NATIONAL AIR TOXICS INFORMATION
CLEARINGHOUSE NEWSLETTER
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards	Volume 4 Number 4
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711	September 1987
v>EPA
0	State and Territorial Air Po"ution Pr°9ram Admmistrators
Association of Local Air Pollution Control Officials
IN THIS ISSUE:
CLEARINGHOUSE UPDATE: REPORT CARD RESULTS, LOG ON PROCEDURES,
CURRENT PUBLICATIONS	1
STATE/LOCAL AGENCY SPOTLIGHT! MARYLAND'S DEPARTMENT OF THE
ENVIRONMENT DRAFTS AIR TOXICS REGS, COMPLETES IEMP PHASE 1	3
BERKELEY COUNTY INITIATES COMMUNITY AWARENESS AND EMERGENCY
RESPONSE PROGRAM	5
REGION X COMPLETES VOC STUDY/RISK ASSESSMENT AT IDAHO RCRA FACILITY	5
URBAN AIR TOXICS ROUND-UP: ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES UNDERWAY IN
ALL EPA REGIONS	6
EPA SENDS INDOOR AIR QUALITY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN TO CONGRESS	7
EPA ANNOUNCES REGULATORY DETERMINATION FOR MUNICIPAL WASTE
COMBUSTION EMISSIONS	8
OTS BUILDING CHEMICAL EMISSIONS INVENTORY THROUGH SARA TITLE 3
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS	11
EPA DEVELOPING HAZARDOUS ORGANIC NESHAP	12
EMSL-RTP ACQUIRES GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY/MATRIX ISOLATION INFRARED
SPECTROMETRY SYSTEM	12
AIR TOXICS MULTI-YEAR DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROGRESS CONTINUES	13
EPA S INTEGRATED RISK INFORMATION SYSTEM TO BE AVAILABLE SOON	14
STATE EMERGENCY RESPONSE COMMISSION REPORT RELEASED BY NATIONAL
GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION	14
CLEARINGHOUSE UPDATE:
REPORT CARD RESULTS, LOG ON PROCEDURES
CURRENT PUBLICATIONS
Newsletter Readers Give
Clearinghouse High Marks
In the March 1987 Newsletter, the National Air Tox-
ics Information Clearinghouse requested feedback on
various Clearinghouse activities. Readers were asked
to complete a "report card" commenting on the Clear-
inghouse publications as well as the computerized data
base (NATICH). Overall, responses to Clearinghouse ac-
tivities were very favorable. In particular, the Newsletters
and specific data base features (e.g., air toxics contacts,
acceptable ambient concentrations, regulatory program
information) received a great deal of positive feedback.
However, approximately 65 percent of the respondents
said that they do not access the NATICH data base on-
line. Though hard copies of the data base information
are available, there are several reasons that accessing
NATICH on-line is preferable:
1.	Flexibility - on-line, data may be sorted by a
number of different variables or combinations of
variables;
2.	Accuracy - the data base is continually updated,
yet a hard copy report of the information is
currently published only annually; and

-------
3. Permit and Source Test Data - due to large
amounts of data, only "notable" permit and source
test files are included in the 1987 hard copy
report. This represents less than 1 percent of the
available permit data and approximately 27 percent
of the available source test data.
Thus, in order to view all Federal, State, and local
data submitted to the Clearinghouse as well as max-
imize the number of ways to view the data, NATICH must
be accessed on-line.
NATICH Log On Procedures Streamlined
To make accessing the NATICH data base easier,
the log on procedures have been improved. To
streamline the log on procedure, obtain full screen ac-
cess by following the procedures outlined in the enclos-
ed brochure. Then:
1.	Type in your user ID and hit the return key. Your
account name, FIMAS ID, and group will
automatically be entered.
2.	Enter your password. Using the TAB key, enter
NATIONAL AIR TOXICS
INFORMATION CLEARINGHOUSE CURRENT PUBLICATIONS
Title/EPA Number/NTIS Number3
National Air Toxics Information
Clearinghouse Newsletters
Rationale for Air Toxics Control
in Seven State and Local Agencies,
EPA-450/5-86-005
NTIS: PB86 181179/AS
How The Clearinghouse Can Help to
Answer Your Air Toxics Questions
E PA-450/5-86-009
Methods for Pollutant Selection
and Prioritization
E PA-450/5-86-010
NTIS: PB87 124079/AS
Ongoing Research and Regulatory
Development Projects
E PA-450/5-87-004
Qualitative and Quantitative
Carcinogenic Risk Assessment
EPA-450/5-87-003
Bibliography of Selected Reports
and Federal Register Notices
Related to Air Toxics
EPA-450/5-87-005
NATICH Data Base Report on State,
Local and EPA Air Toxics Activities
EPA-450/5-87-006
Publication
Date
Radian
Report Price'3'0
NTIS
Price0
Quarterly
August 1985
July 1986
July 1986
June 1987
June 1987
July 1987
July 1987
Free
[contact Nancy Riley
(919) 541-0850]
$16.50
$16.00
$18.95
$9.30
$17.84
$22.04
$65.54
$32.72
$13.95
aAII titles begin with "National Air Toxics Information Clearinghouse-" Whom mtio IT "				—
listed, they are not yet available.	9 °USe" Where NT,S Publication numbers are not
bThese are report prices when ordered from Radian Corporation
cPrice reflects U.S. distribution only. Contact Radian or NTIS for foreign price

-------
"NSSP" at the "Initial Transaction" prompt and
"X" at the "No News" prompt and strike the
return key.
3.	Strike the return key after seeing the command
"Press ENTER to invoke initial transaction
=> NSSP."
4.	When you see the prompt "Application ID,"
complete the log on procedure by typing
"ATCLO" and striking the return key.
For more information on accessing the data base,
please contact the Clearinghouse staff at (919) 541-0850
or (FTS) 629-0850.
New Publications Are Now Available
This summer the Clearinghouse has distributed
four new publications. They are included in the table, a
complete list of current Clearinghouse publications.
These documents are available free of charge to govern-
mental and non-profit organizations. Additional copies
may be obtained by calling Nancy Riley at (919) 541-0850
or (FTS) 629-0850.
Members of the private sector may obtain copies of
these documents through the National Technical Infor-
mation Service (NTIS), (703) 487-4650, or by written re-
quest and advance payment to Barbara Maxey, Radian
Corporation, P.O. Box 201088, Austin, Texas 78720-1088.
Prices are listed on the table. Please do not send cash.
STATE/LOCAL AGENCY SPOTLIGHT;
MARYLAND'S DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
DRAFTS AIR TOXICS REGULATIONS,
COMPLETES IEMP PHASE I
Maryland's Department of the Environment, newly
formed from the combination of several offices and pro-
grams, expects to schedule public hearings in early 1988
on drafted air toxics regulations that establish air quali-
ty levels to screen sources for approval. The Depart-
ment, along with local governments in the Baltimore
area, is also participating in an EPA Integrated En-
vironmental Management Project (IEMP). A report
discussing Phase I of this project was published in May
1987.
Regulations Include Three
General Requirements
Three general requirements are featured in the pro-
posed air toxics regulations. They are: 1) emissions must
be quantified, 2) new sources must use the best
available control technology for toxics (T-BACT), and 3)
emissions must not unreasonably endanger public
health. Each requirement is briefly discussed below.
Emissions Must Be Quantified
Maryland will implement the requirement to quan-
tify emissions via a revised permit application form ask-
ing sources to identify the pollutants they discharge and
to quantify the emissions of these pollutants. Emissions
must be quantified in sufficient detail to demonstrate
compliance with the regulations, however, stack tests will
generally not be required. Existing sources will be asked
to provide emissions data on a schedule that will pro-
bably extend over the next four years. The regulations
are based on "allowable" emissions rather than actual;
permit conditions can be used to limit allowable emis-
sions. Maximum hourly and annual emissions will both
be quantified.
T-BACT to Be Used for New Sources
The regulations require all new sources to be con-
trolled using the Best Available Control Technology for
Toxics (T-BACT). T-BACT will be determined on a case-
by-case basis for each source, taking into account the
cost and feasibility of controls as well as the potency or
toxicity of the substances discharged. The intent of this
flexible requirement is that all new sources be well
controlled.
Ambient Impact Requirements
Protect Public Health
The third requirement is that a source must not
unreasonably endanger public health. Each new source
must demonstrate compliance with this requirement
before receiving a permit to construct. Existing sources
required to obtain annual permits to operate will be re-
quired to demonstrate compliance on a schedule that
will take approximately four years.
According to the Department, flexibility has been
built into these regulations by providing three ways to
demonstrate compliance with the ambient impact re-
quirement. These are to 1) meet conservative screening
levels, 2) meet levels based on a more detailed analysis
of available scientific information, or 3) demonstrate via
a "risk management" process that the public health will
be adequately protected despite the fact that certain
screening levels will be exceeded.
3

-------
Regulations Cover TWo Classes of
Toxic Air Pollutants
The draft regulations divide toxic air pollutants
(TAPs) into carcinogens "Class I TAPs" and other tox-
ics "Class II TAPs." Maryland's draft regulations exclude
substances for which ambient air quality standards have
been developed, as well as nuisance dusts and simple
asphyxiants.
All Class I TAPs are specifically listed in the regula-
tions in order to avoid ambiguities over what is con-
sidered a carcinogen. The list includes substances iden-
tified as known, probable, or potential human car-
cinogens by the National Toxicology Program or the In-
ternational Agency for Research on Cancer.
The regulations do not specifically list all noncar-
cinogens. Instead, the regulations define a Class II TAP
as any substance meeting the definition of "health
hazard" published by the U.S. Occupational Safety and
Health Administration. This broad, open-ended defini-
tion allows evaluation of any toxic substance expected
to be discharged from a new source.
The regulations include a specific, shorter list of
high priority toxic air pollutants, which will be used to reg-
ulate existing sources. This list is currently being revised.
Regulations Exclude Some Sources
The general intent of the regulations is to address
sources required to obtain air quality permits to construct
or to operate. The regulations also include a general pro-
vision allowing the Department to apply the regulations
to any other source that has the potential to
unreasonably endanger the public health. It is estimated
that about 320 existing facilities will be covered by the
regulations. In addition, about 140 new pieces of equip-
ment subject to the regulations are expected to be built
each year.
Fuel-burning equipment and sources regulated by
national emission standards for ha2ardous air pollutants
(NESHAP) are exempt from the air toxics regulations.
The regulations also establish de minimis emission
rates. Emissions of all but the most toxic noncarcinogens
are exempt if they never exceed one-half pound per hour
of a pollutant from an entire facility, or cause impacts off
the property exceeding 0.02 micrograms per cubic meter.
Certain emissions of less potent carcinogens are also
exempt. These emissions must neither exceed 35Q
pounds per year nor exceed one-half pound par hour.
The regulations also provide that the Department may
exempt any source that has limited potential to discharge
toxic air pollutants and will not unreasonably ®n ®nger
public health.
Baltimore IEMP Phase I Completed
The Department has also been working EPa
and other Maryland State and local agencies' ^Par-
ing the two-phase Baltimore Integrated Env.ronmenta|
Management Project (IEMP)-The purposes of tne IEMp
are (1) to identify and assess the significance of a
selected set of environmental issues, (2) to set priorities
for action among these issues, and (3) to assist local
authorities in responding to environmental problems
they have identified.
The greater Baltimore area chosen for the project
is representative of older, industrialized cities of the East
Coast in transition from smokestack to more diversified,
service economies. The city's present environmental
concerns derive largely from these industrial and com-
mercial activities.
The IEMP approach is based in part on risk assess-
ment and on risk management. It uses estimates of risk
(that is, the probability of adverse effects) as the com-
mon measure for comparing problems and setting
priorities among issues affecting human health, involv-
ing different pollutants, sources, and exposure pathways.
Results to Date Summarized
The EPA, Maryland State government, and local
government officials have established an organizational
framework at the State and local levels for setting
priorities for government action on environmental issues
in the study area. EPA has delegated project direction
to a management committee chaired by the Department
and including representatives of local governments. The
Management Committee, with the assistance of a
Technical Advisory Committee, identified and set
priorities among a wide-ranging and diverse set of en-
vironmental issues.
Preliminary results for Phase I of the Baltimore
IEMP have been released for the areas of organics and
metals in the ambient air, trihalomethanes in drinking
water, lead in the general environment, indoor air pollu-
tion, groundwater resources, and the ecology of
Baltimore Harbor.
As a result of the Phase I work, the State and coun-
ties have drastically reduced the standards for the
amount of lead used in solder and flux in the plumbing of
residential drinking water systems after work during
Phase I identified this as a potentially serious health pro-
blem.
Phase II Issues Selected for Study
Five issues will be studied in Phase II of the
Baltimore IEMP. These are: air toxics, lead paint abate-
ment, indoor air pollution, underground storage tanks,
and Baltimore Harbor. One of the most important goals
of the project is to establish a methodology for address-
ing multi-media environmental issues. This methodology
should be useful for other urban areas.
For further information on Maryland's air toxics reg-
ulations, contact Susan Wierman, Maryland Department
of the Environment, 201 West Preston Street, Baltimore,
Maryland 21201, (301) 225-5240. For additional informa-
tion on the Baltimore IEMP, contact Dr. Max Eisenberg,
Maryland Department of the Environment, (301)
225-5780.
4

-------
BERKELEY COUNTY INITI/
AWARENESS AND EMERGE
by Wayne Fanning, South Carolina Department
A fast-growing county northwest of Charleston,
Berkeley County, South Carolina, recognized two years
ago it needed to inform the public about the local
chemical manufacturing industry and the community's
resources for emergency response. To fill that need,
Berkeley County industries initiated the Community
Awareness and Emergency Response (CAER) program
in December of 1985, stating these two purposes:
•	to develop a community outreach program
through which to make available information on
chemicals manufactured and used at local
facilities, and
•	to achieve an integrated local emergency
response plan by combining chemical plant
emergency plans with other local plans.
Since CAER's inception, Amoco, DuPont, Haar-
mann and Reimer, Mobay, other chemical manufac-
turers, and other industries have joined the Berkeley
County Disaster Preparedness Office, the Goose Creek
Fire Departments, the Berkeley County Water and Sewer
Authority, the South Carolina Department of Health and
Environmental Control, and the U S Coast Guard in this
cooperative effort to promote safety and health in
Berkeley County.
Representatives of these businesses and organiza-
tions meet as a coordinating group every other week to
exchange information on handling chemicals. The group
has reviewed the emergency plans of each organization
and summarized the resources available, including
equipment and expertise. In June 1986, the groups par-
ticipating in CAER signed a 9-item Statement of
Purpose.
kTES COMMUNITY
NCY RESPONSE PROGRAM
Health and Environmental Control
Highlights of the statement include these:
•	to maintain individual emergency action (con-
tingency) plans and provide a first response to
hazardous material releases on their respective
properties;
•	to provide for a timely notification to Federal,
State, and local government agencies in the
event of hazardous material releases;
•	to aid in planning for response to hazardous
material releases by providing to one another a
list of hazardous materials stored in such quanti-
ty as to make their release a potential threat to
the community; and
•	to conduct at least an annual exercise of
response to hazardous material discharge.
CAER has developed and tested emergency
response plans with tabletop and field drills in response
to simulated incidents. Among the program's other ac-
complishments is an emergency response manual con-
taining information on chemical storage locations and
volumes, sources, and location of emergency equip-
ment, and material safety data sheets for chemicals on
the EPA's list of extremely hazardous substances. Fur-
ther, CAER has developed and tested fume dispersion
models and has disseminated information to local media
and professional organizations.
In the future, CAER plans to pursue compliance with
Community Right-to-Know legislation requirements and
extend membership in CAER to include hospital and
local government officials. For additional information,
call Wayne Fanning, South Carolina Department of
Health and Environmental Control, (803) 554-5533.
REGION X COMPLETES VO<
AT IDAHO RCRA FACILITY
EPA Region X has completed a VOC study/risk
assessment of a hazardous waste facility. The facility
treats, stores, and disposes of hazardous wastes at this
facility. This risk assessment was preliminary and was
performed as part of a Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) Facilities Assessment at this facili-
ty, which had applied for a RCRA Part B permit.
The study was designed to: 1) identify major
sources of VOCs at the facility, 2) determine the
strengths and chemical makeup of these sources, 3)
estimate downwind concentrations using a dispersion
model, and 4) estimate excess risk based on the
measured and modeled concentrations.
C STUDY/RISK ASSESSMENT
The monitoring program consisted of both ambient
and source sampling. The ambient sampling involved
measurements made with sampling trains located at
various points around the perimeter of the facility. An at-
tempt was made to determine downwind concentrations
using this network.
In addition to ambient sampling, the source
strengths of various area sources were measured. At this
facility, the sources included two abandoned missile
silos approximately 30 feet in diameter and a disposal
trench approximately 1300 feet x 150 feet. Emission
strengths from these sources were measured using an
emission isolation flux chamber in series with a sampl-
5

-------
ing train similar to those used for the ambient monitor-
ing.
A list of 23 volatile organic compounds (VOCs) was
prepared based on a review of the company's informa-
tion report, previous EPA studies on hazardous waste
sites, and an assessment of what could be measured
using EPA Method T01. This method involves the cap-
ture of VOCs on Tenax resin and subsequent desorption
and analysis using GC/MS. The sampling program was
designed to detect these compounds at a concentration
of 1 ug/m3 or greater in ambient air.
Field Study Characterized
Three Sources on Site
The survey was conducted over a three-day period
in August 1986. Region 10 was limited by resources to
analyzing about 30 samples. Including quality
assurance, this allowed for monitoring at one upwind and
one downwind station during each of the three days, plus
characterizing the three area sources on site. Concen-
trations around the perimeter of the facility were in the
low parts per billion range for most of the target com-
pounds. Emission strengths from the area sources were
generally in the range of 0.1-1 ug/m2 per minute.
In order to confirm that the three area sources
studied were the three major sources at the site, a
general screening was performed using real-time VOC
monitors. This screening did not identify any other ma-
jor VOC sources at the facility other than the ones
evaluated.
Risk Assessment Considered Two Scenarios
Using the results of the field study, risk from
exposure to the target VOCs was estimated under two
scenarios. The first involved personal exposure to am-
bient VOC levels in the immediate vicinity of the facility.
This would represent the risk to someone who was work-
ing in a field immediately downwind of the facility 40
hours per week, 52 weeks per year. Downwind ambient
concentrations at the perimeter were used to represent
the exposure level. For noncarcinogenic compounds,
ambient concentrations were compared to acceptable
ambient levels (AALs), while for carcinogens, excess
cancer risks were developed on a compound-specific
basis and then summed for all of the carcinogens
detected. For this scenario, excess cancer risk was
estimated to be 1 x 10 3; none of the AALs were
exceeded.
In addition to this scenario, risk to the general
population was also estimated. The area around the
facility is sparsely populated, with the nearest resident
living about one mile away. Source emission rates from
the silos and trench were entered in the Industrial Source
Complex Long-term (ISCLT) air dispersion model to
predict average annual ambient concentrations at the
residence. Predicted concentrations at the residence
were in the range of 0.001 to 0.01 ug/m3 on an annual
basis. This led to an estimated excess maximum in-
dividual cancer risk of 4 x 107'
Uncertainties Described
Several areas of uncertainty were important in this
study.
Representativeness of Conditions - Although
ambient sampling was done during a time when VOC
emissions would be expected, the number of actual
sampling days was small compared to the total days in
a year.
Constituents Analyzed - Although the VOCs
analyzed included a wide range of toxic and carcin-
ogenic compounds, they did not include all of the
discrete peaks identified in the chromatograms.
Precision of Sampling Results - Sampling
analysis, as well as the limits of Method T01, led to data
with considerable variability. The limits of this
methodology need to be recognized when using these
methods to estimate risk.
Emission Rate Estimates - The number of area
samples collected determines the level of precision
associated with the emission rate estimate. In this in-
stance, relatively few samples were collected.
Unit Risk Factors - The uncertainties associated
with estimating potency of carcinogenic compounds has
been discussed at length in the literature on this subject.
However, despite the uncertainties, the survey was
useful as a means of confirming the VOC sources at the
site and providing some estimate of the degree of risk
to the general population from operations at the site.
For additional information, contact DaveTetta, U.S.
EPA, Region X, (206) 442-2138 or (FTS) 399-2138.
URBAN AIR TOXICS ROUND-UP:
ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES UNDERWAY
IN ALL EPA REGIONS
Urban air toxics assessment activities are planned
or underway for 45 areas in 33 States encompassing all
10 EPA Regions. These activities include air monitoring,
emissions inventory development, risk assessment, and
mitigation analysis. EPA has aided their initiation by pro-
viding $1 million in Clean Air Act Section 105 grant funds,
allocated to 30 urban areas through the EPA Regions,
based on the number of cities with populations greater
than 1 million.
6

-------
Monitoring Program Outlined
Recent studies have demonstrated a potential for
elevated individual lifetime cancer risks to be associated
with air toxics often found in urban areas. In response
to results of these studies, EPA's Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards (OAQPS) has initiated an am-
bient air screening effort under the title Urban Air Tox-
ics Monitoring Program. The purpose of this monitoring
program is to support State and local agency efforts to
assess the nature and magnitude of the urban air tox-
ics problem in their respective areas. EPA's objectives
in promoting and supporting this program are:
—	to provide preliminary estimates of annual
concentrations of selected air toxics suitable
for gross estimation of the levels of cancer risk
to result from inhalation of ambient air;
—	to provide a means for prioritizing and planning
future work and sampling on a more in-depth
and pollutant-specific basis in local areas; and
—	to identify a means to evaluate and prioritize
future air toxics mitigation and assessment
efforts.
The program calls for State and local agency per-
sonnel to collect ambient air samples for subsequent
analysis for specific toxic compounds. An EPA contrac-
tor will assist State and local agency personnel in the
preparation of sampling sites and in the implementation
of the program. Participation in the study, however, re-
quires funding from State or local agencies.
Under the program, air toxic samples will be col-
lected in canisters for 24-hour periods every 12 days for
at least 1 year. Sample canisters will then be shipped to
a central laboratory for analysis of selected volatile
organic compounds (VOCs). Samples will also be col-
lected in cartridges for determination of aldehydes. In ad-
dition, total suspended particulates (TSP) will be col-
lected by high-volume air samplers for determination of
selected metals and benzo(a)pyrene [B(a)P].
This program assists State and local agencies in
assessing the nature and extent of their multi-source,
multi-pollutant urban air toxics problem at a very
reasonable cost. Agencies can take part in this program
for approximately $20,000 per site. Nineteen sites
located in 18 cities will collect 24-hour samples and 12
sites located in 8 cities will analyze their 6:00-9:00 a.m.
nonmethane organic compounds (NMOC) samples for
air toxics. Cities participating in the program include:
Burlington, Vermont; Boston, Massachusetts; New York,
New York; Newark, New Jersey; Atlanta, Georgia;
Louisville, Kentucky; Birmingham, Alabama; Miami,
Flordia; Jacksonville, Florida; Chicago, Illinois; Cincin-
nati, Ohio; Cleveland, Ohio; Detroit, Michigan; Midland,
Michigan; Port Huron, Michigan; Lansing, Michigan;
East St. Louis, Illinois; Northwest, Indiana; Dallas, Texas;
Houston, Texas; Baton Rouge, Louisiana; and Portland,
Oregon. Depending on future funding allocations,
results of assessments and the level of interest of State
and local agencies, this program may be continued.
If you would like a copy of a paper describing the
monitoring program in more detail or more information
on the monitoring program, please contact Dallas Sa-
friet, U.S. EPA, OAQPS, MD-14, Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina 27711, (919) 541-5371 or (FTS) 629-5371.
Emissions Inventory, Risk Assessment
and Mitigation Activities Described
Emissions inventory activities are underway or
planned in at least 35 areas: 28 areas will perform risk
assessment of some type from air quality data or model-
ing of emissions and 14 areas have some form of air tox-
ics mitigation analyses planned or in progress. Several
areas are participating in EPA special studies like the In-
tegrated Environmental Management Program (IEMP)
or have initiated their own studies such as the Multiple
Air Toxics Exposure Study (MATES) in Los Angeles*
Multi-year Development Plans to Be Supported
States that have received Section 105 funds are to
develop urban air toxics work plans as part of their multi-
year development plan. Initial work plans developed are
generally outlines of urban air toxics activities planned
or underway with commitments to continue to develop
urban assessment and, in some cases, mitigation pro-
grams. In 1988, these areas are expected to submit a
more detailed work plan for urban air toxics. To assist in
the preparation of these work plans, several EPA
documents providing information useful in preparing ur-
ban plans are to be published or planned.
A summary report for urban air toxics assessment
and mitigation activities is prepared periodically. For
copies of the status report or for information on urban
work plans for air toxics, please contact Bill Lamason,
U.S. EPA, OAQPS, MD-14, Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina 27711, (919) 541-5374 or (FTS) 629-5374.
*See related article in June 1987 issue. See also air tox-
ics workshop announcement in this issue.
EPA SENDS INDOOR AIR QUALITY
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN TO CONGRESS
In June 1987, EPA sent to Congress the EPA Indoor
Air Quality Implementation Plan, as required by Title IV
of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
(SARA) of 1986. The document contained the Agency's
policy objectives with respect to indoor air quality, its
near-term plan to conduct research and policy activities
7

-------
to meet those objectives, and a description of the pro-
cess to manage and coordinate this new program with
existing programs in EPA and with other Federal agen-
cies.
Attached to the report were five appendices: a
preliminary information assessment document that sum-
marizes current research findings on indoor air quality,
a description of the research activities for the 1987 fiscal
year, a description of the Agency's radon technical
studies and mitigation research activities, a resource
history, and a reference data base.
Indoor Air Objectives Listed
The Agency has set the following policy objectives
and priorities:
1.	To conduct research and analysis to further
refine its assessment of the nature and
magnitude of the health and welfare problems
posed by indoor air pollutants, either individual-
ly or in mixtures. Among the near-term priorities
are the development of models and data bases
to characterize exposure and an increased em-
phasis on identifying the health effects of
volatile organics and biologicals.
2.	To identify and assess the full range of mitiga-
tion strategies available to address high priority
indoor air pollution problems. The priorities in
this area include development of building
diagnostic and mitigation tools and identification
of both ventilation and source-specific control
strategies.
3.	For identified high risk, high priority problems,
to implement appropriate mitigation strategies
which may involve one or more of the following:
issuing regulations under existing regulatory
authorities (such as TSCA, FIFRA, SDWA),
building State and local government and private
sector capacity through non-regulatory informa-
tion dissemination programs, referring problems
to other Federal agencies with appropriate
authority (CPSC and HUD, for example) and re-
questing separate indoor air regulatory authority
from Congress, if appropriate.
Priority Program Tasks Set
As part of its information dissemination program,
EPA will issue four publications over the next 12 to 18
months:
•	a booklet on indoor air quality for the general
public;
•	a directory of where to go for information from
the government and private sector;
•	a manual on mitigation of environmental tobac-
co smoke; and
•	a manual on building diagnostic and mitigation
procedures.
In order to write these materials, EPA must build a
list of indoor air contacts in State and local governments
and a profile of the indoor air activities in those agencies.
In the expectation that the responsibilities for indoor air
pollution are divided among many agencies at the State
and local level, just as at the Federal level, the Agency
will work with STAPPA/ALAPCO, the Association of State
and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO) and its affiliate,
the Public Health Foundation, and other organizations
of State and local officials. If you have information to con-
tribute on indoor air actions within your State or local
government or you wish a copy of the EPA Indoor Air
Quality Implementation Plan, write or call Elizabeth Agle
at the U.S. EPA (ANR-445), 401 M Street S.W., Washing-
ton, D.C. 20460, (202) 382-7753 or (FTS) 382-7753.
EPA ANNOUNCES REGUL^
FOR MUNICIPAL WASTE CC
Approximately two years ago, the Office of Air Quali-
ty Planning and Standards undertook a preliminary
evaluation of air emissions of chromium, cadmium, and
polychlorinated dioxins/furans from stationary combus-
tion sources. In these chemical-specific analyses, it was
observed that municipal waste combustors (MWCs)
emitted these pollutants in significant concentrations.
Last year, the Administrator of the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency (EPA) announced an air toxics strategy in
which the Agency would begin to focus on source
categories of multiple pollutant emissions. Thus, the
study of MWC emissions was expanded into an analysis
of multiple pollutants.
TORY DETERMINATION
3MBUSTION EMISSIONS
MWC Study Results Reviewed
After completing an MWC characterization study, it
became apparent that there would be a rapid growth in
the number of MWCs in the United States over the next
10 to 15 years. Currently, about 100 existing MWCs in-
cinerate about 5 percent of the daily municipal solid
waste (MSW) produced in the United States, whereas,
it is conceivable that by the mid-1990's, 300 MWCs could
be incinerating about 25 percent of the MSW throughput.
In advance of this predicted rapid growth, EPA took ad-
vantage of a unique opportunity to analyze environmen-
tal impacts not only from existing facilities, but from
facilities projected to be built over the next decade. The
8

-------
primary focus of the overall analysis became, "Is further
Federal regulation of MWC emissions necessary?" Ad-
ding to the importance of this question was an out-of-
court settlement of a long-standing lawsuit with the
Natural Resources Defense Council concerning
regulating polycyclic organic matter (POM) as well as
other pollutants emitted from MWCs. The settlement re-
quired EPA to answer this question by July 1,1987. Even-
tually, nine volumes of scientific and engineering data
were produced under the broad title "The Municipal
Waste Combustion Study." Included is a summary
volume entitled, "Report to Congress" that satisfied the
requirements of Section 102 of the Resource Conserva-
tion and Recovery Act to report to Congress on dioxin
emissions from MWCs. The complete study was releas-
ed to the public July 1 and the list of documents appears
in Table 1. The various volumes include information on
combustion control techniques, add-on control tech-
niques, and costs; an estimation of the health risks
associated with MWC emissions; air emissions inven-
tory of specific pollutants; and techniques for sampling,
monitoring, and analysis.
Based on EPA's assessment of air emissions from
MWCs, the Administrator determined that MWC emis-
sions may reasonably be anticipated to contribute to the
endangerment of public health and welfare, and issued
an advance notice of intent to propose regulation of
MWC emissions from new or modified facilities under
Section 111(b) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The decision
is discussed in the July 7,1987 Federal Register (52 FR
25399). The regulation of MWC emissions or
unregulated emission constituents under Section 111(b)
will invoke Section 111(d) of the CAA. Section 111(d) re-
quires issuance by EPA of existing source guidelines
followed by the development by States of emission stan-
dards for existing MWCs.
Regulatory Development Outlined
This summer, EPA initiated activities to revise the
current new source performance standard (NSPS) for
municipal incinerators. The revised NSPS will not only
regulate criteria pollutants but will also address poten-
tially toxic air emissions such as dioxins, polycyclic
aromatic compounds, and mercury. The Agency has
scheduled proposing the revised NSPS for MWC by
November of 1989, and promulgation of the NSPS by
December of 1990.
To fill the hiatus between now and the development
of regulations, EPA has issued operational guidance on
best available control technology (BACT) for new and
modified MWCs. The guidance was issued to promote
consistency in making BACT determinations under the
prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) provisions,
and lowest achievable emissions rate (LAER) determina-
tions under nonattainment new source review. It requires
permitting authorities to consider a dry alkaline scrub-
ber combined with either fabric filters or electrostatic
precipitators as BACT for sulfur dioxide (SO2) and par-
ticulate matter (PM), and the implementation of combus-
tion controls as BACT for carbon monoxide (CO). The
guidance will enable EPA to promote BACT for new
sources while the revised NSPS is being developed.
Also, delays and confusion in the permitting process
should be reduced.
In order to revise the current NSPS and develop the
control technology documents needed to regulate ex-
isting MWCs, EPA will obtain source-specific information
by:
•	contacting State and local agencies, asking for
their MWC data;
•	testing MWCs, including those with a dry scrub-
ber/fabric filter control system on a massburn
unit and those with a dry scrubber/ESP on a
massburn unit; and
•	testing emissions from a recently built refuse
derived fuel (RDF) facility.
Preliminary Risk Assessment
Results Interpreted
The preliminary nationwide risk assessment in sup-
port of the regulatory determination showed the cancer
risks to range from 2 to 40 cancer cases per year for ex-
isting MWCs, and from 1 to 20 cancer cases per year for
projected MWCs (see Table 2). The only baseline con-
trol assumed for this analysis was good combustion and
efficient particulate control for new facilities and installed
equipment for existing facilities. The estimated max-
imum individual lifetime cancer risks ranged from 1/1,000
to 1/10,000 for existing facilities, and from 1/10,000 to
1/100,000 for projected facilities, assuming baseline con-
trols. Most of these risks are associated with vapor phase
organic constituents in the emissions, especially
polychlorinated dioxins and dibenzofurans. The applica-
tion of the control technology presented in EPA's opera-
tional guidance is estimated to be able to reduce these
risk estimates by over an order of magnitude.
Although the quantitative analysis of health impacts
was limited to those Irom direct inhalation of MWC emis-
sions, EPA has also begun a preliminary analysis of the
potential for exposure from the deposition of pollutants
and subsequent human contact through indirect ex-
posure pathways such as ingestion and dermal contact.
Initial results show that environmentally persistent
organic compounds (e.g., dioxins, PCBs, and
chlorobenzenes) have the potential to contribute ap-
preciably to human exposure as a result of long-term
deposition and availability through food and soil inges-
tion. Human exposure of these pollutants may be com-
parable in magnitude to exposure by direct inhalation.
The results also show a potential for indirect exposure
to deposited mercury and lead emissions.
The application of the control technology specified
in EPA's operational guidance should significantly
9

-------
reduce the emissions included in the indirect exposure Robert Kellam, U.S. EPA, OAQPS, (919)
analyses, in addition to other pollutants such as par- 541-5648 or (FTS) 629-5648;
ticulates, metals, acid gases (HCI, S0X, HF) and organic • 0n NSPS revision, James Crowder, U.S. EPA,
compounds such as POM, dioxins, and VOC. OAQPS, (919) 541-5596 or (FTS) 629-5596;
For additional information on the MWC program, . on MWC reports> Steve Greene, U.S. EPA, Of-
contact the following: fice of So|id Wastei (202) 382-4664 or (FTS)
• on MWC risk assessment methodology, David 382-4664; and
Cleverly, U.S. EPA, OAQPS, (919) 541-5332 or • on MWC research, Jim Kilgroe, U.S. EPA,
(FTS) 629-5332; Rayburn Morrison, U.S. EPA, AEERL, (919) 541-2854 or (FTS) 629-2854.
OAQPS, (919) 541-5330 or (FTS) 629-5330; or
TABLE 1. MUNICIPAL WASTE COMBUSTION STUDY
DOCUMENT NUMBERS AND PRICES

Title
EPA Number
NTIS Number
Price
Municipal Waste Combustion Study:
Report to Congress
EPA/530-SW-87-021A
PB87-206074
$18.95
Municipal Waste Combustion Study:
Emissions Data Base for Municipal
Waste Combustors
EPA/530-SW-87-021B
PB87-206082
$30.95
Municipal Waste Combustion Study:
Combustion Control of Organic
Emissions
EPA/530-SW-87-021C
PB87-206090
$24.95
Municipal Waste Combustion Study:
Flue Gas Cleaning Technology
EPA/530-SW-87-021D
PB87-206108
$13.95
Municipal Waste Combustion Study:
Costs of Flue Gas Cleaning
Technologies
EPAV530-SW-87-021E
PB87-206116
$18.95
Municipal Waste Combustion Study:
Sampling and Analysis
EPA/530-SW-87-021F
PB87-206124
$18.95
Municipal Waste Combustion Study:
Assessment of Health Risks
Associated with Exposure to
Municipal Waste Combustion
Emissions
EPA/530-SW-87-021G
(not yet
available)

Municipal Waste Combustion Study:
Characterization of the Municipal
Waste Combustion Industry
EPA/530-SW-87-021H
PB87-206140
$13.95
Municipal Waste Combustion Study:
Recycling of Solid Waste
EPA/530-SW-87-0211
PB87-206157
$13.95
10

-------
TABLE 2. ESTIMATED NATIONWIDE CANCER RISK FROM
DIRECT INHALATION EXPOSURE TO
EMISSIONS UNDER BASELINE CONTROL SCENARIO
Organics3	Metals'3	Combined
Population of Maximum	Maximum	Maximum
Municipal Annual Individual	Annual Individual	Annual Individual
Waste Combustors Incidence0 Risk0'	Incidence0 Risk0'	Incidence0 Risk0'
Existing Sources	2-40 10~4 - 10 3	.5	10"4	2-40 10 4- 10"3
Projected Sources	1 - 20 10"5 - 10'4	.4	10"6	2 - 20 10"5 - 10"4
Combined Total	3 - 60 10"4 -10"3	.9	10"4	4 - 60 10"4 -10"3
aCDD/CDF, chlorophenols, chlorobenzenes, formaldehyde, PCB, PAH. Organic emissions are based on
assumed 20 percent control efficiency for both existing and projected source air pollution control equipment.
^Arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium +6. Metal emissions are based on estimated efficiency for installed air
pollution control equipment for existing facilities, and a 99 percent efficient ESP for projected facilities.
cAnnual incidence is the aggregate risk of cancer cases per year in populations within 50 km of all municipal waste
combustors in the United States.
•^Maximum individual risk is the probability that a person exposed to the highest modeled concentration of pollutants
from a municipal waste combustor to which anyone is exposed will develop cancer over a 70-year lifespan.
OTS BUILDING CHEMICAL EMISSIONS
INVENTORY THROUGH SARA TITLE 3
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
The Environmental Protection Agency's Office of
Toxic Substances (OTS) is the lead office for implement-
ing the toxic chemicals emissions inventory reporting re-
quirements under Section 313 of the Emergency Plan-
ning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986, part of
Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthoriza-
tion Act (SARA).* Section 313 is aimed at developing a
nationwide data base available to the public on the an-
nual release of toxic chemicals into all environmental
media including routine and accidental releases.** "Tox-
ic chemical" in this context refers to chemicals having
the potential to produce both acute and chronic human
toxicity, as well as environmental toxicity. The legislation
requires annual facility and chemical-specific reporting
from a potentially large number of chemical manufac-
turers, processors, and users. Section 313 establishes
an initial list of "toxic chemicals covered" consisting of
329 entries including 309 specific chemicals and 20
chemical categories.
On June 4,1987, EPA issued proposed reporting re-
quirements under Section 313; a final rule will be issued
in December 1987. Facilities subject to this rule will be
required to complete a toxic chemical release form for
specified chemicals. The form must be submitted to EPA
and those State officials designated by the Governor on
or before July 1, 1988 for 1987 releases, and annually
thereafter, on July 1, reflecting releases during each
preceding calendar year. EPA is developing various
technical guidance documents to help companies
estimate their releases.
The reporting requirements apply to owners and
operators of facilities that have ten or more full-time
employees, that are in Standard Industrial Classification
Codes 20 through 39 (i.e., manufacturing facilities) and
that manufacture, process or otherwise use a listed tox-
ic chemical in excess of specified threshold quantities.
For manufacturers and processors, the threshold is
75,000 pounds for 1987, 50,000 pounds in 1988, and
25,000 pounds in 1989 and subsequent years.
The purpose of this reporting requirement is to in-
form government officials and the public about releases
of toxic chemicals into the environment. It will also assist
11

-------
in research activities and the development of regula-
tions, guidelines and standards. EPA is required to
develop a computerized data base containing this infor-
mation and make it available to the public on a cost-
reimbursable basis.
For further information on the right-to-know repor-
ing requirements, contact the TSCA Assistance Office,
U.S. EPA, Office of Toxic Substances, (202) 554-1411.
*See related article in December 1986 issue,
pages 5-6.
"See article on data base (IRIS) in this issue.
EPA DEVELOPING HAZAR
EPA is developing national emission standards for
hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) to limit emissions of
eight organic compounds from chemical plants and
comparable facilities. The standard would limit emis-
sions of butadiene, carbon tetrachloride, chloroform,
ethylene dichloride, ethylene oxide, methylene chloride,
perchloroethylene, and trichloroethylene. Controls are
being considered, as appropriate, for emissions of these
compounds from process vents and equipment leaks.
The Agency has studied these emission sources in
depth as part of the process of developing standards of
performance for new sources (NSPS) for the synthetic
organic chemical manufacturing industry (SOCMI) and
NESHAP for equipment leaks (fugitive emissions). EPA
is using, where appropriate, the control technology
assessments and technical issue resolutions from these
prior standards in the development of the hazardous
organics NESHAP (HON).
Source categories that may be included in the HON
are: butadiene production, polybutadiene production,
neoprene production, styrene-butadiene-rubber produc-
tion, chlorine production, chlorinated hydrocarbon pro-
duction, chemical plants using chlorinated hydrocar-
bons, chlorofluorocarbon production, ethylene
dichloride production, ethylene oxide production,
miscellaneous butadiene production, pesticides produc-
tion, and pharmaceuticals production. The same con-
trol technologies are applicable for all of these source
categories and pollutants. Combustion controls (e.g.,
flares, incinerators) of 98 percent efficiency are univer-
sally applicable to these process vents. Control re-
quirements being considered for equipment leaks con-
sist of the specifications in the benzene NESHAP (40
CFR 61, Subpart V), and the use of dual mechanical seal
DOUS ORGANIC NESHAP
pumps in high risk source categories. Application of
these controls will reduce process vent emissions by 98
percent and equipment leak emissions by about 60 per-
cent. Additional control of equipment leak emissions is
not universally possible using available control methods.
Regulatory options are being developed based on
application of these control techniques to the 13 source
categories. The options vary in the specific source
categories that are required to implement equipment
leak control programs and the process vents that are re-
quired to apply vent controls. The estimated risk reduc-
tions achieved in the options currently being considered
range from about 74 percent (control all sources) to 71
percent (control sources representing about 96 percent
of the total incidence). With application of controls on all
sources in the HON, the estimated annual incidence
would be reduced from about 30 to 8 cancer cases per
year. The estimated maximum individual cancer risk
would be reduced from about 2 x 101 to 6 x 10-2. Emis-
sions of the 8 compounds would be reduced from ap-
proximately 13,000 to 3,500 Mg per year with application
of controls on all sources. The EPA has not identified any
additional, or alternative, controls that could further
reduce emissions and risks. The emission controls
would also reduce emissions of other volatile organic
compounds.
At this time, no decision has been made on which
option will be the basis for the proposed standard. The
current schedule calls for selection of the regulatory op-
tion in the next few months and proposal of the standard
in 1988. Publication of the final standard would follow
about 14 months later.
For additional information, contact Jan Meyer, U.S.
EPA, OAQPS, (919) 541-5254 or (FTS) 629-5254.
EMSL-RTP ACQUIRES GAS
CHROMATOGRAPHY/MATI
INFRARED SPECTROMETR
The Analytical Methods Section of EPA's En-
vironmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory (EMSL),
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, has recently
purchased a GC/MI-IR* system and is currently develop-
I?IX ISOLATION
Y SYSTEM
ing the technique for the identification of semi-volatile
organic compounds in air. GC/MI-IR, a relatively new
analytical technique, is potentially a very valuable tool
for analyzing complex air samples.
12

-------
GC/MI-IR Explained
Briefly, GC/MI-IR traps effluent from a capillary gas
chromatograph in an inert, frozen matrix as it is
deposited on the surface of a rotating cryogenic gold-
plated disk. The separated components from the sam-
ple remain frozen in the matrix indefinitely, making it
possible to obtain infrared spectra of each individual
component. When obtained under matrix isolation con-
ditions, these spectra generally exhibit sharper spectral
features and greater overall intensities for the same
amount of material than do vapor phase or condensed
phase infrared spectra. Also, the ability to signal-average
greatly enhances the sensitivity of the technique as com-
pared to on-the-fly GC/IR with a conventional flow-
through lightpipe. In fact, detection limits approach those
observed for gas chromatography/mass spectrometry
(GC/MS).
Reference Matrix Library Developed
A significant amount of recent effort has been
devoted to developing a reference matrix isolation in-
frared spectral library of compounds of environmental
interest. As mentioned earlier, infrared spectra obtained
under matrix isolation conditions differ significantly in ap-
pearance from vapor phase or condensed phase spec-
tra. As a result, current infrared reference libraries are
not useful in identifying components in a complex sam-
ple. Suspected carcinogens, mutagens, and toxic
substances expected to be present in typical ambient air
samples have been emphasized in the initial phase of
the library development.
Applications Include PAH Identification
An area for which GC/MI-IR shows significant pro-
mise is the unambiguous identification of isomeric
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH). Many of the
PAH isomers are difficult to separate chromatographical-
ly and are difficult to differentiate by GC/MS. However,
each PAH has a unique matrix isolation infrared spec-
trum. Individual PAH in isomer pairs such as ben-
zo(e)pyrene/benzo(a)pyrene, chrysene/triphenylene,
and the b, j, and k isomers of benzofluoranthene can be
easily distinguished by GC/MI-IR.
IACP Samples Analyzed
In addition to extracts from ambient urban air par-
ticulate matter, mobile source emissions, and indoor air
samples, selected samples generated under the In-
tegrated Air Cancer Project (IACP) program have been
analyzed by GC/MI-IR. Efforts so far have concentrated
on the nonpolar fractions of woodstove source emission
samples which are expected to be rich in PAH. The non-
polar fractions of woodstove source samples have
typically been found to contain several PAH including
retene, phenanthrene, fluoranthene, pyrene, benz(a)an-
thracene, chrysene, and triphenylene, and oxygenated-
PAH such as 9-fluorenone and anthraquinone. It should
be noted that the nonpolar fractions of woodstove emis-
sions have been found to have a lower biological activi-
ty than the moderately polar and polar fractions. Future
efforts in the development of GC/MI-IR for the analysis
of samples from woodsmoke-saturated air will be
directed to include more polar compounds in the
reference infrared spectral library to aid in the identifica-
tion of those components in fractions which elicit high
responses in bioassay.
For more information on this topic or on the IACP
in general, contact Barbara Andon, IACP Coordinator,
(919) 541-7532 or (FTS) 629-7532.
*Gas chromatography/matrix isolation infrared
spectrometry
AIR TOXICS MULTI-YEAR D
PLAN PROGRESS CONTIN1
As of August 1987, EPA has received approximate-
ly 70 Air Toxics Multi-year Development Plans (MYDPs) *
These plans represent a major first step in the review of
air toxics-part of an overall approach to air pollution con-
trol. All the plans emphasize problem evaluation through
development of emissions inventory data and a majori-
ty contain steps to incorporate some form of air toxics
review into the new source review procedures now in
place.
It appears that the MYDP process has encouraged
action by some agencies that had formerly not
developed any program to assess the impact of air tox-
ics. For example, based on a STAPPA/ALAPCO report
on the status of air toxics programs in 1983, approximate-
ly 30 percent of the 70 agencies had no air toxics pro-
EVELOPMENT
IES
gram or plans for developing one. This increase in pro-
gram development indicates an increased awareness of
the air toxics problem and is due, in part, to the MYDP
process.
On June 9,1987, EPA released a memorandum that
summarized MYDP activities to date, provided additional
guidance for MYDP development, and identified five ad-
ditional areas for increased emphasis in FY 1988 MYDP
development:
•	Enhanced milestone specificity,
•	Activity continuity,
•	Increased SIP coordination,
•	Drafting progress measures, and
•	Support to the national program.
13

-------
Continued plan development and implementation
is expected in FY 1988. In addition, due to the success
of the national workshops,** EPA also expects more
State and local agencies to participate in the MYDP pro-
cess in FY 1988. For further information, contact Roger
Powell, U.S. EPA, Control Programs Development Divi-
sion, (919) 541-5331 or (FTS) 629-5331.
*See related articles in June 1986 issue, pages 8-9;
September 1986, page 12; March 1987, page 11.
**See related article in June 1987 issue, page 8.
EPA'S INTEGRATED RISK If
TO BE AVAILABLE SOON
The Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)* is
an electronic data base containing EPA risk assessment
and risk management information for specific chemical
substances. Those interested in using IRIS may receive
notice that the system is operational plus information on
how to access it by writing to Karen Grissom, U.S.
EPA/Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office,
MS-114, 26 Martin Luther King Street, Cincinnati, Ohio
45268, (513) 569-7254.
There will be no charge for using the data contained
in IRIS. However, there is a nominal charge for use of the
communications network used to access IRIS.
Therefore, the announcement will explain how to obtain
an account on the communications network.
IRIS is a dynamic system to which chemical files are
continually being added and whose existing files are up-
dated as EPA scientists review what health data say
about the risk of a given chemical. It is a major priority
to add statements on chemicals to IRIS as quickly as it
is possible to do so while maintaining information quality.
Therefore, IRIS is designed for electronic accessing
since hardcopy versions quickly become out of date.
For example, the Newsletter stated in March that
there were 127 chemicals in the system. Currently, IRIS
contains 203 chemical files with reference dose informa-
tion on 178 of those and carcinogenicity information for
30 chemicals. Further, 50 Drinking Water Health Ad-
visories will soon be added to IRIS. Within the next few
^FORMATION SYSTEM
months, 50 more chemicals, mostly pesticides, will be
added to the system as well.
In addition, the Title Ill/Community Right-to-Know
legislation recently passed by Congress may allow for
adding other types of risk information to IRIS.** Title III
requires companies to make public an inventory of their
hazardous substances and to report annually what
quantity of these substances was released into the at-
mosphere in the previous year. Another requirement of
Title III is that health effects data on chemicals deemed
"extremely hazardous" be prepared. EPA is currently
working out the details for including much of this infor-
mation in IRIS. This may mean that chemical use, ex-
posure, acute toxicity, and environmental effects sec-
tions will be added to the chemical files in IRIS. The law
requires that health effects information be gathered on
329 chemicals.
Although Title III will hasten the inclusion of certain
chemicals in IRIS, it is EPA's goal to include all chemicals
with significant health impacts in the data base.
If you have any questions about IRIS, call Rick
Picardi, U.S. EPA, Office of Health and Environmental
Assessment, (202) 382-7315, (FTS) 382-7315.
*The Newsletter introduced IRIS to readers on
pages 8-9 of the March issue.
"See related article elsewhere in this issue.
STATE EMERGENCY RESPO
REPORT RELEASED BY NA'
GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATIO
The National Governors' Association (NGA) an-
nounces release of "State Emergency Response Com-
missions: A Report on Current Status." The report, some
80 pages long, consists of an introduction to the Title III
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of
1986* followed by an alphabetically arranged summary
description of each of the 50 States' (including Puerto
Rico) emergency response commission.
Details given include commission name, format and
address, and legal basis (most State emergency
INSE COMMISSION
TIONAL
N
response commissions were established by executive
order, although some were founded by legislation or by
letter). Commission members are also listed and the role
of the related State agency is described. The largest
SERC has 31 members, while membership in three
States is limited to one member. Most SERCs are
chaired by the director of a State public safety-related or
environmental agency while some are chaired by private
citizens. Several of the SERCs limit membership to
representatives of one or more State agencies such as
14

-------
public safety, environmental quality, public health, labs,
transportation, and community affairs. However, 29
SERCs include members from outside State govern-
ment. The expanded membership includes represen-
tatives from the general public, local government,
specific industries, environmental and other public in-
terest groups, and the academic community.
The NGA compiled the report during the first two
weeks in May through a telephone and mail survey
begun in mid-April. According to an August 1987 NGA
report entitled "Interim Report: The States' Designation
of Local Emergency Planning Districts," 35 States
designated local political subdivisions (e.g., counties,
municipalities, or a combination of the two); 10 States
named regional planning or response areas; and 5
States designated the entire State as a local emergen-
cy planning district. The report lists, for each State, the
number of districts that have been named, the nature of
the district (e.g., county, municipality), the chairperson
of the SERC, and the SERC address. Additionally, the
State/local emergency planning relationship is discuss-
ed. The information contained in the August 1987 report
will be included in an updated SERC report.
For further information on the report, call Mary Fet-
ter at (202) 624-7857 or Jim Solyst (202) 624-7739 at the
NGA.
"Title III of the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) requires the gover-
nor of each State to name a State Emergency Response
Commission (SERC) by April 17,1987. The SERC is the
lead institution responsible for implementing State re-
quirements under Title III. See related article in
December 1986 Newsletter.
INFORMATION
NEEDED
The State of California's Toxic Substances Control
Division Technical Services Unit, Sacramento, Califor-
nia, is collecting information regarding the prevention,
control, and remediation of underground fires at landfill
disposal facilities. If your agency has information to con-
tribute, please call Caroline Rudolph, California Depart-
ment of Health Services, (916) 445-1809.
NEED HELP?
If your agency needs help in finding information on
a specific air toxics question, you can announce that
need in the National Air Toxics Information Clear-
inghouse Newsletter. Your colleagues from other State
or local agencies who have such information will be able
to contact you with assistance. In addition, the Clear-
inghouse staff would like to receive your ideas for future
Newsletter articles. To list an information need in the next
issues or to submit an article or a suggestion for a future
Newsletter article, please contact Alice Pelland, Radian
Corporation, (919) 541-9100.
The National Air Toxics Information Clearinghouse Newsletter is published by the National Air Toxics Informa-
tion Clearinghouse to assist State and local air agencies making decisions on noncriteria air pollutant emissions.
The Clearinghouse is being implemented by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Strategies and Air Standards
Division, Pollutant Assessment Branch as part of a joint effort with the State and Territorial Air Pollution Program
Administrators (STAPPA) and the Association of Local Air Pollution Control Officials (ALAPCO). The National Air Toxics
Information Clearinghouse Newsletter is prepared by Radian Corporation under EPA, Contract Number 68-02-4330,
Work Assignment 27. The EPA Project Officer is Beth Hassett, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, Telephone: (919)541-0850. The Radian Project Director is Alice Pelland,
P.O. Box 13000, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709, (919)541-9100.
The Newsletter is prepared primarily for State and local air pollution control agencies and is distributed free of
charge. Those wishing to report address changes may so so by contacting Nancy Riley, EPA OAQPS (919)541-0850.
Please contact either the Project Director or the Project Officer with any comments you might have pertaining to this
newsletter or with suggestions for future newsletters, Articles in the newsletter are written by Radian Corporation
or EPA staff unless otherwise indicated.
The views expressed in the National Air Toxics Information Clearinghouse Newsletter do no necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency. Mention of trade names or commercial products does
not constitute an endorsement or recommendation for use by EPA.
15

-------

-------