UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region II, New York, New York 10278
DATE:
SUBJECT:
FROM:
September 12, 1989
Risk Assessment Review
William Jr. Mas^nski , P.E.
Acting^Region*! Administrator
Peter Preuss, Director
Office of Technology Transfer and
Regulatory Support
Attached is a copy of the Risk Assessment Review, a
bimonthly publication that is a cooperative effort
between the Office of Research and Development and the
Regional Risk Assessment Network.
The Review serves as a focal point for information
exchange among the EPA risk assessment community on
both technical and policy issues related to risk
assessment. It is currently in its third 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 further issues, contact one of the Committee
members listed on page 1 of the review.
Attachment

-------
August 1989
Highlights
•	Update of the Risk Communication
Program's Problem-Specific
Consulting and Analysis Projects	 p. 1
•	Regional Superfund Risk Assessment
Needs: Report from the ORD
Regional Scientist in Region III 	 p. 1
•	Toxics Integration Branch Activities	 p. 5
•	Region IX - Risk Assessment at
Asbestos Superfund Sites 	 p. 7
I. Special Features
Update of the Risk Communication Program's
Problem-Specific Consulting and Analysis
Projects
by Judith Lomax (FTS 382-2732)
This update provides the most recent information about
projects conducted under the Problem-Specific Consult-
ing and Analysis component of the Risk Communication
Program. These projects are directed toward testing the
effectiveness of existing methodologies and exploring
new approaches to effectively communicating risk
information to the public. In most instances, actual risk
situations are the subject of these analyses.
For more information about projects on this list call the
contact person whose name appears in parenthesis. For
information about the risk communication projects in
general, call Ann Fisher, FTS 382-2732, or Derry Allen,
FTS 382-2747.
Completed Projects
1. Radon
a.	Generation of Citizen's Guide, Training Program,
etc. (OAR, OPPE, Public Affairs, Regions), (Steve
Page, FTS 475-9605).
b.	Maine Study. An analysis of perceptions and
remedial responses of 230 households who
received test results and an information brochure
as part of an epidemiological study. Article in
Risk Analysis, 1987. (Reed Johnson, FTS 382-
4396).
c.	Community Response to Radon Information. An
evaluation of different reactions in Boyertown,
PA; Vernon Township, NJ; and Clinton, NJ;
drawing lessons on how to design a risk
communication strategy that leads people to test
and mitigate appropriately. "Alerting the
Apathetic and Reassuring the Alarmed" Final
report, August 1988; EPA 230/08-88-036. (Ann
Fisher, FTS 382-5500).
d.	Radon Risk Communication Study in Sweden at
the Stockholm School of Economics. No EPA
money, but involvement by OPPE staff. Final
report, August 1988. (Reed Johnson, FTS 382-
4396).
(see Update p.2)
Risk Assessment Review Committee
Peter Preuss - ORD, FTS 382-7669
Sally Edwards - Region I, FTS 835-3387
Maria Pavlova - Region II, FTS 264-7364
Marian Olsen - Region II, FTS 264-5682
Suzanne Wuerthele - Region VIII, FTS 564-1714
Dana Davoli - Region X, FTS 399-2135
II. Headquarters
Regional Superfund Risk Assessment Needs:
Report from the ORD Regional Scientist in
Region III
by Norm Kulujian (FTS 597-9336)
This is the second in a sequence of articles on the
activities of the Regional Scientist Program in the
Regional Operations Staff, ORD, (see July 11, 1989,
issue).
Last year, ORD initiated the Regional Scientist Program
to locate an ORD representative in each region. For the
past year, I have been in Philadelphia (Region III) as the
ORD regional focal point. In September 1988, Region III
was selected as the Lead Region for Superfund. One of
my priorities as the Regional Scientist was to work with
the Region III coordinator to determine the regional
Superfund research and technical assistance needs and
submit them to the ORD Superfund Research Sub-
committee. All of the regions were asked to submit their
research needs to the Region III coordinator. An effort
was made to integrate and prioritize needs across the
regions. The needs were then forwarded to the
Superfund Research Committee.
The regional research and technical assistance needs
were categorized in three significant areas:
•	removal/remedial guidance for specific sites,
•	methods development and validation for hazardous
analytes, and
•	ecological/health effects risk assessment.
The remainder of this article summarizes the risk
assessment needs submitted by the Superfund
Branches in the regions:
•	Methods for determining ecological risk assessment
for Superfund sites in rural locations. There is a
need for ecological risk assessment techniques to
assess risks to environmental receptors (e.g.. birds,
rodents, fish) and ecosystems.
•	Treatment and evaluation of cancer risks when
exposure is not for an entire lifetime (e.g., childhood
ingestion of soils).
(see Regional p. 5)
1

-------
Update (continued from p.1)
e.	Region lll/OPPE/Maryland Study. An evaluation
of alternative community outreach methods for
motivating target audiences to test for radon.
Reports, November 1988; and March 1989.
(Nancy Zahedi, FTS 382-5399; Ann Fisher FTS
382-5500).
f.	Geographic Mapping of Radon Data. Developed
a computerized geographic display of Region I
radon data for use in communicating about radon
risk. Draft final report, October 1988. (Tom
D'Avanzo, FTS 835-3222).
g.	Motivating people to test for radon and mitigate
high levels. Public apathy is more of a concern
than public panic over the well-publicized
dangers from radon in homes. This study
examined the effectiveness of an integrated TV-
PSA/test-kit-marketing effort in getting people to
test for radon, and whether testers mitigated.
Draft February 1989. (Alan Carlin, FTS 382-
5499).
2.	Evaluation of EDB Risk Communications.
a.	Analysis of EPA "message" and media
coverage; report and article in Risk Analysis,
1986. (Derry Allen, FTS 382-2747).
b.	Analysis of market impacts and implicit value of
information about EDB contamination. Final
report, August, 1988. (Reed Johnson, FTS 382-
4396; or (301) 267-2100).
3.	Study of the Effectiveness of Alternative Pesticide
Labeling Formats, 1986. (OPPE) (Ann Fisher, FTS
382-5500).
4.	Evaluation of EPA risk communications concerning
Chernobyl; June 1987 (OPPE, OEA, OAR). (Derry
Allen, FTS 382-2747; Gus Edwards, FTS 475-8200).
5.	Citizens' Guide, "Lead and Your Drinking Water,"
April 1987, (OW, OPPE, OEA, OA). (Jeanne Briskin,
FTS 382-5456).
6.	Toms River, New Jersey, Superfund Site. Risk
Communication Demonstration Study; summary
report, August 1988; (Region II, with OERR and
OPPE); (Maria Pavlova, FTS 264-7364).
7.	Case Studies of Air Pollution Risk Communication.
Three cases of state and local air pollution control
agencies communicating the results of a source-
specific risk assessment to the public. The
emphasis is on what was successful and what was
not. Special report completed. 1988. (Karen
Blanchard, OAQPS, FTS 629-5503).
8.	Guidance for Developing Toxic Profile Summaries.
Focus groups were used in evaluating a draft toxic
profile summary. The results should be used to
guide contractors who write toxic profiles. [A joint
effort between EPA (OPA, OSR, OTS) and ATSDR)].
(Mel Kollander, FTS 382-2734).
9.	Risk Communication for the National Survey of
Pesticides in Drinking Water Wells. Use of focus
groups to pretest draft materials regarding what
sources the public views as credible, what types of
messages make the risk information more
meaningful, and what concerns were not satisfied in
the public's mind. Draft report received July 1988.
(ODW, OPP, OPPE), (Bill O'Neil, FTS 382-3354).
10.	Federal Asbestos-ln-Schools Program. OPTS
analysis of the relationships of EPA's program to
state programs and actual local abatement efforts.
(Mike Stahl, FTS 382-3790).
11.	Wood Stoves. Developed a fact sheet explaining
health risk for burning wood and how the risks can
be reduced while still using this source of fuel.
(Region VIII and Denver IEMP) (Rich Lathrop, FTS
564-1701).
12.	Community Right-To-Know
a.	OTS focus groups to identify community needs
for information about data collected under Title III
of SARA, especially for the routine release data
of Section 313. Final report, fall 1988 (Maria
Pavlova, FTS 264-7364).
b.	OTS pilot communities evaluated draft materials
for interpreting the routine chemical release data
collected under Title III, Section 313 of SARA.
(Mike Stahl, FTS 382-3790).
c.	Municipal Officials and Title III. Region I
examination of what methods municipal officials
see as viable for informing the public about the
existence and potential use of Local Emergency
Plans and Section 313 data. Draft final report,
summer 1988. (Tom D'Avanzo, FTS 835-3222).
13.	Evaluation of risk communication efforts at IEPM
sites. Draft report, spring 1989. (Art Koines, FTS
382-2700).
Ongoing Projects
14.	Radon: Effectiveness of Risk Communication
Activities.
a.	New York Study. 2,300 homes monitored as part
of the New York State Energy Research and
Development Authority study. OPPE (with OEA,
ORP, Region II, and New York State) developed
information, dissemination, and evaluation
program to test effectiveness of alternative
information formats to induce cost-effective
voluntary mitigation of radon risks (Interim report,
July 1987; final data collected in April 1989).
(Reed Johnson, FTS 382-4396; Stephany
Descisciolo, FTS 475-9600).
b.	Summary and critique of radon risk
communication studies. To distill implications for
developing an effective risk communication
strategy. Draft March 1989. Summary paper May
1989. (Ann Fisher, FTS 382-5500).
c.	Interpretation of radon readings for water versus
air. The risk for water versus air. The risks from
10,000 pCi/l in water is approximately equivalent
to 1 pCi/l in air. The concern is that people with,
for example, a 200 pCi/l water test result and a
100 pCi/l air'test result will mitigate their water
2

-------
even though the air risk would be much larger.
This study will examine ways to assure
appropriate interpretation. (Greg Helms, FTS
475-8049).
d.	Preliminary pretesting for revisions of the
Citizen's Guide. Carnegie Mellon University is
examining risk perceptions and communication
under a large grant from the National Science
Foundation. As part of their work on radon, they
have offered to evaluate the effectiveness of
selected components (Ann Fisher, FTS 382-
5500).
e.	Motivations for mitigation. Working with the
National Science Foundation to analyze available
data on radon mitigation decisions. (Ann Fisher,
FTS 382-5500).
f.	Time-of-Scale Incentives. Follow-up to the pilot
study that suggested much higher mitigation
rates when homes are purchased. (Alan Carlin,
FTS 382-5499).
15.	Risk Communication at Superfund Sites. OPPE
studied risk perceptions around the Oil landfill in
California; now doing further work to understand
public perception of Superfund risks and helping
OERR develop a risk communication chapter for its
community relations handbook. Draft being revised.
(Ann Fisher, FTS 382-5500; Vanessa Musgrave,
FTS 382-2339).
16.	Boat hull paints. To assist OPP and NOAA in
developing and evaluating leaflets to be sent to
marinas and boat owners. One test version
emphasizes ecological risk, and the other
emphasizes human health risk. Preliminary draft
report, spring 1989. NOAA is funding most of this
study. (Judith Koontz, FTS 382-4034).
17.	Hotline for Regions and Program Offices. To serve
as an up-to-date resource for information on risk
communication research, skill building,
implementation, and evaluation: FTS 382-5606). (In
place 4/87).
18.	Risk Assessment Review. An EPA internal
newsletter that includes articles about Agency
activities in risk assessment, risk management and
risk communication. (Peter Preuss, FTS 382-7669,
William J. Muszynski, FTS 264-0396, and Jessica
Barron FTS 684-7551).
19.	Study to determine whether risk information leads to
changes in individual's everyday behavior.
Research uses context of skin cancer risks from
exposure to sunlight, because health data are firmer
than for most of the other risks the Agency
manages. Results should apply to several issues in
OPP, OTS, ODW, and OAR. Initiated, Summer
1987. (Alan Carlin, FTS 382-5499 and Hugh Pitcher,
FTS 382-2788).
20.	Community Right-to-Know
a. Evaluating the role, methods and effectiveness of
the local emergency planning committees in
communicating about community risks as part of
explaining their emergency preparedness plans.
(OPPE. OSWER, OPTS, OEA) Phase I Final
Report, December 1988. Phase II adds eight
communities to the two initially studied; draft
report, July 1989. Phase III will disseminate risk
communication information for LEPCs and
community officials dealing with Superfund sites.
(Ann Fisher, FTS 382-5500; John Gustafson, FTS
382-3411).
b.	Transferring lessons learned from communicating
about natural hazards to communicating about
technological hazards. The natural hazards
literature is rich with studies of how these risks
have been communicated to affected groups.
Initial draft report (June 1988) explores potential
applications for technological environmental risks.
Additional work is being done by a different
group. (Janice Quinn, FTS 475-8600 and Ann
Fisher FTS 382-5500).
c.	OSWER/ORD study of how Title III is creating
incentives for companies to reduce risks and
communicate the results to the communities.
(Elaine Davies, FTS 475-8600).
d.	Common Ground. To establish and maintain a
national working group on Title III, that will serve
as a sounding board and source of ideas, and
establish evaluation criteria for measuring
accomplishments. (Charlie Osolin, FTS 382-
4075).
e.	In-place Sheltering vs. Evacuation. Using results
from risk communication literature, this study is
developing criteria for deciding whether or not to
shelter people in place or evacuate them. The
decision criteria will be applicable for
emergencies related to Superfund sites or to
Title III releases. OSWER-lead with Center for
Risk Management. Initiated summer 1988;
Conference, November 1988. (John Gustafson,
FTS 382-3411).
f.	Testing the Effectiveness of Citizen-Derived Risk
Information. Tufts University will use citizen
groups enhanced with scientific experts and
facility representatives to study the dynamics of
learning about the risks and implications for Title
III. (Margaret Chu, FTS 382-7305; Dorothy
McManus, FTS 475-8606).
21. Baseline Study of Public Knowledge and
Perceptions of Chemical Risks. Combines data on
general questions from a nationwide sample with in-
depth questions (especially related to Title III and
Superfund sites) for surveying six communities.
Data collection started July 1988. Briefing for senior
managers, February 1989. Phase I draft report
August 1989. Phase II will examine the existing and
potential roles for health professionals in
communicating about Title III risks. Phase III follow-
up data collection will allow evaluation of how
effective risk communication activities have been
(OSWER, OTS, OPPE). (Derry Allen, FTS 382-2747;
Ann Fisher, FTS 382-5500; Mike Stahl, FTS 382-
3

-------
3790; Dorothy McManus, FTS 475-8606; Karen
Ellenberger, FTS 382-4617).
22.	Comparing Expert and Lay Judgments in Chemical
Risk Assessment. Small initiative to complement
Baseline Study (Immediately above); Draft report,
September 1989. (Ann Fisher, FTS 382-5500).
23.	Measuring changes in risk beliefs. University of
Colorado is measuring risk beliefs of public officials
and community leaders both before and after they
have participated in the Denver Integrated
Environmental Management Project's risk
communication program. Initiated, fall 1986.
Completion is tied to IEMP schedule. (Alan Carlin,
FTS 382-5499).
24.	E-mail updates of Agency's risk communication
activities. (Ernestine Thomas, FTS 382-5606).
25.	"Public Response to Environmental Threat." An
examination of public opinion in three types of
communication (those currently at risk, those
currently at alarm, and those facing no
environmental threat) to learn about how the level of
knowledge and basic perceptions change as the
community goes through different states. The goal
is to suggest how the different actors in
environmental conflicts can communicate better with
each other. (Margaret Randoi, FTS 264-4535).
26.	Informing the Public About the Risks of Low-Level
Radioactive Waste Disposal Options. To determine
baseline level of knowledge about such wastes and
perceptions of their risks; to compare perceptions of
the risks of various disposal options with technical
risk assessments; to design and evaluate messages
for informing people about the risks and benefits of
various disposal options. Initiated summer 1988.
(OSWER lead), (Larry Zaragoza, FTS 382-4617).
27.	Pesticides. Evaluating the effectiveness of
alternative training material formats (e.g., posters,
handbooks, video tapes, slide tapes) for training
agricultural workers about the hazards of pesticide
exposure. Also, to develop and evaluate pictograms
for use as a national symbol prohibiting re-entry into
areas treated with pesticides. (Allie Fields, FTS 557-
7666).
28.	Profiling Community Characteristics for
Communicating about the Risks of Hazardous
Waste Facilities. Both siting and remediation of
hazardous waste facilities lead to community
concerns. This research will develop an index based
on social, economic, financial and environmental
characteristics of communities for predicting their
response to Superfund and RCRA sites, depending
on the specific characteristics of the hazardous
waste site. OSWER-lead. (Karen Ellenberger, FTS
382-4617).
29.	Developing Superfund indicators for communicating
about the risks and results at Superfund sites. (Ruth
Chemerys, FTS 382-4908).
30.	Environmental Contaminants in Schools. Lead in
Drinking Water. To evaluate the effectiveness of
ODW's booklet for school administrators on lead in
drinking water, ORP's guidance to schools about
radon, and OTS's guidance to schools about
asbestos. (Bill O'Neill, FTS 382-5601; Jeanne
Briskin, FTS 382-5456; Peter Caulkins, FTS 382-
2576; Peyton Lewis, FTS 475-9617; and Dave Kling,
FTS 382-3949).
31.	TEAM Study on Risk Communication. To assist
OAR and ORD in developing and evaluating
materials so that participants in the TEAM study can
interpret their readings for approximately 30 air
toxics monitored. (Andy Manale, FTS 382-2857).
32.	Community Right-to-Know. The OSWER Com-
munity Relations Pilot Study has been focusing on
Title III. Region VII has worked with the State of
Kansas, local industry groups, and the Local
Emergency Planning Committee on compliance and
other Title III issues. Further efforts will concentrate
on involving the community. (Hattie Thomas, FTS
757-2803).
33.	Communicating about the Risks From New
Municipal Waste Facilities. Existing landfills will be
full within five years, yet most communities exhibit
strong opposition to the siting of new municipal
landfills, incinerators, compost facilities and transfer
stations. This study will yield guidance for
identifying and responding to community concerns.
(Truet de Geare, FTS 382-6261; Greg Michaels,
FTS 475-6169).
34.	Evaluating the effectiveness of the OAR booklet
entitled "The Inside Story: A Guide to Indoor Air
Quality." (Betsy Agle, FTS 382-7753; Ann Fisher,
FTS 382-5500).
35.	Kanawha Valley Risk Communication Project. To
develop training for local people who then will
communicate the findings of the Harvard National
Institute for Chemical Studies health study to
participants and the community. (Debra Gutenson,
FTS 382- 2733).
36.	A Computerized Risk Communication Manual. Using
HyperCard software and Macintosh computers,
Superfund Community Relations Coordinators and
others will be able to access risk communication
information along whatever paths meet their needs.
(Ann Fisher, FTS 382-5500; Tony Jover, FTS 382-
2387).
Proposed Projects
37.	Communicating about the hazardous waste
permitting process. The identification of data needs
likely to face Regions' permit writers as well as
generators in responding to the community's
questions about the risks from proposed waste
facilities. (Jim O'Leary, FTS 475-7065; Greg
Michales, FTS 475-6197).
38.	Study on the effectiveness of fish toxicity advisories
issued by states about contaminants in freshwater
fish. This study would examine what impacts such
warnings have on recreational fishing behavior. Do
people decide not to fish, or to fish elsewhere, or to
4

-------
fish as usual? Do they fish for different species? Do
they keep fewer fish to eat? Do they change how
they clean and cook the fish? (Mary Jo Keaiy, FTS
475-8665).
39.	Explaining drinking water risks to small
communities, where the cost per household of
complying with MCLs is greater. (Arnie Kuzmack,
FTS 382-5515; Ann Fisher, FTS 382-5500).
40.	Community Decisions About Ground Water
Contamination. Oregon's new law requires that a
community committee recommend voluntary action
to reduce contamination when a threshold is
passed. If a higher threshold is exceeded, the state
mandates controls. This study would trace the
communications and decisions by the local
committees. (Arnie Kuzmack, FTS 382-5515; Ann
Fisher, FTS 382-5500).
41.	Developing a framework for evaluating risk
communication activities. To provide easy-to-use
guidance for tailoring evaluations to the scope of
risk communication activities, so we can learn from
our successes and avoid repeating mistakes. (Ann
Fisher, FTS 382-5500).
42.	Improving Environmental Impact Statement
Methods. How to communicate about impacts and
mitigation to ecosystems, communities, populations
and organisms. (Phil Ross, FTS 382-2407).
43.	Radon and property values. Several regions need
more concrete response to homeowner questions
about the impact of radon on housing values. (Ann
Fisher, FTS 382-5500).
44.	Radon Perceptions and Action. The multiple step
problem. Current policy calls for a screening test
and then confirmatory tests before deciding to
mitigate. People drop out of the process at each
step, so overall mitigation rates are very low. This
study would examine how to prevent people from
dropping out. (Ann Fisher, FTS 382-5500).
45.	Asbestos and the risk-worry budget. This work
would piggy-back on a large grant from the National
Science Foundation to explore the practical
implications of the worry budget for asbestos. (Ann
Giesecke, FTS 382-3801).
46.	Evaluating risk communication as a regulatory
alternative. This project would develop guidelines to
indicate what environmental risk situations might be
most amendable to a risk information program in
lieu of regulation. (Ann Fisher, FTS 382-5500).
•	Determination of the appropriate hierarchy of
standards and guidelines that should be used in
evaluating non-carcinogenic risks (RfDs, MCLGs,
lifetime HAs, AlCs, and AWQC).
•	Guidance on whether to combine, (and if so, how)
cancer risks from multiple carcinogens. In addition,
guidance on the selection of appropriate risk levels
(within the 10-4 to 10-7 range) to target clean-up
levels.
ORD's management is committed to improving the
communication between the Agency's Research and
Development Office and the regions. ORD is currently in
the process of preparing a response to this list of
research and technical assistance needs. The Superfund
Research Committee will actively consider research
needs in next year's budget planning process which are
not currently being addressed by ongoing research. The
Regional Scientist program, with representatives
currently in eight regions, can be instrumental in
relaying regional research needs to the research
committees. If you have any questions or comments, or
would like to discuss additional Superfund-related
research areas on which ORD may be able to provide
assistance, please call me at FTS 597- 9336.
Toxics Integration Branch Activities
by Marlene Berg (FTS 475-9494)
The following sections highlight several activities in the
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response's
Toxics Integration Branch (TIB):
Risk Assessment Guidance - Human Health
Evaluation Manual
Part A of the Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund -
Human Health Evaluation Manual (HHEM) will be
available as an interim final at the end of September
1989. When completed, this manual will replace both the
Endangerment Assessment Manual and the Superfund
Public Health Evaluation Manual. Part A of HHEM covers
the baseline risk assessment chapters (data collection,
data evaluation, exposure assessment, toxicity
assessment, and risk characterization), radiological risk
assessment guidance, and tools to aid the risk
assessors, risk assessment reviewer, and risk manager.
Parts B and C of the manual, which will cover
preliminary remediation levels and remedial alternatives,
will be completed by December 1989.
Contact: Linda Cullen, FTS 475-9494.
Regional (continued from p.1)
• Guidance on the toxicity of mixed chemical
constituents (e.g., carcinogenic vs. non-carcinogenic
PAHs and different PCBs). Research is needed to
determine whether toxicity values assigned
individually or to the mixture as a whole should be
used to characterize health hazards. Regions need
this information to determine target clean-up levels.
Risk Assessment Guidance ~ Environmental
Evaluation Manual
The Interim Final version of the Environmental
Evaluation Manual (EPA/540/1-89/001 A) has been
completed. The manual is a primer on ecology and
ecological risk assessment. It is a very basic, readable
document and includes information on the regulatory
statutes which apply to the ecological assessments.
Copies can be obtained by contacting Pat Mundy, Office
5

-------
of Emergency and Remedial Response (OS-230), US
EPA, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460.
PAHs
Draft interim risk assessment procedures (in the form of
an OSWER directive and background document) is due
out at either the end of August or early September,
1989. In the meantime, the Toxics Integration Branch
has asked the regions to nominate sites for participation
in a pilot study to test the PAH analytical capability of
the Agency's Contract Laboratory Program. The goal of
the pilot study is:
1)	to determine if PAHs of carcinogenic concern (other
than those on the target compound list) occur
frequently at Superfund sites, and
2)	whether the gas chromatographic retention index is
useful in improving the identification of computer-
matched tentatively identified compounds. The
results of the pilot study will help determine whether
the draft interim procedures would make a
difference in characterizing risk from PAH-
contaminated sites.
Lead
Staff members of the Toxics Integration Branch are
working with the Office of Research and Development to
develop a model for determining acceptable soil lead
levels. The model would replace the use of a Reference
Dose (RfD), which does not exist for lead. The
Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, ORD, in
conjunction with the Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards has just completed a document entitled
"Technical Support Document on Lead," which
describes a biokinetic uptake model to be used in
predicting blood-lead levels associated with multimedia
exposures to lead in air, diet, soil and water. The model,
along with a user's guide, is expected to be available for
review this fall.
Cancer Potency Factor (CPF) (Slope Factor). At the
recommendation of the Science Advisory Board, the
Human Health Assessment Group, ORD, is developing a
CPF for lead. A recommended value, which will then
need to be verified, is expected by the end of the year.
The Society for Environmental Geochemistry and Health
is developing an approach for determining soil lead
clean-up levels. The Society expects to have a draft
report available for external review by September.
Contact: Marlene Berg, FTS 475-9493.
Workshops on Risk Assessment, Management
and Communication of Drinking Water
Contamination
by Jim Smith (FTS 684-7355)
The Health Effects Branch of the Office of Drinking
Water and the ORD Center for Environmental Research
Information are offering Workshops on Risk Assessment,
Management and Communication of Drinking Water
Contamination. The current workshops are modified
versions of a very successful series of 14 workshops,
which were previously run and titled "Assessment and
Management of Drinking Water Contamination." The
workshop is typically sponsored by the local section of
the American Water Works Association (AWWA) in
cooperation with EPA's Regional Office, Offices of
Drinking Water, and Research and Development. It is
designed to provide uniform and consistent approaches
and processes nationwide for those officials involved in
determining, communicating about, and managing
drinking water contamination incidents. Lecture topics
include information on health effects of contaminants, an
approach to risk assessment, risk communication, and
abatement of lead, biological contaminations,
particulates, organics, and radon, as well as corrosion
control. Current regulatory initiatives are discussed, and
an update of the Office of Drinking Water's Health
Advisory Program is given. Each workshop attendee
participates in a hands-on case study designed to
illustrate the elements of risk assessment, management
and communication.
Participants who can benefit from attending this program
include: regional, state, and local drinking water
regulatory personnel who work in the health and
technology areas related to the construction of new or
the upgrading of existing drinking water treatment
facilities, or who must respond to contamination
incidents. The program is also of interest to consultants
and drinking water utility staff actively engaged in the
design, operation and/or upgrading of treatment
systems.
Two workshops have been held to date: one, on May 1-
2,1989, in Eugene, Oregon, and the other in the Boston,
Massachusetts, area on August 16-17, 1989. Another
workshop is scheduled for November 6-8, 1989, in New
Orleans. Further information will be provided in future
issues of the Risk Assessment Review.
The registration fee for the course is $95.00 which
covers attendance, C.E.U's, certificate, lunch, and
handouts. For additional information, please contact: Dr.
Jim Smith, US EPA-CERI, 26 West Martin Luther King
Drive, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268. The phone number is FTS
684-7355 or (513) 569-7355.
III. Around the Regions
Region II
The Risk Communication Workshop debuted on (lower)
Broadway on August 1 and 2 in New York. The opening
performance featured Andy Swartz of Temple, Barker
and Sloan whose role included training 15 hopeful
unknowns to replace him in the lead role of "trainer" for
the fall and winter season. Andy's summer stock
performance was humorous yet insightful, even to this
reviewer whose dismay at the trend of regional theatre
coming to Broadway instead of vice versa sometimes
taints her enjoyment of 'outside' shows, especially non-
equity ones. However, moments in the production were,
6

-------
well, a bit slow. Fortunately, at the time of this review,
plans were made to trim the two-day program to a day
and a half. Don't miss the fall and winter seasons
complete with a New York cast and New York pacing.
Contact: Palma Risler, FTS 264-4296.
Region III
Region III presented the Basic Risk Assessment
Workshop at its Wheeling Field Office on July 20 and
21. The workshop was attended by staff from EPA as
well as the states of West Virginia and Pennsylvania.
The Basic Risk Assessment and Risk Communications
Workshops will be presented in Charleston, West
Virginia in October. The schedule for the FY'90 Basic
Risk Assessment and Risk Communications courses at
the Regional Office are: November 1 and 2, 1989;
February 7 and 8; May 9 and 10; and August 8 and 9,
1990.
The region is currently involved with a proposal to help
create an environmental learning institute at Allegheny
County (Pennsylvania) Community College which would
include the risk assessment courses in the curriculum.
Contact: Jeffrey Burke, FTS 597-1177.
Region VII
Region VII was invited to conduct a Risk Assessment
and Decision-Making Workshop for staff at the US
Department of Agriculture/Soil Conservation Service
Midwest Technical Service Center in Lincoln, Nebraska.
The Soil Conservation Service request was part of their
on-going efforts to better understand EPA's
risk/regulatory processes and to improve USDA-EPA
coordination. Twenty-four USDA personnel were joined
by twelve people from other offices including EPA
regional and field offices, and the state environmental,
agriculture, and geological agencies.
The regular two-day workshop was condensed into an
intense one-day session, and the format was modified to
focus on agricultural issues. The workshop was well
received, and an additional session for USDA personnel
may be scheduled later this year.
Contact: Robert Fenemore, FTS 757-2970.
Region IX
The Emergency Response Division of OSWER's
Superfund Asbestos Workgroup met in Washington,
D.C., on August 7 to discuss Region IX's "Proposed
Interim Methodology for Conducting Risk Assessments
at Asbestos Superfund Sites." Developed by Region IX's
contractor Dr. D. Wayne Berman (ICF-Technology) and
Dr. Kenny Crump (ICF-Clement), the risk assessment
methodology considers and addresses several
outstanding questions regarding asbestos characteristics
and toxicity.
The research performed by Drs. Berman and Crump is
based largely on the comprehensive evaluation of
asbestos toxicity provided in the "Airborne Asbestos
Health Assessment Update" (USEPA, 1986), but also
incorporates data from animal inhalation studies and
human epidemiology studies published more recently
than the update. The goal is to develop a relationship
between risk and asbestos exposure expressed as a
parametric equation that incorporates fiber dimensions
and mineral type. This will greatly improve the accuracy
of future risk assessments.
A key component of this research is a statistical
evaluation of animal inhalation data, to better understand
response as a function of fiber size and type. To support
the evaluation, asbestos samples used in Dr. John
Davis' original animal inhalation experiments will be
reanalyzed to obtain precise characterizations of fiber
size distributions within each sample.
Asbestos sampling and analytical methodologies that are
suitable for supporting risk assessments are also being
developed as part of this project. When completed, the
sampling, analytical, and risk assessment protocols will
be incorporated into the Superfund Environmental
Asbestos Assessment Manual. The purpose of the
Manual is to provide Superfund Remedial Project
Managers and On-Scene Coordinators with the tools
needed to investigate and evaluate asbestos remedial
and removal sites. To obtain copies of the draft risk
assessment protocol, the draft air methods, or to obtain
further information on the manual, please contact Don
Kraft, ERD, FTS 382-2452, or Laurie Mann, Region IX,
FTS 454-8200.
Two toxicologists recently joined Gerald Hiatt in the
Office of Health and Emergency Planning (OHEP). David
Lewis received his Ph.D. in Pharmacology and
Toxicology from the University of California at Davis. He
comes to EPA with some experience in a consulting
firm, developing guidelines for non-cancer risk
assessments involving airborne contaminants. Sharon
Seidel obtained her Ph.D. from the University of Iowa in
Pharmacology. She has a strong background in the
medical sciences and has experience working with
community action groups concerned with environmental
contamination. The OHEP Toxicology Group provides
support mainly for the Superfund program, primarily for
risk assessment. Support is also provided for the RCRA
program, mainly in the area of incinerator risk
assessment. The OHEP toxicologists can be reached at
FTS 484-1778, (415) 744-1778, or US EPA (T-6), 215
Freemont Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94105.
IV. Announcements
Environmental Epidemiology Conference
The first annual meeting of the International Society of
Environmental Epidemiology is planned for September
13-15, at Brookhaven National Laboratory, in Upton, New
York. Topics will include various aspects of
environmental epidemiology. One day of the conference
will be dedicated to health effects of water disinfection.
For further information please contact Dr. Leonard D.
Hamilton, Head, Biomedical and Environmental
Assessment Division, Building 475, Brookhaven National
7

-------
Laboratory, Upton, New York 11973-5000 or (516) 282-
2003.
Advanced Risk Assessment: Biological and
Environmental Modeling
The University of Cincinnati Institute of Environmental
Health will offer a three-day Advanced Risk Assessment:
Biological and Environmental Modeling course on March
21-23, 1990. In this hands-on course, participants will
gain direct experience in the application of
environmental, physiological, and statistical models to
risk assessment questions. Computer-based software for
predicting dispersal in water and air and for modeling
integrated dispersion throughout the environment will be
applied to two model chemicals, one a volatile organic
and the other a metal. Physiologically-based kinetic
models will be adapted to the same chemicals in order
to estimate delivered doses. Finally, the exposure
estimates derived from these models will be
incorporated into extrapolation procedures for dose-
tumorigenesis relationships. Working at individual
microcomputer stations, participants will develop
familiarity with both structure and applications of these
models to quantitative risk assessment.
The course is designed specifically for those with risk
assessment or risk management responsibility either in
human health or in the area of environmental
contamination. This group includes state and local public
health officials, environmental engineers, representatives
of management, and representatives of independent
consulting laboratories.
The tuition for the course is $495.00 and will be taught
by Dr. Ellen O'Flaherty. For further information, please
contact the University of Cincinnati, Institute of
Environmental Health, Continuing Education, 3223 Eden
Avenue, ML-056, Cincinnati, Ohio 45267-0056 or (513)
558-1730.
Industrial Waste Incinerators: Design and
Regulatory Considerations
The George Washington University Continuing Engin-
eering Education Program School of Engineering and
Applied: Science will be offering a course on Industrial
Waste Incinerators, Design and Regulatory Con-
siderations, on October 11 - 13, 1989. The course
provides an introduction to the issues and factors that
affect the design and regulation of hazardous waste
incinerators, including permit requirements, disposal
options, equipment, and component processes. Design
considerations for combustion chambers, primer mov-
ers, instrumentation, emission control devices, and other
incineration components are examined. The Federal
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Clean Air Act
and Water Pollution Control Act are reviewed.
The course will provide participants with an
understanding of:
• The development of industrial incineration
technology in the United States.
•	Process design approaches for incineration
components and systems,
•	Regulations and permit requirements affecting
incineration projects, and
•	Related environmental issues.
The fee for the course is $840.00 and includes all course
materials. For additional information contact Carmelo
Blanco at (202) 994-7406 or (800) 424-9773 or
Continuing Engineering Education Program, the George
Washington University, Washington, D.C. 20052.
American Medical Association Conference on
Technological and Chemical Hazards:
Community Awareness and Response
The American Medical Association in cooperation with
the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
and the US Environmental Protection Agency is
sponsoring a comprehensive meeting to address the
release of hazardous substances into the environment
and the need for emergency planning and response.
The conference, Technological and Chemical Hazards:
Community Awareness and Response, will be held on
October 17-18, 1989, at the Ramada Renaissance
Techworld Hotel in Washington D.C. The conference will
focus on SARA-Title III "The Community Right-to-Know
Act" and the obligations of communities to respond to
this legislation that requires public notification and
emergency planning for hazardous substances.
Registration for the conference is $250 (nonmember)
before October 2, 1989, and $275 after that date. For
further information, contact the Technological and
Chemical Hazards, Community Awareness and
Response Conference, American Medical Association,
Department of Registration Services, 535 N. Dearborn
Street, Chicago, Illinois 60610. The phone number is 1-
800-621-8335. Hotel reservations are available from:
Room Reservations Department, Ramada Renaissance
TechWorld Hotel, 999 9th Street, S.W., Washington,
D.C. 20001-9000 or (202) 898-9000.
Toxic Release Inventory State Training
Conference
The US EPA Office of Toxic Substances, and EPA
Regions III and VIII will offer training on September 13-
14, 1989, in McLean, Virginia and September 19-20 in
Denver, Colorado. Courses will include on-line use of
TRI data on the National Library of Medicine TOXNET
system, risk screening, and risk communication. The
training will be beneficial to people working with the
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act.
The courses are designed to help states work with the
TRI. Each day-long course will be offered twice during
each conference and is geared to a maximum of about
20 people. All classes are offered free of charge, and
participants may register for up to two courses per
conference.
The Risk Screening section will include basic philosophy
and approaches, use of TRI data in risk screening, and
8

-------
information and analytical tools needed. Includes case
studies and hands-on training with PC GEMS,
Roadmaps, and IRIS.
Risk Communication will include goals and objectives of
communication, a case study, technical issues, medial
relations, and trust and credibility. Also, a role-play
exercise will be included.
The TRI Database training sponsored by OTS and the
National Library of Medicine will include an overview of
TOXNET, including basic TOXNET TRI database search
menus, command languages, print options, and sorting
and ranging of numeric functions.
Accommodations are available at the Tysons Westpark
Hotel in McClean (703-734-2800 or 1-800-533-3301) and
at the Marriott in Denver (303-297-1300 or 1-800-228-
9290). To reserve a slot in either training course contact
the EPA Office of Toxic Substances Training Groups at
703-883-8894, Attention: Julie Winters.
Need 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 assistance. For assistance in
posting announcements or reading entries on the
Bulletin Board, contact Electronic Mail User's
Support at FTS 382-5639. Your colleagues from
other offices who have information or advice will be
able to contact you with assistance.
Risk and Decision-Making Courses Scheduled
The following is the schedule for the Risk and Decision-
Making Courses through October:
Region IX- September 10-12, Sacramento
Following is the schedule for the Risk Communication
Workshop through October:
Region IX - September 7-8, San Francisco
Region IX - October 11-12, Lake Tahoe
Contact: Mary Setnicar, FTS 382-2747
Contacts:
Jerome Puskin
OAR-RAD
FTS
475-9640
Linda Tuxen
ORD-OHEA
FTS
382-5949
Dorothy Patton
ORD-RAF
FTS
475-6743
Dick Hill
OPTS
FTS
382-2897
Don Barnes
SAB
FTS
382-4126
Dean Hill
NEIC
FTS
776-8138
Sally Edwards
Region I
FTS
835-0764
Marian Olsen
Region II
FTS
264-5682
Jeffrey Burke
Region III
FTS
597-1177
Elmer Akin
Region IV
FTS
257-2234
Milt Clark
Region V
FTS
886-3388
Jon Rauscher
Region VI
FTS
255-6715
Bob Fenemore
Region VII
FTS
757-2970
Suzanne Wuerthele Region VIII
FTS
564-1714
Arnold Den
Region IX
FTS
454-0906
Dana Davoli
Region X
FTS
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, Ohio 45268
9

-------