washington

Three years after the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) revamped its network of research laboratories, the labs are still struggling with the change, says the agency's Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC).

Of particular concern is the scientific workforce, which it says is stretched thin and in some cases unsuited to its new tasks.

BOSC, set up in 1996 to advise EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD) on its programmes and research agenda, relied mainly on written self-assessments by laboratory managers together with brief site visits by board members for its report.

Despite the speed with which BOSC worked — the review took only a few months — EPA science managers who have read drafts say they are impressed with its perceptive analysis. The final report goes to Congress and ORD this week.

BOSC looked at ORD's three national laboratories, each with dispersed divisions, and its two Washington-based ‘national centres’: the National Center for Environmental Research and Quality Assurance (NCERQA) and the National Center for Environmental Assessment. All are part of ORD, which conducts more than 80 per cent of EPA's research and has a budget of $570 million this year.

Of the three main laboratories, the National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory (NHEERL)has adapted best to ORD's new emphasis on risk-based research, increased extramural grants and more rigorous peer review.

But reorganization has left the National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL) short of scientific talent. In five years, it has lost half its budget, 28 per cent of employees and 45 per cent of contract researchers.

Now, says BOSC, the laboratory is “not self-sufficient in personnel and/or funding to carry out many of the large-scale research programs that fall under its mandate”. Morale at the NHEERL improved after the reorganization; at NERL it “has not created any scientific excitement” and has not changed research methods.

Also facing manpower problems is the National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) in Cincinnati, Ohio, which focuses on environmental cleanup and pollution prevention. The laboratory has skilled environmental engineers, says BOSC, but lacks many other professionals, from economists to microbiologists to behavioural scientists, needed for a broader role in risk assessment and management.

In recent congressional testimony, BOSC's chairman, Costel Denson, the University of Delaware's vice provost for research, said EPA needs “an orderly plan and program to enhance or redirect the skills of many of the scientists in ORD”.

ORD managers recognize the need for new blood. The average age of its almost 2,000 employees is 48, and many are expected to retire in the next few years. EPA asked the White House budget office for money to hire 200 postdoctoral researchers in 1999, but was granted enough for only 50.

Many EPA researchers feel hampered in collaborating with other scientists, the BOSC report says. They lack funds to attend meetings and believe — mistakenly, say ORD managers — that conflict-of-interest rules prevent them from interacting with outside scientists supported by EPA research grants.

Most of these grants are administered by the NCERQA under its Science to Achieve Results (STAR) initiative, which has grown in a few years from $20 million to a $100 million-a-year programme. This rapid growth, although considered positive, has taken its toll on NCERQA staff.

Grant administrators say workloads have increased so much that “they are now unable to dedicate the desired level of attention to the technical content of the research”, the BOSC report says. NCERQA plans its own review of STAR this year.

But more than reviews, ORD needs money, says the agency's Research Strategies Advisory Committee. In an April report to the EPA administrator, Carol Browner, it pointed out that ORD's 1999 budget request was the lowest of the decade when adjusted for inflation. This comes as several major research projects are starting, including studies of particulate matter, endocrine disruptors, and microbial pathogens in drinking water.