UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
March 30, 1988 SAB-EC-88-Q24
Office OF
THE ADMINISTRATOR
Honorable lee M. Thomas
J\drninistrator
U. S, Environmental Protection
Agency
401 M Street, S. W.
Washington, D. C. 20460
fear Mr, Thomas»,
The Science Advisory Board's (SAB) Research and Etevelopment
Budget Subcommittee has completed its third annual review of the
President's proposed budget, for the Office of .Research and Develop-
ment and is pleased to transmit copies to you anel Congressional
committees that authorize and appropriate funds for this office.
The President's proposed research budget for Fiscal Year (FY)
1989 for the Office of Research and Development (CRD) is S375.0
million and 1,848 workyears, and increase of $22.7 million and 17
workyears above the level for FY '88. The proposed budget provides
for important research projects and management developments, including a
modest expansion of the in-house research capability, a direction strongly
encouraged in last year's Subcommittee report and reiterated this year.
Much of the proposed overall increase is somewhat illusionary, however,
due to reductions in FY '88 appropriated funds and new programs mandated
by Congress with no additional resources provided.
In the scope of its inquiry,, the Subcommittee examined four general
issues: 1) trends in research budget; 2) human resources issues, 3) the
need for early problem identification: and 4) 18 specific research
programs, serving six separate areas in the Agency,
The demands placed upon the Agency for new knowledge through research
continue to grow at a faster pace than the increases in funding. Concern
is expressed about the age structure of ORD and the inadequate infusion
of junior scientists, a problem which could he alleviated by the institution
of training grant programs. Specific proposals are made for mechanisms
to improve the Agency's ability to detect potential problems while they
are still "over the horizon". Finally, each of the research programs is
discussed in terms of the resources recommended to address the program's
mission.
-------
- 2 -
the Subcommittee and the SAB Executive Committee believe that the
enclosed report adds to the range of points of view that the Administration
and Congress should consider in reaching budgetary decisions. Scientists
and engineers have a responsibility to present their thoughts and
evaluations of the needs for research in the area of environmental science,
and we appreciate the opportunity to do so,
W3 request that the Agency respond to the advice and reeownendations
in the report.
Sincerely,
H
Norton Nelson, Chairman
Executive Committee
Science Advisory Board
John Neuhold, Chairman
0' Research and Eeveloproent Budget Sabcormittee
Science Mvisory Board
cc: A. James Barnes
Vaun Newill
Donald Barnes
-------
SAB-EC-88-024
REVIEW OF THE PRESIEENT'S PROPOSED BUDGET
PCS. EPA'S OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND O3VEIJQPMENT
FOR FISCAL YEAR 1989
Research and Development Budget Subcommittee
Science Advisory Board
i
U. S. Environmental Protection,Agency
March 1988
-------
11
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 Envirormental Protection Agency,
nor of other agencies in the Executive Branch of the Federal government,
nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute
a recommendation for use.
-------
Ill
U- S. Environmental Protection Agency
. Science Advisory Board
Research and Development Budget Subccnroi ttee
Cc. John Neuhold, Chairman
Otah State University
Dspartment of. Wildlife Sciences
College of Natural Resources
Logan, Utah 84322
Q:. Terry 0% Yosie, Director
Science Advisory Board
U. S, Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S. W., Room 1145 Wfest Tower
Washington, D, C. 20460
Dr. Clayton Callis
2 Holiday Lane
St. Louis, Missouri 63131
Mr. Richard Conway
union Carbide Corporation
South Charleston Technical Center
3200 Kanawha Turnpike (Bldg. 770)
South Charleston, West Virginia 25303
Dr. Morton Lippmann
Institute of Environmental Medicine
New York University
Lanza Laboratory
Long Meadow Road
Tuxedo, New York 10987
Dr. Francis McMichael
Department of Civil Engineering
Carnegie Mellon University
5000 Forbes Avenue
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213
B. Water
1, Water Quality
2. drinking Water
C. Hazardous Wastes/Superfund
1. Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation
2. Waste Minimization
3. Land Disposal
4* Municipal Waste Combustion
D. Pesticides/Toxics Substances
1. Saperfund Amendments and'
Reauthorization Act of 1986
Title III Research
2. Biotechnology
3, Adipose Tissue Bank
10
10
10
11
11
11
12
13
14
14
14
14
-------
Page Number
E. Interdisciplinary Research 15
1. Reducing Uncertainties in Risk Assessment 15
2. Exploratory Grants and Centers Program 15
P. Multi-Media and Energy Research 16
1. Acid Deposition 16
v. References 18
-------
I. Executive Summary
The President's proposed budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 1989 for the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requests approximately $4,8 billion
and 14,570 workyears. Of this total, 5375*0 million and 1,848 workyears are
requested for research and development, an increase of S22.7 million and
17 workyears above the levels for FY '88 enacted during the recent Bipartisan
Agreement between the Administration and the Congress.
Approximately $197 million of the proposed research budget is earmarked
marked for the extramural (research and development) account, with $110 million
devoted for in-house (salaries and expenses) needs. Additionally $67 million is
alotted for Superfund work (S56 million extramural* Sll million intramural)
and $0.8 million for work on leaking underground storage tanks, Hie intramural
funding level continues the modest expansion of the in-house research
capability, a development strongly encouraged in last year's Subcommittee
report and reiterated this year.
Sane continuing core needs of EPA's research program highlighted in
last year's Subcommittee report merit re-emphasis.- These include the
increasingly diverse skills required to research,EPA's growing number of
new regulatory and policy priorities, and the need for a more formal mechanism
to define emerging public health and environmental problems. For example,
at present, the Agency has few researchers with stature in the scientific
ccnrounity who are knowledgeable about the ecological effects of stratospheric
ozone depletion. This illustrates the continuing dilemma of EPA's research
program having to catch-up to regulatory problems, and needing several
years to acquire the requisite talents to formulate creative research
programs to address those problems. The 18 programs specifically addressed
by the Subcommittee this year are in the Table of Contents.
The Subcommittee recommends that an in-house group be established to
identify new (and escalating) ecological and environmental health problems.
This in-house group, composed of people from varying scientific and policy-
related disciplines, should prepare an annual report of potential new
problems and recommend needed research. The group could examine monitoring
data, survey literature and conferences? hold workshops! and, prepare
scenarios of assumed future social and technological conditions as means of
identifying new and rapidly escalating problems.
The Research and Development Budget Subccrtmittee of the Science Advisory
Board is encouraged by the recognition of stratospheric ozone depletion,
radon mitigation and Superfund research centers as priorities. In addition,
resources are proposed (not as part of the research budget) for upgrading
certain technical facilities. On the other hand, much of the proposed
overall increase for research is somewhat illusionary because of the general
reduction of $15.2 million for the Office of Research and Development in
the final FY '88 appropriation, and the new Congressionally mandated program
(S3M in FY '88 and $10 million in FY '89—with no additional resources provided)
to reduce uncertainty in risk assessment (RURA). The Subcommittee strongly
recommends that the Congress appropriate new monies when it adds new require-
ments for EPA research.
-------
— 2 —
The demands placed upon the Agency for new knowledge through research
continue to grow at a faster pace than the increase in fowling. This is
reflected in comments in a number of areas in this report.
II, Introduction
During the past several years, EPA's research programs have encountered
many different challenges. They face the continuing need to provide
scientific support for on-going regulatory decision making in EPA's major
program areas. At the same time, the research programs are attempting to
address newer environmental problems such as global climate change and
indoor radon, and to respond to augmented requirements enacted by the
Congress through amendments to the Safe Drinking water Act, Clean Water
Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and Superfund. in managing
the resources available to it and maintain research productivity, the
Office of Research and Development confronts continuing problems in
ensuring that it has adequately trained personnel that possess both the
skills and the equipment to carry out these responsibilities. The latter
area, in particular, has seen a continuing erosion over the past decade
such that EPA research facilities often do not possess a state-of-the-art
capability to detect or assess environmental problems. Finally, there
are notable disparities between EPA's research nee^s and the resources it
has to conduct and/or sponsor research in sucft areas as incineration
technologies, global climate change, land disposal and exploratory research.
Scientists and engineers, of course, have an obligation to help set
research priorities to better match needs with resources, but their
ability to rationally select priorities is hampered by Congressional
restrictions on the flexible use of existing resources, the unpredictability
of a budgeting process that leads to constantly changing priorities and
the mandating or new responsibilities in the absence of commensurate
resources. Despite these difficulties, the president's proposed budget
to EPA's Office of Research and Development maintains a commitment to
continued funding of certain key research programs. These and other
issues are discussed in this report.
This is the third annual report of the Research and Development
Budget Subcommittee of the Science Advisory Board. In previous years,
the Subcommittee has sought to identify continuing core needs for maintaining
productive and high quality research at EPA, while highlighting specific
needs for individual research programs. This year's report continues
that effort. The current report resulted from a Subcommittee meeting on
February 11-12, 1988 at EPA headquarters, in which members received
background briefings on the OR D and EPA-wide budget proposal for FY '89.
The Subccmnittee prepared an initial draft of its findings and recom-
mendations at the meeting and completed its report by mail. Following
approval by the SAB Executive Committee, the report was simultaneously
transmitted to the EPA Administrator and the Congress,
This report is part of a series of actions in which the Science
Advisory Board attempts to improve the quality, direction and support of
research at EPA. Other activities include;
-------
- 3 -
o Formation of a Research Strategies Conmittee {the Aim Cownittee)
to develop a strategy which will identify and communicate to EPA program
offices, the Congress, the Office of Management and Budget, the scientific
community and the public the research opportunities and needs related to
EPA'S mission in the 1990's, and to identify mechanisms to continually
update such research across media lines.
o Review of individual research programs that in the past year has
included land disposal, stratospheric and tropospheric ozone, waste
minimization, radon mitigation, drinking water disinfectants and their by-
products, pollutants in the water distribution system and municipal waste
combustion.
o Evaluation of scientific assessment documents and methodologies
for risk assessment that provides a scientific basis for regulatory decision
making.
It is the Board's hope that, by presenting these views directly to
policy makers in the Executive Branch and the Congress, scientists and
engineers can articulate some of EPA's most important"research needs and,
by doing so, persuade policy makers to allocate the resources necessary
to fund research to resolve environmental problems and achieve our cortmon
objective of protecting the public health and the environment,
III, Some Generic Issues in Managing EPA's Research Program
A. Research Budget Trends
The total amount of resources available for research and development
stems from four major accounts: Salaries and Expenses ($ & E—in-house
monies available for research, salaries, equipment purchases, and maintenance
of scientific infrastructure such as animal care in laboratories}! research
and development (extramural funds devoted to research grants and contracts):
Superfund;' and the leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Trust Fund.
For FY '89 the proposed budget reccproends the following amounts in each
category:
(Ifollars in Millions)
1989 Change fron
Appropriation TPDtal roilars 1988 level
Salaries & Expenses $110.4 +$3.7
Research and Development 197.0 +10.6
Superfund 66.8 + 8.4
IIJST Trust Fund Q..8 --"-
Total • $375.0 +$22.7
The Subcommittee highlights two specific issues related to these budget
reccnmendations. They include:
-------
- 4
o Support for the in-house (or S&£) program shows modest yet
continued growth in support for the in-house program. As noted above,
approjtimately $3.7 million additional dollars are made available for
in-house research. The Subcommittee, as in previous years, supports
this trend, but observes it barely meets the cost of living increases.
Ihe Congress can expect that a real expansion of the in-house program
will not only improve EPA's internal research capabilities but will also
enhance the ability of Agency scientists to interact more effectively
with the scientific community and improve their management of extramural
(R&D) resources. Such developments, if sustained, should improve EPA's
overall research productivity and credibility.
o Growth in the in-house program combined with two other developments,
can begin to alleviate one of EPA's major chronic problems—aging equipment
and facilities. Beginning last fiscal year the Congress authorized the
use of extramural funds of up to $2 million for equipment purchases,
This is a welcome step that provides additional flexibility in managing
research resources. Ihe problem of obsolescent equipment is becoming
acute in certain EPA laboratories. For example, its water research
laboratory in Cincinnati currently lacks the instrumentation to identify
potentially hazardous chemicals resulting from the by-products of disin-
fection technologies used as a substitute for chlorination.1 Ihis occurs
at a time when regulations developed by EPA'S Office of Erinking Water
encourage the shift to disinfection alternatives. A second factor
influencing the capability of the in-house program steins from proposed
improvements to selected research facilities. Resources (not taken frcra
the QRD budget) are proposed for reconstruction of field stations in
Newport, Oregon ($12.2 million) and Edison, New Jersey ($5*6 million),
and an architectural and engineering study for the Chapel Hill North
Carolina Clinical Facility (SI.7 million). EPA, the Administration and
Congress should recognize the relationship between equipment and facility
improvement and research productivity. The Subcommittee recommends that
the Congress require EPA to prepare a study of scientific infrastructure
needs by January 1, 1989 to enable the executive and legislative branches
of government to provide sustained support for equipment and facility
enhancement. 10 avoid this responsibility is to witness a deterioration
of unigue physical assets that serve the national interest.
EPA's research program is subdivided into ten major components, not
including resources provided for management and support. The following
table present the recommended funding levels for each program category,
and the change from the Py '88 appropriation:
-------
- 5 -
(Collars in Millions)
1989 Change From
Research program Total collars 1988
Air $72.5 +S6.7
water Quality 25.1 +0,4
Drinking Water 22.0 - 0,5
Hazardous waste 41.3 - 3-4
Pesticides 14.4 +1.5
Radiation 4*0 +1.1
Interdisciplinary 34,2 . + 7.2
Toxic Substances 26.6 - fl.2
Energy/Acid Rain 55.5 - 0.1
Superfund/UJST 67.6 +8.4
Management & Support_ _ JL1.8 + 1.6
Total .................. . ---- $375.0 . +$22,7
,p_ "^ H
Section iv of this report presents the Subcommittee's evaluation of
each of these program elements.
B. Human Resource Issues
The Full Time Equivalents (FTE) recommended for CRD, '1,848 workyears,
remains approximately the same as the FY '88 level of 1,831 workyears,
The Science Advisory Board expresses its concern once again that a human
resource problem is emerging in CRD, although its origins do not lie in
the overall size of QRD's workforce* Rather, it stems from the fact that
the age structure of the organization is becoming top heavy with mid-level
managers and an inadequate infusion of junior scientists to meet the
demands of attrition and aging. Furthermore, the corps of young people
being trained in the environmental sciences has been declining since the
mid-1970s to a level where an insufficient supply will emerge to fill the
needs of the Agency as its longer tenured scientists reach retirement age
or otherwise leave the Agency. The drinking water research program , for
example, has lost nearly a half dozen senior scientists in recent years,
one of whom was a member of the National Academy of Engineering. This
represents significant reduction for this particular research group and
is only one instance of a broader problem.
Congress and the Agency could avoid a potential crisis in this area by
instituting training grant programs at the universities, much as was done
in the 1960s and early 1970s. Based on enrollments in envirormental
programs, shortages will exist in environmental engineering, chemistry,
ecology, and epidsniology. Training programs implemented now will produce
trained people within three years, in time to avoid a crisis.
At the same time EPA confronts this problem, it has an apparent over-
supply of mid-level research managers that it is seeking to assign elsewhere.
The Agency needs to find ways to effectively use the accumulated skills
-------
- 6 -
ofc these managers. To date, it has sought to voluntarily relocate mid-level
technical staff to EPA regional offices. For FY '88 ORD has assigned
personnel in three regional offices and plans to expand this career
alternative to all ten regions. The Subcommittee endorses this approach,
for it can simultaneously improve the scientific capability of the regional
offices and create opportunities to bring younger people with new skills
into CRD headquarters and laboratory programs. This alternative alone is
unlikely to solve this CRD problem,
C. Early Problem Identification
As discussed in the Sabconmittee's review of the FY '88 budget,
early identification of potential emerging and escalating environmental
problems should take its place along with risk assessment and risk management
as a central part of EPA's mission, the proposed research budget provides
no funds specifically earmarked toward this objective. This is disappointing
in view of the number of issues—such as radon, stratospheric ozone
depletion and global climate change—that have only recently risen to the
top of EPA's policy agenda but which were known to the scientific eonmunity
for a number of years. It is also surprising because of the relatively
high risks and the rising priority for those "newer" problems discussed in
EPA's February 1987 report entitled Unfinished Business: A Comparative
Assessment of Environmental Problems, while 'admittedly not a scientific
study, this report provides a rationale for follow-up investigations that need
to be pursued, if only to minimize future surprises and ensure that resources
are better matched to significant sources of public health and environmental
risk.
The Subcommittee recommends that an in-house group be established to
identify new ecological and environmental health problems, with input from
many outside sources so the in-house group does not become too inbred in
its thinking. This group, composed of people from varying scientific and
policy-related disciplines, should prepare an annual report of potential
new problems and recommend needed research* The group could survey
existing literature and prepare scenarios of assumed future social and
technological conditions as a means of identifying new problems, this
effort also needs the participation of external experts. One mechanisms
is to utilize the National Academy of Sciences to assist in marshalling
leading scientists, engineers, sociologists, and others to participate in
a series of workshops to identify potential and emerging ecological and
health stressors. Such participation would require new money.
The need to identify problems also requires international cooperation.
The increased internationalization of technology and trade also creates
environmental problems that transcend national boundaries. There is a need to
work with Canada concerning acid deposition and Great Lakes water quality.
-------
- 7 -
There is a need to work with Mexico on water quality degradation of the
Colorado River water in Mexico due to U.S. agricultural discharges and
air quality degradation in the U.S. due emissions of a very large Mexican
copper smelter. The saga of the barge carrying Islip, New York and New
York City's commercial solid waste up and down the east coast and around
the Carribbean Sea demonstrates that problems previously regarded as
domestic are international in scope. On an even larger scale, the issues
of stratospheric ozone depletion and global climate change require greater
integration among scientific assessment, policy analysis and mitigation
efforts that any previous environmental problems to date. It is particularly
important for the U.S. government to maintain a capability to evaluate
the magnitude of these issues and to identify others like them.
IV. Comments on Specific Research Prograins
The Subcommittee has evaluated the research budget proposals in each
of the major program categories. The Subcommittee prepared its comments
by examining the rationale contained in budgetary documents that justify
funding increases or decreases, and compared this eationale to the
conclusions of SAB reviews of research programs conducted in the past
year. The expertise of Subcommittee members was also a primary source of
information for preparing the following comments.
A. Air and Radiation
1. Criteria Air Pollutant Research
The proposed decrease in FY "89 funding on research in support of
criteria pollutants (National Ambient Air Duality Standards, or NftAQS)
reflects the fact that the effects of such pollutants are more widely
understood in comparison with many other problems confronting EPA. Hbwever,
there remain many unresolved technical issues for N&&QS, which are among
the most costly regulations developed by EPA, This Subccninittee focused,
in particular, on needs related to short-term effects of nitrogen dioxide
and chronic effects of ozone. For nitrogen dioxide, the Agency has not
supported the research needed to enable it to meet the Congressional
mandate to either set a short-terra NAAQS or to demonstrate that one was
not needed. For ozone, the SAB's Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee
research recommendations call for greatly increased emphasis on the
effects of chronic exposure on lung structure.2 This extremely important
aspect of ozone health effects has received too little attention in the
past and will need augmented research funding to generate the data base
needed for a policy decision on whether to establish a long-term ozone
standard. Given the fact that a major fraction of the 0. S. population
lives in areas of the country that do not attain the current ozone standard,
ozone exposure will remain a high priority issue for many years to ccme.
The proposed PY "89 budget also does not address another need for
research on criteria pollutants, i.e., the health effects of acidic
aerosols. The recent issues paper prepared by ORD and the Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards provides evidence of the rising importance
Of this issue. The Agency will need much more data on the nature of
population exposures and responses as it moves to evaluate whether to
consider a new NAAOS for these pollutants.
-------
2. Mr
The SI million decrease in research funding for hazardous air pollutants
proposed for FY '89 is troublesome in view of the potential impacts such
pollutants can have on human healtht the dearth of data on current population
exposures and the need for more reliable risk assessment methodologies.
In the absence of sufficient resources to support a new emphasis on exposure
and effects assessment, and on the nature and impact of sudden massive
releases of chemicals to the environment, the current emphasis on risk
assessment is appropriate.
3. indoor Air Pollutants
The 14% increase proposed for FY '89 for research on indoor air
pollutants will permit a significant expansion of the Agency's ability to
communicate risks to the general public based on current knowledge concerning
health effects and control resources. However, it will only begin to
provide a basis for the substantial increase in the knowledge base which
is needed. z *
4. Stratospheric Ozone
The signing of the Montreal stratospheric ozone protocol by the
United States and other nations represents a major international achieve-
ment. Rtibedded within the protocol is a commitment to initiate scientific
assessments of the ozone depletion problem in 1990 and 1994. There is a
wide recognition within the scientific communities of many nations,
including the United States, that more research is needed to better
establish the scope of the human health and environmental effects of
concern and the levels of Ultraviolet-B (UV-B) radiation exposure at
which they occur.
Daring its review of the 1PA document, An Assessment of_ the Risks^ of
Stratospheric Modification, the Science Advisory Board's Stratospheric
Ozone Subcommittee concluded that "the potential impacts on aquatic and
terrestrial food chains, and the potential effects on the equilibrium of
plant and animal assemblages, are just as important as the more intensively
studied human effects."^ Subsequent to that Subcommittee's transroittal
of its report, the Office of Management and Budget solicited its further
advice on research needs and priorities.4 Subcommittee members
responded by proposing research that focused on a number of endpoints,
particularly aquatic and plant systems*^
The PY '89 budget proposal provides a substantial increase of approxi-
mately $7 million for stratospheric ozone research. The program will
focus upon such issues as assessing the effects of ozone depletion upon
plants, marine ecosystems and air quality. The Research and Development
Budget Subcommittee welcomes this commitment to a vigorous research
program and recommends that it continue over a series of fiscal years
because of the continuing domestic and international policy decisions for
which research support is needed.
-------
-w Q —
5. Global Climate
Hie issue of global climate change is likely to be even more ccmplex
than stratospheric ozone depletion as a scientific problem and in terms
of the policy issues requiring resolution. In recognition of this,
nations such as the United States and the Soviet Union, as well as the
United Nations, are beginning a more formal process of scientific evaluation
of this problem, Thus, the need for a well-designed, funded and sustained
research program to address the host of interlinked scientific and policy
questions related to global climate change is compelling.
Therefore, the S493 million increase in EPA's proposed PY '89 research
budget for this problem is welcomed. The Sobccumittee supports this
increased funding and suggests that new resources at least equivalent to
those earmarked for stratospheric ozone depletion should be made available.
The Subcorrmittee also recommends that EP& prepare a research plan to
demonstrate its capability to wisely use additional resources, and that
such a plan should identify research needs for a period of at least a
decade. External scientific experts should be called upon to assist in
preparing and reviewing such a plan.
6. Radon Mitigation
Last year, the President proposed a major reduction in funding for
radiation research with most of the decrease taken from the radon mitigation
program, In last year's report, the Subccmnittee concluded that, as a result,
"The radon mitigation program cannot achieve its previously stated objectives
of developing and publishing acceptable mitigation techniques that will
apply to the variety of problems facing American homeowners."
The PY '89 proposal reecmends an increase of approximately SI million
for radon with the majority of funds devoted to demonstration and evaluation
of techniques to prevent and mitigate radon in homes, and to analyze the
results of such efforts.
Ihe Subcommittee applauds this change. The SAB's Radiation Advisory
Committee has maintained a continuing scientific oversight of this research
program and is favorably impressed with both the quality and direction of
EPA's efforts to date.6 ihe proposed increase should solidify and enable
EPA to build on the progress achieved to date.
The proposed radiation research budget also includes funds for
radiological monitoring and surveillance services for the Department of
Energy's Nuclear Testing Program, and a radiochemical analytical quality
assurance program for making radioactivity measurements at Federal, State
and local laboratories. Both of these programs merit continued support.
-------
- 10 -
B.
1. Water
The proposed budget for water quality research increases 5347,000
for a total of approximately S25 million. In addition to continuing with
research'on water quality criteria and standards, developing ase attainability
analyses and implementing water quality based standards, and the Great Lakes,
the Agency proposes research on the problem of the loss or degradation of
wetlands.
With the support of the scientific community, the trend in water
quality criteria development and standard setting has evolved towards a
regional framework, based upon the recognition of region-specific environ-
mental needs, and using geological and ecological principles. The Subcom-
mittee endorses the Agency's recognition of the need for furthering the
eeoregion approach, but it believes that, with additional resources, many
more important scientific insights can be obtained.
In its FY '88 budget report, the Subcommittee commented on the need
to begin to focus attention on non-point wat<§r pollution sources. CRD
has initiated the planning of research efforts into sediments, which are a
latent source of pollutants and which cannot be attributed to a single
source. Because of the huge impact of non-point sources on water quality,
this effort should be seen as only the beginning of a research program
that should also address non-point inputs from surface runoff and direct
atmospheric sources*
The important area of ground water research receives approximately
a 1% increase over the PY '88 budget, or $76,300. Since much of the Nation's
water supply comes from groundwater sources, it is imperative that the
assessment programs proposed on sources, transport, transformation of
groundwater contaminants be emphasized.
2, Q:inking Water
the proposed FY '89 research funding of $21.9 million represents a
2% reduction below FY '88 levels and about a 4% reduction below the FY '87
appropriation.
This past year the SAB Environmental Health Committee reviewed three
major drinking water issues: research on drinking water disinfection and
disinfection by-products'; research on pollutants in water distribution
systemsr? and a review of the scientific data base for the proposed .rules
fior surface water treatment and coliforms,^
There is a growing recognition among scientists, engineers, govern-
mental officials and water supply providers of the public health risks
associated with the continuing incidence of waterborne disease, and the
increasing need to investigate the public health implications of the use of
alternative disinfection techniques and their by-products.
-------
- 11 -
At present, EPA's disinfection work is almost wholly fceased on
ehlorination and.chlorination by-products. More attention should be
devoted to the potential toxicity problems that could arise from alternatives
and/or adjuncts to ehlorination such as chloramination, and the use of
ozone, chlorine dioxide and other disinfectant processes. As treatment
systems tarn to the use of alternative treatment approaches, it is necessary
to expand the research focus to determine which treatment methods protect
public health most effectively, and to compare the relative effectiveness
and risks associated with each treatment technology. Microbiological
research in water systems is also an area that merits additional support,
particularly studies of assirailtable organic carbon which may be used as
an indicator of growth or absence of growth of microbiological contaminants
in water distribution systems, lack of funding seems to be the basis for
reduced work on corrosion. This is short-sighted because there are a
number of unresolved scientific and policy issues related to the public
health threat posed by the leaching of lead and the corrosion of asbestos
pipe. For all of the above reasons, the proposed budget of approximately
$3,3 million for the disinfection by-products and water distribution
system programs should be greatly increased.
C. Hazardous Wastes/LUST/Saperfund
The large economic corwnitment o£ the United States toward proper
management of hazardous wastes and remediation of existing waste sites
warrants the development of a sound scientific basis to ensure that clean-
up efforts are both cost-efficient and effective. The combined hazardous
waste/LUST/Superfund research program in FY '89 shows an increase of $5
million above FY '88 levels, for a total of $108-9 million.
1. Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE)
The SITE program, which evaluates new remediation technology
largely on a demonstration scale, is budgeted at S20 million for FY "89, not
including cost-sharing by industry. Approximately SI million is earmarked
for emerging technology and another $1 million for monitoring method
components. At present, there are 22 SITE projects underway. The Subcom-
mittee believes that the SITE program, has made steady progress since its
inception and can effectively use the recownended resources,
2. Waste Minimization
Preventing or reducing the generation of wastes is important
for many reasons. These include; a) pollution control technologies are
not 100% reliable and some releases inevitably result; b) some control
technologies transfer contaminants to different environmental media and
create new environmental problems; and c) siting new waste management
capacity is very difficult, if not impossible.
Although a few companies and a few states have aggressively
pursued waste minimization, many have not. Interest in waste minimization
is growing, however, as evidenced by an expanding number of reports,
conferences, and legislative proposals devoted to this subject.
-------
- 12 -
Waste minimization deserves substantial visibility and commitment at
the highest levels of EPA. Although the Agency has made some progress in
its awareness of the need for waste minimization, its current programs
and budgets are far too limited to realize the potential benefits, in
part, this reflects the difficulty EPA has concerning its role as a
pollution "prevention" agency.
In a review of EPA's waste minimization research strategy, the SAB's
Environmental Engineering Committee concluded that it should encompass a
variety of on- and off-site, in-process, and post-generation waste
management options that reduce the hazard of a waste, including waste
treatment*^ The Committee recommended that EPA's waste minimization
program could initially focus most productively upon waste prevention
(source reduction) and waste recovery/reuse/recycling. Hie Committee
agreed that waste prevention is the most desirable option. It is the
option that the Agency's waste minimization program should strongly
emphasize, but which has not been directly supported to date. Prom a
practical standpoint, however, EPA may choose to include waste recycling
and reuse in the program because, in many instances", this option will
provide economic benefits to waste generators. The waste minimization
research program should not include waste treatment because it is already
addressed by other - research programs.
Initially focusing the program on hazardous waste prevention (source
reduction) and recycling was reasonable. The goal of the program, however,
must remain protection of human health and the environment, rather than
changes that merely result in avoiding the regulatory classification of a
"hazardous waste."
Given these and other substantial research opportunities, the FY '89
budget proposal seriously underfunds the most promising opportunities
to reduce the Nation's hazardous waste disposal problems. The program
could effectively utilize double or triple the recommended level of resourcesn
3. Land Disposal
Although not widely acknowledged, land disposal must continue to
be an integral part of the nation's waste management strategy. Other
waste management options exist and should be used, but land disposal has a
continuing, inevitable, and important waste management role for EPA and
for the nation.^-0
EPA needs a strong and continuing land disposal research program
to" address such important issues as; a) the land disposal of ash from
the incineration of hazardous and municipal solid wastes, very small
quantity generator wastes, residues produced by best danonstrated available
technology (BEAT) treatment of hazardous wastes, and large volume wastes;
b) the proper design of Subtitle D facilities, including municipal
landfills and industrial noh-hazardoas waste landfills and surface
impoundments; and c) appropriate methods for the closure and post-closure
-------
- 13 -
care of hazardous and non-hazardous landfills, surface impoundments and
waste piles.
There is a need to evaluate and understand the long-term
performance of what are now considered environmentally sound land disposal
practices and the associated monitoring methods to assure that these
practices are environmentally sound over many decades.
These needs are not recognized by the Congress and the SPA, and
EPA does not have a waste management strategy that defines the continuing
role of land disposal. Unless this is corrected, EPA and the nation will
lack the scientific and technical knowledge necessary to the ongoing
development of scientifically sound land disposal guidance and regulations,
Congress and the EPA should provide adequate support for the Land Disposal
Research Program so that it can continue to provide land disposal data
and information and develop a mechanism so that individual shifts in
Agency-wide priorities do not leave it devoid of an important capability.
The proposed budget of S2.5 million to support implementation of land
disposal regulations essentially maintains the level of funding from the
previous fiscal year. It also delays the Agency's capability to respond
in a scientifically responsible manner to the growing number of land
disposal-related problems that confront it.
4. Municipal Waste Combustion
The technology of municipal waste combustion has emerged as a major
alternative to land filling for solid waste disposal in a number of urban
areas* A number of scientific uncertainties, however, are associated
with this technology including the characterisation of emissions, including
metals, from existing combustor stacks; identification of the products of
incomplete combustions ash disposal: determination of the transport,
transformation and fate of emissions; exposure assessment and potential
risk to humans and ecosystems.
In the past year, QRD has prepared a municipal waste combustion research
plan. A SAB Subcommittee has reviewed the plan and concluded that because
of budgetary constraints important areas are either omitted (such as evaluation
of ecological effects) Or ate addressed in a superficial fashion.^
The FY '89 budget proposal includes $2.5 million for research on
municipal waste combustion that will support efforts to develop emissions
standards* This will enable QRD to conduct emissions tests at some
existing facilities and to research various ash disposal techniques such
as solidification. These represent important research needs, but they
will not, taken alone, resolve the host of scientific questions and public
concerns surrounding the siting and use of this technology. As a result, •
controversy and lack of public confidence in EPA decision making will
persist, making it increasingly difficult to solve the nation's municipal
waste disposal problem.
-------
- 14 -
D» Pesticides/Toxic Substances
Research funding for pesticides and toxic substances in the PY "89
proposal has increased over the FY '88 appropriation. Individual research
programs change also within the overall ceiling. An increase of
SI,4 million addresses pesticide research for destruction and disposal of
pesticides that have been cancelled and suspended under FIFRA. Resources
have been decreased by 5322,600 for development of asbestos monitoring
and control technologies, a program scheduled for Science Advisory Board
review later this year. A re-examination of the risks involved with the
various alternative's for management of the asbestos problem is needed
before major expenditures on removal and reconstruction is mandated by
Agency rules,
1. Superfund Amendments Reauthorization Act (SARA) Title III
Research (eownunity right-to-know)
No new research monies were allocated1 in. support off SARA Title
III, although releases to the environment and inventories of chemical
stocks in process will become public knowledge beginning in the last half
of 1988 for several hundred chemicals handled in certain industrial
categories'. Congress should expand EPA's resources devoted to the develop-
ment and interpretation of information on these chemicals in a form that
can be communicated in response to questions from the public.
2. Biotechnology
Resources for biotechnology and microbial and biochemical pest
control agents have remained at essentially at the same level since FY '87,
or approximately S6.9 million ($4.1 in toxics, $2.8 in pesticides).
The Biotechnology Research Review Subcommittee of the Science
Advisory Board has just completed a review of the Office of Research and
Development's Biotechnology/Microbial Pest Control Agent Risk Assessment
Research Program,12 ihe major reccnrnendation of the Subcommittee is that
EPA redefine its focus to emphasize three areas: 1) investigating and
analyzing environmental effects, 2) developing control strategies for
containment and mitigation, and 3) refining further applications such as
protocols, microcosms, models and field tests. In light of the significant
accomplishments of the program to date, primarily in developing methods
for enumeration, identification and protection, the continuity in funding
should enable this shift in focus to be made. Research is also recommended
for determining the potential for environmental change that way result as
genes may transform naturally occurring organisms.
3. Adipose Tissue Bank
The Agency currently plans to drop this non-QRD $2 million
program because of budgetary constraints. In the past, it has served as
-------
15 -
an authoritative source of information on the accumulation or redaction
of chemicals in the human body. It has reported, for example, the declining
levels of polychlorinated biphenyls in human fat. The Subcommittee
believes there is a national interest in maintaining the program, whether
samples need to oe collected and analyzed on an annual or other basis
should be formally evaluated by EPA in a report that should be submitted
to the Congress. EPA should consider, for example, whether it is technically
feasible or desirable to conduct periodic assessments similar to the
National Health and Nutrition Evaluation Survey (NHANES).
E. Interdisciplinary Research
1. Reducing Uncertainties in Risk Assessment (RURA)
Research to support risk assessment is a primary function of CRD
programs. Over the past several years Congress, the Science Advisory
Board and EPA have recognized the need to modify or initiate research
projects into a conceptual framework whose integrating theme is risk
assessment. In the FY '88 Bipartisan Agreement, Congress mandated the
establishment of a S10 million research program to -reduce uncertainties in
risk assessment (RURA) but provided no new monies^ to conduct" the research.
This requirement has added considerable budgetary uncertainty to the task
of reducing scientific uncertainty. EPA research managers, beginning in
the summer of 1987, have invested enormous amounts of time planning
scenarios to cancel or redefine existing productive research projects
into order to conform to the budgetary requirements of RURA.
The PY '89 budget proposes an increase of S7 million for this effort
(S3 million in FY '88) for a total of S10 million. Since this increase
results from the diversion of funds from other program categories, it is
somewhat illusionary. To date, EPA has developed plans for defining
priority research areas under RURA and prepared criteria for selecting
projects. The plans and objectives for the RURA program might be usefully
reviewed by the Science Advisory Board or another external peer review
body.
The Subcommittee believes that research to reduce risk assessment
uncertainties is a vital Agency-wide need. However, Congress mandated
the program and the forced manner that EPA must adopt to ensure compliance
with the Congressional objective does not give the Subcommittee a high
level of confidence that good science will be produced. Changes of this
magnitude often require a change in skill base and sudden changes can be
disruptive to people and expertise now in place.
2. Exploratory Grants and Centers Program
Many of EPA's recent crises or priorities are issues for which
there exists no consistent background research generated by CRD. These
issues include, for example, stratospheric ozone depletion, the incineration
of municipal solid and industrial chemical wastes, and residential radon
exposures. Scientists have long-recognized the importance of these and
other issues, but their efforts did not receive the necessary support, in
part because they were not iittnediate regulatory priorities.
-------
- 16 -
Many of these unanticipated issues have been addressed in research
proposals prepared by scientific investigators at EPA funded academic
centers and in individual research grant proposals submitted to the office
of Exploratory Research. Peer reviewers have judged these proposals to
have scientific merit. Investigator-initiated research under the Grants
program is predicted on the sound assumption that the scientific ceranunity
has valuable ideas as to what needs to be done and has a good chance of
providing information of an innovative nature. Unfortunately, the levels'
of financial support available for these proposed projects has been much
too lew for the past five years, and only a small fraction of the highly
regarded and highly relevant proposals have been funded. This accounts,
at least in part, for the lack of relevant data for decision makers where
"new crisis issues" emerge. This development will continue to hobble
EPA's ability to respond to new problems until a means is found to adequately
fund research beyond the immediate regulatory needs. Ihe proposed FY '89
budget fails to remedy the inadequate level of support for research
grants.
* *
The Congress has mandated that a portion of 'the Superfunel research
program be directed to the establishment of five centers for the exploration
of hazardous waste site impacts. Ihe FY '89 budget proposes approximately
S5 million for these centers, or a level of about $1 million per center
per year. This amount should provide a critical mass of resources
necessary to attract qualified proposals from the university cororaunity
and should lead to a productive research program. EPA should widely
solicit research proposals for these centers (which will be managed by
ORD'S Office of Exploratory Research) and make the final selection on an
independent, peer reviewed and competitive basis.
It is unfortunate that EPA's existing research centers, which were
established to meet needs in areas as diverse as ecology, ground water,
epidemiology, and control technology are being funded at levels deemed
marginal by the scientific ccrananity* Ihe Science Advisory Board, for
example, has several tiroes in the past recommended that the average
funding level of these centers be increased from their current average of
$540,000 to a minimum of $800,000 - $1,000,000 per center. In view of
the PY '89 funding proposal for the Superfund centers, and the productivity
of the existing centers program, the Administration and the Congress
should adopt a policy of parity and appropriate SI million for each o£
the existing centers.
P. Multi-Media and Energy Research
1. Acid Deposition
The ten-year research program mandated by the Acid Precipitation
Act of 1980 is reaching closure, and this is reflected in the leveling off
of funding for acid deposition research. From FY '87 to FY '88 EPA's
program sustained a reduction of $3 million, while proposed funding for
FY '89 remains even at $52 million, out of a total Federal research
-------
- 17 -
budget of approximately S83 million. EPA assumes that, by the end of FY
'90, two thirds of the projects in the existing acid deposition research
program will be completed.
The Subcommittee has two reactions to this evolution of events. First,
it has supported a consistent funding base for acid deposition research because
of the large scientific uncertainties and large societal costs associated
with mitigating this environmental problem. Second, many other research
priorities have emerged that also merit research support.
Under almost any set of assumptions, funding for acid deposition
research will change and/or decline. The rate and direction of change
should consider several factors. These include:
o Much of the acid deposition research is linked to other environmental
problems. The lake and stream surveys for example, provide a baseline for
future research on these sensitive ecosystems.
o Development of monitoring programs provide -a capability, if
continued, for establishment of "early warning" systems to detect ecological
changes, and longitudinal analyses of acidic flux.
o The acid deposition program can provide a scientific basis for a
transition to a broader "ecosystems" research effort that could be used
to better define sensitive ecological endpoints, develop and verify
ecological risk assessment methods and evaluate ecosystem productivity.
The Subcommittee recommends that EPA prepare a research plan to identify
options for the future role of acid deposition research and its relationship
to other environmental research problems and opportunities. At the1same
time, Congress should support the level of funding proposed in the FY "89
budget.
-------
- 18 -
References;
1, U. S. EPA, Science Advisory Board, "Review of the Office of Research
and Development's Health Effects Research Laboratory's linking Water
Disinfection and Disinfection By-Products Research program,"
October 23, 1987 (SAB-EHC-88-QG5).
2. U, S. EPA, Science Advisory Board, "Recommendations for Futare
Research on National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone and
Lead," September 30, 1987 (SAB-CASAC-87-036).
3. U. S. EPA, Science Advisory Board, "Review of EPA's An Assessment of
the Risks of Stratospheric Modification," March 23, 1987 (SAB-EG-S7-Q2S).
4. Gibbons, cavid, Office of Management and Budget, April 23, 1987 letter
to Cr. Margaret Kripke.
5, Kripke, Margaret L. and Mintzer, Irving, "Reccnroended Research on
Effects of Stratospheric Ozone Depletion," Brie"fiog Document Prepared
Cr. Eavid M. Gibbons, Office of Management and Budget, October 1987.
6. U* S. EPA, Science Advisory Board, "Review of the Radon Mitigation
Research Program," January 14, 1988 (SAB-RAC-88-009).
7. r.L s. EPA, Science Advisory Board, "Review of the Office of Research
and cevelopment'S Drinking Water Distribution System Research Program/'
March 9, 1988 (SAB-EHC-88-020).
8. U. S. EPA, Science Advisory Board, "Review of the Scientific Bases of
Proposed Rules for Surface Water Treatment and Coliforms," March 9, 1988
(SAB-EHC-88-Q21).
9. U, S. EPA, Science Advisory Board, "Review of the Office of Research
and Development's Waste Minimization Strategy," October 9, 1987
(SAB-EEC-8S-QQ4).
10. U. S. EPA, Science Advisory Board, "Review of the Office of Research
and Development's tand Disposal Research Program," October 9, 1987
{SAB-EEC-88-003).
11. U. S, EPA, Science Advisory Board, "Municipal Waste Combustion Research
Plan," Craft report dated February 1988.
12. u. S. EPA, Science Advisory Board, "Evaluating EPA's Current Objectives
and Future Needs for Biotechnology Risk Assessment Research," January 29,
1988 (SAB-EETPC-88-010).
------- |