UC Toxic Substances Research and Teaching Program
Public Advisory Committee Fall Meeting
Air Resources Board Building, Sacramento, CA
Thursday, October 8, 1998
Present:
- Jim Stratton, Chair, Dept. of Health Services
Syed Ali, CA Water Resources Control Board
Jim Allen, Dept. of Toxic Substances Control
Gerry Bemis (for Gordon Shremp), California Energy Commission
Steve Book, Dept. of Health Services
Mark DeSaulnier, Supervisor, Contra Costa County
Kean Goh, Dept. of Pesticide Regulation
Jim Hunt, Associate Director, TSR&TP
Charles Lapin, ARCO
Jerry Last, Director, TSR&TP
Niall Mateer, UCOP Academic Affairs
William Orr, CA Integrated Waste Management Board
Mike Paparian, Sierra Club
Lisa Stevenson, Program Manager, TSR&TP
Leslie Stewart, League of Women Voters
Mika Pringle Tolson, Program Coordinator, TSR&TP
William Vance, CA Environmental Protection Agency
Not Present:
- Marc Aarens, UCOP
June Andersen, IBM Environmental Programs
Don Lassiter, Environmental & Occupational Health
Winona Victory, US Environmental Protection Agency
Arthur Winer, Associate Director, TSR&TP
The meeting was brought to order at 10:07am. The minutes from the Spring 1998 meeting were reviewed and Jerry Last reminded the committee that the minutes from Fall 1997 were already up on the TSR&TP website, and that the Spring 98 minutes would also go up on the web for everyone to review before approving. Leslie Stewart asked for a correction on page 3; Jim Stratton then motioned to approve the minutes, and Steve Book seconded the motion. All were in favor and none opposed.
Jerry Last began the discussion on research needs. He referred to the list from the spring meeting and the grants awarded for 1998-99 that were in each area. Jim Stratton asked why there weren't any grants funded in the area of genetics research. Last answered that the TSR&TP Executive Committee has had extensive discussions about it, but that we haven't received any outstanding proposals in that area as yet. He announced the possibility of co-sponsoring a workshop with Susanne Huttner, Director of the UC Biotechnology Program at UC Berkeley. Last also noted that the TSR&TP has tried to recruit Executive Committee members in the genetics field. Last then discussed the general call for proposals. Stratton asked about sensitive populations to particular toxics and how public policy makers are going to deal with the issue. Last said that he and Huttner had also discussed a joint RFP for that subject, but that UC was probably not yet able to deal with the issue. Leslie Stewart asked if we could do something at the spring symposium on genetics and toxicology. The committee agreed it was a good idea and Last stated that he would attempt to do so. Stratton questioned the timeliness of the Advisory Committee’s recommendations in the spring. Last stated that there is still a chance to influence the Executive Committee’s discussion and have the members influence researchers on their campuses. A discussion began on the 1998-99 funded grants and policy research. Last agreed that there was still a problem attracting those proposals. He mentioned the funding for Harvey Molotch’s public policy group over the past few years and a fellowship awarded to UCD graduate student Whitney Leeman. Bill Vance requested a copy of her proposal and Last agreed to provide it, pending Ms. Leeman’s approval. Bill Orr asked about the relationship between the areas in which proposals are received and the areas that are funded. Last offered to do an analysis of the incoming proposals for next year and share it with the committee. Niall Mateer inquired about the risk assessment research priority and whether the new program at UCB under Bill Kastenberg would subsume this category. At Jim Hunt’s request, Last explained that Kastenberg's risk assessment program resulted from his response to a call from UCOP to Multi-campus Research Units (MRUs) for supplemental funding to develop new programs. Last hopes that there will be many interactions with the new program under Kastenberg, but he will happily pass on risk assessment to this new center, because the TSR&TP would not be able to fund a long term program in this area.
Jerry Last began the Report from the Director’s Office. The Director’s Office Review is an independent review by a team who is not currently associated with the TSR&TP, but have been in the past. He invited the committee to provide their input on the process. Harry Ettinger of Los Alamos National Laboratory is the chair of the review committee, and he can be contacted via email at hettinger@lanl.gov. The committee was also encouraged to contact Mika Tolson in the TSR&TP Director's Office for more information. The Lead Campus Reviews were discussed next. The two older programs were reviewed first: The Health Effects Program passed with flying colors, but the review team decided that the current UCLA Engineering Program will be recompeted. The new competition will be in 1999 and the RFP for the New Lead Campus Program will be widely distributed. Last said he hopes to receive a proposal on genetics and the human genome project. The two newer lead campus programs, Coastal Toxicology (mainly UCSB) and Ecotoxicology (UCD), received positive reviews. The purpose of the new lead campus competition is for seed funding and not for endowing long-term research. Orr suggested that there may be some matching opportunities with state agencies. Last noted that there are different views of what is good research for UC and for the agencies. If the research matches agency needs, that is a plus, but it cannot be a goal of a lead campus program. Risk Assessment Activities were discussed. Last noted that the UCB program under Kastenberg was mentioned earlier, and he asked Niall Mateer to speak about the risk assessment reviews for Cal EPA. Mateer referred to SB 1320 (Sher bill) and the handout in the meeting packet. UC was asked to review some of Cal EPA's risk assessments. Mateer explained the process and commented that there were some initial difficulties in meshing the two very different administrative structures, but that the program was a success and he hopes it will continue in the future. Last ended the office report with an invitation to all members to attend the TSR&TP's 12th Annual Research Symposium in Santa Barbara on April 9-10, 1999.
Niall Mateer gave the UC Office of the President update. There was no information on the budget, except to say that funding is stable. A blend of environment and agriculture, engineering, social sciences and humanities will be the research focus of the 10th campus at Merced. UCOP hopes that a research anchor will be established prior to the opening of the new campus in 2005. If the November bond measure passes, the search will begin for a new chancellor. Steve Book inquired about the driving time between Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) and Merced and was told it is between 45 minutes and 1 hour. Mateer commented that LLNL is UC’s closest facility. Charles Lapin asked whether UC was looking at other campuses and how they were formed. Mateer answered that they have looked at UCSC, UCI and UCSD.
Jim Stratton welcomed Mark DeSaulnier, Contra Costa County Supervisor, to the committee as the newest member and asked him to talk about his interest in environmental issues. DeSaulnier mentioned his areas of interest: stationary sources of pollution, oil refineries in Contra Costa County, the growth issue in the Bay Area and land use discussions. In addition to serving as county supervisor, DeSaulnier said he is also a representative for the Air Resources Board (ARB), and he works closely with Leslie Stewart, another TSR&TP Advisory Committtee member, on various issues.
The presentations and discussion on MTBE followed. Gerry Bemis, from the California Energy Commission (CEC) spoke first. The CEC was asked to do a report on MTBE, looking at alternatives and short-term, mid-term and long-term consequences. The short-term effect of a ban on MTBE could be a 40-50% decrease in the fuel supply. Stratton asked if the CEC was involved with the MTBE-free gas being sold in the Bay Area. Bemis stated that the CEC supports removing the requirement for oxygenates, but they were not specifically involved. Bemis also noted that that report and another on the issue of compliance with underground storage tanks would be on the web at www.energy.ca.gov/mtbe after October 23rd. Steve Book passed out and reviewed a handout on the chronology of MTBE in drinking water. Book said all of the information was on the web at www.dhs.ca.gov/ps/ddwem/chemicals/MTBE/mtbeindex.htm< font face="Times">. He gave an overview of the relevant studies on MTBE, current legislation and water program updates. Bill Vance passed out a handout on the chronology of events for MTBE; he reviewed the chronology and pointed out that some decisions will fall on the new Governor early in his term of office. Jerry Last discussed the UC report on MTBE. There will be 2 reports: the Executive Summary and Recommendations (a readable report for the legislature), and the archival research reports. The report explicitly looks at the benefits & cost of MTBE and other alternatives. The intent is to give information rather than a prescribed plan of action. Once the report goes to the Governor’s agent, UC will be out of the loop. The UC report is expected to be finished in the second week of November. Lapin asked how the readable report will be constructed. Last stated that it will touch on every aspect of the archival volumes and be constructed in a logical fashion to address Senator Mountjoy’s SB521 bill. As soon as it is delivered to the Governor, the Executive Summary will be available on the TSR&TP web site at http://tsrtp.ucdavis.edu. Mike Paparian asked who will formulate the recommendations. Last said that all investigators are trying to reach a consensus and the report is from the entire group of UC researchers. If there is a disagreement, then options will be presented. Last commented that he is pleasantly surprised with the quality of the investigators' research and their commitment to work together on the report.
The individual discussions on Public Interest Sector Reports began with Mike Paparian of the Sierra Club. Paparian stated that Governor Wilson vetoed the continuation of the RSU program and saying that the work was done, but Paparian disagrees. That is something to watch over the future and there may be some funds to finish it. Paparian reported that the children’s environmental health bill (AB278) was also vetoed. Leslie Stewart spoke about the League of Women Voters. Stewart elaborated on AB278. Local impacts were investigated by an environmental working group from San Francisco in a report called "School Haze". The report relates releases of emissions and school site lo cations. They drew a mile radius around emission sources and pinpointed if schools were within those areas. They released a list of the worst schools by types of emissions, but they did not check with the EPA and their data was faulty - it listed schools that weren't near emission sources and didn't list schools that were. It was clearly illustrated that the EPA data cannot be used in this way, and the working group concluded that we need better reporting systems. AB278 was written to address the problem, but it has been vetoed. Stewart then spoke about mixing toxics and multiple chemical sensitivities. Combinations of toxics, like air quality problems, may come from the Bay Area where they are not toxic, mix with things in the Valley and subsequently become toxic. Communication is difficult, and state and local agencies need to work together more to help solve the problem. Stratton asked about the League’s positions on the upcoming election’s ballot measures. Stewart stated that the League took a neutral position on Prop 7 (tax credits for air quality) and supports Prop 9 (public utilities deregulation).
The group broke for lunch at 12:10pm and reconvened at 12:45pm with the Private Sector Report by Charles Lapin from ARCO. Lapin passed around 2 handouts: Using Stakeholder Processes, and High Production Volume Chemical Testing. With standardized toxicity tests you get unplanned results. This will be a fertile ground for future research and he urged the TSR&TP to move into the policy arena. UC should address the challenges stated on page 2,4 & 5 in the report. Lapin expressed concern that large companies are not employing graduates from UC. Last said that the TSRTP’s emphasis was more on research than teaching and mentioned his study on the economic impact of TSR&TP funding on trainee career paths, the results of which will be out in 6-9 months.
The Government Updates began with Mark DeSaulnier, the Contra Costa County Supervisor. DeSaulnier stated that Contra Costa County has been unsuccessful in devising an ordinance to create buffers between industry and residences. An ordinance which tied land use permit requirements to risk was replaced by the Good Neighbor ordinance, which also required permits for major maintenance projects at facilities. (Note: This ordinance was replaced in December by an Industrial Safety Ordinance which did not include the maintenance permits.) Jim Stratton said it was valuable to have local government input on the committee and asked how UC can help with local government problems. DeSaulnier stressed the problems with communicating with local refineries on how the local government works. UC could be more of a resource for planning, land decisions and technical issues. Stratton then asked Last what advice TSR&TP needs from local government. Last answered that they could assist with formulating questions and identifying emerging issues. There are faculty who want to be involved in local issues. Stratton inquired if TSR&TP could get local and government officials together with UC personnel to discuss how they can help each other. DeSaulnier said he wants to look into at-risk school populations in congested areas and compare air quality from mobile sources to stationary sources. Stratton suggested that the TSR&TP create an expertise directory. DeSaulnier agreed that this would be helpful.
The federal updates began with Jim Hunt speaking on behalf of Winona Victery from US EPA. Hunt relayed Victery’s concerns about risk assessment and conflicts between federal and state government. Victery wondered if TSR&TP could get involved to help. Bill Vance stated that Cal EPA is trying to coordinate with US EPA risk assessments so there is no duplication between agencies. Jerry Last concluded that he does not see a role for UC except for peer review. Hunt continued with Victery’s update with her view of the major issues for 1999: Persistent Bio-accumulative Toxics (PBT) — toxics that are concentrated in fat - , and MTBE, especially for drinking water in wells in Lake Tahoe. The state updates began with Syed Ali from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Ali referred to a handout distributed to the AC on the Coastal Water Quality Monitoring Plan submitted to Cal EPA. He will send copies of the plan to anyone who requests it. Ali continued with a few words on the Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program. Hot spots on the coast, bays, and estuaries were identified. SWRCB is in the process of preparing a cleanup plan to send to the legislature. Copies of the report can be made available. Ali mentioned four other publications that are available and may be of interest to the committee. Jim Allen from Dept. of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) began by referring to his handouts. 1) Flyer updating SB14 — Source Reduction Planning and Reporting, 2) Fact sheet on new legislation — SB1916, and 3) a Publications list on pollution prevention documents available from DTSC. Allen also has three other reports available by request: 1) Chemicals and Allied Products Industry, 2) Pollution Prevention for Hospitals, and 3) Assessment of Petroleum Industry Hazardous Waste Source Reduction. Steve Book from Dept. of Health Services (DHS) stated that perchlorate is a chemical of interest and that more wells are closed because of perchlorate contamination than from MTBE. Book asked if there was a peer review opportunity for UC. Last answered that UC did not have much interest, but that the state agencies may. Kean Goh gave his report from Dept. of Pesticide Regulation (DPR). The DPR has moved: their new address is 830 K Street. Goh referred to his handouts: 1) A report on well monitoring "Sampling for Pesticide Residues in California Well Water — 1997 Update of the Well Inventory Database", 2) Air monitoring to test pesticides used in agriculture around the City of Lompoc - this is a multiyear study conducted in collaboration with US EPA, ARB, UC, and citizens of Lompoc to determine the potential risk of exposure to pesticides in air; and 3) Herbicide monitoring in the Klamath River Watershed, a three-year surface water and plant monitoring project initiated by DPR and funded by US EPA. Bill Orr from the Integrated Waste Management Board (IWMB) continued the state updates by speaking about IWMB’s priority areas: compost facilities, odor control, bioemissions, end-uses of compost and mulch, and the grass recycling campaign — mulching instead of removing mowed grass. The IWMB has a dual mission of environmental protection and waste reduction. There will be a summit in January of 1999, the 21st Century Initiative, to discuss what direction IWMB should go after these goals are achieved. And finally, Bill Vance spoke about the highlights at ARB, which is considering diesel exhaust as a particulate toxin, and OEHHA, which is organizing a 2-day conference entitled "Emerging Environmental Challenges" to be held in June of 1999. Some of the topics of discussion will be sewage problems - medicines and other agents that are not removed by treatment processes and therefore are being widely distributed, and impacts of dioxins on fish and finding the sources of these dioxins.
The group discussed the next meeting and agreed on the location of Sacramento, and that the spring agenda should include another update on MTBE. The meeting adjourned at 2pm.
| Join
the TSR&TP Mailing List |
Comments |
Please send corrections to the TSR&TP Webmaster