UNITED STATES ENVIROM1NTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region II, New York, New York 1027S
DATE: July 15, 1988
SUBJECT: Risk Assessment Review
FRCM:
Deputy Region a 1 Administrator
Office of Regulatory Support and Scientific Assessment
Attached is a copy of the Risk Assessment Review, a bimonthly
publication that is a cooperative effort between the Office
of Research and DeveIopment and the Regional Risk Assessment
Ne twork.
The Review serves as a focal point for information exchange
among the EPA risk assessment coninunity on both technical
and policy issues related to risk assessment. It is currently
in its second year of publication, and we are pleased at the
positive feedback we've received on the Review's usefulness
to staff across the Agency.
Thanks to all of you who continue to contribute articles
and are involved with production efforts. If you have an
article to contribute or any suggestions for future issues,
contact one of the Coazsittee members listed on page 1 of
the review.
At t achment

-------
June 1988
Highlights
•	National Conference for
State Risk Assessors	 p. 1
•	Proposed Guidelines for Male
and Female Reproductive Effects 	 p. 1
•	2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin ... p. 2
•	OTS Regional Risk Guidance Staff 	 p. 3
•	Public Needs Assessment and Resource
Development for SARA Title III 	 p. 3
•	A Computer-Assisted, Risk-Based Screening
of a Mixture of Drinking Water Chemicals . . p. 5
I. Special Feature
NATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR STATE RISK
ASSESSORS
by Morris Altschuler (FTS) 382-7667
On May 4-6, 1988, the Office of Research and
Development (ORD) through its cooperative agreement
with the National Governors' Association (NGA),
conducted a National Conference on Risk Assessment
for State Risk Assessors. ORD speakers described
recent developments in risk assessment-related
research including pharmacokinetic models and non-
cancer endpoints and chemicals of particular concern to
the states (dioxin, arsenic, chlordane and tetrachloro-
ethylene). ORD presentations also covered the rationale
and philosophy of the Risk Assessment Guidelines.
Emphasis was placed on the fact that these are not
cookbook procedures but an approach and philosophy.
Topics covered in this area included complex mixtures,
extrapolation from high to low concentration for cancer
endpoints, use of the uncertainty factor for reference
dose and multiple routes of exposure, including route-
to-route extrapolation. A paper on structure-activity
relationships by the Office of Toxic Substances was
distributed. Also Victor Kimm, Deputy Director of the
Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances, presented a
paper on Risk Assessment and Title III of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA).
Two demonstrations were presented to the attendees:
one on IRIS and one on Risk Assessment Tools - A
Prototype Computer System for Screening Level Risk
Assessment.
Seven state representatives described their individual
state philosophy and procedures in carrying out risk
assessments to show the great variation in approaches
to risk assessment at the state level. Massachusetts,
Wisconsin, Missouri, New Jersey, California, New
Hampshire and Texas Risk Assessors described pro-
cedures that varied from rigorously quantitative to
nonquantitative for a variety of actual case studies.
Actual state risk assessment case studies presented
included-health risk associated with recreation use of
Union Lake, contaminated with arsenic (New Jersey);
exposure and health risk associated with applying
dioxin-contaminated paper mill sludge to agricultural
(See Conference p. 2)
Risk Assessment Review Committee
Peter Preuss - ORD, FTS 382-7669
Sally Edwards - Region I, FTS 835-3387
Maria Pavlova - OTS, FTS 264-8672
Marian Olsen - Region II, FTS 264-5682
Susan Deihl - Region IV, FTS 257-5065
Suzanne Wuerthele - Region VII, FTS 564-1714
Dana Davoli - Region X, FTS 399-2135
II. Headquarters
NEWS FROM THE RISK ASSESSMENT FORUM
By Unda C. Tuxen (FTS) 475-6743
THYROID NEOPLASIA - On June 6, 1988, a notice of
availability of the Risk Assessment Forum's report titled,
"Thyroid Follicular Ceil Carcinogenesis: Mechanistic
and Science Policy Considerations," was published in
the Federal Register (53 FR 20685). The notice
announces that EPA has asked for Science Advisory
Board (SAB) and Science Advisory Panel (SAP) review
of this report. The date, time, and place of the SAB/SAP
meeting will be announced in a separate Federal
Register notice.
The Federai Register notice explains that a copy of this
Forum document may be obtained by contacting the
ORD Publications Center, CERI-FRN, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 26 W. Martin Luther
King Drive, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268. Telephone: [513]
569-7562 or FTS 684-7562. Please provide your
name, mailing address, and the EPA Document Number
(EPA-625/3-88/014A). The document will be distrib-
uted from the Cincinnati office only.
PROPOSED GUIDELINES FOR MALE AND FEMALE
REPRODUCTIVE EFFECTS - The proposed male and
female reproductive effects guidelines have been
published in the June 30,1988, Federal Register (53 FR
24850 and 53 FR 24834, respectively). These two
proposed guidelines for assessing male and female
reproductive risks are intended to guide Agency
analysis of data on reproductive toxicants according to
appropriate scientific standards, and in line with the
policies and procedures established in the statutes
administered by EPA. The Science Advisory Board will
review these proposed guidelines at a July 14, 1988,
meeting and public comment will be accepted until
August 29.1988.
Comments from the public and the SAB will be
reviewed and incorporated into a revised draft that will
be submitted first to the Risk Assessment Forum and
then to the Risk Assessment Council for review. The
Risk Assessment Council will consider comments from
the public, the SAB, and the Risk Assessment Forum in
their recommendations on final guidelines to the EPA
Administrator.
(See Forum p.2)
1

-------
CONFERENCE (Continued from p.1)
and silvacultural lands (Wisconsin); probable health
effects associated with exposure to a variety of
inorganic chemicals at the Mottolo Hazardous Waste
Site (New Hampshire); methyl mercury impact
associated with consumption of contaminated sport
fish in northern California coastal mountain lakes
(California). All of these assessments resulted in
recommendations and decisions based on limited data.
State procedures and approaches were well described.
Papers were also presented describing ongoing
activities under ORD's cooperative agreement with NGA
including ORD's review of State Risk Assessments, and
ORD's activities under its cooperative agreement with
the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials.
In addition to describing EPA risk assessment
philosophy, the data base and means for extrapolation,
and State variations in conducting risk assessments,
conference objectives included information exchange,
understanding state risk assessment needs and
maintaining an ongoing dialogue. At the conclusion of
the last session it was agreed that meetings of this type
were beneficial and should be continued, perhaps with
smaller groups. In addition, as was suggested, an
exchange of State and EPA/ORD Risk Assessors will be
conducted to train State Risk Assessors as to ORD
philosophy toward better implementation of guidelines
and to provide EPA personnel with a better
understanding of State needs.
Session Chairmen were Dr. Peter Preuss, Director of
the Office of Technology Transfer and Regulatory Sup-
port, who in addition to introducing new developments,
described the new ORD office responsible for
Technology Transfer; Or. William Farland, Acting
Director of the Office of Health and Environmental
Assessment who introduced the Risk Assessment
Guidelines sessions and James Solyst of NGA who
chaired the sessions on State Risk Assessment Case
Studies. Thirty-two states were represented at the
meeting.
If you have any questions, please contact Morris
Altschuler (FTS 382-7667).
FORUM (Continued from p.1)
DERMAL DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY STUDY
WORKSHOP • In April, the Risk Assessment Forum
sponsored a workshop to discuss the use, applicability,
and interpretation of developmental toxicity studies via
the dermal exposure route in risk assessments for
suspected developmental toxicants. Discussion focused
on maternal toxicity, pharmacokinetics, study design,
and future research needs in this area.
The Workshop was co-chaired by Dr. Carole Kimmel,
REAG, and Dr. Elaine Francis, OTS. Invited panelists
included toxicologists, dermal pathologists, and
pharmacokineticists from EPA program offices, National
Center for Toxicological Research, National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences, industry, contract
laboratories, and academia. The report on the workshop
proceedings is in preparation and will be forwarded to
the Forum for review. The Forum will evaluate the report
and use it to formulate an appropriate science policy
statement on the issue for the Risk Assessment
Council's consideration.
RISK ASSESSMENT FORUM COLLOQUIUM - The
Risk Assessment Forum schedules colloquia for
discussion of risk assessment issues of Agency-wide
interest, and to identify issues for later in-depth study
by the Forum or some other Agency group. On May 19,
the Risk Assessment Forum sponsored an all-day
colloquium, chaired by Dr. Donald Barnes of the
Science Advisory Board, on less-than-lifetime
exposure. The purpose of the colloquium was to assist
in determining whether approaches and issues for
estimating immediate or delayed health risk from non-
lifetime continuous exposures should be formally
considered by the Forum. Several recommendations,
including convening of a panel of risk assessment
experts to design a research approach for less-than-
lifetime exposures, will be forwarded to the Forum for its
consideration.
AVAILABLE TECHNICAL INFORMATION
By Marie C. Pfaff (FTS) 382-7345
2,3,7,8-TETRACHLORODIBENZO-p-DIOXIN
(2,3,7,8-TCDD)
Draft documents entitled, "A Cancer Risk-Specific
Dose Estimate for 2,3,7,8-TCDD" (EPA/600/6-
88/007Aa) and "Estimating Exposures to 2,3,7,8-
TCDD" (EPA/600/6-88/005A) are being made available
for public review and comment.
The cancer document re-examines the scientific basis
and methods used by EPA for estimating cancer
potency of 2,3,7,8-TCDD. An ad hoc interoffice
workgroup prepared the report and recommendations,
and scientists outside of the workgroup provided useful
analysis, review, and comment. The objective of the
report is to determine if EPA's 1985 cancer risk
assessment for polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins
should be modified in light of recent data, alternative
risk assessment methods, or alternative interpretations
of data on this chemical.
The exposure document provides the most recent
exposure and risk estimation methodology for
application of 2,3,7,8-TCDD contaminated sites. Also,
other issues were reviewed and are briefly discussed in
Appendices A through F (EPA/600/6-88/007Ab) of the
cancer document.
The Federal Register notice announcing the availability
of the 2,3,7,8-TCDD documents provides the dates of
the public comment period (July 6 through October 5,
1988) and other pertinent information such as the EPA
address where comments should be submitted. At a
later date, also to be announced in the Federal
Register, the draft documents will be reviewed by the
EPA Science Advisory Board in a public meeting.
2

-------
SELECTION CRITERIA FOR MATHEMATICAL
MODELS USED IN EXPOSURE ASSESSMENTS:
GROUND-WATER MODELS
This document (EPA/600/8-88/075F) is one of several
documents addressing selection criteria for
mathematical models used in exposure assessments. It
serves as a technical support document to the EPA
Guidelines for Estimating Exposures published in 1986.
The document presents criteria which provide a means
for selecting the most appropriate mathematical
model(s) for conducting an exposure assessment
related to ground-water contamination.
Single copies of each document also will be available
from the Office of Research and Development at the
following address:
ORD Publications Office
Center for Environmental Research Information
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
26 W. Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
TEL: 513/569-7562 or FTS/684-7562
Please provide your name, mailing address, and the
EPA Document Number when requesting these
documents. Copies of the documents will also be
distributed to Agency offices and libraries.
OTS CHEMICAL ASSESSMENT DESK
By Terry O'Bryan (FTS) 382-3483
The Chemical Assessment Desk (CAD), which was
established two years ago, continues to provide
technical support and consultation to Regional Offices,
ORD and the other Agency Program Offices. The CAD
utilizes OTS technical expertise, risk assessments on
both the New and Existing Chemical Programs, as well
as technical evaluations, contractor reports and
industry-submitted data to answer risk-related
questions and coordinate multimedia responses when
necessary. In many instances, the CAD uses its network
of intra- and inter-Agency contacts to refer inquiries
elsewhere for answers. The CAD will also be available
to provide technical support to Regional staff on SARA
313-related questions.
Most recently the CAD has responded to inquiries on
the toxicity of methylene chloride, chlorofluorocarbon
exemptions under TSCA, acute toxicity thresholds for
gasoline and diesel fuel, assistance in developing unit
risk numbers for boron trichloride, the toxicity of p-
chlorotoluene and 1-chloro-4-methylbenzene, the
regulatory status and toxicity of polychlorinated
terphenyls, the toxicity and environmental fate of
acetophenone, the toxicity of platinum, the evaluation of
new toxicity data on dimethylformamide, health effects
associated with arsenic-contaminated soil, structure-
activity evaluations of digitoxin and phenylhydrazine,
dioxin tolerances in food products, and the association
between electromagnetic radiation and leukemia.
To obtain copies of any of these responses, please
contact Terry O'Bryan at (FTS) 382-3483 (E-Mail
EPA7487), Elaine Suriano at (FTS) 382-6902 (E-Mail
EPA 7591), or Jacqueline Favilla at (FTS) 475-8823
(E-Mail EPA7497).
Please utilize the Chemical Assessment Desk, but also
note that the CAD is intended for Agency staff use only.
Please refrain from referring outside callers, including
State Agency staff, directly to the CAD. In addition, each
Regional Office has designated one or more staff as
focal points for contacting the CAD. These contacts
were established through the Regional Pesticides and
Toxic Substances Branch Chiefs to channel your
requests to the CAD.
The Chemical Assessment Desk has recently become a
part of the new Regional Risk Guidance Staff. (See next
article).
OTS REGIONAL RISK GUIDANCE STAFF
By David Klauder (FTS) 382-3628
The Office of Toxic Substances (OTS) has just
established a Regional Risk Guidance Staff (RRGS)^ to
serve as the OTS focal point for risk-related technical
support to the Regions. The primary function of this
newly created entity is to concentrate OTS multimedia
risk assessment support to the Regions, especially that
related to SARA Section 313, in a single center. The
Chemical Assessment Desk (CAD) is now a part of the
RRGS. In addition, RRGS will provide service to include
support to the Regions on resolution of risk-related
policy and research issues through appropriate Agency
science policy and research committees. Share your
Section 313 risk-related questions and needs with
David Klauder (FTS 382-3628), Director of the RRGS,
or Terry O'Bryan (FTS 382-3483) or Elaine Suriano
(FTS 382-6902), both of the CAD.
There are currently four vacancies in RRGS. Regional
staff with risk assessment experience are encouraged to
express their interest in either a detail or a permanent
position on RRGS to David Klauder.
PUBUC NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND RESOURCE
DEVELOPMENT FOR SARA TITLE III
By Marts Pavlova (FTS) 264-8672
In preparation for the release of information from the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of
1986 (SARA) Title III (Section 313), the Office of Toxic
Substances, EPA, and the Institute for Health Policy
Analysis, Georgetown University, are studying public
awareness, interests, and concerns regarding the
potential release of toxic substances into their
communities. The study will produce recommendations
and strategies for use by EPA and others preparing
information for the public.
The project methodology includes an inventory and
assessment of available public education materials,
focus groups with the public, interviews with
professionals, an analysis of current public opinion data,
preparation of recommendations for EPA and a com-
munications manual.
3

-------
Educational materials that relate to the need for
information generated by the new data being made
available through the Community Right-to-Know
process are available from a variety of sources,
including federal and state government, industry, and
independent organizations. Materials include those on
chemical concepts, legal and regulatory requirements,
and the assessment and interpretation of health risks. A
selected bibliography of the most relevant materials
which have been evaluated for technical accuracy and
ability to communicate to various target audiences will
offer some alternatives for risk communication
programs.
Based on a review of existing public opinion data, the
general public is concerned about environmental issues
but many do not feel personally affected. In preliminary
focus groups, participants have expressed surprise that
toxic chemicals are being released in their communities.
Subsequent groups will provide more insights into the
flow of information within the community and the
reaction of local citizens.
Local authorities and the media appear to be the most
frequent source of information on toxic chemicals. Ways
to enhance the flow of information through these
channels are being explored. The existing and potential
roles of collateral information channels such as health
professionals, environmental groups and industry are
also being discussed.
The project will be completed in the summer of 1988.
Reports currently available include:
•	A Bibliography of Public Education Materials
Related to Toxic Chemicals,
•	An analysis of Public Opinion Polling Data Related
to Toxic Chemicals and Environmental Hazards,
and
•	A Summary of Findings from Six Public Focus
Groups.
Additional reports are forthcoming. For copies of any of
the above reports or other information, contact: Or.
Maria Pavlova, Emergency and Remedial Response
Division, Room 737, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency - Region II, 26 Federal Plaza, New York, New
York 10278.
WORKSHOP ON EVALUATION AND EFFECTIVE
RISK COMMUNICATION
By Maria Pavlova (FTS) 264-8672
Approximately 150 communicators from around the
country met in Washington, DC, on June 2 and 3 to
discuss methods of evaluating environmental and health
risk communication programs. The Workshop Co-
Chairpersons, Vincent Covello (Health Effects Institute),
Ann Fisher (EPA Office of Policy Analysis), and Rose
Mary Romano (National Cancer Institute), along with the
planning committee chaired by Maria Pavlova (EPA
Region II), structured the agenda to facilitate interactions
among speakers and attendees. The Workshop was
held under the auspices of the Interagency Group on
Public Education and Communication, a subcommittee
of the Task Force on Environmental Cancer and Heart
and Lung Disease.
On the first day, Milton Russell, former EPA Assistant
Administrator for Policy. Planning, and Evaluation, in his
keynote address, raised a central issue in risk
communication - the importance of public trust and
confidence in society's institutions. Dr. Russell asked
attendees to consider whether risk communication can
serve to restore trust or whether that trust, once lost,
can ever be fully restored.
Health communications consultant Elaine Bratic Arkin
defined risk communication and its goals and facilitated
a panel discussion on how evaluation can show that risk
communication programs are working. Panelists pre-
sented case studies of successful risk communication,
but with the mention of problems encountered, from
Federal, State and private perspectives. Peter Rossi of
the University of Massachusetts provided the theoretical
context for evaluation methodology, and panelists des-
cribed the use of evaluation in specific risk com-
munication programs.
Attendees were then asked to select among 11 small
workshop sessions on the topics of Developing the
Message, Tracking Progress, and Measuring Accom-
plishments. Workshop leaders were given wide latitude
in how to conduct their sessions but all were
encouraged to engage attendees in dialogue and
provide the opportunity for open discussion. The first
day ended with a problem-solving session in which
attendees were able to discuss their own particular
communication and evaluation problems with experts.
Both days of the Workshop featured luncheon speakers.
William Novelli of Porter/Novelli discussed the role of
marketing research in evaluation. John Ahearne, Chair-
man of the National Academy of Sciences Committee
on Risk Perception and Communication, challenged
attendees to ensure that risk communication does make
a difference in today's society.
Before breaking into small groups again on the second
day, attendees heard from Roger Kasperson of Clark
University about the maturation of risk communication in
terms of theory, methodology, and practice. He
suggested that the most important characteristic of risk
communication is that it be humane, because its
ultimate goal must be to anticipate harm that may be
inflicted and reduce human suffering.
Attendees then participated in two of nine workshops on
topics dealing with evaluation, such as obstacles to
evaluation, Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
procedures, quick and easy evaluation techniques, use
of evaluation results, deciding on the extent of
evaluation, and matching needs with evaluators'
capabilities. A poster session enabled attendees to
present details on case studies on risk communication
and evaluation and gave market research vendors an
opportunity to discuss their services.
The concluding session of the Workshop involved all
attendees in identifying problems and recommending
research and other measures to improve the practice of
risk communication. Although it was agreed that much
4

-------
progress has been made in a relatively short time,
attendees recognized the continuing gap between the
theory and practice of risk communication. It was
suggested that narrowing the gap would require the
commitment of agencies and institutions to make risk
communication a matter of political will rather than
simply a science. In conclusion, attendees reiterated the
importance of sharing their experiences and knowledge
and building and expanding risk communication
networks.
The full proceedings of the Workshop will be prepared
for publication along with appropriate case studies. The
draft discussion papers, prepared by Peter Rossi (A
Guide to Evaluation Research Theory and Practice) and
Elaine Bratic Arkin (Evaluation for Risk Communication),
are available upon request to Maria Pavlova (FTS)
264-8672 or (212) 264-8672.
INFORMATION RESOURCES DIRECTORY
By Bruce McCaffrey (701) 841-5506
The Office of Information Resources Management
(OIRM) is developing a directory that will identify all
risk-related information resources available to the
Agency. Known as the Information Resources Directory
(IRD), it will include an EPA Contacts List, appropriate
data bases housed at EPA and elsewhere, other Federal
Environmental Contacts, a list of publications focused
on environmental issues and a synopsis of EPA Library
facilities and resources. The IRD is one of the first
products of OIRM's work on the Comprehensive Risk
Information Structure Project (CRISP). The directory
should be available sometime later this year.
III. Around the Regions
REGION III
A COMPUTER-ASSISTED, RISK-BASED
SCREENING OF A MIXTURE OF DRINKING
WATER CHEMICALS
During 1987, EPA Region III sampled raw and treated
drinking water at ten locations in Virginia and
Pennsylvania to estimate risks to human health
associated with water use. This work was performed as
part of the Region's Measurable Environmental Results
Initiatives (MERIT) process. Composite samples were
taken from water supply intakes in the Roanoke River
basin and the lower Susquehanna River at three
hydrologically distinct times. Samples were analyzed for
187 contaminants, including metals, volatile organic
compounds, pesticides, and polynuclear aromatic
compounds. One hundred three substances were
detected in at least one water sample.
Upper bound lifetime carcinogenic risk and systemic
hazard index were calculated for each chemical in each
sample. Chemical-specific carcinogenic risks and
hazard indexes were summed to estimate total risk and
hazard index for each sample. Sample sums were
averaged for each location.
Mean upper bound lifetime cancer risk ranged from 8 x
10-5 to 2 x 10*4; total systemic hazard index ranged
from 0.1 to 0.5. No contaminants other than trihalo-
methanes contributed significantly to total cancer risk or
hazard index. Additional exposure from inhaling
trihalomethanes which volatilize from tap water in
homes may increase exposure and risk by a factor of
approximately 2. Acetone, which potentiates
trihalomethane-induced liver and kidney damage in
animals, occurred with trihalomethanes at most
locations. This suggests the total hazard index may
have been higher than the sum of individual chemical
hazard indexes.
A combination of micro and mainframe computers
assisted with each phase of the data analysis. The
microcomputer wrote program statements which were
executed by the mainframe computer, for the following
purposes: (1) storage of the raw data in the STORET
data base, (2) retrieval of the stored data in a form
readable by the SAS statistics package, (3) manage-
ment of the SAS data set, (4) all risk calculations, and
(5) production of summary tables of the results. The
microcomputer was able to quickly produce error-free
mainframe programs in excess of 10,000 lines. This
process saved a substantial amount of time compared
to the usual manual entry/debugging method of
programming.
This work is presently undergoing EPA internal review
prior to intended publication.
Contact: Roy L. Smith (FTS 597-9857)
REGION X
SEMINAR ON QUANTITATIVE METHODS IN
RISK ASSESSMENT
On June 16, Herbert (Pepe) Lacayo, a statistician from
the Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation in
Headquarters, presented a workshop on statistical
procedures used in dose-response modeling for car-
cinogens. The workshop focused upon the calculation of
the potency factor, q*. using the multi-stage model with
an emphasis on the derivation of maximum likelihood
estimates and upper confidence limits. The Global
computer program for the multistage model was also
demonstrated. This was the second in a series of
workshops designed for technical risk assessment staff
from Region X, state and local agencies, and local
universities.
Contact: Dana Davoli (FTS 399-2135)
IV. Announcements
COMPUTER SOFTWARE
Drs. Jeanne Appling, June Fessenden-Raden and
Carole Bisogni of Cornell University's Institute for
Comparative and Environmental Toxicology have
developed a self-paced instructional computer
software package called "Toxicology and Public Health:
Understanding Chemical Exposure." The program is
designed to help users, with no prior computer
experience, who must consider the implications of toxic
chemicals in their work. The program explains the
basics of toxicology and the sources of uncertainty
about the risks posed by chemicals in the context of
5

-------
current issues. All fundamental concepts are covered,
using well over 200 chemicals as examples of:
•	common terms
•	routes of entry
•	dose response
•	properties that affect toxicity
•	pharmacokinetics
•	variation in response to chemicals
•	defense mechanisms
•	regulation of toxic chemicals
•	health effects
•	carcinogens
•	reproductive poisons, and
•	risk assessment and management.
The program includes: simple commands, plentiful art,
animation, user-selected examples, simulations,
interactive exercises, informative quizzes, crossword
puzzle, a cocktail party, and glossary of more than 160
terms. The program offers the freedom to learn what
you want, when you want to.
The software runs on an IBM PC/XT or true compatible
with enhanced graphics. IBM color graphics may be
substituted but quality will be compromised; the
program will take about 1 megabyte of space.
The system is available at a not-for-profit rate of
$120.00. For further information on ordering the system
contact: Media Services Distribution Center, Cornell
University, 8 Research Park, Ithaca, New York 14850;
Attn: Richard Gray, (607-255-2091).
WORKSHOP ON RISK ASSESSMENT AND
MANAGEMENT OF DRINKING WATER
CONTAMINATION
The next Workshop on Risk Assessment and
Management of Drinking Water Contamination is
scheduled in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on August 22,
23 and 24. 1988.
The three-day workshop is offered three to four times
per year. The course is primarily geared towards
regional and state staffs and includes a combination of
lecture and case study to teach how to assess drinking
water contamination.
For further information contact: Marlene Regelski at FTS
382-3639 and Bill Hartley at FTS 382-7588.
STORMWATER AND WATER QUALITY MODEL
USER GROUP MEETING
The Stormwater and Water Quality Model User's Group
meeting is scheduled for October 3-4, 1988, in Denver,
Colorado. The registration fee is $50.00 payable to the
conference coordinator. Preregistrations will be
appreciated.
Abstracts of presentations on all aspects of Stormwater
and Water Quality Modeling are invited to be submitted
to the conference coordinator by August 1, 1988.
Authors will be notified of acceptance by August 15,
1988. Papers will be due at the meeting.
The conference will be held at the Executive Tower Inn
in Denver, Colorado (800-525-6651 or 303-571-
0300). A block of rooms has been reserved at the
conference rate of $45.00 single or double. Deadline for
the conference rate is September 20. The Urban
Stormwater Modeling Conference should be mentioned
when making reservations.
For further information contact: Dr. James C. Y. Guo,
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Colorado
at Denver, Campus Box 113, 1200 Larimer Street,
Denver, Colorado 80204-5300.
MODELING WORKSHOPS
MODEL ON EXPOSURE AND
BIOACCUMULATION OF TOXICANTS IN
SURFACE WATERS
The Office of Research and Development's Center for
Exposure Assessment Modeling, U.S. EPA, Environ-
mental Research Laboratory in Athens, Georgian is
sponsoring two Workshops on the Model on Exposure
and Bioaccumuiation of Toxicants in Surface Waters.
The first Workshop is scheduled for July 25-28 at the
Omni Georgetown Hotel at 2121 "P" Street in
Washington, DC 20037. The second workshop is
scheduled for August 15-18, 1988, at the Clarion
Harvest House, 1345 Twenty-Eighth Street, Boulder,
Colorado 80302.
The Exposure and Bioaccumuiation of Toxicants in
Surface Waters Training Course will cover a variety of
environmental models designed to aid scientists and
engineers in the management of pollution control to
achieve water quality goals. The purpose of the course
is to provide participants with the knowledge and the
tools to evaluate problems associated with toxicants in
surface waters. Lectures will address the theory and
principles that control chemical transport, transformation
fate, and biological impact of pollutants in surface
waters. The course will also provide experience in the
actual application and operation of models through the
"hands on" modeling of simple systems. The following
models will be discussed:
SARAH: A steady state hazardous waste mixing zone
model.
EXAMSII: A steady state and quasi-dynamic model
for rapid evaluation of the behavior of
synthetic organic chemicals in surface
waters.
WASP4: A dynamic model for site-specific
evaluation of transport, transformation and
fate of contaminants in surface waters.
THE FOOD CHAIN MODEL:
A WASP4 associated program that predicts
uptake and distribution throughout a user
described aquatic food chain.
FGETS: A toxicokinetic model that simulates
bioaccumuiation of non-polar organic
chemicals by fish.
6

-------
Robert Ambrose, Jr., of EPA's Center for Exposure
Assessment Modeling at Athens, Georgia; Or. John
Connolly of Manhattan College in New York; Scarlett
Vandergrift of EPA's Athens Laboratory, Athens,
Georgia: and Timothy Wool of the Computer Science
Corporation in Athens, Georgia, will make presentations
at ttiis course.
For further information and registration contact: Trisha
Hasch, ERG Corporation, 6 Whittlemore Street,
Arlington, Massachusetts 02174, at (617) 648-7803.
METALS EQUILIBRIUM SPECIATION WORKSHOP
The Office of Research and Development's Athen's
Laboratory is sponsoring a Workshop on a Model for
Metals Equilibrium Speciatior (MINTEQA1) on August
23 through the 25, 1988, at the Clarion Harvest House,
1345 Twenty-Eighth Street, Boulder, Colorado 80302.
The training course is designed for engineers,
scientists, and managers who perform and manage
water quality monitoring activities. MINTEQA1 is a
geochemical model that is capable of calculating
equilibrium aqueous speciation, adsorption, gas phase
partitioning, solid phase saturation states, and precip-
itation-dissolution of metals. Included in MINETEQA1
is an extensive thermodynamic data base that is ade-
quate for solving many problems without need for
additional user-supplied thermodynamic data. Seven
sorption models are available in MINTEQA1 depending
on the quality ard type of metal sorption data available
for specific problems.
The purpose of the training course is to provide
participants with the knowledge and experience to apply
the MINTEQA1 model to a variety of environmental
exposure assessment problems for metals and to
provide an understanding of chemical and mathematical
speciation equilibria in order to eliminate "black box"
interpretations of MINTEQA1 outputs. Specific objec-
tives of the course will be to demonstrate how to relate
environmental problems to MINTEQA1, how to enter
MINTEQA1 problems into the computer and how to
interpret MINTEGA1 outputs.
Lectures will address solution and redox chemistries,
solids equilibria, and advanced theory. The course will
also cover case studies, including problems pre-
submitted by the participants. (Pre-submitted prob-
lems must be received at least one month in advance of
the course starting date. Upon receipt of your
registration a confirmation letter will be sent, including a
problem submission form). In addition, actual
experience in applications of MINTEQA1 model will be
provided through "hands on" modeling of simple
systems.
Lecturers at the course will be: Dr. David Brown of
EPA's Athens Laboratory, Athens, Georgia; Dr. John
Westall of Oregon State University, CorvaJlis, Oregon;
and Dr. Allen Medine, Water Science Corporation,
Boulder, Colorado.
The following prerequisite is strongly suggested but is
not mandatory; experience with solution chemistry
equilibria or experience with an IBM-PC or compatible
computer.
For additional information on the workshop, contact:
Trisha Hasch, ERG Corporation, 6 Whittiemore Street,
Arlington, Massachusetts 02174.
SCHEDULE FOR RISK AND DECISION-
MAKING COURSES
The following is the schedule for the Risk and
Oecision-Making Courses through September:
Region III
Headquarters
Region V
Headquarters
Region II
Headquarters
Region IV
Tentative Schedule:
Headquarters
Headquarters
Headquarters
Headquarters
Headquarters
Headquarters
July 6 -
July 13 ¦
July 13 ¦
July 20 ¦
July 26 •
July 27 •
14
15
21
28
28
August 23-25
August 10-11
August 17-18
August 24 • 25
September 14-15
September 21 - 22
September 28 - 29
Contact: Pam Stirling (FTS 382-2747)
Contacts:
Jerome Puskin
Linda Tuxen
Dick Hill
Don Barnes \
Dean Hill
Marian Olsen
Roy Smith
Elmer Akin
Dave Dolan
Jill Lyons
Bob Fenemore
Arnold Den
Dana DavoS
OAR-Rad.
ORD-RAF
OPTS
SAB
NEIC
Region II
Region III
Region IV
Region V
Region VI
Region VII
Region IX
Region X
FTS
FTS
FTS
FTS
FTS
FTS
FTS
FTS
FTS
FTS
FTS
FTS
FTS
475-9640
475-6743
382-2897
382-4126
776-8138
264-5682
597-9857
347-3454
886-6195
255-7208
757-2970
454-0906
399-2135
If you would like to receive additional copies of this and
subsequent Reviews or to be added to the mailing list,
contact;
CERI Distribution
26 W. Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Afeed Help?
If your office needs help in finding information or
assistance on a specific risk assessment problem,
you can announce that need on the Risk
Assessment/Risk Management Bulletin Board now
available on E-Mail. Your colleagues from other
offices who have information or advice will be able
to contact you with ass/stance. For assistance in
posting announcements or reading entries on the
Bulletin Board, contact Electronic Mail User's
Support at FTS 362-5639. Your colleagues from
other offices who have information or advice will be
able to contact you with assistance.
7

-------