The h t u r e of Future Risk
About a year ago, EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) issued a report that p r o p o s e d r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s to strengthen science at EPA. That report, entitled Fwure Risk: Research Strategies for the 19% not surprisingly received an enthusiastic reception from the research and academic communities. What was surprising was the favorable reception it received from environmental groups, industry, and policy makers in the executive and legislative branches. Now it is time to determine whether the premises of this report are still as relevant as they were a year ago and to see what implementation progress has been made. The overriding recommendationfor EPA to pursue pollution prevention rather than end-f-pipe controls as its highest priority-has been gaining intellecml steam and bureaucratic muscle. The previous administrator, Lee Thomas, established an OfTice of Pollution Prevention to focus agency efforts. The current administrator, William K. Reilly, has established a special fund for pollution prevention projects. Many states have established waste minimization programs. The visibility of and programmatic support for pollution prevention are rising dramatically. However, a coherent rationale and strategy are lacking. Presumably, the optimum amount of pollution prevention is not occurring because market prices fail to reflect environmental damages from residuals or because information on cost-effective substitutes, process changes, o r better management of wastes is not available. Current efforts deal with pctential information o r knowledge gaps but fail to deal with pricing. In the long
run, market-based incentives or disincentives may be necessary to achieve success. In essence, the agency is making progress but must begin to think more strategically about pollution prevention. The SAB report clearly stated the need to plan, implement, and sustain a long-term research program. T h e agency has already developed an excellent plan for its core research program that would implement many of the recommendations of the SAB report. If EPA does implement and sustain the basic thrust of the Office of Research and Development's internal core research plan, this recommendation of the SAB will be fully implemented. Another key recommendation of the SAB report was to create better mechanisms to ensure that a coherent, balanced R&D strategy is planned and implemented. Specifically, the report recommended creation of a Research Strategies Council, made up of senior EPA officials, to oversee the ressrch program and an independent standing committee of the SAB to provide an independent review. EPA has established the Research Strategies Council and held two productive meetings. The SAB Research Strategies Advisory Council was created and has provided the agency independent counsel prior to and at these sessions. Overall, this recommendation has been implemented fully by the agency. Indeed, the agency has been responsive to the Future Risk recommendations in all areas fully under its control. Those recommendations requiring Office of Management and Budget and congressional approval, however. are tougher to implement and hence action has been partial at best. As of this writing, EPA has not taken any public steps to create the Environmental Research Institute called for in the SAB report. The institute was a key recommendation of the SAB report for a number of reasons. First, the SAB panel felt strongly that there was a great need for ecological research and a comprehensive program of ecological monitoring and analysis. The institute was designed to provide the federal leader-
0015936w89m9231071501.50l0 :5 1989 American Chemical Society
ship for such a coordinated effort. Second, the SAB also felt there were advantages to insulating the long-term core research and monitoring program from the daily vicissitudes of the budgetary process. Third, an institute would bring into the EPA research effort firstclass scientists who may not choose federal employment; some of these institute scientists might work at EPA laboratories. It would also provide an o p portunity for EPA employees to take sabbaticals at the institute. Finally, a nongovernmental entity that collects, analyzes, and disseminates ecological data may have more credibility than a government entity. Administration support for an environmental institute would be an important step in achieving the objectives above. Most important, an institute could get ahead of serious ecological problems, rather than reacting to them after irreversible damage has occurred. The other difficult issue is funding. As the SAB report indicated, the EPA R&D budget decrcascd by 20% in real terms between 1980 and 1989. At the same time. Congress dramatically enhanced many of EPA's statutes, such as the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (1984). Superfund (1986). the Safe Drinking Water Act (1986). and the Clean Water Act (1987). Many new environmental concerns such as acid rain, indoor air pollution, radon, and stratospheric ozone depletion have emerged over the last decade. Thus, EPA's need for better scientific information has been growing while its ability to fund the research to generate that information has been shrinking. The vise continues to tighten as new technology transfer needs arise from the Superfund program: the Clean Air Act amendments promise to create a whole new set of research needs. EPA's R&D budget must increase substantially to meet both programmatic and long-term research needs. The SAB recommended a doubling of the EPA R&D program over a five-year period. The arguments for such an increase are powerfully stated in the SAB report: "The longer we remain ignconrinued on p. 1084 Envimn. Sci. Technol.. MI. 23.NO. 9. 1989 1071
ktters conrinuedfrom p. 1079 (2)Reurr. J . 0.; Johnson. D.W.AddDrpm tion and Acidijicorinn of Soi1.s and Water!
Ecological Studies 5 9 Springer-Verlq New York. 1986. (3)Gallaway. 1. N.: Norton. S. N.: Churct M. R. Environ. Sci. 7echnol. 1983, I : 541A-45A.
Charles T. Drisfo Syracuse Universit Gene E. Liken Lars 0. Hedi The New York Botanical Garde E Herbert Borman Yale Universit
Regulatory Focus continuedfrom p. 1071 rant of environmental problems ant
their possible solutions, the greater th~ risk of advelse consequences to humai health and environmental quality. Thu research is the most fundamental of th~ tools that promote environmental qual ity. Without the strong scientific ant technical knowledge that results fron research and development programs standard-setting would not be possible control technologies would not exist and there would be nothing to enforce.' EPA's R&D budget is only one-hal of one percent of total expenditures 01 environmental improvement. No high technology firm would allocate such i small portion of revenues to R&D. I credible increases are not forthcominl in the next few years, the momentum o the changes brought about by the SA1 report will be lost. It is extremely un likely that this InOmenNm could be re gained in the foreseeable future. Alvin L Alm is a director and senio vice president for energy and rhe envi ronment for Science App/ications Inter M~~OM Corp., I a supplier of high-tech nology products and services related tt the environment. energy, health. am national securify
ENVIRONMENTAL INDM SOURCE BOX
.^
r^..iu".^...^,n..^ A^....^, ,:*, r,,, - I -
(n,ur.,,m.,-,,ru-r,,~~
-
port; US. Government Printing Of.
fice: W a s h i n g t o n , DC, 1988. p. 3W. e-5) Ibld., p. 392, @J Ibld., p.384. mibid., p.385. (elibid.,~. 170. (s, 10)Ibld., p. 175. of)Ibid., p. 176. yr2) E M press release, R. 123, July 13,1989. (733 McCloskey, J. M.: SDaidlm. H. Ambb 1989. 18. 221. &la, S. J. Ambb 1989; 18, 250. (rs) Kabale, S.J. Ambb 1989,18,250. 08)National Association of Manufacturers; issue
64,
1080 Environ. %I.Technol.. MI.23,No. 9,1989
TheSouth FloridaWaterManagement District ISB 16-countyreg~onal agencycreatedthrough state le(1~slaI~on. which IS reswnsible lor the manaoementol water re~ourcesin the most ur-
We currently Seek a dynamic experienced manager b fill the position d D i r m o r dWater Oualily l o ~ v e n e e t h eDiStrict'Smonitoring, research. and waterqualilydalacollectianprograms. The selmedcandidatewill be responsible l o r l h e d a i l y ~ p e w i ~ i 01 o na stallo124, thedevelopment and adminiStratim olannual budge(. asw811asrepr-ntingthe DiStrid'S WaterOualily Program to state and local OHicialS. This uniquely c h a i l e n g i n g ~ t l u t i l yrequima Masler'sdegreeinWmrOualiiordeled field wilh emphasisin Iheareasolchemicalorbiological limnology: Ph.D. preferrBd.TheseImed candidatewill haveaprownlrack ieFord01increasinglyrerponsibleexprienceasasuprvisodmanager with live to ten w a n exmrience orelerred. Solid Commu~icsllonlinlomBrSOnBI Skillsarea must
In exchange lor yourexpertipe.weofter a m p e l i t i n , salary bawdon experienw endan emllent bendits program. Forconsidemtionpleassaubrnityourresumelo: h m n A d l . Employ. mant .... ... Admlnlstntar . .. .. . .. South . . . .. . Flarlde .. . Walm Yanq.ment MsIrl~l.P.O. Box South Florida 21680. West Palm 8.ach. FL 33416
..
Water Manaaement District
ANALYTICAL CHEMIST
4680 or
l4OTI 686.8800 16365.
Equal 0pport;nity
Employer
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER/SCIENTIST
Blomedtcal S c r n w s . Inc. has an imnmdlate openmg lu a Tschnicbn In A ~ l y t l c a Chemistry l The pQSltlon 1111 incIUdt) developing w edeptmp emlytlcaI methodologies t u trace levels 01 orpanics in var ous matrices. including water. sod. end food The successluI cand*dete will have a B S tn Analyt
