window dressing." However, Starr also took the opportunity to criticize EPA enforcement for being "uncoordinated, unfair, inconsistent, and focused on small issues at the expense of larger ones." Defending proposed cuts to EPA enforcement of 25% or more, Keith Cole, a counsel to Sen. Christopher (Kit) Bond (R-Mo.), chair of the Senate appropriations subcommittee that controls EPA funding, said EPAs role has increasingly been taken over by states, a trend Congress would like to continue. He said 83% of enforcement actions are currently done by states, and he noted that environmentally related spending by states has grown from zero 25 years ago to $9.3 billion in 1991. With states running more and more environmental programs, Cole asked, "Why should EPAs enforcement budget keep rising?" He predicted that in the years ahead, Congress will increasingly shift more environmental responsibility to states. Starr countered that front-line state prosecutors frequently have difficulty bringing enforcement actions against politically connected environmental offenders. "The states need EPA," he said. —JEFF JOHNSON
Clinton releases "thematic" budget The Clinton administration issued a "thematic overview" of its fiscal year 1997 budget priorities on Feb. 5. The quietly released overview stood in sharp contrast to the 2000-page document that normally is released each year to much fanfare and discussion. The 20-page overview held few environmental details, other than a priority for enforcement and Superfund, more funds for EPAs operating program, establishment of a tax incentive program for brownfield cleanups, more authority for state-run water programs, and increases for research on global climate change and ozone depletion. Noting "uncertainty over 1996 appropriations," the president said he anticipated transmitting a detailed budget by March 18.
NEWS SCIENCE Atrazine not an ecological risk, study says Despite its widespread presence in U.S. surface waters, atrazine, one of the most widely used agricultural herbicides, does not pose a risk to the aquatic environment, according to a recently published ecological risk assessment. The assessment, funded by the principal atrazine manufacturer, CibaGeigy, followed current best-practice recommendations and is being widely praised as a model assessment. But despite the rigor of the new study, some researchers believe it does not completely clear atrazine of possible ecological harm. "This new risk assessment is well done," said Anthony Maciorowski, chief of the ecological effects branch in EPAs Office of Pesticides. "But ecological risk assessment is still evolving. Other people would come to other conclusions." Although ecological risk assessment is an emerging field, EPA is backing it as the best means of integrating scientific information with decision making. The atrazine study is one of the first examples of an ecological risk assessment intended to influence such decision making. Recent research on the ecological effects of atrazine and the other triazine herbicides has been stimulated by an EPA "special review" started in 1994 and scheduled to produce findings at the end of this year. The review is EPAs procedure for determining whether a chemical may pose unreasonable risks to people or the environment. The determination is based on a risk-benefit analysis
and can result in a decision to cancel, restrict, or continue chemical uses. Human health issues triggered the review, but ecological effects also concern the agency, according to EPA review manager Joe Bailey. "When we initiated the review, we felt that there might be an ecological effect, but at the time we could make a stronger case for human health concerns," he said. The review process will attempt to weigh and balance human and ecological risks. The atrazine risk assessment was performed by a panel of scientists established by the Institute of Wildlife Toxicology, Clemson University (North Carolina) and headed by Keith Solomon, director of the Centre for Toxicology, University of Guelph, Ontario {Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 1996, 15, 31). Atrazine kills weeds in corn fields by inhibiting photosynthesis. In surface water, the herbicide also affects aquatic plants. Determining the scope and significance of this effect is the bottom line for the risk assessment. The risk assessment tested three hypotheses: (1) Atrazine may cause temporary, reversible reductions in plant productivity, and long, repeated exposure could reduce total biomass. (2) The herbicide could damage the ecosystem community structure and reduce the ability of the habitat to sustain other organisms such as fish. (3) Direct effects of the herbicide on aquatic plants may result in adverse indirect ef-
Each year, 80 million pounds of atrazine are spread on U.S. crops, particularly corn.
1 1 0 A • VOL. 30, NO. 3, 1996 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / NEWS
