sured levels with standards set by Environment Canada, because EPA has not set standards for pes­ticides on aquatic life. Atrazine and cyanazine concentrations in a few samples exceeded the Ca­nadian guidelines, but what im­pressed the USGS scientists was the pervasiveness of pesticides in the Mississippi River water: the herbicides atrazine and metola-chor were detected in more than 95% of the samples.

In December 1995 EPA's Gulf of Mexico program looked into this issue and sponsored a con­ference of state and federal scien­tists, agencies, and citizens to dis­cuss agricultural contamination in the Mississippi and the Gulf. "This conference represented the first effort to pull all of the data together," said Wilkins. "So far, EPA ha.s concentrated on a num­ber of limited scientific issues but not tackled policy or manage­ment of the river as it relates to the Gulf " she said. "But as the scientific evidence accumulates citizens' grouDS are anxious to work with the federal and state governments to tackle these is-sues " REBECCA RENNER

R&D FUNDING EPA gets a budget

Seven months into the fiscal year, Congress and the White House agreed to a 1996 EPA budget April 26. HR 3019 appropriated $6.5 billion to the agency, slightly less than last year's post-rescis­sions level of $6.6 billion.

Congress maintained about the same level of science and research funding—$525 million— as it did in 1995. The account includes Office of Research and Development funding.

In broad terms, the appropria­tion included $2.8 billion in grants to states for environmental pro­grams and drinking water and clean water state revolving funds; $1.3 billion for Superfund; and most of the rest for EPA program management.

A major stumbling block in reaching agreement was over­come when Republicans dropped several environmental riders and gave the president authority to suspend others.

Endocrine disruptor research planned by White House, agencies, industry Over the next year, federal agen­cies, industry associations, the White House, and the National Research Council will lay out ex­tensive research strategies to help understand the threat from hor­mone-related toxic compounds in the environment. Triggering the search is growing concern about studies showing the potential of some 50 chemical compounds to disrupt the hormonal systems of wildlife and fears that these com­pounds may have similar effects on humans {ES&T,pril 1996 168A).

A White House task force is taking the threat seriously and plans to complete an inventory this summer of all federally funded endocrine-disruptor-re-lated research. The inventory will provide a research baseline and identify data gaps. Then the task force will move on to fashion a coordinated federal research strategy, according to officials with the National Science and Technology Council's Committee on Environmental and Natural Resources (CENR) who are orga­nizing the effort

Explaining the White House's interest in endocrine-disrupting chemicals, a staff member with CENR noted the "swirling contro­versy" over the veracity of the hy­pothesis in the scientific commu­nity. "There are clearly effects at high exposure from these chemi­cals and suggestive studies that low levels could be causing im­pacts. But there are also lots of confounders related to the ob­served impact. There is a serious research need to find out if the alleged decrease in sperm counts and quality as well as if the in­creases in testicular breast and prostate cancers are real or if they are reflective of our better abili­ties to detect these diseases "

The inventory and plan are being put together by a working group of 26 government scientists who represent a half-dozen key agencies with an interest in the environment or health. White House officials estimate the fed­eral government spends some $20 million to $30 million yearly on research directly focused on endocrine disruptors. But they

note the amount could easily be as high as $500 million if research that indirectly examines endo­crine disruption is figured in. In all, the federal government spends $5 billion to $6 billion on environmental and natural re­source research, the officials said.

The working group, chaired by Lawrence W. Reiter, director of EPA's National Health and Envi­ronmental Effects Research Labo­ratory, intends to have a national research plan completed by the

end of the year. A White House official also opened the door to including industry research projects when setting a federal strategy but added, "Our first task is to get the federal house in or­der." The group is expected to closely consider recommenda­tions from a soon-to-be pub­lished report from EPA national workshops (see box).

EPA is also working on its own internal strategy to guide endo­crine disruptor research over the next three to five years, according to Robert Kavlock, director of EPA's Reproductive Toxicology Department. The strategy will be completed this summer and then reviewed by EPA's Science Advi­sory Board. It will lay out how EPA will distribute its $3.5 million extramural and $1.5 million inter­nal research grant program in this area Kavlock expects the amount to double next year as EPA gets a firmer handle on research needs

The strategy has identified 14 major issues that must be ex­plored, Kavlock said, particularly dose-response and exposure re­search. Key areas, according to Kavlock, include determining if mixed endocrine-disrupting chemicals are additive when working through the same cellu­lar receptor; examination of mo-

From the National Research Council to the chemical industry, researchers tailor multiyear agendas.

2 4 2 A • VOL. 30, NO. 6, 1996 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / NEWS