Chemicals
in Progress
VOL12/N0.3
AUGUST 1991
OFFICE OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
highlights
6 Efforts to Revitalize Existing
Chemicals Program Show
Results
10 TSCA Section 4(e)
Priority List Revised
TOXICS RELEASE INVENTORY
1 TRI Emissions Have Decreased
2-5 Other TRI Articles
Toxics Release Inventory
TRI Releases Decrease by Almost 800 Million Pounds in 1989
Initial results of the 1989 Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) show that 5.7 billion
pounds of toxic chemicals were released into the nation's environment by
22,650 industrial facilities. The release data represent a decrease of almost 800
million pounds from releases reported for 1988, EPA Administrator William
K. Reilly said May 17 when the 1989 data were released.
The inventory shows that in 1989, 189 million pounds of toxic chemicals were
released into rivers, lakes, streams, and other bodies of water; 2.4 billion pounds
were emitted into the air; 445 million pounds were disposed of in landfills; and
1.2 billion pounds were injected into underground wells. An additional 551
million pounds were transferred to municipal wastewater treatment plants, and
916 million pounds were transferred to treatment and disposal facilities.
From 1987, the first year for which TRI data were collected, to 1989, emissions
and transfers of all TRI chemicals decreased by 1.3 billion pounds. Estimated
air releases, which account for 42 percent of all releases and transfers, decreased
by 8 percent; releases to water decreased by 54 percent; and releases to land
decreased by 39 percent. About half of the decline in releases to water and
land, however, may be attributable to facilities' faulty estimates of 1987 releases
of mineral acids and metal compounds.
Evidence suggests, though, that the numbers indicate real reductions in toxic
emissions. First, 2,000 more facilities reported for 1989 than for 1987. Sec-
ond, industrial production by the majority of industries required to submit
reports increased between 1987 and 1989.
The TRI's effectiveness as a tool for improving environmental management has
far exceeded EPA's expectations. "TRI has been extensively used by citizen
groups, government agencies, and corporations to assess the potential health
TRI Releases continued on page 5
VOL.12/N0.3 AUGUST 1991
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
Toxics Release Inventory
General Accounting Office Releases Report on TRI Implementation
In a review of the implementation of
the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI),
the General Accounting Office
(GAO) found that TRI information is
valuable in helping to reduce pollu-
tion and recommended certain
changes to improve its usefulness.
GAO presented a report on its re-
view—Toxic Chemicals: EPA's Toxic
Release Inventory Is Useful, But Can Be
Improved-—to Congress in June 1991.
The report was required by the 1986
Emergency Planning and Commu-
nity Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA),
which established the TRI.
The first year for which TRI data
were collected was 1987. The GAO
observed that since 1989, when the
first data were published, the TRI has
shown itself to be a valuable informa-
tion resource. TRI data were used by
Congress to support more stringent
clean air legislation and by EPA,
states, and industry in efforts to con-
trol and reduce pollution.
GAO recommended that EPA im-
prove the TRI in a number of ways,
including the following:
• identify additional sources of toxic
emissions, including
nonmanufacturers and facilities
with fewer than 10 employees, that
should be required to submit TRI
reports;
• identify additional toxic chemicals
for which reporting should be re-
quired;
• develop a public outreach strategy
to more effectively publicize data
availability;
• develop an inspection strategy for
EPA regional offices to use to
identify facilities that have failed
to submit TRI data and issue na-
tional guidance for implementing
this strategy; and
• place greater emphasis on verifying
data quality, with particular atten-
tion to assessing the reasonableness
of emissions estimates.
GAO recommended to Congress that
it amend the law (1) to require that
any federal facility meeting the re-
porting criteria be required to submit
annual reports on its toxic emissions,
unless doing so would threaten na-
tional security, and (2) to provide
EPA with explicit authority to in-
spect facilities subject to TRI report-
ing requirements.
To order a copy, call GAO at (202)
275-6241 and request document
number RCED-91-121.
I Information about
EPCRA Available from
Hotline
The Emergency Planning and Com-
munity Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA)
Information Hotline provides infor-
mation about EPCRA-related issues
such as
• the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
provisions of EPCRA,
• emergency planning and notification,
• trade secrecy provisions, and
• emergency and hazardous chemical
inventory reporting.
The EPCRA Information Hotline
operates from 8:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m.
Eastern time, Monday through Fri-
day. The hotline can be reached by
calling (800) 535-0202 or
(703) 920-9877.
Analysis of 1989 TRI Data to Be Released in Fall
EPA will publish an analysis of the
data collected for the 1989 Toxics
Release Inventory (TRI) in fall 1991.
The report, Toxics in the Community,
will provide detailed information
about the scope and requirements of
section 313 of the Emergency Plan-
ning and Community Right-to-
Know Act (EPCRA), which estab-
lished the inventory. It also will
present a comprehensive analysis of
the 1989 data, including comparisons
with data from previous years.
To help the public use TRI more
effectively, Toxics in the Community
will provide examples of different
ways the data can be used and various
methods for analyzing the data. It
will also report on activities carried
out by federal and state governments,
citizen groups, and other users of
TRI data.
For more information about Toxics in
the Community, contact Ken Mitchell,
Economics and Technology Division
(TS-779), Environmental Protection
Agency, 401 M Street, S.W., Wash-
ington, B.C. 20460; phone, (202)
260-3960.
B
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
How to Obtain TRI Data
Toxics Release Inventory
• 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 Infor-
mation Services, National Library
of Medicine, 8600 Rockville Pike,
Bethesda, MD 20894. Account
holders also have access to other
National Library of Medicine data-
bases on toxicology, health, and
chemical substances.
• At the library. Access to state TRI
data is available at most federal
depository and county public li-
braries. The depository libraries
holding the fiche or CD-ROM in
their collections are listed in Fed-
eral 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, mag-
netic tape, or written report These
formats can be purchased from the
National Technical Information
Service (NTIS) or the U.S. Govern-
ment Printing Office (GPO). The
years for which the data are avail-
able and ordering numbers are
listed below. For additional infor-
mation, please contact NTIS at
(703) 487-4650 or GPO at (202)
783-3238 (microfiche or report
form) or (202) 275-0186 (CD-
ROM or magnetic tape).
I TRI Data Available for Purchase
NTIS
GPO
CD-ROM
Microfiche
Diskette
Magnetic Tape
Report
1987 National
inventory
#PB90-502311
1987 National
inventory
#055-000-00356-4
1987 National
inventory
*
1987-lndividual state
*
1987 National
inventory
#055-000-00320-3
1987 Individual state
*
1987 and 1988
National inventory
*
1987 and 1988
Individual state
*
1988 National
inventory
*
1988 Individual state
t
1987 National
inventory
#PB-89-1 86068
1988 National
inventory
#PB-90-502030
1989 National
inventory
#PB-91 -507509
1987 National
inventory
*
1988 National
inventory
*
1989 National
inventory
*
1987 Complete
report
tfPB-208144
1987 Executive
summary
#PB-208151
1987 Complete
report
#055-000-0290-8
1987 Executive
summary
#055-000-0289-4
1988 Complete
report
#055-000-00363-7
Order number 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.12/N0.3 AUGUST 1991
-------
Toxics Release Inventory
Toxics Release Inventory Section 313 Petitions
Receipt Date
Chemical Name
Action 180-Day Proposed Rule
Submitter Requested Deadline PR Pub Date
Final Rule or
Denial Pub Date
PETITIONS DENIED
11/25/86
04/30/87
05/15/87
05/15/87
05/1 5/87
07/13/88
07/13/88
09/09/88
04/1 4/89
04/14/89
05/1 5/89
06/27/89
08/07/89
09/05/89
09/07/89
09/1 9/89
12/12/89
01/29/90
Inorganic Fluorides
Orthophenylphenol
Cobalt and Compounds
Nickel and Compounds
Manganese and Compounds
Ethylene
Propylene
Cyclohexane
Cadmium Selenide
Cadmium Sulfide
Decabromodiphenyl Oxide
Cr/Sb/Ti Buff Rutile
Barium Sulfate
Antimony Compound
Zinc Borate Hydrate
Barium Sulfate
Sulfuric Acid
Zinc Sulfide
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.
ECOLAB Inc.
Ore and Chemical Corp.
List /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Defist /
DeEist /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ 02/12/90
/ / /
/ / /
/ 02/1 2/90
/ / /
/ / /
05/29/87
10/29/87
12/03/87
12/03/87
12/03/87
01/27/89
01/27/89
03/15/89
10/19/89
10/18/89
11/03/89
01/08/90
05/23/91
02/13/90
03/20/90
05/23/91
06/18/90
08/01/90
PETITIONS GRANTED
08/24/87
08/1 9/87
08/19/87
10/06/87
10/06/87
10/06/87
10/07/87
04/22/88
06/01/88
06/01/88
06/01/88
08/09/88
09/30/88
Titanium Dioxide
Titanium Dioxide
Titanium Dioxide
Titanium Dioxide
C.I. Acid Blue 9, Diammenium
Salt
C.I. Acid Blue 9, Disodium
Salt
Melamine Crystal
Sodium Hydroxide Solution
C.I. Pigment Blue 15
C.I. Pigment Green 7
C.I. Pigment Green 36
Sodium Sulfate
Alum. Oxide (Non-Fibrous)
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
Industry
Ecological and Toxicological Assoc.
of the Dyestuffs Manufacturing
Industry
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.
Delist /
Delist /
Defist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Delist /
Deiist /
Delist /
/ 02/19/88
/ 02/19/88
/ 02/1 9/88
/ 02/19/88
/ 04/1 2/88
/ 04/1 2/88
/ 06/20/88
/ 12/09/88
/ 05/15/91
/ 05/15/89
/ 05/15/89
/ 02/1 7/89
/ 04/1 2/89
06/20/88
06/20/88
06/20/88
06/20/88
10/07/88
10/07/88
03/29/89
12/15/89
05/23/91
05/23/91
05/23/91
06/20/89
02/14/90
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
Toxics Release Inventory
Toxics Release Inventory Section 313 Petitions
Receipt Pate Chemical Name
Submitter
Action 180-Day
Requested Deadline
Proposed Rule Final Rule or
FR Pub Date Denial Pub Date
07/27/89 Terephthalic Acid
01/09/90 Seven CFCs and Halons
PETITIONS PENDING
11/19/90 Phosphoric Acid
05/21/91 Chromium (III) Compounds
PROPOSED RULES
02/09/87 Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
01/23/89 Ammonium Sulfate (SOLN)
12/24/90 SulfuricAcid
Amoco Corp.
Natural Resources Defense Council
and Governors Mario Cuomo of
New York, Madeleine Kunin of
Vermont, and Thomas Kean of
New Jersey
The Fertilizer Institute
California Products Corp.
Monsanto Chemical Co.
Allied Signal, Inc.
American Cyanamid
Delist
List
Delist
Delist
02/15/90
03/21/90
05/18/91 / /
11/17/91 / /
12/10/90
08/03/90
Delist / / 07/20/87 / /
Delist / / 03/30/90 / /
Modify 07/13/91 07/02/91 / /
TRI Releases continued from page 1
and environmental risks posed by
chemical emissions and to target
reductions where the opportunities
are the greatest," Administrator
ReiLly said.
The laws passed in 15 states to pre-
vent pollution or to reduce the use of
toxic chemicals demonstrate the im-
portant role that the TRI can play in
supporting the passage of new legis-
lation. Many of these laws resulted
from lobbying by local environmen-
tal and citizen action groups using
TRI data from their regions. Use of
specific TRI data has also been the
basis for petitions filed by citizen
groups in 10 states to designate addi-
tional bodies of water as "toxic
hotspots" under the Clean Water
Act. Such a designation triggers a
requirement for tightened effluent
limitations in discharge permits.
Public involvement has also raised
the awareness of manufacturing fa-
cilities about the toxic chemicals they
release into the environment.
Use of TRI data through the Na-
tional Library of Medicine's
TOXNET system has increased
steadily, as have telephone calls to
EPA's TRI User Support service. In
both areas, activity and requests by
Local citizens show an increased
knowledge of the information con-
tained in the TRI. (See article on
page 3 for information about how to
obtain access to TRI data.)
The Pollution Prevention Act of
1990 significantly expands TRI data
collection. In the TRI reporting
forms due by July 1992, facilities
will be required to submit informa-
tion about changes in and projections
for future waste reduction, treatment
and recycling, source reduction prac-
tices, methods used for calculating
reductions, and estimates of one-time
chemical releases not associated with
routine production processes.
The TRI is required by law under the
1986 Emergency Planning and Com-
munity Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA). The law requires that cer-
tain industrial facilities with 10 or
more full-time employees provide
annual emissions estimates for more
than 300 toxic chemicals and 20
chemical categories that are manufac-
tured, processed, or used in excess of
certain threshold amounts. EPA re-
ceived more than 80,000 reports for
1989-
B
VOL.12/N0.3 AUGUST 1991
-------
Existing Chemicals
Process to Review Existing Chemicals Shows Results
RM1 Process Worked Well in First Year of Implementation
Last year, the Office of Toxic Sub-
stances (OTS) initiated a new effort
to increase the number and effective-
ness of actions taken to reduce or
eliminate potential health and envi-
ronmental risks posed by chemicals
currently in production.
Chemicals currently in production—
referred to as "existing chemicals"—
are listed on the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) Inventory. Of
the approximately 70,000 chemicals
on the inventory, OTS's Existing
Chemicals Program is focusing on the
14,000 nonpolymeric chemicals pro-
duced in quantities greater than
10,000 pounds annually. (OTS's
New Chemicals Program assesses
"new chemicals"—chemicals not yet
in production.)
Two levels of review
The new Existing Chemicals Program
has two levels of review: Risk Manage-
ment One (RM1) and Risk Manage-
ment Two (RM2). An explanation of
the RM1 process and a summary of
how it worked in its first year of
implementation follow. On page 9
is a report on how opportunities for
pollution prevention are identified
during the RM2 process, the second
stage of review. The RM2 process will
be summarized in a later issue of the
Ckemicals-'m-Pngress Bulletin.
Risk Management One (RM1)
The purpose of RM1 is to identify
chemicals that require further action.
The first step in the RM1 process is to
screen chemicals for review. OTS
identifies screening candidates from
its own analyses and databases and
receives nominations from interna-
tional organizations, states, environ-
mental groups, labor organizations, and
other EPA offices, including regional
I RM1 Decisions
Risk Reduction List
Acrylonitrile
Aniline
Bromoe thane
Carpet emissions pollution prevention and
testing program
Chloranil/violet 23
Chloroethane
Chlorinated paraffins
C.I. Direct Blue 15
1,2-Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichloropropane
Hydrazine
Hydroquinone
2-Nitropropane
1,2-Dichloropropene
Phosphoric acid production wastes
Refractory ceramic fibers
Sodium cyanide
o-Toluidine
Recommended for testing
Acetophenone
Acrylic acid
Arylphosphates
Brominated flame retardants
Butyraldehyde
Chloroethane
Cyclohexane
Developmental/reproductive endpoint test
rule (12 chemicals)
2,6-Dimethylphenol
Ethyl acetate
Glycidols
Mesityl oxide
Neurotoxicity endpoint test rule
(10 chemicals)
Phenol
N,N,-Dimethylani!ine
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Persistent bioaccumulators cluster (initial
set of 34 chemicals recommended for
ecotoxicity testing)
Sodium cyanide
Subset of Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
chemicals
4-Vinylcyclohexene
Referred to other programs
for possible action
Antimony and compounds
C-9 aromatic hydrocarbons
Cresols
Cumene
Cyclohexanorie
1,2-dibromoethane
Dichlorobenzidine
Dicyclopentadiene
2-Ethylhexanoic acid
Hydrogen cyanide
Isophorone
Phenoxyethanol/acetate
Prapylene glycol, t-butyl ether
Vinyl acetate
Dropped with no further action
Diisodecylpheny! phosphite
Oleylamine
Propylene oxide
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
D
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
Existing Chemicals
offices. After OTS identifies screening
candidates, the process of selecting
which chemicals to screen begins.
First, OTS reviews current scientific
literature, newly submitted test data
from industry, and other information
to weigh the potential health and
environmental effects of individual
chemicals. When data indicate poten-
tial health or environmental concerns,
OTS places the chemical into RM1
review. Since April 1990, OTS has
screened more than 900 reports sub-
mitted by industry or other sources.
Industry submits reports to the
agency under section 8(e) of TSCA or
on a For Your Information (FYI) basis
(see pages 28 to 34). Other sources of
reports on chemicals include such
programs as the National Toxicology
Program/National Institute for Envi-
ronmental Health Sciences, which
provided a number of cancer bioassay
reports over the past year. During the
screening of these chemicals, OTS
determined that most of the cases did
not need further review.
Second, the program looks at whether
there are any large groups of chemi-
cals that possess common characteris-
tics and may present common con-
cerns. OTS uses this approach to
identify health and environmental
risks that might otherwise go unrec-
ognized. For instance, the decision to
screen a "cluster" of hundreds of
chemicals found in consumer products
was prompted not by specific toxico-
logical data, but by concern that
chemicals used extensively every day
in the home should be evaluated for
safety.
During the past year, OTS initiated
RM1 reviews on four clusters:
• about 1,000 commercially pro-
duced chemicals with physical and
chemical properties that indicate a
potential for bioaccumulation and
persistence in the environment;
• about 250 chemicals in consumer
products that may contribute to
indoor air pollution;
• about 1,200 existing chemicals
whose molecular structures re-
semble those of chemicals known
to be toxic; and
• 28 Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
chemicals that have raised well-
established toxicity concerns, in-
cluding chronic toxicity and carci-
nogenicity.
Which chemicals warrant review?
To establish the order in which
chemicals should be reviewed, chemi-
cals are initially assigned to the fol-
lowing categories:
Priority 1: Chemicals referred to OTS
by other EPA programs or govern-
ment agencies.
Priority 2: Chemical clusters that
present common concerns and allow
broad-scale testing, risk reduction
decisions, and pollution prevention
actions.
Priority 3: Chemicals for which EPA
required industry to develop test data
under TSCA section 4.
Review continued on page 8
I Factors Considered in Identifying and Selecting
Screening Candidates
TSCA jurisdiction
Toxicity
Exposure
Assessment and regulatory status
Testing needs
Opportunities to reduce risks and prevent pollution
Needs of EPA regulatory programs
Recommendations of the EPA Science Advisory Board in Reducing Risk: Setting
Priorities and Strategies for Environmental Protection
VOL.12/N0.3 AUGUST 1991
-------
I
Existing Chemicals
Review continued from page 7
Priority 4: Chemicals for which infor-
mation has been submitted to EPA
through TSCA section 8(e) notices
and FYI reports or by referrals from
the National Toxicology Program,
OTS's New Chemicals Program, and
others.
After a chemical is placed in one of
these four groups, OTS considers
several other factors in setting final
priorities:
• Chemicals that pose significant
risk to human health or the envi-
ronment will be designated for
immediate review regardless of
other factors.
• If the chemical is associated with
an existing regulatory activity, the
chemical will receive a higher pri-
ority, since OTS favors an inte-
grated regulatory approach to
products or process categories.
• A chemical referred by more than
one source or in more than one
screening category will receive a
higher priority. Paint stripper sub-
stitutes, for example, form a use
cluster that is also an important
product category in the consumer
product/indoor air pollution cluster.
• The availability of existing data or
assessments that allow OTS to
perform necessary analyses and
reviews quickly will raise a
chemical's priority.
C.I. Direct Blue 15, a dye, offers an
example of how this flexible approach
works. C.I. Direct Blue 15 was ini-
tially assigned a relatively low prior-
ity, since it was submitted via a Na-
tional Toxicology Program study.
During the review of the study and
other risk/exposure factors, however,
OTS determined that C.I. Direct
Blue 15 posed a significant potential
risk of cancer. As a result, the sub-
stance was placed in the high-priority
classification for further review and
consideration of risk management
activities.
Grouping together chemicals
related by a set of defined
characteristics allows OTS to
make "generic" decisions
about an entire cluster and
increases the number of
chemicals OTS can screen.
Results of RM1 review
From April 1990 to June 1991, the
Existing Chemicals Program com-
pleted screening on more than 40
cases, representing over 150 chemi-
cals. RM1 screening decisions are
based on evaluation of a chemical's
potential for significant hazard or
exposure, since conclusive data about
chemicals are rarely available during
RM1 screening. What follows is a
summary of the decisions made from
April 1990 to June 1991.
• Four cases were dropped from fact-
finding or risk-management activities
because the facts assembled did not
indicate the need for further action.
• Fourteen cases were dropped from
further OTS assessment but were
referred to other federal agencies
for possible risk assessment or
management activities.
• Eighteen cases were identified as
presenting potentially significant
concern and were placed on the
Risk Reduction List, which is the
entry point for RM2—the second
stage of review in the Existing
Chemicals Program. Chemicals are
not removed from the Risk Reduc-
tion List until the concerns they
present have been addressed and
resolved through voluntary action
or regulation.
• Efforts to implement TSCA sec-
tion 4 testing requirements have
been initiated on 115 chemicals.
• Testing was recommended under
TSCA section 4 for 20 cases cover-
ing more than 140 chemicals; these
chemicals have been placed on
EPA's Master Testing List for fu-
ture testing,
• Seven cases have been identified for
development of "letters of con-
cern." These letters alert manufac-
turers and users of the chemicals to
OTS's concerns about the possible
risks posed by the chemicals and
recommend that pollution preven-
tion measures to reduce exposure
and releases be considered.
B
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
I
Existing Chemicals
I Administrative Record
Open to Public
The Office of Toxic Substances (OTS)
encourages active public participation
in the Existing Chemicals Program
through comment on the administra-
tive record, which documents deci-
sions reached on chemicals reviewed
in Risk Management One (RM1) and
Risk Management Two (RM2). The
administrative record includes
• a screening dossier containing
relevant exposure and hazard infor-
mation, a recommendation from
the screening workgroup, and the
supporting rationale for that
decision;
• copies of summaries of major stud-
ies cited in thepre-RMl dossier;
• summaries of the RM1, RM2, and
regulatory development meetings;
• copies of any letters of concern to
industry and industry replies; and
• comments and correspondence
from other parties outside of EPA.
The public can gain access to the
administrative record in three ways:
1. In person, by going to 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
4:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday.
2. By writing to EPA/OTS/PDB (TS-
793), Attention: RM1 Process,
Room G-004, Northeast Mall, 401
M Street, S.W., Washington , D.C.
20460.
3. By calling (202) 260-3587.
OTS Uses Pollution Prevention Scoping Methodology
in Review of Existing Chemicals
Every chemical on the Office of Toxic
Substances (OTS) Risk Reduction List
(see page 6) is reviewed to determine
how any risks it may pose to human
health or the environment can be
eliminated, or reduced. In the view of
EPA, as well as other health and envi-
ronmental experts, preventing pollu-
tion before it occurs is the most effec-
tive way to reduce or eliminate these
risks.
The Existing Chemicals Program,
which is part of OTS, has developed a
scoping methodology to evaluate
opportunities to prevent pollution.
Through this methodology, OTS
incorporates pollution prevention
criteria into the development of regu-
latory and nonregulatory options for
reducing or eliminating risk.
Chloroethane and acrylonitrile were
among the first chemicals to which
OTS applied the pollution prevention
scoping methodology. What follows is a
synopsis of the steps taken during the
scoping process for these two chemicals,
which began in April 1991.
First, researchers collected informa-
tion on chloroethane and acrylonitrile
that identified five separate uses for
each chemical. Manufacturing sites
and capacities, trade data, and end-
product information were provided
for esrh of the 10 uses. With this
information, OTS scientists con-
ducted a lifecycle analysis for each use
to identify where exposures to the
chemical might occur.
At the same time, OTS staff searched
for potential substitutes for
chloroethane and acrylonitrile. When
appropriate, these substitute chemi-
cals or products were reviewed to
determine if their use might create
any potentially hazardous exposures.
Using the information collected during
the use ar.d substitute analyses, pre-
liminary risk characterizations were
performed for each use of the chemi-
cals. These preliminary assessments
allowed OTS to identify areas where it
might be possible to reduce risks from
use of chloroethane or acrylonitrile.
At this point, EPA is ready to assess
avenues for reducing or eliminating
risks to health or the environment for
those uses that result in exposures and
for which a risk was identified.
For each use, EPA will consider the
following hierarchy of pollution pre-
vention options:
• reducing or eliminating use of the
chemical;
• process changes to reduce the use of
the chemical or changes in manage-
ment practices to reduce exposures;
• methods to recycle wastes that
cannot be reduced or eliminated at
the source; and
• adding or modifying equipment to
make emissions safer for release to
the environment.
If more than one option is possible to
implement, EPA would select which-
ever option achieves the greatest risk
reduction for the Least cost.
The pollution prevention scoping
methodology will also be used to inte-
grate pollution prevention criteria
into the development of regulations.
It is currently being used to identify
high-exposure uses of lead solder for
regulatory consideration.
VOL12/N0.3 AUGUST 1991
-------
Interagency Testing Committee
Interagency Testing Committee Revises TSCA
Section 4(e) Priority Testing List
In its 28th Report, the Interagency
Testing Committee (ITC) placed nine
chemicals and eleven chemical groups
on the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) Section 4(e) Priority Testing
List. The ITC designated six of these
chemicals for EPA to act upon within
12 months.
Congress created the ITC to screen
chemicals for their potential health
and ecological effects and chemical
fate. The chemicals reviewed by the
ITC and recommended for testing
may present an unreasonable risk of
injury to health or to the environ-
ment, or they may involve significant
or substantial human exposure or
substantial environmental release.
To gather the information necessary
for making testing decisions about
individual chemicals, the ITC works
through its members. ITC members,
who represent 18 federal organiza-
tions, link the committee to hundreds
of other federal organizations that may
have relevant data available from in-
dustry or from their own testing. For
example, the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) representative
provides a conduit to 26 separate
agencies organized under the USDA.
Additional information is collected
through TSCA sections 8(a) and 8(d).
When the ITC places a chemical or
chemical group on the priority test-
ing list, TSCA sections 8(a) and 8(d)
require industry to provide recent
production and exposure information
and unpublished health and safety
studies on the chemical. Through the
ITC, these studies are avaikble to all
federal agencies for use in decision-
making and regulatory activities.
The ITC uses the data submitted by
industry to determine whether
chemicals on the priority testing list
should be withdrawn or "designated."
The ITC's mandate from Congress
allows the committee to determine
The chemicals reviewed by
the ITC and recommended
for testing may present
an unreasonable risk of
injury to health or to the
environment, or they may
involve significant
or substantial human
exposure or substantial
environmental release.
the order in which EPA should act on
ITC recommendations by designating
chemicals to which EPA should re-
spond within 12 months. The
agency must either begin rulemaking
under section 4 of TSCA or explain to
the public why the testing is unnec-
essary. EPA also has the option to
implement testing for any chemical
that is on the priority testing list.
The committee revises its priority
testing list at least twice a year and
submits the list to the EPA
administrator.
The testing recommendations for
chemicals and chemical groups that
have been added to the TSCA Section
4(e) Priority Testing List are listed
below.
Designations
The ITC designated six chemicals listed
In EPA's Integrated Risk Information
System (IRIS): acetone, n-butanol,
isobutanol, dl-(2-ethylhexyl) adipate,
thiophenol, and dimethyl terephthalate.
Testing: health effects, chemical fate,
or ecological effects.
Rationale: The EPA's Reference Con-
centration (RfC)/Reference Dose (RfD)
Workgroup asked the ITC to recom-
mend testing of IRIS chemicals to
provide data to develop or improve RfC
or RfD values. An RfC or RfD value is
an estimate of how much of a chemical
people can inhale or ingest daily with-
out experiencing deleterious effects
during part or ail of their lifetime.
The ITC designated the six IRIS
chemicals to increase confidence in
health effects data and to reduce the
uncertainties in the assessment of
risk. The ITC requested that EPA
implement testing for these chemi-
cals by May 31, 1992, due to con-
cerns and uncertainties related to
substantial production volumes and
potential exposures and releases.
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
Interagency Testing Committee
Recommendations
The !TC recommended three chemicals
listed In IRIS: m-tilnitrobenzene, allyl
alcohol, and 2,4-dichlorophenol.
Testing: health effects, chemical fate,
or ecological effects.
Rationale: The ITC recommended w-
dinitrobenzene, allyl alcohol, and
2,4-dkhlorophenol to increase confi-
dence in health effects data and to
reduce the uncertainties in the assess-
ment of risk. The committee is inter-
ested in reviewing additional data
before deciding whether to designate
these chemicals for testing. The data
to be reviewed are production and
exposure information and unpub-
lished health and safety studies—
which are automatically required
under TSCA sections 8(a) and 8(d) for
any ITC recommendation—and vol-
untary submissions of use exposure
and release information and physical
chemical property data. Information
submitted or developed regarding
these chemicals is iikely to satisfy the
data needs of a number of federal
organizations represented on the ITC.
The ITC recommended 11 chemical
groups: alkynes, nitroalcohols, phos-
phonlums, tiydrazlnes, oxiranes,
alkoxysilartes, aldehyde hydrates, pro-
pylene gtycol ethers and esters, methyl
ethylenegtycol ethers, Isothiocyanates,
andcyanoacrylates.
Alkynes, nitroalcohols, and
phosphonlums
Testing: physical chemical properties
and biodegradation rate
screening.
Rationale: These three chemical
groups were selected because of con-
cerns and uncertainties related to pro-
duction and use, potential exposures
ITC members link the
committee to hundreds of
federal organizations that
may have relevant data
available from industry or
from their own testing.
and releases from production, process-
ing, and use, and for the potential for
persistence in the environment. Infor-
mation submitted or developed is
likely to satisfy some of the data needs
of EPA, the Department of Transpor-
tation (DOT), the Department of the
Interior (DOI), and state and local
governments involved in assessing the
effect of chemical releases to the envi-
ronment. The ITC will review the
nonpubiic data submitted under
TSCA sections 8(a) and 8(d) before
designating any of the individual
chemicals in these groups.
One of the alkynes—3-butyn-2-ol,2-
roethyl (CAS number 115-19-5)—is
among the 5 3 chemicals in the Orga-
nization for Economic Cooperation
and Development's (OECD) Screen-
ing Information Data Set (SIDS)
phase-one voluntary testing program.
Submission of reliable data or data
development through the OECD
SIDS program could change the
ITC's testing recommendation for
this alkyne.
Hydrazlnes, oxiranes, aikoxysilanes, and
aldehyde hydrates
Testing: ecological effects.
Rationale: Hydrazines, oxiranes, and
aikoxysilanes were recommended
because of concerns and uncertain-
ties related to production and use,
potential exposures and releases from
production, processing, and use, and
for their potential to cause adverse
ecological effects. Information on
aldehyde hydrates is needed to com-
plete the ITC's recommendation
process for aldehydes, which were
recommended with in tent-to-desig-
nate in November 1990. Data sub-
mitted or developed are likely to
meet the data needs of EPA, DOT,
DOI, and state and local govern-
ments involved with assessing the
effect of chemical releases to the
environment.
The ITC will review the nonpubiic
data submitted under TSCA sections
8(a) and 8(d) before designating any of
the individual chemicals in these
groups. Hydrazine, methyl-
hydrazine, l.l-dimethylhydrazine,
and 1,2-diphenylhydrazine are listed
in the 1990 Clean Air Act. EPA's
RfC/RfD Workgroup may develop
RfC values to assess the risk of these
chemicals. If the TSCA section 8(d)
submissions do not allow the RfC/RfD
Workgroup to develop or improve
continued on page 12
VOL.12/N0.3 AUGUST 1991
-------
Interagency Testing Committee
continued from page 11
RfC values, the ITC may designate
testing that will permit the
workgroup to make these develop-
ments or improvements.
Propylene glycol ethers and esters and
methyl ethylene glycol ethers
Testing: reproductive effects or devel-
opmental toxicity.
Rationale: Chemicals in these groups
are suspected of causing birth defects.
Data submitted or developed are
likely to satisfy some data needs of
the Consumer Product Safety Com-
mission, the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health, the
Occupational Safety and Health Ad-
ministration, and others.
One propylene glycol ether—
propanol,[(l-methyl, 1,2-
ethanediyl)bis(oxy)]bis (CAS number
24800-44-0)—is among the 53
chemicals in the OECD SIDS phase-
one voluntary testing program. Sub-
mission of reliable data or data devel-
opment through the OECD SIDS
program could change the ITC's
testing recommendation for this pro-
pylene glycol ether. The ITC will
also work with the National Toxicol-
ogy Program regarding the program's
current prechronic toxicity studies of
l-methoxy-2-propanol and 1-(1,1-
dimethylethoxy)-2-propanol (CAS
numbers 107-98-2 and 57018-52-7)
and oxybispropanol (CAS number
25265-71-8).
Glycol ethers are also listed in the
1990 Clean Air Act. EPA's RfC/RfD
Workgroup may develop RfC values
to assess the risk of these chemicals.
If the TSCA section 8(d) submissions
do not allow the RfC/RfD Work-
group to develop or improve RfC
values, then the ITC is likely to desig-
nate testing that will permit the
workgroup to make these develop-
ments or improvements.
Isothfocyanates
Testing: persistence.
Rationale: Isothiocyanar.es were rec-
ommended so that the ITC could
complete the recommendation process
for isocyanates and isothiocyanates.
Cyanoacrylates
Testing: physical chemical properties.
Rationale: Cyanoacrylates are chemi-
cals with commercially important
bonding applications, and insuffi-
cient data are publicly available to
reasonably determine or predict
physical and chemical properties.
Data submitted or developed in re-
sponse to these recommendations are
likely to satisfy some multiple data
needs of EPA, DOT, the National
Cancer Institute, the National Toxi-
cology Program, and others.
I Chemicals Deferred from Further Consideration
The Interagency Testing Committee (ITC) has deferred more than 800 chemi-
cals from further consideration because the chemicals were not reported to EPA
or to the U.S. International Trade Commission as being recently produced.
The group of deferred chemicals included 243 alkynes, 26 phosphonium
compounds, 141 oxiranes, 268 alkoxysilanes, 38 isothiocyanates, and 114
hydrazines.
The committee also deferred phosgene from consideration for testing because
of concerns that inhalation toxicity studies on the chemical cannot be properly
designed. The ITC deferred consideration of testing for methyl isothiocyanate
because it may be used exclusively as a pesticide and thus would probably fall
outside the statutory scope of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
New production information on deferred chemicals is reassessed by the ITC's
computerized processes to identify when the chemicals should again be consid-
ered for testing as a result of increased production.
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
33/50 Project
Industry Is Working with EPA to Reduce Emissions of 17 Toxic Chemicals
A number of companies have agreed
to reduce by half the wastes they
generate that contain one or more
of 17 high-priority chemicals tar-
geted by EPA. These companies
have told EPA they will eliminate
over the next four years at least 201
million pounds of the 17 chemicals
that they now release into the envi-
ronment or transfer to waste man-
agement facilities.
The companies' efforts, which are com-
pletely voluntary, are part of EPA's 33/
50 Project. The 33/50 Project takes its
name from its goal of reducing releases
of the 17 chemicals by 33 percent by the
end of 1992 and by 50 percent by the
end of 1995.
The participating companies are
among the 600 businesses identified
by EPA as having discharged into the
environment or transferred to waste
management facilities the greatest
amounts of the 17 chemicals in 1988.
Last February, EPA invited these
companies to participate in the 33/50
Project. EPA has since identified
another approximately 5,400 compa-
nies—6,000 firms in all—that also
generate large amounts of the chemi-
cals, and it is contacting all of these
companies about how to participate
in the voluntary program.
Data from the 1988 Toxics Release
Inventory (TRI) indicate that the
6,000 companies released to the envi-
ronment or transferred to waste man-
agement facilities 1.4 billion pounds
of the 17 chemicals. Close to 80
percent of the total releases and trans-
fers of the 17 chemicals—1.1 billion
pounds—were generated by the 600
firms identified last winter.
By the end of 1991, EPA expects to
receive additional commitments from
industry that will meet or exceed the
national goal of reducing total releases
and off-site transfers of the 17 chemicals
by 700 million pounds by the end of
1995. The commitments received so far
from 140 companies to reduce dis-
The commitments received so
far from 140 companies to
reduce discharges and
transfers of the 17 chemicals by
201 million pounds represent
a substantial first step,
charges and transfers of the 17 chemicals
by 201 million pounds represent a
substantial first step.
EPA's efforts to work with industry
to reduce toxic risks through volun-
tary action are meant to supplement
the agency's regulatory approach to
reducing risks. The 33/50 Project is
expected to reduce emissions of the
17 chemicals in less time than would
be required to enact statutes or put
regulations into place. TRI data,
which are updated every year in ac-
cordance with the Emergency Plan-
ning and Community Right-to-
Know Act (EPCRA), will be used to
track reduction of emissions of the 17
chemicals. Any changes will be mea-
sured against 1988 data. In tracking
industry efforts to cut generation of
toxic waste by one-half by 1995, the
33/50 Project will also evaluate the
effect the program is having on over-
all pollution prevention.
Companies that have not been con-
tacted by EPA are also invited to par-
ticipate. For more information, write
to 33/50 Project, EPA, TS-792a, 401
M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.
20460; or contact the TSCA Assistance
Information Service (TSCA hotline).
See page 35 for information on how to
contact the hotline.
EPA encourages all companies,
whether they are participating in the
33/50 Project or not, to take steps to
reduce or eliminate generation of
pollutants and wastes.
I Chemicals Targeted by
the 33/50 Project
Benzene
Cadmium and compounds
Carbon tetrachloride
Chloroform
Chromium and compounds
Cyanides
Dichloromethane
Lead and compounds
Mercury and compounds
Methyl ethyl ketone
Methyl isobutyl ketone
Nickel and compounds
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
Xylene(s)
VOL.12/N0.3 AUGUST 1991
-------
I
33/50 Project
1 List of Participating Companies as of June 1991
3M
Acme Steel
Aerovox
Air Products and Chemicals
Akzo Chemicals
Aladdin Industries
Aldan Rubber
Allegheny Ludlum
Allied Signal
Aluminum Co. of America
American Cast Iron Pipe
American Cyanamid
American Safety Razor
American Standard
American Synthetic Rubber
Amer. Telephone & Telegraph
Amoco
Amsted Industries
Andersen
Archer Company
Arco Products
Aristech Chemical
Armstrong World Industries
ASARCO
Ashland Oil
Auburn Foundry
Avondale Industries
Barnhardt Manufacturing
BASF
Bassett Furniture
Baxter International
Bayer USA
Bayou Steel
Bethlehem Steel
Boeing
Boise Cascade
Borden
Bowater
BP America
Bristol-Myers Squibb
B. F. Goodrich
Cabot
Cargill
Carpenter Technology
Champion International
Chaparral Steel
Chem-Tech Rubber
Chevron
Ciba-Geigy
CMC Steel Group
Coleman Outdoor Products
Corning
Crown Cork and Seal
Cyclops Industries
Dallas Woodcraft
Dalton Foundries
Degussa
Dittler Brothers
Doe Run
Dow
Dow Corning
duPont
Duo Fast
Duracell Inc.
Eagle Ottawa Leather
Eagle-Picher Industries
Easton Foam
Eaton
Eli Lilly
Emerald Packaging
Engelhard
Ethyl Corp.
Evanite Fibers
Exxon
Facile Holdings
Federal Mogul
Federal Paper Board
FINA
Finite Industries
First Chemical
Flexcon
FMC
Ford Motor
Franklin Industries
GAP
Gencorp
General Dynamics
General Electric
General Motors
Geneva Steel
Georgia-Pacific
Gillette
Grumman
Guardsman Products
Hadco
Halstead Industries
Handy and Harman
Hanlin Group
Hercules
Hewlett-Packard
Hoechst Celanese
Hoffman-La Roche
Honda
IBM
ICI American Holdings
Illinois Tool Works
Inco United States
Ingersoll-Rand
Inland Steel Industries
Intel
International Paper
IR International
Irving Tanning Co.
J & L Specialty Products
Jade Systems
James River
J.I. Case
Kalama Chemical
Keene
Kennecott
Kern-Liebers USA
Kerr-McGee
Kodak
Lincoln Electric
Lockheed
Lomac
Louisiana Pacific
LTV Aerospace
LTV Steel
Lyondell Petrochemical
Mac Lean-Fogg
Madix
Mallinckrodt
Manville
Marion Merrell Dow
Martin Marietta
Masco Corp.
Masco Industries
McDonnell Douglas
Mead
Merck
Milliken
Mobil
Modine Manufacturing
Molded Fiber Glass Co.
Monroe Auto Equip.
Monsanto
Moore Business Forms
Morton Thiokol
Motorola
Newell Operating
North Star Steel
Northrop
Occidental Chemical
Olin
Oregon Steel Mills
Owens-Corning Fiberglas
O'Sullivan
Packaging Corp of Amer.
Parker Hannifin
Peerless of America
Pennzoil
Perrigo
Pfister Chemical
Pfizer
Phillips Petroleum
Photocircuits Corp.
Polaroid
Poly Pak Industries
Potlatch
PPG Industries
Precision Castparts
Printed Circuit
Procter and Gamble
Providence Metallizing
Raytheon
Republic Engineered
Steels
Reynolds Metals Thomas Industries
Rhone-Poulenc Thomas Steel Strip
Rockwell International Thomson Consumer
Rohm and Hass Elect
Timken
Rolscreen
Trinova
Roseburg Lumber
RSR
Union Carbide
Rubicon
Union Zinc
Russell
Uniroyal Chemical
Sartorius
United Technologies
Schering-Plough
Unocal
Scott Paper
Shell Oil
U.S. Steel
Sherwin-Williams
USS-Posco Industries
Shuford Mills
Varian Associates
Simpson Paper
Velsicol Chemical
Slater Steels
Vulcan Materials
SmithKlme Beecham
Vytech
SnyderGeneral
Washington Steel
Sonoco Products
Weirton Steel
Standard Industries
Westinghouse Electric
Star Enterprise
Westvaco
Steelcase
Weyerhaeuser
Sterling Chemicals
White Consolidated kid.
Storeys Transprints
Witeo
Syntex Agribusiness
Wolverine Tube
Tecumseh Products
Woodbridge Holdings
Temple-Inland Forest
Prod W. R. Grace
Texaco Xerox
Texas Instruments
This list includes all of the com-
panies that provided EPA with
numerical commitments to the
33/50 Project, as well as those
that indicated commitments are
pending. Not listed here are the
companies that submitted letters
supporting the 33/50 program
without explicit commitments.
After EPA clarifies these compa-
nies' commitments, the compa-
nies will be included in future
reports.
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
Enforcement Actions
Petroleum and Lead Industries Are First Targets of EPA/OSHA Joint Work Plan
EPA and the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) have
agreed to help one another's enforce-
ment efforts. Cooperative efforts will
focus on increasing protection of
workers in the petrochemical and
lead smelting industries.
Under the agreement, EPA and
OSHA inspectors will exchange data,
police each other's jurisdictions when
making site visits, and participate in
cross-training to help inspectors rec-
ognize violations of environmental
and health and safety laws.
"Our experience indicates that facili-
ties with violations of OSHA stan-
dards often have violations of EPA
standards as well," OSHA Adminis-
trator Gerald F. Scannell said. "Both
EPA and OSHA are concerned about
the threat to workers and the public
by chemical explosions and exposure
to lead."
The program will support OSHA's
petrochemical special emphasis in-
spection program and EPA's lead
exposure reduction strategy. The
OSHA initiative has identified 28
major petrochemical facilities for
special review. The EPA strategy
includes a major enforcement initia-
tive to reduce lead pollution at 28
lead smelters.
According to the agreement, EPA
will join OSHA on as many as six
inspections of petrochemical facili-
ties. EPA inspectors will focus on
compliance with environmental stan-
dards for air, water, toxic substances,
and hazardous waste. EPA is also
providing OSHA with inventories of
chemicals used at each facility and
data on accidental chemical releases
that have occurred at those sites.
OSHA will inform EPA of reports of
accidents or worker complaints that
would trigger an OSHA inspection.
OSHA is also providing EPA with
files on cases resulting from inspec-
tions of five of the targeted lead
smelters.
The agencies also agreed to set up a
complaint referral and tracking sys-
tem concerning potential hazards
identified by the agencies. The work
plan approved by the two agencies
applies only to fiscal 1991; the agen-
cies will meet annually to set goals
for each succeeding fiscal year.
EPA Seeks $35.4 Million Fine for Improper Disposal of PCB-Contaminated Sludge
General Motors Corporation (GM)
and two New York-based hazardous
waste disposal companies face a
combined proposed penalty of
$34.5 million for improperly dis-
posing of sludge contaminated with
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
The penalty is the largest ever pro-
posed for alleged violations of the
Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA).
GM was charged with sending about
31,000 tons of PCB-cohtaminated
sludge to various unauthorized dis-
posal sites from February 1984
through October 1987. The alleged
violations were uncovered during an
EPA inspection at the GM facility in
Massena, N.Y., in 1988.
According to the complaint, lubri-
cating fluids containing PCBs were
collected and processed through
GM's wastewater treatment system.
Sand and limestone were added to
the reclaimed fluids to form sludge
and shipped off site for disposal.
This sludge contained PCBs in ex-
cess of 500 parts per million. Any
wastes with PCB concentrations of
more than 500 parts per million
must be incinerated, according to
EPA rules.
EPA separately charged two of the
commercial landfills used by GM
with violating their PCB disposal
permits. CWM Chemical Services, a
subsidiary of Chemical Waste Man-
agement Inc., and CECOS Interna-
tional, a subsidiary of Browning
Ferris Industries, were charged with
failure to test the wastes to determine
their PCB concentration, as required
by the companies' TSCA permits.
The complaints propose penalties of
$14.17 million against GM, $14.15
million against CECOS International,
and $7.07 million against CWM
Chemical Services.
VOL.12/N0.3 AUGUST 1991
-------
Enforcement Actions
Penalties Reduced
Against Two Companies
That Submitted
TRI Reports after EPA
Inspections
Companies that report toxic emissions
to EPA after the deadline for Toxics
Release Inventory (TRI) reporting has
passed should not be held liable for
failure to report, even when an inspec-
tion by EPA appears to have impelled
the submittal, according to two rul-
ings by EPA administrative judges.
EPA had sought a $15,000 penalty
against Pease and Curren, a Rhode
Island metals recovery firm, under
the agency's Emergency Planning
and Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA) enforcement policy, which
states that a late report submitted by
a facility after contact by EPA should
be treated as a failure to report. Pease
and Curren submitted the TRI report
after an inspection by EPA revealed
that it had not been filed. At that
point, the TRI report was 13 months
past the reporting deadline.
EPA Chief Administrative Law Judge
Henry B. Frazier III reduced the
penalty to $9,000 for kte filing,
saying the EPCRA penalty policy is
"arbitrary and opposed to the ex-
pressed interest in arriving at civil
penalties in a fair, uniform, and con-
sistent manner."
In the case of CBI Services, Inc., of
Illinois, EPA had sought a fine of
$125,000 against the company for its
failure to file TRI reports. The com-
pany had filed the reports more than
180 days after the reporting deadline
was passed and three months after the
company had been inspected for
EPCRA compliance. Ruling that
EPA's penalty policy was arbitrary,
Administrative Law Judge J.F.
Greene reduced the fine to $99,000
for filing a late TRI report.
The decisions in these cases supported
an earlier case against Riverside Furni-
ture Corporation, of Arkansas, in
which EPA's policy of characteri7ing a
report made after an inspection as a
failure to report, rather than a late
report, was judged to be arbitrary.
In all three cases, however, the
judges affirmed the significance of
TRI reporting. Writing in the Riv-
erside case, the administrative law
judge stated that "the success of
EPCRA can be attained only
through voluntary, strict, and com-
prehensive compliance with the act
and regulations . . . and a lack of
such compliance will weaken, if not
defeat, the purposes expressed fin
the act]."
I EPA Reduces Kodak Penalty by $2.4 Million
EPA has mitigated a $2.5 million penalty assessed against Eastman Kodak Co.
to $100,000. The company was fined for manufacturing four chemicals on
multiple occasions without properly completing the new chemicals review pro-
cess. The fine was assessed against Kodak in 1988, two years after the company
voluntarily disclosed the violations to EPA.
Kodak and EPA participated in ongoing discussions between 1979 and 1984
on filing premanufacture notices—required before a new chemical is manufac-
tured—based on an end use of a material. According to a Kodak spokesman,
the company later learned that premanufacture notices were required when any
reactants are introduced into the process.
After prolonged discussions between EPA and Kodak, the agency decreased the
proposed penalty by $700,000 in recognition of Kodak's prior efforts to seek
guidance from EPA regarding when to file premanufacture notices with the
agency. In reducing the penalty, however, the agency did not drop the allega-
tions associated with EPA guidance.
EPA also reduced the fine by $521,000 in exchange for Kodak's commitment
to destroy 36 transformers and 11 capacitors containing polychlorinated biphe-
nyls (PCBs). Kodak's agreement to destroy the equipment, which has a life
expectancy of up to 46 years, is intended to remove and destroy more than
14,000 gallons of PCBs in an environmentally safe manner years in advance of
scheduled disposal.
Additional reductions to the penalty were made for Kodak's "good attitude" in
pursuing settlement for all four allegations and for taking all steps reasonably
necessary to ensure that existing stocks were not sold during the review of the
premanufacture notices.
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
Enforcement Actions
State Loses Bid to Intervene in Texas Eastern Suit
The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has lost its bid to intervene in the court-
approved settlement between EPA and the Texas Eastern Transmission Corpora-
tion. EPA brought the suit against Texas Eastern for illegal handling and dis-
posal of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) along 10,000 miles of natural gas pipe-
line in 14 states.
The EPA lawsuit was settled by a 1989 consent decree in which the company
agreed to pay a $15 million civil fine and to spend an estimated $500 million
to clean the 89 disposal pits along its pipeline into which the company rou-
tinely dumped liquids contaminated with PCBs.
Nineteen of the disposal pits are in Pennsylvania, and the state sought to
intervene in the federal action in order to levy civil penalties on Texas Eastern
and to force the company to clean up PCB-contaminated sites in the state.
The appeals court ruled that Pennsylvania failed to show how the settlement
between EPA and Texas Eastern impaired the state from enforcing its laws to
protect its environment and its citizens. The state in 1987 had signed its
own consent agreement with the company. In the agreement, Texas Eastern
agreed to identify contaminated sites within the state. The state also levied
$61 million in penalties and assessment costs for groundwater and site
remediation against Texas Eastern.
The federal consent decree was shaped to leave state rights intact, said Helene
Ambrosino, an EPA attorney. EPA envisioned that the states would take en-
forcement actions under their laws and did not intend to interfere with enforce-
ment of state law, she said. The consent decree also includes a section on how
state and federal actions should be coordinated.
I Other Enforcement Actions
• EPA has proposed a penalty of
$688,125 against Altana, Inc., of
Connecticut, for failing to notify
EPA of its intent to import a new
chemical substance into the United
States. Section 5 of the Toxic Sub-
stances Control Act (TSCA) re-
quires that EPA be notified at least
90 days before a new chemical is
imported. "Failure to comply with
the notification requirements of
TSCA is very serious, since it re-
stricts EPA from identifying new
chemical hazards and instituting
means to minimize potential risk,"
said Paul G. Keough, the deputy
administrator of EPA's Region 1.
The proposed penalty against
Altana, which was formerly BYK-
Chemie USA, includes a 25 percent
reduction because the company
voluntarily disclosed the violation.
A church-operated school has been
fined $4,000 for failing to develop
an asbestos management plan as
required by the Asbestos Hazard
Emergency Response Act (AHERA).
Cornerstone Baptist Church, located
in Union City, Indiana, had argued
that EPA lacks jurisdiction over the
school because it is run by the
church and thus is protected under
the First Amendment. The First
Amendment forbids any law affect-
ing the establishment of or practic-
ing of religion. EPA Administra-
tive Law Judge Spencer T. Nissen
ruled that the church was a local
education agency operating a school
as defined in AHERA. "Inasmuch
as there is no evidence that the act
. . . prevents the church from prac-
ticing its religion or coerces it in
any way as to the nature of those
practices, the claim that the First
Amendment is a bar to the enforce-
ment of the act and regulation ... is
rejected," Judge Nissen wrote. He
imposed the full penalty for non-
compliance.
VOL.12 /N0.3 AUGUST 1991
-------
Reports and Reviews
NAS Recommends that EPA Continue Adipose
Tissue Study
A national program to analyze hu-
man tissue for selected chemicals
should be continued, according to a
National Academy of Sciences
(NAS) review released in May. The
report on the review, Monitoring
Human Tissues for Toxic Substances,
recommends that the National Hu-
man Monitoring Program remain at
EPA in an office at the highest orga-
nizational level in the agency. The
program is currently administered
by EPA's Office of Toxic Substances
(OTS).
In 1988, OTS decided to terminate
the monitoring program due to a lack
of resources. After the scientific and
public health communities objected
to the decision, Congress directed
EPA (1) to obtain a review of the
program from the National Academy
of Sciences and (2) to continue the
program until the review was com-
pleted.
The NAS review strongly supports
continuing a national human moni-
toring program. Through the Na-
tional Human Adipose Tissue Sur-
vey (NHATS), the main component
of the EPA program since 1970,
OTS collects human adipose tissue
specimens from the general U.S.
population and analyzes them for
such chemicals as organochlorine
pesticides, polychlorinated biphe-
nyls, halogenated dioxins and furans,
and diphenylethers. The academy
recommends significantly changing
Toxic
stances
the program to focus primarily on
collecting and analyzing blood
specimens. To run the program, the
academy recommends that a full-
time staff and a minimum annual
budget of $5 million be provided.
The report also identifies areas for
improvements. The academy recom-
mends the current program continue
until the recommended changes can
be made.
EPA is reviewing Monitoring Human
Tissues for Toxic Substances and will
give serious consideration to its
recommendations before making a
final decision on the future of the
program. Copies of the report are
available from the National Acad-
emy Press for $29 plus shipping. To
purchase the report, call (800) 624-
6242 or, if calling from Washing-
ton, D.C., (202) 334-3313.
EPA Evaluates
Implementation of Law
Requiring Schools to
Assess and Manage
Asbestos
The Office of Toxic Substances (OTS)
has completed an evaluation of how
well the nation's schools have carried
out key aspects of the 1986 Asbestos
Hazard Emergency Response Act
(AHERA). AHERA requires the
nation's primary and secondary
schools, both public and private, to
conduct inspections of their school
buildings for asbestos-containing
material, develop plans for its man-
agement, and take steps to control it.
The purpose of the evaluation was to
determine (1) whether AHERA has
helped to reduce the risks from asbes-
tos exposure in schools and (2) which
elements of AHERA, if any, might
be useful in a program for public and
commercial buildings. In 1988, EPA
told Congress it would objectively
assess the program before deciding
whether to proceed with additional
regulations for public and commer-
cial buildings.
The evaluation report, Evaluation of the
Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act,
focuses on how well most of the key
aspects of AHERA have been imple-
mented and how specific factors have
affected implementation. It does not
address whether schools have complied
with all requirements of the law, nor
does it address the degree to which
AHERA reduces exposure to asbestos
in schools or'reduces the incidence of
asbestos-related diseases caused by
exposure to asbestos in schools.
D
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
Reports and Reviews
Participation in the evaluation was
voluntary. The evaluation was con-
ducted in 198 schools in 30 commu-
nities. Specially trained inspectors
reinspected each sampled school
building, and their findings were
compared with the schools' AHERA
inspection reports to determine how
well the original inspections identi-
fied, assessed, described, and quanti-
fied any building materials that
might be asbestos. Additional infor-
mation was collected through inter-
views with each school principal, the
AHERA contact person for each
school district, the inspector who
performed the original AHERA in-
spection, the head of the PTA or
another active parent, and an active
teacher in the school. Focus groups
were also conducted in nine locations
with parents and teachers or with
school maintenance and custodial
workers.
High rate of identification
The report shows that AHERA in-
spectors were successful in identify-
ing the vast majority of the suspect
asbestos material in schools. Almost
90 percent of suspect material was
identified. Despite the relatively high
percentage of materials identified and
material quantities reported, how-
ever, 82 percent of school buildings
had at least one material that was
unidentified in the original AHERA
inspection. Floor tile, ceiling tile,
and all types of thermal system insu-
lation were regularly identified as
materials that might contain asbes-
tos. Certain types of materials, how-
ever, were not regularly identified:
vibration dampening cloth, fire
doors, and linoleum.
Training of maintenance and
custodial workers
Many maintenance and custodial
workers who work around asbestos
in schools may not be receiving the
amount of training required by
AHERA. The report found that
frequent unprotected and inappro-
priate work practices are used in
schools in the five communities in
which the focus groups were held.
On the whole, these inappropriate
work practices occurred during
cleanup of fiber release episodes of
less than three linear or square feet
or during routine maintenance and
custodial activities.
Maintenance and custodial workers
at 85 percent of the schools received
training. The length of training for
maintenance workers, however, was
less than that required by AHERA
for people who work directly with
asbestos-containing building materi-
als. The length of training for custo-
dial workers was not statistically
different from that for maintenance
workers.
Many management plans need
improvement
Plans for managing asbestos were
evaluated on completeness and use-
fulness as a resource for custodial
and maintenance workers and the
public. Eighty-one percent of the
plans for managing asbestos were
found to be complete. However, 39
percent of the plans were readily
understandable only by people who
had some college coursework, and
another 22 percent of the plans were
not usable unless the reader had
specialized instruction.
Other findings
Among the other findings reported
in the evaluation:
• There does not appear to be a
correlation between the training
received by an inspector and the
thoroughness of his or her inspec-
tion.
• Parents in fewer than 20 percent
of the schools reacted to receiving
notification about the existence of
an asbestos management plan.
Half of the parents and 25 percent
of the teachers contacted during
the evaluation did not recall being
notified about the management
plan or the contents of the notifi-
cation.
Additional Information is available
To obtain Evaluation of the Asbestos
Hazard Emergency Response Act
(AHERA): A Summary Report, con-
tact the TSCA Assistance Informa-
tion Service (TSCA hotline). See
page 35 for information about con-
tacting the hotline.
To receive a copy of Evaluation of the
Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response
Act (AHERA) Final Report, which
includes the full findings of the
evaluation along with the statistical
methodologies and questionnaires,
contact the National Technical In-
formation Service, U.S. Department
of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal
Road, Springfield, VA 22161;
phone, (703) 487-4650. The
report's document number is
566/4-91-013.
VOL.12/N0.3 AUGUST 1991
-------
New Chemicals
I * WAM A T
JUULJLILJ
Q
n
n-
a •
Companies Voluntarily Providing Information about
Pollution Prevention Activities
New Chemicals Program Will Evaluate Data to Assess Potential
Risks from New Substances
Many companies are voluntarily providing EPA with information about pollu-
tion prevention activities associated with new chemical substances. The infor-
mation is requested on the revised premanufacture notice (PMN) form, which is
used in accordance with section 5 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
to report to EPA the manufacture of a new chemical substance. The revised
form became available for use in March 1991 •
Forty-two PMNs were submitted to EPA on the revised form in June 1991, the
month in which use of the form was officially required. Of these, 20 included
information about efforts to prevent pollution. Among the efforts described
were recycling and the reduction of use of toxic chemicals during production or
in packaging.
EPA will use this information in assessing the potential risks from new sub-
stances and in weighing the need for regulatory actions. The Office of Toxic
Substances (OTS) has created a New Chemicals Pollution Prevention
Workgroup to develop ways to better promote pollution prevention in the New
Chemicals Program.
OTS Developing Biotechnology Rules
The Office of Toxic Substances (OTS)
is developing biotechnology rules
under the Toxic Substances Control
Act (TSCA).
In 1984, EPA's Office of General
Counsel announced that living organ-
isms, including microorganisms, were
chemical substances under TSCA.
Thus, these organisms would be sub-
ject to review by EPA under TSCA.
OTS, which implements EPA's New
Chemicals Program, has recently inte-
grated its biotechnology activities
with its new-chemical activities.
EPA currently reviews intergeneric
microorganisms under the 1986
Policy Statement on Microbial Prod-
ucts Subject to the Federal Insecti-
cide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA) and TSCA (51 FR 23313,
June 26, 1986), which is part of the
Federal Coordinated Framework for
Regulation of Biotechnology. In
accordance with an agreement with
EPA, manufacturers voluntarily sub-
mit to the agency information about
intergeneric microorganisms, which
contain genetic material from differ-
ent genera, if the microorganisms are
going to be released into the environ-
ment for research and development
projects. Additionally, persons who
manufacture or process intergeneric
microorganisms for general commer-
cial use are required to submit a
premanufacture notice to EPA under
TSCA.
The biotechnology rules being devel-
oped by OTS are based on the "Prin-
ciples for Federal Oversight of Bio-
technology," published by the Office
of Science and Technology Policy (5 5
FR31118rjuly31, 1990]). Before
the rules are published in the Federal
Register., they must be reviewed
within EPA and by the Office of
Management and Budget and the
Biotechnology Working Group of
the Vice President's Council on
Competitiveness.
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
New Chemicals/General Information
Provisions Can Be Used to Establish
Airborne Exposure Limits
The New Chemicals Program in
EPA's Office of Toxic Substances has
recently developed provisions to es-
tablish airborne exposure limits for
new chemicals subject to agreements
negotiated under section 5(e) of the
Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA). The provisions, known as
New Chemical Exposure Limits
(NCELs), will be used to establish
airborne exposure limits that prevent
unreasonable risks to workers from
inhalation exposure to new chemical
substances.
The NCELs provisions offer compa-
nies an alternative way to protect
their workers from risks associated
with inhalation exposure to new
chemicals. In the past, when a
premanufacture notice (PMN) indi-
cated a potential risk, the New
Chemicals Program addressed the
risk by negotiating with the manu-
facturer or processor to require use of
appropriate respirators in the work-
place. Reliance on respirators has
several drawbacks, however: some
workers do not wear respirators be-
cause they are uncomfortable; because
respirators are cumbersome, they can
be detrimental to other aspects of
workplace safety; respirators are inap-
propriate for some combinations of
chemicals and for some workplace
conditions; and they may not be cost-
effective.
The NCELs provisions, which are
modeled after the permissible expo-
sure limits established by the Occu-
pational Safety and Health Adminis-
tration (OSHA), allow companies to
use engineering controls and work
practices to maintain a specified
workplace airborne concentration.
These concentrations are interim
levels set by EPA; they are based on
information available to the agency at
the time the section 5(e) order is
developed.
Provisions comparable to NCELs will
soon be incorporated into significant
new use rules (SNURs) promulgated
under TSCA.
I Michael Stahl Appointed New Director of OCM
Michael Stahl became director of the Office of Compliance Monitoring (OCM)
in April 1991. Prior to his appointment, Mr. Stahl was director of the Environ-
mental Assistance Division of the Office of Toxic Substances (OTS). OTS and
OCM are both part of EPA's Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances.
While in OTS, Mr. Stahl was responsible for implementing a national program
to control asbestos in buildings, coordinating toxics control programs with
EPA regional offices and state agencies, and ensuring public participation in
OTS's toxics programs. As director of OCM, Mr. Stahl will direct efforts to
ensure compliance with federal laws and regulations governing pesticides and
toxic substances.
Emphasis on Pollution
Prevention Changes Role
of Analytical Chemists
Analytical chemists have traditionally
focused on measuring pollution con-
trol mechanisms at the end ofthemi-
cal production processes. New efforts
to stop pollution before it occurs,
however, are forcing analytical'chem-
ists to develop methods and instru-
mentation that can be integrated into
the process stream itself. These
methods of measurement must work
as the process is under way to mea-
sure the intended product plus unin-
tended contaminants and pollutants.
How pollution prevention is redirect-
ing analytical chemistry—out of the
laboratory and into the process
stream—was the theme of an April
1991 symposium presented by the
American Chemical Society's Division
of Environmental Chemistry. The
symposium, Pollution Prevention and
Process Analytical Chemistry, was co-
chaired by Joseph J. Breen, of the Ex-
posure Evaluation Division of EPA's
Office of Toxic Substances, and Michael
J. Dellarco, of EPA's Office of Research
and Development's Office of Modeling,
Monitoring Support and Quality
Assurance.
Abstracts are available of the
symposium's sessions: Chemical and
Biological Sensors; Membrane Sam-
pling and Extraction Methods; New
Approaches to Process Analytical
Chemistry: Parts I and II; Methods
and Measurements; Robotics; and
Toxics Release Inventory and Pollu-
tion Prevention. For more informa-
tion, contact Dr. Joseph J. Breen,
Exposure Evaluation Division (TS-
798), Environmental Protection
Agency, 401 M Street, S.W., Wash-
ington, D.C. 20460; telephone, (202)
260-3569; FAX, (202) 260-6704.
VOL.12/N0.3 AUGUST 1991
-------
General Information
EPA Proposes Rule to Regulate Spreading of Sludge Contaminated with
Dioxins and Furans
EPA has proposed a rule to control
the land application of sludge from
pulp and paper mills that use chlo-
rine or chlorine-derivative bleaching
processes. This sludge is generally
contaminated with dioxins and
furans, principally 2,3,7,8-
tecrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin(TCDD)
and 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran
(TCDF).
In proposing the rule, the agency is
seeking to minimize the hazards to
wildlife from TCDD and TCDF.
Even in small amounts and at low
concentrations, TCDD can cause
reproductive damage to animals, and
EPA has classified it as a probable
human carcinogen. TCDF is also a
highly toxic chemical.
TCDD and TCDF, as well as other
dioxins and furans found in paper-
mill sludge, are byproducts of the
chlorine-bleaching processes used by
104 of the pulp and paper mills in
the United States. Sludge is the solid
material that settles out during the
treatment of process wastewater.
Sludge from 12 of the mills is spread
on land to dispose of it and to utilize
its soil-conditioning properties. The
sludge is also used for revegetation at
strip mines and at other land recla-
mation sites.
The proposed rule would set the
maximum allowable dioxin and furan
concentration in soil at 10 parts per
trillion following the land applica-
tion of paper-mill sludge. Under the
proposed rule, the mills generating
the sludge would be responsible for
measuring the soil concentration
prior to application and for ensuring
that the post-application soil concen-
tration would not exceed the 10 parts
per trillion limit. The mills would
also be responsible for maintaining
all records of land application activi-
ties, regardless of who owns the land
or who applies the sludge. At least
45 days prior to applying sludge at a
given site, the mill would be required
to file notice with the appropriate
EPA regional office identifying the
location of the site, the TCDD and
TCDF concentration in soil at the
site, the amount of sludge to be ap-
plied, and the TCDD and TCDF
concentration in the sludge. EPA
proposed the rule on May 10, 1991,
under section 6(a) of the Toxic Sub-
stances Control Act (TSCA).
The principal hazard from TCDD
and TCDF in soil arises through food
chain bioaccumulation. Earthworms,
insects, and other soil-dwelling crea-
tures can ingest TCDD and TCDF,
which accumulate in their tissues.
Birds and small mammals that con-
sume these creatures ingest the accu-
mulated TCDD and TCDF and can
pass it to their predators. The chemi-
cals can also affect the reproductive
capability of birds and small
mammals.
Humans can be affected if they eat
the meat or milk products of animals
that have grazed on sludge-treated
lands. While very little TCDD and
TCDF is taken up by the plants,
grazing animals typically consume
some soil along with the foliage, and
the TCDD and TCDF in that soil can
accumulate in the animals.
Limiting TCDD and TCDF concen-
tration in soil to no more than 10
parts per trillion will protect human
health and limit risks to wildlife.
EPA estimates that health risks to
the general public from the land
application of sludge are very low.
Subsistence farmers and people who
fish in sludge-treated areas are the
only populations thought to experi-
ence significant TCDD and TCDF
exposures from land application. The
10 parts per trillion limit would
generally limit these persons' lifetime
cancer risk associated with sludge-
treated land to one in 10,000. There
are no data on the size of the subsis-
tence populations, but they are esti-
mated to be very small.
The deadline for public comment was
September 17. An informal public
hearing is scheduled to begin on
October 29.
The proposed rule fulfills one part of
EPA's obligations under a consent
decree signed in July 1988 with the
Environmental Defense Fund and the
National Wildlife Federation. The
consent decree required that EPA
assess and address dioxin risks in the
pulp and paper industry. EPA is
continuing regulatory investigations
into other aspects of this issue, in-
cluding the possible regulation of
sludge disposal in landfills and sur-
face impoundments.
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
General Information
TSCATS Provides Information on Unpublished Health and Safety Studies
EPA collects unpublished health and
safety studies from industry under
the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA). Information about the stud-
ies is compiled in an online database
called Toxic Substances Control Act
Test Submissions (TSCATS).
The agency receives studies through
rules promulgated under section 4
and section 8 of TSCA. Some studies
are also submitted voluntarily on a
For Your Information (FYI) basis
when the submitting organization is
uncertain whether the findings indi-
cate significant risk.
TSCATS categorizes studies into
three broad areas: health effects, envi-
ronmental effects, and environmental
fate. It is possible to search TSCATS
records in several fields, including
chemical name, Chemical Abstract
Service (CAS) number, study title,
submitting organization, and type of
study. The online format is similar
to a bibliographic citation for a jour-
nal article or book; the database indi-
cates where a study is located.
TSCATS includes abstracts for a
small number of the studies.
How to obtain access to TSCATS
The TSCATS database is accessible
online through the National Library
of Medicine, Chemical Information
Systems, Syracuse Research Corpora-
tion, and Chemical Abstract's Science
and Technology Network.
• National Library of Medicine: Here,
TSCATS is a subfile of two sepa-
rate files, TOXLINE and the Haz-
ardous Substance Database.
TOXLINE is a bibliographic file
containing information on the
effects of chemicals and other
agents on living systems. A search
in TOXLINE will retrieve cita-
tions to records, which will point
to the source of the information.
TSCATS is one of 15 subfiles in
TOXLINE. It is possible to re-
trieve only TSCATS by specifying
the subfile during a search. To
obtain access to TOXLINE, call
(800) 638-8480.
The Hazardous Substance Database
contains data on more than 5,000
chemicals, including information on
chemical and physical characteris-
tics, uses, disposal methods, haz-
ards, and toxicology. These data are
extracted from many sources, in-
cluding TSCATS. All the TSCATS
entries in the database have ab-
stracts. Once again, a search can be
narrowed to look just at TSCATS
information. To obtain access to
the Hazardous Substance Database,
call (301) 496-6531.
• Chemical Information System (CIS):
CIS carries TSCATS as a separate
file, which can be searched inde-
pendently from all the other files.
CIS also provides an online mecha-
nism for ordering copies of studies.
To obtain access to CIS, call (800)
CIS-USER (247-8737).
• Syracuse Research Corporation (SRC):
The TSCATS database is a separate
file through SRC. To obtain access
to SRC, call (315) 426-3200.
TSCATS continued on back cover
I
Sample Record of TSCATS Entry
File 4; Entry 2
Accession No. 1 868
RNO) Record Number
017478
CAS) Cos Number: 22 10799
NAM) Name-
rrsq
(TIE)
0-CRESYL GLYCIDVL ETHER
TSCA Section: BD
Title: FINAL REPORT ON THE EPOXIDES EVALUATED
FOR MUTAGENICITY WITH COVER LETTER
(CIT)
(DPR)
(CNI)
(DRE)
(SUB)
(CRE)
(JRN)
(FCH)
(PRP)
Purl
HE
.
-
-
Document Number: 87821 1534
Date Produced:
8-24-77
Contractor: UN IV of TX MEDICAL
Date Received:
2-20-82
Submitting Organization:
BRANCH
DOW CHEM CO
Chemical Category: GLYCIDOL &
Journal/Source:
ITS DERIVATIVES
U.S. EPA/OTS Public Files
Fiche Number: 0206138
Study Purpose:
Pur 2
GTOX
-
-
-
Pur 3
MUTA
DNAF
CHRM
MUTA
Orgl
BACT
MAMM
-
•
(S)
Org2
HUMN
MICE
-
Rte 1 Rtc
INVR
-
ORAL
DERM
> 2 Purity
SNGL
-
-
* Jilts entry is from the Chemical Information Systems' database, JSCATS is abo accessible through other
systems listed in the article above.
VOL.12/N0.3 AUGUST 1991
-------
17 States, 1 Indian Tribe
Offered Grants for
Regulating Asbestos
EPA recently offered $1.26 million
in grants to 17 states and one Indian
tribe for use in regulating asbestos.
Eligible activities include
• developing comprehensive state-
wide asbestos management plans;
• consolidating and integrating
existing state asbestos programs;
• developing state certification and
inspection programs for asbestos
abatement;
• establishing state assistance pro-
grams for asbestos abatement
projects; and
• improving the collection of data on
asbestos abatement and making the
data more accessible to the public.
EPA's Office of Toxic Substances
(OTS) announced the state enhance-
ment grants in February 1991. To
receive funds that have been offered,
the recipient must provide a match-
ing contribution of at least 25 per-
cent of the project cost.
Grants
• State Enhancement Grant Allocations for
Regulation of Asbestos
STATE PROJECT(S) FUNDS
Connecticut Development of asbestos abatement $45,000
legislation and program capability.
Maine
Vermont
New York
Alabama
Kentucky
Tennessee
Michigan
Development of asbestos abatement
legislation; establishment of accreditation
programs for project monitoring, consul-
tants, and laboratories; improvement of
public access to asbestos information.
Development of a comprehensive state
asbestos management plan and state
accreditation program; support for
integrating existing inspection programs.
Reevaluation of training and development
of new tests for abatement workers and air-
sampling technicians; development of an
asbestos primer for schools.
Establishment of an accreditation
program for operations and maintenance
personnel in schools; provision of technical
assistance to local education agencies for
operations and maintenance issues.
Development of administrative
procedures and new statutory/regulatory
authorities required for EPA approval
of the state accreditation program and
state inspection program.
$45,599
Rhode Island Implementation of programs for public $44,844
outreach, education, complaint
response, licensing, and certification.
$118,560
$90,112
$ 33,875
$21,125
Development of a computerized
system to track asbestos management plans
of local education agencies, to target inspec-
tions, and to improve public access to asbestos
compliance data.
$ 45,000
Acquisition of computer hardware and
software to improve access to and state tracking
of asbestos compliance-monitoring data.
$ 50,000
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
Grants
STATE
Wisconsin
PROJECT(S)
Development of an integrated interagency
computer network to improve access to and
state tracking of asbestos compliance-
monitoring data.
FUNDS
$ 50,000
Oklahoma
Development of an EPA-approved
state accreditation program and new
training programs for workers who
take air samples and work in confined
spaces.
526,157
Louisiana
Development of an inspection and
management program for state-owned
buildings; evaluation of existing state rules
on asbestos; implementation of outreach
programs; and improvement of access to
program data.
$ 91,723
Colorado
Establishment of an integrated asbestos
data management and processing network
to enhance access to and tracking of data.
$ 50,000
Utah
Upgrading of state accreditation
program to conform with new national
standards.
$ 44,045
California
Support to start a state accreditation
program; establishment of a computer
database.
$288,808
Hawaii
Development of a comprehensive state
asbestos management plan, including the
drafting of new legislation to expand
accreditation and to track and improve access
to asbestos data; integration of existing
compliance-monitoring activities.
$35,518
Alaska
Development of a comprehensive
state asbestos management plan and
drafting of new statutes and regulations
as required.
$155,934
Shoshone
Bannock
Tribe
Implementation of an inspection and
management program for the tribe's
nonschool buildings.
$ 24,000
VOL12/N0.3 AUGUST 1991
-------
Grants
$46,3 Million Awarded to School Districts for Asbestos Abatement
In April 1991, EPA awarded $46.3
million to school districts to undertake
asbestos abatement projects. The funds
were offered to 123 school districts for
abatement projects in 201 schools.
Four hundred and six local education
agencies applied for assistance.
About $12.8 million in grants and
$33.5 million in interest-free loans
will be provided to the schools.
The fiscal 1991 funds were autho-
rized by the Asbestos School Haz-
ard Abatement Act (ASHAA) of
1990. EPA estimates that these
asbestos abatement projects will
eliminate more than 2 million
hours of exposure to asbestos per
week for students and school em-
ployees.
Including this year's awards, EPA has
provided $291-5 million for asbestos
abatement in 1,907 schools since 1985.
Standards revised
EPA reviewed the indicators used to
evaluate school districts' financial
need and determined that changing
two key indicators would allow more
equitable treatment of all applicants.
These new indicators were used dur-
ing the fiscal 1991 award cycle.
First, the agency began using school
districts' operating budget per pupil
to evaluate both public and private
school applications for ASHAA funds.
Previously, the operating budget per
pupil was used for private schools
only, and per capita income was used
as an indicator for public schools.
Second, in determining financial
qualification, the new formula weighs
the cost of abatement in relation to
the school district's operating budget
per pupil and automatically elimi-
nates the richest school districts from
being considered for awards.
Application information
School districts will be notified by No-
vember 15,1991, if Congress appropri-
ates funds for awards in fiscal 1992.
EPA Will Provide $1.2 Million to Programs Supporting Local Emergency
Planning Committees
More than 35 states and Indian
tribes have applied to EPA for
grants to support their local emer-
gency planning committees. These
committees are required by federal
law to develop local emergency re-
sponse plans for use by police,
firefighters, or other local officials
who respond to accidents involving
hazardous materials in their
communities.
EPA will announce the awards in
October 1991. The agency will
award at least $1.2 million in grants
and cooperative agreements to state
and tribal programs under the Emer-
gency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) of the
Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986
(SARA), which is also known as title
III of SARA.
SARA title III required that local
emergency planning committees
develop emergency response plans
by October 1988. Most committees
are now testing and revising these
plans. Some committees, however,
are in the early stages of developing
or implementing their plans. In
making the awards, EPA will con-
sider start-up projects as well as the
improvement of programs already
under way.
The procedure for appointing the
local emergency planning commit-
tees was established by SARA title
III. The law required governors and
tribal leaders to appoint state and
tribal emergency response commis-
sions, which then designated the
local emergency planning
committees.
The purpose of the grants is to pro-
vide money to state or tribal emer-
gency response commissions for
projects that strengthen the capa-
bilities and operation of the local
committees. The deadline for apply-
ing for the funds was June 21, 1991.
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
Reevaluation of Dioxln
Risk Under Way
In April 1991, EPA Administrator
William K. Reilly asked the agency's
Office of Research and Development
to reevaluate the risks of exposure to
dioxin in light of new scientific de-
velopments concerning dioxin. The
review, which will encompass eco-
logical risks as well as toxicity and
exposure to humans, is expected to be
completed in about a year, at which
time it will be made available for
peer and public review.
"There has been much speculation
about the effect of these new develop-
ments on our revised dioxin risk as-
sessment," said Administrator
Reilly. "Some factors may decrease
the level of concern. Others may
result in estimates of increased risk.
We cannot draw conclusions about
the results of our reassessment until a
complete review has been performed
and the combined effect on the over-
all assessment of dioxin risks deter-
mined."
Administrator Reilly also asked a
group of senior agency managers to
review agency actions related to di-
oxin that are either under way or
planned for the next year and to rec-
ommend whether any changes are
appropriate over the period during
which the revaluation is being un-
dertaken. Until review of that report
is completed, all ongoing activities
related to dioxin will proceed as
planned. "In particular," said the
administrator, "enforcement cases,
Superfund or other cleanup actions,
and individual control strategies and
permits under the Clean Water Act
involving dioxin should move for-
ward."
General Information/TSCA Section 8(e) Information
Compliance Audit Program Is Modified
EPA has announced the final modifi-
cation of the Compliance Audit Pro-
gram (CAP). CAP is a one-time,
voluntary program developed to en-
courage companies to audit their files
for substantial risk information re-
quired by section 8(e) of the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA).
The final modifications to CAP, an-
nounced June 20, 1991, are
• the addition of a provision for
listing previously reportable TSCA
section 8(e) information that was
provided to EPA before June 18,
1991, under another section of
TSCA or under another statute,
and a stipulated fine of $5,000 for
each of the overdue filings;
• the suspension of two parts of
EPA's TSCA Section 8(e) Policy
Statement—part V(b)( 1), which
pertains to widespread and previ-
ously unsuspected chemical distri-
bution in environmental media,
and part V(c), which addresses
emergency incidents of environ-
mental contamination (see related
article on this page); and
• the availability of a TSCA section
8(e) reporting guide.
For more information or to obtain
copies of the revised CAP agreement or
the section 8(e) reporting guide, see
page 35 for information on how to
contact the TSCA Assistance Informa-
tion Service (TSCA hotline). Copies of
the Federal Register notices about CAP
are also available from the TSCA
hotline. CAP was announced on Feb-
ruary 1, 1991 (56 FR4128), and modi-
fied on April 26, 1991 (56 FR 19514),
and on June 20, 1991 (56 FR 28458).
I EPA Announces Review of TSCA Section 8(e)
Policy Statement
EPA is assessing the information it collects under section 8(e) of the Toxic Sub-
stances Control Act (TSCA) concerning widespread environmental distribution
and emergency incidents of environmental contamination.
On June 20, 1991, the agency announced it will review the data submitted
under TSCA section 8(e) and other federal laws to determine with greater speci-
ficity what information should be reported under TSCA section 8(e). EPA's
Office of Toxic Substances (OTS) will conduct the review, which will involve
discussions with other EPA program offices and EPA regional offices, other
federal agencies, state programs, the regulated community, environmental
groups, and others. In the fall, EPA will announce how interested parties can
submit comments on the issue.
EPA has suspended parts V(b)(l) and V(c) of the TSCA Section 8(e) Policy
Statement while the review is under way. In the interim, the regulated com-
munity is advised to rely on the statutory language of section 8(e) of TSCA to
determine the reportability of information of this type under CAP and to ensure
compliance with the statute.
VOL.12/N0.3 AUGUST 1991
-------
TSCA Section 8(e) Notices
Under section 8(e) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), anyone who
obtains information that indicates a chemical might pose a substantial risk to
human health or the environment must report that information to EPA within
15 working days of obtaining it.
The Office of Toxic Substances (OTS), which responds to TSCA section 8(e)
submissions, has changed its format for doing so. As of October 1, 1990, OTS
began issuing "submission summaries," rather than "status reports," following
initial section 8(e) notices. Submission summaries contain a detailed account-
ing of the toxicological and other data contained within the 8(e) submission,
but no information regarding EPA's evaluation or disposition of the case.
Below is a list of TSCA section 8(e) notices received between January 1, 1991,
and June 6, 1991. In the list, "S" indicates that a sanitized, or nonconfidential,
version of the document is available, and "P" indicates that a portion of the
submission is protected under the Privacy Act.
Log No. 8EHQ-
Chemical Name
CAS No.
Type of Information
0191-1145
0191-1146 S
0191-1147 S
0191-1148S
0191-1149 S
0191-1150S
0191-1151 S
0191-1152 S
0191-1153
Phenol
108-95-2
Phenoxyquinoxaline, Substituted Confidential
Polymeric Quaternary Ammonium Salt Confidential
Silane, Alkyl Trialkoxy- Confidential
Acetic Acid, Bromo- 79-08-3
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic Acid, 28553-12-0
Diisononyl Ester
Halogenated Organic Solvent Based None
Adhesive Product
Alkaryl Sulfonic Acid, Calcium Salt Confidential
Alkaryl Sulfonic Acid, Magnesium Salt Confidential
Benzenediazonium, 4-(Dimethylamino)-, 6087-56-5
Trichlorozincate(1 -)
Env. Occurrence/Release/Fate
Groundwater Contamination
Oncogenicity (Animal)
Chronic Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Mutagenicity (In Vitro)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Reproductive ToxicityATerato. (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Human)
Allergenicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Ecotoxicity/Aquatic Toxicity
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
TSCA Section 8(e) Notices
Log NO. 8EHQ-
Chemical Name
CAS No.
Type of Information
0191-1154
0191-1155
0191-1156 S
0191-1157
0191-1158 S
0191-1159
0191-1160
0191-1161 S
0191-1162 S
0191-1163 S
0191-1164 S
0191-1165 S
0191-1166 S
0191-1167S
0191-1168 S
0191-1169 S
Benzenediazonium, 4-(Dimethylarnino)-, 124737-31-1
5-Sulfosalicylate
Benzenediazonium, 2,5-Diethoxy-4- 32178-39-5
(4-Morpholiny!)-, Sulfate(1:1)
Heterocycle, Aromatic Confidential
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic Acid, 117-81 -7
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl) Ester
2-Butanone,0,0',0",0'"-Silanetetrayl- 34206-40-1
Tetraoxime
2-Butanone, 0, O'-(Diethoxysilylene) 93917-75-0
Dioxime
2-Butanone, 0, 0', 0"-(Ethoxysilylidyne) 101371-00-0
Trioxime
2-Butanone, 0-(Triethoxysilyl)Oxime 101371-01-1
Benzene 71-43-2
Benzene, 2-lsocyanato-1,3-Bis- 28178-42-9
(1-Methylethyl)-
Acetylenic Compound, Di-Substituted Confidential
Heterocycle Confidential
Heterocycle Confidential
Amino Acid Amide, Substituted Confidential
Heterocycle Confidential
Pyridine, Substituted Confidential
Tetrahydrofuran:; Haloaryl-Substituted Confidential
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Ecotoxicity/Aquatic Toxicity
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Heterocycle
Tetrahydrofuran, Halo-Substituted
Confidential
Confidential
Env. Occurrence/Release/Fate
Groundwater Contamination
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Human Exposure (Product Contamination)
Allergenicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Subchronic Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Oncogenicity (Animal)
Chronic Toxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Oncogenicity (Animal)
Chronic Toxicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Subchronic Toxicity (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
VOL.12/N0.3 AUGUST 1991
-------
TSCA Section 8(e) Notices
Log NO. 8EHQ-
Chemical Name
CAS No.
Type of Information
0191-1170
0291-1171 S
0291-1172 S
0291-1173 S
0291-1174 S
0291-1175
0291-1176
0291-1177
0291-1178
0291-1179 S
0291-1180 S
0291-1181 S
0291-1182
0291-1183 S
0291-1184
0291-1185 S
0291-1186 S
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic Acid,
Bis(2-Methoxyethyl) Ester
Heptane, Bicyclo-
Benzoheterocycle
Benzoheterocycle
Alcohol, Substituted Alkyl
Diethylene Glycol
Amines, C13-15-Alkyl, Ethoxylated
Iron Pentacarbonyl
Benzoic Acid, 2-[(2-Hydroxy-1-
Naphthalenyl)Azo]-,2-(Dimethylamino)
Ethyl Ester, Monohydrochloride
Heterocycle
Heterocycle
Heterocycle
Benzene
Methylene Chloride
Benzene, Ethyl-
Toluene
Xylene
Lead
Amidophosphate, Aromatic
Ethyl Acrylate
Hexanedione (A), Cyclo-
Hexanedione (B), Cyclo-
117-82-8
Confidential
Confidential
Confidential
Confidential
111-46-6
70955-14-5
13463-40-6
118207-99-1
Confidential
Confidential
Confidential
71-43-2
75-09-2
100-41-4
108-88-3
1330-20-7
7439-92-1
Confidential
140-88-5
Confidential
Confidential
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Metabolism/Pharmacokinetics (Human)
Human Exposure (Monitoring)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Subchronic Toxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Clastogenicity (In Vitro)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Subchronic Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Subchronic Toxicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Chronic Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Subchronic Toxicity (Animal)
Env. Occurrence/Release/Fate
Groundwater Contamination
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
TSCA Section 8(e) Notices
Log NO. 8EHQ-
Chemical Name
CAS No.
Type of Information
0391-1187
0291-1188
0291-1189
0291-1190 S
0291-1191
0391-1192 S
0291-1193
0391-1194
0391-1195 S
0391-1196 S
0391-1197 S
0391-1198 S
0391-1199 S
0391-1200 S
0391-1201 S
0391-1202
0391-1203
0391-1204 S
Cotton Dust None
Phosphine 7803-51-2
Benzenamine, 4-Nitro-N-Phenyl- 836-30-6
Pyrimidine Sulfonamide, Substituted Confidential
Sulfonamide, Substituted Pyrimidine Confidential
2,5-Cyclohexadiene-1,4-Dione, 935-92-2
2,3,5-Tri methyl-
Catalyst Ligand 23899 Confidential
Phosphine, Organo- Confidential
Cyclopentane, Methyl- 96-37-7
Hexane 110-54-3
3-Buten-2-One, 4-Phenyl- 122-57-6
Polyol, Nitrated-Polyether Confidential
Phosphonate, Thio- Confidential
Benzoheterocycle Confidential
Hydrazine, Substituted Confidential
Heterocycle Confidential
Arylmethyl-2-Cyclopropyl-2- Confidential
Arylethyl Ether
Siloxane, Organomodified Polydimethyl- Confidential
Cobaltate(3-), Hexakis(Cyano-C)-, Zinc 14049-79-7
(2:3), (OC-6-11)-
Mercury 7439-97-6
Cadmium 7440-43-9
Triazolinone, Phenyl- Confidential
Chronic Toxicity (Human)
Epidem iology/Clin ical
Clastogenicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Ecotoxicity/Aquatic Toxicity
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Allergenicity (Human)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Subchronic Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Human Exposure (Monitoring)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
D
VOL12/N0.3 AUGUST 1991
-------
TSCA Section 8(e) Notices
Log No. 3EHQ-
Chemical Name
CAS No.
Type of Information
0491-1205 S
049 1-1 206 S
0491-1 207 S
0491-1 208 S
0491-1 209 S
0491-1210
Amino Acid Amide, Aryl Substituted
Tetrahydrofuran, Halo-Substituted
Quinazoline (V), Substituted
Benzoxazinone
Triazole (Fungicide)
Hydroquinone
Confidential
Confidential
Confidential
Confidential
Confidential
123-31-9
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Oncogenicity (Anima!)
0491-1211 S
0491-1212 S
0491-1213 S
0491-1214
0491-1215
0491-1216 S
0491-1217S
0491-1218 S
0491-1219
0491-1220
0491-1221
0491-1222 S
Pyrimidine Confidential
Phosphoric Acid, Mixed 3-Bromo-2,2- 125997-20-8
Dimethyl propyI and 2-Bromoethyl and
2-Chloroethyl Esters
Triazolinone, Phenyl Confidential
Lucel-3 Azo Foaming Agent 57910-39-1
Dioxins, Chlorinated None
Benzenamine, 2,6-Dichloro-4-Nitro- 99-30-9
Benzoheterocycle Confidential
Polypropylene Oxide, Acid Grafted Confidential
Pyridine Confidential
2-Propanol 67-63-0
Benzenepropanoic Acid, 3,5-Bis- 125643-61-0
(1,1- Dimethylethyl)-4-Hydroxy-, C7-9-
Branched Alkyl Esters
Octanoic Acid, 1,1,3,3-Tetrabutyl- 56533-00-7
1,3-Distannoxanediyl
Bicycloalkane Confidential
Chronic Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Human Exposure (Product Contamination)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Human)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
TSCA Section 8(e) Notices
Log No. 8EHQ-
Chemlcal Name
CAS No.
Type of Information
0491-1223
0491-1224 S
0491-1225 S
0491-1226
0491-1227 S
0491-1228
0491-1229
0491-1233 S
Pyrimidine, Amino-
Hydrazone
Triazole (Fungicide)
C.I. Acid Red 114
Confidential
Confidential
Confidential
6459-94-5
Amino Alcohol, Substituted Cyclic
Aluminum Complex, Organo
Confidential
Confidential
Ethylene Oxide
Propionate, Phenoxy
75-21-8
Confidential
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Oncogenicity (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Chronic Toxicity (Animal)
Clastogenicity (In Vitro)
Mutagenicity (In Vivo)
Mutagenicity (In Vitro)
Subchronic Toxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Mutagenicity (In Vitro)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Subchronic Toxicity (Animal)
Allergenicity (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Clastogenicity (In Vitro)
Metabolism/Pharmacokinetics (Animal)
Epidemiology/Clinical
Clastogenicity (Human)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
I Availability of 8(e) Notices and FYI Submissions
Section 8(e) notices and FYI submissions are located in the OTS Public Reading
Room, NE-G004, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460. Single copies
of section 8(e) submission summaries are available from the TSCA Assistance
Information Service (TSCA hotline). For more information about contacting the
TSCA hotline, see page 35.
To obtain a copy of a full section 8(e) or FYI submission, write to EPA, Free-
dom of Information (A-101), 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, duplication of a
167-page document will cost $25.15.
VOL.12 /N0.3 AUGUST 1991
-------
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 submit-
ted by chemical manufacturers, processors, federal, state, or local agencies,
foreign governments, academic institutions, public interest and environmental
groups, and the general public.
The FYI classification system was established by the Office of Toxic Substances
(OTS) to distinguish such submissions from notices submitted formally to EPA
under section 8(e) of TSCA.
Listed below are the FYI submissions received between February 1, 1991, and
June 6, 1991- In the list, "S" indicates that a sanitized, or nonconfidential,
version of the document is available, and "P" indicates that a portion of the
submission is protected under the Privacy Act.
FYI NO.
Chemical Name
CAS No.
Type of Information
0291-0802
0391-0803
0391-0804
0391-0805
0491-0806
0491-0807
0591-0808
Benzene, Methyl- 108-88-3
Formaldehyde 50-00-0
Urea 57-13-6
Glutarate, Bis(4-Vinyloxymethylcyclo- Unknown
hexylmethyl)
4-(2'-Ethoxy-4'-Diethylaminophenyl- Unknown
imino)-2-(N-Propylcarbamoyl)-1,4-
Naphthoquinoline
Ethene, Fluoro- 75-02-5
Gasoline Unknown
Benzene 71-43-2
Misc. Chemicals None
Ethene, Chloro- 75-01-4
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Chemical/Physical Properties
Production/Use/Process
Guinea Pig Maximization Test
Mutagenicity (In Vitro)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Human Exposure (Monitoring)
Env. Occurrence/Release/Fate
Groundwater Monitoring
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
For More Information
Send All Correspondence to
Environmental Assistance Division (TS-799)
Office of Toxic Substances
U.S. EPA
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 Toxic
Substances. If you are not currently receiving the bulletin and would like
to become a subscriber, or if you would like to stop receiving the bulle-
tin, please fill out or tape a mailing label onto the form below and send it
to us.
Q Please add my name to the mailing list for the Chemicals-in-Progress
Bulletin.
Q I no longer want to receive the Chemicals-in-Progress Bulletin.
Q I'd like a copy of the following OTS publication(s):
Name
Title
Company or Organization Name
Type of Business
Street Address
City
State
Zip Code
TSCA Hotline
Call (202) 554-1404
The TSCA Assistance Information
Service (TSCA hotline) operates
Monday through Friday, from 8:30
a.m. to 5:00 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 equip-
ment by dialing (202) 554-0551.
To request assistance by mail, write
to the Environmental Assistance
Division at the address provided on
this page.
New OTS Publications
Are Available from the
TSCA Hotline
• A Guide for Chemical Importers/
Exporters: An Overview
• The Interim Guidance on Nonliquid
PCB Disposal Methods to be Used as
Alternatives to a 40 CFR 761.75
Chemical Waste Landfill
• PCB, Lead, and Cadmium Levels in
Shredder Waste Materials: A Pilot
Study
• Evaluation of the Asbestos Hazard
Emergency Response Act
(AHERA): A Summary Report
You may request single copies of
these publications by calling or send-
ing a FAX to the TSCA hotline or by
filling out and mailing the form on
this page.
VOL.12/N0.3 AUGUST 1991
-------
TSCATS
continued from page 23
• Chemical Abstract's Science and
Technology Network (STN): TSCATS
information is in STN's Chemlist
file. TSCATS can be retrieved
separately by qualifying the chemi-
cal by a TSCA section, for example,
section 4(a). To obtain access, call
(800) 848-6533.
• TSCATS entries from 1981
through the present are also found
on SilverPlatter Information, Inc.'s
TOXLINE CD-ROM. To order the
CD-ROM, call (800) 343-0064.
How to order studies
Copies of the studies listed in
TSCATS are available from the Na-
tional Technical Information Service
(NTIS). NTIS requires persons or-
dering documents to provide the
fiche numbers. The correct number
will be in one of the following for-
mats: 0206138, OTS0206138, or
NTIS/OTS02 0613 8. (In the example
on page 23, the fiche number is
0206138.) Document numbers in
other formats are insufficient for
ordering material from NTIS.
Material can also be ordered from
CIS, which has an online mechanism
for ordering paper copies printed
from microfiche or microfiche copies.
Study abstracts
A small number of TSCATS entries
have abstracts. EPA will abstract
additional studies, starting with
those that are required by a testing
rule under section 4 of TSCA. Stud-
ies received by EPA under section
8(e) of TSCA will be the next priority
for abstracting.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSISTANCE DIVISION
Office of Toxic Substances (TS-799)
U.S. EPA
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
00023330 I...56
CHARLOTTE' FOLK
ENVIRON RESEARCH LAB
First Class Mail
Postage and Fees Paid
EPA
Permit No. G-35
COLLEGE b i ft •
GA
30605
------- |