas of
environmental management such as
standard setting, cost-benefit  analysis,
and compliance incentives. Negotiations
are continuing as the  two  sides work
toward a package which will incorporate
both site-specific and  national
environmental management
  Environmental quality in China is a
complex, multi-faceted topic that eludes
easy generalization. Through  extensive
structural  reform of the economy, China's
leadership aims to quadruple agricultural
and industrial production by the year
2000. The implications of such a program
for China's environment, already
overburdened with decades of neglect,
are not lost on the nation's
environmental managers . As a  matter of
national policy, the People's Republic of
China has declared its intention to
control emissions in the design phase of
new  construction, rather than clean up
pollution after the fact. But the increasing
decentralization of economic
decision-making, together  with the
guiding  principle that  he who pollutes is
also  reponsible for treatment, makes  this
goal  problematic at best. Delegation
member David Klaus, staff counsel for
the House Energy and Commerce
Committee, observed:
   The Chinese are at the beginning of
   working out whether day-to-day
   environmental protection decisions will
   be made at a local or national level... The
   Chinese are a/so facing directly the
   question of how much environmental
   protection they can afford if that goal
   conflicts  with economic development.
   Pending a clear resolution of these
   issues, the Chinese are emphasizing that
   which can be agreed upon: a
   commitment to research.
  Here, too, China has its work cut out
for it. The Cultural Revolution left  a
gaping demographic hole where the
country's middle-aged scientific
intelligentsia should be. Replacing this
missing generation  of environmental
scientists and engineers will be a  long-
term effort. In institutes and universities
around the country, China has made a
good start.  In virtually every location
visited last  September, the  U.S.
delegation encountered talented
scientists and technicians working
with sophisticated equipment. No less
striking was the depth of professional
commitment in a field which  is, for
China, relatively new. Assistant
Administrator Goldstein noted:

   Talking to the Chinese scientists in their
   laboratories left me with  the same
   impression I get when visiting EPA labs.
   There's a great consciousness of
   purpose, a genuine commitment to
   achieving and maintaining environmental
   The challenge to  both sides in the
years ahead is to turn this shared
commitment to mutual advantage in a
way which combines good science
with good will. D

A  Weather  Report
for  the  Future
by Walter 0. Roberts
"The summer of the year 1783 was an
amazing and portentous one, and full of
horrible phenomena; for besides the
alarming meteors and tremendous
thunderstorms that affrighted and
distressed the different counties of this
kingdom,  the peculiar haze, or smoky
fog,  that prevailed for many weeks in
this island, and in every part of Europe,
and even  beyond its  limits, was a most
extraordinary appearance,  unlike
anything known  within the memory of
man....The sun, at noon, 'ooked as
blank as a clouded moon,  and shed a
rust-coloured ferruginous light on the
        (Diary of Vicar Gilbert White of
        Selborne,  England)
   Benjamin Franklin identified the cause
   of the strange hazes and dry fog that
Vicar White described as ejecta from the
huge volcanic eruption of Laki, Iceland,
which began on June 8, 1783. The
ensuing heat, drought, and
famine—plausible consequences of the
eruption—killed over half of Iceland's
livestock. The pastures withered, and a
fourth of the population perished. The
following winter was the coldest on
record in  the eastern United States, and
it was also unusually cold in Europe.
  Laki was small, however, compared  to
the Mount Tambora eruption of April 10-
11, 1815,  on the island of Sumbawa in
Indonesia. Over 88,000 people died from
the eruption and its ashfall. The
explosion was heard 1,500 miles away.
Darkness extended for two days to a
distance of nearly 400 miles. A ruddy
sun, orange sunsets, and dry fogs
prevailed for more than a year in
London, New York, and throughout the
northern hemisphere. The year 1816
became known in Europe and North
America as "the year without a
summer," because of the hemispheric
cooling that most climatologists attribute
to the volcano.
  By far the best studied of the great
volcanic eruptions is the blast of
El Chichon in Mexico on March 28 and
April 4, 1982. Modern instruments such
as laser scanners, aircraft samplers, and
satellite detectors were brought to bear.
The National Center for Atmospheric
Research made sample-gathering flights
from the  southern hemisphere to the
Arctic Circle. We know that huge
amounts  of dust and gas were blown
into the stratosphere. There, at altitudes
near 25 kilometers, sulfur dioxide is
converted by the sun's light into
light-scattering particles. At an
observatory in Hawaii, the direct solar
beam was reduced by 25 percent in the
months after El Chichon and, even after
the diffusely scattered light was added
back, the net reduction of incoming
sunlight was about five  percent.
  The El Chichon volcano had far bigger
effects than the eruption of Mount Saint
Helens in Washington State in March
1980, because the Mexican volcano
spewed its debris nearly straight up, well
into the stratosphere, while Mount Saint
Helens' effects were confined mostly to
the lower atmosphere,
  The case is strong  that volcanoes
decrease the world's temperature if
they throw enough matter,  especially
sulfur dioxide gas, into the
stratosphere. The biggest ones
produce coolings in mid-latitudes of
more than one degree Celsius (C), and
the light veiling effects last up to three
years. A TC global cooling  means a
shortening of the growing season in
the U.S. corn belt by about 10 days,
and a loss of production of perhaps
five percent.
  Volcanoes are one of several causes of
climate change, but they are not the
greatest.  Nature's unexplained short-term
climate fluctuations are a bigger factor in
human affairs. We are still far short of
real skill at forecasting these climate

Climate  and the Causes of Its
Climate, first of all, is usually defined as
the expected weather, including its
expected variations, for a particular place
and period of time. The expected value is
traditionally calculated from the average
values of the different weather
parameters in the region over some
specified number of years. The climatic
"normal" is usually defined as the
average over the last 20 years for the
time and place.
  We speak of the warm, dry weather of
the winter  of 1976-77 in the West by
comparison with its preceding  averages.
The Corn Belt weather in the summers of
the 1940s was termed warm, favorable,
and steady because the weather was
better in these regards than the expected
climate at that time. Similarly, December
1983 in North America was colder than
the climatic expectation, and October
1984 was a wet  month in Colorado,
compared  to what we normally get.
  The most notable fact about  weather
and climate, to my mind, is the large size
of the changes that occur on all scales of
time and space. For example, 18,000
years ago we had a severe ice  age in the
northern hemisphere, with large glaciers
extending well down below the Canadian
border. In general, the period from 4,000
to 8,000 years ago, known as the
"altithermal," had  a relatively warm
climate, compared to the  preceding or
following millennia. We are all familiar,
of course,  with individual cold  winters or
wet periods.
  Changes of climate are clearly the
largest single cause of fluctuation  in
agricultural productivity both in
industrialized and developing countries.
Energy usage, transportation, fisheries,
water power, recreation, public health —all
these sectors and more—are also
sensitive to climate. The recent
disastrous food crisis in Ethiopia and
other parts of sub-Saharan Africa is but
one of many tragedies triggered by
  Perhaps  the most drastic U.S. climate
anomaly since the American Revolution
was the Dust Bowl of 1934-35 in the
Great Plains. The area  embraced 97
million acres of southeastern Colorado,
western Kansas, northern New Mexico,
and the Texas and Oklahoma
Panhandles.  Many farms were  engulfed
in drifting  dust,  as the  precious soil of
their fields blew all the way to  the
                                                                                                        EPA JOURNAL


                                                  ST.  '
Atlantic. The out-migration of people
from the region was one of the largest in
world history. The Dust Bowl was,
however, but one of many dry spells the
West has suffered.
  There is some evidence that the
droughts of this region tend to recur
approximately every 22 years, even
though  there are droughts at other times.
The recurrence pattern occurred, for
example, in the decades of 1890, 1910,
1930, 1950, and 1970. This coincides, for
totally unknown reasons, with the
alternate minimums of the sunspot cycle.
The sun's emissions probably vary with
this period, and thus influence the
  Fluctuation in the ocean surface
temperature is another factor in climate.
The most spectacular recent example is
the extremely large "El Nino-Southern
Oscillation"  that occurred  in 1982-83. The
Western Pacific near the Equator warmed
up  by 6°C at maximum compared to
normal, as a warm coastal current called
the El Nino disrupted the food supply for
fish. The anchovetta crop, a major source
of protein for Peru, was nearly destroyed.
Millions of birds died as their food
supply disappeared.  Climate was
disrupted in South America, with rains  in
normally dry zones, and drought in
normally wet regions. Perhaps even the
Australian, North American, and African
climate upsets were related. To discover
the ultimate cause of this irregularly
recurring phenomenon is one of the
great challenges now facing atmospheric
and oceanic scientists.
  Still another source of climate
fluctuation is alteration of the amount of
sunlight reflected into space by the
planet, the "albedo" of the  planet. Clouds
are a major factor in determining albedo,
and their short- and long-term
fluctuations are poorly  understood.
Likewise, changes in snow and  ice cover
can influence weather and climate. It is
even  probable that altered land use
patterns or urban growth can  change
weather and climate. On geologic time
scales, changes in mountain height or
ocean area can also be significant.

Mankind Comes Center Stage
The prodigious growth of energy
consumption, most of it provided by
fossil fuels, is probably the  main
manmade climate modifier  through
action of the now familiar "greenhouse
effect."  Carbon dioxide is increasing in
the atmosphere and is a potent
"greenhouse  gas." To this must now be
added the other greenhouse gases, more
than a dozen  in number, with  freons and
methane high on the list. All the
greenhouse gases come from expanding
human activity, though there are lots of
unsolved questions about exactly how
and why they are increasing at their
observed rates. The expected climatic
effects of the greenhouse effect are large.
It is likely that some regions will benefit
from the warming, but the overall
dislocations, on balance, will probably do
more harm than good.
  To put things in perspective, very
big volcanic eruptions can probably, if
their debris reaches the stratosphere
in  abundance, reduce  global
temperatures by 1.5 C at the most,
with  effects lasting up to three years.
The greenhouse effect is expected to
raise global temperatures 4 to 6 C by
the middle of the next century, and
the effects are predicted to last for
hundreds of years.
  The ultimate human insult to climate,
however, would be a large scale nuclear
war. Though much more research is
needed, it appears that its impacts would
dwarf not only the effects of natural
volcanic eruptions, but even the largest
imaginable greenhouse effect,  it delivers
its jolt in days, and leaves little human
capacity to adjust. The vast fires likely
from a large nuclear holocaust, if it
occurred in the northern hemisphere
summer, might trigger a year-long
nuclear winter, cool huge regions of the
earth below freezing, bring a total end to
a large part of agricultural production for
a year—and, at the extreme, eradicate a
major fraction of humanity.
  Barring such catastrophic human
intervention, however, the global
greenhouse effect is enough, in all
likelihood, to bring us a weather regime
unlike anything which has prevailed since
the origin of mankind. The transition will
be slow—scarcely perceptible in a
decade—but the changes will  last for
centuries. It is likely that in the time scale
of dozens of millennia the earth will cool.
But on the scale of a half century or so,
far more important to  human societies,
the odds are all on the side of warming.
It is not a moment too soon for those
who  will be most affected to begin
designing strategies to overcome the
adversities of the warming, and to
capitalize on the benefits.

Why   Every  Species  Counts
by Peter H. Raven
     With each passing year, irreversible
     damage is being done to the
world's stock of plants, animals, and
microorganisms, consequently limiting
the range of possibilities available for the
betterment of our own condition. Our
general failure to recognize the
dimensions of this problem, if continued,
is likely to make it even more serious in
the near future.
   Roughly three million kinds of plants,
animals, and microorganisms occur in
the tropics, at least twice as many as  in
the much larger temperate regions of the
world. Of these, only-about 500,000 have
yet been given a scientific name. For the
small minority that we have catalogued,
we have only obtained detailed
information on about one in a hundred!
   The U.S. National Research Council
Committee on Research Priorities in
Tropical Biology, which reported its
findings in 1980,  estimated that there
were probably no more than 1,500
trained scientists to deal with the
problem of finding the remaining
organisms. If all of these scientists were
fully supported and could devote their
entire lives to the process, they would be
able to add only a small percentage to
the total that is known. Even if time were
not a limiting factor, most tropical
organisms stil! would remain completely
unknown for decades or centuries with
the existing level of effort.
   Unfortunately, we do not have decades
or centuries to complete the process.  The
present human population of some 4.8
billion people is well over twice what it
was at the end of World War II, and is
climbing rapidly. The Population
Reference Bureau has estimated that 15
years from now, at the end of the
century, there will be more than six billion
people. More than 80 percent of this
                 ' tin; Mi

 with I1
                  'Hindi Con
growth will occur in the tropics, where
roughly half of the people in the world
live at present. Anywhere from 40 to 50
percent of the people who live in tropical
countries are 15 years of age or less, and
have not yet reached  childbearing age.
For this reason, the level of population in
these countries cannot attain stability for
two or  three generations, even if present
policies that attempt to limit population
growth are pursued successfully for that
whole period.
  By World Bank estimates,  well over a
third of the people in the tropics are
living in absolute poverty, at least half of
them malnourished. It is these rapidly
growing numbers of rural poor, who
have no other options available to them,
that constitute the principal force in
devastating the environment of their
countries.  For example, the Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations (FAO) has estimated that tropical
evergreen forests are being cut at a rate
that would lead to their complete
removal in 90 years. This estimate,
however, is unrealistically optimistic,
because it does not take into account the
greatly increased effects of a rapidly
growing population in the future. Most of
the lands that are being cleared are
practically useless, at our present level  of
knowledge and economic strength, for
sustained  cultivation.
  With the destruction of the tropical
forests will come the extinction of many
of the kinds of organisms that live in
them, most of which  will never have
been discovered  before they are lost. We
can estimate the magnitude of this loss
indirectly by considering in detail what is
happening in  a few selected regions.  In
Madagascar, an island in the western
Indian  Ocean  about twice the size of
Arizona, scarcely five percent of the
vegetation  remains in a natural condition.
Even smaller amounts of natural
vegetation  remain in  western Ecuador, a
region  that was completely forested a
few decades ago, or in the Atlantic
forests of Brazil. By extrapolation, one
may estimate that something on the
order of 200,000 species of organisms
originally occurred in each of these
areas, and that from a third (western
Ecuador) to two-thirds (Madagascar) of
these organisms occur nowhere else.
Taken together, these three tropical
regions alone are estimated to contain
anywhere from 300,000 to 500,000
species of organisms that don't occur
elsewhere. All of these species,
approximately  10 percent of the total
found on earth, are surviving in from one
to five percent of the original forest, and
only about a sixth of them have yet been
  When natural forest is reduced to
remnant  patches, the surviving  species
exist only in small numbers, and they are
especially susceptible to loss for that
reason alone. For example, on Barro
Colorado Island—an island of six square
miles formed by the flooding of the
Panama Canal from  1911 to 1914,
separated from source areas on the
mainland by a gap of about 640 feet, and
protected continuously as a
sanctuary—over a quarter of the 208
species of land birds present  initially
have disappeared over the last 60 years.
  Furthermore, most kinds of tropical
organisms have extremely narrow
ecological requirements, and  these
requirements obviously are much less
likely to be met in smalf forest patches
than in larger ones.  For all of these
reasons,  one can expect the loss of
species to be rapid over the next few
decades in Madagascar, western
Ecuador, the Atlantic forests of  Brazil,
and in all other parts of the tropics
outside of the main  forest blocks of the
western Amazon and the Zaire Basin,
forested areas that might persist well into
the twenty-first century.
  Because of our limited knowledge, it
has not been possible to arrive  at
accurate  estimates of the rate of
extinction, but at least several hundred
thousand species are likely to be lost
during the next few  decades, during our
lives and those of  our children.  Such a
rate of extinction has not occurred since
the end of the Cretaceous Period,  65
million years ago,  when the dinosaurs
and many of the other kinds of
organisms associated with them
                                                                                                          EPA JOURNAL


disappeared forever. We are, therefore,
facing an event of global  importance, and
must be wary of ill-advised efforts to
minimize its importance by those who
are ignorant of the facts and wish to
believe in a happier, if fanciful, scenario.
  The importance of this  loss in limiting
human possibilities can only be outlined
briefly here. Of the estimated 240,000
kinds of plants, for example, only a  few
thousand have ever  been grown
commercially; a few hundred are
cultivated now; and only  a handful
contribute more than 80 percent  of the
world's food supply. Even for these, the
genetic diversity is being  eroded
seriously, and their wild relatives are
being lost rapidly. Most plants have
never been studied in any detail, and we
have no idea whether they would provide
anything of use to a modern industrial
society.  Despite this neglect, many useful
products have been discovered recently.
As examples, the periwinkle, native only
to Madagascar, has yielded drugs that
are highly effective  in the treatment of
Hodgkin's disease; Cyclosporine,
developed during the last few years from
a soil fungus that was tested by chance,
has greatly enhanced the possible range
of organ transplants; and the oil palm
has been developed into a
multibillion-dollar tropical crop during
the present century.
  These are just examples,  but they
surely indicate, on economic grounds
alone, why we should not passively
tolerate the loss of several hundred
thousand kinds of plants, animals, and
microorganisms over the next few
decades without even attempting to find
them. We should be working
cooperatively to develop biological
surveys of all tropical regions and
computerizing the data obtained as a
base for our subsequent action. We
should be training additional biologists.
both in the tropical countries themselves
and in the developed countries, and
devoting significant sums annually to the
exploration of tropical regions. We
should be screening the plants, animals,
and microorganisms of the  tropics
actively for possible usefulness to us,
and bringing  them into domestication
when such uses are found.  We should
also be setting aside reserves of various
sizes in connection with our development
projects, reserves carefully designed to
preserve a maximum number of kinds of
  Only by taking these steps, and  others
related to them, can we avert the
extinction of a significant percentage of
the plants, animals, and microorganisms
that now exist on earth, contribute to the
stability of the rapidly growing human
populations of the tropics, and preserve
our human options for  the future in a
responsible way. D

Environmental  Issues
Facing  the  99th  Congress
by Lloyd  Bentsen
 The EPA Journal asked U.S. Senator
 UoydBentsen,D-Tex.,  for his
 views on the environmental policy
 issues facing the 99th Congress.
 Senator Bentsen recently became the
 new ranking minority member of the
 Senate Committee on Environment and
 Public Works,  a key environmental
 position on Capitol Hill.
  Senator Bentsen first came to the
 Senate in 1971 after 16 years in
 business in Houston. He was
 re-elected to a third term in 1982. In
 addition to the Environment and Public
 Works Committee, he serves on the
 Senate Finance Committee, the Senate
 Intelligence Committee, and the Joint
 Committees on Economics and
  In private life, Bentsen and his  wife
 B.A. have three children. The Senator
 was born in  1921 in Mission, Tex,
 and holds a J.D.  from the University of
 Texas Law School. He served during
 World War II as a much-decorated
 bomber pilot, flying 50 missions over
 Europe. He served three terms in  the
 House of Representatives between
 1948 and 1954, declining to seek
 re-election after the third term.
  Senator Bentsen explains his views
 in the following article:
A    fair and sound environmental policy
    is a critical national goal that can only
be achieved by correcting the mistakes of
the past and adopting a new, dedicated
outlook for the future.
  Over the past few years, environmental
policy has unfortunately—for ail of
us—lost the public trust that is the basis
of any effective public effort.
  When the public loses faith in its
government, in its protective agencies, it
will resist with great intensity any action
that appears based on inadequate review
or faulty,  confusing regulations. It will
seek whatever recourse is
available—including the courts and
Congress—and the atmosphere for the
recovery of this public trust becomes
even more clouded.
  This is where we find ourselves at the
beginning of the 99th Congress—
environmental policy has  stagnated,
environmental protection  is questioned,
and industrial  development has been
severely hampered by conflicting and
uncertain signals from Washington.
  At the forefront of this diiemma is
EPA. Although questions and complaints
over EPA's management and intent have
in fact resulted in changes at the agency,
these came only after public trust in
EPA had been depleted. In the highly
polarized  arena of environmental policy,
no decision or regulation  proposed by
EPA will go unchallenged until the
agency has regained its reputation for
fairness and efficiency. EPA  is making
efforts to  recover, but this will take time,
and there is little of that precious
commodity to waste.
  Meanwhile,  there is a clear risk that
environmental policy will  be immobilized.
Over the past several years most of the
major environmental funding
authorizations have expired. While this
has not limited the ability of laws to be
enforced or regulations  to be developed
or modified, it certainly  reflects the
difficulties facing Congress in attempting
to reach decisions on how to improve
environmental policy.
  Much of this is due to the fact that
questions regarding the effectiveness of
EPA to carry out the mandates of
environmental law have limited the
ability of Congress to enact needed
revisions. The extent of the delegation of
authority to the judgment of the EPA
Administrator  has become a

time-consuming issue, and all too often
the attention of Congress must be
directed to oversight of EPA activities.
  Quite frankly, whenever Congress is
devoting its time and energies to
rewriting regulations, it is a sure sign
that the regulatory process is failing. This
type of serious problem normally stems
from the misuse of delegated authority,
either the extension of authority beyond
Congressional intent, or an obvious
failure of public support for the
regulatory effort. In this important case,
the issue is the loss of public trust.
  Compounding this problem is the open
and expanding polarization of interest
groups. From a national standpoint, the
environment has been, and largely
continues to  be, a bipartisan issue with
broad public support, but this uniformity
of opinion is not the case among the
interest groups who lobby on
environmental issues.
  In the  1970s these groups would differ
but ultimately move toward the
agreement that is essential to legislation.
This is how great progress was made.
Now, under this often bitter polarization,
any attempt to find the middle ground
may be viewed as outright betrayal by
one or more advocacy positions.
  Sound policy cannot be easily crafted
in such an atmosphere. Environmental
policy, because it must address the
sensitive questions of a balance between
aspects of public health and economic
considerations, demands careful thought,
dedicated work, and the full cooperation
of all involved.  One of the most
debilitating effects of the current
polarization is that we cannot effectively
define new policy approaches because
we cannot enact new legislation. Even
                                                                                                      EPA JOURNAL

rational debate on the course to be
followed is inhibited.
  It is in this context that EPA's stature
becomes particularly important. As the
issues become increasingly complex, as
the sciences become more uncertain, as
the economic implications of any policy
decision become larger and often
international in scope, we as a nation
must have a stable and professional EPA
to provide that "neutral ground"
necessary to assess the complex issues.
EPA must be willing and  able to provide
the type of professional analysis that the
public and the Congress can rely on as
unbiased and unaltered by advocates of
a particular position.
  EPA has as its primary  function the
protection of the environment, and it is
expected to carry out this role with a full
realization of the impact of its decisions
on the national economy. If EPA
cannot do this, or if it appears that
environmental policy is being
manipulated by other forces, it cannot
fulfill its critical role as an unbiased
analyst. The result, again, is a loss of
public trust and continued stagnation of
environmental policy.
  We simply cannot afford this situation.
Environmental issues, as  ail others,
change with time and must be properly
monitored. Today's environmental
problems differ from those of a decade
ago, in part because our current laws
have been effective in many areas and in
part because our perception of public
health  threats has changed with new
evidence. Many of our current laws were
passed at a time when environmental
threats were viewed as risks to be
handled by threshold levels.  If we
reduced exposure to a level below the
threshold, the risk would  be eliminated.
Today, for many pollutants, particularly
carcinogens, the operative theory is that
no effective threshold can be
established—that any exposure
represents some risk. The issue thus
becomes a matter of risk  management,
and it requires policy-makers to develop
complex new courses of action. To
perform this critical task, we must  work
together, and we must begin now.
  These and other pressing
environmental issues have been
neglected far too long. For example, the
effect of toxic pollutants in all
environmental media demands policy
guidance, and  may highlight the need to
respond to all multimedia environmental
  Most immediately, Congress must
reauthorize the Superfund trust fund.
There is no question that a larger fund is
necessary, just as there is no doubt there
will be considerable debate and
controversy over the nature of the fund.
The current feedstock tax is too small,
but it cannot be significantly increased
without unacceptable economic
consequences to an element of the
national economy. Other revenue
alternatives must  be found. A waste end
tax should be included, but this too can
provide only limited funds. Additional
revenues will have to be generated from
a much broader revenue base, such as
general revenues. Whatever is decided,
Congress  must act quickly  and fairly to
assure that the Superfund program can
continue at an accelerated  pace.
  We will  also return to the important
issues of the Clean Water and Clean Air
Acts. While progress was made on
developing legislation on the non-
construction grants portion of the Clean
Water Act, the law was  not reauthorized
in the last  Congress—leaving this
Congress to review those issues as well
as consider the future of the construction
grants program.
  An effort that deserves special
consideration is the development of a
non-point  source pollution  program.
This increasingly important area of
environmental concern  received
considerable attention in the last
Congress,  but substantial progress can
come only through cooperation of the
land owners who  will be most affected
by any control program. The Committee
on Environment and Public Works has
made considerable progress toward
developing an approach which
emphasizes such positive cooperation.
  The controversial environmental issue
of acid rain appears to be the  pivotal
point in determining  success or failure
for Clean Air legislation. Because  it is  a
regional economic issue as well as an
environmental issue, economic welfare is
expected to play a significant role in any
resolution. This  nation must and will
confront this contentious issue, and it
should be  addressed with a maximum of
  There are, of course, other important
issues to be considered in Clean Air
legislation, including the problem of
developing a sound air toxics  program.
Ultimately, although probably not in this
Congress, certain fundamental questions
must be answered. Specifically, the Act
relies on the premise that areas which
exceed national ambient air quality
standards are subject to deadlines for
meeting these standards. While this
philosophy may  be applied in general, it
is becoming evident that it likely will not
work in some areas.
  Most notably, there are cities such as
Los Angeles and Houston where no
realistic attainment date can be projected
for meeting the oxidant ambient
standard. If this is the case, as it appears,
it seems that a different approach might
be considered which would press
increasingly rigorous controls on  these
areas while recognizing that attainment
dates are not yet definable. The
bipartisan National Commission on Air
Quality suggested some alternatives that
may be appropriate. This difficult
problem deserves a full and clear
evaluation, and it underscores the type of
policy issues on the horizon.
  If we are serious about seeking a
successful review and the needed
modification of environmental policy for
the remainder of this decade,  we  must
recognize that the delicate key to  success
is the ability of all interested parties to
compromise for the sake of progress.
The alternative is the status quo. Without
a general willingness to help improve the
environmental laws, little will  be done at
a time when standing still means  being
left perilously behind.
  The citizens of this country deserve a
safe  environment, our industries deserve
a consistent guideline for long-term
planning, and all interest groups deserve
to be heard on the issues. Congress
plays an important role in forging the
difficult decisions from a variety of
viewpoints. So does a stable and
professional EPA. But the work cannot go
forward without the assistance and
cooperation of concerned individuals and
advocacy groups, just as there can be no
successful program without the support
of the American public.
  If we cannot work together,  if we
cannot move ahead through
compromise, if we cannot form our plans
and fund them, the loser will  be the
nation's environment. We must not, and I
believe we will not, risk this possibility. D

An  Enforcement
Status  Report
by Courtney  M. Price

 "Unless they [the states] have a gorilla
 in the closet, they can't do the job. And
 the gorilla is  EPA. If they open the door
 and find nobody there, or somebody
 who won't come out, that doesn't do
 them any good. They can't enforce
 these laws by themselves."
 —Former EPA Administrator William D.
 Ruckelshaus at National Compliance and
 Enforcement Conference, January 1984
   The "gorilla" had an especially good
   year in Fiscal Year 1984, the Office of
Enforcement and Compliance
Monitoring's first full year since its
establishment. Working with the
Department of Justice and the various
states, EPA's legal enforcement activities
gave new credibility to the agency's
efforts to enforce the laws.
  Increasing the level of enforcement
activities was one of the agency's highest
priorities in FY 84. Our accomplishments
have been outstanding. In every
program,  EPA and the states used a variety
of actions to address a majority of the
significant violators targeted at the year's
onset. The air program dealt with 99
percent and, based on only 11 months of
data, the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) program addressed
100 percent of the hazardous waste
handlers targeted from its top violator
list. Our regional offices issued over
3,000 administrative orders and referred
263 civil and 35 criminal actions to
headquarters. In turn, 240 civil cases and
31 criminal cases were referred by EPA
to the Department of Justice for further
  Other accomplishments included
several very important judicial decisions
and some significant out-of-court
settlements. Also, a  number of important
policy and management initiatives
provided new,  improved tools for use by
federal and state environmental
enforcement efforts.
           . .     i         Wo
Significant Cases
Because the hazardous waste enforcement
program under RCRA and the Comprehen-
sive Environmental Response, Compensa-
tion, and Liability Act (CERCLA, also refer-
red to as "Superfund") is relatively new,
compared  to the air and water programs,
it is in this area where much new law is
being made by judicial interpretation of
the statutes. In most instances, the courts
have read  the statutes to cover the
broadest possible range of parties and
practices. Some of the most important
cases that  have been decided this year

• U.S. v. Northeastern Pharmaceutical
and Chemical Co.: In this case, involving
dioxin-contaminated waste, the court
held that under CERCLA, EPA can  require
a company that generates hazardous
waste, which was disposed of on
someone else's property, to reimburse
the government for its costs of cleaning
up the waste, even if the waste was
disposed of before CERCLA was enacted,
and even if the company was not
negligent when it  disposed  of the waste.
The court also held that CERCLA
authorizes EPA to recover the costs of
litigating enforcement cases, the cost of
cleanup work, and the interest on these

• U.S. v. Conservation Chemical Co.:  As
in the Northeastern Pharmaceutical case,
the court ruled that individuals or
companies which  generated waste before
the passage of CERCLA  are liable for
cleaning up those wastes if the waste
presents a hazard to health  or the
environment.  The court  also held that
CERCLA imposes "joint  and several
liability." This means that where a given
site involves two or more defendants, the
courts can  decide  that the harm imposed
by the site cannot be divided among the
defendants, and that any one of them
can be held responsible for paying the
entire cost of cleanup. If any one
defendant  believes that his share of the
harm is somehow divisible from the
others (and therefore he should pay only
a proportional share of the cleanup costs)
the burden is on that defendant to
convince the court of this.
• U.S. v. Metate Asbestos Company:
This case involved an asbestos mining
company in Globe, Ariz., where a
subdivision of approximately 55 families
had to be evacuated because of asbestos
pollution. The court decided that mining
wastes are included within CERCLA's
definition of hazardous waste.

• U.S. v. South Carolina Recycling and
Disposal, Inc.:  Like Conservation
Chemical, this case held that CERCLA
imposes "joint and several liability."
Further,  the issue was raised as to
whether CERCLA is unconstitutional.
Specifically, one question was whether
the Act violates the due process clause
by regulating past conduct. The court
preferred not to rule on this issue
directly, but did say that the statute was
not unconstitutional  as applied to the
facts of this case. The court also said that
defendants are responsible for all costs
actually  incurred by the government,
including attorneys' fees and
prejudgment interest.

• U.S. v. Waste Industries: The Fourth
Circuit Court of Appeals held that under
RCRA Section 7003, where the past
activities of hazardous waste handlers
may  present an "imminent and
substantial" endangerment to health or
the environment, EPA has the authority
to compel such waste handlers to take
corrective action even though their
improper activities occurred in the past
and may have  ceased prior to EPA's

  We also won some important cases
under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and Clean
Water Act (CWA):

• U.S. v. City of Kansas City, Kansas: In
this CWA case, the judge ordered the
municipal sewage treatment system to
comply with its National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
requirements regardless of the
availability of funds. The case thus gave
support to the  agency's National
Municipal Policy, which requires publicly
owned treatment works to construct the
necessary pollution controls even if
federal funding is not available.

• U.S. v. City of Providence: In this
action to enforce an existing CAA
consent decree, the judge initially
                                                                                                         EPA JOURNAL

said he would not impose a penalty as
high as the amount which the parties had
previously agreed to pay if the decree
was violated. The government persuaded
the court, however, that it did not have
the authority to reduce these stipulated

• U.S. v. Kaiser Steel: In this case, the
government won  a large civil
penalty—$850,000—and forced the
shutdown of a significant source of
pollution in an area where the air quality
does not meet the standard set by EPA
as necessary to protect human health.

• U.S. v. Borden, inc., U.S. v. Conoco,
Inc., and U.S. v. B. F. Goodrich Co.: In
these actions to enforce the vinyl
chloride emission standard, the
defendants challenged the validity of part
of the standard. Because one district
court had previously accepted this
argument, it was important that these
three other courts reject it,  as they did.

  In addition to the court cases we won
this year, we have accomplished a great
deal by negotiated settlement of
enforcement actions. Some of the most
important of these settlements are:

• U.S. v. Petro Processors: This
landmark settlement involved what is
believed to be one of the largest
hazardous waste sites, and a  possible
threat to  the Baton Rouge,  La., water
supply. The  defendants will conduct a
comprehensive cleanup  of the site, and
maintain  the  remedy in perpetuity, at an
estimated cost of  over $50 million.
Also under the decree, the  government
can compel the defendants to remedy
any future problems at the  site.
•  U.S. v. A & F Materials: In addition to
requiring the defendants to perform a
full-scale study of this Illinois waste site
and perform the necessary remedial
work, this consent decree, like the one in
Petro Processors, contains language
which will allow the government to
require the defendants to remedy any
future threats to health or the
environment posed by the site.

•  U.S. v. Hooker Chemical and Plastics
(S Area Landfill): This settlement (which
is  awaiting court approval as this article
goes to press) covers one of four major
enforcement actions involving chemical
dumpsites in the vicinity of Niagara Falls,
N.Y.  The company is required to clean up
the site with advanced, state-of-the-art
technology, to take stringent measures  to
protect the drinking water supply for the
City of Niagara Falls, and to undertake
surveys and long-term  monitoring to
assure that chemicals do not contaminate
the ground water. The settlement allows
EPA to seek further remedial action if the
surveys or monitoring programs show
ground-water contamination.

•  U.S. v. General Motors Corp.: This
case was the first major CWA action
taken to enforce the categorical
pretreatment standards for integrated
electroplaters,  The standards involved
here define what must  be done to
wastewater from the  electroplating
process before the wastewater is sent to
publicly owned treatment works.  Eight
separate consent decrees were
negotiated concurrently. The agency held
firm on the June 30, 1984, deadline set
by the standards, and will collect
substantial civil penalties from GM for
violations occurring after that date.

• U.S. v. District of Columbia: This CWA
consent decree requires the District of
Columbia to remedy NPDES permit
violations at its Blue Plains Sewage
Treatment Plant by  hiring additional staff
and repairing, operating, and maintaining
the pollution  control equipment. The
District must  also undertake  a $200,000
environmental project, and pay a $50,000
penalty. The case was particularly
important because EPA had made a large
investment of construction funds in the
facility, and because failure to properly
operate and maintain the plant built with
those funds had created significant
pollution problems.
• U.S. v. Dow Chemical Corporation:
This settlement resolved a three-year
dispute over EPA's authority to obtain
information on water pollution control
processes and internal waste streams.
Under the decree, Dow must provide EPA
the data it needs to draft discharge
permits; allow EPA access to its Midland,
Mich., facility to conduct sampling and
analytical  studies; perform studies
requested by EPA for use in  drafting the
permit; and give EPA broad access to
information concerning the presence,
sources, and control of dioxins and
furans at the  Midland facility.

Policies and Guidance

Outside the courtroom and consent
decree negotiations, the Office of
Enforcement  and Compliance Monitoring
(OECM) has other, critically significant
functions. One of these is to develop—or


help the media program offices develop
policy and guidance documents either
for the enforcement program as a whole,
or on media-specific issues. These
documents help assure uniform
enforcement efforts nationwide so that
violators know that as far as EPA is
concerned, they will be treated the same
wherever they are in the United States.
Such policies and guidance become  an
important tool for enforcement efforts.
  OECM produced several important
documents this year, many jointly with
the  media program enforcement offices.
Some of these are: compliance and
enforcement manuals for the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA), RCRA,
and CAA;  compendia of the
enforcement policies now in effect for
(Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act)  programs; a
compendium of all the general
enforcement policies now in effect; a
revised general penalty policy from
which program-specific policies have
been drawn for the air and RCRA
programs, and are under development in
other programs;  guidance on  pursuing
enforcement actions against insolvent
parties in the hazardous waste area;
guidance on enforcing information
requests in the hazardous waste area;
general guidance on model consent
decrees; and guidance on enforcing  the
new municipal policy. Other important
policies, issued jointly with the EPA
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response, covered the issuance of
certain RCRA orders and the participation
of potentially responsible parties  in the
development of remedial investigations
and feasibility studies under CERCLA.

Management Initiatives

Last but not least among OECM's
accomplishments for FY 1984  are several
management  initiatives aimed at  making
better use of our available tools and
resources, and focusing on results.
  For example, FY 84 saw the first
concerted effort to put a long
under-utilized tool of the Clean Air Act to
use. Section 120  of the Act provides  an
administrative remedy designed to
recoup the economic benefit a facility has
gained by violating CAA standards. From
1980 to 1983, EPA had initiated only  20
Section 120 actions, but  in FY 84, 22 such
actions were initiated.
  Another tool which has long  been
available but has not been used is the
contractor listing provisions of the Clean
Air and Water Acts. Under these
provisions, certain civil and criminal
violators can  be suspended from
receiving any federal grants, loans, or
contracts. Our Office of Legal and
Enforcement  Policy took steps to put this
tool to use by publishing proposed
revised regulations, issuing guidance on
the use of this mechanism until final
rules are in place, and encouraging the
regions to propose candidates for
  Similarly, FY 84 saw far more extensive
use of the criminal enforcement
provisions of our statutes. We increased
the number of criminal investigators—we
had 23 at the beginning of FY 84, and we
had 35 by the end of calendar year 84.
One very important accomplishment
in the program was the deputation of the
investigators  as Special  United States
Marshals. This means they now have full
law enforcement powers, such as
authority to carry  firearms, make arrests,
and execute warrants. The additional
resources devoted to the criminal
program showed significant  results: in
comparison to FY 82, the number of
cases referred for prosecution increased
from 20 to 31, the number of defendants
charged increased from 14 to 36, and the
number of defendants convicted
increased from 11 to 26.
  Another type of initiative we have
taken  in the past year may be
characterized as "super-coordination" of
cases. This refers  to selected cases which
are large and complex, involving multiple
facilities, and/or multiple companies,
and/or multiple media violations. The GM
pretreatment  case, discussed above, was
one of these,  involving eight separate
facilities and eight separate decrees.
Another type  of a coordinated,
comprehensive, well-planned approach
to a large-scale problem is OECM's
Chesapeake Bay initiative. We will work
closely with Region 3 and the
surrounding states to define the specific
noncompliance problems in and around
the Bay, and determine where
enforcement action would help solve the
problem. This of course will be a
long-term project, but one well worth a
substantial effort.
  Also in FY 84, OECM took the lead in
two other major projects, again aimed at
improved coordination and  planning of
the enforcement effort, but on an even
broader scale.  First was the Steering
Committee on  the State Federal
Enforcement Relationship. Responding to
the 1983 State Federal Task Force Report
to the Administrator, the Steering
Committee developed a policy  framework
for State'EPA enforcement agreements.
Headquarters enforcement program
offices then developed more specific
guidance for the regions on negotiating
these agreements and on oversight of
state programs. In particular, the
guidance provides criteria and
procedures for direct enforcement action
by EPA. Through extraordinary effort by
headquarters, the regions, and  the slates,
these agreements now have been
negotiated in each program in  almost all
states. This project has greatly  improved
our working relationships with  the states,
and this will be a key factor in
maintaining our momentum.
  The second OECM-led, agencywide
initiative was to put in place by the end
of FY 84 a strategic planning process for
compliance and enforcement matters.
The process, which has been integrated
with the agency's existing management
systems, involves discussion between
OECM and the media program  offices,
and then between the agency and the
Department of Justice.
  In short, I am very proud of the
accomplishments our "gorillas" have
made this year, and i am looking forward
to another very successful year. D
                                                                                                            EPA JOURNAL

A  Day  in  the  Life  of  a  Criminal  Investigator
by Susan Tejada
(First in a series of occasional reports
on how some EPA employees spend
their working days.)
  In May 1982, for the first time in its
  history, EPA began recruiting special
agents: criminal investigators to help
enforce environmental iaws. In July 1984,
authority was given to deputize the
agents as U.S. Marshals, empowered to
carry guns on the job.  By January 1985,
EPA had hired 35 criminal investigators,
with a  minimum of two stationed in each
regional office.
   David Wilma, former Seattle cop  and
special agent for the Drug Enforcement
Administration, came to EPA in January
1983. Based  in Chicago, he investigated
environmental law violations in a 10-state
   Last  September, Wilma transferred to
EPA's Region 9 office in San Francisco.
He was the first special agent in the
region, developing cases and working to
incorporate the criminal investigation
function into ongoing operations.
   Soon after arriving in Region 9, Wiima
began  an investigation of an electrical
equipment manufacturing  company
suspected of illegally using and
disposing of polychlorinated biphenyls,
or PCBs. The situation  had first come to
EPA's attention two months earlier, when
the agency had carried out a Superfund
emergency action at the company site to
look for PCB-contaminated  materials.
   EPA's criminal investigators do spend
some of their time in cloak-and-dagger
activities: surveillance  and
reconnaissance, for example, or
clandestine interviews  with confidential
sources, But they also  spend a lot of time
just waiting:  waiting for airplanes,
waiting for people, even waiting for
typewriters and copying machines.  This
article describes a day  in the life of  one
EPA criminal investigator:  October 30,
1984, the day special agent David Wilma
prepared to enter the electrical
equipment manufacturing  company with
a search warrant to look for evidence of
criminal wrongdoing.

5:30 a.m.

Camped out in what he called the "Casa
de Flop," waiting for his family to sell
their house in Chicago and join him in
San Francisco, David Wilma woke up.
  Yesterday had been a long day. Wilma
had been at the EPA office until after
nine, working with the Assistant Regional
Counsel on a search warrant request.
They had filled a 10-page affidavit with
the site history, technical  information,
and the results to date of the criminal
investigation. Today would be another
long day, and so would tomorrow.
  Wilma got dressed and then did
something he does at least twice  a week:
drove to the airport to catch a plane to
another city. With the ratio of criminal
cases to investigators as high as it is,
EPA's special agents more often than not
find themselves on the road or in the air,
working to cover a lot of territory.
  Wilma had to allow time before
departure for a weapons check. EPA
special agents can carry guns, but they
have to go through  inspections each  time
they board a plane.  "You  can't just show
up 10 minutes before flight time," says
Wilma, "and expect to make it."
  At the airport, Wilma met the two
regional officials who were going with
him to obtain the search warrant. At 7:00
a.m., they flew out of San  Francisco.

8:30 a.m.
After yet  another forgettable  in-flight
breakfast of danish and coffee, Wilma
and his partners arrived at their
destination, rented a car, and drove to
the office of the U.S. Attorney.
  Criminal investigators "always make
contact with the federal prosecutor when
beginning an investigation,"  Wilma says.
"When the U.S. Attorneys  get involved in
a case early on, they become familiar
with the details, and can give direction
on how to proceed." Besides, the
investigator can determine the chances
of a prosecution."Each district has a
different approach," Wilma explains.
"Some prosecute you if you  throw a
cigarette out the window. Others
prosecute an environmental case  only if
it's a sure thing."
  The U.S. Attorney involved in Wilma's
case had  already been briefed on  the
particulars, and met now with Wilma's
group to go over the affidavit. When the
documents were in order,  he advised
Wilma how to obtain the warrant.

10:15 a.m.

Wilma brought the affidavit to the
chambers of the U.S. Magistrate.  The
judge read the document, Wilma  swore
that it was truthful and signed it,  and the
judge approved the search warrant.
  "I've never had  a warrant turned
down," says Wilma. "By the time we get
to that stage, enough work has been
done so that there is an excellent chance
the warrant will be signed."
  In this particular case,  "enough work"
had meant locating and interviewing
confidential sources over a one-month
period prior to preparing the affidavit.
"We interviewed state and local
inspectors familiar with the facility,"
Wilma explains."We cashed in on one
inspector's sense  that  a particular
individual knew about the situation in the
facility and was concerned about  it. We
asked him 'Who else will help?' We
discreetly contacted people at night,  in
their homes, to find out what was going
on. County regulatory  agency files
confirmed what the sources told us."

11:00 a.m.

Wilma now had the search warrant, but
he couldn't use it  until the following  day.
For one thing, he  needed a full  day for
the search, and this day was almost  half
over. For another, the  rest of the search
team wouldn't arrive from San  Francisco
until later in  the day. Wilma decided  to
run a little reconnaissance  mission.
  "I drove by the  facility," he recounts,
"to be sure everything was still there. I
had to be discreet about it—I couldn't
just stand at the fence and peer
in—because in this case, the element of
surprise was very important. The  search
warrant was a deep secret. We  didn't
want records spirited away or drums
disappearing  before we could serve the
  Satisfied that the facility, from the
outside at least, appeared unchanged,
Wilma paid a courtesy visit to the local
police to  inform them of the operation
planned for the following day. Then he
selected a rendezvous  point for the team
members: a donut store  in a shopping
center. "If we wanted to keep the
element of surprise, we couldn't very
well collect, one by one, in the parking
lot of the company."

1:00 p.m.

Wilma headed back to  the airport  to meet
an incoming  flight. There it was a case  of
hurry up and wait: the flight was  late.
  Wilma went over a mental checklist for
the next day. Two teams were enroute  to
join him. One group of people would
collect physical samples at  the facility.
They would need  respirators and
protective clothing for  four, plus an
adequate supply of glass jars, tubes, and
ice chests. Another group would seize
documents. Those people would need
containers to hold the records they
collected. Had all the equipment been
ordered? A local EPA contractor had
some of the equipment already in the
area. More was enroute from the
regional office via an express delivery
service. Members of the sampling team
would be bringing 10 ice chests with

3:00 p.m.

The plane he had come to meet finally
arrived. Wilma found his passenger, an
engineer from the sampling team, and
drove directly to a home where two of
the confidential sources were waiting.
  "In an ordinary EPA inspection,"
explains Wilma, "the company president
goes over his operations and makes
records available. It's all nice and
friendly. But an inspection under a search
warrant is different. You can assume the
people won't be cooperative because
they've done something wrong. That's
why it was important for the engineer to
talk to insiders before entering the
  The engineer's team would be
collecting samples from soil, drums of
oil, and electrical items. The sources told
him what processes were used  at the
plant and what safety risks he would
encounter. This pre-search interview was
"a damn good idea," Wilma emphasizes.
"The engineer found out how to take the
most important samples in the most
efficient way, how to handle them safely,
and how to transport them."
  The confab lasted  until 6:00. Then
Wilma and the engineer headed back to
the hotel.

9:00 p.m.

In a meeting room that had already been
reserved, members of the search teams
gathered for a final briefing  before zero
hour the next day. Besides the Assistant
Regional Counsel who had acccompanied
Wilma from  San Francisco that  morning,
there were eight others from the regional
office,  plus four local contractors, and
someone from the county health
  The involvement of other agencies in
an EPA criminal investigation is "real
typical," according to Wilma. One reason
is because "EPA is so desperately short
of criminal investigators and equipment."
Another is that violations of
environmental statutes often involve
more than one agency, and "joint
investigations are more efficient than
separate ones." In this particular case,
the county had loaned one van  for
handling samples, and the U.S. Treasury
Department loaned another for a mobile
  The search teams were enthusiastic.
"Over the past 10 years," explains
Wilma, "people at EPA have seen some
truly egregious environmental harm take
place. And they have seen companies get
off the hook by writing a check. That
grates. Now they  had an opportunity to
make a violator pay. There was
tremendous esprit."
  Wilma began the briefing with an
overview of the investigation and
described how the warrant would be
executed. It would be important to show
up early in order to secure the office area
and deny entry to employees as they
arrived. It would be important to move
fast, so there would be no time for
company  personnel to remove or tamper
with evidence. And it would be important
to be polite. "There will be
understandable resentment at your
entry," Wilma told the group, "and you
have to expect it.  Some employees may
try to make it difficult for you to gather
samples. You have to be diplomatic.
There's nothing more powerful than a
search warrant, so you can be just as
nice as you want."
  The heads of the document collection
and sampling teams described what they
would be doing, and the group clarified
any remaining questions about the

11:00 p.m.

The glass jars and other  equipment that
had been  shipped via express  delivery
finally arrived. Their late delivery had
provoked  "some tension," and the arrival
brought a sense of relief.


Wilma and the other members of the
search teams turned in for the night.

  At 7:00 a.m. the next morning—
October 31, 1984—Wilma served the
search warrant. Execution of the warrant
went completely according to plan.
  At the present time, this case is still
under investigation and has not yet been
brought to trial. Because of this,
additional details are not available for
publication. Nevertheless, says Wilma,
"The evidence we expected to find, was
found.  There was contamination, and it
was worse than we thought. It should
result in a successful prosecution."
  Nationwide, EPA's criminal
enforcement program showed significant
results in fiscal year 1984 (see  related
story, page 22). Thirty-six individuals
were charged with criminal violations of
environmental statutes, more than twice
as many as in fiscal year 1982; and 26
were convicted, compared to only 11  two
years earlier. D
                                                                                                          EPA JOURNAL

Asbestos  in  Schools
One  State's  Answer
by Jack  Lewis
Aoating as/besfos hazards in America's
schools is still primarily a state and
local responsibility, although EPA's role
has been growing steadily in recent
years, and continues to grow. The
following article explains how one state
took the initiative in handling the

   At a time when  some states are just
     becoming aware of asbestos
contamination problems, Oklahoma has
already compiled an admirable record of
achievement. The  "Sooner State"  has
lived up to its nickname by launching an
ambitious asbestos abatement program,
originally confined to schools but now
embracing ail buildings Oklahoma owns
or leases.
  Oklahoma has also implemented a
certification program for training and
licensing asbestos contractors. And the
state has an 85 percent rate of
compliance with EPA's Inspection and
Notification Rule at a time when the
national average for compliance with this
school inspection  rule is only 34 percent.
  This is not meant to suggest that
Oklahoma's asbestos record is without
flaws. There has been an element of trial
and error in the state's asbestos
abatement efforts. However, it is difficult
to fault the initiative Oklahoma's officials
have shown  in tackling the problem of
asbestos—or their willingness to learn
from their mistakes.
  In the  late 1970s, Oklahoma's
Department of Health began addressing
inquiries about asbestos to officials at
EPA and the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH). Federal officials advised
Oklahoma of scientific evidence that links
the breathing of asbestos fibers with
several types of cancer and with a
scarring of lung tissue called asbestosis.
Asbestos fibers most often escape into
the air when surfaces coated with
"friable" asbestos begin to deteriorate.
Asbestos is called  "friable" if it crumbles
easily when  subjected to hand pressure.
Even "nonfriable"  asbestos can,
however, release fibers if it is damaged,
disturbed, or improperly maintained.
  In 1973 EPA prohibited the spraying of
friable asbestos for purposes of

soundproofing or insulation. Five years
later, the agency banned the spray
application of friable asbestos for
decorative purposes. Prior to these bans,
the American construction industry had
made widespread use  of the substance.
  During the years of rapid growth
following World War II, Oklahoma
contractors followed the national pattern
by making frequent use of
asbestos-containing materials, both
friable and nonfriable.  The state's health
officials  were concerned about the
ramifications of the problem, and they
did not hesitate to address it.
  Even before the passage of federal
legislation requiring asbestos
inspections, Oklahoma had taken giant
strides in that direction. Between June
1979 and April 1981, the state  surveyed
almost all of its 6,691 school buildings
for possible asbestos contamination.
  Every county in Oklahoma has a
"sanitarian," and it was these  local
health officials who first inspected public

school buildings for deteriorating friable
asbestos. Oklahoma's sanitarians
conducted their inspections according to
specifications set forth in EPA's March
1979 guidance document,
"Asbestos-Containing Materials in School
Buildings." Officials from the Oklahoma
Departments of Education and Health
provided on-site technical assistance,
whenever possible.
  Suspicious samples were analyzed free
of charge by the Oklahoma  Department
of Health, which used a technique known
as polarized light microscopy in its tests.
These tests confirmed that 70 out of
Oklahoma's 617 school districts—over 10
percent—had at least one building with
friable asbestos-containing material. In 47
school districts, the material was
deteriorated or damaged to such an
extent that the Department of Health
recommended abatement action.
  During the summer of 1980,
Oklahoma's Education and Health
Departments sponsored  Asbestos
Abatement Workshops at locations
throughout the state. NIOSH funded the
workshops, which  were planned with
help from EPA Region 6. No federal
funds were, however, available at that
time for  actual asbestos abatement.
  As a result, state and local authorities
were thrown back  on their own resources
to fund any abatement actions. By

December 1980, a few schools in the
state had already taken corrective action
on their own initiative, even though they
were under no legal obligation to do so.
Others, because of budgetary constraints,
were waiting for the state to  offer them
  When confronted with evidence that
some eight percent of Oklahoma's public
school districts needed asbestos
abatement, the state's legislators did not
take long to act. In June 1981, Governor
George Nigh signed into law an
appropriation bill setting up a $2 million
Asbestos Removal Fund.
  School districts had to meet two
requirements to qualify for grants under
this revolving fund: (1) Grants had to be
used strictly to reimburse a school
district for abatement work already
completed, and (2) the school district in
question had  to have an annual  budget
carry-over of  less than 10 percent at the
end of its most recent fiscal year.
  Twenty-nine of the 47 problem school
districts met these two requirements and
received financial help from the state in
tackling their  asbestos problem. Between
June  1981 and September 1982, all of the
state's asbestos removal fund of $2
million and an additional $1  million of
local funds were expended to complete
abatement actions in all 47 school
districts.  A total of 1,116,948  square feet
of friable asbestos was handled. In most
cases, removal was the abatement option
used. However, encapsulation was used
in several instances to avoid  the undue
disturbance of asbestos fibers that
full-scale removal actions might have
  The level of state reimbursement
varied from 100 percent in the case of
poorer school districts, such  as Pauls
Valley, on down to 35 percent for more
affluent districts such as Tulsa. One
factor working in favor of rural school
districts was the availability in those
areas of contractors willing to perform
abatement work for fees close to the
official reimbursement rate of $2 per
square foot. That flat rate worked against
urban areas such as Tulsa where
contractor fees as high as $7 or $8 per
square foot were not uncommon.
  The quality of available contractors
became a source of concern  by 1982.
Instances of shoddy, unprofessional, and
even potentially harmful abatement work
were  reported. These lapses  occurred
despite early state issuance of federal
safety guidelines for asbestos contractors
and regular on-site monitoring by the
Department of Health. According to Bill
Giles  of Oklahoma's Department of
Labor, "Sometimes we ended up with
more of a problem than we had to begin
with" as a result of incompetent
contractors. Ideally, Oklahoma should
have had asbestos contractors trained
and licensed before any abatement work
was done. In actuality, there was a time
lag of over a year before the state
developed a certification program.
  The state's licensing program, which
was approved in April 1982, did not
become effective until October  1982,
when the last of the state's Asbestos
Removal Fund money had already been
spent. Fortunately, however, more than
60 percent of all asbestos abatement
completed in Oklahoma prior to the start
of the state's licensing program was
performed by a contractor voluntarily
committed to the most exacting safety
standards.  The company in question—
Utility Savers, Inc.—has in all cases
required its asbestos workers to
wear protective masks, coveralls, and
boots that did not become mandatory in
the state until 1982.
  Only formally trained and certified
contractors have been allowed  to handle
the 103,000 square feet of asbestos
abatement completed since 1982. Fifty
contractors have been trained and
licensed since the certification program
began. Even though certified, their work
is subject to on-site inspections by the
state Labor and Health Departments,
which have shut down several  projects
until proper standards could be met.
  Dale McHard  and Bill Kemp—two
officials at the Oklahoma Department of
Health—have been the motivating forces
behind most of the state's asbestos
initiatives since the late 1970s.  McHard is
the Chief of the Department of  Health's
Special Hazards/Radiation  Division, and
Kemp is his Special Hazards deputy.
Since the completion of public  school
inspections in 1981, they have expanded
their inspection network to include
religious and non-sectarian private
schools as well as day-care centers and
  As a result, three parochial schools
have conducted major removal actions,
and several religious academies have
moved from their leased facilities to new
ones without asbestos contamination.
These steps have been taken without
state subsidy because of Oklahoma's
rigid tradition of church-state separation.
However, the Department of Health did
make available  to all  private and
parochial schools such services as
surveillance, sampling, bulk sample
analysis, and assistance in developing
corrective action plans.
  In the spring of 1983, the Department
of Health conducted a survey of
Oklahoma's 2,100 day-care centers and
pre-schools. After visual inspection
pinpointed possible problem areas, state
health officials stepped in to help with
formal sampling and laboratory analysis.
Thus far, ten centers have either moved
or launched abatement actions as a
result of this initiative.
  Largely as a precautionary measure,
Oklahoma's Governor George Nigh
recently ordered the Department of
Health to re-inspect all of the state's
public school buildings after 16,000
square feet of deteriorating  friable
asbestos was discovered in  a previously
inspected Oklahoma City high school.
The mistake at this school has prompted
concern about the quality and
thoroughness of previous inspections, as
well as the  records kept to document
  The new  inspections will be more
rigorous and thorough than those
conducted between 1979 and 1981. They
will cover not only public access areas
but also pipes and  boilers, and both  state
and local officials will be subject to more
stringent recordkeeping requirements.
Also, for the first time, Department of
Health officials will inspect 1,000 other
buildings that Oklahoma owns or leases
for possible asbestos contamination.
  Governor Nigh has increased the
state's emergency fund from $2.5 million
to $5 million to cover the cost of all these
new inspections and any abatement
actions that may result from them.
  It is too early to tell whether the
re-inspection  of Oklahoma's schools  will
raise serious doubts about the results of
previous inspections. However, at least
one other aspect of Oklahoma's asbestos
record is already open to criticism, and
that is the state's failure to have a
contractor certification program in place
before abatement actions were
undertaken. This step would have
prevented unnecessary hazards resulting
from improper asbestos removal
  But the positive aspects of Oklahoma's
approach to the asbestos problem clearly
outweigh the negative. The  state is
widely admired for its prompt asbestos
inspections, careful adherence to  federal
guidelines,  and generous funding of
inspections and abatement actions. Few
other states have compiled  a comparable
record of achievement in dealing  with
asbestos contamination. D
                                                                                                            EPA JOURNAL

Destroying  Dioxin
with  EPA's  Mobile  Incinerator
by Rowena Michaels

This is the fifth article in a series by
EPA's regional offices on major
environmental problems they are
addressing. Articles thus far have been
from EPA regions 1, 4, 9, and 10.
Rowena Michaels is the Director of the
Office of Public Affairs in EPA Region 7.
   The most promising state-of-the-art
   technology for the destruction of
hazardous waste—high temperature
incineration—is being used to burn
dioxin-contaminated wastes in
southwest Missouri.
  EPA's Kansas City regional office
finalized a permit for the mobile
incinerator on November 19, 1984. The
incinerator, which had been designed,
constructed, and tested by the EPA Office
of Research and Development, was then
moved from the Office of Environmental
Engineering and Technology's field
station at Edison, N.J., to a farm site near
Verona, Mo. The incinerator will be at the
farm location for several months while it
is being used to destroy dioxin. The trial
burn began in early January.
  Millions of words have been written in
the past few years about dioxin; many of
those stories concerned the 42 dioxin
sites in the State of Missouri. Pictures of
"moon suited" field workers stared out
from the  pages of newspapers around
the world. "TirriPc Beach" became a
synonym for environmental disaster.  But
why so much  attention focused on
Missouri? The now-defunct chemical
company, North Eastern Pharmaceutical
and Chemical  Company (NEPACCO) in
Verona, Mo., produced hexachlorophene
in the early 1970s. The 2,3,7,8-tetrachlo-
rodibenzo-p-dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD)
present in the contaminated waste at
nearly all of the Missouri sites was  an
unwanted byproduct from the
manufacture of trichlorophenol, produced
as an intermediate in hexachlorophene
production. (Hexachlorophene, a
compound once sold as a germicide,
now has restricted  uses.)
               A salvage oil company owner hauled
             the dioxin-contaminated waste from the
             plant in Verona to eastern Missouri
             where, after being mixed with waste oil,
             it was used as a dust suppressant on
             roads, parking lots, and horse arenas.
               Some waste was disposed of on farms
             in southwestern Missouri and on
             property now owned by the City of
             Neosho. Some waste still remains at the
             former NEPACCO plant now owned by
             Syntex Agribusiness, Inc.
               An anonymous phone call late in 1979
             to the EPA Region 7 offices led to an
             intensive investigation that has, to date,
             revealed more than 40 locations where
             the dioxin was spread.
               Up until now, little relief could be
             offered to those citizens whose lives
             were marred by the  presence of dioxin
             on their property. Temporary measures
             have been taken to ensure that: (1)
             people are removed from the dioxin
             contamination; (2) the dioxin  is removed
             from the people (gathered and
             contained); or (3) barriers are put in
             place to prevent contact with  or
             subsequent migration of the chemical.
               But these are temporary measures that
             do not solve the monumental
                                                                  environmental problem of destroying
                                                                  dioxin and restoring the communities.
                                                                    The agency announced early last year
                                                                  an accelerated research program to find
                                                                  a solution to this dilemma. Researchers
                                                                  from EPA, other federal agencies, state
                                                                  officials, representatives from the private
                                                                  sector, and officials from foreign
                                                                  countries have met together repeatedly
                                                                  to share the limited information available
                                                                  on dioxin destruction. An international
                                                                  literature search was carefully conducted
                                                                  in an effort to find  clues to a possible
                                                                    The trail kept leading  back to the "Blue
                                                                  Goose," the EPA's  mobile incinerator.
                                                                  Incineration is a proven technology;
                                                                  hazardous waste materials had already
                                                                  been destroyed successfully in the unit
                                                                  and so the project  was launched.
                                                                    The commitment made for this project
                                                                  has been a major one. Overall costs are
                                                                  estimated at S4 million involving the
                                                                  Office of Research  and Development,
                                                                  Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
                                                                  Response (Superfund), Region 7, and
                                                                  Syntex Agribusiness, Inc.
                                                                    A tremendous amount of planning and
                                                                  preparation for the project has been done
                                                                  and is continuing. Weekly conference

calls between all of the participants have
kept the project on track.
  Permit applications for the incinerator
were submitted to both EPA-Region  7
and the Missouri Department of Natural
Resources. The  permits were issued to
the Office of Research and Development
and its operating contractor, IT Corp. of
KnoxviHe, Tenn. The EPA permit was
reviewed by responsible EPA offices and
issued by Region 7 in about 90 days. The
permit assures the public of compliance
with all of the rules and regulations that
would be required for any commercial
incinerator under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act.
  Logistical planning and site preparation
at the Denney Farm site in northern  Barry
County,, Mo., where the incinerator will
be  operating, has been accomplished by
Syntex Agribusiness, Inc., Springfield,
Mo. The company is also providing much
of the dioxin-contaminated material to be
used in the trial burns and field test of
the incinerator.
  The incineration process is an
application of modern technology to the
ancient art of purification by fire.
  The extremely high temperatures of up
to 2,200 F literally break apart the dioxin
molecules  into atoms of carbon, oxygen,
chlorine, and hydrogen, which then form
small basic molecules, predominantly
carbon dioxide,  water, and hydrochloric
acid. The acid is then neutralized through
contact with an  alkaline solution and
rendered harmless.
  To assure that the public health and
environment are protected, the field
demonstration of this incineration system
will be conducted under the strictest
surveillance by local, state, and federal
authorities. All Toxic Substances Control
Act and Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act requirements will be met as
well as the stringent state environmental
standards and all applicable local
  Upon successful completion of the
project we will have demonstrated that
no  harmful contaminants entered the
environment by any route from the
process. Ash and water produced by this
destruction process will be shown
harmless and the stack emissions will be
thoroughly monitored. We will have
successfully, safely destroyed dioxin.
  When the agency decided to move the
mobile incinerator to southwest Missouri,
Region 7 undertook a comprehensive
effort to ensure that the citizens were
informed; that they received  consistent,
accurate technical information; and that
they were listened to.
  A brochure and a slide show were
developed to explain the incinerator
project.  A briefing for neighbors of the
Denney Farm, local citizens, and elected
officials was  held before the official
announcement of the decision. Followup
visits to elected officials and citizens in
the area were made the day after the
announcement. Brochures, fact sheets,
and photographs were provided for these
individuals to share with constituents and
neighbors. An intensive speaking tour of
major civic organizations in the area was
arranged for  the scientist in charge of the
project in  the region. His presentation
was always the same: the slide show,
prepared script, and brochure. This
ensured that  the very technical
information we were sharing was, in
each case, consistent and factual.
  A joint public hearing on the permits
was held with the state, followed by a
15-day public comment period.
  When the final permits were issued for
the mobile incineration operation, both
the state and EPA were able to respond
to the wishes of the citizens by limiting
the duration  of the permit to  one year
and limiting the materials to be
destroyed to  Missouri wastes only.
  An  on-site  demonstration day for
visitors has elicited a great deal of
interest, locally and nationally. The
quality-assured data from the trial burn
will be shared with the public as quickly
as possible. An on-site liaison from the
regional office will be present during the
burn to answer any questions the  public
may have.
  The overall goal of this research
project is  to safely destroy dioxin. The
project will provide valuable technical
and economic research information.  EPA
Region 7 remains sensitive to the
concerns of those residents whose
homes and communities have been
contaminated with dioxin. We are
committed to finding answers and
remedies  tc the dioxin problem. The field
demonstration of a proven technology
for the destruction of hazardous wastes
as described  here will make a significant
contribution  to solving the challenge of
dioxin destruction. [ :
New Stack Height Rules
EPA has proposed new
regulations to set certain
limitations on the use of tall
smokestacks to disperse air
pollution from industrial sources.
  The proposed regulations are
designed to help meet the
national ambient air quality
standards for sulfur dioxide and
other pollutants in cases where
dispersion by tall smokestacks
would be deemed inappropriate.
The national  ambient air quality
standards are designed to
protect public health and
welfare. States would be
required to determine what
methods other than tall stacks
should be  part of their clean air
plans (State Implementation
Plans) for given cases.

Interstate Pollution Petitions
EPA has denied petitions filed by
the states of  Pennsylvania, New
York, and Maine. These states
had claimed that violations of
ambient air quality standards
within their boundaries had been
caused by  emissions of
pollutants from sources in the
  The petitioning states claimed
that such emissions hindered
their ability to meet federat air
quality standards, interfered with
visibility, and caused acid rain.
  The petitions requested relief
under Section 126 of the Clean
Air Act. That  section gives the
Administrator the authority to
control interstate transport of air
pollutants that may cause
violations of another state's
ambient air quality standards.
  EPA said that it could only
provide relief under Section 126
of the Clean Air Act for those
transboundary pollutants to
which the act is specifically
addressed: that is, only when
transboundary or interstate air
pollution causes a  state to
violate  national ambient air
quality standards, to exceed its
prevention of significant
deterioration  increments, or to
violate  its visibility requirements.
                                                    HAZARDOUS  WASTE

                                                    Emelle PCBs Removal
                                                    EPA has announced a
                                                    wide-ranging agreement with
                                                    Chemical Waste Management
                                                    concerning its Emelle, Ala.,
                                                    disposal site. The Emeile site is
                                                    the largest of its kind in the
                                                    United States.
                                                                                                               EPA JOURNAL

A review of recent major EPA activities and developments in the pollution control areas.
  Chemical Waste Management
has agreed to pay a 5600,000
penalty for violations pertaining
to storage and handling of
polychlorinated biphenyls (RGBs).
  Part of the agreement is the
first environmental auditing
requirement ever incorporated
into a settlement. The audit will
include all plant management
and operations, systems,
practices, and policies, and will
evaluate them in relation to
existing legal requirements to
ensure safety.

109 Chemicals To Be Regulated
EPA has added 109 more
commercial chemicals to its list
of hazardous wastes. The agency
is proposing to regulate the
disposal of these chemicals.
  Of the  chemicals EPA is
proposing to add to the list, 81
would be classified as "toxic
hazardous wastes," and 28
would be classified as "acutely
hazardous wastes." Acutely
hazardous wastes are subject to
more stringent standards than
toxic hazardous wastes.

EDB Production Wastes Disposal

EPA is proposing to regulate the
handling  and disposal of wastes
from the  production of ethylene
dibromide (EDB). The agency
has begun this process by
adding EDB production wastes
to its list  of hazardous wastes
subject to regulation  under the
Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA).
  Wastes from EDB
production—if improperly stored,
transported, or disposed
of—could leach into ground
water or evaporate into the air,
posing a  threat to human health
and the environment. EPA's
Carcinogen Assessment Group
has found a significant cancer
risk to humans  in  certain lifetime
levels of  EDB exposure.
  Almost 90 percent  of all EDB
still being produced is for use as
a gasoline additive. It is also
produced as an intermediate in
the production of other
chemicals and as a solvent for
resins, gums, and waxes. EPA
has suspended its use as a soil
and grain fumigant and as a
quarantine fumigant  on citrus
and other fruits. Use  of EDB as a
gasoline additive is expected to
decline as EPA's lead
phase-down regulations take

Superfund  Report to Congress
On December 12,  EPA sent  to
Congress a series of
Congressionally mandated
studies on the agency's
experience with the nation's
hazardous waste cleanup law.
  The studies, which EPA is
required to submit to Congress
under Section 301 of the
Superfund law (the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980), report on
EPA's experience with the
nation's hazardous waste
cleanup law so far. Based on
these findings, EPA will submit a
list of recommended changes to
Congress this year, when
Congress begins considering
reauthorization of the Superfund
Pentachlorophenol Restrictions
EPA has proposed cancelling
most of the non-wood
preservative uses of the pesticide
pentachlorophenol after
determining that continued use
may cause unreasonable risk to
public health.
  The agency's decision is based
on data which show that
pentachlorophenol causes  birth
defects in  offspring of laboratory
animals and that its
(HxCDD) and hexachlorobenzene
(HCB), cause cancer in laboratory
  The non-wood preservative
uses of pentachlorophenol are as
a herbicide, disinfectant,
defoliant,  moss control agent,
and anti-microbial agent.
Linuron Restrictions Lifted
EPA has lifted its requirements
that linuron pesticide products
be used only by certified
applicators and bear a tumor
warning statement.
  EPA has taken this action
because of new studies
submitted by E. I. duPont de
Nemours & Co., Inc., one of the
linuron registrants. DuPont's
studies show that the potential
health risks to workers applying
this pesticide with ground
equipment were much less than
originally estimated. These
studies included a skin
penetration study and a
workplace exposure study.
  However, the agency is
requiring the registrants of
linuron products to modify
labeling to provide more
protection for workers.
Specifically, the new label will
require workers to wear
forearm-to-elbow length
chemical resistant gloves. Recent
evidence has shown that such
gloves provide more protection
than the heavy fabric work
gloves that EPA originally
  Because of agency  concerns
about high exposure to
applicators, DuPont has
voluntarily cancelled all aerial
applications of linuron. EPA will
require other registrants to do so
as well.

Voluntary Dinocap Suspension
As the result of a reregistration
initiative by  EPA, Rohm & Haas
Company, the manufacturer of
the pesticide dinocap, has
notified EPA that it will
voluntarily suspend the sale and
distribution of this product
pending the outcome of
additional testing to determine
its safety.
  The suspension action was
taken after recent laboratory
tests showed that dinocap (trade
name Karathane) caused birth
defects in rabbits. Tests
confirming birth defects were
conducted by Rohm & Haas in
response to routine EPA requests
to pesticide  registrants for
toxicology data  necessary to
reregister all older pesticides as
required under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).

School Asbestos Compliance
EPA has released the results of a
survey on compliance with its
1982 Asbestos-ln-Schools Rule.
The field survey was completed
in January 1984 and included
1,800 public  school districts and
800 private schools throughout
the U.S.
  The survey indicates that 93
percent of America's school
buildings have been inspected
for asbestos  and that 35 percent
of those inspected have friable
materials containing asbestos.
The survey also revealed that 67
percent of the schools have
voluntarily taken action to
control the asbestos in their
  While 93 percent of the
country's schools have been
inspected, the survey reports
that only 34  percent of the
school districts have complied
with major requirements of the
1982 Asbestos-ln-Schools Rule.
Small Manufacturer Exemption
EPA has issued a final regulation
that exempts small chemical
manufacturers and importers
from most of the reporting and
recordkeeping that is required by
Section 8(a) of the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA).
  The Act requires EPA to
exempt small manufacturers,
importers, and processors from
Section 8(a) regulations except in
certain limited statutory cases.
Instead of doing this on a
case-by-case basis, EPA has
established a  general set of
exemption standards.

Shortened Polymer Review Time
EPA has issued a final rule
shortening the time that certain
new polymers must undergo
agency review for health and
environmental risks before
production of the substances can
  Polymers, which have a  wide
variety of  industrial applications,
are the basic molecular
ingredients in plastics
  This action, authorized by the
Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA), is expected to result in
lower information reporting
costs and  a shorter
preproduction waiting period for
private industry, without
compromising public health

Nonpoint Source Task Force
A special task force has
presented EPA with a proposed
national policy document on
nonpoint source water pollution.
  The task force, whose
chairman is Jack E. Ravan, EPA
Assistant Administrator for
Water, was created in January
1984 by former EPA Deputy
Administrator, Alvin L. Aim.
  Nonpoint source pollution  is
caused by runoff from
agriculture, urban areas,
construction sites, mining
activities, silviculture (forestry),
and similar operations.
  The policy declares that with
federal leadership, all levels of
government as well as the
private sector must cooperate to
carry out nonpoint source
management programs.
  As directed by the Clean Water
Act, EPA will serve as lead
agency to coordinate interagency
and state actions. The policy said
that states will lead in
developing and carrying out
nonpoint source strategies on
state and private lands. For other
activities, the policy said success
would  depend on cooperation
and efforts by the private sector. L

Appointments  at  EPA

Senate confirmation hearings for Lee M.
Thomas, Administrator Designate of EPA,
were scheduled for February 6. President
Reagan named Thomas Administrator
Designate in late November.
  Also appointed in acting status were
A. James Barnes as Acting Deputy
Administrator of EPA, Jack W. McGraw
as Acting Assistant Administrator for the
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response, and Gerald H. Yamada as
Acting General Counsel.
  Barnes has served as EPA's General
Counsel since 1983. Before he joined
EPA, he was General Counsel for the U.S.
Department of Agriculture from  1981 to
1983.  Between 1975 and 1981, Barnes
practiced law in Washington,  D.C.  He first
served with EPA as Assistant  to the
Administrator from 1970 to 1973.
  McGraw has served as EPA's Deputy
Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste
since July  1983. Before he joined EPA, he
served as the Deputy Director for
Emergency Operations and Assistant
Associate Director for Response Planning
Coordination at  the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA).
  Yamada, who has served as EPA's
Deputy General  Counsel for the  past
year, joined EPA in 1977. Between 1974
and 1977, he was an attorney with the
U.S. Department of Justice.

John Quarles will head the newly created
Ground Water Research Review
Committee of EPA's Science Advisory
Board. Quarles is a partner in the law
offices of Morgan Lewis & Bockius,
where his practice is primarily in the field
of environmental law.
  Quarles has played a prominent role in
the development of EPA. He joined the
agency when it  was created in December
1970 as EPA's first Assistant
Administrator for Enforcement and
General Counsel. He served as the
agency's chief legal officer for nearly two
and a half years. In April 1973, Quarles
was appointed Deputy Administrator of
EPA. He held that position until March
  For the past five years, Quarles has
served as Chairman of NEDA.CAAP, a

business-labor coalition seeking
amendments to the Clean Air Act.
  From 1962 to 1969, Quarles was
engaged in the practice of general
corporate law in Boston, Massachusetts.
In 1969-1970 he served as chief staff
assistant to the Secretary of the Interior.
  Quarles received his  college  education
at Yale University, where he graduated
Phi  Beta Kappa in 1957. In 1961 he
graduated magna cum  laude from
Harvard Law School.

Glenn L. Unterberger has been appointed
Associate Enforcement Counsel for Water
in EPA's Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Monitoring. This position,
which Unterberger has held on an acting
basis since June 1984,  gives him
responsibility for  overseeing EPA's
national enforcement judicial litigation
program under the Clean Water Act and
the  Safe Drinking Water Act.
  Unterberger joined EPA in September
1977, shortly after he received  his J.D.
from the Georgetown Law Center. He
served two years as  a staff
attorney-advisor in EPA's Mobile Source
Enforcement Division before his 1979
appointment to be Chief of the Division's
Waivers Section.  Unterberger held that
position until 1981. In 1981 he also
served for six months as Chief  of a
Special Task Force responsible for
proposing and evaluating alternative
strategies for enforcing federal
automobile pollution control
  In November, 1981 Unterberger became
a branch chief in  EPA's Office of Legal
and Enforcement Policy. He held that
position until February 1983 when he
became Director of the Office of Legal and
Enforcement Policy. Unterberger served
in that position until June  1984.
  Unterberger completed his
undergraduate education at the
University of Pennsylvania, where he
received his B.A.  in Physics in 1974.

Thomas A. Speicher has been appointed
Regional Counsel of EPA's Region 8
office in Denver. As Regional Counsel,
Speicher will be responsible for legal
enforcement matters as well  as legal and
policy advice to the Regional
Administrator and other senior
managers. He has held that position  on
an acting basis since November 1983.
  Speicher joined the  Region 8 Office of
General Counsel in October 1978 as a
general attorney.  In 1980 he became lead
regional attorney for underground
injection control programs. In November
1982 Speichei was appointed  Deputy
Regional Counsel.
  From 1971 to 1978 Speicher worked as
an attorney-advisor for environmental
law problems at the U.S. Army Materiel
Command in Alexandria, Va.
  Speicher became a member of the
Maryland Bar in 1970, shortly after he
received his J.D. from the  University of
Maryland School  of Law in Baltimore,
Md. Between 1970 and 1971, he
completed an LL.M. at the Southern
Methodist University School of Law in
Dallas, Tex. Speicher did his
undergraduate studies at the University
of Maryland in College Park, where he
received his B.A.  in 1967.
                                                                                                        EPA JOURNAL

A lumbeiman cuts down a tiee in
rain forest in Papua, New Guinea.
operations threaten to diminish the
biological diversity that flourishes in tin:
tropics.  (See story on p. /
United States
Environmental Protection
Washington DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
Third-Class Bulk
Postage and Fees Paid
Permit No. G-35