Chemicals in Progress
WINTER / SPRING 1997 EPA-745-N-97-001
9 National Pollution
Prevention Progress
10 Guidelines for
preferable cleaning
23 TSCA Biotechnology
Paper Available

1995 TRI Data Released
On May 20, 1997 EPA announced the most recent data on toxic
chemical releases from industrial and federal facilities. The data,
submitted to the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) under EPA's Right-
to-Know program for reporting year 1995, cover 643 toxic chemi-
cals, including the 286 chemicals added to the TRI list in 1994.
EPA Administrator Carol M. Browner said, "Arming the public with
basic information about toxic chemicals in their communities is
1995 TRI continued on page 3
OPPT FY96 Annual Report Available
The Fiscal Year 1996 Annual Report of the Office of Pollution Preven-
tion and Toxics (OPPT) is available through the TSCA Hotline (tel:
202-554-1404, fax: 202-554-5603, e-mail: tsca-hotline@epamail.epa.
gov). The report describes OPPT's activities in four mission areas.
(This Bulletin is similarly organized along the same lines.) The four
components of OPPT's mission are:
~	Pollution Prevention: Promote pollution prevention as a prin-
ciple of first choice to encourage society to care for and think
about the environment in a more protective manner, preventing
harm before it occurs.
~	Safer Chemicals: Promote the design, development, and applica-
tion of less toxic chemicals, processes and technologies in the
industrial sector of the economy.
~	Risk Reduction: Promote the reduction of risks, particularly due
to exposure, and encourage responsible risk management prac-
tices throughout the life cycle of major chemicals of concern.
~	Public Understanding of Risks: Promote public understanding
of the risks of chemicals and public involvement in environmental
decision-making through the development and dissemination of
information on toxic chemicals.
VOL. 18/NU. 1 WINIbH / SPHINti 199/

I Table of Contents
Pollution Prevention
1 1995 TRI Data Released
4	Design for the Environment:
Flexography Project Evaluates
Three Ink Technologies
5	DfE Printed Wiring Board
Update: Alternative
Technologies Look Like
6	Promoting Prevention at the
State Level
7	Getting a Handle on
Environmental Costs: New
Resources from the
Environmental Accounting
8	Kodak-EPA Project Yields
Technology Transfer Lessons
9	1997 National Pollution
Prevention Report
10	Environmentally Preferable
Purchasing: Cleaning Products
Pilot Project
Safer Chemicals
13 Advisory Committee Meets on
Endocrine Disruptors
13	Streamlined Regulations
Announced for Screening
Biotech Products
14	EPA Updates the Master Testing
List, Seeks Increased Industry
15	TSCA Interagency Testing
Committee (ITC) Proposes More
Efficient Use of TSCA Section 8
Risk Reduction
16	Chicago Cumulative Risk
17	Acrylamide Grout Rule Nearing
18	EPA Considers Amendments to
TSCA Asbestos Regulations
19	Revising the TSCA Inventory
Update Rule
Public Understanding of Risks
20	TRI Industry Sector Expansion
Signed on Earth Day
21	Update of TSCA Section 8(e)
Triage Database
22	CLI Report Provides Preliminary
Answers to Labeling Questions
23	TSCA Biotechnology Paper
For correspondence and
Chemicals In
Progress Bulletin
U.S. EPA (7407)
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Joe Boyle, Editor
Gilah Langner
Free Hand Press, Layout

Pollution Prevention
1995 TRI Data
From page 1
among the most effective,
common-sense steps to protect
the health of families and chil-
dren from the threats posed by
pollution. Since the inception of
the Community Right-to-Know
program, reported releases of
pollution into communities have
declined by 46 percent. That is
why the Clinton Administration
has consistently expanded the
type and amount of information
available to the public under the
Right-to-Know program."
The new chemicals account for
238 million pounds — or 10
percent — of all reported re-
leases of toxic chemicals into
air, land or water. Ninety-four
percent of the 286 newly added
chemicals have demonstrated
chronic health hazards and/or
environmental effects, including
cancer or reproductive disor-
ders. Also, one of the newly
added chemicals — nitrate
compounds — alone was re-
sponsible for nearly 65 percent
of all reported water releases.
Primary sources of nitrate com-
pounds are manufacturers of
For the core chemicals reported
for 1995, releases decreased by
4.9 percent, from 1.75 billion
pounds in 1994 to 1.66 billion
pounds in 1995. Reported air
emissions were down by 88.8
million pounds, or 7 percent;
reported discharges to surface
water were down 4.1 million
pounds, or 10 percent. Releases
to land were down by 17 mil-
lion pounds, or 6 percent. Only
underground injection releases
increased, by 24.5 million
pounds, a 19 5 percent increase.
The top 10 chemicals released
into the environment — metha-
nol, ammonia, toluene, nitrate
compounds, xylene (mixed
isomers) zinc compounds,
hydrochloric acid, carbon disul-
fide, n-hexane, and methyl ethyl
ketone — accounted for 1.2
billion pounds, or over half the
total amount of 2.2 billion
pounds of TRI chemicals re-
leased. The chemical manufac-
turing industry continued to
rank first in terms of the amount
of chemicals released (36% of
total releases), followed by the
primary metals industry (15%),
p2per (11%), and plastics (5%).
As required under the Pollution
Prevention Act of 1990, compa-
nies report pollution prevention
activities to the TRI. Of the
21,951 facilities reporting to TRI
for 1995, nearly 29% reported
having undertaken at least one
source reduction activity. Most
commonly reported were "good
operating practices" followed by
process modifications, and spill
and leak prevention.
Although releases of chemical
pollution continue to decline,
the right-to-know data also
show that generation of toxic
Of the 21,951 facilities
reporting to TRI for 1995,
nearly 29% reported having
undertaken at least one
source reduction activity.
chemical wastes by American
manufacturers continues to
increase. In 1995, the volume of
toxic waste containing all TRI
chemicals, including the new
chemicals, was over 35 billion
pounds. Since 1991, when EPA
first began collecting TRI waste
data, there has been a 7 percent
increase in waste generation.
[In April, an expansion of the
TRI list to include seven new
industrial sectors was signed.
See p. 20 for the full story.]
Information on TRI is available
in public libraries or online at or by
calling the Hotline number at 1-
VOL. 181 NO. 1 WINTER / SPRING 1997

Pollution Prevention
Design for the Environment:
Flexography Project Evaluates Three Ink Technologies
Flexographic printing is used in
printing some of the most com-
mon household packaging,
including the plastic bags that
hold foods such as bread, potato
chips, and frozen vegetables.
Three different ink technologies
are currently used to print these
products: solvent-based, water-
based, and ultraviolet (UV)-
curable. Many of the more
traditionally used inks present
environmental challenges. Some
represent a printer's primary
source of emissions of VOCs
(volatile organic compounds),
others present hazardous waste
To reduce these environmental
impacts, printers can change the
way they handle their inks, or
try switching to different ink
technologies. To do so, how-
ever, printers must have good
information on (1) how much
inks cost, (2) how well they
perform on various substrates,
and (3) what risks they might
pose to the environment and
worker health.
Despite industry efforts to test
the different options, there is
little information that compares
the three ink types systemati-
cally across all three of these
factors. This led to a partnership
under the Design for the Envi-
ronment (DfE) program of
representatives from the
flexography industry and EPA in
the DfE Flexography Project.
Together, a technical committee
of experienced flexographers,
trade association leaders, indus-
try consultants, academic ex-
perts, and EPA personnel
assembled the methodology
which is being used to evaluate
the inks for their performance,
cost, and health and environ-
mental risks.
Two types of evaluations have
been performed under the
partnership: (1) a series of field
demonstrations at 11 volunteer
printing facilities across the
United States and in Europe,
and (2) testing in a controlled
laboratory setting at the Printing
Pilot Plant of Western Michigan
University (WMU). The inks
printed in the field and lab runs
are currently being tested for
performance at WMU. Twenty
different performance tests are
being conducted to show how
the inks will hold up under the
real-life stresses to which flex-
ible packaging is subjected.
The costs of using each of the
inks will be evaluated, using
data collected from the field
and a cost methodology devel-
oped by the technical commit-
tee. The cost analysis is broader
than determining the purchase
price of the inks. It will ask, for
example: "How much energy is
consumed in printing and
drying? Do the inks have a high
or low 'mileage'? How many
labor hours are required to
produce the finished image?"
Finally, an EPA workgroup will
be examining the possible
environmental and health risks
associated with the inks. Do the
inks contain hazardous materi-
als, such as VOCs? If so, what
risks do they pose to printers, or
to the community and environ-
ment outside a printing shop?
Findings will be compiled in a
full technical report,
Flexographic Inks: Cleaner
Technologies Substitutes Ass ess -
ment (CTSA). The most perti-
nent and helpful information
from the CTSA will then be
distilled into shorter outreach
documents that can be used by
printers and press operators to
make educated decisions and
real process improvements.
A fact sheet and two case studies
are currently available from the
DfE Flexography Project. To
obtain these documents, other
DfE products, or for more infor-
mation about the Flexography
Project, contact the Pollution
Prevention Information Clear-
inghouse, tel.- 202-260-1023,
fax: 202-260-4659, e-mail:

I Pollution Prevention
DfE Printed Wiring Board Update:
Alternative Technologies Look Like Winners
The Design for the Environment
(DfE) Printed Wiring Board
(PWB) Project has completed its
first major technical study — a
Cleaner Technologies Substitutes
Assessment (CTSA) of one of the
steps of PWB manufacturing.
The results of the CTSA are
expected to be published in
draft form in June 1997.
The CTSA examined the step of
"making holes conductive"
(MHC). The study was devel-
oped by the University of
Tennessee's Center for Clean
Products and Clean Technolo-
gies under a grant from EPA, in
collaboration with the PWB
industry and other stakeholders,
In the study, the health and
environmental risks, perfor-
mance, and costs of seven
existing and emerging MHC
technologies were evaluated.
The results of the CTSA indicate
that when compared to the
baseline of electroless copper
technology, the alternative
technologies: (1) appear to pose
less risk to human health and
the environment (through the
elimination and reduction in use
of toxic chemicals, including
formaldehyde); (2) perform as
well, when operated properly;
(3) present substantial cost
savings; and (4) require the use
of much less water and energy.
Project participants, including
representatives from industry,
academic and research institu-
tions, an environmental organi-
zation, and the DfE Program,
recently presented the CTSA
results at the Institute for
Interconnecting and Packaging
Electronic Circuits' Printed
Circuits Expo 1997, in San Jose,
CA. (The results were also
presented in Orlando, and will
be presented in Minneapolis,
Chicago, Boston, and Phoenix
in 1997.)
The PWB Project recently pub-
lished a document designed to
assist PWB manufacturers to
implement the cleaner MHC
technologies: Implementing
Cleaner Technologies in the PWB
Industry: Making Holes Conduc-
tive (EPA 744-R-97-001; February
1997). This document contains
first-hand information about
manufacturers' experiences in
using the MHC alternatives,
gathered through a survey of 27
PWB manufacturers and vendors.
Other PWB Activities
The PWB Project is now begin-
ning another CTSA that will
evaluate the risk, performance,
and cost of lead-free alternatives
to the standard hot air solder
leveling process. A new elec-
tronics project will be started
this year, working with the flat
panel display industry to con-
The Design for the Environ-
ment (DfE) Printed Wiring
Board (PWB) Project is a
voluntary, non-regulatory
initiative that encourages
companies to implement
cleaner technologies, in
order to improve environ-
mental performance and
industrial competitiveness.
For further information,
please visit our website at
http://www. ipc. org/html/
eh sty pes. htm*design, or
contact Kathy Hart at 202-
duct a life-cycle assessment of
four flat panel display technolo-
gies, as possible replacements
for cathode ray tube displays.
A recently-published pollution
prevention case study (Case
Study 5: A Continuous-Flow
System for Reusing Microetchant;
EPA 744-F-96-024) highlights the
waste reduction and cost sav-
ings experienced by a PWB
company when it implemented
a continuous-flow system for
reusing sulfuric acid-potassium
persulfate microetchant.
All DfE PWB Project documents
are available from the Pollution
Prevention Information Clear-
inghouse, at 202-260-1023,

I Pollution Prevention
Promoting Prevention at the State Level
Pollution prevention has moved
from being the responsibility of a
small group of state technical
assistance programs to becoming
the approach of choice for
single-media state regulatory
programs seeking new and
innovative ways to address their
mandates. OPPT is helping to
promote cross-media pollution
prevention approaches to envi-
ronmental protection at the state
level through two relatively new
organizations. The first, the
Media Association P2 Forum,
convenes quarterly with up to
three board members of each of
the major single-media associa-
tions. OPPT has also initiated a
Pollution Prevention Project
within OPPT's Forum on State
and Tribal Toxic Action
(FOSTTA). Both these efforts
represent an opportunity to
begin more structured dialogue
between EPA and the states on
pollution prevention.
Media Association P2 Forum
The Media Association P2 Forum
is a group of senior state pro-
gram directors that OPPT brings
together periodically to examine
opportunities for incorporating
pollution prevention in a multi-
media fashion into environmen-
tal management practices.
Participants are the leading state
environmental associations,
including the Environmental
Commissioners of the States
(ECOS), the Association of State
and Territorial Solid Waste
Management Officials
(ASTSWMO), the Association of
State and Interstate Water Pollu-
tion Control Administrators
(ASIWPCA), the State and Terri-
torial Air Pollution Control
Administrators (STAPPA), the
Association of Local Air Pollu-
tion Control Officials (ALAPCO),
the National Pollution Preven-
tion Roundtable, and FOSTTA.
The forum is the Agency's only
group that brings together these
associations; organizing it around
pollution prevention represents
an exciting opportunity for
encouraging better integration
within state environmental
programs. The latest meeting of
the group was held on July 23-24
in Washington, D.C.
FOSTTA P2 Project
The purpose of the Pollution
Prevention Project within
FOSTTA is to secure the counsel
of senior state and tribal officials
with an interest in, and knowl-
edge of, pollution prevention
issues and programs to help
guide P2 activities in EPA.
OPPT intends to structure each
meeting so that major cross-
cutting P2 policy issues for the
Agency are described and dis-
cussed, with an opportunity for
EPA program managers to hear
the advice of the group on
current P2 issues and develop-
OPPT is helping to promote
cross-media pollution
prevention approaches to
environmental protection at
the state level through two
new organizations.
ments. It is also expected that
members of the project will raise
issues of concern to them and
other state organizations. The
participants will serve on the P2
Project as individual experts
rather than as representatives of
their states or of states in general.
With the changing relationship
between EPA and the states, in
part due to the National Envi-
ronmental Performance Partner-
ship System and Performance
Partnership Grants and Agree-
ments, there are new opportuni-
ties for integrating pollution
prevention into core state media
programs. Through the Forum
and the FOSTTA P2 Project, EPA
is trying to capitalize on changes
in the delivery of environmental
protection and to work coopera-
tively with the states in crafting
programs and policies to pro-
mote pollution prevention. For
more information, contact Lena
Ferris at 202-260-223 7.

I Pollution Prevention
Getting a Handle on Environmental Costs:
New Resources from the Environmental Accounting Project
This winter the Pollution Pre-
vention Division's Environmen-
tal Accounting Project added
two items to its inventory of
environmental managerial
accounting products: a report on
valuing potential environmental
liabilities and P2/FINANCE
Version 3-0, a total cost assess-
ment software spreadsheet
Valuing Potential Environ-
mental Liabilities for Mana-
gerial Decision-Making: A
Review of Available Tech-
niques describes approaches
and tools for estimating the
monetary value of future, pre-
ventable environmental liabili-
ties. Environmental liabilities
include compliance obligations,
remediation costs, fines and
penalties, compensation obliga-
tions, punitive damages, and
natural resource damages pay-
ment obligations. A potential
pay-off of pollution prevention
investments is the avoidance of
such environmental liabilities,
and, if this benefit is over-
looked, environmental invest-
ments may appear less attractive
than they truly are. Unfortu-
nately, business managers often
feel that they cannot estimate
these costs with a sufficient
degree of accuracy to merit
inclusion in decision-making
calculations. This report was
developed in order to assist
managers to more easily in-
clude potential environmental
liabilities in everyday planning
The report includes a discussion
of the categories of environmen-
tal liabilities that firms might
face, an overview of the tech-
niques identified in EPA's re-
search, an annotated bibliography
with information on 32 different
techniques, and detailed profiles
of 24 of those techniques. The
report was reviewed by over 70
professionals from industry,
accounting organizations, EPA,
and other federal agencies.
P2/FINANCE Version 3.0,
developed by the Tellus Insti-
tute, is a financial evaluation
software application that
prompts users to consider the
environmental costs associated
with current and proposed
investments and uses time
horizons and profitability indica-
tors that capture the long-term
savings typical of P2 invest-
ments. An earlier version, P2/
FINANCE Version 2.0, has been
made available to government
agencies for three years. Version
3.0 features new capabilities and
increased user-friendliness.
Additionally, EPA has a new
license agreement that autho-
rizes all government agencies to
distribute P2/FINANCE Version
3.0 to any interested party. The
system is available for use with
both Microsoft Excel for Win-
dows and Lotus 1-2-3 for DOS.
The User's Guide includes step-
by-step instructions on data
entry and two case studies of
P2/FINANCE applications.
Both the report and P2/FI-
NANCE are available free-of-
Version 3.0 of P2/FINANCE
features new capabilities and
increased user-friendliness.
charge from EPA's Pollution
Prevention Information Clearing-
house at 202-260-1023, fax: 202-
260-4659, or e-mail: ppic@ If ordering P2/
FINANCE, please specify
whether you prefer the Excel for
Windows or Lotus for DOS
formats and whether you would
like to receive a User's Guide.
Both products are also available
via the Environmental Account-
ing Project's website:
For further information, please
contact Susan McLaughlin at
202-260-3844, fax: 202-260-
0178, ore-mail: mclaughlin.susan®

I Pollution Prevention
Kodak-EPA Project Yields Technology Transfer Lessons
A pilot project involving OPPT
and the Eastman Kodak Com-
pany is yielding positive results
regarding the potential for
achieving pollution prevention
through technology transfer.
The project had two basic
goals: first, to determine if
OPPT's analytical methods
could be successfully trans-
ferred to others; and second, to
learn if the information gener-
Our first goal had been met:
OPPT could successfully
transfer assessment
techniques to others.
ated by use of these methods
could affect decision-making on
the part of chemical companies,
among others.
To test the first goal, OPPT shared
with Kodak some of the analytical
methods used by EPA to evaluate
the environmental and human
health risks of chemicals. These
methods include computer model-
ing techniques, quantitative
staicture activity relationships, and
automated exposure assessment
methods. Both EPA and Kodak
used the methods to evaluate the
same set of chemicals. The results
of the independent Kodak and
OPPT analyses were remarkably
close. We concluded that our first
goal had been met: OPPT could
successfully transfer assessment
techniques to others.
Kodak then began to apply the
methodologies in its day-to-day
operations. The company
enthusiastically reported that
the techniques enabled Kodak
to identify and eliminate prob-
lematic chemicals early in the
development stage, thereby
saving significant time and
money. Kodak officials com-
mented on the effort:
"... these methods, if
applied early enough in a
chemical or product devel-
opment cycle, can have an
immediate and positive
impact on programs to
reduce the potential haz-
ards from chemical manu-
facturing operations."
"The methodologies sup-
plied by the Agency al-
lowed those chemicals
with the greatest potential
hazard to be eliminated
from further consideration
at a point in time when the
economic impact of the
decision was minimal. By
applying the methods early
in the development cycle,
we were able to avoid
unnecessary expenditures
on product formulations
for which appropriate
alternatives were available
or could be developed."
The project vividly demon-
strated that the concept of
pollution prevention is not
merely a lofty goal, but one
that can contribute to a cleaner
environment and yield substan-
tial economic benefits to a
company. The project demon-
strated that OPPT methodolo-
gies could be consistently and
independently used by others
outside EPA to advance pollu-
tion prevention objectives.
What's Ahead:
Pollution Prevention
Assessment Framework
The Kodak project also helped
OPPT recognize that we need to
"package" analytic tools in an
integrated, user-friendly manner.
Typically, companies have
questions that call for a variety of
analytic methods. For example:
"An effluent from a manu-
facturing facility receives
primary treatment on-site
and then is discharged to a
publicly owned water
treatment plant (POTW).
The POTW discharges to a
river that is the primary
drinking water source for a
community 25 miles down
stream. Does the chemical
pose a hazard to aquatic
organisms, and what is the
concentration of the chemi-
cal at the downstream
drinking water intake?"
Based on lessons learned
during the pilot project with
Kodak Project continued on next page

Pollution Prevention
Kodak Project
From previous page
Kodak, OPPT is taking steps to
better explain how individual
methodologies can be used to
answer specific questions, and
how methods can be applied in
an integrated manner to answer
more complicated risk-related
questions, such as the one
above. Our goal is to prepare
an integrated Pollution Preven-
tion Assessment Framework
that will explain and document
individual methodologies and
include a series of case studies
showing how methods can be
integrated to answer compli-
cated questions.
September Workshop in EPA Region 9
OPPT and EPA Region 9 will jointly host a workshop to evalu-
ate the utility of the Pollution Prevention Assessment Frame-
work developed in the Kodak project. The workshop,
scheduled for September 1997 at Region 9 headquarters in San
Francisco, will include representatives from chemical compa-
nies, the electronics and aerospace sectors, state environmental
organizations, and nongovernmental organizations. At the
workshop we hope to learn if the P2 Framework can help
others independently evaluate chemical hazards and identify
safer chemicals and processes. Based on the response of work-
shop participants, OPPT will update and enhance the P2 Frame-
work to better reflect the needs of the user community. Our
goal for 1998 would be to broadly disseminate the P2 Frame-
work to EPA Regions, interested states, companies, nonprofits,
and other interested organizations.
For additional information, contact Don Rodier at 202-260-1276,
Bill Waugh at 202-260-3489, or John Katz at 415-744-2150.
1997 National Pollution Prevention Report
OPPT's Pollution Prevention and
Environmental Assistance Divi-
sions have been working for the
past year on a national report
on pollution prevention
progress. The report, Pollution
Prevention 1997: A National
Progress Report, updates the
first national report published
six years ago. In this report, EPA
examines successes and chal-
lenges in pollution prevention at
EPA and other federal agencies,
in industry, among states and
tribes, educational institutions,
communities, and the non-profit
sector. The report contains a
chapter on progress in measur-
ing pollution prevention and a
final chapter that ponders the
future of pollution prevention.
More than twenty outside au-
thors provide guest commentar-
ies on prevention issues,
including Warren Muir, president
of Hampshire Research Associ-
ates; David L. Thomas, Director
of the Illinois Department of
Natural Resource's Waste Man-
agement and Research Center;
Harry Freeman, Executive
Director of the Louisiana Envi-
ronmental Leadership Pollution
Prevention Program at the
University of New Orleans;
Joanna Underwood, president of
INFORM, Inc.; and Gerald Kotas,
co-director of the National
Climate Wise Program and
senior environmental scientist
with the Office of Energy Effi-
ciency and Renewable Energy of
the Department of Energy.
For information on obtaining
the report, contact EPA's Pollu-
tion Prevention Information
Clearinghouse at 202-260-1023.

I Pollution Prevention
Environmentally Preferable Purchasing:
Cleaning Products Pilot Project
Now, federal buildings can be
both green and clean! Govern-
ment buyers have a new tool for
comparing cleaning products on
the basis of their environmental
attributes. A matrix developed as
part of a joint General Services
Administration (GSA) project
with EPA makes it easy to select
a cleaning product based on
local environmental needs.
The Cleaning Products Pilot
Project is the first of many
environmentally preferable
purchasing (EPP) pilot projects
being developed by EPA to
demonstrate how environmental
considerations can be success-
fully incorporated into purchas-
ing decisions. Cleaning products
were selected as the first EPP
pilot project because they are
used throughout the federal
government. The project con-
sisted of three phases:
~	A field test to examine the
performance, health and
safety, and environmental
impacts of several alternative
cleaning products
~	A screening-level risk assess-
ment conducted by EPA
~	Development of a list of
environmentally preferable
cleaning product attributes.
After considering several meth-
ods for promoting the preferred
environmental attributes, the
GSA/EPA team developed a
matrix. The matrix allows pur-
chasers to identify and compare
commercial cleaning products
based on the environmental
attributes most critical for their
geographic region and intended
use. The matrix was first pub-
lished in GSA's February 1996
Commercial Cleaning Supplies
catalog, which was distributed
to 15,000 federal government
buyers. The catalog included a
13-page section listing 48 com-
mercially available biodegrad-
able cleaners and degreasers
from 30 suppliers. Additional
information on seven environ-
mental attributes for 28 of the
48 products was voluntarily
provided by the manufacturers
and suppliers.
Following publication of the
matrix, more than 70 companies
requested information on join-
ing the program. Manufacturers
provided environmental at-
tribute information for three
additional cleaning products,
which will be included in the
next GSA catalog, to be pub-
lished in June 1997. GSA also
expanded the matrix to include
all of the cleaning products that
meet the acute toxicity and
biodegradability criteria detailed
in the Federal Supply Schedule
Contract for Biodegradable
Cleaners/Degreasers (solicitation
number FTC-92-MT-7906B).
Attribute Matrix
The matrix lists the seven envi-
ronmental attributes selected by
the GSA/EPA team across the
top and provides information for
each of the cleaning products
underneath. None of the at-
tributes is considered more
important than any other. Gov-
ernment buyers are encouraged
to select the most relevant
attribute(s) for their needs and
balance the available environ-
mental information, along with
traditional factors such as price
and performance, when making
purchasing decisions.
Following is a brief description
of the seven attributes.
1.	Skin Irritation
Some cleaning products can
cause skin redness or swelling.
Products with a lower skin
irritation potential are more
preferable than those with a
higher irritation potential.
2.	Food Chain Exposure
Some cleaning products contain
chemicals that can enter the food
chain when consumed by
aquatic plants and animals.
Chemical concentrations can
increase throughout the food
chain as these plants and animals
are consumed by larger animals.
Products that contain ingredients
that are less likely to accumulate
in this manner are preferable.

I Pollution Prevention
Defining EPP
Environmentally preferable products are "products and ser-
vices [that] have a lesser or reduced effect on human health
and the environment when compared to other products and
services that serve the same purpose." Environmentally Prefer-
able Purchasing (EPP) promotes federal government use of
products and services that have reduced impacts on human
health and the environment. Such purchases are required by
Executive Order 12873, Federal Acquisition, Recycling, and
Waste Prevention, The Executive Order also directed EPA to
develop guidance to help federal agencies incorporate envi-
ronmental preferability into their purchasing procedures.
3.	Air Pollution Potential
Some cleaning products contain
volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) that can escape during
product use. VOCs have been
linked with smog formation,
which has been shown to cause
eye, nose, throat, and lung
irritation and cause asthma
attacks. As a result, many state
and local authorities have
restrictions on the use of VOCs.
The lower the VOC percentage,
the more preferable the product.
4.	Fragrances
Fragrances are added to some
cleaning products to improve
their odor or mask offensive
odors. A basic principle of
pollution prevention is to avoid
additives that are unnecessary,
which might suggest avoiding
products with fragrance addi-
tives. Some people, however,
consider fragrances necessary
for aesthetic reasons or to
distinguish among cleaning
products. It is up to the indi-
vidual government purchaser to
determine if fragrances are a
necessary ingredient.
5.	Dyes
Like fragrances, some cleaning
products contain dyes to change
or enhance the aesthetics of a
product. While the addition of
dyes contributes little to the
cleaning value of the product, it
may be important for safety
reasons like differentiating
between products and other
liquids such as water. Again, a
basic principle of pollution
prevention is to avoid unneces-
sary additives and it is up to the
individual government pur-
chaser to determine if dyes are a
necessary ingredient.
6.	Packaging
A product's packaging can
account for a significant portion
of the product's contribution to
the solid waste stream. EPA's
recommended approach to
managing solid waste is to
reduce product packaging and
use recycled materials when
packaging is necessary. Products
with reduced packaging or
recycled content packaging are
preferable. Reduced packaging,
however, often results in a
product being shipped as a
concentrate, which can create
additional human health and
safety or environmental risks. As
a result, the final attribute is
related to product packaging.
7. Exposure to Concentrate
Although packaging a product
in concentrated form may result
in reduced packaging, it raises
the potential that the end users
of the product will be exposed
to the concentrate. Exposure to
the concentrate may place the
end user at greater health risk
than exposure to the ready-to-
use product. It is preferable
that products shipped as con-
centrates are provided in pack-
aging that minimizes concentrate
Alternative Methods for
Identifying EPPs
The environmental attribute
matrix was not the only method
considered to promote the
purchase of environmentally
preferable cleaning products.
The GSA/EPA team also consid-
ered establishing thresholds for
individual environmental at-
tributes. Products that met the
thresholds would be placed on a
list of "green" cleaning products
or be identified by a "green dot."
Proponents of this method
suggested that it would be the
most convenient for government
buyers. Others felt that if mini-
Cleanlng Products continued on next page
VOL. 18 / NO. 1 WINTER / SPRING 1997

Pollution Prevention
Cleaning Products
From previous page
mum environmental performance
criteria were established, manu-
facturers would have no incen-
tive to exceed the minimum
criteria. They also suggested that,
although a "green dot" would
make it easier for buyers, it
might also obscure vital environ-
mental information including
which environmental attribute(s)
warranted the "green dot." Such
information is important because
government purchasers buy
cleaning products for a variety of
situations — from remote forest
service outposts to entire military
bases — each of which has
unique environmental and
performance needs.
Additional EPP projects are being
developed and implemented by
federal, state, and local govern-
ment agencies, as well as in the
private sector. The Pollution
Prevention Information Clearing-
house (PPIC) has several EPP
documents available, including
Executive Order 12873 on Fed-
eral Acquisition, Recycling, and
Waste Prevention; EPA's Guid-
ance on Acquisition of Environ-
mentally Preferable Products and
Services (60 FR 50722); and the
Cleaning Products Pilot Project
Case Study (EPA742-R-97-002),
which documents the history of
and lessons learned from the
pilot project.
For copies or additional infor-
mation, contact PPIC at tel.- 202-
260-1023 or fax: 202-260-4659.
EPA's EPP Guidance
EPA identified seven guiding principles to help federal agen-
cies incorporate environmental preferability into their procure-
ment practices. These principles were proposed in EPA's
Guidance on Acquisition of Environmentally Preferable Prod-
ucts and Services (60 FR 50722):
~	Consideration of environmental preferability should begin
early in the acquisition process and be rooted in the ethic
of pollution prevention, which strives to eliminate or re-
duce, up front, potential risks to human health and the
~	A product or service's environmental preferability is a
function of multiple attributes.
~	Environmental preferability should reflect life-cycle consid-
erations of products and services to the extent feasible.
~	Environmental preferability should consider the scale (global
versus local) and temporal reversibility aspects of the impact.
~	Environmental preferability should be tailored to local
conditions where appropriate.
~	Environmental objectives of products or services should be
a factor or subfactor in competition among vendors, when
~	Agencies need to examine product attribute claims carefully.

I Safer Chemicals
Advisory Committee Meets on Endocrine Disruptors
The Endocrine Disruptor Screen-
ing and Testing Advisory Com-
mittee (EDSTAC) held its third
meeting in Baltimore, MD on
April 29-30. The major focus of
discussion was a Framework
Concepts document developed
by the Principles Workgroup.
The Framework Concepts will
provide guidance to the Screen-
ing and Testing and Priority
Setting Workgroups and help
coordinate their efforts. The
framework document describes
a process for sorting, prioritiz-
ing, screening and testing
chemicals and pesticides for
their potential to disrupt the
endocrine system in humans
and wildlife. It describes a
multistage process beginning
with sorting and prioritizing
existing information. This is
followed by a first tier of
screening level assays and a
second tier of confirmatory
The Prioritization Workgroup is
developing criteria for determin-
ing when chemicals and pesti-
cides should proceed to
screening, when they should go
directly to the testing phase,
when there are adequate data to
begin hazard assessment, and
when there are adequate data to
determine that no additional
testing is necessary. The Screen-
ing and Testing Workgroup is
developing a matrix of method-
ologies that have been evalu-
ated at several workshops
sponsored jointly by the Chemi-
cal Manufacturers Association,
EPA, and the World Wildlife
Fund. Both workgroups were to
report on the progress of their
deliberations and identify cross-
cutting issues at the July 15-16
EDSTAC meeting in Chicago.
Streamlined Regulations Announced for Screening Biotech Products
On March 28, 1997, EPA issued
new regulations that establish a
streamlined process for the
screening of certain microbial
biotechnology products to
ensure that they are safely
developed for commercial use
in a broad range of industrial
and environmental applications.
"Today's action achieves the
Clinton Administration's objec-
tive to protect human health and
the environment, while provid-
ing flexibility for the develop-
ment of our nation's emerging
biotechnology industry," said
EPA Administrator Carol M.
Browner. "Our goal is to help
the nation safely realize the
widespread benefits of biotech-
nology in a number of markets,
from pollution prevention to
environmental cleanup."
The regulations, issued under
authority of the Toxic Sub-
stances Control Act (TSCA)
cover microbial biotechnology
products developed for indus-
trial applications. Other federal
authorities regulate the develop-
ment and introduction of bio-
logical pesticides, drugs and
food additives.
Under these regulations, compa-
nies that manufacture or re-
searchers who develop
microbial biotechnology prod-
ucts are required to notify and
obtain EPA review prior to the
use of their products in com-
merce or testing in the environ-
ment. Specifically the new
~ Tailor pre-existing screening
requirements for new chemi-
cals and establish a distinct
program for microbial bio-
technology products under
Section 5 of TSCA. EPA has
been reviewing microbial
biotechnology products for 10
years under the authority of a
policy statement issued in
1986 and under TSCA regula-
tions originally written for
new chemicals. Today's action
supersedes these pre-existing
policies and regulations.
Biotech continued on next page

I Safer Chemicals
EPA Updates the Master Testing List,
Seeks Increased Industry Testing
From previous page
~	Continue to focus the
Agency's regulatory attention
on microorganisms that are
likely to display new traits or
to exhibit less predictable
behavior in the environment.
~	Provide full or partial exemp-
tions from the notification and
screening requirements for
certain categories of new
microorganisms introduced
for commercial use or testing
in the environment and for
which EPA has acquired
substantial assessment experi-
ence. A process for seeking
additional exemptions also is
The final rule was published in
the Federal Register on April 11,
1997. The text of the final rule
and certain supporting docu-
ments are also available elec-
tronically through OPPT's
Biotechnology Program home
page at
opptintr/biotech/ or at gopher.
Note: New Biotechnology Paper
Available (see page 23).
As part of EPA's ongoing efforts
to facilitate environmental stew-
ardship in the chemical industry,
OPPT has updated the Master
Testing List (MTL) (see 61 FR
65939, Dec. 13, 1996). Almost all
of the chemicals identified on
the MTL are domestically pro-
duced in high volumes (i.e.,
more than 1 million pounds/
year). The revisions add more
than 300 individual chemicals
and four chemical categories and
remove more than 75 chemicals
for which testing is complete.
The 1996 MTL now contains over
500 individual chemicals and 13
chemical categories and repre-
sents EPA's TSCA Chemical
Testing Program priorities for
While testing is underway on
almost 300 chemicals, over 200
other chemicals need testing
actions to begin. The identifica-
tion of these testing needs
provides an opportunity for
chemical companies to demon-
strate their corporate responsibil-
ity by initiating activities to
develop the needed data. EPA
strongly encourages the chemical
industry to fulfill its commitment
to environmental stewardship,
specifically, by conducting the
appropriate testing to fill the
priority data needs identified.
Although EPA has the authority
under Section 4 of TSCA to issue
formal rules requiring chemical
manufacturers, importers and
processors to test chemicals
listed on the MTL, the Agency
has developed programs that
provide industry greater flexibil-
ity in developing needed data.
EPA seeks to obtain test data
more efficiently, effectively and
cooperatively via Enforceable
Consent Agreements and Volun-
tary Testing Agreements which
provide the flexibility to consider
pollution prevention and other
types of risk-reducing product
stewardship actions by the
chemical industry as a possible
substitute for or adjunct to the
needed testing.
EPA believes that chemical
companies with product steward-
ship programs will recognize the
importance of promptly filling
the data needs identified via the
MTL. Testing is needed to pro-
vide the public, industry, and
government with the information
necessary to understand the
hazards and risks posed by
chemicals used in consumer and
other products and/or released
to the environment.
The 1996 MTL also has a new
format and is publicly available
in hard copy form and online at
main/ctibhome.htm. For further
information about the MTL or
EPA s TSCA Chemical Testing
Program, contact Charles Auer at

I Safer Chemicals
TSCA Interagency Testing Committee Proposes
More Efficient Use of TSCA Section 8 Resources
In its 40th Report to the EPA
Administrator delivered on
April 28, 1997, the TSCA Inter-
agency Testing Committee
(ITC) proposed procedures for
promoting more efficient use
of TSCA Section 8 resources
by: 1) refining Section 8 data
needs; 2) encouraging elec-
tronic data submissions; and 3)
providing incentives for manu-
facturers, importers, processors
and users of chemicals recom-
mended by the ITC to volun-
tarily submit Section 8
information in a form that is
rapidly reviewed by the ITC.
The ITC notes in its report that
it has had some success in
obtaining voluntary exposure,
use and toxicity data from
manufacturers, importers,
processors and users of chemi-
cals that have been recom-
mended and added to the
Priority Testing List and in
establishing partnerships with
the relevant chemical trade
associations. For example, a
partnership with the Propylene
Glycol Ethers Panel of the
Chemical Manufacturers Asso-
ciation (CMA) provided data
needed by the Consumer Prod-
uct Safety Commission that
resulted in removal of all
propylene glycol ethers from
the Priority Testing List (60 FR
42982, August 17, 1995). A
partnership with the Silicones
Environmental Health and
Safety Council provided data
needed by the Food and Drug
Administration, produced an
electronic database of TSCA
Section 8(d) studies in a com-
patible format, and resulted in
removal of 43 of 56 siloxanes
from the Priority Testing List
(61 FR 4188, February 2, 1996).
The ITC wants to pursue these
voluntary approaches to data
The ITC encourages manufac-
turers, importers, processors or
users of chemicals recom-
mended by the ITC to develop
databases compatible with the
TSCA Test Submissions
(TSCATS) database, and to
submit electronic information in
a form that is rapidly and easily
reviewed by the ITC, e.g., the
TSCA Electronic Cover Sheet
developed by the EPA and the
CMA. TSCATS can be searched
on the Right-to-Know web site
(, where in the
future it will be possible to
retrieve the TSCA Electronic-
Cover Sheet.
For those that establish partner-
ships with the ITC and provide
easy-to-review (electronic)
submissions, the ITC offers the
potential to eliminate promulga-
tion of TSCA Section 8(a) Pre-
liminary Assessment Information
Reporting and Section 8(d)
Health and Safety Data rules.
For more information, contact
John D. Walker, fax: 202-260-
7895, e-mail: walker.jobnd@

I Risk Reduction
Chicago Cumulative
On February 23, 1996, EPA
received a Section 21 petition
from the Chicago Legal Clinic,
representing 11 Community
Advocacy Groups. The petition
requested that EPA issue a TSCA
Section 6 rule regulating the
disposal of dioxins, furans,
mercury, cadmium, and lead
through air deposition from
eight incinerators slated to begin
operating (or in one case,
already operating) in Cook
County, Illinois and Lake
County, Indiana. The petition
alternatively requested the
issuance of a TSCA Section 4
rule that would require data
collection on cumulative effects,
focusing on risks posed by these
chemicals. Under Section 21 of
TSCA, EPA had 90 days from
receipt of the petition to pre-
pare and issue a response.
A workgroup was assembled to
evaluate the petition and gener-
ate a response. After analyzing
information collected during the
investigation, the workgroup
determined that insufficient
information existed to support
the initiation of Section 6 activ-
ity. The workgroup also deter-
mined that due to the uncertain
status of the planned incinera-
tors targeted by the petition,
committing to Section 4 activity
was not the most appropriate
course of action.
The workgroup did, however,
conclude that several significant
Risk Initiative
issues were raised during the
petition investigatory process.
Those issues included: cumulative
effects; loading; and risks posed
by incinerators and other point,
area, and mobile sources. In the
workgroup's response (dated May
23, 1996), EPA denied the petition
and proposed that the petitioners
work with the Agency to plan
and implement a community-
based effort to investigate the
cumulative issues (but covering a
wider range of toxics and
sources) faced by residents of the
two counties.
At a June 1996 meeting in
Chicago, stakeholders requested
that the EPA workgroup develop
an outline of the proposed
project. The workgroup as-
sembled the requested material
and presented it at an August
meeting. Stakeholders reacted
favorably and discussed modifi-
cations to the project, proposed
deliverables, and the nature of
stakeholder participation. The
new project, entitled the Chi-
cago Cumulative Risk Initiative
(CCRI), has developed into a
four phase activity:
Phase I: Generating a
cumulative environmental
loading profile.
This profile will be a complete
catalogue of the source and
nature of toxics emissions into
various media (e.g., air, water)
in the two county study area.
The environmental loading
profile will establish a list of
toxics to which cumulative
exposure will be estimated. The
report presenting the environ-
mental loading profile will serve
as a vital reference on Chicago-
area emissions for stakeholders
and other interested parties.
Phase II: Convening a
facilitated workshop to
discuss CCRI-relevant
This phase was scheduled to be
completed in June 1997. The
workshop will involve the stake-
holders, EPA Headquarters and
Region V, state and local officials
in Illinois and Indiana, and other
non-governmental organizations
in discussing and reaching
accords on the environmental
loading profile, the cumulative
risk assessment, and customer
service issues. The workshop
will be held in Chicago.
Phase III: Applying the
Cumulative Risk Matrix.
Because the scope of a compre-
hensive, cumulative risk analysis
is potentially enormous, the
workgroup intends to conduct a
focused assessment that will
~	the most significant environ-
mental hazards;
~	their sources and exposure
Chicago continued on next page

I Risk Reduction
Chicago	Acrylamide Grout Rule Nearing Completion
From previous page
~	risks of various health effects
from multiple exposure
sources and pathways; and
~	locations and other character-
istics defining sensitive popu-
The assessment will focus on a
small number of contaminants
made significant by their toxicity
or carcinogenicity in combina-
tion with (1) the volume re-
leased, (2) their potential
synergistic effects with other
contaminants in the area, (3)
their tendency to bioaccumulate,
(4) their potential for relatively
high exposures or the exposures
of particularly sensitive popula-
tions (e.g., children), or (5) their
possible contribution to high
incidence health effects in the
Chicago-area population.
Phase IV: Initiating Pollution
Phase IV, the risk management
or pollution prevention/
remediation phase of CCRI,
relies on the preceding three
phases and is currently in the
initial planning stages.
For more information, contact
James Boles at 202- 260-3969-
Acrylamide grouts are primarily
used to seal leaks in manholes
and sewers without requiring
excavation. Motivation for
sealing sewer leaks arises from
the need to prevent infiltration
of groundwater into sewer
systems, in order to preserve
the effective capacity of water
treatment works. Acrylamide is
a human neurotoxicant and has
been classified by EPA as a
probable human carcinogen.
The population at risk consists
of approximately 1,000 workers
who are engaged in sewer
grouting. N-methylolacrylamide
(NMA) grouts are used for the
same purpose, and use the
same equipment and methodol-
ogy, as acrylamide grouts. NMA
was developed as a less hazard-
ous substitute for acrylamide
grouts. Although NMA produces
the same cancer and neurotoxic
effects as acrylamide, it is about
an order of magnitude less
In 1991, EPA proposed a rule
that would have banned all
uses of acrylamide grouts
immediately, and banned all
uses of NMA grouts three years
following promulgation. In the
course of drafting the final rule,
however, the provision regard-
ing NMA was dropped — based
in part upon the perceived lack
of an effective substitute for
both acrylamide and NMA. In
late 1995, the draft final rule,
with NMA deleted, was sent to
The population at risk
consists of approximately
1,000 workers who are
engaged in sewer grouting.
OMB for pre-promulgation
review. Following that review,
the rulemaking record was
reopened for 30 days. Based
upon responses received to that
reopening, questionnaires were
subsequently sent to the pro-
ducers of grouts and grouting
equipment in order to deter-
mine whether a third grout may
now have become an accept-
able substitute for both
acrylamide and NMA grouts.
Responses to the questionnaires
have now been received. Based
upon an analysis of those
responses, the draft final rule
will be revised and resubmitted
to OMB for review in the
18 / NO. 1 WINTER / SPRING 1997

I Risk Reduction
EPA Considers Amendments to TSCA Asbestos Regulations
In 1994, the Occupational Safety
and Health Administration
(OSHA) amended its Construc-
tion Standard for Asbestos and
EPA issued interim final amend-
ments to the Asbestos Model
Accreditation Plan. Shortly
thereafter, EPA and OSHA began
receiving questions and com-
ments from the regulated com-
munity and other stakeholders. It
soon became apparent that there
were several inconsistencies
between the Model Accreditation
Plan and the OSHA standard.
Employers with projects covered
by more than one regulation
were unclear as to the proper
way to comply with the various
rules. In response, EPA and
OSHA formed an inter-agency
workgroup to identify inconsis-
tencies and develop potential
solutions. The workgroup deliv-
ered its recommendations in the
summer of 1996. To implement
these recommendations, EPA has
tentatively agreed to pursue
amendments to the AHERA
regulations and the asbestos
Model Accreditation Plan.
EPA has also received other
comments and suggestions from
stakeholders on changes that
should be made to the Model
Accreditation Plan and the
AHERA regulations. Some of
these ideas include incorpora-
tion of modular training prin-
ciples, reducing the record-
keeping requirements for local
educational agencies, lengthen-
ing the reinspection period for
schools from 3 to 5 years, and
requiring refresher training for
accredited persons on a bien-
nial, rather than annual, basis.
A notice describing the recom-
mendations of the EPA/OSHA
workgroup and soliciting com-
ments specifically on modular
training issues is being prepared
and is expected to be published
within the next 60 days. This
notice will be followed in early
1998 by a Notice of Proposed
For more information, contact
Cindy Fournier at 202-260-153 7.
Background on Asbestos Regulations
Asbestos abatement projects in schools, public, commercial,
and industrial buildings are covered by a number of regula-
tions. These include:
~	the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA,
TSCA Title II) regulations for schools, which require build-
ing inspections and management plans for in-place asbes-
tos-containing building materials.
~	the Asbestos Model Accreditation Plan under TSCA, which
prescribes training and accreditation requirements for
asbestos inspectors, management planners, project design-
ers, workers and contractor/supervisors.
~	the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollut-
ants under the Clean Air Act, which contain work practice
and notification requirements for building demolition and
renovation activities involving asbestos.
~	the OSHA Construction Standard for Asbestos, which con-
tains requirements for work practices, training, monitoring,
and personal protection equipment.

I Risk Reduction
Revising the TSCA Inventory Update Rule
OPPT plans to propose amend-
ments to the TSCA Inventory
Update Rule (IUR) in late 1997.
The amendments will accom-
plish several goals: providing
raw data for input to Agency
risk screening tools, enabling
The IUR provides a
"snapshot" of organic
chemical manufacturing
the Agency to better develop
risk-based priorities; providing
linkages between the Chemical
Update System database and
other EPA databases; and giving
the Agency a more comprehen-
sive data set to support its risk
screening and management
The IUR provides a "snapshot"
of mostly organic chemical
manufacturing by collecting
production information on a
subset of the chemicals listed on
the TSCA Inventory. The IUR
requires facilities manufacturing
or importing more than 10,000
pounds per year of a TSCA
chemical to report to EPA every
four years. Information currently
reported includes company
name and facility identification,
chemical name, production or
import volume, and whether the
substance is site-limited. Data
have been collected three times
since 1985- The next reporting
period, beginning in August
1998, will collect information for
The changes under consider-
ation for the IUR Amendments
relate to certain administrative
aspects of the rule, types of
information to be reported,
chemicals and production levels
exempt from reporting, and
confidential business informa-
tion claims. These changes
would be implemented after the
1997 collection.
The administrative changes EPA
is considering include requiring
reporting by calendar year
instead of by a reporter's fiscal
year, altering the frequency of
reporting from the current every
four years, and reporting addi-
tional facility and company
identification information,
including an EPA identification
EPA is considering increasing
the reported information re-
quirements, adding a require-
ment to submit limited
chemical-specific, exposure-
related information. The expo-
sure-related information may
include the number of workers
potentially exposed, the number
of use and processing sites, the
chemical functions, and SIC
codes of use sites. A variety of
reporting thresholds are under
consideration, including basing
the type of information reported
on the production or import
EPA is also considering several
changes to the categories of
substances exempted from
reporting. First, inorganic chemi-
cals, generally currently exempt,
would be required to report.
Second, some subset of petro-
leum chemicals would become
exempt. Third, a low-risk ex-
emption is being considered for
chemicals the Agency has
already reviewed.
CBI changes under consider-
ation include requiring upfront
documentation for facility
identification claims. Currently,
upfront documentation is re-
quired for chemical identity
claims only. EPA is also consid-
ering requiring some form of
reassertion of past CBI claims.
For more information on this
project, contact Susan Krueger
at 202-260-1713 or e-mail:
krueger. susan® epa ma il.epa .gov.

I Public Understanding of Risks
TRI Industry Sector Expansion Signed on Earth Day
On April 22, 1997, EPA finalized
the expansion of the Toxics
Release Inventory (TRI) to in-
clude an additional seven indus-
try sectors that are now required
to report releases of toxic chemi-
cals under Section 313 of the
Emergency Planning and Commu-
nity Right-to-Know Act of 1986
(EPCRA). The expansion will
strengthen community right-to-
know by providing information
on toxic chemical releases and
waste management for approxi-
mately 6,100 more facilities.
The seven industry groups
added are as follows:
~	Metal Mining (SIC code 10
except SIC codes 1011, 1081,
and 1094)
~	Coal Mining (SIC code 12
except SIC code 1241)
~	Electric Utilities (SIC codes
4911, 4931, 4939)
~	Commercial Hazardous
Waste Treatment (SIC code
~	Chemicals and Allied Prod-
ucts-Wholesale (SIC code
~	Petroleum Bulk Terminals
and Plants (SIC code 5171)
~	Solvent Recovery Services
(SIC code 7389).
Facilities operating in these
industry segments that meet
reporting thresholds under
EPCRA Section 313 must report
related chemical release and
management information begin-
ning with activities that occur
during 1998, with some excep-
tions. Of the electric generating
facilities operating in SIC codes
4911, 4931, and 4939, only those
that use coal and/or oil to
produce energy for distribution
in commerce are required to
consider their activities for
potential TRI reporting. Like-
wise, of the commercial waste
treatment facilities operating in
SIC code 4953, only those
facilities regulated under the
Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle C
program are covered by this
action. As proposed, EPA is
exempting coal extraction
activities because operations
related to coal extraction are
extremely unlikely to result in
TRI reporting.
This final action also amends
the definition of the activity
threshold known as "otherwise
use." Under the amended
definition, activities considered
as "otherwise used" include the
treatment, stabilization, and
disposal of toxic chemicals
received from off-site for waste
management purposes or gener-
ated during the waste manage-
ment of materials received from
off-site. This will require cov-
ered facilities to consider
amounts managed in these
processes toward reporting
thresholds. The amendment will
provide additional information
on waste management activities
at currently reporting facilities,
and on amounts managed by
commercial hazardous waste
treatment and disposal facilities.
EPA has considered expanding
the TRI to include additional
facility sectors for several years.
In 1994, EPA expanded TRI to
include an additional 286 chemi-
cals and chemical categories,
renewed its commitment to
continue expanding TRI, and
announced that it would begin
consideration of a third phase of
TRI expansion — the collection
of chemical use information in
TRI. On August 8, 1995, the
President directed EPA to expe-
dite the industry expansion
rulemaking and the consider-
ation of collecting chemical use
information. This final rule
fulfills the first order of that
directive. The proposed rule for
industry expansion was pub-
lished in the Federal Register on
June 27, 1996; the final rule was
published on May 1, 1997.
For more information, contact
Maria Doa at 202-260-9592 or
Tim Crawford at 202-260- 1715.

Public Understanding of Risks
Update of TSCA Section 8(e) Triage Database
The 8(e) Triage Database is a PC-
based database of significant
health risk studies submitted to
EPA under Section 8(e) of TSCA.
An updated version is
currently being prepared
and is expected to be
available for distribution by
Fall 1997.
It provides users with informa-
tion about these studies and
serves as a pointer system to the
complete studies. The database
breaks down the 8(e) studies
into high, medium, and low
levels of toxicological concern
and gives a short statement
describing why they were cat-
egorized as such. Abstracts are
provided for studies considered
to be of high concern and high
production level. Version 2.0,
released in December 1994,
contains information from about
10,000 of the approximately
14,000 studies submitted under
Section 8(e). The database is
available on diskettes through
the TSCA Hotline (202-554-1404)
and on EPA's Web site
( and gopher
servers. An updated version is
currently being prepared and is
expected to be available for
distribution by Fall 1997.
For more information, contact
Linda Goodman at 202-260-
VOL 18 / NO. 1 WINTER / SPRING 1997

I Public Understanding of Risks
CLI Report Provides Preliminary Answers to Labeling Questions
The Consumer Labeling Initia-
tive (CLI) is a voluntary, coop-
erative effort to foster pollution
prevention, empower consumer
choice, and improve under-
standing by presenting clear,
consistent, and useful safe use,
environmental, and health
information on household
consumer product labels. Gov-
ernment, industry, and other
groups are working together in
the CLI to make it easier for
consumers to find, read, and
understand label information,
enabling consumers to compare
products and safely use the ones
they select.
The CLI project has several
phases. In 1996, EPA went
directly to individual consumers
to learn what they thought
about existing labels on indoor
insecticides, outdoor house and
garden pesticides, and house-
hold hard surface cleaners,
including ant and roach prod-
ucts, weedkillers, and floor and
basin, tub, and tile cleaners. EPA
also invited individuals and
groups to give their ideas about
label problems and solutions,
and looked for research already
conducted by others. All of that
preliminary work is summarized
in the Consumer Labeling Initia-
tive Phase I Report (which can
be downloaded from the CLI
website [
opptintr/labelingj, or obtained in
hard copy from PPIC, tel: 202-
260-1023, fax: 202-260-1023,
In the coming months, some of
the companies that make these
consumer products will help
EPA to learn more from custom-
ers about how to make label
information more understand-
able and useful. EPA will also
make some of the language on
pesticide product labels simpler
and more direct. To address
some of the more difficult
issues, such as how to present
useful information on chemical
ingredients and their health
effects simply and without
overloading the label, EPA will
sponsor a series of seminars and
roundtables where alternatives
Some of the more difficult
issues [are] how to
present useful information
on chemical ingredients
and their health effects
simply and without
overloading the label.
can be explored. Project status
reports and information on
upcoming events will appear on
the project website. For more
information, contact Mary
Dominiak at 202-260-7768 or
email the project team at

I Public Understanding of Risks
TSCA Biotechnology Paper Available
The EPA has prepared a draft
document entitled "Points to
Consider in the Preparation of
TSCA Biotechnology Submissions
for Microorganisms" that explains
how submitters can most effec-
tively meet the information
requirements for submissions for
microbial products of biotechnol-
ogy pursuant to the Agency's
final biotechnology rule under
TSCA. The final rule went into
effect on June 10, 1997.
The types of submissions ad-
dressed in the Points to Con-
sider document are: Microbial
Commercial Activity Notices
(MCAN's); TSCA Experimental
Releases Applications (TERA's);
Test Marketing Exemptions
(TME's); Tier II exemption
requests, petitions for addition
of a microorganism to the lists
of exempt microorganisms
under 40 §725.420; and bona
fide submissions.
Recognizing the evolution of
scientific knowledge, EPA will
continue to update the Points to
Consider document as needed
to provide appropriate guid-
ance. Interested parties are
invited to submit comments or
requests for clarification of the
draft document to the Agency.
Written comments should be
forwarded to: Document Pro-
cessing Center, Mail Code 7407,
Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics, Environmental
Protection Agency, Room G99,
401 M St. S.W., Washington,
D.C. 20460. Documents should
bear the docket control number
OPPTS-00049C. Comments can
also be submitted via e-mail at:
A copy of the draft Points to
Consider document has been
placed into the public docket
for the TSCA biotechnology rule,
Docket No. OPPTS-00049C. The
docket is available for public
viewing Monday through Friday
from noon to 4:00 p.m. at the
EPA headquarters building at
401 M Street S.W., Northeast
Mall Room B607, Washington,
D.C. 20460; tel: (202) 260-7099.
Electronic copies of the docu-
ment will also be available at
the TSCA Biotechnology Pro-
gram home page at http://
A limited number of paper
copies of the document are
available by calling the TSCA
Hotline at (202) 554-0515.
For more information, contact
David Giamporcaro at (202)
260-6362; e-mail: giamporcaro.; or
Dr. Phil Sayre, (202) 260-9570;
e-mail: sayre.phil@epamail.
VOL 181 NO. 1 WINTER / SPRING 1997