in    Progress
                 VOLUME 14 / NO 1
                   JANUARY 1993
                          U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
17  Congress Acts to Reduce
    Hazards from Lead-Based
    Paint in Housing

24  OPPT Updates the Master
    Testing List

25  EPA to Propose Measures to
    Decrease Number of CBI

32  Pollution Prevention
    Guidelines for PMNs Are
Sustainability: Focus for the future

by Gary O'Neal, Director
Office of Environmental Sustainability, EPA Region 10

When the '90s end, we'll be able to look back and see a decade of funda-
mental changes in environmental management. Things like market incen-
tives, voluntary agreements, and pollution prevention initiatives are becom-
ing important components in a comprehensive management framework that
once included only regulation and enforcement. The focus of this evolving
framework is the concept of sustainable development.

What is sustainable development? What does it mean for those in the busi-
ness sector and in government and, importantly, what barriers are there to
making  the transition to Sustainability?

Applying the philosophical to  decision making
At a philosophical level, most people can agree with the goal of sustainable
development:  integrating economic and environmental goals to ensure that
both are achieved and sustained over the long term. The difficulty comes in
applying the philosophical to day-to-day decisions.
In the business sector, for instance, decisions that sustain long-term opera-
tions may not correspond with those that generate immediate profits. Or,
the  need to increase reliance on  renewable resources may require the re-
prioritizing of company objectives, necessitating hard choices. In govern-
ment, agencies must broaden their approach to environmental management
decisions. For  example, marketplace forces might be more effective than tra-
ditional  regulatory measures  in  achieving sustainable development practices.
And the government might also play a larger role in developing data that
can be applied to environmental management decisions, such as the rela-
tionships among the quality of our ecosystem, the quality of our lives, and
our nation's economic viability.

Every organization must take up the challenge of evaluating operations with
Sustainability  in mind. There are two levels to this challenge. The first is for
each organization, whether private or public, to understand the components
                                 Sustainability continued on page 6
                                                                            Printed with Soy/Canola Ink on paper that
                                                                            contains at least 50% recycled fiber

                                      Pollution Prevention
Report's Integration of Data Expected to Broaden
Understanding of Environmental Toxics
For the first time, EPA has inte-
grated a wide range of information
about toxic chemicals into one
report. The report, Industrial Toxics
and Pollution Prevention: A National
Report, will be available by March
The report includes data from the
Toxics Release Inventory, the
33/50 Program, the TSCA
Inventory, the New Chemicals
Program, EPA's pollution  preven-
tion program, and other sources.
Integration of these data is expect-
ed to increase the understanding  of
environmental toxics on the part of
industry, public interest groups,
government officials, and  interest-
ed members of the public.

Various economic data are analyzed
in the report, which broadens the
context in which toxics are viewed.
The economic data help explain
how chemicals enter and move
through commerce and how they
ultimately enter the environment
at the end of their useful life.
Economic factors also affect toxic
chemical releases and transfers.
Analyzing the impact of such fac-
tors can help predict what may
happen in the environment when
certain conditions are present.
The report also looks at how pub-
lic-private efforts and voluntary
initiatives are increasingly playing
a role in reducing risk and pre-
venting pollution. Several case
studies are presented to show some
of the ways companies are facing
their environmental responsibili-
ties. Through the power of exam-
ple, EPA hopes more companies
will incorporate the pollution pre-
vention ethic into their daily activ-
ities. In addition, as companies try
new methods and approaches to
pollution prevention and risk
reduction, the country's technolo-
gy and information base will
In future reports, EPA's Office  of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics
(OPPT)  plans to use the informa-
tion in the 1993 report as a base-
line for analysis and comparisons
of long-term trends in risk reduc-
tion and pollution  prevention.

For more information
•  To obtain Industrial Toxics and
   Pollution Prevention: A National
   Report, contact the TSCA
   Assistance Information Service
(TSCA hotline) or the
Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know
(EPCRA) Information Hotline.
Information on contacting the
hotlines is on pages 36 and 38.
Or, write to the Public Informa-
tion Center (PM-21 IB), U.S.
EPA, 401 M Street, S.W.,
Washington, D.C.  20460.
For more information about the
report, call Ellen Shapiro at
(202)260-9557 or Kent
Benjamin at (202)  260-1714;
FAX them at (202) 260-0981;
or write to them at the follow-
ing address: Economics,
Exposure, and Technology
Division (TS-779), U.S. EPA,
401 M Sweet, S.W.,
Washington, D.C.  20460.
Pollution Prevention Act Established
Hierarchy for Environmental Management
In integrating pollution prevention throughout its activities, the Office
of Pollution Prevention and Toxics applies the environmental manage-
ment hierarchy established by Congress in 1990:
 1. Pollution should be prevented or reduced at the source whenever
 2. Pollution that cannot be prevented should be recycled in an environ-
    mentally safe manner.
 3. Pollution that cannot be prevented or recycled should be, treated in
    an environmentally safe manner.        , /"| •""% \ 9 |**S/^**^ifi
                                       ' 1 »«*•*--- 1 •"»  I «**>*
                                        jLf .H  f I   W*wr  \
 4. Disposal or release into the environment slrouRrbe^a rasT'resorT and
    done in an environmentally safe manner.
                                       CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS

                                      Pollution Prevention
Pulp and Paper Industry Sharing
Information  about Preventing Pollution
EPA Held  International Symposium in August
More than 340 people from the
pulp and paper industry, federal,
state, and local governments, and
environmental groups met last sum-
mer to discuss pollution prevention.
EPA sponsored the three-day sym-
posium, which kicked off an agency
initiative to stimulate efforts by the
pulp and paper industry to volun-
tarily reduce pollution.
The International Symposium on
Pollution Prevention in the
Manufacture of Pulp and Paper
addressed a variety of issues related
to the manufacture and use of pulp
and paper.  The topic generating
the most discussion was the use of
chlorine for bleaching paper.

Using chlorine to bleach paper
Treating wood pulp with chlorine
produces dioxin compounds.
There is scientific uncertainty
regarding how exposure to dioxin
and other chlorinated organic
chemical compounds affects
human health and the environ-
ment. EPA classifies dioxin as a
highly  toxic chemical and a proba-
ble human carcinogen. The major-
ity of the pulp and paper industry,
however, argues that the dioxin
created by  the chlorine-bleaching
process contributes less than 1
percent of the dioxin found in the
environment. Environmentalists
support a switch to chlorine-free
bleaching processes used through-
out Sweden, in a few other
European nations, and in a small
number of U.S. mills.
In an open discussion, the pros and
cons of the technical and economic
issues of pulping and bleaching
        In  an open
     discussion, the
    pros and cons of
    the technical and
  economic issues of
        pulping and
  bleaching  practices
       were argued.
practices were argued by partici-
pants from industry, environmen-
tal groups, universities, foreign
governments, and federal and state
governments. Among the topics
discussed were pulping and
bleaching practices, including the
use of chlorine, the use and perfor-
mance of emerging technologies,
and consumer acceptance of
nonchlorine-bleached products.

Pollution prevention initiative
EPA sponsored the international
symposium to open a dialogue
among the pulp and paper indus-
try, environmental and other pub-
lic interest groups, other federal
agencies, states, and the interna-
tional regulatory community.
Attendees at the symposium are
meeting periodically to share
information and continue the work
begun at the symposium.
EPA's pulp and paper cluster work-
group initiated the symposium.
Comprising high-level EPA per-
sonnel, the workgroup is identify-
ing areas of concern in the pulp
and paper industry and is coordi-
nating agency efforts to reduce
pollution associated with the

Proceedings available
The proceedings for the conference
contain presentations, transcripts
of discussion sessions, and a list of
The proceedings are available
through the National Technical
Information Service (NTIS). For
information on contacting the
NTIS, see page 39.
                                      VOL. 14 / NO. 1 JANUARY 1993

                                   Pollution Prevention
State and Regional Programs Receive
$3 Million For Pollution Prevention  Projects
The Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics has awarded $3 million
to 16 programs under the 1992
Pollution Prevention Incentives
for States grant program. These
grants and cooperative agreements
support state programs that seek
to reduce or eliminate pollution.
Since 1989, $15.5 million has
been awarded to 56 state organiza-
tions. States, state organizations,
and tribal governments are eligi-
ble for the awards, which do not
exceed $200,000. Grant recipients
are required to match at least 50
percent of the federal funds.
Matching contributions can be
made in dollars and in-kind goods
and services, or both. This year's
awards were announced in
October 1992.
                                  Grant Recipients
              1992 Pollution Prevention Incentives for States
                          Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
                                Colorado Department of Health
                           Delaware Department of Natural Resources
                                 Hawaii Department of Health
                            Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
                         Maine Department of Environmental Protection
                            Maryland Department of the Environment
                            Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management
                                  Montana State University
                                 New Mexico Pueblo Indians
                      New York Industrial Technology Assistance Corporation
                                 University of Cincinnati, Ohio
                     Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management
                            South Dakota Department of Environment
                            Washington State Department of Ecology
                         Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality
                                    CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS

                                        Pollution Prevention
The Denver Airport:  Pollution Prevention by Design
 Reprinted from the EPA Journal
By Jack W. McGraw
Acting Regional Administrator,
EPA Region 8

When the first of an expected 34
million passengers per year begin
flying into America's newest and
largest airport in October 1993,
the planning that went into the
airport will be obvious in the
space-age architecture, the park-
like setting, and the smooth flow
of travelers and  aircraft through its
highly accessible layout. Not so
obvious, but every bit as revolu-
tionary, will be  the environmental
planning that went into the facili-
ty—a concept called "pollution
prevention by design."

Preventing pollution in the first
place simply makes more sense in
economic and environmental terms
than traditional "end-of-the-pipe"
strategies. The Denver
International Airport will embody
features built into it specifically to
cut much of the pollution that
would otherwise accompany such a
mammoth public works project.
EPA's regional office in Denver
assigned David  Duster, one of its
own scientists, to  help design
those features.
Duster's first obstacle was to over-
come the single-focus approach
that regulators develop when they
work in specific programs such as
air, water, waste, and toxics.
Building pollution prevention into
a $2.7 billion facility on a 53-
square-mile parcel of land called
for a "big picture" view—what is
known as a "multimedia"
The project was planned during an
economic downturn and was not
without critics. The expected eco-
nomic benefits figured prominent-
ly in successful election campaigns
to secure local approvals and to
approve the sale of bonds to
finance construction. The project
and ancillary development
promised jobs in an area still suf-
fering from contractions in the
energy industries, which boomed
in the 1980s.
State and civic planners see Denver
as an aircraft hub to the world.
Equidistant to Tokyo and London,
the airport is ideally positioned to
handle the flow of goods and people
between the economic giants of the
Pacific Rim and a renewing Europe.
Airport boosters see the new airport
as assuring Denver and Colorado a
preeminent role in the global econo-
my of the next century.
While struggles with pollution
will continue into the next centu-
ry, conscious design choices such as
those made for the Denver
International  Airport should help
substantially.  Here are some of the
impact-reducing measures slated.
• Embedding some 180,000 tons
  of fly ash (unburned fuel parti-
  cles from nearby coal-fired ener-
  gy plants) in concrete, rather
  than sending it to landfills, will
   save enough space to accommo-
   date the solid waste generated
   by a city of 40,000 over nine
   years. The fly ash also helps
   strengthen the concrete and
   make it more durable.

•  Collecting 760 tons a year of
   glycol deicing fluids and reusing
   them for both deicing and refor-
   mulation  will reduce the
   amount going to wastewater
   treatment by 95 percent.

•  Installing ultra-low flow toilets
   (currently being tested at the
   area's existing airport, Stapleton
   International) throughout the
   Denver International Airport
   should conserve 130 million
   gallons of water annually,
   enough to supply the yearly
   water needs of 1,570 families.

•  Using reclaimed wastewater (not
   treated to drinking water levels)
   to irrigate landscaping, beginning
   in 1999 is expected to save 542
   million gallons of water per year.
•  Conserving energy through mea-
   sures built into the facility, from
   a Teflon-coated fiberglass roof to
   take advantage of natural light,
   to the use of natural gas chillers
   for air conditioning and energy-
   efficient lighting consistent with
   EPA's Green Lights program.
   This will mean the local utility,
   Public Service Company of
   Colorado, will not have to signif-
   icantly increase  its power supply
   capabilities (or air emissions) to
   serve the new airport.

Airport continued on page 6
                                        VOL. 14 / NO. 1  JANUARY 1993

                                          Pollution Prevention / Sustainability
Airport continued from page 5

•  Controlling volatile organic
   compounds—vapors—via float-
   ing roofs on fuel storage tanks
   and capturing those vapors dur-
   ing fuel transfers will keep some
   52 tons a year of smog-forming
   chemicals out of the metro-
   area's atmosphere.

•  Designing parking to take
   advantage  of natural ventilation
   to disperse carbon monoxide,
   and offering employees stag-
   gered shifts, compressed work-
   weeks,  and shuttle services to
   cut their contribution of auto-
   related emissions by an estimat-
   ed 7,000 pounds a year.
•  Landscaping with a heavy
   reliance on the West's own
   water-stingy plants, especially
   prairie  grasses, will yield water
   savings in  the hundreds of mil-
   lions of gallons per year.
•  Building an energy-saving pow-
   er plant for airport heating and
   cooling operations: low nitro-
   gen-oxide  boilers and flue gas
   recirculation will mean that 90
   tons per year  of nitrogen oxide
   will not be going into metro air.

•  Driving fleet  vehicles fueled by
   natural gas, rather than gaso-
   line, thereby cutting both emis-
   sions of carbon monoxide and
   nitrogen oxide.

•  Designing a solid waste plan
   aimed at cutting waste at its
   source, and reclaiming and recy-
   cling a variety of materials with a
  preliminary goal of reducing
  solid waste disposal by 16 tons
  per day.

Air. Water. Waste. These are the
three basic pollution problems for
any new facility, no matter how
carefully planned.

Critics make the point, in fact,
that the Denver International
Airport, which will be the nation's
largest when completed, and its
ancillary development  will ulti-
mately cause more pollution than
it can ever mitigate. Those argu-
ments were present when  Denver
and Colorado voters went to the
polls on two occasions. Since voters
supported going forward with the
airport, EPA decided to get
involved early on with the project
planning. This enabled us to
employ the latest tools to mini-
mize the impact of the project.
In working on the project, EPA
has learned to apply new thinking
and tools to technical challenges,
and we have also learned a new
way to relate to the regulated com-
munity. There have been so many
winners in this process—including
the environment—that I believe
we can expect to see "pollution
prevention by design" become the
normal way of doing business
through the rest of this century
and into the new one.

How to subscribe
to the EPA Journal
To subscribe to the EPA Journal,
send a check or money order
payable to the Superintendent of
Documents, U.S. Government
Printing Office, P.O. Box 371954,
Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954. The
annual rate for subscribers in the
United States is $10.  The charge
to subscribers in foreign countries
is $12.50  a year.
Sustainability continued from page 1
of sustainable development and
change its internal practices to sup-
port progress in those areas.
Examples of such changes are modi-
fying supplier contracts to provide
incentives for use of recycled or
renewable materials, modifying cor-
porate accounting procedures to
include environmental damages and
benefits, or establishing a public
advisory board to strengthen ties to
the local community.

But internal changes alone will not
ensure Sustainability of the larger,
supporting system. So, the second
aspect of the challenge requires that
each organization view its activities
within the larger context of the
community, the watershed, or the
ecosystem. For instance, concern for
the survival of tropical rain forests
has brought furniture manufacturers
together to ask how their operations
affect forests. The answer? Using
tropical woods produced from sus-
tainable forestry—not boycotting
tropical wood products—can
enhance the survival of tropical rain
forests, produce global environmen-
tal benefits, and increase the eco-
                                          CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS

nomic value of the forests for the
countries that contain them. The
industry is now developing a defini-
tion of sustainable forestry—the first
step toward integrating itself into
the larger and more comprehensive
sustainability framework. Another
example might be called the "quali-
ty of life" factor. If the quality of the
general environment declines, the
quality of the community generally
does also. This can adversely affect
business in a number of ways, from
hurting efforts to attract employees
or new businesses to the area to
increasing community demands for
cleanup initiatives.

EPA activities
EPA is changing its approach to
environmental management to
encompass the concept of sustain-
able development. This new
approach can be seen in EPA's
Design for the Environment pro-
gram and in the agency's emphasis
on pollution prevention and waste
minimization. These programs
emphasize addressing problems in a
holistic, integrated way within
watersheds, ecosystems, and priority
geographic areas. The use of market
incentives to address a variety of
issues has gained momentum.
EPA has also developed voluntary
programs to conserve energy and
other resources. The Green Lights
Program is a successful example of
such a program. As of November
1992, 301 major corporations, 24
state and county governments, 298
utilities, lighting and lighting prod-
uct manufacturers, and nonprofit
groups had agreed to survey their
U.S. facilities and install energy-effi-
cient lighting wherever appropriate.
The Green Lights program estimates
that the new lighting will use 52
percent less energy than the older
lighting—and will save participants
$952 million in utility costs over
the next five years.

EPA's regional offices will play a
large role in developing agency
approaches to sustainability and
implementing sustainability pro-
grams at the state and local levels.
An example of this is evolving in the
Northwest. EPA's Region 10 has a
program under way to encourage the
move toward sustainability.  As the
Sustainable Development Initiative
continues to develop, it is expected
to serve as a model for other parts of
EPA. The program's activities are
organized in three broad categories:

•  Focusing on geographic priorities.
   Region 10 has identified a num-
   ber of watersheds and geographic
   areas where ecological integrity of
   the system is threatened.  These
   vary in size from small watersheds
   to major river basins. The region
   is selecting a subset of these areas
   where our work will emphasize
   sustainable development. Efforts
   will include integrating economic
   and environmental planning,
   establishing a consensus vision of
   what needs to be sustained, and
   developing information and edu-
   cational programs to increase the
   focus on sustainability.

•  Developing a business program.
   A growing body of information is
   becoming available on how busi-
   nesses can modify practices to fos-
   ter transitions toward sustainabil-
   ity. Region 10 plans to develop a
   series of workshops and other
   processes for increasing business
   awareness of and focus on these
   needed changes.

•  Increasing the knowledge base.
   Region 10 will work with public
   and private universities to help
   develop the scientific, economic,
   and policy underpinnings of the
   needed changes. This will help fit
   together the pieces of the com-
   plex puzzle that is sustainability.

Facing the future
We are just at the beginning of
understanding how to define and
achieve economic development
within environmental limits. At
EPA, we have identified a number of
the transitions that are necessary and
are beginning to address them.
Others are doing the same. We need
to develop processes that include  all
sectors of society in rethinking some
of the fundamental assumptions and
practices driving the continued
industrialization and urbanization of
our world.
Albert Einstein wrote, "The signifi-
cant problems we face cannot be
solved by the same level of thinking
we were at when we created them." I
end with his words, which capture
the essence of the problem.  Re-
thinking the future to achieve sus-
tainability is too important a chal-
lenge for us to refuse participation.
                                          VOL 14/N0.1 JANUARY 1993

                                       Design for the Environment
 'Wet Cleaning"  Tested in  Demonstration  Project
A process for cleaning clothes that
doesn't use any chemical solvents
was used in a monthlong demon-
stration project by two dry clean-
ers in Washington, D.C. The "wet
cleaning" process relies on heat,
steam, pressing, and biodegradable
soaps to clean clothes.

The wet cleaning demonstration
project is the first step in evaluat-
ing chemicals and technologies
that could decrease exposures to
chlorinated solvents used in dry
cleaning. Currently, the chlorinat-
ed solvent perchloroethylene (PCE)
is used by 82 percent of dry clean-
ers in the United States. PCE is
listed as a hazardous air pollutant
under the Clean Air Act. The
demonstration project will indi-
cate whether wet cleaning could
substitute for some dry cleaning
processes that use PCE and other
chlorinated solvents.
EPA's Design for the Environment
(DfE) program conducted the
demonstration project, in coopera-
tion with the Neighborhood
Cleaners Association and the
International Fabricare Institute,
from November 16, 1992, to
December  16, 1992. Two small dry
cleaning businesses participated in
the demonstration project: a dry
cleaner in the shopping mall where
EPA is located and a dry cleaner in
L'Enfant Plaza, where a large num-
ber of U.S. government employees
work. U.S. government employees
and Greenpeace employees were
asked to bring their clothing to
these cleaners for use in the demon-
stration project. A competitive price
was charged for the wet cleaning.
The large-volume demonstration
project will help to determine
• whether wet cleaning works as
  well as dry cleaning;
• whether wet cleaning is cost
  effective; and
• whether there are ways to
  improve the wet cleaning

The DfE program will compare the
risks, costs, and performance of wet
cleaning with dry cleaning and with
other alternatives tested in the
future. The assessment will also
weigh the opportunities to prevent
pollution and conserve energy that
are presented by alternative solvents
and technologies. The DfE program
is part of the Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics.
National Pollution Prevention Center Awards Internships
Ford Motor Company Sponsors Students' Work at Plant
The National Pollution Prevention
Center, located at the University
of Michigan, is working with pri-
vate industry to establish intern-
ships for graduate students. The
first two internships, sponsored
by the Ford Motor Company, were
awarded by the center in spring
Two industrial engineering grad-
uate students at the University of
Michigan received the intern-
ships. The students developed a
waste minimization guidance
document based on waste mini-
mization audits they conducted at
the Ford plant in Livonia, Michigan.
Ford will use the document to
develop ways to reduce or elimi-
nate waste streams in its manufac-
turing processes.
The National Pollution Prevention
Center was established in 1991 to
develop pollution prevention edu-
cation and training activities. Its
primary focus is development of
pollution prevention modules for
inclusion in graduate courses.
The modules for law, industrial
design, and engineering courses
are almost completed and will
be piloted at the University of
Michigan this year. Modules
for business, national resources,
and other fields are under devel-
                                       CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS

                                        Design for the Environment
Projects Seek Substitute Chemicals and  Processes
for Dry Cleaning and Printing  Industries
The printing and dry cleaning
industries are working with EPA to
examine options for reducing envi-
ronmental and health exposures to
the chemicals they use. On its end,
EPA will assess the risks, exposures,
costs, and performance of alterna-
tive chemicals and technologies for
each industry. On the industry side,
companies have volunteered to pilot
the use of certain alternatives.

The cooperative programs were
initiated by EPA's Design for the
Environment (DfE) program,
which is administered by the
Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics (OPPT).

Dry cleaning project
During an international round-
table on pollution prevention for
the dry cleaning  industry, spon-
sored by EPA in May 1992, a
number of representatives from
both industry and state regulatory
agencies asked EPA to assess alter-
native chemicals and technologies.
In response, EPA began a "cleaner
technologies substitutes assess-
ment" as part of the DfE dry clean-
ing project.

The first alternative cleaning process
being evaluated is "wet cleaning."
In the United States, the process
was tested for a few days in a Florida
shop; EPA is working with an
industry group to test the process in
a high-volume cleaning operation.
(See accompanying article, page 8.)
The DfE dry cleaning project is
interested in hearing from manu-
facturers or others who are devel-
oping new technologies and sol-
vents for the dry cleaning industry.

Printing project
Materials are printed by one of six
methods, each of which uses differ-
ent chemicals and processes.
Representatives from the printing
industry have chosen a particular
area of concern for five of these
methods; EPA is focusing on eval-
uating alternative chemicals and
technologies for these concerns.
The areas of concern are

•  press and blanket washes used
   in lithography,

•  inks used in flexography,

•  inks used in gravure printing,

•  cleanup washes used in screen
   printing, and

•  roller washes used in letterpress

To begin  a comparison of alterna-
tives, OPPT's printing project has
developed information about
printing market data, different
printing methods, and technology
trends. The information is avail-
able in the document  Use Cluster
Analysis of the Printing Industry.

Since the summer of 1992, printing
industry trade groups and EPA have
sponsored meetings with printers
and product vendors to inform them
of current and anticipated EPA reg-
ulatory activities affecting printing
alternatives. Industry's participation
in the project has also been coordi-
nated at the meetings.

For more information
Printed materials on both the dry
cleaning project and the printing
project are available from the
Pollution Prevention Information
Clearinghouse, 7600-A Leesburg
Pike, Falls Church, VA 22043;
telephone, (703) 821-4800; or
FAX, (703) 442-0584. Specific
materials that may be of interest
are the proceedings of the 1992
International Roundtable on
Pollution Prevention and Control
in the Dry Cleaning Industry; the
"List of Federal Regulations
Possibly Affecting the Printing
Industry;" and Use Cluster Analysis
of the Printing Industry.

Additional information about the
dry cleaning project is available
from Ohad Jehassi, Economics,
Exposure, and Technology
Division (TS-779), U.S. EPA, 401
M Street, S.W., Washington D.C.
20460; telephone, (202) 260-0676;
FAX, (202)260-0981.

Persons interested in participating
in the printing project can contact
Cathie Ramus, Economics, Expo-
sure, and Technology Division
(TS-779), U.S. EPA, 401 M Street,
S.W., Washington D.C., 20460;
telephone, (202) 260-0667; FAX,
                                        VOL. 14 / NO. 1 JANUARY 1993

                                        Design for the Environment
Universities  Receive  Grants for Research
on Alternative Synthetic Chemical Pathways
The Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics has awarded $330,000
to six universities for research on
making chemical substances while
minimizing or eliminating the use
or production of toxic substances.
Toxic substances are generally used
as feedstocks, catalysts, and sol-
vents or are produced as byprod-
ucts and impurities.
Receiving $55,500 each are
Brandeis University, the
University of California at Los
Angeles, the University of
Connecticut at Storrs, Iowa State
University, Purdue University, and
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University.

Each of the six research projects
addresses a methodology to reduce
or prevent pollution through the
design of a more benign synthetic
step, or pathway. Specifically, the
research projects would reduce the
generation of pollution by
• eliminating the use of organic
   solvents for various types of
   chemical reactions;
• using alternative, recyclable
   reagents or biocatalysts in place
   of heavy metals as catalysts for
   certain synthetic transformations;
• producing certain chemicals using
   sunlight as the active reagent
   rather than toxic chemicals;

• using simple sugars  as a feed-
   stock for the production of
   large-volume commodity chem-
  icals, such as hydroquinone and
  adipic acid.

EPA intends for these projects to
serve as models for future organic
chemistry research. The agency
believes the research will support
pollution prevention (1) by stimu-
lating thinking and further research
on alternative synthetic pathways
and (2) by producing tools for
industry to use to incorporate envi-
ronmental criteria in designing syn-
thetic chemical pathways.
           200 applicants
           EPA invited about 200 colleges
           and universities to submit
           research proposals for funding.
           A panel of senior chemists from
           EPA and chemistry experts from
           outside of the agency selected the
           six  proposals that received awards.
           The panel assessed each project's
           potential to further pollution pre-
           vention goals. EPA will track the
           projects' progress over the coming
Research Projects
University              Project
Brandeis University
University of California
  at Los Angeles
University of Connecticut
  at Storrs
Iowa State University
Purdue University
Virginia Polytechnic
  Institute and State
Development of new catalysts to replace highly
toxic tin-based catalysts. Project will include
research on regenerating the new catalysts electro-
chemically so they will not enter the waste stream.
Synthesis of styrene without the feedstock ben-
zene, a suspected human carcinogen.
Use of visible light instead of toxic heavy metals in
a number of important chemical reactions, includ-
ing reactions commonly used in the dye industry.
Use of visible light to create a photochemical reac-
tion.  This method could be substituted for the
Freidel-Crafts reaction, among the ten most widely-
used chemical reactions in the world, in which
highly toxic reagents are used.
Use of simple sugars as feedstocks, rather than
toxic feedstocks and catalysts, in the synthesis of
large-volume chemicals.
Development of methods to use liquid carbon
dioxide as the solvent for certain chemical reac-
                                         CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS

                                        Toxics Release Inventory
How to Obtain  TRI Data
  Through a Computer network. Online access to national and state TRI data is available from the National
  Library of Medicine's TOXNET. To obtain an account, call (301) 496-6531, or write TRI Representative,
  Specialized Information Services, National Library of Medicine, 8600 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, Maryland
  20894. Account holders also have access to other National Library of Medicine databases on toxicology,
  health, and chemical substances.
  At the library. Access to state TRI data is available at most federal depository and county public libraries.
  The depository libraries holding the fiche or CD-ROM in their collection are listed in Federal Depository
  Libraries: Your Source for the Toxic Release Inventory; the names and addresses of the public libraries that have
  TRI on fiche are listed in the Directory of Public Libraries. To obtain a  list of the libraries that provide TRI
  access or to obtain the brochure Public Access to the Toxic Release Inventory,  call EPA's EPCRA Information
  Hotline at (800) 535-0202 or (703) 920-9877.
  By purchasing one of these formats: CD-ROM, microfiche, diskette,  magnetic tape,  or written report.
  These formats can be purchased from the National Technical Information Service (NTIS), the U.S.
  Government Printing Office (GPO), or the Department of Commerce (DOC). Listed below are the years for
  which the data are available. For additional information, please contact NTIS at (703) 487-4650; GPO at
  (202) 783-3238 (microfiche, CD-ROM, and report form)  or (202)  275-0186 (magnetic tape and diskette);
  or DOC at (202) 377-1986 (CD-ROM).
TRI  Data Available for Purchase
Magnetic Tape     Report
NTIS 1987 national
1987-1 989 national

GPO 1987 national
national inventory

1987 national
1988 national
1987 and 1988
individual state

national inventory
individual state

1988 and 1989
national inventory
1988 and 1989
individual state

1 987 national
1988 national
1989 national
1990 national
1987 national
1988 national
1989 national
1990 national
1987 complete
1987 executive

1987 complete
1987 executive
1988 complete
1989 complete
DOC    1989 complete
       report (included in
       the "National
       Economic, Social,
       and Environmental
       Data Bank")
* Order numbers can be obtained from the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) Information Hotline at (800) 535-0202 or (703) 920-9877.
                                        VOL. 147 NO. 1 JANUARY 1993

                                       Toxics Release Inventory
SBA Petitions EPA to Modify
TRI Reporting  Requirements
In August 1991, the Office of
Advocacy of the U.S. Small
Business Administration peti-
tioned EPA to exempt facilities
releasing small amounts of toxic
chemicals from reporting to the
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI).

The Small Business
Administration suggested that
EPA "exclude facilities with releas-
es and transfers below 5,000
pounds annually for the vast
majority of section 313 chemicals"
no matter how large a quantity of
the chemical is used by the facility.
For chemicals that are toxic in very
small amounts, the SBA suggests a
lower release threshold, such as 10

In its petition, the Small Business
Administration stated that current
reporting regulations (1) subject
small businesses to reporting toxic
releases of insignificant amounts,
(2) have a minimal impact on the
environment, and (3) subject small
businesses to unnecessary regula-
tion. The petition  does not define
"small business" or suggest an
acceptable level of burden for these

The Small Business Administration
petitioned EPA under section 553(e)
of the Administrative Procedure
Act, which allows any person to
petition EPA or other federal agen-
cies to issue, amend, or repeal rules.

Reporting thresholds for chemicals
and chemical categories are estab-
lished by section 313 of the
Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA)of 1986. EPCRA
requires that certain facilities
report to the TRI if they manufac-
ture, process, or import 25,000
pounds of a toxic chemical annual-
ly or if they otherwise use 10,000
pounds of a toxic chemical annual-
Section 313 of EPCRA allows EPA
to add or delete chemicals from the
TRI  list and to change the thresh-
old reporting limits. The statute
does  not address other means of
modifying EPCRA reporting.

EPA  requests comment
EPA identified several areas of con-
cern  regarding this petition and
published a Notice of Receipt of
Petition (57 FR 48706, October
27, 1992). The notice requested
public comment on the overall
effect of release-based TRI report-
ing and other issues.

For more information, contact
Tamara McNamara, Environmental
Assistance Division (TS-799), 401
M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.
20460; telephone, (202) 260-
EPA Makes
Proposals for
Adding Substances
to TRI List
EPA has made two alternate propos-
als for adding chemical substances
and chemical categories to the list of
toxic substances subject to reporting
under section 313 of the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-
Know Act (EPCRA).

• EPA proposes adding 68 chemi-
  cals and two chemical categories
  to the reporting list.

• EPA proposes to establish an
  annual manufacturing threshold
  and add the chemicals that
  exceed this threshold to the
  reporting list.

New York Governor Mario M.
Cuomo and the Natural Resources
Defense Council petitioned the
agency in March 1992 to add 80
chemicals and two chemical cate-
gories to the EPCRA list. All of the
chemicals and chemical categories
on the petition are listed as toxic
wastes in the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act.

EPA proposes to add 68 of the
chemicals and the two chemical
categories listed on the petition to
the EPCRA list. Available data
indicate that these 70 chemicals
meet the criteria for addition to the
reporting list as established by sec-
tion 313(d)(2) of EPCRA. The cri-

Proposals continued on page 13
                                       CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS

                                         Toxics Release Inventory
TRI  Attracts Attention at International  Exhibition
The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
was showcased this summer at the
International Exhibition of
Environmental Technology in San
Paulo, Brazil. The technology fair
took place in conjunction with the
United Nations' Earth Summit in
Rio de Janeiro.
Thousands of people visited the TRI
exhibit during the six-day fair. The
United States is one of the few
nations in the world that collects
and provides public access to data
about toxic chemicals emitted by
industry. The emissions data are
taken from reports that certain facil-
ities are required by law to file with
EPA. EPA compiles and releases this
information annually in the TRI.
Among the visitors to the TRI
exhibit were foreign officials inter-
ested in learning how to provide
their citizens access to data about
toxic emissions in their communi-
ties. Visitors from Brazil were par-
ticularly interested in learning how
to integrate toxic chemical report-
ing by industry with information
the nation currently collects for
emergency preparedness.
The TRI exhibit provided back-
ground on the U.S. commitment to
the principle of the public's right to
know the amounts and kinds of
chemicals that are stored, used, and
released in their midst. It provided
specific information about the TRI
and EPA's  33/50 Program, a volun-
tary effort to reduce toxics emis-
sions. The exhibit also included a
demonstration of the CD-ROM ver-
sion of TRI and videos on the
Right-to-Know program and the
33/50 Program.
EPA Administrator William K.
Reilly and United Nations Secretary-
General Maurice Strong conducted
the ribbon-cutting ceremony at the
TRI exhibit. The delegation from
EPAs Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxic Substances, sponsors of the
TRI exhibit, was headed by Linda
Travers, director of the Information
Management Division.
Proposals continued from page 12
teria are that the chemicals cause
acute human health effects, cancer
or other chronic human health
effects, or harmful environmental
In a second proposal, EPA proposes
to add to the EPCRA list only those
chemicals manufactured, imported,
or processed in quantities greater
than an annual per-facility threshold
set by EPA. EPA is considering two
manufacturing and processing
thresholds: (1) a 25,000-pound a year
threshold for each facility, which is
the current EPCRA section 313
manufacturing and processing
threshold or (2) a 10,000-pound a
year threshold for each facility, which
is the current EPCRA section 313
use threshold. EPA sought public
comments during the fall on the use
of an annual threshold and on what
an appropriate threshold should be.
EPA believes that adding chemicals
that do not meet the 25,000-pound
threshold (1) will not result in addi-
tional release information and (2)
will impose an undue burden on

Twenty-two of the 70 chemicals
that EPA is proposing to add to the
EPCRA reporting list are manufac-
tured or processed at individual
facilities in quantities of greater
than 25,000 pounds.

In regard to the 48 chemicals that
do not meet the 25,000-pound
threshold, EPA proposes requiring
industry to notify the agency prior
to any activity that would meet the
25,000-pound threshold.
Notification would be required by a
significant new use rule (SNUR)
under section 5 of the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA).
The advance notice required by
SNURs would allow EPA to act to
prevent potentially adverse exposure
to or effects from the increased use
of the substance.

For more information
For further information, see 57 FR
41020; September 8,  1992. Or, con-
tact Maria J. Doa, Environmental
Assistance Division (TS-799), U.S.
EPA, 401 M Street, S.W., Wash-
ington, D.C. 20460; telephone,
260-9592; FAX,  (202) 260-0981.
      VOL. 14/NO 1 JANUARY 1993

                                             TRI Section 313 Petitions
Receipt Date  Chemical Name
  Action    180-Day  Proposed Rule   Final Rule or
Requested   Deadline   FR Pub Date   Denial Pub Date
Petitions Denied
Inorganic Fluorides
Cobalt & Compounds
Nickel & Compounds
Manganese & Compounds
Cadmium Selenide
Cadmium Sulfide
Decarbromodiphenyl Oxide
Cr/Sb/Ti Buff Rutile
Barium Sulfate
Antimony Compound
Zinc Borate Hydrate
Barium Sulfate
Sulfuric Acid
Zinc Sulfide
Chromium(lll) Compounds
Safe Water Foundation of Texas
DOW Chemical Company
Hall Chemical Company
Hall Chemical Company
Hall Chemical Company
Chemical Manufacturers Assoc.
Chemical Manufacturers Assoc.
Chemical Manufacturers Assoc.
SCM Chemicals, Inc.
SCM Chemicals, Inc.
Great Lakes Chemical Corp.
Dry Color Manufacturers Assoc.
Petroleum Equipment Suppliers Assoc
Synthetics Product Company
U.S. Borax Research Corp.
Dry Color Manufacturers Assoc.
Ore and Chemical Corp.
California Products Corp.
List /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ 02/12/90
/ / /
/ / /
/ 02/12/90
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
Petitions Granted




Titanium Dioxide
Titanium Dioxide

Titanium Dioxide
Titanium Dioxide
Cl Acid Blue 9

Cl Acid Blue 9

Melamine Crystal
Sodium Hydroxide Solution
Cl Pigment Blue 15
Cl Pigment Green 7
Cl Pigment Green 36
Sodium Sulfate
Alum. Oxide (Non-Fibrous)
Terephthalic Acid
Seven CFCs and Halons

Dupont De Nemours And Co.
SCM Chemicals, Inc. and Didier
Taylor Refractories Corp.
Didier Taylor Refractories Corp.
Kemira Oy.
Ecological and Toxicological Assoc
of the Dyestuffs Manufacturing
Ecological and Toxicological Assoc.
of the Dyestuffs Manufacturing
Melamine Chemical Company
Chlorine Institute Inc.
Dry Color Manufacturers Assoc.
Dry Color Manufacturers Assoc
Dry Color Manufacturers Assoc.
Hoechst Celanese Corp
Aluminum Association, et al.
Amoco Corp.
Natural Resources Defense Council
and Governors Mario Cuomo of
New York, Madeleine Kunm of
Vermont, Thomas Kean of New
Delist /
Delist /

Delist /
Delist /
Delist /

Delist /

Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
List /

/ 02/19/88
/ 02/19/88

/ 02/19/88
/ 02/19/88
/ 04/12/88

/ 04/12/88

/ 06/20/88
/ 12/09/88
/ 05/15/91
/ 05/15/89
/ 05/15/89
/ 02/17/89
/ 04/12/89
/ 02/15/90
/ 03/21/90





                                              CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS

                                                 TRI  Section 313 Petitions
Receipt Date  Chemical Name
  Action     180-Day  Proposed Rule   Final Rule or
Requested   Deadline   FR Pub Date  Denial Pub Date
Petitions Pending
11/19/90      Phosphoric Acid
09/11/91      Hydrochloric Acid
09/24/91      Acetone
09/24/91      Barium Sulfate
11/06/91      Barium Sulfate
01/28/92      Di-N-Octyl Phthalate
06/18/92      Chromium in Stainless Steel
10/06/92      Nickel in Stainless Steel
Proposed Rules
             Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
             Ammonium Sulfate (SOLN)
             Sulfunc Acid
             82 Resource Conservation
                                          The Fertilizer Institute               Delist      05/18/91
                                          Vulcan/Dupont/BASF/Monsanto       Modify    03/09/92
                                          Eastman Chem./ Hoechst Celanese    Delist      03/22/92
                                          Chemical Products Corp.            Delist      03/22/92
                                          Dry Color Manufacturers Assoc.       Delist      03/22/92
                                          Vista Chemical Company            Delist      07/26/92
                                          Russel Harrington Cutlery Co.        Exempt    12/15/92
                                          Bath Iron Works                    Exempt    04/06/93
Monsanto Chemical Co.             Delist
Allied Signal, Inc.                   Delist
American Cyanamid                Modify
Natural Resources Defense Council,   List
 Friends of the Earth, Environmental
 Defense Fund
Natural Resources Defense Council,   List
              Recovery Act U Listed Chemicals   Governor Mario Cuomo of New York
Petitions Withdrawn

01/27/88      Iron Chromite
01/27/88      Molybdenum Tnoxide
07/21/88      Phthahc Anhydride
09/09/88      Methyl Ethyl Ketone
09/09/88      Methyl Isobutyl Ketone
11/22/88      Diethyl Phthalate
11/28/88      Trifluralin
12/14/89      Phosphoric Acid
                                          American Minerals
                                          Amax Mineral Resource Co
                                          Chemical Manufacturers Assoc.
                                          Chemical Manufacturers Assoc.
                                          Chemical Manufacturers Assoc.
                                          Firmenich, Inc.
                                          Eli Lilly and Co.
                                          Ecolab, Inc.
Chemicals Added to TRI Reporting List by EPA
  /  /        2,3-Dichloropropene            EPA
  /  /        m-Dinitrobenzene              EPA
  /  /        p-Dmitrobenzene               EPA
  /  /        o-Dmitrobenzene               EPA
  /  /        Allyl Alcohol                   EPA
  /  /        Isosafrole                     EPA
  /  /        Creosote                      EPA
  /  /        Dinitrotoluene-mixed Isom      EPA
  /  /        Toluenediisocyanate-mixed      EPA
f 2/01/89
                                                 VOL. 14 / NO. 1  JANUARY 1993

                                    Local Emergency Planning Committees
Local Emergency  Planning Committees Receive  Grants
EPA has awarded more than
$500,000 to 15 states and one
Indian tribe to strengthen the
capabilities and operations of their
local emergency planning commit-
tees. Federal law requires these
committees to develop local emer-
gency response plans to manage
accidents involving hazardous
materials in their communities.

Each recipient of the funds is
located in an area at high risk for a
major accident associated with a
chemical release.

The Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA) required that states and
Indian tribes set up local emer-
gency planning committees.
EPCRA is part of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization
Act of 1986 (SARA) and is also
known as title III of SARA. There
are more than 3,800 local emer-
gency planning committees in the
United States.
New York
North Carolina
Rhode Island
Umatilla Tribe
West Virginia
Grant Recipient
Office of Emergency Management
Emergency Response Commission
Emergency Response Commission
Emergency Response Commission
Emergency Response Commission
Department of Environmental Control
Emergency Response Commission
Emergency Response Commission
Emergency Response Commission
Emergency Response Commission
Emergency Management Agency
Department of Labor
Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla
Emergency Response Commission
Emergency Response Commission
Emergency Response Commission
Award Received
$ 50,000
$ 46,367
$ 49,500
$ 50,000
$ 39,750
$ 47,842
$ 27,400
$ 30,000
$ 25,000

Congress Passes Law to Reduce
Hazards from  Lead-Based Paint in  Housing
On October 16, 1992, Congress
passed a broad housing bill that
contained provisions to eliminate
lead-based paint hazards in private
and public housing. President
Bush signed the bill into law on
October 28.

The lead provisions are contained
in the Residential Lead-based
Paint Hazard Reduction Act, also
known as title X of the Housing
and Community Development Act
of 1992.

Requirements for EPA
The new law provides EPA with
the authority to carry out activities
to reduce the prevalence of child-
hood lead poisoning in a reason-
able and cost-effective manner. For
instance, the bill asks EPA to issue
Lead  Hotline  Opens

Information about Reducing Children's Exposure
to  Lead Available From New  Information Service

Call the National Lead Information Center at (800) LEAD-FYI (532-3394)
The U.S. government has opened a toll-free information service to edu-
cate parents about simple steps for reducing their children's exposure to
lead in the home. Callers to the automated answering service will receive
an easy-to-read brochure outlining these steps and several fact sheets on
related topics. The materials are available in both English and Spanish.
The information service will also provide each caller with a list of state or
local contacts for additional information. The toll-free telephone number
for the information service  is (800) LEAD-FYI (532-3394). The TDD
phone number is (800) 424-LEAD (424-5323).
The information service is the first phase of the federal government's
National Lead Information Center. The next phase, slated to open in
mid-1993, is a lead clearinghouse. The clearinghouse, staffed by informa-
tion specialists, will serve as a resource for a wide range of people, includ-
ing  health professionals; state and local officials; the housing, construc-
tion, and residential renovation sectors; the financial, real estate,  and
insurance sectors; and private citizens.
The National Lead Information Center is a joint effort of EPA, the
Centers for Disease Control, the Department of Housing and Urban
Development, the Department of Defense, the Consumer Product Safety
Commission, and other federal agencies.
guidelines for reducing the risk of
exposure when renovating or
remodeling, and it requires the
training and certification for
inspection workers and lead-based
paint abatement contractors. The
law also directs EPA to

• work with HUD to jointly pro-
  mulgate rules that require peo-
  ple who are selling or renting
  pre-1978 housing to disclose
  the presence of any known lead-
  based paint;

• identify lead-based paint hazards,
  lead-contaminated soil, and lead-
  contaminated dust; and

• study the extent to which peo-
  ple who renovate or remodel
  homes are exposed to lead and
  the extent of the hazard created
  by the renovation or remodel-
  ing.  If appropriate, the agency is
  to revise the accreditation regu-
  lations using the results of this

Requirements for HUD
The U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) is
also required to undertake a num-
ber of activities under the law. The
law directs HUD to

• work with EPA to jointly pro-
  mulgate rules that require people
  who  are selling or renting pre-
  1978 housing to disclose the
  presence of any known lead-
  based paint;

Lead Bill continued on page 19
                                      VOL. 14 / NO. 1 JANUARY 1993

EPA Establishing Lead Accreditation Program for Labs
Interagency Report  Provides Guidelines
Agencies involved in a federal ini-
tiative to reduce exposures to lead
have agreed a national program to
accredit laboratories analyzing
lead is necessary. Congress recently
gave EPA responsibility for set-
ting up the program, which will
focus particularly on laboratories
performing analyses of lead-conta-
minated paint, dust, and soil from

An Interagency Lead-Based Paint
Task Force subcommittee provid-
ed guidelines for establishing the
program in its report Laboratory
Accreditation Program Guidelines:
Measurement of Lead in Paint,
Dust, and Soil. The task force
comprises a number of agen-
cies—including EPA and the
Department of Housing and
Urban Development—involved
in a federal initiative to reduce
children's exposure to lead-based

EPA activities
EPAs Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) has
established the EPA National Lead
Laboratory Accreditation Program
(NLLAP). The accreditation pro-
gram will help ensure the quality
of analytical data used for deci-
sions about abatement and control
of lead-contaminated paint, dust,
and soil from homes.
OPPT has drafted two sets of
guidelines for the program: train-
ing guidelines for lead laboratory
assessors and operations guidelines
for laboratories that want to be
accredited. To receive accredita-
tion, laboratories must successful-
ly (1) complete a proficiency test-
ing program and (2) undergo an
on-site systems audit. The profi-
ciency testing program is being
implemented by the National
Institute of Occupational Safety
and Health, in cooperation with
the American Industrial Hygiene
Association. EPA will accredit pri-
vate organizations to perform the
on-site systems audits.  These
activities, as well as other planned
activities, are based on the task
force subcommittee report's rec-

For more information
For further information or to
obtain a copy of Laboratory
Accreditation Program Guidelines:
Measurement of Lead in Paint, Dust,
and Soil, contact John Scalera,
Chemical Management Division
(TS-798), 401 M Street, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20460; tele-
phone, (202) 260-6709.
   The  accreditation program will help ensure
       the quality of analytical data used  for
    decisions about abatement and control of
      lead-contaminated paint, dust, and soil
                      from homes.
                                     CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS

Lead Bill continued from page 17

• provide grants to states and
  local programs to certify con-
  tractors who engage in lead-
  based  paint activities;

• ensure the inspection and abate-
  ment  of lead-based paint haz-
  ards in federally owned housing
  constructed before I960; and
• require periodic risk assessments
  and interim controls in pre-
  1978  housing (1) covered by
  HUD mortgage insurance or (2)
  rented with HUD housing assis-
  tance, in addition to providing a
  pamphlet on lead-based paint
  risks to people who buy or rent
  this housing.

Federal  lead activities
EPA, HUD, and the Department
of Health and Human Services
have been at the forefront of feder-
al efforts to reduce children's expo-
sure to lead. During 1990 and
1991, the three agencies released
strategies aimed at reducing the
health risks caused by lead expo-
sure, particularly in children. They
are working with 14 other federal
agencies on the Federal
Interagency Lead-based Paint Task
EPA Studies  Leaching  of
Lead  from Abated  Materials
When lead-based paint is abated
in people's homes, housing materi-
als such as windows, doors, and
moldings are often removed. In
1990, Congress directed EPA to
study which of these and ot ";r
abated materials are likely to fall
within the definition of hazardous
waste that is contained in the
Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA). Materials
classified as hazardous  waste must
be disposed of according to RCRA
In the study, EPA collected sam-
ples of wastes typically generated
by abatement: paint chips, plaster,
wash water, and plastic sheeting
used to protect floors and carpets
from contamination, in addition to
the bulk woodwork samples men-
tioned in the first paragraph. The
agency tested these materials to
determine whether lead is likely to
be leached from them  into ground-
water and surface water. The
agency followed RCRA regula-
tions in conducting toxicity test-
ing of the sample wastes.
EPA will report to Congress on the
test results in 1993. The report
will also be available to the public.
The report will contain prelimi-
nary cost information about dis-
posal of abatement materials if
classified as hazardous  waste. The
report is currently being reviewed
by the Office of Management and
For more information
EPA's Office of Solid Waste and
Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics conducted the study. For
information about the report, con-
tact Melinda Pearce, Chemical
Management Division (TS-798),
      EPA collected
   samples of wastes
   typically generated
      by abatement:
   paint chips,  plaster,
     wash water, and
     plastic sheeting.
U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20460; tele-
phone, (202)260-3397.
For information about RCRA haz-
ardous waste testing, treatment,
and disposal requirements, contact
Dave Topping, Characterization
and Assessment Division (OS-333),
U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20460; tele-
phone, (202) 260-7737.
                                      VOL. 14 / NO. 1 JANUARY 1993

OPPT Restructures Functions, Programs
In October 1992, the Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics
(OPPT) restructured many of its
functions and programs. The reor-
ganization reflects the way OPPT
operates today and will better
accomplish OPPT's mission: pro-
tecting and improving public
health and environmental

OPPT's vision
OPPT uses both regulatory and non-
regulatory approaches to promote
• pollution prevention as a princi-
  ple of first choice to achieve
  environmental stewardship
  throughout society;

• the design, development, and
  application of safer chemicals,
  processes, and technologies in

• risk reduction and responsible
  risk-management practices
  throughout the life cycle  of
  major chemicals of concern; and
• public understanding of chemical
  risks and public involvement in
  environmental decision making.
To achieve this vision, OPPT
• focuses on activities that (1)
  maximize risk-reduction  oppor-
  tunities, emphasizing ecological
  as well as human health con-
  cerns; (2) involve multimedia
  exposures; (3) link OPPT activi-
  ties to EPA priorities; and (4)
  emphasize pollution prevention
acquires, helps to interpret, and
disseminates information to
governments, industry, and the
public on (1) chemical uses,
exposures to chemicals, and
risks posed by chemicals; (2)
chemical releases, including
reductions of toxic chemicals in
releases and in waste streams;
and (3) pollution prevention
technologies, strategies, and
successes; and

supports adoption of pollution
prevention activities by (1) sup-
plying information, training,
and technical assistance to all
sectors of government and
industry and (2) publicly recog-
nizing those who have success-
fully implemented pollution
prevention activities.

OPPT organization chart is on
page 21.
The  reorganization
  reflects the way
  OPPT operates
   today and will
 better accomplish
  OPPT's  mission:
   protecting and
  improving public
      health and
                                   II  CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS

VOL 14/ NO. 1 JANUARY 1993

                                  Existing Chemicals Program
                             Update  of Existing Chemicals Program
                             RM1  and RM2 Activity
 RM materials are
  available to the
public through the
RM administrative
EPA's Existing Chemicals Program
identifies and develops strategies
for managing risks posed by
"existing chemicals," those chemi-
cals that can be commercially pro-
duced or used under the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA).
There are about 70,000 existing
chemicals in the United States.
The Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics (OPPT) administers the
Existing Chemicals Program,
which comprises two levels of

• During Risk Management One
  (RM1), OPPT identifies exist-
  ing chemicals that (1) need
  additional testing; (2) present
  potentially significant risk-man-
  agement concern; or (3) do not
  currently  require further OPPT
• During Risk Management Two
  (RM2), OPPT focuses on (1)
  improving understanding about
  the potential risks posed by expo-
  sure to particular chemicals and
  (2) developing strategies to reduce
  or eliminate the potential risks.

Activity update
A chart showing RM1 and RM2
activity as of July 1992 ran in
Chemicals-in-Progress Bulletin,
Volume 13, No. 2. The chart on
page 23 shows only those chemi-
cals that have moved to another
stage of RM review as of October

For more information
OPPT encourages public partici-
pation throughout the RM
process. RM materials are available
to the public through the RM
administrative record. The public
can gain access to  the administra-
tive record in four ways:
 1.  In person, by going to the
    Public Reading Room, in
    room G-004 of the Northeast
    Mall, EPA headquarters, 401
    M Street, S.W., Washington,
    D.C., between 8:00 a.m. and
    noon and 1:00 p.m. and 4
    p.m., Monday through Friday.
 2.  By  writing to
    EPA/OPPT/PDB (TS-793),
    Attention: RM Administrative
    Record, Room G-004,
    Northeast Mall, 401 M Street,
    S.W., Washington, D.C.,
 3.  By  calling (202) 260-3587.
 4.  By  FAXing (202) 260-4655,
    Attention: RM Administrative
                                  CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS

                         Existing Chemicals Program
RM Activity from July 1992 through September 1992
Chemical Name
Aerosol paints
Carpet emissions
Lead encapsulants
Lead, nonplumbing solder
Methyl ethyl ketone
/methyl isobutyl ketone
Metal-cutting fluids
Phosphoric acid waste
Chemical Cluster
Management audit
Glycol ethers
Tri (alkyl/alkoxy)
RM1 Activity
Risk reduction
Testing to assess the effect of carpet
emissions in laboratory animals




RM1 Activity
RM2 Activity
Entered in queue for assessment

Consent agreements and voluntary industry
agreements to convert to cleaner product
Implementing RM2 exit options
(Implementing lower American
Conference of Governmental Industrial
Hygienists' threshold level value; negotiat-
ing with industry on labeling)

Exited RM2 in October 1992

Assessment under way individually and
as part of paint-stripping cluster

Exited RM2 in August 1992
RM2 Activity

                         VOL. 147 NO. 1 JANUARY 1993

                                        Existing Chemicals Program
1992 Master Testing  List Is Available
For the Master Testing List or
additional information, contact
the TSCA Assistance Information
Service (TSCA hotline) at
(202) 554-1404.

EPA has updated the Master
Testing List (MTL), which is the
agency's agenda for testing indus-
trial chemicals over the next two
to three years.  Development of
test data is necessary because exist-
ing test data on the substances are
insufficient for EPA to evaluate
potential health and environmen-
tal risks. The MTL indicates the
testing needed for hazard end-
points (health and environmental
toxicity) and exposure.

Additions to the  MTL
Since 1990, when EPA released the
first MTL, the  agency has added
222 chemical substances and nine
chemical categories to  the MTL.

The 222 chemical substances com-
prise  106 chemicals from the
Organization for  Economic
Cooperation and  Development's
Screening Information Data Set
(SIDS) program;  14 chemicals  des-
ignated by the Interagency Testing
Committee in  its 27th and 28th
Reports; 66 chemicals from the
category of glycidol and glycidol
derivatives; 12 chemicals from the
category of aryl phosphates; 12
chemicals that are listed in the
proposed multi-chemical test rule
for developmental and reproduc-
tive toxicity; 10 chemicals that are
listed in the proposed multi-chem-
ical test rule for neurotoxicological
effects; refractory ceramic fibers,
for which exposure monitoring
will be undertaken; and formalde-
hyde, for which emissions charac-
terization in new conventional and
manufactured housing will take

The nine chemical categories that
have been added are persistent
bioaccumulators; chemical  cate-
gories of concern identified by
EPA's New Chemicals Program; a
subset of chemicals from the
Toxics Release Inventory; a subset
of chemicals from the air toxics list
in section 112 of the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990; a subset of
chemicals listed for priority testing
by the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry
under section 104 of the
Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act;  respirable
synthetic and naturally occurring
fibers; polychlorinated dioxins and
furans in wood pulp and paper
mill sludge; volatile organic com-
pounds from carpets and carpet
products for indoor air source char-
acterization; and volatile organic
compounds from paint, varnishes,
and other interior coatings for
indoor air source characterization.

Summary of testing  activity
Since 1990, EPA has  begun efforts
to obtain needed testing for more
than 110 chemicals.  EPA has also
issued test rules, signed consent
orders, or negotiated voluntary
agreements with industry for test-
ing six individual chemicals and
various chemicals in carpet and
carpet products.  Risk assessments
were completed for more than 40
chemicals, and these chemicals
were deleted from the 1992 MTL.
Further, industry from around the
world is voluntarily testing 159
international high-production-vol-
ume chemicals through the SIDS
program. U.S. participants have
agreed to test 39 of the SIDS

EPA asks for submission of
existing data
EPA requests that industry and
other parties submit existing rele-
vant data on the substances listed
in the MTL. Existing data may
meet or refocus the need for test-
ing of specific chemicals and make
it unnecessary for the agency to
develop consent orders and test
rules under the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA).  The agency
encourages respondents to consult
EPA prior to submitting such
information. For consultations,
contact David Williams, Chemical
Control Division (TS-794), U.S.
EPA, 401 M Street, S.W.,
Washington D.C. 20460; tele-
phone, (202) 260-8130.

How to submit comments
To provide comments on this or
future  updates of the MTL, write
to the TSCA Public Docket (TS-
793), Attn: TSCA Section 4
Master Testing List, Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20460.
                                        CHEMICALS IM PROGRESS

                                       TSCA Confidential Business Information
EPA to Propose Measures to
Decrease Number of TSCA  CBI Submissions
Early this year, EPA will propose a
number of voluntary and regulato-
ry measures to reduce the amount
of material submitted as confiden-
tial business information (CBI)
under the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA). The proposal
follows a commissioned study's
findings that CBI claims severely
limit public access to TSCA data
and that a significant number of
claims do not appear to be sup-
portable under the statute. EPA
will continue to protect legitimate
CBI claims that preserve a compa-
ny's competitive advantage, such
as CBI claims made for informa-
tion contained in premanufacture
notices submitted for review.

TSCA directs EPA to collect
chemical data and make it avail-
able to the public. The law also
allows companies to claim infor-
mation submitted to EPA as confi-
dential, provided the information
meets certain criteria. EPA pro-
vides full CBI security protection
to all CBI claims. However, there
are no penalties under TSCA for
false claims of confidentiality, and
EPA's existing procedures do not
provide effective regulatory con-
trols for CBI claims. The CBI
study found that the proportion of
data submitted under TSCA that
is covered by CBI claims is much
greater than that for data submit-
ted under other statutes that col-
lect comparable information, but
which impose more stringent
requirements for asserting CBI
claims. In fact, the study found
publicly available data in the
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
that were similar to data claimed
as CBI under TSCA.

OPPT activity
The Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics (OPPT) has taken steps
to reverse the  upward trend of CBI
submissions. The focus of this
effort was, and continues to be,
health and safety studies and
notices of substantial risk submit-
ted under sections 8(d) and 8(e) of
TSCA. First, in 1990, OPPT initi-
ated a program to challenge sub-
missions that did not appear to
meet the  legal definition of CBI.
In every case challenged by EPA,
the submitting company amended
its CBI claim. Second, in 1991,
OPPT commissioned the study of
CBI claims. The study, completed
last year, found that while many
CBI claims are valid, many others
are unsubstantiated or are not
allowed under the TSCA. Third, in
September 1992, OPPT began a
series of individual meetings with
industry, state officials, and repre-
sentatives from environmental
groups  to discuss the study's find-
ings and the future direction of the
TSCA CBI program. Fourth, in
October 1992, OPPT held an open
public meeting on the subject.
In these meetings, participants
discussed whether OPPT should
(1) exclude certain classes of infor-
mation from ever being submitted
as CBI; (2) allow CBI claims to
expire after an established time
limit, known as a sunset provision;
(3) require industry to substantiate
CBI claims at the time of submit-
tal; or (4) require that a senior
company official certify the claim
is necessary, as required when sub-
mitting CBI to the TRI. The par-
ticipants' comments are being con-
sidered by EPA in preparing for
the next step: proposing voluntary
and regulatory measures to
decrease TSCA CBI submissions.
The proposal will be subject to a
public meeting and further discus-
sions with industry, states, and
public interest groups.
In the course of the coming year,
OPPT will continue to meet with
interested and affected members of
the community to address TSCA
CBI issues. OPPT is especially
interested in working with  indus-
try to voluntarily reduce the num-
ber of CBI claims. Education pro-
grams, voluntary industry
guidelines, and other cooperative
activities could reduce the need for
regulatory measures. OPPT will
continue to review and challenge
CBI claims for information  sub-
mitted about existing chemicals,
which are listed on the TSCA
                                       VOL. 14 / NO. 1 JANUARY 1993

                                       Indoor Air Activities
EPA Conducts Study of Environmental  Design
Used in Washington State Office Building
EPA is conducting a large-scale
pilot study in an office building to
confirm the effectiveness of using
fresh-air exchanges to flush out
indoor pollutants. The office
building is part of a government
complex in Olympia, Washington.
In 1989, the state of Washington
received complaints from state
employees about their office build-
ing's air quality. The complaints
spurred the state to design envi-
ronmental features into other office
buildings planned for the govern-
ment complex. The Natural
Resources Building, completed
last April, is the site of the pilot
study. EPA will use the pilot find-
ings to develop a more detailed
study of the Ecology Building,
slated for completion in 1993-
In designing the buildings, the
state set maximum indoor pollu-
tant levels and established testing
procedures to ensure that the lim-
its are met.  Before purchasing
building materials, the state devel-
oped environmental criteria for
heating, ventilation and air condi-
tioning systems and required ven-
dors to certify that interior finish-
es, furnishings, and products met
established emission rates.

How effective is fresh-air flushing?
EPA is evaluating whether the
state's efforts did in fact improve
the air quality in the Natural
Resources Building. The study is
primarily focusing on the effective-
ness of a 90-day flush-out period,
which took place prior to the build-
ing's occupation. During these 90
days, the heating and air condition-
ing system continuously flushed the
building with outdoor air and
exhausted the building's indoor air.
The state specified that furnishings,
wall coverings, flooring, and carpet-
     This is the first
   study that seeks to
     confirm that the
       improves air
      quality in large
ing were to be installed prior to or
during the flush-out period.

Chamber studies have demonstrat-
ed the effectiveness of a flush-out
period in increasing emissions of
toxics from products used indoors.
Scientists have speculated that air
exchange would also work in larg-
er areas. This is the first study,
however, that seeks to confirm that
the procedure improves air quality
in large buildings.

EPA's evaluation
EPA is analyzing air samples from
the building for total volatile
organic compounds, individual
volatile organic compounds, and
total particulates. The samples, col-
lected in periodic intervals over
eight months, were taken from four
representative locations within the
building and from  air drawn into
the building through the heating
and air conditioning system. The
agency also set up continuous mon-
itors at one site in the building. In
addition, EPA continuously moni-
tored emissions of formaldehyde at
the four representative locations.

Throughout the eight-month peri-
od, EPA periodically measured the
rate at which outdoor and indoor
air were exchanged in the build-
ing. Temperature and humidity,
which affect the release of pollu-
tants from products, were also
measured at the four representative
locations. EPA  expects to complete
its analysis in April 1993.

For more information
To obtain additional information
about the pilot study, write to Sid
Abel, Economics, Exposure, and
Technology Division (TS-779),
U.S. EPA, 401  M Street, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20460.
                                    •1  CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS

                                     Indoor Air Activities
Indoor Air Pollution Prevention Program Seeks to Reduce
Health Risks From Products Used Indoors
In the early '80s, EPA compared
the results of air samples taken
from public buildings with air
samples taken outdoors. The
results indicated that indoor air
was frequently more polluted than
outdoor air in both rural and urban
areas. Since then, EPA has worked
on a number of projects to  reduce
indoor air pollution.

One of these programs is the
Indoor Air Pollution Prevention
    The program will
    ask manufacturers
    to characterize the
   chemical emissions
   from their  products.
Program. In this program, EPA is
identifying products that con-
tribute to indoor air pollution and
obtaining data on the chemicals
contained in those products. The
long-term goal of the Indoor Air
Pollution Prevention Program is to
reduce the risks associated with
products in indoor environments.
EPAs Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) and
the Indoor Air Division, of EPA's
Office of Radiation and Indoor Air
U.S. Census Bureau Product Classes Used for
Indoor Air Pollution Prevention Program
The Indoor Air Pollution Prevention Program is screening products by
their product class. The product classes have been denned by the U.S.
Census Bureau's Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system.
For instance, the Indoor Air Pollution Prevention Program is assessing
resilient floor covering. The breakdown of the SIC classification for this
product class is shown below.
                                       Product group
       Product class
       (five-digit code)
       (seven-digit code)
       Product name/brand
 Building materials
 Consumer products
 Furnishings and equipment
 Resilient floor covering
 Sheet vinyl flooring
 Armstrong vinyl flooring
Programs, are working together on
the Indoor Air Pollution
Prevention Program.

Prioritizing product
classes for review
OPPT's Indoor Air Pollution
Prevention Program has designed a
system to rank product classes by the
risks they pose in the indoor environ-
ment. The Existing Chemicals Pro-
gram will review the product classes
in the order of their risk scores. (For
information about product classes,
see accompanying article.)

The ranking system uses a source-
ranking database to score product
classes according to existing informa-
tion on chemical formulations, emis-
sions, product use rates, toxicity, and
the size of exposed populations.

chemical emissions
The Indoor Air Pollution
Prevention Program will ask man-
ufacturers to characterize the chem-
ical emissions from their products.
OPPT will analyze this informa-
tion and document the extent of
chemical use in each product class.
Health hazard information will be
developed to develop a quantitative

Indoor Air continued on page 28
     VOL 14/NO 1  JANUARY 1993

                                        Indoor Air Activities
Indoor Air continued from page 27
or qualitative sense of a chemical's
OPPT will seek voluntary agree-
ments with industry to conduct the
characterizations. If this approach
is unsuccessful, the agency will use
its regulatory authorities under the
Toxic Substances Control Act

Reducing indoor
toxics emissions
To reduce the risks posed by indoor
air pollution, the Indoor Air
Pollution Prevention Program is
focusing on reducing the toxic
emissions from building materials
and other products widely used by
consumers at home and at work.
Reductions are best achieved by
substituting chemicals used in pro-
ducing consumer products or by
developing alternative products
and technologies.
OPPT plans (1) to actively work
with industry and other interested
people to assess how indoor air pol-
lutants affect human health; (2) to
solicit voluntary participation in
surveys of existing alternative and
safer products and technologies
that could result in reductions of
indoor emissions; (3) to encourage
development of new products and
technologies for source reduction;
and (4) to develop regulations
under TSCA, when necessary, to
require testing, labeling, or reduc-
tion of toxic emissions.

Assessment process
for product classes
The process for assessing indoor air
products for review is summarized

 1.  OPPT is prioritizing product
    classes according to the poten-
    tial health risks created by
    their toxic emissions. After the
    prioritization is complete,
    OPPT will select a product
    class and perform preliminary
    testing of sample products,
    develop test procedures for
    chemical content and emis-
    sions, and develop market
    studies, exposure estimates,
    estimates of human health risk,
    and other preliminary informa-

 2.  If the information developed
    indicates that the product class
    presents a potential risk, OPPT
    will assess the availability and
    potential risks of alternative
   formulations and technologies.
   At this point, OPPT will also
   establish a stakeholders' dia-
   logue with industry and other
   interested parties. In the stake-
   holders' dialogue, EPA and
   other participants will
   exchange test data and infor-

3. OPPT will encourage industry
   to voluntarily identify and use
   alternative products and tech-
   nologies. OPPT will also ask
   industry to characterize their
   products and to use environ-
   mental indicators to measure
   their progress in reducing
   chemical emissions. If volun-
   tary means cannot be used,
   EPA will use its regulatory
   authorities under TSCA as
Clearinghouse  Provides
Information on  Indoor Air Quality
EPA recently opened IAQ INFO,
formally known as the Indoor Air
Quality Information Clearing-
house. IAQ INFO is a central
resource for information about
indoor air quality.

Three ways to
contact IAQ INFO
 1.  Call (800) 438-4318 or (301)
    585-9020 between 9 a.m. and
    5 p.m., Monday through
    Friday, or leave a voice message
    after hours.
2. FAX (301) 588-3408 at any
3. Write Indoor Air Quality
   Information Clearinghouse,
   IAQ INFO, P.O. Box 37133,
   Washington, D.C. 20013-7133.

NOTE: IAQ INFO is continuing to
build its resources. If your
organization develops or
distributes information on indoor
air quality topics, please contact
IAQ INFO or place IAQ INFO on
your organization's mail list.
                                        CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS

                                     General Information
EPA Reviewing Public Comments on
What Constitutes Chemical Processing  Under TSCA
In September 1992, EPA held a
public meeting to solicit comments
on how chemical "processing" is
defined in the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) and in regula-
tions promulgated under TSCA.
Four representatives from automo-
bile manufacturing groups and
electronics companies spoke at the
meeting and urged EPA to limit
the scope of activities considered as
processing. Such limits would
exclude certain activities—for
instance, the use of chemical sub-
stances to manufacture consumer
goods—from regulation under

Since TSCA was passed in 1977,
EPA has promulgated a number of
regulations in which "processing"
is denned in different ways. The
agency has received numerous
inquiries about the term's defini-
tion. Many of the inquiries sought
to establish when companies are
subject to TSCA requirements for
processors in reporting, keeping
records, and in some cases, testing
Section 3 of TSCA defines
"process" as a step after the manu-
facture of chemical substances or
mixtures. "Processing" a substance
or mixture involves preparing it for
distribution in commerce  in one of
the following ways:
• in the same form or physical
  state as that in which it was
  received by the person who pre-
  pared the substance or mixture;

• in a different form or physical
  state from that in which it was
  received by the person who pre-
  pared the substance or mixture;

• as part of an article containing
  the chemical substance or mix-

About 65 people attended the
September meeting, which was
     Since TSCA was
     passed  in  1977,
          EPA has
      promulgated a
        number of
      regulations in
  which "processing"
       is defined in
      different ways.
held in Washington, D.C. They
represented the chemical, automo-
tive, and electronics industries,
trade associations, law firms, con-
sulting firms, EPA regional offices,
EPAs Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics, EPAs Office
of Compliance Monitoring, EPAs
Office of Enforcement, and EPAs
Office of General Counsel. Oral
remarks were presented by the
American Electronics Association,
the General Electric Company, the
Motor Vehicle Manufacturers
Association of the United States,
and the Association of
International Automobile

EPA also solicited written com-
ment from the public on the term's
definition (57 FR 38832; August
27, 1992). When review of the oral
and written comments is complet-
ed, EPA will address those that it
has determined are of the greatest

For more information
A public record (docket number
00123) is available for review in
the TSCA Public Docket Office, in
room G-004 of the Northeast Mall,
EPA headquarters, 401 M Street,
S.W, Washington, D.C., between
8:00 a.m. and noon and 1:00 p.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through
                                     VOL. 14 / NO. 1 JANUARY 1993

                                      General Information
Revisions to Asbestos
Accreditation  Requirements Under Way
EPA is revising the training and
accreditation requirements for
asbestos control professionals.
Congress mandated the revisions
in the Asbestos School Hazard
Abatement Reauthorization Act
(ASHARA)of 1990.

Since 1987, anyone performing
asbestos abatement work in public
and nonprofit private schools has
been subject to basic training and
accreditation requirements.
ASHARA requires that asbestos
control professionals working in
public and commercial buildings
meet similar requirements and
receive accreditation as of
November 28, 1992. The statute
also increased the hands-on health
and safety training required for all
asbestos workers.
EPA is working toward promulgat-
ing a revised model accreditation
plan as an interim final rule early in
1993. The revised plan will estab-
lish minimum federal training and
accreditation standards. State
accreditation programs are required
to be no less stringent than the EPA
model plan. The agency's Office of
Compliance Monitoring, in the
Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and
Toxic Substances, has provided an
interim compliance policy for con-
tractors to follow until EPA com-
pletes the revised plan.

Public meeting held
On May 13, 1992, EPA published
a Federal Register notice outlining
the changes to the model accredi-
tation plan under consideration
(the 1987 model accreditation plan
is found at 40 CFR part 763,
appendix C to subpart E). The
agency accepted public comment
during a 45-day period and held a
public hearing on June 8, 1992, in
Washington, D.C. The administra-
tive record on the agency's pro-
posed changes comprises 80 writ-
ten submissions and a hearing
transcript, which contains testimo-
ny from 23 commenters.
The public comments are being
carefully considered in develop-
ment of the new rule. When pro-
mulgated, the rule is expected to
provide for a phase-in period to
allow an orderly transition from
the old standards to the new. EPA-
approved state accreditation pro-
grams and all approved training
programs will need to make
adjustments to comply with the
new requirements.
National Human Adipose Tissue  Survey

Specimens Available  for Research

EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) is developing
guidelines to provide researchers access to human adipose tissue speci-
mens collected for the National Human Adipose Tissue Survey
(NHATS). OPPT will announce the procedures for applying for access to
the specimens later this year. EPA is not providing any funds for research
on the specimens; applicants must have their own funding sources.
OPPT began collecting human adipose tissue specimens from the general
U.S.  population in 1970. At first, the agency analyzed the specimens for
the presence of organochlorine pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs). Later, analysis was expanded to include halogenated dioxins and
furans, volatile chemicals, and semi-volatile chemicals.
EPA halted analysis of the specimens in 1988 due to a lack of resources. At
the direction of Congress, however, EPA continued collecting samples and
commissioned a review of the program from the National Academy of
Sciences. The academy's report, issued in May 1991, recommended that
EPA replace NHATS with a human tissue monitoring program centered on
probability sampling of blood, supplemented by adipose tissue collection.
EPA created an agencywide task force  to review the report's findings and
NHATS continued on page 31
                                    II  CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS

                                      General Information
NHATS continued from page 30
recommend a direction for the pro-
gram. In 1992, the task force pro-
posed that human tissue monitor-
ing be incorporated into the
National Human Exposure
Assessment Survey (NHEXAS),
which is being designed by EPA's
Office of Research and Develop-
ment. The task force further rec-
ommended that EPA accelerate
implementation of NHEXAS and
discontinue NHATS.
Accordingly, OPPT has halted col-
lection of specimens under
NHATS. The decision to make
existing specimens available to
researchers is the result of a
lengthy review of the future of
NHATS. All existing specimens
and data files will be preserved
until the end of 1995. At  that
time, OPPT will review the
research petitions received to
determine whether outside interest
merits continuing to preserve the
specimens. At the end of 1997,
OPPT will stop maintaining the
specimens. The NHATS specimens
will be transferred to a new stew-
ard or discarded.
OPPT expresses appreciation to all
the hospitals, medical examiners,
and pathologists who supplied the
specimens from 1970 through
1992 and to the staff at contractor
institutions who provided techni-
cal expertise in analyzing them.

Information on how to petition
EPA for access to the human adi-
pose tissue specimens will be pub-
lished in the Federal Register in
EPA Issues Draft Criteria for
Exempting Chemicals from Reporting
EPA has released a draft document
that clarifies when industrial chem-
icals are exempt from two Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA)
reporting rules. Over the past three
years, a number of chemical compa-
nies have questioned EPA's inter-
pretation of the rules' exclusion
The two rules are the premanufac-
ture notice (PMN) rule and the
inventory reporting rule. The PMN
rule requires that anyone who plans
to manufacture or import a new
chemical substance submit a PMN
to EPA at least 90 days prior to the
activity. The inventory reporting
rule governs reporting for the
TSCA Chemical  Substance
Inventory, commonly referred to as
the TSCA Inventory.
In both rules, reporting is not
required when a  substance
• is not manufactured or processed
  for distribution in commerce as a
  chemical substance per se and
• has no commercial purpose
  separate from  the product of
  which it is a part.
These substances are usually formed
during the manufacture or process-
ing of another substance that is
reportable under TSCA.

EPA sponsored
meetings with industry
The agency held meetings with
representatives from industry and
trade groups in February 1992 and
July 1992. At the July meeting,
EPA's draft document, which had
been released earlier that month,
received a supportive response from

The draft document states that only
commercial chemical substances
that provide the "primary proper-
ties" of a product must be reported
under the two rules. It establishes
three criteria for determining when
substances are exempt from the
TSCA reporting rules:
       A number of
     companies have
    questioned EPA's
     interpretation  of
   the rules' exclusion
 1.  The substance is formed from a
    chemical reaction that involves
    the use of a substance of the
    type described in 40 CFR
Draft Criteria continued on page 32
                                       VOL. 147 NO. 1 JANUARY 1993

                                       General Information / New Chemicals Program
Draft Criteria continued from page 31


2.  The substance does not function
    to provide the primary proper-
    ties that determine the use of
    the product or product mixture
    distributed in commerce, even
    though it may impart certain
    physicochemical characteristics
    to the product or product mix-
    ture of which it is part.

3.  The substance is not itself the
    one intended for distribution in
    commerce. Although it may be
   a component of the product
   mixture or formulation actually
   distributed in commerce, it has
   no commercial purpose separate
   from the product mixture or
   formulation of which it is a

EPA considering comments
Since release of the draft document,
a number of trade associations and
chemical companies have submitted
written comments on it to EPA.
The agency is reviewing the com-
ments before formally proposing a
clarification of the exclusion provi-
sions in the Federal Register in 1993
for public review and comment.

For more information
• For information about the exclu-
  sion provision of the inventory
  reporting rule, see 40 CFR

• For information about the exclu-
  sion provision of the PMN rule,
  see 40 CFR 720.30(h) and 40
  CFR 720.30(h)(7).
Guidelines Available for Submitting
PMN Pollution Prevention Information
Guidelines are now available on pro-
viding pollution prevention infor-
mation about new chemical sub-
stances to EPA. The agency's New
Chemicals Program worked with
the Chemical Manufacturers
Association and other groups in
developing the guidelines.

EPA has incorporated pollution pre-
vention information into its review
of new chemical substances since
1991. That year, the agency began
asking companies to voluntarily
include pollution prevention infor-
mation in premanufacture notices
(PMNs) submitted to the agency's
New Chemicals Program. The New
Chemicals Program, which is part of
the Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics (OPPT), reviews PMNs
to identify new substances that
require regulatory action.
The guidelines discuss the types of
pollution prevention information the
New Chemicals Program considers
in evaluating the toxicity of the new
     Questions about
     individual cases
    can  be discussed
       with the PMN
substance, human exposures to the
substance, and releases of the sub-
stance to the environment. A check-
list of pollution prevention items is
included in the document.

For more information
To obtain a copy of EPA Guidance for
Providing Optional Pollution Prevention
Information in TSCA Section 5
Premanufacture Notices (PMNs), con-
tact the TSCA Assistance
Information Service (TSCA hotline).
For information on how to contact
the TSCA hotline, see page 36.

Comments on the document can
be provided in writing to Stuart
McArthur, Chemical Control
Division (TS-794), U.S. EPA,
401 M Street, S.W., Washington,
D.C. 20460.
Questions about individual cases can
be discussed with the PMN preno-
tice coordinators at (202) 260-1745
or (202) 260-3937.
                                       CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS

                                           New Chemicals Program
OPPT  Begins Pollution Prevention Pilot Programs
EPA's review of new chemical sub-
stances often reveals steps that can be
taken during manufacturing or pro-
cessing to reduce or prevent pollu-
tion. In October 1992, the Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics
(OPPT) announced two new pilot
projects aimed at identifying more
pollution prevention opportunities.

Section 5  of the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) requires anyone
who plans to manufacture or import a
new chemical substance to submit a
premanufacture notice (PMN) to EPA
at least 90 days prior to the activity.

Pollution Prevention
Plan Pilot Program
OPPT's new Pollution Prevention
Plan Pilot Program provides PMN
submitters the option of developing a
plan for reducing unnecessary expo-
sures to or releases of the PMN
chemical. To identify cases for which
development of pollution prevention
plans may be beneficial, the New
Chemicals Program will evaluate the
following three factors: (1) whether
the chemical may present an unrea-
sonable risk to human health or the
environment; (2) the level of human
exposures to the chemical and the
level of environmental  releases; and
(3) the potential for pollution preven-
tion opportunities in the manufac-
ture or processing of the chemical.
The pollution prevention plan will
be used in two circumstances, which
are discussed below.

 1.  If the New Chemicals Program
    determines that a new chemical
    substance may pose unreasonable
    health or environmental risks,
   section 5(e) of TSCA allows EPA
   to enter into a consent order with
   the PMN submitter. A section
   5(e) consent order permits the
   PMN submitter to manufacture
   or import the substance under
   certain restrictions, intended to
   sufficiently mitigate the risk
   from exposures to or releases of
   the chemical. Section  5(e) con-
   sent orders generally require that
   certain toxicity test data be sub-
   mitted before exceeding a speci-
   fied production volume.

   In the future, some section 5(e)
   consent orders will also require
   companies to develop a pollution
   prevention plan when production
   volume of the PMN chemical
   reaches a certain level. EPA is not
   mandating implementation of
   the plan; it is left to the compa-
   ny's discretion.

2. Section 5(e) of TSCA allows EPA to
   permit the PMN submitter to
   suspend the new-chemical review
   period and develop additional data.
   Submitters generally take this step
   when the New Chemicals Program
   determines a substance may pose
   unreasonable health or environ-
   mental risks that cannot sufficiently
   be mitigated by TSCA section 5(e)
   consent order restrictions.

   In these cases, development of a
   pollution prevention plan may
   indicate a safe way to  manufac-
   ture or process the chemical sub-
   stance. EPA will determine, case-
   by-case, whether to require
   implementation of specific pollu-
   tion prevention activities or
   development of additional data.
Alternate Synthetic
Pathway Pilot Program
The objective of the Alternate
Synthetic Pathway Pilot Program is
to assist the PMN submitter in
reducing pollution in the manufac-
ture, processing, and use of new non-
polymer substances that will be pro-
duced in large quantities.

During the PMN review, the New
Chemicals Program will assess the
chemical process being used by the
PMN submitter. An evaluation of
the feedstocks, solvents, byproducts,
and impurities will be conducted to
characterize the waste stream and to
identify where the use and generation
of toxic chemicals can be reduced or
eliminated. Whenever possible, the
New Chemicals Program will identi-
fy alternative processes and provide
information sources to help the PMN
submitter in assessing and modifying
these alternatives.

For more information
To obtain more information on the
Pollution Prevention Plan Pilot
Program, contact Roy Seidenstein,
Chemical Control Division (TS-794),
U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20460; telephone,

To obtain more information on the
Alternate Synthetic Pathway Pilot
Program, contact  Paul Anastas,
Economics, Exposure, and Tech-
nology Division (TS-779), U.S.
EPA, 401 M Street, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20460; telephone,
(202) 260-2257.
                                           VOL. 14 / NO. 1  JANUARY 1993

Appeals Court Upholds TSCA
Import Certification Compliance Rule
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the
3rd Circuit has affirmed EPA's
authority to enforce U.S. Customs
Service regulations for chemical
importers. The court decision
upheld the agency's authority to
require self-policing by importers
and to subject chemical importers
who violate import certification
requirements to civil penalties.

The appellate court also upheld
penalties of $19,500 against the
ALM Corporation, of New Jersey,
for violations of section 15 of the
Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA). Section 15 of TSCA
makes it a violation to fail to sub-
mit reports, notices, or other infor-
mation required by the statute.

In 1985 and 1986, ALM imported
seven shipments of plastic pellets
without certifying to the Customs
Service (1) that the shipments were
in compliance with TSCA regula-
tions or (2) that the shipments
were not subject to TSCA. In
1986, the company imported two
more shipments of the pellets
accompanied by false certification
stating they were not subject to

Importers are required to provide
TSCA certification to the Customs
Service by section 13 of TSCA.
Section 13 of TSCA authorizes the
Customs Service to refuse entry
into the United States of any
chemical substances or mixture
that does not comply with TSCA
or any rule issued under TSCA.
However, the Customs Service did
not detain ALM's shipments, and
in 1986, EPA filed a complaint
against ALM for failure to submit
"reports, notices, or other informa-
tion" required under section 15 of

In 1989, an administrative law
judge found that ALM's failure to
submit appropriate certifications
violated section 15 of TSCA.
Following an appeal by ALM, EPA
Administrator William K. Reilly
issued a final decision and order
affirming the decision and a
$19,500 fine. ALM appealed the
decision to the Court of Appeals
for the 3rd Circuit.

ALM's appeal
In its appeal, the ALM
Corporation argued that (1) the
required certification is not a
"report, notice, or other informa-
tion" under section 15 of TSCA;
(2) Customs Service detainment is
the exclusive remedy when import
shipments violate the compliance
certification requirements; and (3)
a company that violates the com-
pliance certification requirement is
entitled to a "right to rectify" its
violation before penalties are

The Court of Appeals rejected
ALM's arguments. A summary of
the appeals court's ruling follows:

• The required certification
  informs EPA that the chemical
  substances being imported are
  in compliance with applicable
  TSCA requirements and is a
  "report" or at least "other infor-

• Customs Service detainment
  procedures and EPA's TSCA
  penalty provisions are coexisting
  but independent means of
  enforcement: it  is impractical to
  expect the Customs Service to
  identify every noncomplying
  shipment in port, and EPA has
  the authority to impose civil
  penalties for failure to certify.

• Companies are responsible for
  self-policing their compliance
  with  TSCA certification; if com-
  panies were allowed an opportu-
  nity to submit certification after
  the fact, they would have no
  incentive to comply with the
                                        CHEMICALS IM PROGRESS

                                       TSCA Section 8(e) / FYI Submissions
TSCA  Section 8(e)  Notices

Under section 8(e) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), anyone
who obtains information that indicates a chemical may pose a substantial
risk of injury to human health or the environment must report that infor-
mation to EPA within 15 working days of obtaining it.

The Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) received more
than 2,200 TSCA section 8(e) notices from April 1, 1992, through
September 30, 1992. Most of these notices were submitted by companies
participating in EPA's Compliance Audit Program.

In the past, Chemicals-in-Progress Bulletin has listed recent section 8(e)
submissions. Because of the volume of notices recently submitted, how-
ever, the list is not being published in this issue. For information on how
to obtain an index of section 8(e) notices or copies of the notices, see the
related article on  this page.
FYI Submissions

For Your Information (FYI) submissions are voluntary submissions that
cover a wide variety of information and may include data on chemical
toxicity and exposure, epidemiology, monitoring, and environmental
fate. FYIs are submitted by chemical manufacturers, chemical processors,
federal, state, and local agencies, foreign governments, academic institu-
tions, public interest and environmental groups, and the general public.

The agency established the FYI classification system to distinguish such
submissions from notices submitted formally to EPA under section 8(e)
of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The Office of Pollution
Prevention  and Toxics received 28 FYI submissions from April 1,  1992,
through September 30, 1992.
Availability of 8(e)

Notices and FYI


Section 8(e) notices and FYI submis-
sions are available to the public in a
number of ways, which are listed
below. Note that EPA no longer issues
submission summaries of section 8(e)

• Section 8(e) notices and FYI sub-
  missions can be reviewed and pho-
  tocopied at EPA headquarters in
  the OPPT Public Reading Room,
  NE-G004, U.S. EPA, 401 M
  Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.
  20460; telephone, (202) 260-7099.
  The room is open from 8 a.m. to
  noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.,
  Monday through Friday.

• A copy of a full section 8(e) or FYI
  submission can be obtained by
  writing to Freedom of Information
  Office (A101), U.S. EPA, 401 M
  Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.
  20460. Duplication of the first 166
  pages of any document is free. At
  the 167th page, there is a $25 fee
  and an additional $0.15 charge for
  each page. For example, duplica-
  tion of a 167-page document will
  cost $25.15.
• Chronological indices of section
  8(e) and FYI notices are available
  from the TSCA Assistance
  Information Service (TSCA hotline)
  two to three months after the end
  of each  fiscal quarter. The fiscal
  quarters end on September 30,
  December 31, March 31, and June
  30. See page 36 for information on
  how to  contact the hotline.
                                       VOL. 14 / NO. 1 JANUARY 1993

                                       TSCA Hotline
TSCA Hotline: Call (202) 554-1404
The TSCA Assistance Information
Service (TSCA hotline) operates
Monday through Friday, from 8:30
a.m. to 5 p.m. Eastern time. To
speak to an information specialist,
call (202) 554-1404. FAX requests
for documents are received every
day, at all times, on (202) 554-
5603. Documents can also be
requested by deaf persons who
have TDD equipment by calling
To request assistance by mail,
write to the Environmental
Assistance Division at the address
provided on page 37.
TSCA Hotline:  Question  & Answer
Q! Does a chemical substance
being imported for research and
development require certification
under the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA)?

A: Yes, it does. When any chemi-
cal substance is imported into the
United States, the importer must
(1) certify to the U.S. Customs
Service that the shipment is sub-
ject to TSCA and complies with all
applicable rules under TSCA or
(2) certify that the shipment is not
subject to TSCA.

If the imported chemical is not
listed on the TSCA Chemical
Substance Inventory, which is a list
of the chemicals in commerce in
the United States, the importer
must also submit a premanufacture
notice (PMN) to EPA at least 90
days before importing the sub-
stance. However, chemicals that are
imported for research and develop-
ment are exempt from the PMN
requirement if all of the conditions
described below are met. These
conditions are described in general
terms; more specific information is
available from the resources listed
at the end of this article.
 1.  The substance is being import-
    ed in small quantities solely
    for research and development.
    (TSCA defines a small quantity
    as that which is "reasonably

 2.  The importer notifies the peo-
    ple who will work with the
    chemical of the potential
    health risks associated with the

 3.  A technically qualified indi-
    vidual performs the research
    and development or supervises

 4.  The importer notifies everyone
    to whom it distributes the
    substance outside of the
    importing company that use of
    the substance is limited to
    research and development,  and
    the company informs them of
    the substance's potential health

 Noncommercial research
 and development
 Chemicals that are imported for
 noncommercial research and devel-
opment are exempt from PMN
submission requirements.
Examples of noncommercial
research and development are sci-
entific research at a university or
analysis at a hospital.

For more information
• See 40 CFR sections 720.3(cc),
  720.30(c), 720.30(i), 720.36,
  and 720.78.

• See the Chemical on Reporting
  Rules Database (CORR List),
  which lists the chemicals sub-
  ject to proposed or final regula-
  tions under TSCA.
• See questions 45 through 56 in
  the TSCA Guide for Chemical
  Importers I Exporters, An Overview.
• See the New Chemical Information
  Bulletin: Exemptions for Research
  and Development, and Test

To obtain any of the publications
listed here, contact the TSCA
Assistance Information Service
(TSCA hotline) at (202) 554-1404.
                                    il CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS

                                    Information Resources
Send  All Correspondence to
Environmental Assistance Division (TS-799)
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Editor: Jane Gurin
Would  You Like to Receive the
Chemicals-in-Progress Bulletin?

The Chemicals-in-Progress Bulletin is published by EPA's Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics. If you are not currently receiving
the Bulletin and would like to become a subscriber, or if you would
like to stop receiving the Bulletin, please fill out this form or tape a
mailing label onto it, and mail it to the address on this page.

D Please add my name to the mailing list for the Chemicals-in-
   Progress Bulletin.

D I no longer want to receive the Chemicals-in-Progress Bulletin.

D I'd like a copy of the following publication(s):
Company or Organization Name
Type of Business
Street Address
                Zip Code
                                CERCLA, PCBs,
                                and  Ballasts
The September 1992 issue of
Chemicals-in-Progress Bulletin (vol-
ume 13, number 2) discussed what
EPA regulations must be followed
when removing or disposing of
PCBs contained in fluorescent
light fixtures. The statement that
"CERCLA requires that building
owners notify the National
Response Center if they dispose of
or move (from one location to
another) more than one pound of
PCBs within 24 hours" generated
questions from readers who asked
for a reference for the statement.

CERCLA defines a release or threat
of release to include the discarding
of containers or other closed recep-
tacles containing any hazardous
substance, pollutant or contami-
nant, such as PCB-containing fluo-
rescent light ballasts, into the
environment (40 CFR section
300.5). A release equal to or
exceeding the reportable quantity
in any 24-hour period requires
notification  to the National
Response Center (40 CFR section
302.6). Placement into or destruc-
tion by an approved disposal facili-
ty should not be considered a
release to the environment and no
notification  is required.

For more information
For additional information on
CERCLA reporting requirements,
contact the Superfund hotline at
                                    VOL. 14 / NO. 1 JANUARY 1993

                                     Information Resources

New Publications

From the TSCA Hotline
New information package on the Organization for Economic and Community Development's Screening
Information Data Set (SIDS) program. Single copies can be obtained by calling or sending a FAX to the TSCA
hotline (see page 36) or by filling out and mailing the form on page 37.

From EPA's Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know (EPCRA) Information Hotline
Managing Chemicals Safely uses nontechnical language to explain good practices for managing chemical process
safety, suggests how to get started, and recommends sources and resources for more information. The publica-
tion is directed to owners and managers of small- to medium-sized businesses that use hazardous chemicals.

Single copies can be obtained by calling the EPCRA hotline at (800) 535-0202 or (703) 920-9877. Additional
copies and bulk orders can be ordered from the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO) for $2.00 a copy; the
order number is 055-000-00398-0. Information about ordering from GPO is below.

From the U.S. Lead Hotline
The brochure Lead Poisoning and Your Children, which explains how to reduce children's exposure to lead in the
home, is available from the U.S. lead  hotline at (800) 532-3394. See page 17 for additional information about
the brochure and the hotline.

From the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS)
The NIBS Manual:  Asbestos Operations  and Maintenance Work Practices is available in hard copy or on diskette from
NIBS, 1201 L Street, N.W., Suite 400, Washington, D.C. 20005; telephone, (202) 289-7800; FAX, (202) 289-1092.
Contact NIBS for information on prices.
                          To order publications from the
                        U.S. Government Printing Office
                                   Superintendent of Documents
                                        P.O. Box 371954
                                   Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954
                                   Telephone: (202) 783-3238
                                      FAX: (202)275-2529
                                      CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS

                                   Information Resources
Agency's Information Resources
Described in ACCESS EPA
ACCESS EPA is a series of directo-
ries that provides contacts and
descriptions of information avail-
able to the public from EPA and
related sources. The directories can
be purchased individually from the
National Technical Information
Service (NTIS).
A consolidated volume of ACCESS
EPA can be purchased for $21
from NTIS or the U.S.
Government Printing Office
(GPO). For information on con-
tacting NTIS and GPO, see below
and page 38.
                              Series Title
                      NTIS Order Number     GPO Order Number
ACCESS EPA               PB92-147438
ACCESS EPA               PB91-151571
 Public Information Tools
ACCESS EPA               PB91-151589
 Major EPA Dockets
ACCESS EPA               PB91-151597
 Clearinghouses and Hotlines
ACCESS EPA               PB91-151605
 Records Management Programs
ACCESS EPA               PB91-151613
 Major EPA Environmental Databases
ACCESS EPA               PB91-151621
 Libraries and Information Services
                              ACCESS EPA
                               State Environmental Libraries
                        To order publications from the
                  National Technical Information Service
                                   5285 Port Royal Road
                                   Springfield, VA 22161
                                 Telephone: (703) 487-4650
                                   FAX: (703)321-8547
                                  VOL. 14 / NO. 1 JANUARY 1993

                                       Information Resources
Toxicology Profile Information Line
The Agency for Toxic Substances
and Disease Registry (ATSDR) has
developed more than 100 toxico-
logical chemical profiles, which are
available to interested parties.
Each profile contains information
on potential exposure routes to the
chemical substance, possible health
effects of exposure, and other sci-
entific data.
A list of the available profiles can
be obtained through the automat-
ed TOX Information Line at (404)
639-6000. The TOX Information
Line also provides information
about how to order toxicological
profiles. A touchtone phone is
required to use the automated line,
which operates 24 hours a day.
ATSDR also announces the avail-
ability of profiles in the Federal
ATSDR is part of the Department
of the U.S. Public Health Service.
The agency is responsible for
developing information about the
health effects caused by hazardous
substances found at hazardous
waste sites.
 EPA's Public  Information System
 17EPA's Public Information
 Center (PIC) responds to inquiries
 for general information about EPA
 or the environment. The PIC also
 directs public inquiries on techni-
 cal issues to EPA program offices,
 clearinghouses, dockets, hotlines,
 and other federal agencies.
 Requests for information can be
 made by calling (202) 260-7751
 or (202) 260-2080; by FAXing
 (202) 260-6257; or by writing or
 visiting Public Information Center
(PM211-B), U.S. EPA, 401 M
Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.
20460. The PIC accepts phone
calls and FAXes from 8:00 a.m. to
5:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday. The PIC is open to visitors
from 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday. The PIC
is closed on federal holidays.

Other services
available to PIC visitors
The PIC Visitor Center contains
computer workstations that allow
visitors to gain access to a variety
of data bases, including EPA's
online library system, the Toxics
Release Inventory, and several EPA
bulletin boards, such as the
Pollution Prevention Information
Exchange System (PIES). In addi-
tion, the PIC provides presenta-
tions, multimedia programs, and
tours to on-site visitors.
     United States
     Environmental Protection Agency
     Washington, DC 20460
     Official Business
     Penalty for Private Use $300
     Address Correction Requested
                                              BULK RATE
                                              Postage and Fees Paid
                            1 7 7 o 3
                            EPA  L
                                                              CHICAGO/  1L