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

-------