STATEMENT OF DR. STEPHEN J. GAGE, ACTING ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, ACCOMPANIED BY DELBERT BARTH, DAA FOR HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS, OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Dr. GAGE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. S. I would like to introduce my colleague, Dr. Delbert Barth, DAA for Health and Ecological Effects within ORD. Dr. Barth and I will handle together any questions that you may have at the conclusion of my statement. You do have a written version of the statement, as you indicated, and I would like that submitted for the record. Mr. BREAUX. Without objection, the entire statement will be made to matter of the record. [The following was received for the record.:] STATEMENT OF DR. STEPHEN Gage, Acting Assistant Administrator for RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, OFFICE of Research and DevelopmENT, U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure to appear before this committee to testify on the proposed bill dealing with marine pollution research and development. The bill recognizes that there is need to establish a comprehensive Federal program of marine environmental research and development, particularly with regard to the introduction, fate, and effects of petroleum, sewage sludge, and other pollutants. The proposed legislation also acknowledges that pollution in the marine environment is expected to increase in the future, largely due to the need to import large quantities of petroleum and petroleum products from abroad. The Legislation would designate the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) as the lead Federal agency for oil and marine pollution environmental research and development to be carried out through close coordination among NOAA, EPA and the Department of the Interior (DOI). The bill calls for a 5-year plan which would include a detailed inventory of on-going Federal programs in this area including monitoring and general research on marine ecosystems. Such a plan will also enumerate the goals and estimated costs of each Federal program, and provide a list of actions taken to fully coordinate interagency efforts. The intent of the bill is to eliminate duplication. We recognize this need and strongly support those efforts which are aimed at providing a cohesive, coordinated Federal program of marine protection and research. Through formal agreements as well as through informal cooperative efforts, EPA has worked with NOAA in a number of research areas. For example, the baseline research being managed by NOAA for the Bureau of Land Management provided data which helped form the basis for our objection (under section 309 of the Clean Air Act) to specific lease-sales inthe Northeast Gulf of Alaska. In this instance, NOAA studies identified concerns (active fault areas, unconsolidated sediments, fish nursery and spawning areas, etc.) which were helpful in making our case that such lease-sales should be considered by DOI only after NOAA's studies were completed and a sufficiency of baseline data acquired. We work closely with NOAA in other areas. We are currently, under our energy pass-through program, funding a number of NOAA studies including an actual study of a Gulf of Mexico oil field where the effects of energy development are being examined. The NOAA studies will aid us specifically with information needed for criteria development and will give us some idea of what to expect from increased outer continential shelf development. NOAA's offshore capability is this instance has helped supply our specific need for regulatory data. We recognize that NOAA has built a solid base of scientific capability, especially in the offshore marine area, and we have often been the beneficiary of such expertise and competence. These capabilities have been developed, for the most part, in response to NOAA's increasing legislative responsibilities. Catastrophies like the Argo-Merchant spill tend to dramatize marine pollution from oil tanker accidents. While it is generally agreed that oil pollution in the marine environment will increase, it is a fact that the largest fraction of oil contamination reaching the marine environment comes from land sources through our rivers. In general, most marine pollution derives from sources onshore. A wide variety of pollutants-pesticides, industrial chemicals, metallic wastes, thermal discharges, municipal sludge, etc.-find their way into the oceans, inadvertently or intentionally. EPA is concerned with all anthropogenic marine pollutants because of the Agency's several legislative mandates to regulate and control such pollution before it enters the natural environment. To be specific, EPA must respond to the congressional mandates embodied in the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, and the new Toxic Substances Control Act. Consequently, EPA's Officer of Research and Development (ORD) and its associated research laboratories have developed substantial expertise in the process of supporting the Agency's regulatory efforts. Specifically regarding marine regulatory research, ORD is currently conduting numerous research activities in response to provisions of the four Acts previously identified. A detailed enumeration of research objectives as well as the associated manpower and funding data has been supplied for your information in the attached appendix. I must emphasize that EPA's research efforts are designed to substantiate the regulatory approach which EPA must follow in carrying out its mission. Research which is tailored to support regulatory activities requires a philosophy and focus significantly different from that which is oriented toward solely advancing scientific understanding. Our programs do not emphasize so-called “basic” research, although many of our efforts do add substantially to a more fundamental comprehension of environmental processes and effects. It is critical that regulatory agencies, such as EPA, not be encumbered by requirements which would interfere with the planning and implementation of research which must be performed to support their regulatory missions. EPA, for example, needs to know more than the simple fact that a substance such as arsenic is toxic, in order to write a permit under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System. In most instances, we must be able to quantify the health and ecological effects of exposure to specific substances at different concentrations. Our current efforts in the marine area are designed to provide such critical information. As I mentioned earlier, other Federal agencies have contributed information and expertise to our regulatory effort. We anticipate this will continue. EPA supports the general intent of the bill which we are considering today. In my experience, regulatory agencies rarely suffer from excessive coordination. Of equal importance are cooperation and communication at all levels. As a matter of fact, my staff is convening today the first sessions of a major conference on estuarine research sponsored by six Federal agencies, Symposia such as this are an important mechanism for improving coordination, coopertion and communication. We must, however, raise two questions on the proposed legislation. The first relates to section 4(b) which requires the Administrator of NOAA to "recommend priorities for the Federal program of environmental research and development related to marine pollution". While that section also requires coordination with EPA and other organizations, we do not feel that the Administrator of NOAA can set priorities for EPA's research in support EPA's regulations. EPA could certainly include its long-term marine pollution research within such a priority ranking, but the priorities for the Agency's marine research in support of regulation are established by the Congressional mandates identified earlier. The second question relates to possible overlapping mandates for marine pollution research coordination. The proposed bill essentially assigns such a responsibility to NOAA in sections 4(a) and 4(c). On the other hand, other legislation now being considered by the Congress, would also require the Administrator of EPA to identify all Federal environmental research and to recommend measures, including legislation, to assure coordination of these efforts. Further, this bill would require the Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality to study environmental research coordination and to make appropriate recommendations. If the aforementioned legislation and H.R. 8823 were both enacted, then the problems of overlapping and possibly conflicting mandates would still exist. In view of the foregoing we believe that this legislation is premature at this time. As an immediate alternative, improved efforts for coordination could be initiated immediately under the Federal Coordinating Committee on Science, Engineering and Technology (FCCSET). All Federal marine research efforts could be reviewed and coordinated under the auspices of FCCSET. Meanwhile, the President's Reorganization Task Force is currently studying all Federal problems dealing with natural resources and the environment with an eye toward possible realignment of the various Agency responsibilities. Therefore, the administration does not currently support legislation of this type. Mr. Chairman, I would like to close by saying that the EPA marine laboratories are currently at the state-or-the-art on determining the impact of pollutants on the marine environment. This is the result of the in-house expertise which has been developed over many years, and also due to professional associations established and maintained with marine scientists outside the government. With a properly implemented Federal marine research program, we are optimistic that solutions to many current pollution problems may be well within our grasp. EPA will continue to interact with sister agencies through interagency agreements, workshops, symposia, and other cooperative efforts. We are encouraged by your recognition of the need for improved coordination and cooperation in marine pollution research and development. We share your concern. We would be pleased to assist the Committee in any way possible. Thank You Mr. Chairman. I will be glad to answer any questions. MARINE AND ESTUARINE RESEARCH OF THE OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT Marine and estuarine research is conducted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development (OR&D) at laboratories located at Corvallis, Oregon, Gulf Breeze, Florida and Narragansett, Rhode Island. Complementing the studies conducted at the laboratories, grants and contracts are sponsored by OR&D at colleges and universities throughout the United States. The research projects conducted and sponsored by the laboratories are assembled below according to the following eight topics: A. Ocean Disposal B. Oil and Petrochemicals C. Pesticides D. Carcinogens E. Thermal pollution F. Anti-biofouling agents G. Complex wastes H. Ecosystem dynamics Each research objective is identified by title and the sponsoring Environmental Research Laboratory: Corvallis (CERL), Gulf Breeze (GBERL), Narragansett (NERL) and the Health Effects Research Laboratory (HERL) at Cincinnati. Funding is identified as in-house (I.H.) or extramural (Extra.) within the fiscal year budgets of FY 76 and FY 77. A-1 A-2 A-3 OCEAN DISPOSAL TITLE: Development of procedures and guidelines for assessing the Determine the mobilization of metals, H2S, toxic organics, and biostimulants as influenced by partical size, sediment compaction, and degree of dispersion in dredging and discharge modes. The rate of mobilization is hypothesized as being mediated by biochemical processes involved in stabilization of organic materials, and this rate mediating process needs to be quantified to assess acceptable levels for disposal practices. Develop alternative criteria for determining the upland edge of wetlands and assess potential levels of environmental protection of these different criteria. TITLE: Development and validation of predictive models which LABORATORY: CERL FY 76 FUNDING ($K): 24 I. H. MANPOWER: (M-Y): 0.8 FY 77 FUNDING ($K): 31.9 L. H. OBJECTIVES: Periodically update the ocean outfall analysis manual describing advances in predicting the physical, chemical, and biological mechanisms in nature which influence the fate of pollutants discharged from pipelines and bays. Emphasis is placed on describing water quality concentrations of pollutants and the time-varying nature of these concentrations so that assessments of biological effects can be made. Conduct research to improve the characterization of waste materials in terms that are appropriate for use in the models, and to improve the mathematical terms when new mechanisms of behavior are elucidated. |