tration of DMF (dimethylformamide), a widely used industrial sol vent, varies from country to country, from a low airborne concentration of 10 mg/m 3 in the U.S.S.R. to a high airborne concentration of 60 mg/m 3 in Germany; the U.S. value is inter mediate, at 30 mg/m 3 or 10 ppm. The percutaneous absorption of DMF is more important than the pulmonary uptake, according to the report of Z. Bardodej of the Charles University Medical Faculty of Hygiene (Prague, Czechoslovakia). The relationship between the urinary concentration of mercapturates (y) and monomethyl
formamide (x) was y = 4.93 + 0.58.x; the correlation coefficient is 0.92. The best monitoring technique is to mea sure urinary monomethylformamide. More on biological monitoring The proceedings of a symposium sponsored by the Division of Pesticide Chemistry, "Risk Determination for Agricultural Workers from Dermal Exposure to Pesticides," will be pub lished by ACS Books in its sympo sium series. There will be a conference July ΙΟ Ι 3 on "Medical Screening and Bio-
logical Monitoring for the Effects of Exposure in the Workplace" in Cin cinnati, Ohio. This conference is sponsored by the three federal agen cies—NIOSH, EPA, and the Nation al Cancer Institute. —Stanton Miller Additional Reading Baselt, Randall C. "Biological Monitoring Methods for Industrial Chemicals"; Bio medical Publications: Davis, Calif., 1980. Lauwerys, Robert R. "Industrial Chemical Ex posure: Guidelines for Biological Monitor ing"; Biomedical Publications: Davis, Calif., 1983.
Water cleanup trends Additional pretreatment regulations and the enforcement of EPA's new toxics control policy may be expected
In March, industries and others concerned with or affected by water laws and regulations were asking these questions: "Will the Clean Wa ter Act (CWA) be reauthorized this year?" "With or without a new law, what might the regulatory emphasis be in the months and years to come?" As far as the first question is con cerned, EPA's leadership is "desir ous" of early reauthorization. This is according to Jack Ravan, assistant administrator for water, who spoke at the 1984 Water and Wastewater Equipment Manufacturers Associ ation Washington Forum in late Feb ruary. And Sen. Robert Stafford (R.Vt.), chairman of the Senate En vironment and Public Works Com mittee, expressed confidence that two reauthorization bills (S. 431 and 2006—the latter addresses nonpoint sources) would reach the Senate floor this year. In late March Robert Hur190A
Environ. Sci. Technol., Vol. 18, No. 6, 1984
ley of that committee's professional staff offered a similar prediction to the 18th Annual Government Affairs Seminar of the Water Pollution Con trol Federation (WPCF), held in Washington, D.C. On the other hand, many in the water-wastewater com munity—perhaps a majority—do not expect reauthorization this year. Main endeavors With or without CWA reauthori zation, the development of regula tions will continue. The principal en deavors spelled out by EPA Admin istrator William Ruckelshaus for the WPCF seminar are completing the issuance of best available technology economically achievable (BATEA or BAT) rules for direct and indirect in dustrial dischargers; pretreatment of industrial wastewater destined for publicly owned treatment works (POTW); and improvement of the
quality of water not meeting ambient standards despite the installation of BAT. The present water law calls for the use of BAT to begin by July 1. However, EPA is more than 18 months away from completing the is suance of effluent guidelines and im plementing permits. So Ruckelshaus has proposed an extension to July 1, 1988. "We do a disservice by setting deadlines impossible to achieve," he said. Other thrusts could involve in creasing municipal compliance and trying to attack pollution from nonpoint sources. S. 431 and its House companion bill, H.R. 3282, set July 1987 deadlines for these measures. Pretreatment-POTW efforts will involve enforcement of those effluent guidelines already issued and "an ag gressive move" on sludge, Ruckels haus noted, adding that a sludge task force has been established within EPA. Also, because the compliance
0013-936X/84/0916-0190A$01.50/0
© 1984 American Chemical Society
deadline for most of the electroplating industry was April 1, Ruckelshaus in dicated that that sector will be among the first to bear the brunt of the act's requirements to remove toxic materi als from effluents. As for post-BAT programs, an EPA spokesperson told ES& Τ that one has already begun. It involves identifying areas in which BAT con trols are not likely to solve water qual ity problems, and writing BAT and water quality permits now. Moreover, while some surveillance would work on a numerical pollutant-specific ba sis, there will always be a need for techniques to analyze whole effluent toxicity. Principal among the tech niques would be biomonitoring, the spokesperson said. In this case, bio monitoring involves analyzing tissues of aquatic organisms for the accumu lation and effects of contaminants. EPA estimates that even with BAT in place, perhaps 20% of discharging industrial plants will need to install additional technology to remove toxic pollutants. S. 431 and H.R. 3282 would mandate "beyond-BAT" mon itoring, permits, and treatment proj ects. And herein lies a controversy. As Peter Wise of EPA's Office of Water put it, "EPA now has the authority to require post-BAT t r e a t m e n t — w e
Some pretreatment problems WPCF's Andrew Stevenson told ES
