News: EPA again delays mercury risk report release; will seek new

list of six high-priority areas iden- tified in the strategic plan, both the SAB and the NRC panel pointed out that two of the cate- gories—"ecosyst...
1 downloads 0 Views 3MB Size
list of six high-priority areas identified in the strategic plan, both the SAB and the NRC panel pointed out that two of the categories—"ecosystem protection" and "human health protection"— were too vague to be useful. But in its interim report, the NRC chalked that vagueness up to it still being early in the process. "It is possible that this first round of priority setting may have been influenced more by pragmatic considerations than by a strict application of the risk analysis," the panel wrote. EPA observers expect to see more specifics as the plans develop and are looking for followthrough—meaning a commitment to stable funding—once the research strategies are finalized. In a public comment at the March SAB meeting, Alan Roberson of the American Water Works Association, an industry group that sponsors its own drinking water research said that while ORD's plans were laudable "If the research isn't done it's just more A draft of the ORD Strategic Plan is available on the World Wide Web at http://www.epa.gov/ docs/ORD/WebPubs/stratplan. html. —TONY REICHHARDT

EPA again delays mercury risk report release; will seek new reviews, wait for more data A long-delayed EPA report on risk from mercury air emissions will be stalled for one to two more years, according to EPA officials, who cite "tremendous pressure" from industry, Congress, and other federal agencies to hold off on the report's release. EPA decided to put off the report in early April, agency officials said, backtracking from a judgment made only a month earlier to issue the draft report on April 15 in compliance with a judicial order The mercury report HUe Nov 15 1994 under the Clean Air Act 1990 Amendments is to include the emission rate health impacts and control tprhnolnpies for sources of mercurv air emision ( , EPA's draft woulH h a v e rprpntlv toucrhenpH m e r n i r v health qtan dard Aopnrv s r i p n r k r s belip

the more stringent reference dose is protective while they await hnal results from a partially com1

^

IT O

. . J

T

1 1 1

1

J

plete study of Seychelles Islanders i

r

j

j

i

i

i

r

that found no adverse health ef, -i , fects in children exposed to mer, , i curm levels currently considered

HUMAN HEALTH Veterans study suggests dioxin, spina bifida link A National Academy of Science study of Vietnam War veterans has found "limited or suggestive" evidence of an association between a father's exposure to the herbicide Agent Orange and spina bifida in his offspring. The study was conducted by a committee of the National Institute of Medicine and is an evaluation of scientific information collected on health effects of soldiers exposed to the herbicide and to dioxin, its most toxic ingredient. The congressionally mandated report also provides further support for earlier findings that there is sufficient evidence to confirm a link between Agent Orange and soft tissue sarcoma, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, Hodgkin's disease, and chloracne. New, however, is the possible association between a father's exposure and the higher risk to his children of spina bifida, a congenital birth defect characterized by spine and spinal cord deformity. Other diseases in the limited or suggestive category include prostate cancer; multiple myeloma; and respiratory cancers of the lung, larynx, or trachea. The spina bifida association is based on three epidemiological studies, according to the report, the largest of which is the Ranch Hand study, which looked at a group of veterans directly involved in spraying most of nearly 19 million gallons of defoliant in Vietnam. The report notes that in the two years since the committee's first examination of veterans and Agent Orange exposure, the Ranch Hand data have been reanalyzed by the U.S. Air Force, and that review bolstered the committee's conclusion that there is limited evidence of an association. —JEFF JOHNSON

Under the new plan, EPA will shortly send the draft report to the EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) and a comparable Food and Drug Administration panel for review and will await release of other mercury studies. EPA sources, however, stood by the science in the draft report, noting that it had been years in planning and had been peer reviewed by scientists outside the agency. An EPA official said "political management" within the agency argued for the delay in order to calm objections from some fed~ eral agencies and to avoid contentious congressional hearings in which EPA s c i e n r p would b e attackpH in trie m o n t h s hpfore n a t i o n a l ptprtions

A scientist familiar with the study and the review process said no additional scientific information has been made available to change the agency's position and ascribed EPA's change of mind to "national and interagency politics." The source also added that it is unusual for such a congressional report to go to SAB for review. Meanwhile, EPA will move ahead on a related congressional report that lays out a regulatory scheme for a range of toxic emissions from electric utilities, which includes mercury. Also required by April 15 but under a different court order, the utility report will be issued in draft form May 30 and finalized Dec. 15, 1996, EPA said. How the utility industry and its allies in Congress will respond to the study is unclear according to utility and agency officials who note that portions of the stalled mercury report serve as basis for the utility report

Much will also turn on the response from environmentalists who successfully sued to obtain the April release date for both studies. An attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council said the organization was now considering its response but would demand that for "step one" EPA formally release the mercury draft risk report so it is available to the public. JEFF JOHNSON

VOL. 30, NO. 5, 1996 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / NEWS • 1 9 3 A