Public
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF
Editorials Health February 1979 Volume 69, Number 2
EDITOR Alfred Yankauer, MD, MPH EDITORIAL BOARD Michel A. Ibrahim, MD, PhD (1980), Chairperson Ruth B. Galanter, MCP (1980) George E. Hardy, Jr., MD, MPH (1981) David Hayes-Bautista, PhD (1981) C. C. Johnson, Jr., MSCE (1980) Selma J. Mushkin, PhD (1981) George M. Owen, MD (1979) Doris Roberts, PhD, MPH (1980) Pauline 0. Roberts, MD, MPH (1979) Ruth Roemer, JD (1981) Sam Shapiro (1979) Robert Sigmond (1979) Jeannette J. Simmons, MPH, DSc (1981) David H. Wegman, MD, MSOH (1979) Robert J. Weiss, MD (1980)
STAFF William H. McBeath, MD, MPH Executive Director/Managing Editor Allen J. Seeber Director of Publications Doyne Bailey Assistant Managing Editor Deborah Watkins Production Editor Monica Pogue Administrative Assistant Ann Profozich
Classified Advertising CONTRIBUTING EDITORS William J. Curran, JD, SMHyg Public Health and the Law Barbara G. Rosenkrantz, PhD Public Health Then and Now Jean Conelley, MLS Book Section
Established 1911
Training and Education of Environmental Health Manpower: An EPA Perspective In commenting on the survey by Moeller, Pahl, and Hammond in this issue of the Journal,' I will limit my comments on this subject to an outline of what is, in my opinion, the appropriate role of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in supporting, stimulating, and encouraging the higher education and training of professional environmental pollution control practitioners. The appropriate federal role in the higher education and training of environmental health researchers is a broader and more complex question, involving a variety of federal agencies, policies, and programs, deserving of very serious consideration by those primarily responsible for, interested in, and knowledgeable about it. I apply the term environmental pollution control practitioner primarily to those professional engineers, applied scientists, and technologists who specialize in one or more of the following phases of pollution measurement, analysis, and control technology: design, development, construction, fabrication, operations, maintenance, and evaluation. Because environmental pollution control is a very broad and diverse field in terms of types of sources, media, control technology, social and economic impact, and public policy, there is great diversity among pollution control professionals in place and type of employment, functional specialization, level of responsibility, and, of course, professional education and training. Many excellent pollution control practitioners have only a baccalaureate degree, usually in engineering. The trend, however, is toward a master's degree requirement for full professional standing. In some of the applied science specialties, the PhD is required. In 1977, the National Academy of Sciences issued its comprehensive report, Manpowi,er for Env,ironmental Pollution Control,2 which prescribed a major role for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in ensuring an adequate supply of welltrained environmental professionals to meet the nation's long-term needs. This report contains a number of findings, conclusions, and recommendations which call for a re-evaluation of EPA policy on environmental workforce development generally, and professional training in particular. It now appears that to the extent that the NAS recommendations fall within the Agency's overall policy goals and resource limits, they probably will be translated into specific action plans for implementation by FY 1980 at the latest. Those NAS recommendations which call for changes in Agency policy are now being examined in depth by the Agency's Environmental Workforce Coordinating Committee. This body will soon develop and propose action recommendations and a comprehensive Agency policy for review by EPA's top management.
One of the values of the NAS report is that it does place the problem of the need for the education and training of environmental pollution control personnel in perspective, a necessary condition if EPA is to develop an appropriate policy on the matter: AJPH February 1979, Vol. 69, No. 2
EDITORIALS "The Committee concludes that a large-scale or general shortage of pollution control manpower is not now apparent or likely to develop in the near future . . . It is possible, however, that shortages will occur in selected, specialized occupations. Also, it is apparent that the quality of the current environmental work force could be upgraded through supplemental training and improvements in the educational process."2
The report further states: "Examination of degree projections over the next decade reveals that the educational system normally will produce enough scientists and engineers overall to meet the nation's requirements. At the same time, more good quality supplemental pollution control education will be needed."2 Clearly, the Environmental Protection Agency has a major interest in assuring an adequate supply of well-trained
professional pollution control specialists. Significant shortages of such specialists over prolonged periods would inevitably and seriously impede efforts to attain environmental quality standards through improved design and performance of pollution control systems, facilities, and equipment. There are at least three major actions which EPA should take to as§ure an adequate supply of professional pollution control specialists: 1. Encourage, stimulate, and support a strong leadership role by state environmental protection agencies in the higher education and training of professional environmental pollution control personnel. In many States the university system presently has the in-house capability to meet most of the intrastate demand for engineers, applied scientists, and technologists qualified for entry-level employment in the field of environmental pollution control. This university system capability could be greatly enhanced and better utilized if state environmental agencies would provide the following services to the university system: a. Regularly assess the intrastate demand for professionally trained environmental pollution control specialists and communicate such assessments to university program planners and directors; b. Provide regular advice and consultation to universities on their pollution control curricula design and on the conduct of specialized training programs using such curricula; c. Actively recruit and employ environmental engineering, science, and technology students enrolled in cooperative education and work/study programs and provide relevant on-the-job training to such students; d. Contract with universities to utilize their environmental training staffs and facilities to meet the identified short-term technical training needs of environmental pollution control personnel already employed. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency should provide the necessary encouragement, stimulation, and support for such a state agency leadership role through some form of special technical and financial assistance to such agencies. It may even be necessary and desirable for EPA to require state agencies to submit an annual Education and Training
AJPH February 1979, Vol. 69, No. 2
Support Plan as a condition for continued program grant support. 2. Provide direct continuing technical and financial support to a select group of universities for the development and conduct of professional level specialized training programs in environmental pollution control. The universities selected for this assistance should be major centers of excellence in engineering, science, and technology generally, and should be geographically distributed so that every region in the country would have at least one such institution. These training programs should be designed to meet regional and national needs for highly specialized training which individual state programs alone cannot pe expected to provide for reasons of economic efficiency or technical capability. In addition to grants for long-term support, EPA should use contracts and cooperative agreements with these institutions to accomplish mission-oriented training objectives ihvolving state and local agency personnel and industry personnel engaged in pollution control. The number of these centers of excellence to be supported by EPA should probably range from 20 to 30 institutions at a minimum average annual support level of about $100,000 each. 3. Provide highly specialized and advanced professional training directly to employees of state and local environmental agencies, federal agencies, private industry, educational institutions, and other appropriate organizations to meet critical mission-oriented training needs which state, regional, and national extramural training programs and institutions cannot reasonably be expected to meet for reasons of economic efficiency, timeliness, and necessary technical capability. The Agency should generally maintain, but some program areas expand, its in-house direct training capability. In conclusion, the NAS Report observed that "'there are no hard-and-fast solutions to the problems involved in maintaining a balance between manpower supply and demand for environmental pollution abatement and control."2 I believe, however, that nearly everyone would agree that among all federal agencies, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ought to be the most concerned with finding a solution to the problem.
ROBERT C. CLUSTER, MA Address reprint requests to Robert C. Cluster, MA; Manpower Development Specialist, NatiQnal Workforce Development Staff, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460. The opinions expressed in this communication are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
REFERENCES 1. Moeller DW, Pahl HB and Hammond PB: Trends in university environmental health research and training. Am J Public Health 60:125-129, 1979. 2. National Academy of Sciences, Environmental Manpower for Pollution Control: A Report to the U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency from the Committee for the Study of Environmental Manpower, Washington, DC, 1977.
119
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF
Editorials Health February 1979 Volume 69, Number 2
EDITOR Alfred Yankauer, MD, MPH EDITORIAL BOARD Michel A. Ibrahim, MD, PhD (1980), Chairperson Ruth B. Galanter, MCP (1980) George E. Hardy, Jr., MD, MPH (1981) David Hayes-Bautista, PhD (1981) C. C. Johnson, Jr., MSCE (1980) Selma J. Mushkin, PhD (1981) George M. Owen, MD (1979) Doris Roberts, PhD, MPH (1980) Pauline 0. Roberts, MD, MPH (1979) Ruth Roemer, JD (1981) Sam Shapiro (1979) Robert Sigmond (1979) Jeannette J. Simmons, MPH, DSc (1981) David H. Wegman, MD, MSOH (1979) Robert J. Weiss, MD (1980)
STAFF William H. McBeath, MD, MPH Executive Director/Managing Editor Allen J. Seeber Director of Publications Doyne Bailey Assistant Managing Editor Deborah Watkins Production Editor Monica Pogue Administrative Assistant Ann Profozich
Classified Advertising CONTRIBUTING EDITORS William J. Curran, JD, SMHyg Public Health and the Law Barbara G. Rosenkrantz, PhD Public Health Then and Now Jean Conelley, MLS Book Section
Established 1911
Training and Education of Environmental Health Manpower: An EPA Perspective In commenting on the survey by Moeller, Pahl, and Hammond in this issue of the Journal,' I will limit my comments on this subject to an outline of what is, in my opinion, the appropriate role of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in supporting, stimulating, and encouraging the higher education and training of professional environmental pollution control practitioners. The appropriate federal role in the higher education and training of environmental health researchers is a broader and more complex question, involving a variety of federal agencies, policies, and programs, deserving of very serious consideration by those primarily responsible for, interested in, and knowledgeable about it. I apply the term environmental pollution control practitioner primarily to those professional engineers, applied scientists, and technologists who specialize in one or more of the following phases of pollution measurement, analysis, and control technology: design, development, construction, fabrication, operations, maintenance, and evaluation. Because environmental pollution control is a very broad and diverse field in terms of types of sources, media, control technology, social and economic impact, and public policy, there is great diversity among pollution control professionals in place and type of employment, functional specialization, level of responsibility, and, of course, professional education and training. Many excellent pollution control practitioners have only a baccalaureate degree, usually in engineering. The trend, however, is toward a master's degree requirement for full professional standing. In some of the applied science specialties, the PhD is required. In 1977, the National Academy of Sciences issued its comprehensive report, Manpowi,er for Env,ironmental Pollution Control,2 which prescribed a major role for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in ensuring an adequate supply of welltrained environmental professionals to meet the nation's long-term needs. This report contains a number of findings, conclusions, and recommendations which call for a re-evaluation of EPA policy on environmental workforce development generally, and professional training in particular. It now appears that to the extent that the NAS recommendations fall within the Agency's overall policy goals and resource limits, they probably will be translated into specific action plans for implementation by FY 1980 at the latest. Those NAS recommendations which call for changes in Agency policy are now being examined in depth by the Agency's Environmental Workforce Coordinating Committee. This body will soon develop and propose action recommendations and a comprehensive Agency policy for review by EPA's top management.
One of the values of the NAS report is that it does place the problem of the need for the education and training of environmental pollution control personnel in perspective, a necessary condition if EPA is to develop an appropriate policy on the matter: AJPH February 1979, Vol. 69, No. 2
EDITORIALS "The Committee concludes that a large-scale or general shortage of pollution control manpower is not now apparent or likely to develop in the near future . . . It is possible, however, that shortages will occur in selected, specialized occupations. Also, it is apparent that the quality of the current environmental work force could be upgraded through supplemental training and improvements in the educational process."2
The report further states: "Examination of degree projections over the next decade reveals that the educational system normally will produce enough scientists and engineers overall to meet the nation's requirements. At the same time, more good quality supplemental pollution control education will be needed."2 Clearly, the Environmental Protection Agency has a major interest in assuring an adequate supply of well-trained
professional pollution control specialists. Significant shortages of such specialists over prolonged periods would inevitably and seriously impede efforts to attain environmental quality standards through improved design and performance of pollution control systems, facilities, and equipment. There are at least three major actions which EPA should take to as§ure an adequate supply of professional pollution control specialists: 1. Encourage, stimulate, and support a strong leadership role by state environmental protection agencies in the higher education and training of professional environmental pollution control personnel. In many States the university system presently has the in-house capability to meet most of the intrastate demand for engineers, applied scientists, and technologists qualified for entry-level employment in the field of environmental pollution control. This university system capability could be greatly enhanced and better utilized if state environmental agencies would provide the following services to the university system: a. Regularly assess the intrastate demand for professionally trained environmental pollution control specialists and communicate such assessments to university program planners and directors; b. Provide regular advice and consultation to universities on their pollution control curricula design and on the conduct of specialized training programs using such curricula; c. Actively recruit and employ environmental engineering, science, and technology students enrolled in cooperative education and work/study programs and provide relevant on-the-job training to such students; d. Contract with universities to utilize their environmental training staffs and facilities to meet the identified short-term technical training needs of environmental pollution control personnel already employed. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency should provide the necessary encouragement, stimulation, and support for such a state agency leadership role through some form of special technical and financial assistance to such agencies. It may even be necessary and desirable for EPA to require state agencies to submit an annual Education and Training
AJPH February 1979, Vol. 69, No. 2
Support Plan as a condition for continued program grant support. 2. Provide direct continuing technical and financial support to a select group of universities for the development and conduct of professional level specialized training programs in environmental pollution control. The universities selected for this assistance should be major centers of excellence in engineering, science, and technology generally, and should be geographically distributed so that every region in the country would have at least one such institution. These training programs should be designed to meet regional and national needs for highly specialized training which individual state programs alone cannot pe expected to provide for reasons of economic efficiency or technical capability. In addition to grants for long-term support, EPA should use contracts and cooperative agreements with these institutions to accomplish mission-oriented training objectives ihvolving state and local agency personnel and industry personnel engaged in pollution control. The number of these centers of excellence to be supported by EPA should probably range from 20 to 30 institutions at a minimum average annual support level of about $100,000 each. 3. Provide highly specialized and advanced professional training directly to employees of state and local environmental agencies, federal agencies, private industry, educational institutions, and other appropriate organizations to meet critical mission-oriented training needs which state, regional, and national extramural training programs and institutions cannot reasonably be expected to meet for reasons of economic efficiency, timeliness, and necessary technical capability. The Agency should generally maintain, but some program areas expand, its in-house direct training capability. In conclusion, the NAS Report observed that "'there are no hard-and-fast solutions to the problems involved in maintaining a balance between manpower supply and demand for environmental pollution abatement and control."2 I believe, however, that nearly everyone would agree that among all federal agencies, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ought to be the most concerned with finding a solution to the problem.
ROBERT C. CLUSTER, MA Address reprint requests to Robert C. Cluster, MA; Manpower Development Specialist, NatiQnal Workforce Development Staff, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460. The opinions expressed in this communication are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
REFERENCES 1. Moeller DW, Pahl HB and Hammond PB: Trends in university environmental health research and training. Am J Public Health 60:125-129, 1979. 2. National Academy of Sciences, Environmental Manpower for Pollution Control: A Report to the U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency from the Committee for the Study of Environmental Manpower, Washington, DC, 1977.
119
