NIH: The programs of the NIEHS are carried out through grants to universities and institutions of higher learning; through contracts to institutions of higher learning, non-profit research firms and industry; and directly in its own laboratories in the Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

The 1971 budget provides $20.0 million for the activities of the Institute. Of this amount approximately $16.0 million is committed to the conduct of research activities-$9.5 million through grants, $1.0 million through contracts, and $5.5 million in the Institute's laboratories in North Carolina.

The preponderance of the research conducted through grants and contracts is carried out through university research centers around the country. HSMHA: No research contracts are awarded.

Question 7. What mechanism, if any, do you have for identifying and addressing large-scale environmental questions by interdisciplinary teams? What mechanism do you have for coordinating your activities with the Environmental Protection Agency? Please include copies of any memoranda or letters of agreement which detail your coordination mechanism.

Answer. NIH: Certain Chemical Biological Research facilities at Pine Bluff Arsenal, Pine Bluff, Arkansas, were formally turned over to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare on April 1, 1971, for the purpose of setting up a National Center for Toxicological Research. FDA, DHEW, and EPA have entered into an agreement to coordinate their activities for the purpose of toxicological studies, and extending the use of the Center to other agencies as determined by a policy board. An interim policy board of six members has been established consisting of three FDA members and three EPA members. A permanent policy board will be established soon.

A copy of the interagency agreement for joint participation in this facility is attached to the end of this report.

NIH: NIEHS has several mechanisms for identifying and addressing largescale environmental questions. One of the successful mechanisms for the identification of research needs is the establishment of ad hoc task forces of experts such as the Task Force on Research Planning in Environmental Health Science which met in the summer of 1969 and published its recommendations in "Man's Health and the Environment-Some Research Needs," U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970. In cooperation with the EPA and other agencies, steps are being taken to periodically bring this report up to date and to redefine research needs as progress is evaluated.

The University Environmental Health Centers developed by the extramural program of NIEHS are a valuable resource for addressing environmental problems by interdisciplinary teams. In each center there is a wide variety of disciplines and at the same time each center is a source of expertise that is unique to that specific center. Through regular conferences between the center directors and NEIHS staffs, this Institute and center directors are aware of programs, problem areas under study, and capabilities within each institution, thus facilitating the identification and evaluation of emerging problems.

Since the establishment of NIEHS it has had full-time staff charged with liaison with the many Federal agencies with environmental responsibilities including EPA and its predecessor agencies. This liaison has resulted in exchange of information and recognition of research needs with those agencies. Recently the Director of NIEHS met with the Assistant Administrator for Research and Monitoring, EPA, to establish mechanisms for coordinating the activities of the two agencies. Currently, formal memoranda of agreement are being prepared. In the meantime, NIEHS is continuing and ad hoc committees concerned with specific problems, for example, the Lead Liaison Committee and the Committee for Biologic Effects of Atmospheric Pollutants. HSMHA: Not applicable to HSMHA.

Question 8. What important questions, if any, are you unable to research adequately within your existing research structure? What are the main hindrances to proceeding with such research?

Answer. FDA: An accelerated and extensive concern relevant to the potential health hazards of environmental chemicals has imposed an unprecedented requirement on regulatory agencies for the assessment of safety and control of such compounds in man's environment. A wide array of such agents of chemical, microbial, or processing origin, to which man may be continuously or intermittently exposed, may either individually or additively impact on his health. General classes of compounds or potential toxic agents to which man may be

exposed may be categorized as food additives, industrial and household chemicals, pesticides, natural toxins (plant, marine, and microbial), cosmetics, drugs, and others still uncharacterized.

Whereas some past assurance of safety has been established for some cases of chemicals used in the food supply, some of these have come under extensive review recently. Current approaches and resources are inadequate to provide an assessment and assurance of the degree of safety currently required. Of special concern is the valuation of potential hazards related to low dose exposures. Better understanding of low level dose-response relationships is needed to evaluate genetic abberations, birth defects, cancer or undifferentiated biochemical-metabolic deviations induced in animals and their relevance to human health. On the basis of these pressing requirements, a National Center for Toxicological Research will be established under the administration of the Food and Drug Administration. Program support in funding and participation by other agencies will provide a collaborative input in the resolution of the problem of safety evaluation in this important area of environmental health.

NIH: Because the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences is a new organization, it has been necessary to establish priorities for its study of the health effects of environmental agents. Consequently, in some instances the study of problems of secondary priority has been postponed until more adequate resources were available. With new intramural research facilities that have just become available and modest increases in personnel and budget, many projects that have been delayed can be undertaken. With anticipated further increases in resources in intramural, collaborative and grants programs, NIEHS expects to be able to undertake adequate research to produce fundamental, theoretical knowledge on the health effects of environmental agents on man. Plans for the development of additional laboratory facilities for the intramural research program on the permanent 509-acre site in North Carolina are in progress.

NSHMA: The recent reorganization has removed all research concerned with pesticides from HSMHA, and there is need for this competence in disease control activities. The limitation is funding.

INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY FOR JOINT PARTICIPATION IN THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR TOXOLOGICAL RESEARCH, PINE BLUFF, ARK.

Purpose and General Policy:

On January 27, 1971, President Nixon announced the establishment of a National Center for Toxicological Research at Pine Bluff, Arkansas. The Food and Drug Administration will administer the facility in a manner that is responsive to the needs of the signatory agencies when programs require research and development suitable to the Center. In addition, other Federal agencies, universities, and industry groups will be invited to participate to the extent that their participaion appears feasible and desirable. Priority is to be given to those programs of concern to the participating agencies, particularly if these programs are jointly planned or supported. An effort will be made to maintain maximum flexibility in the operation and management of the facility to ensure responsiveness to the changing needs of participating agencies.

Principles of Operation:

There will be a Director of the Center with overall authority to operate and manage the Center in accordance with policies and priorities established by a policy board. The Director will be appointed by the Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration after consultation with and approval by the policy board.

The policy board will consist of government employees appointed by the Secre tary of Health, Education, and Welfare, and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, with provision for additional members as needed. All members of the board must have an opportunity to express their opinions and vote on all major decisions.

The Director will be authorized to arrange for operations of all or any portion of the Center by contract with a suitable organization, if after consultation with the policy board, such contract operations seem desirable.

Fiscal and agency audit functions will be the responsibility of the Food and Drug Administration.

Functions of Director:

The Director will have full authority to operate the National Center for Toxicological Research within the guidelines established by the policy board.

The Director shall provide a full-time staff of one or more people acceptable to the policy board to serve as Secretariat to the policy board. The Director will provide managerial supervision and facilities to this staff, but will not interfere in any way with any instructions the Secretariat staff receives from the board. He will assure that such staff as well as the members of the board have full acess, with his knowledge, to all activities of the Center.

Functions of Policy Board:

The policy board will meet at regular intervals, no less than six times per year primarily at the Center, to consider and develop policies, scientific priorities, and related program budgets and such other matters as may affect the scientific excellence of the Center and to assure its flexibility to serve the purposes for which it is established. An interim board is hereby established to serve not beyond September 30, 1971, by which time the permanent policy board will be designated. The membership of the interim board will consist of three voting members appointed by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welware, three voting members appointed by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, one observer from the Office of Science and Technology, and one observer from the Council on Environmental Quality. The six voting members shall elect a chairman from among themselves.

The interim board will proceed immediately to develop a charter and operating procedures to be approved by the Secretary (HEW) and the Administrator (EPA). The charter and operating procedures will specify: the structure and membership of the board. the procedure for appointing members (which procedure shall in any event provide for representation in equal numbers from HEW and EPA), a mechanism for participation of other organizations that should participate in the policy and priority setting, a mechanism for obtaining scentific advice from consultants, the selection of the chairman, the frequency of meetings, the definition of a quorum, the procedures for convening special meetings, and a method of amending the charter and operating procedures.

Matters upon which the policy board will provide advice or guidelines to the Director include:

1. Organization of the Center.

2. Qualifications and selection of key personnel.

3. Overall budget requests and modifications.

4. General plans and overall protocols of major projects.

5. Major building construction and modification requirements.

6. Arrangements for contracts for major activities of the Center.

7. Contingencies which require experimentation and expenditures of contingency funds.

8. Such other matters as the Director or members of the board considers appropriate.

Protection of the scientific integrity of the laboratory is paramount. To this end it should be understood that no regulatory body will be obligated in any way to give any special weight to results of activities of the Center or interpretation of those results; by the same token, the board, rather than individual scientists, will be the source of any official interpretations of Center activities desired by regulatory agencies.

As soon as possible, the interim board will recommend contracts or other activities to the Commissioner of FDA that will facilitate and expedite the establishment of appropriate activities of the Center, making use of the funds being held in reserve for this purpose.

Functions reserved to the Commissioner of FDA:

1. Appointment of the Director of the Center after consultation with an approval by the policy board.

2. Establishment of procedures to assure the legal and fiscal responsibilities of the Center.

Effective date:

This plan of operation will become effective on the first day after it has been signed by both the Secretary of HEW and the Administrator of EPA.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Hon. EDMUND S. MUSKIE,

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY,
Washington, D.C., July 6, 1971.

Chairman, Subcommittee on Air and Pollution, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR MUSKIE: The enclosed memorandum with attachments responds to the questions contained in your letter concerning this Department's environmental science and technology research activities.

As requested, we have provided separately detailed accounts for each agency and bureau of the Department, giving information under each question heading in the same order of agencies or bureaus.

As you may know, we have been in touch with the staff of the Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution concerning these questions and we will be pleased to discuss this subject further should you desire.

Sincerely yours,

Enclosures.

HOLLIS M. DOLE,

Assistant Secretary of the Interior.

Responses to Questions Submitted by Senator Muskie to Secretary of the Interior Morton by Letter dated May 14, 1971, Relating to Environmental Research

Question 1. What is the organizational structure of your environmental research program? How many separate laboratories or installations in your agency are engaged in this research? What is the size and composition of the staff of each?

A. Office of Water Resources Research (OWRR): The OWRR program is administered by a small staff of about 40 persons all headquartered in Washington, D.C.

OWRR performs no in-house research. Under Title I of the Water Resources Research Act, and through annual and matching grants, OWRR supports one State water resources research institute located at a State university in each of the 50 states and in Puerto Rico. Additionally, under Title II, OWRR utilizes contracts and grants to support urgently needed research performed by any competent organization-public, private, academic, and others.

As indicated, the State water resources research institutes supported by the OWRR program are not Federally operated or Federally staffed. A typical State institute is managed by a Director (often part-time) with clerical assistance, and research is performed by persons employed in several of the institute university colleges or departments. An average of about 15-18 part-time professional researchers, and 18-25 student research assistants work on OWRR-supported research projects at each State institute.

B. Office of Coal Research (OCR): The environmental research program of the Office of Coal Research (OCR) includes virtually all of OCR's projects. Accordingly, there is no separate environmental research program in OCR. In Fiscal Year 1971, OCR has 15 ongoing contract research projects, each in a different location. Each contractor usually has other work, and the number of staff assigned by the contractor to its OCR contract varies essentially with the size of the contract; and the scientific skills of such assigned staff correspond to the subject to the contract. There are three Government-owned contractoroperated pilot plant projects.

C. Office of Saline Water: Environmental research sponsored by the Office of Saline Water is carried out through contracts and grants. The work is conducted through our Research Assistant Directorate and our Engineering and Development Assistant Directorate. Although some of the research is conducted at our five Test Facilities, it is done by contractor personnel. There are no Federal laboratories doing this type of work under our jurisdiction.

(1229)

D. Geological Survey: The U.S. Geological Survey attempts to investigate all aspects of earth science within the U.S. and its continental shelves. Therefore, approximately 47% of the present effort is classifiable as environmental research and approximately 43% is in the collection of water data and preparation of topographic maps, which are basic foundation materials for most environmental studies and thus broadly classifiable as environmental research. This work is accomplished in three divisions of the Geological Survey-Geologic, Water Resources, and Topographic and the Earth Resources Observation Systems (EROS) Program. The fourth division, Conservation, has responsibility for the classification and supervision of the public lands, but conducts no environmental research. The work is accomplished in the three main regional centers: Washington, D.C., Denver, Colorado; and Menlo Park, California; each of which has about 2,000 personnel about equally disrtibuted among the three pertinent divisions. Two regional centers of about 1,000 employees each are in Rolla, Missouri (deals primarily with topographic mapping) and in St. Louis, Missouri (deals primarily with water resources). In addition, there are about 295 field offices in the United States, each with 5 to 100 personnel usually restricted to a single division. Because we are dealing with the environment of the earth, most of these centers and offices can be considered "laboratories" in a broad sense.

E. Bureau of Reclamation: The Bureau of Reclamation environmental research program consists of about 15 research investigations, each with a particular objective which is carried out by Reclamation scientists and engineers or through contracts with qualified research organizations. Although the program is Bureauwide in scope, the majority of these investigations are conducted or monitored at our Engineering and Research Center, Denver, Colorado. Research covering the broad field of concern for the impact of water resources development on ecology and water quality is the responsibility of the Division of General Research at the Engineering and Research Center. Other research investigations, such as those involving planning, are under the auspices of 2 or 3 other divisions at the Denver Center.

In the Division of General Research, employees whose work is devoted in whole or in part to environmental research include approximately 10 engineers and scientists covering the fields of botany, plant physiology, zoology, limnology, aquatic biology, ecology, physics, chemistry, and engineering.

F. Bureau of Outdoor Recreation (BOR): BOR has a research design and coordination capability in its Division of Research and Education, which is presently staffed by 3 professionals and 2 nonprofessionals. The Bureau does not operate any laboratories or installations for research.

G. National Park Service: Environmental studies in the National Park Service are coordinated under the Chief Scientist (Assistant Director level), within the following groups: Terrestrial Ecology, Aquatic Ecology, Water Resources and Geology, Natural History Theme and Natural Landmarks Studies, and Ecological Services. The bulk of the program is carried out by scientists who are stationed in the various parks. Attached is a list of locations, staffing, etc.

H. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife: The organizational structure of the Division of Wildlife Research is such that there are 5 major centers, 42 substations and 19 Cooperative Wildlife Research Units located at universities throughout the nation.

I. Bureau of Mines: The mission of the Bureau of Mines is to assure the wise and effective development and use of our Nation's minerals, fuels, and the underground domain in order to preserve the security and enhance the welfare of our people. Our research is directed to developing the means by which current and emerging needs may be met, the real cost of such achievements, and the assess