Office o< tN» Airrt*+ratc» 8AB--88-007
Scfcno* Advfcwry Botrd Dcembtr, 19B7
WuNngt0n,D.C, 2CM60
EPA Report of the Director of the
Science Advisory Board for
Fiscal Year 1987
SCIENCE
ADVISORY
BOARD
-------
\ ••.'
Cecember 10, 1987
NC-TE TO THE READS'-
This is the second Annual Report of the Director of the Science
Advisory Board of. the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. This report
presents the activities and accomplishments of the Board for Fiscal Year
1987 (October 1, 1986 to Septanber 30, 1987). During this year the Board
maintained a very active program of. independent reviews of EPA research
programs and the scientific bases of a number of the Agency's major
regulatory and policy decisions. In addition, it began to implement th«
Congressional mandate in the Amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act
for review of the technical bases of drinking water standards. Ih^se
and other activities were designed to increase the scientific community's
ability to present high quality and timely advice to policy makers and
the Congress, and to promote technical consensus as a means of achieving
consensus on environmental policies. Finally, and in recognition of the
increased public awareness and desire for information on the Science
Advisory Board, operating procedures were developed for publication in
the Federal Register.
Like last year's report, it is my hope that the report for Fiscal
Year 1987 will improve public understanding not only of the Board's
contributions but also of an array of scientific issues and their role in
the decision making process,
cry
Director
Board
-------
SAB-88-007
Report ofc the Director of the Science Advisory Board
For Fiscal Year 1987
Science Advisory Board
u, S- Environmental Protection Agency
December 1987
-------
U. S- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NOTICE
this report has been written as a part of the activities of the
Science Advisory Board, a public advisory group providing extramural
scientific information and advice to the Administrator and other officials
of the Environmental Protection Agency, The Board is structured to
provide a balanced expert assessment of scientific matters related to
problems facing the Agency, this report has not been reviewed for approval
by the Agency and, hence, the contents of this report do not necessarily
represent the views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency,
nor of other agencies in the Executive Branch of the Federal government,
nor does mention of trade names or ccrnmercial products constitute
endorsement of recommendation for use.
-------
11
Table of Contents
Page
I. Summary of the Science Advisory Board's
Fiscal Year 1987 Activities ..... .................. 01
II. Science Advisory Board Operating Procedures 06
III. Organization, Budget and Personnel ....4....................... 10
IV. Reports Issued ,, 15
V. Current Members and Consultants as of October 1> 1987 ............ 2R
VI. Annex A; Science Advisory Board Charter A-l
-------
I, Summary of the Science Advisory Board's Fiscal Year 1987 Activities
This report presents the activities and accomplishments of the Science
Advisory Board for Fiscal Year (FY) 1987 (October 1, 1986 to September 30,
1987), Curing this year the Board maintained a very active program of
independent reviews of EPA research programs and the scientific bases of
a number of the Agency's major regulatory and policy decisions. In
addition, it began to implement the Congressional mandate in the Amendments
to the Safe Drinking Water Act for review of the technical bases of
drinking water standards. All of. the above activities were designed to
increase the scientific community's ability to present high quality and
timely advice to policy makers and the Congress and to promote technical
consensus as a means of achieving consensus on environmental policies.
Like last year's report, the report for Fiscal Year 1987 is intended
to improve public understanding not only oi the Board's contributions but
also of an array of scientific issues and their role in the decision making
process .
le no single form of peer review can address the range of scientific
issues encountered by regulatory agencies, the capability of the Science
Advisory Board has evolved to enable -it to conduct a wide ranging set of
scientific evaluations, these include reviews of:
o Research programs
o the technical bases of regulations and standards
a Policy statements or guidance
o Methodology development
o Advisory documents
o Specific scientific proposals, studies or surveys
o Presidential research budget proposals
o Reviews requested by other Federal agencies
o EPA reports to Congress
o and SAB initiatives
To conduct these reviews the Board had to maintain or recruit
scientific expertise from a number of scientific disciplines. In addition,
it had to assist in defining the relevant scientific and technical issues
under discussion; exhibit a familiarity with existing legislative
requirements and EPA policies, procedures and regulations? understand and
communicate the latest developments and advances generated by various
research disciplines; and integrate the skills of advisory committee members
and consultants to prepare high quality and timely scientific reports for
the EPA Administrator and Congress.
-------
Several major characteristics of SAB reviews during the past year
include the following;
o Implementation of Amendments to the Safe Ftinking Water Act.
Through the establishment of a Drinking water Subccromittee
of the Environmental Health Committee, the Board conducted 17
reviews of drinking water issues. They included evaluations
of; drinking water criteria documents and other assessments
that supported rulemaking activities; research programs; health
advisoriesi and a draft report to Congress comparing the health
risks associated with alternative treatment technologies.
o Greater emphasis upon ecological issues. The Board's focus
included ongoing EPA research programs such as the water quality
based approach, biotechnology, and the development of methodologies
for ecological risk assessment. The formation of the Long-Range
Ecological Research Needs Subccmmittee pointed to the broader
need for EPA to develop a longer-range research program and
agenda.
o Evaluating and reccrnmending modifications of the Superfuml
Hazard Ranking System. In its first review of a Superfund
program issue, the Board focused on three major scientific
issues: exposure, toxicity and large volume wastes. A major
theme of the review is the need to more closely relate the
ranking received by a site to the risk posed by the site.
o For the first time in its history, Board responded to a joint
request from EPA and the office of Management and Budget. Both
agencies askea the SAB to identify research needs associated with
health and environmental effects of stratospheric ozone depletion.
o A salient characteristic of the past year was EPA's responses
to SAB reports. In his memorandum of June 25, 1985 to senior
managers, Administrator Lee Thomas directed that any office that
received a SAB report should respond in writing to the Board's
advice, indicating agreement or disagreement and the reasons for
such action. In FY 87, EPA offices uniformly complied with this
directive, oftentimes providing verbal or written feedback before
the completion of the SAR's review, in addition to formal responses
following the completion of reviews-
The SAB carried out 77 scientific reviews during FY 87 (including
the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee). Some of these reviews were
initiated during FY '86, while others that began this past, year will
carry over in FY 88. By category ot activity, the following issues
constituted the SAB's agenda for FY 87:
Research Programs
o Development of Research Strategies
(Five issues; Sources, Transport and Fate; Exposure Assessment;
Health Fffects? Ecological Effects; and Risk Reduction)
o land Disposal
-------
o Drinking Water Disinfectants and Their By-Products
o Indoor Air Quality
o Engineering Research Program on Indoor Air Quality; Radon Reduction,
Research and Development, Program Description and Plans
o Research Needs for lead and Ozone (Ttoo issues)
{Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee)
o Biotechnology
o Waste Minimization
o Municipal Waste Combustion
o Integrated Air Cancer Project
o Ecological Risk Assessment
o Radon Mitigation
o Extrapolation Modeling
o Water Quality Based Approach
o Scientific and Technological Achievement Awards
o Draft Screening Analysis of Mining Wastes
o Underground Storage Tank Release Simulation Model
o Craft Health Assessment Documents for Beryllium;
Cis- and Trans- Eichloroethylene; 1,2 Dichloropropane ;
Polychlorinated Biphenalss Polychlorinated DLbenzofurans;
letrachloroethylene ; and Trichloroethylene (8 issues)
o Drinking Water Criteria Documents for Meta-Ortho-Para Dichlorobenzene;
Monochlorobenzene ; Nitrate/Nitrite; Xylene; Man-made
Radionuclide Occurrence; Radium; Radon? and Uranium (10 issues)
o Drinking Water Assessment of Radionuclides
o Proposed Drinking Water Rules for Filtration and Coliforms
(2 issues)
o Assessment of the Risks of Stratospheric Modification
o Evaluation of landfilling and Land Application as Alternatives to
Ocean Disposal of sewage Sludges
-------
- 4 -
o Assessment of the Separate Treatment of Sewage Sludges and Dredged
Materials Under EPA's ocean Djrnpiog Regulations
o Sewage Sludge Risk Assessment Methodologies to Support the revelopment
of National Criteria for Sludge Management
o Scientific issues Related to Municipal Waste Combustion
o Municipal Waste Combustion Ash Assessment
o Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Other Photochemical Oxldants
(Clean Air Scientific Advisory Conmittee)
o Addendum to the Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter and Sulfur Oxides
(Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee)
o Addendum to the QAQPS Staff Paper for Particulate Matter
(Clean Air Scientific Advisory Ccwmittee)
o Addendum to the QA0PS Staff Paper for Sulfur oxides
(Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee)
Policy Jjtaternen_ts_ or_Gui_dance
o Review of Draft Guidance for the Establishment of Alternate Concentration
Limits for RCRA Facilities
o Superfund Hazard Ranking System
Development
o Methodology for the Assessment of Health Risks Associated with Multiple
pathway Exposure to Municipal Waste Conbustor Bnissions
o Integrated Environmental Management Program
o Methodology for Valuing Health Risks of Ambient Lead Exposure
(Clean Air scientific Advisory Committee)
o A Eamage Function Assessment of Building Materials; The impact of Acid
reposition
(Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee)
o Interim Procedures for Estimating Risk Associated with Exposure to
Mixtures of Chlorinated ribenzo- g-Dioxins and Dibenzofurans
o Cjuidelines for Water Quality Advisories for Human Health and
Aquatic Life (2 issues)
-------
- 5 -
o Drinking Water Health Advisories for 37 Compounds {3 reviews);
acrylamide, benzene, p-dioxane, ethylbenzene, ethylfene glycol, hexane,
leejionella, methylethylketone , styrene, toluene, xylene, arsenic,
barium, cadmium, chromium, cyanide, lead, mercury, nickel, nitrate/
nitrite, carbon tetrachloride, chlorobenzene, dichlorobenzene,
Ir2-dichloroe thane, cis and trans 1,2-dichloroethylene, 1,1-
dichloroethylene, dichlorcmethane, dichloropropane, dioxin,
epichlorohydrin, hexachlorobenzene, polychlorinated biphenyls,
tetrachloroethylene , 1,1, 2-triehloroethylene , 1,1 r-trichloroethylene ,
and x'inl chloride.
_Specif_i£ ,S5J_ejntifi_c_ Prpposals^^ Studies or Surveys
o Design of the National Radon Survey
o Idaho Radionuclide Exposure study
o Kanawha Valley Toxics Screening Study
o National Surface Water Monitoring Study
o laboratory Measurement Proficiency Program for Radon Testing
Presidential
o Evaluation of the President's Proposed Budget for the Office of
Research and Development for FY 1988
Reviews^ Requested by
o Recommended Research on Effects of Stratospheric Ozone Depletion -
EPA and the Office of Management and Budget
<3 Congress
o Report to Congress on Indoor Air Pollution and Radon
o Comparative Health Effects of Drinking Water Treatment Technologies
o National Dioxin Study
SAB JtnJLtia tive
o workshop on Mouse Liver and Rate Kidney Tumors and Their Role in Human
Risk Assessment (2 issues)
-------
II. Science Advisory Board Operating Procedures
To ensure the quality of technical analyses used in its decision making
process/ EPA has expanded its use of various formal and informal methods of
peer review. The Science Advisory Board (SAB) , established by the Congress
through the passage of the Environmental Research, Development and Dsmonstration
Authorization Act (ERDCAA) amendments of 1978, is the principal independent
advisory body used by the Administrator to formally obtain advice on the
scientific aspects of a large number of important public health and environmental
issues .
The Agency's referral of studies and assessments to the SAB for peer review
preceeded, but is consistent with, the recommendations of the National Academy
of Sciences in its report on risk assessment in the Federal government.-'- A
major recommendation of this report was for regulatory agencies to create
independent peer review panels to review scientific studies that form the basis
for major agency regulatory actions.
Tne Congress has required specific SAB review of such issues as the
scientific bases of National Ambient Air Quality Standards, National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, and National Primary drinking Water
Standards. Section 8(e) of ERDCAA also mandates that the Agency make available
for SAB review "any proposed criteria document, standard, limitation or
regulation."
In light of the growing importance of the SAB to EPA's regulatory and
research programs, the Agency has decided to formalize some of the procedures
governing the selection of SAB members and the operations of the Board. In the
past, the Agency has been extremely fortunate in having leaders of the scientific
community serve on the SAB and will seek to continue this high level of expertise
on the Board through a more formal selection process.
VJhile trsis notice makes no significant changes in the SAB's procedures for
reviewing studies and providing advice to the Agency, it is important for the
public to know what those procedures are. Other aspects of the SAB's operations,
including its objectives, responsibilities, and composition are set forth in
its Charter (which is attached as Annex A). Ihe charter of a Federal advisory
committee must be renewed every two years,
Selection ofSAB Members
Members of the SAB are selected by the Administrator and Dsputy Administrator.
Members are appointed for staggered terms of one to four years, which may be
extended at the end of the term for the same range of time. The SAB has
solicited nominations for membership from the general public in the past. 2 ib
continue ensuring the highest caliber participant on the SAB, EPA is announcing
today a more formal process to solicit nominations of qualified scientists,
engineers, or other disciplines as appropriate for review of the technical
issues addressed by the Board. Such nominations will be solicited from!
o Federal research agencies such as the National institutes of Health,
the National Center for Health Statistics, and the National Science
Foundation.
o The Presidents oE the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of
Engineering and the institute of Medicine.
-------
- 7 -
o Professional scientific societies.
o Current or former SAB members.
o The public (including the private sector and public interest groups)
o EPA staff,
EPA will solicit such nominations by Federal Register notice as
frequently as needed, but no less than every other year. To achieve
balanced points of view among various schools of scientific thought,
individuals will be appointed to the Board on the basis of their expertise
and not their organizational affiliation or constituency, in announcing
a solicitation, EPA will also identify particular scientific disciplines
where expertise is needed. Members of the Board will be selected from
among the nominated individuals. The Agency will publish in the Federal
Register, on an annual basis, the current roster of SAB members. Members
of the~"public are encouraged to submit nominees for Board membership at
any time and need not await a formal solicitation from EPA.
SAB members appointed by the Administrator or Ceputy Administrator
serve on various standing committee, subcommittees or ad hoc panels, or
serve as piarnbers-at-large. In addition, the Board uses consultants with
more specialized expertise on as-needed basis. Such consultants, who must
meet the same standards of scientific expertise as members, do not vote
on formal matters before the Board.
Each SAB member or consultant is required to exercise judgment prior
to any meeting as to whether a potential conflict of interest might exist
due to his or her occupational affiliation, professional or research
activity or financial interest on a particular matter before the Board.
If there is a potential conflict of interest, the member or consultant
must excuse himself/herself from the deliberations and/or votes of
committees or subcommittees of the Board with respect to that matter.
SAB members and consultants currently complete an annual Confidential
Statement of Employment and Financial Interests (Form 3120-1) beginning
at the time of their initial appointment. Those compensated at or above
the GS-16 rate, and who work more than 60 days per fiscal year, must
conform to the financial disclosure provisions of the 1978 Ethics in
Government Act. in addition, the SAB is currently in the process of
preparing specific conflict of interest guidelines for its members and
consultants, ihese guidelines, when completed, will be published in the
Federal Register.
The SAB_Jteview process
The advisory process employed by the SAB will vary depending on the nature
of the technical issues undergoing review, but certain generalizations concerning
the review process can be stated. Most technical issues and scientific data
evaluated by the Board are described in technical support documents prepared
internally by EPA or by external contractors hired by EPA program offices
-------
- 8 -
in developing regulations, standards, guidance or policy statements. The SAB
also evaluates a considerable number of individual programs within the Office
of Research and Development. The Administrator has previously instructed
program and research offices to seek advice from the SAB as early as possible
in the decision making process and, generally, before the proposal in the
Federal Register of a regulation or standard, or before the final issuance
of criteria". Technical support or guidance documents.3
in general, the SAB review process involves the following steps:
1. At the direction of the Administrator or Deputy Administrator, each
program or research office nominates scientific issues of importance to EPA
that are subsequently submitted to the SAB Executive Committee for approval to
authorize a SAB review. These issues are in addition to those that are legally
required. The SAB can also initiate written requests to the Administrator to
review individual issues. Based on consultations between the Executive Comittee
and senior EPA program and research officials, the Committee assigns priorities
for the SAB. These priorities are subject to adjustment by the Executive
Committee of the SAB in consultation with the Agency during the year.
2. The issues identified in step 1 are referred by the Executive Committee
to an appropriate existing SAB ccmmittee for review, or the Executive Committee,
as the need arises, establishes an appropriate subcommittee to conduct the review.
3. Additional expertise is recruited, if needed. A schedule for the review
is established.
4. Agency documents and studies by outside contractors are transmitted to
the SAB committee. Preliminary briefings or site visits are conducted if needed.
At this stage of the advisory process, the Administrator has directed that program
or research offices prepare an "issues paper" which synthesizes the relevant
scientific data, states the EPA position based on such data and defines the
specific issues to be addressed by the SAB.
5. EPA documents are formally reviewed in meetings open to the public.
While some meetings may be closed in accordance with specific provisions of
the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b Section 10 [d] of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act) such action is only taken for compelling
reasons, in addition, public comments of a scientific nature are accepted
by the SAB. Following discussion within the review committee and between
the ccmmittee and EPA staff and members of the public, the committee prepares
a statement of its major conclusions and recommendations.
6. Based upon EPA and SAB discussions, EPA may prepare an additional
draft of its technical documents and may request another cycle of scientific
review by the committee. If this does not occur, the ccmmittee1s final report
is transmitted to the Executive Committee for approval.
7. The Executive Committee reviews the report and, if approved, transmits
it to the Administrator. The final SAB report becomes a public document which
is available for public inspection and copying.
8. The director of the relevant program or research office, or the
Administrator, formally responds in writing to SAB advice, noting areas where
the advice will be accepted or not accepted, and the reasons for such action.
-------
— 9 —
Tteiel_i_ness o_f_ SAB Review
To avoid delaying important EPA decisions, the scientific review process
must, to the extent feasible, be conducted in an expeditious manner without
sacrificing a high level of quality in both the preparation and review of
technical documents.• Consistent with this objective, the SAB establishes a
schedule for the preparation o£ each report. Similarly, the Agency's response
to the SAB's advice should be transmitted promptly. In general, the SAB seeks
to submit a written report to the Administrator within 90 days of the completion
of a review. EPA seeks to respond in writing to SAB advice within the same
time frame following the formal submittal of a final SAB report.
Sutanittal of Questions^ and Nqninations
Members of the public who have questions pertaining to the above
stated procedures or who wish to recommend nominees for SAB membership
should write or. Terry F. Yosie, Director! Science Advisory Board, U- S.
Environmental Protection Agency, (A-101), 401 M Street, S.W., Washington,
IX C. 20460.
References
1. National Research Council, "Risk Assessinent in the Federal Government:
Managing the process,: (National Academy Press, Washington, D. C,, 1983).
2. 49 federal Register, 33169, August 21, 1984.
3. Memorandum frcm EPA Administrator tee M. Thomas to Assistant Admin-
istrators and Office Directors, "Improving the Agency's use of the Science
Advisory Board," June 25, 1985.
-------
ORGANIZATION OF THE SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD
H
T-H
H
B
Not*; With in* »xo«p1lon of c*l*C *hloh It mtnd«1«d
fin*) i f *|>ori dlri«tiy 1o 1h« B jnaullvw C«mmllt**,
P*rmiri*n( tlandlng CommlUi*» m*y 1 1 10 farm t ubocrnmlll««»
Th» off to* of 111* Olr«otw of tn* tcl»noi Advltwy Satrd
m»y b» oen1iol*d on < J 0?k s»Z-4 1 1». M ethir naff m*y
b* oontke litf «n < I Oil »2>!ft6t,
-------
_ 11 _
_Standinci_ Comuttees
, Transport anc[ JFate _COTnittee
o Municipal waste Combustion Subcommittee
Chair: Dr. Rolf Bartung
o Water Quality Subcommittee
Chair: Or. Kenneth cickson
o Surface Water Monitoritxj Subcommittee
Chair; Dr. Kenneth Cickson
HealthConiuittee
o Drinking Water Subcommittee
Chair; Dr. Gary Carlson
o Halogenated Organics Subcommittee
Chair-. Dr. John Boull
o Metals Subccromittee
Chair: Dr. Bernard Weiss
Radition Advisor Cmiittee
o National Radon Survey resign Subcommittee
Chair: Dr. Cfldvar Nygaard
o Radionuclides in Erinking Water Subccromittee
Cnair: Et. Warren Sinclair
o Radon Mitigation Subcommittee
Chair; Dr. John Till
Environmental Engineering Ccrrariittee
o Alternate Concentration Limits Subcommittee
Co-Chairs: Mr. Richard Conway
Dr. Mitchell Small
o Land Disposal Subcowtiittee
Chair: Or, Raymond Loehr
o Waste Minimization Subcommittee
Chair; Mr. Richard Conway
o Underground Storage Tank Subcommittee
Chair; Dr. Keros Cartwright
-------
- 12 -
Canmittee
o Acidic Aerosols Subcommittee
Chair; Dr. Mark Utell
o lead Benefit Analysis Subcommittee
Chair: Dr. Robert Rowe
o lead/Ozone Research Needs Subcommittee
Chair; dr. Morton Lippmann
o Material Carnage Review Subcommittee
Chair; Dr. Warren Johnson
o Visibility Subcommittee
Chair: Dr. Shep Burton
-------
13
SCI_ENC_E_ MyiBCm_BCmp_ J3TAFF
_ DIRECTOR ... ...... . .............. . ..... . ...... * . .......... Terry F. Yosie
Secretary . , ...... ...I................................ Joanna A. Foellmer
Clerk- Typist . .................... . ........ .......... Vacant
_ffi_pprf_ _DKECTCB ...... ........... .......... ...... . ---- .... Kathleen W. Conway
Secretary ... ......... ....... ....... . ..... ....... ---- Janet R, Butler
|£CGRAM_ ANALYST ...... ....... ---- ......................... Cheryl B. Bentley
CLEAN AIR SCIENTIFIC AWISCY
Environmental Scientist ....... ....... ........ ...... . A. Robert Flaak
Secretary ... ...... ......... ..... ............ ........ Carolyn L. Osborne
ENVTRONMENTAL EFFECTS, TRANSPORT AND FATE CCMMIITEE
Environmental Scientist ....... ..... ................. Janis C. Kurtz
Secretary ... ......... ............................... Lutithia V. Barbee
ENGINEERING COMMITTEE
Envirorroental Eng ineer ....... ....................... Vacant
Eric H. Males
(Acting until 8/31/87)
Environmental Engineer .............................. Harry Torno
(1 year leave of absence)
Secretary ....... ..... ............................... B, Marie Miller
Environmental Scientist ........... ........... ....... C. Richard Cothern
Secretary , .......... . ....... . ..... ........ ....... ... Vacant
RADIATION AP7ISCRY COMMITTEE
Environmental Scientist ............................. Kathleen W. Conway
Secretary ...... ..... ................... ............. Dorothy M. Clark
Stay-in-School Assistants ......... ...... , ..... ........... Lavonia E, Shirley
DsreK L. Jackson
-------
14 -
SCIENCE AIVISCRy BOKRD FISCAL YEAR 1987 BUDGET
Compensation S 851,246.44
(Members, Consultants and Staff)
Travel $ 281,888.41
Other Contractual Services ».. $ 53,832.00
(Court reporting services, equipment, training,
maintenance for word processing equipment,
copying machine, etc.}
Tbtal ,..,..... »,. S 1,186,966.80
-------
- 15 -
IV. Reports issued
SCIENCE A.WISORY BOARD REPORTS
(FISCAL YEAR 1987)
Report to the Administrator on a review conducted by the Clean Air Scientific
Advisory Committee of the Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and other Photochemical
Oxidants— -Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee— October 22, 1986 — SAB-CASAC-87-001
report documents the Committee's findings relative to its review
of the Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Other Photochemical Oxidants
prepared by the Agency's Environmental Criteria and Assessment office,
CASAC unanimously concluded that this document represents a scientifically
balanced and defensible presentation and interpretation of the scientific
literature.
Report to the Administrator on a review of the Agency's Research Program On indoor
Air Quality— Indoor Air Quality Research Review Panel — November 5, 1936 — SA8-EC-87-002,
The Panel concluded that while the indoor air research being conducted
was of high quality, the research taken as whole did not constitute a
"program" in indoor air quality. The major recommendations include*
1) development and adoption of a clear policy statement that indoor
air quality is an important and essential component of the responsi-
bility of the Agency, 2) assigning responsibility for the indoor air
quality program to an individual of appropriate scientific statute
with specific experience in this area, 3} the proposed limited field
survey should not be carried out as presented since the resources that
it would demand are not commensurate with the scientific information and
insights which would be derived, 4) preparation of a relative risk
assessment for more important pollutants (including asbestos, biological
contaminants, criteria air pollutants, and toxic chemicals) in order to
develop a framework for decision making, and 5) eight general conclusions
and recommendations concerning current research in indoor air quality.
Report to the Administrator on a review of the final draft of the Agency's Guidance
for the Establishment of Alternate Concentration Limits for RCRA Facilities — Environ-
mental Engineering Committee — October 24, 1986 — SAB-EEC-87-OQ3-
Committee conducted a preliminary review of the above document in
March 1986, and identified obvious errors or emissions which are explained
in detail in its initial report, The Office of Solid Waste asked the
Committee to review the final draft ACL guidance when it was ready for
publication in the Federal Register. This report represents the Committee's
review of the final draft which was found to be well-written and technically
sound ,
SINGLE COPIES OF THESE REPORTS ARE AVAILABLE AT NO CHARGE FROM THE SCIENCE |
ADVISORY BOARD. SAB REPORT NUMBERS SHOULD BE REFERRED TO WHEN MAKING REQUESTS, j
PLEASE ADIRESS REQUESTS TO SCIENCE AD7ISCRY BOARD (A-10IF), ElWffiONMENTAL 1
PROTECTION AGENCY, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460, ATTENTION CHERYL B. BENTLEY OR \
CALL {202) 382-2552. ]
-------
- 16
Report to the Administrator on a SAB review requested by the Office of QrinKing Water
(OEM) of thirty-seven drinking water health advisories—Environmental Health CcRWiittee—
October 24, 1986—Metals Subcommittee (SAB-EHC-87-004); Halogenated Qrganics Subcommittee
(SAB-EHC-S7-005); and Drinking Water Subcommittee (SAR-EHC-S7-OQ6).
The Environmental Health Committee has reviewed 37 health advisories for
drinking water. Health advisories are action levels for exposures of
different duration and are not regulations. Three Subcommittees partici-
pated in the reviews. Each one prepared general eccnments as well as
specific comments on specific substances as follows:
Office of Drinking Water Health Advisories for 37 Compounds!
acrylonide, benzene, p-dioxane, ethylbenzene, ethylene glycol, hexane,
legionella, methylethylketone, styrene, toluene, xylene, arsenic, barium,
cadmium, chromium, cyanide, leadr mercury, nickel, nitrate/nitrite, carbon
tetrachloride, chlorobenzene, dichlorobenzene, 1,2-dichloroethane, cis and
trans 1,2-dichloroethylene, 1,1-diehloroethylene, dichlororaethane, dichloro-
propane, dioxin, epichlorohydrin, hexachlorobenzene, polychlorinated biphenyls,
tetrachloroethyiene, 1,1,2-trichloroethylene, 1»1,-trichloroethylene, and
vinyl chloride.
Overall the Environmental Health Coranittee reached the following conclusions:
o The scientific quality of health advisories were uneven.
o The Oftics ot Erinking Water has made a commendable effort in
providing exposure analysis information.
o A major problem in the health advisories is that they are intended
for a diversity ot readers, who have widely varying background levels
and concerns.
o Communication would be enhanced if the Office of Drinking Water
adopted a three step process to include a Criteria Document, a health
advisory and narrative summary for each substance.
Report of the Director of the Science Advisory Board for Fiscal Year 1986™
October 1986—SAB-87-007.
This is the Science Advisory Board's (SAB) first in a series of SAB annual
reports which is intended to inform EPA, SAB members and consultants,
and other interested constituencies of the Board's continuing activities.
In addition, the report represents an effort to promote a better under-
standing of the Board's role in decision inaking, and its efforts to
provide scientific advice.
-------
- 17
Report to the Administrator on a review of a draft document entitled "Interim
Procedures for Estimating Risk Associated with Exposure to Mixtures of Chlorinated
Dibenzc-jD-Dioxins and DLbenzof urans" , prepared by the Agency's Risk Assessment
Forum — Dioxin Toxic Equivalency Methodology Subcommittee — November 4, 1986 —
SAB-EC-87-008.
The Assistant Administrator for Air requested the science Advisory
Board to review the draft document mentioned above which sets forth
an approach for assessing the hazards of Chlorinated Dibenzo-g-
Dioxin (CDD) and Dibenzofuran (CCF) mixtures relative to the toxicity
of the 2, 3, 1, 8-tetrachloro-dibenzo-|>-diQxin (TCDD) iscmer. The
Subcommittee concluded that the draft document represented a successful
interim attempt to articulate a scientific rationale and procedures
for developing risk management decisions for mixtures which contain CPD's
and CEFS related in structure and activity to TCDD,
Report to the Administrator on a review of the 1986 Addendum ( Seoond__Addendxjn
to ^it ttiterie for Particulate Majbter and Sulfurides (1982)) —
to the 1982 'Mr^ Quality CrYteria f or JPart_icu"late Matter__an Sulfur Oxides,
prepared by the 'Agency's Environmental Criteria and "Assessment Office — Clean Air
Scientific Advisory Committee — December lb, 1986 — $AB-CASAC-87-QQ9.
The Committee unanimously concluded that the 1986 Addendum, along
with the 1982 Criteria Document previously reviewed by CASAC, repre-
sent a scientifically balanced and defensible summary of the scientific
literature on these pollutants. CASAC requested the review of the 1986
Addendum to the 1982 Air Quality Criteria Cocument on PM/SQst for the
purpose of updating the knowledge of recent scientific studies and
analyses. Key findings from earlier documents are summarized which
provide a reasonably complete summary of newly available information
concerning particulate matter and sulfur oxides, with major emphasis
on evaluation of human health studies published since 1981.
Report to the Administrator on a review of the 1986 Addendum to the 1982 Staff
Paper on Particulate Matter (Review of the NAAQS for Particular Matter: Assess-
ment of Scientific and Technical Information) prepared by the Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards — Clean Air Scientific Advisory Ccromittee —
December 16, 1986— SAB-CASAC-87-G1Q.
The Committee concluded that this document is consistent in all
significant respects with the scientific evidence presented and
interpreted in the combined Air Quality Criteria Document for
Particulate Matter/Sulfur Oxides and its 1986 Addendum. The
Committee believes that this document should provide the kind
and amount of: technical guidance that will be needed to make
appropriate revisions to the standards. Major conclusions and
recommendations concerning the scientific issues and studies
discussed in the Staff Paper Addendum are detailed in the report.
-------
- 18 -
Report to ths Administrator on a review of the Agency's Water Quality Based
Approach research prog-ram—Water Quality Based Approach Research Review
Subcommittee—December 11, 1986—SAB-EC-87-011.
As part Of a series of Science Advisory Board ongoing reviews on
the CRD research program, the SAB reviewed a document entitled
"Reference Material for SAB Review of Water Quality Based Approach
for the Control of Toxics - Freshwater". This document was prepared
by four RPA laboratories that carry out research in this particular
program,
The Subcommittee's major conclusion was that methods for deriving water
quality criteria have undergone a steady evolution and extensive scientific
review. The scientific and regulatory ccranunities have widely accepted
the resulting criteria. Additional Subcommittee reccmraendations were
directed at further strengthening the water quality based approach, and
integrating it with work related to other areas of toxic controls needing
attention,
Report to the Administrator on a review of EPA's National DLoxin Study—National
Eioxin Study Review Subcommittee—December 19, 1986—SAB~EC-87^012.
The Subcommittee commended EPA and its personnel for the preparation
of a comprehensive, informative and well-written document, with revisions
that are identified in the report, the thoroughness of the Study and
quality of the data base are scientifically supportable, given the
understanding of current knowledge.
The four objectives of the study were; (1) to assess "the associated
risks to humans and the environment", (2) a study of the extent of
contamination, (3) implementation of site clean-up efforts, and (3) the
evaluation of a variety of disposal and regulatory alternatives.
Report to the Administrator on a review of reports developed by the Office
of Policy, Planning and Evaluation on landfilling and land application as
alternatives to ocean disposal of sewage sludges—Environmental Engineering
Cconittee—January 15, 1987—SM-EEC-87-013.
The Committee believes that the reports did not provide adequate
documentation to justify the choice of methodology and selection
of models. The Committee also recommended that the Agency conduct
sensitivity analyses to evaluate the importance of variables and
uncertainties in the models. In addition, the methodology should
use data distributions rather than subjectively defining- "representative"
conditions.
-------
- 19 -
Raport to the Administrator of a report written by the office of Marine
and Estuarine Protection (CMEP) to justify the separate treatment of sewage
sludges and dredged materials under the EPA ocean dumping regulations—Environ-
mental Engineering Committee—January 16, 1987—SAB-EEC-87-Q14.
Although the Committee is in agreement with the Agency that there
are significant differences in the properties of most sewage sludges
and dredged materials, significant exceptions exist. Clearly defined,
consistent, rigorous, and peer-reviewed procedures must exist to
identify these exceptions. CMEP maintains that existing procedures
for evaluating dredged materials (under Part 227,13) are adequate;
however, based on the documents provided to the Committee, a rigorous
protocol for identifying exceptions do not appear to exist.
Report to the Administrator on a review of four sewage sludge risk assessment
methodologies developed by the Office of Research and Development for the Office
of Water to support the development of national criteria for sludge management—
Environmental Engineering Committee—January 15, 1987—SAB-EEC-87-Q15.
The Committee recommends that further work be conducted before
tiie risk assessment methodologies are used to develop numerical
criteria. Major shortcomings include various unexplained technical
omissions and overly conservative and unrealistic risk assessment
assumptions, including a sole focus on "maximum expos
-------
- 20 -
Report to the Administrator on a review the Office of Research and Development's
ecological risk assessment program—Ecological Risk Assessment Research Review
Subcarmittee—January 16, 1987—SAB-EC-87-Q17.
The Subcommittee's major conclusion was that the overall concept
of ecological risk assessment developed in this program is
comprehensivet scientifically ambitious, and sets forth a research
direction for the long-term (perhaps twenty years). In the short-
term (five years), it is not achievable as planned, particularly
because some of the key elements (density-dependent population,
coranunity and ecosystem mechanist models) are based on an incomplete
understanding of the fundamental mechanisms. However, the research
staff have made a promising start in identifying sane of the major
issues this program should address.
Report to the Administrator on a review of a draft Addendum to the Health
Assessment Document for Percliloroethylene—Environmental Health Conmittee—
January 27, 19S7—SAB-EHC-87-Q18.
The Committee previously reviewed a draft Health Assessment Document
on '--lay 9-10, 1984 and an Addendum is desirable because of newly
available data, primarily an inhalation bioassay of rodents by
the National lexicology program. The Subcommittee believes it is
reasonable to' describe the weight of the epidemiological evidence
in humans as conforming to the EPA guideline for carcinogen risk
assessment definition of "inadequate". The Subcommittee concluded
that the animal evidence of carcinogenicity is "limited" because
of positive results in only one strain of mouse of a type of turoor
that is common and difficult to interpret. Therefore, the Subcommittee
concluded that perchloroethylene belongs in the overall weight-of-the-
evidence category C (possible human carcinogen).
Report to the Administrator on a series of scientific reviews of Agency research
programs—Executive Committee—January 16, 1987—S&B-EC-87-019,
The Board believes that its reviews of Agency research programs
have proven to be a highly useful means of assessing the quality
and relevance of existing research. These reviews have focused
both the SAB's and the Agency's thinking on research plans and needs
to a degree never before achieved through preparation and review
of the Five Year Research and Development Plan (Research Outlook).
The Board believes that its extensive research program reviews fulfill
the spirit and intent of Congress for SAB oversight of the Agency's research
program.
-------
_ 21 -
Report to the Administrator on a review of a draft Drinking water Criteria Document
for Monochlorobenzene—Environmental Health Committee—January 16, 1987—SAB-EHC-
87-020.
The Subcommittee evaluated the animal evidence for carcinogenicity of
ehlorobenzene to be "inadequate" under EPA's new guidelines based on
th£ lack of a statistically significant increase in the incidence
of tumors in female mice, male mice and female rats, and on the
basis of the perception of a diminished biologic significance of
reported malignant neoplastic nodules of the liver in the highest
dose-treated .male rats. this evidence would place chlorobenzene
into the overall weight-o£-the-evidence category "EP (not elassified).
Report to the Administrator on a review of a draft Health Assessment Document
for Polychlorinated Dlbenzofurans—Environmental Health Committee—January Ifi,
1987— SABH5HC-87-Q21.
The available information on polychlorinated dibenzofurans is scant.
For this reason, staff utilized information about polychlorinated
dibenzQ-p_~dioxins in the assessment. The scientific theory that
supports "the use of this analogy is sound. Both groups of substances
are thought to cause biological effects by binding with different
affinities to the same intracellular receptor molecule. However,
the draft document assumes this theory for one plausible effect of
receptor binding, namely developmental abnormalities, and not for other
effects which have been attributed to polychlorinated dibenzo-g-
dioxins in previous Ayency assessments, such as carcinogenicity.
The Subcommittee requests that EPA either assume the same theory
for all effects or provide an explanation of why carcinogenic effects
do not follow from binding to the receptor.
Report to the Administrator on a review of the 1986 Addendum to the 1982
Staff Paper on Sulfur Oxides (Review irOf_the National_janbient Air Qua_lity
Standards fqr_Sulfur Oxides: _ OpdatedT Assessment pi the "scientifj^jand"
Technical |njpjirat.ion]_ prepared" by™the Agency's Office of "Air Quaffty Planning
and'Standards (CftQPS)—Clean Air Scientific Advisory Comittee—February 19,
1987—-SA8-CASAC-87-G 22.
The Committee concluded that this document is consistent in all
significant respects with the scientific evidence presented and
interpreted in the combined Air Quality Criteria Document for
Particulate Matter/Sulfur Oxides (1982) and its 1986 Addendum,
and that the Staff Paper and its Addendum provide the Administrator
with the kind and amount of technical guidance that will be needed
to make decisions with respect to the national ambient air quality
standards for sulfur oxides.
-------
- 22 -
Report to the Administrator on a review of the Office of Research and Development's
Integrated Air Cancer Project'—integrated Air Cancer Project Research Review
Subcommittee—February 25, 1987—SAB--EC-67-Q23.
This is the first time the Agency has addressed the carcinogenic potency
of mixtures of materials in the ambient air and is a critical step towards
characterizing the exposure of humans to a complex environment. The Sub-
committee found the Integrated Air Cancer Project to be scientifically
well-founded. The project represents a logical and appropriately innovative
approach that can achieve its long-range goals of addressing these complex
envirormental health issues. In addition, the project effectively exploits
sotie of the research tools and results developed in the past decade and
presents an example of effective multi—laboratory research management within
the Agency.
Report to the Administrator on a second SAB annual review of the President's
proposed budget for the Office of Research and Development—Research and Develop-
ment Budget Subcommittee—March 6, 1987--SABHGC-87-024.
The scope of the Subcommittee's review addresses three major issues:
1) trervJs in the research budget; 2) continuing core needs of EFA's
research program; and 3) Garments on specific research programs in
eight major areas—air, radiation, water quality, drinking water,
pesticides/toxic substances, hazardous wastes/Superfund, energy/acid
rain and interdisciplinary research.
Report to the Administrator on a review of EPA's risk assessment document
entitled An Assessment of the Risks of Stratospheric Modification-—Stratospheric
Ozone Subcommittee—March' 23, 1987—SAB-EC-87-025.
The Subcommittee co^ludC'd that EPA's draft document represents an
extensive effort to develop an integrated risk assessment based upon
currently available scientific information to ascertain the potential
threat to the stratosphere posed by a continued growth world-wide of
©missions of chlorofluorocarbon (CFCs) compounds. The Subcommittee
gutv.vrally finds that EPA has done a commendable job of assembling the
relevant scientific information in the body of the document. The Sub-
cciTiiaittee has provided many specific recommendations for improving the
treatment of particular scientific issues and characterizing scientific
uncertainties which are detailed in the report.
-------
- 23 -
Report to the Assistant Administrator for Research and Development on the 1986
Scientific and "technological AeM ev^nent Awards—1986 Scientific and Technological
Achievement Awards Subeomittee—April 6, 1987—SAB-EC-87-Q26.
The Subcommittee reviewed 113 papers nominated by EPA's Office of
Research and Development for the 1986 Scientific and Technological
Achievement Awards; 34 were recommended for awards. The Subcemraittee
noted that more papers were nominated for awards this year (113 versus
92 in 1985), but a higher percentage (30% versus 25%) of those nominated
have been recommended for an award. Papers in the Control Technology
category were judged worthy of an award for the first time in several
years.
The Subcommittee ;nade the following three suggestions: (1) the call
for papers should be widened so that qualifying work of engineers and
scientists throughout the Agency can be considered? (2) a letter of
recognition should be sent to scientists and engineers outside the
Ayency who co-authored award-winning papers? and (3) recognising in
sane other way a number of papers which were of very high quality but
did not qualify Cor awards.
Report to the Administrator on a review of a document jointly prepared by the
Girt ice of Air Quality Planning and Standards and the Environmental Criteria and
Assessment Office entitled Methodology__for the Asjsjsgsroent of Jtealth Risks Associated
with Multiple Pathway Exposure to Municipal MasteConbustor Emissions—Municipal
Waste Combustion Subcommittee—April 9, 1987—SAB-EETS.FO87-027.
The Subcommittee considered the proposed methodology to be a considerable
improvement over other multi-media risk assessment methodologies previously
developed by EPA and reviewed by the Science Advisory Board. Ths current
methodology was more comprehensive in scope and, in general, provides a
conceptual framework that ought to be expanded to other environmental
problems.
The Subcommittee identified several areas in this methodology that need
further consideration, including; the applicability of the Hampton incin-
erator facility and associated data to represent typical mass burn technology?
the failure to use data frcm current best available control technology facilities
for model validation; separate treatment of particulate and gaseous emissions
and their fate, i.e., downwash; the need to use best available kinetics in
predicting soil degradation; exposure resulting from the landfilling of ash;
using the maximally exposed individual (MEI) concept: and the treatment of
plant (and herbivore) exposure.
-------
- 24 -
Report to the Administrator on a review of a Health Assessment Document for
Beryllium—Environmental Health Committee—April 24, 1987—EBC-87-Q2S.
The Metal's Subcommittee agrees with the conclusions reached in
the draft document concerning the evidence of carcinogenicity
using epidemiological and animal data. The Subcommittee was
unable to reach a consensus on advising the Agency on the use
of existing data to estimate an upper bound to human risk. In
addition, the Subcommittee continues to disagree with the Agency's
choice of a model for the pharmacokinetics of inhaled beryllium
particulars. These and other issues are detailed in the report.
Report to the Administrator on a review of the Drinking Water Criteria Document
for Nitrate/Nitrite—Environmental Health Cornnuttee-"-May 11, 1987-SAB-eS>87-Q29,
The Drinking Water Subcotnmittee advised further technical changes
before finalizing the document such as; (1) clarifying the use
of the Walton study, including limitations of the study and the
weight assigned to its use for regulatory decision making,- and
(2) the representation of a clearer scientific rationale on the
selection of margins of safety. Additional comments can be found
in the report.
Report the the Administrator on a review of the progress made by the Office of
Research and Development in addressing EPA's needs for extrapolation models-
Extrapolation Models Subcommittee—May 26, 1987—SA3-EC-87-Q30.
The Subcommittee's major finding was that there is no overall,
conceptually integrated Agency research program on extrapolation
modeling, but a conglomeration of investigator-initiated projects,
many of which are conmendable in their design and implementation.
Major recommendations of the Subcommittee suggested that EPA should
develop a comprehensive plan for an extrapolation models research
program, that should; 1) articulate an overall conceptual objective
towards which individual projects would aim; 2} enhance EPA's risk
assessment-risk management framework for decision making; 35 develop
a franework that promotes more planning and resource stability in
support of the research? 4) provide a common nomenclature; 5) improve
communication among the Agency's organizational components; and
6) explain to the nonscientist how the research on extrapolation models
support the Agency's regulatory decisions.
-------
25 -
Report to the Administrator on a review of BPA's Draft Kanawha Valley Toxics
Screening Study—Integrated Environmental Management Subcanmittae—May 27, 1987—
SAB-EC-87-031.
Ihe Subconmittee unanimously concluded that the Kanawha Valley
study represented an important component of EPA's overall effort
to develop methodologies to define public health and environmental
priorities. Studies such as this provide (1) valuable technical
challenges and experiences to EPA staff, particularly to regional
offices; and (2) provide a valuable means for developing closer
working relationships with state and local officials and the
general public.
In general, the Subccrnmittee viewed the Draft Kanawha valley Toxics
Screening Study as one step of a continuing process to assess risks.
Ihe current study addresses chronic health exposures to carcinogens
which represent one of many public health concerns in the Valley, As
a follow-up to the current study, the Subcommittee reccnmended the
following two additional steps:
o expanded monitoring of air toxics, and use of monitored
values to obtain more precise estimates of exposure and
health risks; and
o greater focus on accidental releases and fugitive emissions
as areas of public health concern,
Report to the Administrator on a review requested by the Office of'Air Quality
Planning and Standards entitled "Methodology for Valuing Health Risks of Ambient
lead Exposure" prepared by Mathtech, Inc., an EPA contractor—Clean Air Scientific
Advisory Committee—June 30, 1987—SAB-CASAC-87-032.
Ihe Subcommittee on Lead Benefit Analysis of the Clean Air Scientific
Advisory Committee conducted a review of the above document and concluded
that the revised document provides a defensible presentation of the
benefits that were analyzed. The revised document included written
conments made by tin:- Sabcd-t-ii'i'.-.--.- prior to its March 10, 1987 public
meeting. However, there are potentially substantial benefit categories
that are currently excluded in the analysis such as the likely relative
magnitude of benefits for individuals in lead-based painted homes, and how
fetal impacts (reduced birth weight and early developmental effects) and
other benefit categories that could be included in future assessments.
-------
- 26 -
Report to the Administrator on a review requested by the QEfiee of Policy,
Planning and Evaluation entitled "A Carnage Function Assessment of Building
Materials: The Impact of Acid Deposition" prepared by Mathtech, inc., an EPA
contractor—Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee—June 30, 1987—SAB-CASAC-
87-033.
The Material Carnage Review Subcommittee of the Clean Air scientific
Advisory Committee conducted a review of the above document and concluded
that the 1986 Mathtech report was well done and represented an improvement
over earlier efforts, given the limitations in available data and the
scope of the study. Identified in the report are emissions, errors,
and biases inherent in the work, and attempts to account for a range of
possible alternatives by furnishing lower and uppper damage estimates.
In view of the uncertainties involved, especially in paint damage costs,
the subcommittee believes that the total costs fron acid deposition should
not be used in the Sulfur oxides National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) rulemaking process. Nevertheless, the conceptual framework and
procedures that are used in this report do provide useful information
which should be considered. The analyses contained in this report
should be considered as complementary to the supply/demand model
approach that is now incorporated in the draft Regulatory Impact
Analysis (RIA) for Sulfur Oxides.
Report to the Administrator on a review of the Office of Policy, Planning and
Evaluation's Integrated Environmental Management Program (IEMP)—Executive
Committee—July 24, I987---SAB-EC-87-Q34.
Ihe program's lack of clearly stated scientific assumptions and
objectives, and its need for a more consistent approach to peer
review, constitute its most serious technical deficiencies. Ihe
absence of consistently documented assumptions and objectives, and
the ad hoc approach to peer review, has created difficulties in
assessing whether the program as a whole, or specific studies, have
achieved their overall goals.
Report to the Administrator on a review of the Office of Drinking Water's
Assessment of Radionuclides in Drinking water and Pour Craft Criteria
Documents: Man-Made Radionuclide Occurrence; Uranium? Radium; and Radon by
the Drinking water Subcommittee—Radiation Advisory Committee—July 27, 1987—
SAB-RAC-87-Q35.
At the request of the Office of Drinking Water, the Cewmittee addressed
four issues: the weighting factors to be used in effective dose equiva-
lent calculations, the chemical toxicity and radiotoxicity of uranium,
the linearity of the dose-response curve for naturally occurring
radionuclides, and the appropriate use of the relative and absolute
risk models.
-------
_ 27 -
Report to the Administrator on the Recommendations for Future Research on
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone and Lead—Clean Air Scientific
Advisory Committee--September 30, 1987—SAB-CASAC-87-036.
The research recommendations for ozone are presented in three parts:
1) atmospheric chemistry; 2) health effects; and 3) agriculture, forests
and re la tod ecosystems. Each part is critical to setting an ozone NMQS.
The latter two areas are critical in establishing exposure-response
relationships for the effects that ambient ozone produces. However,
without a better understanding of exposure profiles* scientists and
regulators cannot accurately establish the extent of the effects of
ambient ozone exposure on public health and welfare- Furthermore,
without a better understanding of atmospheric chemistry, we cannot
predict.either the frequency of excessive exposures or the influence
of the various souces of the ozone precursors on the anbient
concentrations.
-------
SCIENCE ADVISORY POAPD MEMBERSHIP
CURRENT MFWRERS
1. nr. Seymour Abrahamson
Professor of Zoology &
Genet tcs
University of Wisconsin
Madison, Wisconsin
2. Dr. Martin Alexander
Professor, Dept. of Agronomy
Cornell University
Ithaca, New York
3. Alvin L. Aim
Pres, & Chief Executive Officer
Alliance Technologies Corp,
213 Burlington Road
Bedford, Massachusetts
4. Dr. Stanley I. Auerbach
Director, Environmental Sciences
Division, Oak Ridge f^ational
Laboratory
Oak Rid OH, Tennessee
5. Dr. Joan Rerkowite, President
Risk Science International
Washington, D.C.
6. Dr. Gary P. Carlson
Professor of Toxicology
Per>t. of Pharrpacology and Toxicology
Purdue University
west Lafayette, IN
7. Dr. Keros Cartwright
Illinois State deolooical Survey
Champaiqn, IL
FORMER SA.B SRRVTCf--
SAB Consultant
Former SAP Meir«ber
None
Former SAB Consultant
Pooner SAP Consultant
Former SAB Consultant
CURRENT POSITION
, Environmental
Health Committee
Member, Bnvironn»ental
Effects, Transport
& Fate
Membe r-At-Larqe
Member, Executive
Committee
, Environmental
Engineering committee
Member, Environmental
Health Committee
Member, Fnvironmental
Rnqineerincr committee
to
tn
a
CO
-------
FORMER SAB SERVICR
CURRENT POSITION
8. Dr. Yoraff* Cohen
Associate Professor
School of Engineering and Applied
Science, Univ. of California
toe Angeles, Ch
9. Dr. Richard A. Conway
Corporate Development Fellow
Union Carbide Corporation
South Charleston, W
10. i3r, Paul F. Deisler
Private Consultant
Houston, Texas
11. Dr. Kenneth L. Dickson
Director, Institute of Applied
Sciences
North Texas State University-
Deoton, Texas 76203-3078
12. Dr. John Doull
Professor of Phar ecology
University of Kansas
Medical Center
Kansas City, Kansas
13, Dr. Philip E, Enterline
Professor of Biostatistics s
Director for the Center for
Environmental Epidemiology
University of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, PA
14. Dr» Ben B. Ewing
Director, Institute for
Environmental Studies
University of Illinois at
Urba na-Champa ion
Urban, Illinois
Former SAR Consultant
None
None
Former SAB Consultant
FIPRA RAP, 1976-1980
None
None
Member, Environmental
Effects, Transport
& Fate Committee
Member, Bnvironmental
Enaineecinn Committee
Member, Executive
Committee
Member, Environrnental
Effects, Transport
& Pate Committee
Member, Bnvironmental
Health Committee
I
ro
Member, Envitronmental
Health Committee
Member, Bnvironmental
Enqineerinq Committee
-------
CURRENT MEMBERS
FORMER SAB SERVICE
CURRENT POSITION
15, Dr. Robert Frank
The Johns Hopkins School
Of Hygiene and Public
"Health
Raltimore, MO
16. Dr. Sheldon K. Friedlander
Parsons Professor of
Chemical Fried nee ring
University of California
at Los Angeles
Los Angeles, CA
17. Dr. Wilford R. Gardner
Head, Department of soils,
water and Engineering
University of Arizona
Tucson, Arizona
18. Dr. William Glaze
Director, School of Public Health
UCLA
Los ftngeles, Cft
19, i>r. Earnest F. Gloyna
Dean, College of - Engineering
University of Texas at Austin
Austin, Texas
20, Mr. George P.'Green
Public Service Coinpany of Colorado
Manager, Production Services
Littleton, CO
Consultant
CASAC &
Environmental
Health Committee
Consultant
SAB Technology
Committee 1975-78
CASAC 1978-1982
Member, Clean Air
Scientific Advisory
Committee
-At-La rge
None
Former SAB Consultant
Chair, Executive
Committee
None
Member, Environmental
Effects, Transport
& Pate Committee
Member, Environmental
Engineering Committee
Member, Executive
Committee
Member, Environmental
Engineering Committee
U)
o
-------
CURRENT
FORMER SAB SERVICE
POSITION
21. Dr. Richard A. Griesemer
Director, Biology Division
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Oak Ridge, Tennessee
22. Dr. Rolf Hartung
Professor of Environmental
Toxicology, School of Public Health
University o£ Michigan
Ann Arbor, Michigan
23 Dr. J. William Haun
vice President
Engineering Policy
General Mills, Inc.
Minneapolis, MM
24. Dr. George M. Hidy
President
Desert Research institute
Reno, HV
25. Dr. Robert J. Huggett
Senior Marine Scientist
Virginia Institute of Marine Science
College of William & Mary
Gloucester Point, VA
26. Dr. Reymour JabIon
Director, Medical Follow-up Agency
National Research Council
Wash.r D.C.
None
None
None
None
Former
Consultant
None
Chair, Environmental
Health Committee
Chair, Environmental
Pffectsr Transport,
& Pate Committee
Member, Environmental
Engineering Committee
Member, Executive
Coirardttee
Member, Environmental
Effects, Transport,
& Pate Committee
Wewber, Radiation
Advisory Committee
-------
CURRENT MEMBERS
PORKER SAB SERVICE
CURRENT POSITION
27, Dr. Kenneth D. Jenkins
Professor of Biology
California State University
at Long Beach
Lona Peach, CA
28. i>r. E. Marshall Johnson
Professor and Chairman
Department of Anatomy
Jefferson Medical College
Philadelphiar PA 19107"""
29. Dr. Warren B. Johnson
Manager, Research Aviation
Facility, National center for
Atmospheric "Research
Boulder, CO
30. Dr. Nancy Kim
Director, New York Department
of Health
Bureau of Toxic Substance
Assessment
Albany, New York
31. Dr. Richard A. Kimerle
Senior Science Fellow
Monsanto Company
St. Louis, Missouri
Former SAB
Consultant
Former SftB Consultant
None
None
Former SAB Consultant
Memberr Environmental
Effects, Transport
& Fate Committee
Member, Environmental
Health Committee
Meiriber, Clean Air
Scientific Advisory
Committee
Member, Environmental
"Health Committee
Member, Environmental
Effects, Transport
& Fate Committee
-------
CURRENT MEMBERS
SAP SEWICB
CURRENT POSITION
32. T
-------
CURRENT MEMBERS
FORMER SAB SERVICE
CURRENT POSITION
37. r»r. Raytnancl Loehr
Civil Engineering Department
University of Texas
Austin, Texas
38. Dr. William Lowrance
Senior Fellow and Director
Life Sciences Program
The Rockefeller University
New York, New York
39. Dr. Francis L. Macrina
Department of Hiccobiolooy &
Immunology
Virginia Commonwealth University
Richmond, Virginia
SAB Technology
Comrai ttee
1976-1981
None
Former SAR Consultant
Chair, Environmental
Enoineerinq Committee
Member, Executive
Committee
Member-At-Latge
40. Dr. Roger O. McClellan
Lovelace Biomedieal and
Environmental Research inst.
AlbuQueraue, New Mexico
41» Dr. Francis C. McMichael
professor of Civil
Engineering
Carneqie-Mellon University
Pittsburah, Pfl
42. Dr. Paul A. Heal
President, Chemical Industry
institute of Toxicology
Research Triangle Park, WC
SAB Executive
Gown., 1976-1980
Environmental Health
Coimu , 1980-82
Environmental Health
Committee Chair
SABf Technology
Committee,
1979-81 Former
SAB Consultant
FIFRA SAP, 1976-80
KfDWtC, 1979-82,
1983-85, Former SAB
Consultant
Memberr Executive
CdTfimittee
Member-At-La rae
Member, Executive
Committee
-------
CURRENT
POWER SftB
CURRENT POSITION
43. nr. James V. Neel
Lee R. Dice University Professor
of Human Genetics
University of Michigan Medical School
Ann Arbor, Micbican
44. or. Morton Nelson
Professor of Environmental
Medicine
New York University
New York, Mew York
45, Dr. John H. Neuhold
Dept. of Wildlife Sciences
Colleoe of Natural resources
Utah .State University
Logan, Utah
46. Dr. D. Warner North
Principal, Itecision Focus, Inc.
Los Alto, CA
47. Dr. Oddvar Nygaard
Professor of Radio-logy
Director of the Division of
"Radiation Biology
Case Western Reserve University
Cleveland1, Ohio
48, Dr. Donald J, O'Connor
Professor of Environmental
Engineering
Manhattan College
"Bronx, MY
Former SAB Consultant
Environmental Health
Committee L975-197s?
Ecology Committee
1974-1978
SAB Executive Comm.,
1980-1982
Ferrer SAB
- Consultant
None
None
Meirberf Radiation
Advisory Committee
Chair, Executive
Committee
Chair, Subcommittee
on Strategic & Lortg-
Term Research Plannina
I
w-
, Fnvironmental
Health Committee
Member, Radiation
Advisory Committee
Member, Environmental
Engineerinq Committee
-------
CURRENT
FORMER SAP SERVICE
CURRENT POSITION-
49. Dr. Charles fi. O'Helia
Professor, Dept. of Geography
and Environrnental Engineer I no
John Hopkins University
Baltimore, MD
50. Dr. Gilbert S. Oraenn
Professor an<3 Dean
School of Public Health and
Community Medicine, SC-30
University of Washington
Seattle, Washington
51. Dr. Charles F. Reinhardt
Haskell Laboratory for Toxicolooy
and Industrial Medicine
B. I. du Pont de Nemours & Company
Newark, Delaware
52. Dr. Paul v. -Roberts
Professor of Environmental
Engineering
Stanford University
Stanford, CA
53, Or. Keith 3. schiager
Director, padiological Health Dept.
Orson-Spencer Hall - Rm 100
University of Utah
Salt Lake City, UT
54. Dr. William J. Schull
Director and Professor of
population Genetics
Science Center at Houston
Houston, Texas
None
Former SAB
Consultant
None
None
Formet SAP
Consultant
Member, Environmental
Health Committee
Mentoer, Environmental
Engineering Coranittee
Member, Clean Air
Scientific Advisory
Committee
Menfoe r-At-La rge
I
UJ
Member, Environmental
Engineerino Committee
Member, Radiation
Advisory Committee
Chair, Radiation
Advisory Committee
-------
OTRRBNT
FORMER SAB SERVICE
CURRENT POSITION **
55. Dr. Thomas T. Shen
Senior Research scientist
New York State Department
of Environmental Conservation
Albany, New York
56. Dr. Ellen K. Silhergeld
Senior Scientist
Toxic Chemicals Program
Environmental Defense Fund
Washington, B.C.
57. Dr. warren Sinclair
President, National Council on
Radiation Protection and
Measurements
Bethesda, Maryland
58, Dr. Mitchell Small
Assistant Professor
Department of Civil Engineering
Carnegie-Mellon University
Schenley Park
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
59. Mr. Stephen Smallwood
Air Pollution Control Program War.
Bureau of Air Quality Management
Florida Depar t men t of.Enviton-went a 1
.Regulation
Tallahassee, Florida
60. Jan A. J. Stolwijk
Department of Epidemiology
and Public Health
Yale University School of Medicine
Wew Haven, Connecticut
None
None
Member, Environmental
Rnaineerino Committee
Member, Executive
Commi ttee
None
Former SAB
Consultant
Member, Radiation
Advisory Committee
I^einber, Environmental
Engineering Committee
None
Membe r-ftt-Laroe
None
Chair, Indoor Air
Research "Review
Subcommittee
-------
CURRENT
FORMER SAP SERVICE
CURRENT
61. Dr. Charles Susskind
Professor, Electrical
Engineering and Computer
Sciences Department
University of California
at Berkeley
Berkeley, CA
62. Dr. Robert Tardiff
Bnv iron-Corporation
Washington, D.C.
53. Dr. John Till
Private Consultant
Neeses, South Carolina
64. Dr. Mark J. Utell
Associate Professor
Department of Medicine
University of Rochester
School of Medicine
Rochester, MY
65. Dr. Herb Ward
Department of Biology
Department of Environmental
Science & Enqineetinq
Rice University
Houston, Texas
66. Dr. James Ware
Department of Biostatistics
Harvard School of Public health
Boston, Massachusetts
None
None
None
Former SAB
Consultant
None
Former CASAC
Consultant
Member, Radiation
Advisory Committee
Member, Environmental
Pea1th Committee
Member, Radiation
Advisory Committee
Hembe r-At-Laroe
GO
I
Member, Environmental
Enqineerina committee
Member, Clean Mr
Scientific Advisory
Committee
-------
CURRENT
SAB SERVICE
CURRENT POSITION
67. Dr. Barnard Weiss
Professor, Division of Toxicolocrv
University of Rochester
Rochester, New York
68, Dr. Jerome J. Wesolowski
Air and Industrial Hyqiene Lab
University of California, Berkeley
Berkeley, California
69. Or. James Wbittenberger
Southern Occupational Health
Center
University of California
Irvine, Cfl
70. Dr. G. Bruce Wiersma
Manager, Earth and Life Sciences
EG&G Idaho Inc.
Idaho Palls, Idaho
71. Dr. Ronald E. Wyzga
Program Manager
Electric Power Research
Institute
Palo Alto, CA
Former SAB
Consultant
Neuter, Environmental
Health Coinmittee
None
Environmental Health
Coramittee
Former SAB
Consultant
Former SAB
Consultant
Member, Clean Air
Scientific Advisory
Conmittee
Hembe r-At-La rge
Long-term Research
Planning Subcoimnittee
Member, Environmental
Effects, Tranport
& Fate Committee
Member, Environmental
Health Committee
-------
•40 -
NAME
SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD CONSULTANTS
COMMITTEE/SUBCOMMITTEE
1 Barry J. .Adams
2 Ira Adelman
3 Eleanor R. Adair
4 Abdul K. Ahmed
5 Ahmed E. Ahmed
6 Mary 0, Amdur
7 Julian B. Andelman
8 Anders w. Andren
9 Larry Andrews
10 Carol R. Angle
11 Lynn Anspaugh
12 Bernard D, Astill
13 Stephen F. Ayres
14 Robert Baboian
15 Richard E. Balzhiser
16 Michael J, Barcelona
17 Charles E. Becker
18 Alfred H, Beeton
19 Euoene Bentley
20 Irwin Billick
21 Eula Bingharn
22 Jeffery Black
Envirorarental Engineering committee
Ecological Risk Assessment
Radiation Advisory Commnittee
Environmental Health Conwimittee
Environmental Health Committee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee
Environmental Health Committee
National Dioxin Review Subcommittee
Environmental Health Committee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee
Radiation Advisory Committee
Environmental Health Committee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee
Clean Air scientific Advisory comm.
National Acid Precipation
Advisory program
Environmental Engineering Committee
Environmental Health Committee
Laboratory Organization Review
Group
Laboratory Organization Review
Group
Indoor Air Quality Review
Air Toxics study Group
Environmental Effects, Transport
& Pate committee
-------
-41 -
eDMMITTBE/SUECQMMITTEE
23 James Bond
24 Victor Bond
25 Phillippe Bourdeau
26 Eileen Brennan
27 Kenneth Brown
2B Stephen Brown
Environmental Health Committee
Radiation Advisory Committee
Long Range Ecological Research
Subcommittee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee
Environrental Health Committee
Radiation Advisory Committee
29 Gordon Brownell
30 George T» Bryan
31 Thomas A. Burke
32 Shepard Burton
33 Janis But let
34 Martyn M. Caldwell
35 John Cairns
36 Clayton Callis
37 Larry W, Cantor
38 italo Carcicb
39 George F. Carpenter
Radiation Advisory Committee
Environmental Health Committee
Radiation Advisory Committee
Environmental Health Committee
Ground Water Research
Committee
Stratospheric ozone Subc.
Environmental Effects Transport
S Pate committee
Executive Committee
Environmental Engineering
committee
Environmental Effects, Transport
& Pate committee
Radiation Advisory Coiroittee
40 Melbourne R. Carriker
41 Barbara K, Chan
42 Julian Chisolm
Environmental Effects, Transport
& Fate Committee
Environmental Effects, Transport
& Fate Committee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee
43 Leo Chylack
Stratospheric Ozone subcommittee
-------
-42 -
COMMITTEE/SUBCOMMITTEE
44 Thomas Clarkson
45 Stephen P. cieary
46 Lenore Clesceri
47 Ronald Coburn
48 Warren D. Cole
49 Rita Colwell
50 William F. Cooper
51 Herbert H. Cornish
52 Edward D, Crandall
53 James D. Crapo
54 Kenny S. Crump
55 Anita Curran
56 Allen Cywin
57 Walter F. Dabberdt
58 Rose Dagirmanjian
59 Juan M. Daisey
60 James M. Davidson
61 Terry Davies
62 Stanley N, Davis
63 Gary L. Diamond
Environmental Health Committee
Radiation Advisory Committee
Environmental Effects, Tranport
& Fate Committee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory comm.
Forest Effect Research Review
panel
Biotechnology Research Review
Group
Environmental Effects, Transport
& Fate Committee
Integrated Environmental Hgmt,
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
committee
Clean Air scientific Advisory
Committee
Environmental Health Committee
Clean Air. Scientific Advisory
Committee
Environmental Engineering Committee
Clean Air scientific Advisory
Committee
Environmental Health Committee
Fadiation Advisory Committee
Ground water Research Review
Committee
Integrated Environmental Management
Environmental Engineering Committee
Environmental Health Committee
-------
- 43 -
NAME
COMMITTEE/SUBCOMMITTEE
64 Naihua Duan
65 Patrick P. Burkin
66 Benjapin C. Dysart,
67 Lawrence Fechter
68 Thomas Pitzpatrick
69 Davia L. Ford
70 James Pox
71 Jawes Friend
72 wycick A. Freeman
73 John S. Pryberger
74 James N. Galloway
75 Thomas A. Gasiewiez
76 Mary E. Gaulden
77 Walcterico Generoso
78 Shelby 0. Gerking
79 Jaires E. Gibson
80 Jerome B. Gilbert
81 Bruno Gilletti
82 Dan Golomb
83 Michael Gough
84 Herschel B. Griffin
85 David T. Grimsrud
86 James Gruhl
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
committee
Environmental Engineering Committee
III Envirorarental Engineering Committee
Fisk Assessment Guidelines "Review Group
Stratcpheric Ozone Subc.
Environmental Enaineerina cominittee
Environmental Health committee
Stratospheric Ozone Subcommittee
Clean &ir Scientific Advisory Committee
Environmental Engineering Cominittee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee
Dioxin Toxic Eouivaiency
Environmental Health Committee
Environmental Health Conroittee
Environmental Effects, Transport &
Pate Committee •
Laboratory Organization Review Committee
Environmental Health Committee
Environmental Engineering Committee
Visibility Study Group
Environmental Health Committee
Environmental Health.Committee
Indoor Air Air Quality Peview
Inteqrated Environmental Manaaenient
-------
NAME
CDHMITTEE/SUPCQWITTEE
87 Arthur W. Guy
88 Jack D, Hackney
89 Yacov Haimes
90 Ponald J, Hall
91 Paul K. Hammond
92 Ralph W. F, Hardy
93 John H . Harley
94 Allen Hatheway
95 Paul Hedman
96 Ian T, Higgins
97 John E. Hobble
98 Fonald D, Hood
99 Roger Hornbrook
100 Charles Hosier
101 Harry Fjovey
102 Lloyd G. Humphreys
103 Donaia M. Hunten
104 Rudolph Husar
105 Jay s. Jacobson
Environmental Effects, Transport
& Pate Committee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee
Ecoloaical "Risk Assessinent
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
committee
Clean Air scientific Advisory
Committee
Biotechnology Fesearch Review
Radiation Advisory Committee
Environrental Engineering committee
scientific and Technological
Awards Subcommittee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee
Ecological Bisk Assessment
Environmental Health Committee
Environmental Health committee
Environmental Effects/ Transport
S Fate Committee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory Comm.
Clean Air Scientific Advisory Comm.
Stratospheric Ozone Subcommittee
visibility Study Group
Clean Air scientific Advisory Coitan.
-------
.45
COMMITTEE/SUBCOMMITTEE
106 Ronald L. Jarman
107 Alfred Joensen
108 James Johnson
109 David Kaufman
110 Graham Kalton
111 Stephen V. Kaye
112 Lawrence Keith
113 Laurence S. Kaminsky
114 Curtis D. Klaassen
115 Raymond K, Klicius
116 Jane Q. Koenig
117 Joseph Koonce
118 Paul Kotin
119 Thomas J. Kulle
120 Marvin Kuschner
121 victor G. Laties
122 Lester B. Lave
123 Brian B, Leaderer
124 Michael Lebowitz
Environmental Effects, Transport
& Pate committee
Environmental effects, Transport
& Fate committee
Environmental Health Committee
Environmental Health Committee
Radiation Advisory Committee
Radiation Advisory Committee
Environmental Engineering Committee
Environmental Health Committee
Environmental Health Committee
Environmental Effects, Transport
& Fate committee
Clean Mr Scientific Advisory
Committee
Strategic and Long Term Research
Planning Subcommittee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee
Indoor Air Quality
Environmental Health Committee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee
Stratospheric Ozone Subcommittee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee
-------
- 46 -
NAME
QOMMITTEF/SUECOMMITTEE
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138 Wilbur McNulty
139 Wesley A. Magat
140 Peter N. Magee
141 Kathern wahaffey
142 David Maschwitz
143 Myron Mehlman
144 Daniel Menzel
145 James Mercer
Jay H. Lehr
Allan H, Legge
Steven Lewis '
Paul J. Lioy
Lawrence D. Longo
Leonard A. Losciuto
Cecil Lue-Bing
Richard Lathy
Delbert C. McCune
,7, Corbett McDonald
Donald McKay
Donald E. McMillan
Peter
Ground water Research Review Comm.
Clean Air Scientific Advisory Cairo*
Environmental Health Committee
Integrated Environmental Management
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee
Radiation Advisory Committee
environmental Engineering Committee
Environmental Engineering Committee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee
Environmental Health committee
Ecological Risk Assessment
Environmental Health committee
Environmental Effects, Transport
& Fate Committee
Environmental Effects, Transport
& Pate Committee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory Comnu
Environmental Health Committee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee
Environmental Effects Transport
& Pate committee
Environmental Health Committee
Environmental Health Committee
Ground Water Research Review
Committee
146 Jaoaueline Michel
Radiation Advisory committee
-------
NAME
COMMITTEE/SUBCOMMITTEE
147 David W, Miller
148 Irving Mintzer
149 Harold Mooney
150 Granger W, Morgan
151 Richard H, Moser
152 Brooke T. Mossman
153 James W. Moulder
154 Bruce Napier
155 Scott w, Nixon
156 Roger G- Noll
157 (7uenter Oberdoerster
158 Allan OKey
159 Patrick O'Keefe
160 Betty H, Olsen
161 Michael Gppenneimer
162 Gordon H« Orians
163 Michael Overcash
164 Haluk Qzkaynuk
165 Albert I. Page
166 Bernard c. Patten
167 Stanford S, Penner
Ground water Research Review
Committee
Stratospheric Ozone Subcommittee
Long-range Ecological Research
Needs Subcommittee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee
Environmental Health committee
Environmental Health Committee
Biotechnology Research Review Group
Radiation Advisory Committee
Environmental Effects, Transport
& Fate committee
Clean Air scientific Advisory
Committee
Environmental Health Committee
Integrated Environmental Management
National Dioxin Review
Environmental Health committee
National Acid Precipitation
Advisory Program
Environmental Effects, Transport
& Pate Committee
Environmental Engineering Committee
Visibility Study Group
Environmental Engineering committee
Environmental Effects, Transport
s Pate Committee
National Acid Precipitation
Advisory Proararn
-------
- 48 -
NAME
COMMITTEE/SUBCOMMITTEE
168 Frederica Perera
169 Tony J. Peterle
170 Richard Peterson
111 James Petty
172 Henry pi tot
173 Gabriel L. Plaa
174 Jeanne Poindexter
175 Lincoln Pollissar
175 Thomas A, Pricket t
177 John
178 Michael R. Rabinowitz
179 Martha J. Radike
180 Stephen M. Rappaport
181 Verne A, Ray
182 Paul Risser
183 Joseph v. Rodrieks
184 Joan Rose
185 Robert Rowe
186 Richard Royall
187 Karl K. Rozroan
188 Liane Pussell
189 Stephen N. Safe
190 Jonathan Samet
191 Adel F. sarofim
Environmental Health Conwittee
Environmental Effects, Transport
& Fate Committee
National Dioxin Review
National Dioxin Review
Risk Assessment Review Group
Environmental Health Committee
Biotechnology Research Review Subc,
Environmental Health Committee
Ground Water Research Review
Committee
Environmental Engineering
Clean Air Scientific ^dv. Comm.
Environmental Health Committee
Environmental Health Coiwnittee
Environmental Health Committee
Ecological Risk Assessment
Radiation Advisory Committee
Environmental Health Committee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee
Environmental Health Committee
Environmental Health Committee
Environmental Health Committee
Radiation Advisory committee
Environmental Effects, Transport
& Fate Committee
-------
NAME
COMMITTEE/SUBCOMW TTEE
192 Harold sehecter
193 Marc A. Schenker
Committee
194 Richard Sehlesinger
195 Dennis SchuetEle
196 Donald F. Schutz
197 Hichard Sextro
198 Eileen M. shanbroro
199 Jack Shannon
200 Herman H. Shugart
201 Carl A. Silver
202 Clifford V. Smith
203 Kerry V, smith
204 Poger P. Smth.
205 Michael D. Sirolen
206 Mark D. sobsev
207 Frank Speizer
208 Peter Spencer
209 John Spengler
210 Robert A. Sauire
211 Thomas B. Starr
212 Andrew P, stehney
213 Joseph Stetter
214 Roger Strelow
215 Peter W, Summers
Environmental Health Committee
Clean Air scientific Advisory
Environmental Health committee
Radiation Advisory committee
Fadiation Advisory Committee
radiation Advisory Committee
Environmental Health Committee
Visibility Heview Group
Forest Affects Research Review
Panel
Environmental Engineering Committee
Radiation Advisory committee
Clean Air scientific Advisory
Committee
Environmental Health ComMttee
Environmental Effects, Transport &
Fate Committee•
Environmental Health Committee
Clean Air Scientifc Advisory Comm,
Environmental Health Committee
Clean Air Scientific Advisory Comm.
Environmental 'Health Committee
Environmental Health Committee
Radiation Advisory Committee
Total Human Exposure Subcommittee
"Research strategies Subcommittee
Forest Effects Review Review Panel
-------
_ 50 _
CDMMITTEE/SUBCDMHITTEE
216 Frederick W. sunderman
217 James A. Swenberg
218 Men Dak Sze
219 Joel Tarr
220 Georae E. Taylor
221 Thomas Tephly
222 Lloyd 8. Tepper
223 Ducan C. Thomas
224 Michael Treshow
225 John Trijonis
226 William A. Turner
227 Ruby M. Valencia
228 Charles
229 W. Kip ViSCUSi
230 Kvsn Vlachos
231 William Waller
232 Leonard weinstein
Environmental Health Conwittee
Environmental Health Committee
Stratospheric Ozone Subcommittee
Integrated Environmental wanageirent
Clean Air Scientific advisory Committee
Environmental Health Coirmittee
Environmental Health Committee
Radiation Advisory committee
Clean Mr Scientific Advisory
Committee
Visibility Review Group
Radiation Advisory committee
Environmental Health Committee
Environmental EffectsT Transport
& Fate Committee •
Clean Mr scientific Advisory Committee
Environmental Engineering committee
Fnvironmental Effects, Transport
& Pate Committee
Environmental Effects, Transport &
Fate Committee
-------
A-I
ANNEX A
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ADVISORY COMMITTEE CHARTER
ORGANIZATION AND' FUNCTIONS - COMMITTEES, BOARDS, PANELS, AND COUNCILS
SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD
1« PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY* This Charter is reissued for the Science
Advisory Board in accordance with the requirements of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. (App.l)~9(c). The former science
Advisory Board, administratively established by the Administrator
of EPA on January 11, 1974, was terminated in 1978 when the Congress
created the statutorily mandated Science Advisory Board by the
Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization
Act (ERDDAA) of 1978, 42 0.S.C. 4365. The Science Advisory Board
charter was renewed October 31, 1979; November 19, 1981? November 3,
1983,- and October 25, 1985.
2. SCOPE OF ACTIVITY. The activities of the Board will include
analyzing problems, conducting meetings, presenting findings,
making recommendations, and other activities necessary for the
attainment of the Board's objectives. Ad hoc panels may be
established to carry out these special activities in which
consultants of special expertise may be used who are not members
of the Board.
3, OBJECTIVES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. The objective of the Board is
to provide advice to EPA's Administrator on the scientific and
technical aspects of environmental problems and issues. While the
Board reports to the Administrator, it may also be requested to
provide advice to the o.S. Senate committee on Environment and
Public Works or the U.S. louse Committees on Science and Technology,
Energy and Commerce, or Public Works and Transportation. The
Board will review scientific issues, provide independent advice
on EPA's major programs, and perform special assignments as requested
by Agency officials and as required by the Environmental Research,
Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act of 1978 and the
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977, Responsibilities include the
following:
- Reviewing and advising on the adequacy and scientific
basis of any proposed criteria document, standard,
limitation, or regulation under the Clean Air Act,
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, the Noise
Control Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, the
Safe Drinking Water Act, the comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, or any other
authority of the Administrator!
-------
A-2
ADVISOR! COMMITTEE CHARTER
- Reviewing and advising on the scientific and technical
adequacy of Agency programs, guidelines, methodologies,
* protocols, and tests;
- Recommending, as appropriate, new or revised scientific
criteria or standards for protection of human health
and the environment;
- Through the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee,
providing the scientific review and advice required
under the Clean Air Act, as amended;
- Reviewing and advising on new information needs and
the quality of Agency plans and programs for research,
and the five-year plan for environmental research,
development and demonstration.
- Advising on the relative importance of various natural
and anthropogenic pollution sources;
- As appropriate, consulting and coordinating with the
Scientific Advisory Panel established by the Administrator
pursuant to section 21(b5 of the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended; and
- Consulting and coordinating with other Agency advisory
groups, as requested by the Administrator.
4» COMPOSITION. The Board will consist of a body of independent
scientists and engineers of sufficient size and diversity to
provide the range of expertise required to assess the scientific
and technical aspects of environmental issues. The Board will be
organized into an executive committee and several specialized
committees, all members of which shall be drawn from the Board.
The Board is authorized to constitute such specialized standing
member committees and ad hoc investigative panels and subcommittees
as the Administrator and the Board find necessary to carry out its
responsibilities. The Administrator will review the need for
such specialized committees and investigative panels at least once
a year to decide which should be continued. These committees and
panels will report through the Executive Committee.
The Deputy Administrator also shall appoint a Clean Air
Scientific Advisory Committee of the Board to provide the scientific
review and advice required by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977,
This Committee, established by a separate charter, will be an integral
part of the Board, and its members will also be members of the Science
Advisory Board.
-------
A-3
ADVISORY COMMITTEE CHARTER
5- MEMBERSHIP AMD MEETINGS. The Deputy Administrator appoints
Individuals to serve on the Science Advisory Board for staggered
terms of one to four years and appoints from the membership a Chair
of the Board, The Chair of the Board serves as Chair of the Executive
Committee. Chairs of standing committees or ad hoc specialized
subcommittees serve as members of the Executive Committee during the
life of the specialized subcommittee. Each member of the Board
shall be qualified by education, training, and experience to evaluate
scientific and technical information on matters referred to the
Board, No member of the Board shall be a full-time employee of the
Federal Government.
There will be approximately 60-75 meetings of the specialized
committees per year, A full-time salaried officer or employee of
the Agency will be present at all meetings and is authorized to
adjourn any such meeting whenever this official determines it to be
in the public interest,
Support for the Board's activities will be provided by the
Office of the Administrator, EPA. The estimated annual operating
cost will be approximately §1,416,700 and 14.6 work years to carry
out Federal permanent staff support duties and related assignments.
*>• DURATION. The Board shall be needed on a continuing basis.
This charter will be effective until November 8, 1989, at which
time the Board charter may be renewed for another two-year period,
7, SUPERSESSION. The former charter for the science Advisory
Board, signed by the Administrator on October 2, 1985, is
hereby superseded.
Approval DateDeputy Administrator
NDV -6198?
Date Piled ^with Congress
------- |