UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region II, New York, New York 10278
DATES
SUBJECT:
FROM:
May 13, 1991
Risk Assessment Review
William J.^fcrezynskyr P.E.
Deputy Regional Administrator
William Farland, Ph.D. j / st\
Director	(//
Office of Health and Environmental Assessment
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 fourth 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

-------
May 1991 — CERI-91-39
Highlights
•	Sixth Regional Risk Assessor's Meeting	p.l
•	EPA to Update Its Dioxin Risk Assessment	p. 1
•	IRIS2 Available Soon	p.3
•	Keeping Up With IRIS	p.3
•	Second Annual Superfiind Risk Assessor's Meeting	p.3
•	Reducing Public Health Risk Posed by
Rainwater Catchment Drinking Water Systems
in the U.S. Virgin Islands	p.4
•	Seasonal Study of Arsenic in Groundwater,
Snohomish County, WA			p.5
•	Predicting the Ecological Effects of
Contaminants at Superfiind Sites	p.6
I. Special Features
Sixth Regional Risk Assessor's Meeting
by Suzanne Wuerthele (FTS 330-7612)
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency invites you
to attend the Sixth Annual Regional Risk Assessor's meet-
ing on June 24 - 27, 1991, in the Beaver Run Resort and
Conference Center in Breckenridge, Colorado. The Sixth
Annual Conference will provide an opportunity for EPA
risk assessors to meet and exchange information on risk
assessment issues. The following sections provide an over-
view of the purpose of the conference, logistical consider-
ations, and the draft agenda.
Purpose: To exchange information on risk assessment
methodologies among EPA's regional risk assessors and
HQ scientists.
Registration: Beginning Monday, June 24, 1991, con-
tact the Beaver Run Resort and Conference Center between
12:00 pm and 1:00 pm to register. The Beaver Run Resort
and Conference Center is located at 620 Village Road,
Breckenridge, Colorado 80424-2115.
Accommodations: A block of rooms has been reserved
at the Beaver Run Resort and Conference Center. A rate of
$58.00 has been arranged for a single room. To obtain this
rate, which is tax exempt, you must present EPA identifica-
tion. Reservations may be made by calling 1-800-525-2253.
When making reservations use the following code: "EPA
Risk Assessment Meeting." Reservations must be made by
May 24th to ensure the $58.00 room rate.
Travel: You may arrange ground transportation between
Denver's Stapleton Airport and the Beaver Run Resort and
Conference Center by contacting Resort Express (1-800-
334-7433). The fare is $21 one way, $42 round trip. Travel
time is approximately 2 hours. Reservations are required.
When making reservations with the Resort Express, use the
following code: "EPA Risk Assessors's Meeting at Beaver
Run Resort and Conference Center." The Resort Express is
located in the baggage claim area of Stapleton Airport,
Door #6. You should enter the counter area at Door #6. The
schedule begins on p. 2.	See Meeting, p.2
EPA to Update Its Dioxin Risk Assessment
by Linda Tuxen (FTS 382-5949)
On April 10, 1991, the Environmental Protection
Agency's Administrator William K. Reilly announced that
the Agency will begin a reevaluation of die risks of expo-
sure to dioxin. In an April 8 memorandum to Erich W.
Bretthauer, Assistant Administrator for Research and De-
velopment, Mr. Reilly requested that EPA's Office of Re-
search and Development undertake this review in light of
scientific advances in the understanding of those risks.
Over the past several years, EPA's approach to assess-
ing the risks of exposure to the most widely known and
studied of the chemicals in the dioxin family—2,3,7,8-
tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD), has been based on
the best and most appropriate studies and methodologies
available. However, the Agency has closely monitored con-
tinuing dioxin research and current thinking and has deter-
mined that progress is at a point where a reassessment could
adequately utilize this new information and innovative ap-
proaches. This new information not only concerns dioxin as
it relates to potential adverse human health effects, but also
to the areas of exposures and ecological risks.
In the Administrator's April 8 memorandum, he stated
that,
"There has been much speculation about the effect
of these new developments on our revised dioxin risk
assessment. Some factors may decrease the level of
concern. Others may result in estimates of increased risk.
We cannot draw conclusions about the results of our
reassessment until a complete review has been per-
formed and the combined effect on the overall assess-
ment of dioxin risks determined.
Our efforts to reduce risk must be based on the best
available scientific information. As a result, it is impera-
tive that we follow-up new scientific developments,
assess what we can leant from them, act upon them to
improve our programs, and draw implications from them
for EPA's priorities."
EPA's scientific review is expected to be completed in
about 12 months and will then be subjected to peer review
by scientific experts and to public comment. Administrator
Reilly also asked a group of senior Agency managers to
evaluate the potential impacts of the reassessment on Agency
See Dioxin, p.3
Risk Assessment Review Committee
Bill Farland — ORD, FTS 382-7317
Sally Edwards —Region I, FTS 835-3696 :
Maria Pavlova — Region II, FTS 264-7364
Marian Olsen — Region II, FTS 264-5682
Suzanne Wuerthele — Region VIII, FTS 330-1714
Dana Davoli — Region X, FTS 399-2135
1

-------
Meeting, continued from p.l
About the Area: Breckenridge, Colorado, is a ski resort
situated at 9,600 feet above sea level. At the end of June
expect 70 degree days with brief afternoon thundershowers,
and nights cool enough for a warm sweater or jacket
Restaurants can be reached on foot from the resort, but if
you wish to use the many hiking trails nearby, bring a
sturdy pair of walking shoes or boots. Sunglasses and
sunscreen are advised!!!
For additional information about the meeting, contact
any of the following:
Bob Benson	FTS 330-1543 or (303) 293-1543
Jim LaVelle	FTS 330-7656 or (303) 294-7656
Chris Weis	FTS 330-7655 or (303) 294-7655
Suzanne Wuerthele	FTS 330-7612 or (303) 293-1731
Resort Express Schedule
Depart Denver
Stapleton Airport
9:30 am
11:30 am
12:00 pm
1:30 pm
3:00 pm
5:30 pm
7:00 pm
Depart Beaver
Run Resort
7:30 am
8:30 am
9:45 am
11:00 am
12:15 pm
3:00 pm
4:00 pm
***** Draft Agenda *****
(April 30,1991)
1991 Regional Risk Assessor's Meeting
Monday June 24
12:00 Registration
1:00 Introduction of Regional Administrator—Toxic
Tetrad
Welcoming remarks: Jim Scherer, RA
1:15 Logistics
Monday afternoon session: Ecological Risk Guidelines—
Chair: Chris Weis
1:20 Overview of the case study process
1:45 Framework for ecological risk assessment
2:10 Overview of ecorisk guidance development pro-
cess for mining sites
2:30 Break
2:50 Remote sensing applications for ecological risk
assessment
3:10 The LA basin story
3:45 Case study: Kesterson Wildlife Refuge
4:15 Case study
Tuesday June 25
Tuesday morning session: Human Health Topics-
Chair: Elmer Akin
8:30 Risk assessment under siege
9:15 Research addressing risk issues
10:00 Break
10:15 Status repent of on-going risk projects:
Kiddierisk and Dioxin
10:30 Carcinogenesis: New weight-of-evidence
schemes
11:00 New risk quantitative approaches
11:30 Overview of toxicological data from pesticide
registration program
Tuesday afternoon session: Human Health Topics—
Chair: Jon Rauscher
1:00 Benchmark dose
Dermal exposure
Exposure assessment
Electromagnetic radiation
Wednesday June 26
Wednesday morning session: Ecological Risk Topics-
Chair: Harvey Simon
8:30 "Implementation of the SAB Report:
Ecological Anarchy"
Dr. Bill Cooper,
Michigan State University
9:30 Comparative risk
10:30 Break
10:45 Assessing bioavailability and toxicity to
contaminated sediments—methods develop-
ment and application
11:05 Multimedia transport modeling to assess the
bioavailability of lead
11:25 Panel discussion: Bioavailability bioaccumula-
tion issues: measurement vs modeling
Wednesday afternoon session: Risk Assessment Tools—
Chair: Jim Lavelle
1:00	ARAR'S ASSIST
1:15	IRISn
1:30	MIXTOX
1:45	RISK ASSISTANT
2:15	Lead: IU/BK Model
2:30	TScreen
2:45	Break
3:00	Hands-on software review and regional
software exchange:
2

-------
All of the above software
Tox screen spreadsheet—Region in
Any others
Wednesday evening: Risk Training Session—
Bill Muszynski
7:00-9:00 pm Opportunity to exchange techniques and
information on risk training
Thursday June 27
Thursday morning session: Administrative Issues—
Chair: Bill Muszynski
8:30 Introduction and overview
9:00 Creativity and the big picture: A clinical
rotation at Rocky Mountain Poison Control
Center
9:20 Multiple career paths and input into the hiring
process
9:40 Update on Superfund meeting
10:00 Break
10:15 CAA Amendments—Review of agency risk
procedures
10:40 Discussion—Who and what are the RAC, the
Forum, the IRIS Subcommittee, the Risk
Training Committee, Interagency Groups, etc.
How can the regions participate and have
input?
11:30 Regional round-robin
12:05 Transfer of the famed baton—
The Toxic Tetrad
Dioxin, continued from p. 1
programs that deal with dioxin and to report to him in May
1991. Until he has reviewed the report, Reilly asked that ail
dioxin-related activities move forward as planned.
For more information on this subject, please contact: Dr.
William H. Farland, Director, Office of Health and Envi-
ronmental Assessment (RD-689), Office of Research and
Development, U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C. 20460 or call
202-382-7315.
	-	—i
II. Headquarters
IRIS2 Available Soon
by Jacqueline Patterson (FTS 684-7584)
A prototype of IRIS2, the PC version of the Integrated
Risk Information System (IRIS), will be tested from mid-
May to the end of June. IRIS2 contains the same data as the
current IRIS, however, it is a PC-based system written in
Hyperpad software. When it is fully implemented the sys-
tem will be loaded onto an individual PC or local area
network. Monthly updates will be downloaded from the
IBM mainframe using Arbiter software. IRIS2 will be
distributed to EPA users this fall. IRIS on E-Mail will then
be discontinued.
The IRIS staff is looking for a few EPA staff members
who are willing to test the prototype and provide us with
comments on it If you are interested, please contact
Jacqueline Patterson at the Environmental Criteria and As-
sessment Office, Cincinnati, OH, or FTS 684-7574.
Keeping Up With IRIS
by Linda Tuxen (FTS 382-5949)
As of April 1,1991, IRIS contained 468 chemicals. This
included 338 oral reference dose (RfD) and 28 inhalation
reference concentration (RfC) summary sections, and 198
carcinogen assessments, for a total of 564 risk information
summaries. In addition, the system contains summaries of
64 chemical-specific drinking water health advisories, 187
U.S. EPA regulatory action summaries, and complete bib-
liographic citations for 401 chemicals. Specifically, the
April update included the addition of inhalation RfC risk
summaries for ethyl chloride and triethylamine.
IRIS is a resource tool that provides chronic human
health risk information on only two of the four dependent
components of risk assessment: hazard identification and
dose-response. It does not provide situational information
on instances of exposure. It directs users to the underlying
animal and human data on which this risk information is
based. Because of the assumptions and uncertainties used in
risk assessment, IRIS risk information should be used care-
fully and with scientific judgment
For information on accessing IRIS, call: IRIS User
Support at (513) 569-7254 or write: IRIS User Support
ECAO/EPA (MS-114), 26 West Martin Luther King Dr.,
Cincinnati, OH 45268.
Second Annual Superfund Risk Assessor's
Meeting
by Monique Currie (FTS 475-9490)
The Second Annual Superfund Risk Assessor's Meeting
was held in Charleston, SC, March 4-6,1991. The three day
meeting was hosted by the Toxics Integration Branch of the
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. The 55
participants were composed of the staff of the Toxics Inte-
gration Branch, risk assessors from nine regional offices,
other members of the Superfund program, and representa-
tives from the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Re-
sponse, the Office of Air and Radiation, the Office of Waste
Programs Enforcement, and the Office of Research and
Development The purpose of the meeting was to provide a
forum for the exchange of technical ideas and policy con-
cerns between EPA Headquarters and the regions on issues
regarding Superfund risk assessment The agenda items
3

-------
included chemical-specific issues such as lead and PAHs,
the use of standard exposure factors, inhalation unit risk, the
Reasonable Maximum Exposure (RME) concept, dermal
exposure, FY'90 review of risk assessments, and risk man-
agement For more information on the meeting contact
Monique Currie, of the Toxics Integration Branch at FTS
475-9490.
The meeting began and ended with a Total Quality
Management (TQM) exercise in which participants identi-
fied a TQM project in the area of quality assurance in risk
assessment The project chosen was that of the concentra-
tion term in the RME concept As a result the RME
Concentration Workgroup was formed, composed of regional
Superfund risk assessors and members of the Toxics Inte-
gration Branch and the Office of Research and Develop-
ment For more information on the workgroup, contact
Ruth Bleyler of the Toxics Integration Branch at FTS 475-
9492.
fmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmsmrnm
III. Around the Regions
Region II
Reducing Public Health Risk Posed by Rainwater
Catchment Drinking Water Systems in the U.S.
Virgin Islands
Region II has several initiatives to reduce human health
risk posed by drinking water systems in the U.S. Virgin
Islands. The U.S. Virgin Islands poses a unique challenge to
the Region II drinking water program since over ninety
percent of its residents rely on roof catchment of rainwater
as a major source of drinking water.
Rainwater catchment systems collect direct runoff of
rainwater from the roof surface and convey the water through
gutters and downspouts to a cistern which is usually under-
ground. The water is then pumped from the cistern for use
as needed. In the U.S. Virgin Islands, the water in the
cistern is often supplemented with desalinated water or
groundwater provided through the U.S. Virgin Islands Wa-
ter and Power Authority distribution mains or by private
water haulers.
There are over 500 Public Water Supplies (PWS) in the
U.S. Virgin Islands, all of which rely on rainwater catchment
systems. When PWSs are added to the residential systems,
the total population served by rainwater catchments in the
U.S. Virgin Islands is over 90,000. The importance of
rainwater systems can be seen by the fact that the U.S.
Virgin Islands building code requires all building construc-
tion to include a rainwater catchment system.
In rainwater catchment systems, contamination of the
drinking water from microbes and from the materials used
in the catchment system which come in contact with the
rainwater poses a significant potential health problem.
In regard to microbiological contamination, studies of
water quality in rainwater catchments thus far have been
limited to conventional testing for the presence of bacteria
that in many cases, has found extremely high concentra-
tions of bacteria, including some pathogens. Diseases that
are frequently linked to contaminated water, such as
giardiasis and gastroenteritis, are common in the U.S. Vir-
gin Islands, although documented waterborne diseases do
not reflect what would be expected given the poor raw
water quality and lack of treatment This is likely due to the
diseases going unnoticed or unreported. Additionally, the
U.S. Virgin Islands Department of Health reported prob-
lems with waterborne legionellosis, and a 1985 outbreak of
typhoid was probably caused by contaminated drinking
water. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that waterborne
pathogens are having a significant health impact
In general, microbiological contamination of roof
catchments can occur from deposition on the roof catchment
surface of bird and rodent droppings, leaves and other tree
materials, insect eggs and larvae, and algae and moss accu-
mulation. Compounding the problem in the U.S. Virgin
Islands is the fact that treatment in rainwater catchment
systems is minimal at best and generally consists of manu-
ally batch chlorinating the water stored in the cistern.
Region n has aggressively campaigned against PWSs in
the U.S. Virgin Islands because of microbiological and
turbidity violations. Over the past three years, seventy-eight
systems have been issued Federal Enforcement Actions and
to date, sixty-three have been brought into compliance.
In addition to its ongoing enforcement initiative, an
investigation of water quality in cisterns is being initiated
this fiscal year to be carried out by EPA, the U.S. Virgin
Islands Department of Planning and Natural Resources, the
University of the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the College of
Public Health at the University of South Florida. The objec-
tive of the study is to evaluate the occurrence of
Cryptosporidium oocysts and giardia cysts in cistern water
and to concurrently evaluate coliform and E. coli occur-
rence. Cryptosporidium and giardia are enteric protozoa
which are responsible for gastrointestinal illness. "Hie result
of the parasite monitoring will then be used in a risk
assessment model to evaluate potential public health im-
pacts from protozoan contamination. The study will also
have implications for determining the appropriateness of
using the indicator bacteria coliform for assessing the oc-
currence of parasites in water. One unanswered question in
the study of water quality is the lack of association between
the indicator bacteria coliform and protozoa. The results of
the study will have further application in implementing
appropriate treatment strategies since protozoa are very
resistant to disinfection and usually must be filtered to be
removed. Regional efforts will include testing the effective-
ness of different treatment technologies and reducing disin-
fection byproducts.
4

-------
In regard to organic and inorganic contamination of the
drinking water from roofing and other surface materials
used in the catchment system, limited investigations of
specific incidents have been traced to the roofing material.
Collection surfaces may contribute contaminants from leach-
ing or deterioration of unsuitable surface materials such as
asbestos shingles, unsuitable or uncured paints and coat-
ings, or corrosion of metal roofs. Exposure to the extreme
tropical environment in the U.S. Virgin Islands may accel-
erate the weathering process and increase the probability of
contaminants leaching into the drinking water supply.
Currently, the materials used in these "non-conven-
tional" drinking water systems are unregulated and a stan-
dardized procedure to evaluate the potential adverse health
effects when the materials come in contact with the rainwa-
ter is non-existent.
The American National Standards Institute/National Sani-
tation Foundation Standard 61, Drinking Water System
Components—Health Effects (ANSI/NSF Standard 61) is
the nationally recognized voluntary third party consensus
standard for evaluating the health effects of materials used
in drinking water systems. However, ANSI/NSF Standard
61 only addresses applications in "conventional" drinking
water systems and does not consider specific product appli-
cation in a "non-conventional" rainwater catchment drink-
ing water system. Region II and the U.S. Virgin Islands
Department of Planning and Natural Resources are working
with NSF on the revision of ANSI/NSF Standard 61 to
include a protocol for evaluating materials used in rainwater
catchment systems.
The region will simultaneously be working with the
U.S. Virgin Islands to establish appropriate regulations that
would require approval of roofing and other surface materi-
als prior to their use in rainwater catchment systems. Manu-
facturers would be responsible for obtaining the approval
by having their products evaluated under the standaniized
protocol for rainwater catchments. It is anticipated that such
requirements would be incorporated in the building code
and that the U.S. Virgin Islands would maintain an official
list of approved products. Similar regulations for cistern
coatings will also be addressed.
In addition, the region will be investigating the effect
that the use of first flush mechanisms will have on reducing
the contamination entering the cistern by diverting the
initial runoff from the roof catchment into a drain rather
than into the cistern. Such a mechanism would help to
address microbiological contamination as well as contami-
nants introduced from the materials used in the catchment
surface.
With this multi-faceted approach, Region II hopes to
minimize the potential risk from rainwater catchment drink-
ing water systems in the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Contact: Robert Williams (FTS 264-1800)
Region IX
Staff Changes in Region IX
Gerald Hiatt has assumed a new position as Senior Risk
Assessment Policy Advisor in the Regional Administrator's
Office in Region IX. He will be working there with Arnold
Den, Senior Science Advisor, and will concentrate on ge-
neric risk assessment issues, especially policy aspects of
risk assessment and risk management Gerald has been with
EPA for 3 years, as a toxicologist in the Region IX Superfund
program. Prior to joining EPA, Gerald was a toxicologist in
the Community Health group at the Chevron Environmen-
tal Health Center and was a Study Director in the U.S.
Army toxicology lab at the Letterman Army Institute of
Research.
Gerald can be reached at U.S. EPA, Region IX (Office
of Regional Administrator), 75 Hawthorne Street, San Fran-
cisco, CA. 94105. FTS 484-1022 and Direct Dial (415)
744-1022.
Contact: Gerald Hiatt (FTS 484-1022)
Region X
Seasonal Study of Arsenic in Groundwater,
Snohomish County, WA
More than 70 private water supply wells in central
Snohomish County, Washington, have been found to con-
tain elevated levels of arsenic, and a number of individuals
have been identified with arsenic-related symptoms. Samples
of ground water from many of these wells exceed the
maximum contaminant level (MCL) of 0.05 mg/1 (milli-
grams per liter) of arsenic, as established under the Federal
Safe Drinking Water Act and adopted by the Washington
Department of Health. The source of arsenic is believed to
be naturally occurring in the aquifer material. Concern
arose that seasonal variability in arsenic concentrations
might lead to a situation whereby wells are considered
"safe" on the basis of one clean sample, while they may
actually be above the MCL at other times of the year. In
response to this concern, monthly samples were collected
from 25 wells for a year, from February 1988 to January
1989, and analyzed in the laboratory for arsenic, selenium,
and fluoride. Additional water quality parameters including
pH, electrical conductivity, and temperature were deter-
mined in the field. Wells were selected in order to span a
range of arsenic concentrations from near or below the
detection limit of 0.01 mg/l to the highest levels found, 10-
30 mg/1. The results indicate that variations in arsenic
concentration occur over time in these wells. The range of
variability from lowest to highest concentrations in a single
well is 1.2 to 23 fold. In general, the higher the concentra-
tion, the greater the variability, such that the coefficient of
variation in the more contaminated wells is as high as 31%.
Because of this variability, four out of the eight wells with
concentrations which straddled the MCL of 0.05 mg/I,
would have been considered "safe" on the basis of a single
sample but would have exceeded the MCL at another time
5

-------
of the year. Repetitive sampling across seasons for at least
one full year is recommended to provide sufficient data to
detect elevated levels of arsenic in ground water. As a
general recommendation, seasonal variability should al-
ways be considered when establishing monitoring programs
in other areas of suspected ground water contamination.
Complete results of the seasonal study are published in a
report entitled "Seasonal Study of Arsenic in Groundwater,
Snohomish County, Washington," published jointly by the
Snohomish Health District, Washington Department of
Health, and EPA Region X. Additional information or a
copy of the report can be obtained by calling Floyd Frost,
Washington Department of Health"(206-753- 3336) or Leigh
Woodruff, Region X (FTS: 399-8087).
Contact: Leigh Woodruff (FTS 399-8087)
Predicting the Ecological Effects of Contaminants
At Superfund Sites
(Revised Abstract from the ASTM meetings on Environ-
mental Toxicology & Risk Assessment (April 14-16,1991;
Atlantic City, NJ))
At four Superfund sites in EPA, Region X, predictive
approaches have been used to assess the ecological effect of
contaminants. The sites are: (1) an abandoned mine where
cyanide was used to leach metals from the mine tailings; (2)
a sludge pit adjacent to a railroad; (3) hillsides near a
smelter, and (4) a military installation with contaminated
groundwater. In a manner similar to most risk assessments,
the basic steps include the exposure and hazard assessments
followed by risk characterization.
In addition to delineating the ecosystem components
and evaluating pathways, the exposure assessment relies
heavily on the site visit to determine which components
appear to be most at risk and which pathways are most
relevant In the hazard (toxicity) assessment, the quotient
method is used to compare contaminant concentrations with
water quality criteria and with available data such as aquatic
and terrestrial bioassays, wildlife reviews, sludge applica-
tion studies, and examples of dose estimates for wildlife.
Worst-case analyses are often conducted first. For those
contaminants exceeding the initial screening value, the
database may be examined more closely to target the eco-
system components of concern (such as fish or wildlife). In
the risk characterization step, exposure and hazard assess-
ments are integrated to produce a final set of contaminants
of concern. These are ranked and conclusions are drawn.
Uncertainty (or confidence) in the approach is evaluated
and summarized.
For each of these steps, the presentation compared the
approaches used at the four sites.
Contact: P. Bruce Duncan (FTS 399-8086)
mwmmmmmmmmmmmmmMMmMmmmmmm
IV. Announcements
Risk and Decision-Making Courses Scheduled
The following is the schedule for the risk and decision-
making courses through May:
May 7 - 9	Region IX (NEIC, Denver, CO)
May 15 -17	Region n
June 4 - 5	Headquarters
June 19 - 21	Region IX (Honolulu, Hawaii)
The following is the schedule for the Risk Communica-
tion Workshops through May:
May 15 -16 Region VII (Kansas City)
May 21-23 Region IX (Honolulu, Hawaii)
June 25 - 26 Headquarters
Contacts: Jim Cole (FTS 382-2747)
Marian Olsen (FTS 264-5682)
Fourth Summer Institute in Environmental
Health Studies
The Department of Environmental Health Sciences of
the Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Pub-
lic Health will sponsor the Fourth Summer Institute in
Environmental Health Studies from June 3 to 14,1991, in
Baltimore, Maryland.
The Fourth Summer Institute in Environmental Health
Studies will present seven courses during this two week
period for academic credit or for continuing education
credit. The institute is designed for a diverse group of
students, including practicing health professionals, people
responsible for health, safety, and environmental matters in
government service or the private sector, and public health
practitioners.
Courses will cover the principles of toxicology, risk
communication of environmental hazards, fundamentals of
occupational health; physical agents in environmental health
sciences; contemporary problems in radiation health sci-
ences; risk assessment and risk management, including case
studies; and principles of industrial hygiene.
For further information on the training course, please
contact Dr. Jacqueline Corn or Catherine Walsh of the
Johns Hopkins University, 615 North Wolfe Street, Room
6001, Baltimore, Maryland 20205. They can be reached at
(301) 955-2609.
6

-------
Contacts:





Jerome Puskin
OAR-RAD
FTS 475-9640
Jeffrey Burke
Region in
FTS 597-1177
Linda Tuxen
ORD-OHEA
FTS 382-5949
Elmer Akin
Region IV
FTS 257-1586
Dorothy Patton
ORD-RAF
FTS 475-6743
Milt Clark
Region V
FTS 886-3388
Dick Hill
OPTS
FTS 382-2897
Jon Rauscher
Region VI
FTS 255-6715
Don Barnes
SAB
FTS 382-4126
Bob Fenemore
Region VII
FTS 757-2970
Dean Hill
NEIC
FTS 776-8138
Suzanne Wuerthele
Region Vm
FTS 330-1731
Sally Edwards
Region I
FTS 835-3696
Arnold Den
Region IX
FTS 484-1018
Marian Olsen
Region II
FTS 264-5682
Dana Davoli
Region X
FTS 399-2135
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 informa-
tion or advice will be able to contact you with assis-
tance. For assistance in posting announcements or
reading entries on the Bulletin Board, type PRPOST at
the > prompt and identify RISK as the Category. Your
colleagues from other offices who have information or
advice will be able to contact you with assistance. For
additional information please contact Marian Olsen at
FTS 264-5682.
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 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
7

-------