Chemicals
in Progress
VOI.12 / NO .2
APRIL 1991
Taking a Global Approach
U.S. Increases International Involvement to Protect
the Environment
By Linda J. Fisher
Assistant Administrator for Pesticides and Toxic Substances
Just as it has become obvious that pollution does not recognize geopolitical
boundaries, it also has become evident that solutions to environmental prob-
lems will, in many cases, be shaped in the global arena. To achieve this, EPA
Administrator William K. Reilly has established international cooperation as
one of the central elements in the agency's overall strategy for environmental
protection.
OFFICE OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
highlights
2 OTS Director Looks Ahead
10 Strategy to Reduce
Lead Exposures Is Released
12 New Process for
Master Testing List
FAKING A GLOBAL APPROACH
1 U.S. Committed to
International Involvement
14-9 Other Articles about
International Activities
The obvious benefits of international cooperation are better protection of public
health and the environment globally. But there are other practical benefits as
well. All countries face resource constraints, and review and evaluation of
existing chemicals is time consuming and resource intensive. If we cooperate
with other concerned nations, we can share the burden of testing and reviewing
chemicals. We can avoid duplication of effort, and we can improve the reliabil-
ity and acceptability of our information-gathering, assessment, and control
efforts.
The Office of Toxic Substances (OTS) shares the administrator's commitment to
international cooperation. To this end, OTS is working on two major fronts.
The first involves the 24 industrialized member nations of the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD); the second focuses on
multilateral efforts with major trading partners, including member nations of
the European Community (EC), Japan, and Canada. As the following activities
demonstrate, our toxic chemicals program is among several agency programs
that are succeeding in expanding the agency's capacity to deal with environ-
mental issues on an international scale.
Environment continued on page 4
1
VOL.12/N0.2 APRIL 1991
Vyy Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
From the Director
OTS Director Mark Greenwood Looks at the Year Ahead
What are your goals for the Office of
Toxic Substances?
I think we need to focus our attention
on the themes and priorities that Bill
Reilly (EPA administrator) and Hank
Habicht (EPA deputy administrator)
have set. Most notably, we should be
¦ adopting a "pollution prevention"
perspective as we develop strategies
for addressing identified risks;
¦ looking at ecological as well as
health effects as we characterize
chemical hazards; and
¦ actively examining risk reduction
measures that rely on information
disclosure and market incentive
approaches.
We need to think of ourselves as a
multimedia toxics program that uses
any and all available tools to achieve
behavioral changes that improve
environmental protection.
We are not just the custodians of
TSCA. In focusing on EPA's tradi-
tional mission of protecting the air,
water, and land, we cannot forget
that we are also part of a network of
federal and state agencies that are
concerned with protecting workers
and consumers from hazards in the
workplace and the marketplace. My
hope is that we can build on what we
have already done and strengthen our
relationships with the other agencies
that share our interest in these areas
so that we can undertake more joint
actions. Also, I would like to see the
talents of the OTS staff fully utilized
in accomplishing the mission of EPA.
I'm impressed with the people in
OTS, and I think they bring tremen-
dous assets to the work of the agency.
Do you plan to make any changes in the
revitalized existing chemicals program?
I probably have spent more time on
the existing chemicals program
revitalization effort than on any other
issue. This program is one of the
reasons I wanted to come to OTS. I'm
very comfortable with its direction, its
themes. It is on target to help
accomplish the mission of EPA.
We need to think of
ourselves as a multimedia
toxics program that uses any
and all available tools to
achieve behavioral changes
that improve environmental
protection.
Mark Gmnwood, OTS Director
Over the last two months, we have
resolved many of the outstanding
issues on how our existing chemicals
management process will work. We
are now ready to push forward and
make decisions on specific chemical
cases.
Please comment on the new chemicals
program. How do you see that working?
Well, two characteristics come to
mind immediately. First, this is a
program that has been involved in
pollution prevention activities long
before anyone talked about pollution
prevention as such. Second, the
premanufacture notice (PMN) pro-
gram has achieved the highest produc-
tivity of any program I have seen in
the agency. Very few organizations
can bring together people from
multiple disciplines to resolve cross-
media issues and reach the high level
of productivity that the PMN pro-
gram has achieved. It is a model of
what we can do in OTS and should be
viewed as a model by the rest of the
agency. One of my roles will be to try
to publicize the strengths of the new
chemicals program.
What do you see as key priorities for the
Toxics Release Inventory (TRi)?
We are looking at several options for
enhancing the TRI database. Clearly,
a central focus for 1991 is the Pollu-
tion Prevention Act. Passage of this
act in 1990 mandates that EPA
collect in 1992 certain pollution
prevention data for calendar year
1991- Data elements specified in the
law include the amount of source
reduction and recycling that have
been achieved from one year to the
next, as well as projections for such
achievements. We are considering
proposing some additional data
elements not specified in the law. In
addition, we are working on technical
guidance to help industry with this
reporting.
We are also considering requiring
reporting of peak releases of TRI
chemicals, adding chemicals to the
TRI list, and expanding the Standard
Industrial Classification (SIC) codes
subject to TRI reporting. Given the
demands of the new Pollution Preven-
tion Act, it is unlikely that we will be
able to follow through on any of these
ideas until later in the year. We are,
however, looking at the relative
environmental significance of peak
release, SIC code expansions, and
additional chemicals in allowing us to.
proceed with high-priority actions
once the Pollution Prevention Act
activities are complete.
LS IN PROGRESS
-------
Changes at the Top
Joseph Powers Assumes
OPME Directorship
Joseph Powers became director of the
Office of Toxic Substances' Office of
Program Management and Evalua-
tion in February.
For the past two years, Mr. Powers
served as chief of the Policy, Plan-
ning, and Operations Staff in the
Special Review and Registration
Division of the Office of Pesticide
Programs (OPP). In this position, he
was engaged in implementing the
reregistration provisions of the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Mr.
Powers had previously di recced an
agency wide task force to implement
the FIFRA amendments.
While obtaining a master's degree in
public policy studies from the
University of Michigan in Ann
Arbor, Mr. Powers joined the EPA
Motor Vehicle Emissions Laboratory
loeaced there. After receiving his
master's degree in 1975, Mr, Powers
remained at the EPA laboratory,
where he focused on planning and
hudgeting until 1983, when he
joined OPP in Washington, D.C. He
has served in several positions in the
Program Management and Support
Division in OPP.
Mr. Powers received a bachelor of
science degree in psychology in 1967
from Michigan State University in
East Lansing. He served in the U.S.
Air Force from 1968 until 1973.
Susan Hazen Heads OTS's New Special Projects Office
Susan Hazen has been appointed director of the newly created Special Projects
Office in the Office ofToxic Substances (OTS), The Special Projects Office was
established in December 1990 to implement the Industrial Toxics Project, a
pollution prevention program focusing on encouraging voluntary reductions in
releases of 17 toxic chemicals. (See article on page 17.)
Ms. Hazen moves into the position ftora the Economics and Technology
Division in OTS, where she served as acting director from 1988 to 1990-
During that time, she also directed OTS's Emergency Planning and Commu-
nity Right-ta-Know Act (EPCRA) program.
Ms. Hazen joined OTS in 1979 as a policy analyse and moved on to serve as
deputy director of the Existing Chemical Assessment Division and as special
assistant to former OTS directors Don Clay and Charles L. El kins
From 1974 through 1979, Ms. Hazen was a research assistant at the Center for
Policy Alternatives at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology ar.d at the
Institute for Environmental Studies at the University of Toronto.
Ms. Hazen has a bachelor of arts in child psychology and special education from
Marymount College, New York.
Mary EJten Weber is New ETD Director
Mary Ellen Weber joined the Office ofToxic Substances as director of its
Ecor.arr.ics and Technology Division in November 1990.
Ms. Weber has a Ph.D. in economics from the University of Utah. She com-
pleted her post-graduate studies while on a Foreign Area Fellowship in Chile,
under the auspices of the Social Science Research Council. She also performed
post-graduate work in economics at Stanford University, the University of
Chile, and the Ur.iversidad National Autonoma de Mexico. Ms. Weber
received her bachelor of arts in economics from Dominica.it College.
On returning to the United States from Chile, Ms. Weber taught economics at
Smith College before joining the World Bank as a country economist. She later
worked for the International Research and Technology Corporation. There, she
evaluated the effect of various public policies on the environment for EPA, the
Office of Technology Assessment, tbe Department of Energy, and private
industry.
Ms. Weber directed the Office of Regulatory Analysis at the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration from. 1979 to 1984. She left to found a
computer software company, which she continued to run until joining EPA.
K>,2 APRIL 1991
-------
Taking A Global Approach
Environment continued from page 1
Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development
Harmonization of test guidelines
One of the most important OECD
initiatives has been the development
of internationally agreed-upon test
guidelines for physical/chemical
properties, environmental fate, and
health and environmental effects
testing. Underlying this harmoniza-
tion effort is the concept of "mutual
acceptance of data," meaning that
OECD members would accept any
test results based on studies con-
ducted using OECD test guidelines
and Good Laboratory Practices. The
most significant benefits of this
agreement are that
¦ uniform testing guidelines would
minimize confusion among those
who generate test data and
¦ the potential for using testing
requirements as nontariff barriers to
trade would be eliminated.
The Office of Pesticides and Toxic
Substances (OPTS) has played a
leading role as the U.S. representative
in OECD guidelines development
and harmonization efforts. We are
currently working to establish
uniform testing guidelines in the
Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP)
and in OTS. We are also working
toward identifying existing differ-
ences between OPTS and OECD
guidelines. In the coming years, we
will attempt to resolve these differ-
ences through the OECD's program
to update test guidelines.
The Screening Information Data Set
(SIDS) program
The SIDS program is the result of
efforts by OECD member countries
to develop a base level of test data for
existing chemicals that are produced
in the largest quantities worldwide.
Fifty-three chemicals are currently
being handled through the program,
and 94 more will be tested in the
next phase.
Through the SIDS effort, more
countries will gain the experience
needed to "share the burden" of
testing, which, in turn, will speed
the development of test data. By
encouraging cooperative efforts to
assess the hazards, exposures, and
risks of high-production-volume
chemicals, the SIDS program is also
providing opportunities for resolving
issues concerning mutual acceptance
of data and evaluations.
Clearinghouses
The OECD has established interna-
tional clearinghouses for exchanging
information about chemicals and
facilitating cooperative efforts to test
and assess chemicals. In one success,
following a series of bilateral discus-
sions, the governments and industry
of the United States and Germany
agreed to conduct a number of tests
on 2,4- and 2,6-dinitrotoiuene,
including analyses of pharmacokinet-
ics, acute/chronic aquatic toxicity,
and environmental fate endpoints.
Testing is being done voluntarily by
industry in both nations. The
United States is serving as the lead
for clearinghouses on chloranil, the
AQUIRE database of aquatic toxicity
information, and others.
Risk reduction
The United States was instrumental
in developing the basis of an OECD
program begun last year to imple-
ment new approaches to risk reduc-
tion through regulatory and
nonregulatory actions. Activities may
affect any stage of commercial and
environmental lifecycles, beginning
with the natural resources needed to
produce chemical products, through
their final disposal. This program
represents a major step toward greater
cooperation, consistency, and,
ultimately, harmonization in reduc-
ing the risks from chemicals.
The program is examining member
countries' ongoing risk reduction
efforts associated with lead, mercury,
cadmium, brominated flame re tar-
dan ts, and methylene chloride. The
United States is serving as the lead
country for lead. As part of the effort
on methylene chloride, the United
States held an international meeting
in February 1991 to discuss substi-
tutes for methylene chloride in paint-
stripping uses. (See related articles on
pages 8 and 9 )
Biotechnology issues
The OECD has been examining issues
in biotechnology over the last decade
and has published four reports on the
subject. EPA has had extensive
involvement in the studies addressing
safety in biotechnology, small-scale
field tests of genetically modified
organisms, and the development of a
database on environmental releases of
genetically modified organisms
worldwide. The OECD is consider-
ing future research on large-scale
environmental uses of genetically
modified organisms and food safety
issues in biotechnology. The comple-
tion dates for these projects have not
been set.
.LS IN PROGRESS
-------
Taking A Global Approach
The U.S. Department of State
coordinates federal activity in OECD
and EC biotechnology projects, which
typically involve a number of federal
agencies. Under the authority of the
United States/European Community
Environment Bilateral Consultations,
EPA and the U.S. Department of
Agriculture have been meeting since
1989 with Directorate General XI of
the EC on technical issues relevant to
risk assessment for genetically
modified organisms that are released
to the environment. The risk assess-
ment issues identified for discussion
include monitoring, gene introduc-
tion of microorganisms to the
environment, identification/tax-
onomy, and large-scale releases of
plants and microorganisms. A paper
summarizing the state of the art in
microbial detection methods is
scheduled for completion this year.
The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
Administrator Reilly has called the
creation of the Toxics Release Inven-
tory one of the most profoundly
influential laws on the environment
ever enacted in the United States.
The data collected in the inventory on
toxic releases to air, water, and land
from industrial plants throughout the
nation have spurred calls for reduc-
tions in these emissions from indi-
vidual citizens, public interest
groups, state lawmakers, and the
companies themselves.
OTS is beginning a program to help
other nations learn about the funda-
mentals of release reporting and
right-to-know programs. This
spring, a seminar will be held for
OECD member nations. Later this
year or early next year, OTS will
conduct a TRI workshop for OECD
nations and Central and Eastern
European countries. (See related
article on page 9.)
Initiatives with major trading
partners
Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC)
substitutes testing
The United States has been actively
involved in efforts by Japan, the EC,
and a group of independent CFC
producers, who are represented by the
Program for Alternative Fluorocarbon
Toxicity Testing (PAFT), to develop
substitutes for fully halogenated
CFCs. Under the Montreal Protocol
on Substances that Deplete the Ozone
Layer, CFCs that have the potential
for stratospheric ozone depletion will
be phased out of use and replaced
with alternative substances.
A number of possible substitutes,
including several hydrofluorocarbons
(HFCs) and hydrochlorofluorocarbons
(HCFCs), have been identified. But
before they achieve widespread use, it
is prudent that they undergo further
evaluation for potential hazards.
While it is important to find substi-
tutes for CFCs, it is equally impor-
tant that they be sufficiently tested.
In solving one problem, we must not
create another.
EPA has been working with PAFT to
determine what testing is needed to
adequately assess the potential
hazards of these substitutes. In
establishing PAFT test protocols,
prior non-PAFT tests were reviewed
and used where appropriate to avoid
unnecessary duplication of tests.
Consideration was also given to
established testing protocol require-
ments of the United States, the EC,
Japan, and the OECD.
After reviewing the original PAFT
testing program, the United States,
the EC, and Japan cooperatively
identified the need for additional
testing of HCFCs and HFCs being
handled by the various PAFT
programs. This understanding
represents the first instance in which
our country, the EC, Japan, and an
international group of producer
companies have pursued and reached
a common conclusion regarding
testing needs for chemicals of such
international importance.
Comparison of chemical
assessment methods used in the
United States and in nations of
the European Community
New chemicals
One of the major differences between
the new chemicals program in the
United States and in the EC concerns
test data requirements. The EC
requires a base set of test data,
known as the minimum
premarketing dataset (MPD), for
each new chemical that will be
produced in quantities exceeding one
metric ton; polymers are excluded
from this requirement. In contrast,
the United States requires no data
for new chemicals that are submitted
to EPA through premanufacture
notices (PMNs) under section 5 of
the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA). Instead, the United States
relies on analysis of structure-
Environimnt continued on page7
<0.2 APRIL 1991
-------
Taking A Global Approach
OTS Is Active in International Programs
The Office of Toxic Substances (OTS)
is one of several EPA offices partici-
pating in the agency's international
program. Through the United
Nations (UN) and the Organization
for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD), OTS is
initiating and supporting activities to
further the exchange of information
and cooperative testing, assessment,
and risk reduction on a global level.
Prior Informed Consent
Prior Informed Consent (PIC) refers
to a procedure developed by the UN
to allow importing countries to
obtain information about chemicals
whose use is banned or severely
restricted in other countries. The
importing country can use this
information to decide whether to
allow, restrict, or halt future imports
of these chemicals.
The United States is planning to
implement PIC procedures for both
pesticides and industrial chemicals.
OTS and the Office of Pesticide
Programs are developing a joint
policy statement on
implementation, which will be
published in the Federal Register.
PIC procedures comprise four
components:
¦ Based on information submitted
by UN member countries, a list of
chemicals subject to bans or other
restrictive actions will be established.
¦ Exporting countries will be
informed of decisions by importing
countries regarding future shipments
of these chemicals.
¦ If a nation bans or severely
restricts a chemical in some way, that
country must provide this informa-
tion to importing countries. Notifi-
cation would take place the first time
that the chemical is exported and
periodically thereafter if any signifi-
cant development concerning the
control action occurs.
¦ Exporting countries would be
required to implement appropriate
regulatory controls to ensure that
chemicals are not exported to nations
that do not want those chemicals to
enter the country.
OTS is initiating and
supporting activities to
further the exchange of
information and cooperative
testing, assessment, and risk
reduction on a global level.
Sharing information is one of the
most important components of
international cooperation. OTS
participates in two UN programs
that support information sharing.
One is the International Program on
Chemical Safety (IPCS) and the other
is the International Register of
Potentially Toxic Chemicals
(IRPTC).
International Program on
Chemical Safety
The IPCS is a cooperative effort of the
United Nations Environment
Program, the International Labor
Organization, and the World Health
Organization. Its primary objective
is to disseminate evaluations of the
effects of chemicals on human health
and the environment. IPCS activi-
ties include the development of
Environmental Health Criteria
documents on industrial chemicals
and Health and Safety Guides.
The Health and Safety Guides are less
technical than the Environmental
Health Criteria documents and are
intended to provide chemical infor-
mation to developing countries
lacking the resources to interpret the
more technical Environmental Health
Criteria documents. Other activities
include the development of instruc-
tional information for coping with
chemical accidents, coordination of
laboratory testing and epidemiologi-
cal studies, and promotion of research
on the mechanisms of the biological
action of chemicals.
OTS also provides information to the
international Chemicals Currently
Being Tested for Toxic Effects
database. IPCS maintains the
database, in conjunction with the
IRPTC, in an effort to eliminate
duplication of testing and to lead to
more opportunities for cooperation
among participating nations.
International Register of Potentially
Toxic Chemicals
The IRPTC is an information
network established by the UN
Environment Program. Through the
network, nations have easy access to
data on the production, distribution,
exposure, release, disposal, toxicity,
and regulation of existing chemicals.
The IRPTC stores information
gathered through the OECD Screen-
ing Information Data Set (SIDS)
project, the PIC project, and other
OECD efforts. The IRPTC also
IS IN PROGRESS
-------
Taking A Global Approach
develops chemical data profiles that
contain information concerning
hazard identification and risk assess-
ment of chemicals.
EXICHEM
The OECD created the EXICHEM
database in 1987 to help members
exchange information and identify
opportunities to test existing chemi-
cals cooperatively. EXICHEM
contains information about planned
or ongoing national activities for
existing chemicals. These activities
include information-gathering,
testing, assessment, monitoring, and
control efforts. EXICHEM contains
contributions from scientific and
industrial organizations located in
OECD's 24 member countries and
from the IPCS. The database is
updated twice each year.
To contribute information or gain
access to EXICHEM, please contact
Karen Boswell, U.S. EXICHEM
coordinator, Existing Chemical
Assessment Division (TS-778),
Environmental Protection Agency,
401 M Street, S.W., Washington,
D.C. 20460; telephone, (202) 382-
3635; FAX, (202) 475-8168.
Environment continued from page 5
activity relationships (SAR) to
support its review of the potential
hazards of new chemicals.
The United States and the EC have
begun a study to compare the two
approaches and to determine the
extent to which U.S. SAR analyses
would have changed in the presence
of a base set of test data. The results
of the study are expected to be useful
in judging the strengths and weak-
nesses of SAR-based approaches to
assessing new and existing chemicals
and in determining the utility of
MPD data in improving U.S. assess-
ment capabilities.
Existing chemicals
Additional opportunities for coopera-
tion among nations are being created
all the time. For instance, the EC is
debating a proposed new regulation
that could give the Commission of the
European Community broad new
authorities on existing chemicals.
Once in place, this regulation could
provide significant opportunities for
more coordination between the EC
and the United States. Elsewhere, a
new environmental protection law
recently passed by Canada offers a
number of possible opportunities for
close cooperation on toxic chemicals.
Discussions to identify areas of
mutual interest have been initiated
between OTS and Canadian authori-
ties in Environment Canada and the
departments of Health and Welfare.
In one recent case, OTS and Environ-
ment Canada exchanged information
on uses of, exposures to, and risks
from chloranil. Test data developed
by both nations determined that
chloranil is contaminated with
dioxins and furans. We are coordinat-
ing efforts to continue studies of
chloranil and violet 23, a pigment
manufactured with chloranil.
These activities are occurring at a
time when people the world over are
demanding a safer environment and
are seeking greater participation in
the decisions that affect their well-
being. At EPA, we are committed to
international cooperation and want to
foster public dialogue within our own
nation at the same time that we are
promoting discussions with other
countries.
The Office of Toxic Substances is
working hard to achieve international
harmonization in chemical testing,
assessment, and risk reduction; these
efforts to realize more openness and
sharing of ideas and information with
other nations can only benefit us all.
J0.2 APRIL 1991
-------
Taking A Global Approach
OECD Environment Ministers Approve Existing Chemicals Act
An agreement to share responsibility
for investigating and addressing the
risks posed by existing chemicals was
reached by the environment ministers
from the member nations of the
Organization for Economic Coopera-
tion and Development (OECD) at a
January meeting in Paris.
Approval of the agreement—the
Cooperative Investigation and Risk
Reduction of Existing Chemicals
Act—stengthens the OECD's
longstanding existing chemicals
program. The agreement stresses
the use of lifecycle management to
identify the stages where pollution
and waste can be controlled most
effectively. Under the act, member
countries will work together to
identify and test chemicals produced
in large volumes to determine which
are potentially hazardous to human
health or the environment. Based on
this research, members will under-
take concerted regulatory and
nonregulatory activities to reduce
unacceptable risks. This act affirms
the commitment of OECD members
to the Screening Information Data
Set (SIDS) and risk reduction
projects.
Other Action
The environment ministers also
approved the Integrated Pollution
Prevention and Control Act, which
encourages and guides the 24 nations
in OECD to develop integrated
national policies to prevent pollution
rather than focusing on individual
environmental media such as water or
air. This approach is consistent with
EPA's national pollution prevention
strategy and strategies on risk
reduction. The EPA strategies favor
eliminating pollution at its source
and avoiding the transfer of risk from
one medium to another.
"I believe that, although circum-
stances differ among countries,
pollution prevention opportunities
are available and deserve widespread
consideration and encouragement,"
EPA Administrator William K.
Reilly, who headed the U.S. delega-
tion, said in a speech to the other
OECD environment ministers. "By
pollution prevention, I mean an
approach to resource use that empha-
sizes innovative technologies to
substitute nontoxic for toxic prod-
ucts, use resources more efficiently,
generate less waste in the first place,
and reuse chemicals and other
materials."
The ministers also approved three
other acts focusing on
¦ development of improved statistics
and indicators of environmental
conditions to measure environmental
performance and denote trends;
¦ use of economic instruments, such
as market permits, to achieve envi-
ronmental goals; and
¦ reducing the amount of hazardous
waste disposed of in nations other
than where it is generated.
The ministers, who are the highest-
level environmental representatives
from member nations, also discussed
how to involve Eastern European
nations and developing nations that
are not OECD members in interna-
tional efforts that affect the environ-
ment. Other broad policy issues
discussed at the meeting were how to
integrate environmental and eco-
nomic decision making and the
development of environmental
strategies for the 1990s.
Copies of the meeting communique
and of the five acts are available
through the TSCA Assistance
Information Service (TSCA hotline).
See page 27 for information about
how to contact the hotline.
I Heavy Metals Draw Attention from OECD
Twenty-four nations have joined together to explore how to reduce the
significant health and environmental risks associated with exposure to the
heavy metals lead, cadmium, and mercury.
The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
initiated the international project in 1989, and, as a first step, individual
nations are analyzing the possibilities for reducing risks from the metals. The
United States is preparing analyses of how lead is used in OECD countries
and of the laws or policies that control the use of or exposure to lead-contain-
ing products in these nations. Discussions of draft risk reduction reports will
take place at the 16th Joint Meeting of the Chemicals Group and Manage-
ment Committee of the OECD from May 28 to 30, 1991.
*LS IN PROGRESS
-------
Taking A Global Approach
OTS Helps Other Nations Learn about Right-to-Know Programs
The Office of Toxic Substances (OTS)
is preparing two educational pro-
grams about environmental release
data for international audiences.
Fundamentals will be discussed
The first of these programs will be a
seminar to familiarize foreign nations
with the fundamentals of toxics
release reporting and right-to-know
programs. In the seminar, delegation
heads of Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development
(OECD) member nations will hear
representatives from OTS discuss
their experience collecting informa-
tion for the Toxics Release Inventory
Innovative research and technical
information about reducing risks from
paint stripping were presented at a
February 1991 conference held by the
Office of Toxic Substances (OTS).
More than 250 manufacturers, people
who use paint strippers, and govern-
ment officials from around the world
attended the conference, which was
held in Washington, D.C. The
conference on paint stripping was the
first international pollution preven-
tion conference convened by OTS.
The conference focused on use of paint
strippers in original equipment
manufacturing, industrial mainte-
nance operations, and household and
commercial operations.
Panel sessions provided information
on alternative paint-stripping tech-
nologies and the regulatory process.
Technical presentations addressed
(TRI) under the Emergency Planning
and Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA).
Specific seminar topics will include
how right-to-know programs have
affected environmental policy,
elements of release reporting, how to
manage data and provide the public
with access to data, and perspectives
on generation and use of release data.
To conclude the seminar, representa-
tives from U.S. environmental groups
and industry will take part in a panel
discussion.
The seminar will take place during
substitute chemicals and substitute
technologies, ways to reduce exposure
to hazardous substances during paint-
stripping activities, and ways to
reduce the hazardous waste streams
resulting from paint-stripping
operations.
Joining EPA in chairing the technical
sessions were the Occupational Safety
and Health Administration, the
National Institute of Occupational
Safety and Health, and the Consumer
Product Safety Commission. Attend-
ees included people from Australia,
Japan, Canada, the United Kingdom,
France, the Netherlands, Switzerland,
and Germany.
The conference proceedings, which
will include presentation summaries,
are available from John Gruber, Abt
Associates, 4800 Montgomery Lane,
Suite 500, Bethesda, MD 20814;
telephone, (301)913-0538.
the 16th Joint Meeting of the Chemi-
cals Group and Management Com-
mittee of the OECD in May.
Hands-on workshop to be held
OTS will hold a TRI workshop for
OECD members and Central and
Eastern European nations in late 1991
or early 1992. The workshop is
designed to provide practical informa-
tion to senior and technical staff of
government programs that collect and
use environmental release data;
industries that may be affected by the
reporting; companies that provide
environmental services; and environ-
mental and public interest groups.
During the workshop, participants
will have hands-on access to computer
databases. Working sessions will be
held on modeling environmental
concentrations and performing risk
screening through the interpretation
of model results.
Participants will be encouraged to
make use of OTS's experience in
implementing legislation, guiding
industry in development of the data,
assuring the quality of the data,
disseminating the data, and aiding
states and others in using the data.
OTS plans to invite industry and
environmental groups from the
United States to help present the
workshop. Other countries with
active right-to-know release reporting
programs will also be asked to discuss
their programs. For information,
contact JT&A, Inc., 1000 Connecti-
cut Avenue, N.W., Suite 802,
Washington, D.C. 20036; telephone,
(800) 726-4853. In Washington,
D.C., call (202) 429-0904.
Reducing the Health Risks from Paint Stripping
10.2 APRIL 1991
-------
Lead Activities
EPA Releases Strategy for Reducing Lead Exposures
On February 21, 1991, EPA released
a comprehensive strategy to reduce
lead exposures to the fullest extent
practicable, with particular emphasis
on reducing the risk to children.
The strategy focuses on developing
ways to identify and address the most
serious existing exposures; setting
priorities for remedial action to
reduce health risks from lead expo-
sures; investigating ways to prevent
pollution by limiting unnecessary
uses of lead and by encouraging
recycling; strengthening the partner-
ship among federal agencies, states,
localities, and the private sector to
minimize lead exposures; and
educating the public about risks from
lead exposures and how to reduce
them.
"This plan is aimed directly at
reducing lead exposure to children,"
said EPA Administrator William K.
Reilly. "Lead can be a pernicious
problem, and EPA intends to use
every authority at its disposal to
reduce risk to public health and the
environment."
The strategy consists of a variety of
initiatives, both regulatory and
nonregulatory, several of which are
described below.
Lead-based paint
EPA's Office of Toxic Substances is
working with the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development
and other federal agencies to reduce
exposure to lead-based paint. These
efforts include initiatives to train
workers—through courses, education
centers, and grants—in the safe
removal of lead-based paint. EPA is
also funding studies to identify and
evaluate cost-effective abatement
methods and measurement tech-
niques.
Urban soil and dust
Lead contamination of urban soil
results from both nonindustrial
sources (paint, gasoline, and used oil)
and industrial sources (battery
factories, mining and milling sites,
and smelters). EPA has been con-
ducting studies in three cities-
Boston, Baltimore, and Cincinnati—
to evaluate the problem. In these
studies, EPA is examining the
effectiveness of removal of lead-
contaminated soil and dust. In other
studies, the agency is examining how
best to address sources of lead-
contaminated soil and dust.
This plan is aimed
directly at reducing lead
exposure to children....
EPA intends to use every
authority at its disposal to
reduce risk to public health
and the environment.
William K. Reilly, EPA Administrator
Drinking water
Lead in drinking water results
primarily from corrosion of lead-
bearing materials in water supply
distribution systems and in house-
hold plumbing. EPA expects this
spring to promulgate a regulation to
reduce the current lead standard for
drinking water (which now allows up
to 50 parts per billion of lead in
drinking water) and to require
corrosion-control treatment to
minimize lead levels at household
taps.
EPA is also investigating the feasibil-
ity of further limiting the manufac-
ture and sale of lead solder used to
join water pipes. Current restrictions
against lead solder in plumbing apply
only to its use in public water supply
systems and facilities connected to
those systems.
In addition, to ensure further reduc-
tion of lead in drinking water, EPA
expects to limit the amount of lead
allowed to leach from brass and
bronze faucets and other plumbing
components.
Battery recycling
A high proportion of all lead con-
sumed is used to produce automotive
batteries. In 1989, between 800,000
and 1 million metric tons of lead were
used in lead-acid batteries, represent-
ing approximately 80 percent of total
U.S. lead consumption. As a result,
increasing the rate of battery recycling
would reduce the amount of lead
discarded in the environment and new
lead mined.
In January 1991, EPA began a
negotiated rulemaking with all
interested parties to consider a rule to
increase the rate of safe battery
recycling and to sustain high recy-
cling rates in the face of fluctuations
in the world market price for lead.
Air quality
Lead levels in ambient air have
dropped dramatically in urban areas .
over the last ten years as a result of the
removal of lead from most gasoline
™ OHFMIHALS IN PROGRESS
-------
and other control measures. Current
data indicate that the National
Ambient Air Quality Standard for
lead is being attained in all places
except near large stationary sources
such as lead smelters, refineries, and
remelters. As part of its lead strategy,
EPA has developed a compliance
program to bring these areas into
attainment. The agency is also
reviewing the adequacy of the existing
standard, which prohibits the level of
lead, as a quarterly average, from
exceeding 1.5 micrograms per cubic
meter of air.
Pollution prevention
To prevent future exposures to lead,
EPA is considering regulations to
limit or ban current uses of lead if
they present an unreasonable risk.
The agency is also considering
screening new uses of lead.
On the voluntary side, lead and lead
compounds are among the 17 chemi-
cals addressed in EPA's recently
announced Industrial Toxics Project.
(See related article on page 17.)
Enforcement
EPA plans to increase the number of
enforcement actions against facilities
in violation of existing lead standards.
A primary focus will be on violation
of Clean Air Act standards at large
industrial facilities.
Single copies of EPA's "Strategy for
Reducing Lead Exposures" are
available from the TSCA Assistance
Information Service (TSCA hotline).
See page 27 for information on how to
contact the hotline.
Lead Activities
EPA Supports Efforts to
Develop Methods to
Abate Lead Paint
An estimated 57 million residences in
the United States still contain lead-
based paint, according to the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD). EPA has been
working with HUD since 1989 to
determine the most effective methods
to safely remove or otherwise contain
this paint, and in the coming months,
the agency will undertake additional
activities as part of the newly an-
nounced national program to reduce
the public's exposure to lead. (See
accompanying article.)
On the agency's research agenda are
two field studies: one evaluates the
long-term effectiveness of abatement
methods used in a HUD demonstra-
tion project; the second evaluates the
long-term efficacy of various low-cost
abatement techniques that will be
used in housing in Baltimore, Mary-
land. Collection of data for both
projects will begin later this year and
is expected to continue through 1993.
EPA is also actively working to
improve the performance of kits used
to test for the presence of lead-based
paint. In related activities, the agency
is developing standard reference
materials for use in evaluating the
presence of lead in water, air, and soil,
and is developing the key components
of a laboratory accreditation program.
The agency will also develop proto-
cols to measure the effectiveness of
lead-based paint encapsulants, collect
additional data on how to dispose of
wastes generated from abatement
I Top 10 Uses of Lead in
the United States in 1989
Metric Tons Uses
1,283,234
TOTAL USED
1,012,155
Storage batteries
62,940
Ammunition: shot and
bullets
57,984
Paint, glass, and ceramics
products, other pigments
and chemicals
22,605
Cable covering
20,987
Sheet lead
17,009
Solder
16,175
Casting metals
9,818
Pipes, traps, other
extruded products
9,610
Brass and bronze: billets
and ingots
42,684
Miscellaneous uses
Source: U.S. Department of the Interior,
Bureau of Mines
projects, and statistically analyze
HUD data on the extent of lead-based
paint in housing and on HUD's
abatement method demonstration
project.
EPA is also developing programs for
training and education related to
lead-based paint. Among these
activities are development of model
curricula for worker-training courses
in lead abatement; establishment of
training centers to disseminate these
courses throughout the country;
initiation of a flagship center to serve
as a national focal point for informa-
tion on lead-based paint; and provi-
sion of grants to major labor groups
for worker-training courses on
abating lead-based paint.
I0.2 APRIL 1991
-------
Testing
New Process Established for Setting Chemical Testing Priorities
Broad Chemical Categories Can
Be Recommended by the Public
EPA's Office of Toxic Substances
(OTS) is developing a process to set
priorities for testing industrial
chemicals. The objective is to ensure
that testing is begun quickly on
chemicals for which data are needed
for risk assessment and risk
management.
The central element of the process is
development of a Master Testing List
(MTL), which will clearly establish
EPA's testing agenda for the next
two years. Testing priorities will be
based on broad input from all those
who have a stake in EPA's existing
chemicals program, including public
interest groups, unions, chemical
companies, private citizens, the
international Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Develop-
ment (OECD), other offices at EPA,
and other federal organizations.
Conceptual Input
It is not necessary for recommenda-
tions for testing to be made on a
chemical-by-chemical basis. OTS
will consider recommendations for
testing of broad categories of
chemicals.
For example, it is possible to suggest
concern about the chemicals that are
being substituted for methylene
chloride in paint strippers, without
having to put forth an exhaustive list
of these chemicals. In fact, one of the
major entries proposed for the draft
1991 MTL, "chemical substitutes for
problematic products," includes the
category of substitutes for methylene
chloride in paint strippers, and OTS
encourages similar proposals of other
categories.
Testing candidates for the draft MTL
As a starting point, OTS is compiling
testing candidates for the draft MTL.
Among the candidates are the 189
toxic air pollutants listed in the
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,
a subset of the 250 Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization
Act (SARA) section 110 "toxicologi-
cal profile" chemicals, more than 400
international high-production-
volume chemicals, and a subset of the
325 Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
chemicals.
OTS envisions the development of
the MTL as a fluid process. As the
toxics community identifies other
chemicals of concern, the list of
testing candidates will be expanded.
Interested members of the toxics
community should consider the range
of potential testing needs and sort
and weigh the candidates before
offering guidance to OTS. OTS will
consider this guidance in deciding
which chemicals are the most
important to test first. The MTL
will be updated regularly.
OTS will consider the following
factors in setting testing priorities:
¦ whether the chemical is subject to
statutory requirements for testing;
¦ whether a practical use for the data
has been specified;
¦ the extent to which the testing
addresses relatively high-risk or high-
exposure situations; and
¦ the guidance provided by the
recent recommendations of the EPA
Science Advisory Board in its report
"Reducing Risk: Setting Priorities
and Strategies for Environmental
Protection."
Ensuring that testing occurs
Several hundred chemicals are
expected to be on the final 1991
MTL. About one-third of these will
be designated for testing to begin
within the next year. Approximately
150 of the chemicals on the final
MTL will be tested through a
voluntary international effort under
the aegis of the OECD. EPA is
encouraging the chemical industry to
develop specific proposals for volun-
tary testing of the remaining chemi-
cals; however, the agency is commit-
ted to using the full authorities of
TSCA, as necessary, to obtain the
needed information on MTL chemi-
cals, including the use of consent
orders and test rules.
OTS also expects that the public
process of prioritizing chemicals for
the MTL may reveal existing data
that will meet or refocus the need for
testing.
Chemicals will be removed from the
MTL after a final rule has been
issued, after a consent order has been
signed, after data from voluntary
testing have been received, or if the
need or priority for testing a given
chemical changes markedly.
How to participate
To obtain more information about
the MTL or to provide comments on
the process, please contact Charles
Auer, Director, Existing Chemical
Assessment Division (TS-778),
Environmental Protection Agency,
12
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
Testing
401 M Street, S.W., Washington,
D.C. 20460; telephone, (202) 382-
3442; FAX, (202) 475-8168.
Description of Major
Entries on Draft 1991
Master Testing List
Described here are some of the major
entries that will appear on the draft
1991 Master Testing List (MTL).
¦ 1990 Master Testing List:
The 1990 MTL will be included in
its entirety in the draft 1991 MTL.
The 1990 list contained 98 chemicals
and four categories from the follow-
ing sources: Interagency Testing
Committee (ITC) nominations;
testing needs identified by EPA
offices (including OTS) and other
agencies; 53 pilot chemicals from the
Organization for Economic Coopera-
tion and Development's (OECD)
voluntary cooperative testing effort
on international high-production-
volume chemicals, known as the
Screening Information Data Set
(SIDS) program; and others.
¦ The Toxics Release Inventory:
The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
is a provision of the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-
Know Act (title III of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization
Act). The draft 1991 MTL will
include TRI chemicals that combine
high production with high TRI
emissions. OTS plans to require
screening-level testing on all such
chemicals that lack screening-level
data. This testing will be a first step
in assessing these chemicals and will
help OTS evaluate petitions for
delisting.
¦ Section 110 of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act:
This section of the statute requires
EPA and the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry
(ATSDR) to list chemicals that are
frequently found at Superfund sites.
To date, 250 chemicals have been
listed under section 110. ATSDR is
determining testing needs for a
subset of these 250 chemicals, and
this subset will be included in the
draft 1991 MTL.
¦ Persistent Bioaccumulators:
Many chemicals that combine
persistence and bioaccumulation have
been found to present significant
environmental problems. Emerging
concerns in the agency, especially in
the Office of Water, focus on sedi-
ments contaminated with chemicals
having the characteristics of persis-
tence and bioaccumulation. OTS
plans to require development of
environmental fate and ecotoxicity
test data on these chemicals to
support a more comprehensive risk
assessment.
¦ ITC's 27th Report:
The draft 1991 MTL will include the
chemicals designated by the ITC in
its 27th Report: six reference dose
chemicals, 4-vinylcyclohexene, and
sodium cyanide.
¦ OECD:
The OECD will identify 94 chemi-
cals that will be added to the 1991
draft MTL in July. Testing will
begin on these chemicals in 1992
under the SIDS program.
¦ indoor Air Total Volatile Organic
Compounds (TVOC) Source
Characterization:
The ongoing effort to develop test
data needed to characterize TVOC
from carpets will be complemented
by efforts to characterize other indoor
air TVOC sources. The testing effort
will be coordinated with the Indoor
Air Division of EPA's Office of Air
and Radiation (OAR).
¦ Air Toxics:
EPA's OAR needs data to determine
the residual risk posed by the 189
chemicals listed under section 112 of
the Clean Air Act Amendments of
1990. The draft 1991 MTL will
include these chemicals.
¦ Emerging Technologies and
Chemical Substitutes for
Problematic Products:
This entry to the MTL focuses on
new technologies and chemicals that
are proposed as safer substitutes for
problematic chemicals. Examples of
cases being considered for the draft
1991 MTL are substitutes for
methylene chloride in paint strippers
and terpene-based substitutes for
chlorinated solvents and chlorofluoro-
carbons (CFCs).
¦ Emergency Preparedness Test Set on
High-Volume Industrial Chemicals:
This entry focuses on development of
a testing program leading to genera-
tion of emergency preparedness data
on selected high-volume chemicals.
10.2 APRIL 1991
-------
Testing
OTS Develops Two Multisubstance Test Rules
Subject Chemicals and Testing Requirements
CHEMICAL
diethyl ether
acetone
1 -butanol
isobutyl alchohol
methyl isobutyl ketone
tetrahydrofuran
2-ethoxyethanol
n-butyl acetate
ethyl acetate
n-amyl acetate
hexadecanoic acid
bromochloromethane
carbon disulfide
CAS NO.
60-29-7
67-64-1
71-36-3
78-83-1
108-10-1
109-99-9
110-80-5
123-86-4
141-78-6
628-63-7
57-10-3
74-97-5
75-15-0
2-methylpropanoic acid 79-31-2
2,4-toluenediamine 95-80-7
terephthalic acid 100-21-0
2-ethylhexanol 104-76-7
acrylonitrile 107-13-1
methyl ester of octanoic acid 111-11-5
o-hydroxyphenol 120-80-9
p-aminophenol 123-30-8
dodecylphenol 271193-86-8
New Approach to Implementation
of TSCA Section 4
As part of its revitalized existing
chemicals program, the Office of
Toxic Substances (OTS) has stream-
lined the process for developing test
rules. Using the new approach, OTS
has developed two multisubstance
test rules under section 4 of the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA). One
rule proposes testing 10 chemicals for
neurotoxicity; the second proposes
testing 12 chemicals for developmen-
tal and/or reproductive toxicity.
EPA has typically conducted an in-
depth analysis of all the testing needs
for a given chemical or related group
of chemicals before it developed
rules. In contrast, for these
multisubstance test rules, the agency
shortened its usual approach by
evaluating only what it believed were
the priority testing needs for the
subject chemicals. This new process
is expected to be used whenever it is
more efficient to combine chemicals
into a single rulemaking.
As a new subpart of the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR), OTS has
developed "multitest requirements
for specific chemical substances."
This subpart, once finalized, will
provide a single location that identi-
fies testing needs for a given chemical
by Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS)
number, chemical name, type of
testing, basic test requirements,
additional testing requirements, and
effective dates. EPA plans to prepare
amendments to this subpart of the
CFR so that all future multisubstance
rules will be listed in a single table,
and all test requirements for a
substance—such as health effects,
environmental, and chemical fete-
will be in a single location. EPA
believes this will be helpful to those
subject to test rules under TSCA as
well as to EPA's monitoring and
compliance efforts.
Neurotoxicity endpoint rule
The neurotoxicity endpoint rule was
designed to collect data on 10 high-
production and high-exposure
solvents. As a group, solvents are
thought to be associated with
neurological effects; however, the
available neurotoxicity and
neurobehavioral testing data for these
substances are typically incomplete
or of low quality.
Each of the 10 solvents included in
this rule is highly volatile, and their
widespread use in the workplace and
by consumers assures significant
human exposure. Nine of the
solvents have been detected in at
TEST(S)
Neurotoxicity
Neurotoxicity
Neurotoxicity
Neurotoxicity
Neurotoxicity
Neurotoxicity
Neurotoxicity
Neurotoxicity
Neurotoxicity
Neurotoxicity
Developmental Toxicity
Reproductive T oxicity
Developmental and
Reproductive Toxicity
Developmental Toxicity
Developmental and
Reproductive Toxicity
Reproductive Toxicity
Developmental Toxicity
Developmental Toxicity
Developmental Toxicity
Developmental Toxicity
Developmental Toxicity
Developmental Toxicity
least one of the following: ground,
surface, and drinking water; air; or
effluents. Four have been reported to
be released to the environment in
substantial quantities. The rule
proposes a battery of neurotoxicity
tests, including acute and subchronic
functional observation battery, acute
and subchronic motor activity,
subchronic neuropathology, and
subchronic schedule-controlled
operant behavior. The estimated total
cost for testing each substance is
$494,188 to $875,000.
The proposed rule was published in
the Federal Register on March 4, 1991
(56 FR 9092).
Developmental and reproductive
toxicity endpoint rule
The developmental and reproductive
toxicity endpoint rule was designed to
collect data on 12 chemicals that may'
present an unreasonable risk of injury
ICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
Testing
ITC Solicits Voluntary Submission of Use Exposure Data
^to human health. Available data
suggest that 10 of the chemicals may
cause developmental damage and
that four may affect reproduction.
Most of the chemicals selected for
this rule have diverse uses and
exposures. For example, more than
61,500 workers may be exposed to
acrylonitrile during manufacturing,
processing, use, and disposal, while
800,000 to 2.2 million
photohobbyists who develop their
own film may be exposed to p-
aminophenol.
One of the chemicals included in this
rule, terephthalic acid, was recently
deleted from the list of substances for
which reporting is required under
section 313 of the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-
Know Act (EPCRA) (see 55 FR
50687, December 10, 1990). If the
proposed testing of this substance
provides EPA with evidence that
terephthalic acid meets EPCRA
section 313 listing criteria, EPA
plans to immediately initiate
rulemaking to again add this sub-
stance to the list.
The estimated total cost of testing
each substance ranges from $48,000
to $67,000 (for acrylonitrile,
dodecylphenol, and 2-ethyhexanol),
to $573,000 to $875,000 (for carbon
disulfide).
The proposed rule was published in
the Federal Register on March 4, 1991
(56 FR 9105).
In its 26th and 27th Reports, the Interagency Testing Committee (ITC)
announced that after recommending chemicals for screening tests, it would
review data on the chemicals submitted under the section 8(a) Preliminary
Assessment Information Rule (PAIR) of the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA). All ITC-recommended chemicals are automatically subject to PAIR
reporting requirements.
The PAIR requires that manufacturers and importers submit production
volume and worker exposure information related to chemical manufacturing
(40 CFR 712). The PAIR, however, does not require submission of data on
uses of the chemicals and potential exposures from these uses (i.e., use exposure
data). As a result, the ITC is soliciting voluntary submission of use exposure
data from the chemical industry. The committee hopes a voluntary approach
will prove more efficient than pursuing notice-and-comment rulemaking under
a TSCA section 8(a) Comprehensive Assessment Information Rule. Chemical-
specific information on uses and potential exposures that may result from these
uses, combined with the PAIR data, will allow the ITC to withdraw chemicals
from the TSCA Section 4(e) Priority List that should not be considered for
further testing.
The ITC is particularly interested in obtaining use exposure data for individual
chemicals in the following chemical groups it has recommended for screening.
Questions or submissions should be directed to Norma Williams, Executive
Assistant, Interagency Testing Committee (TS-792), 401 M Street, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20460; telephone, (202)382-3825.
1 Recommended Chemical Group
ITC Report
Imidazolium quaternary ammonium compounds
22nd
Ethoxylated quaternary ammonium compounds
22nd
Chloroalkyl phosphates
23rd
Brominated flame retardants
25th
Isocyanates
26th
Brominated flame retardants
26th
Alkyl phosphates
26 th
Aldehydes
27th
Sulfones
27th
Substantially produced chemicals in need of subchronic tests
27th
10.2 APRIL 1991
-------
Proposed SNURs
Alkali Metal Nitrates Used in Metalworking Fluids
EPA has proposed a significant new use rule (SNUR) under section 5(aX2) of
the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for alkali metal nitrites that are used
in metalworking fluids. The alkali metals are lithium, sodium, potassium,
rubidium, cesium, and francium.
The agency is concerned that nitrosamines may be formed when alkali metal
nitrites are used in amine-containing metalworking fluids. EPA has classified
the primary nitrosame produced, N-nitrosodiethanolamine (NDELA), as a
probable human carcinogen.
The agency is unaware of any current commercial use of alkali metal nitrites in
metalworking fluids. Prior to 1987, alkali metal nitrites were used to lubricate
the working surfaces in grinding, cutting, and shaping operations and to
control the temperature of metals. The SNUR would require that EPA be
notified at least 90 days prior to the manufacture, import, or processing of the
substance. This would allow EPA to evaluate worker exposure to these chemi-
cals and their nitrosamine products before any new use is undertaken.
The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on January 24, 1991 (56
FR 2733).
Erionite Fiber
EPA has proposed a significant new
use rule (SNUR) under the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA) for
erionite fiber (CAS No. 12510-42-8
when an exact molecular formula is
not known or 66733-21-9 when an
exact molecular formula is known).
The agency believes that erionite
fiber may be hazardous to human
health and that use of it in any way
may result in significant human
exposure.
Erionite is a durable fiber that may
cause cancer and lung fibrosis in
humans when inhaled. Epidemio-
logical data show that populations
exposed to fibrous erionite have a
high risk of mesothelioma and an
excess of nonmalignant pleural
disease.
Erionite fiber is not currently in use
in the United States. In the past, it
was used in building materials for
houses, to increase soil fertility, to
control odors in livestock production,
and as a noble-metal-impregnated
catalyst in a hydrocarbon cracking
process in a U.S. plant.
The proposed rule would require
anyone who intends to manufacture,
import, or process erionite fiber to
notify EPA at least 90 days prior to
the intended activity. The advance
notification would allow EPA to
prevent potentially adverse exposure
to the chemical.
Since people may be exposed to
products that contain erionite fiber,
EPA is also proposing to require
people who intend to import or
process erionite fiber as part of an
article to follow the 90-day notifica-
tion requirements.
The proposed rule was published in
the Federal Register on January 25,
1991 (56 FR 2889).
.LS IN PROGRESS
-------
The management and staff
of the Industrial Toxics
Project are enthusiastic
about the tremendous level
of interest and support
shown by industry,
community organizations,
and states, as well as by
EPA headquarters and
regional offices.
Thank you all for your
broad and substantial
encouragement We look
forward to at least
four years of successful
reductions.
I Industrial Toxics Project
Industry Joins Effort to Voluntarily Reduce
High-Risk Releases
In response to a letter from EPA Administrator William K. Reilly about the
Industrial Toxics Project, dozens of major firms have sent reports to EPA on
their progress to date and have pledged to make further reductions to help meet
the national goal of cutting toxic releases and transfers in half by 1995.
The response was particularly encouraging because the administrator did not
ask the companies to respond in any way, but told them to "stay tuned" for
more information about the project. The project is working toward reducing
environmental releases of 17 high-risk chemicals by 33 percent by the end of
1992 and by at least 50 percent by the end of 1995.
To achieve the reductions through voluntary efforts, project staff are coordinat-
ing meetings between high-level managers in industry and EPA. Mr. Reilly
has met with managers from the chemical, petroleum, and paper industries,
and Deputy Administrator Hank Habicht and Assistant Administrator Linda
Fisher recently chaired a meeting with managers from the automobile and
transportation industry. Meetings are also being held with the rubber, pharma-
ceutical, printing and coating, wood and metal, machinery and electrical, and
iron and steel industries.
How to participate
EPA began distributing guidance materials in March for companies that want
to participate in the project. Companies can join the voluntary effort by
sending EPA a letter in which they state their numerical targets for overall
reductions by 1995. EPA is also asking companies to consider providing
additional information that the agency and the public can use to evaluate the
success of reduction efforts.
There are no deadlines for participation in the reduction effort. However,
companies considering participating should be aware of the following dates.
All reduction letters received by May 15, 1991, will be included in EPA's first
progress report to the public on the industrial community's response to the
Industrial Toxics Project. Companies that have provided an initial reduction
letter and want to follow up with more detailed information are asked to do so
by July 30,1991. Participating companies should submit any necessary
revisions to their initial letter (made necessary, for example, in response to new
Clean Air Act regulations) by November 30, 1991.
40.2 APRIL 1991
-------
I Enforcement Actions
Detroit Not Liable for Two PCB Spills, Judge Rules
The city of Detroit is not responsible
for spills of polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs) at two sites it acquired in
1984, an EPA judicial officer has
ruled.
"It may be good public policy to
extend the PCB disposal require-
ments to owners who do not inspect
property before acquiring it, but such
a policy is simply not expressed in
the language of the PCB regulations,
in the preamble to the regulations, or
in the statute implemented by the
regulations," EPA Chief Judicial
Officer Ronald McCallum said in his
ruling.
The city of Detroit was fined
$264,000—the largest civil penalty
ever imposed in the history of the
Toxic Substances Control Act—for
charges that it had improperly
disposed of PCBs at a number of
industrial facilities obtained from
Chrysler Corporation. The city
appealed two $5,000 counts, claim-
ing that EPA had not proved that the
spills took place during the time that
Detroit owned the sites.
In reversing the two counts, Judge
McCallum established a rebuttable
presumption for PCB spills, saying
that EPA must provide evidence of
the cause of the spill or the source of
contamination. In the case of
Detroit, the judge said EPA had
failed to carry its burden of persua-
sion, while the city had successfully
argued that the discharges occurred
during Chrysler's ownership of the
property and while Chrysler owned
and controlled any PCB sources on
the property. Detroit has paid
$254,000, the balance of the fine.
The rebuttable presumption estab-
lishes the following:
¦ If PCBs are found in the soil or on
a surface of a piece of property so as
to raise the inference that an uncon-
trolled discharge has taken place,
then it must be presumed that the
present owner caused the uncon-
trolled discharge.
¦ The present owner can rebut this
presumption by showing that it is
more likely or equally likely that
another person or persons caused the
uncontrolled discharge.
¦ In the event the present owner
makes such a showing, EPA will lose
the case unless the agency can
provide other evidence that the
present owner caused or contributed
to the cause of the discharge.
Judge Upholds Fines Levied by EPA for Customs Violation
A New Jersey corporation fined by
EPA for improperly importing
chemicals has lost its bid to have the
penalties dismissed. "TSCA (the
Toxic Substances Control Act)
provides strict liability for violations
of section 13," Administrative Law
Judge J.F. Greene has ruled. In
doing so, the judge rejected argu-
ments by the ALM Corporation that
the U.S. Customs Service, which has
the authority to detain chemical
shipments carrying no TSCA certifi-
cation, was responsible for allowing
the chemical substance to enter the
country.
In a preliminary ruling issued in
1989, this case established an
important precedent in upholding
EPA's enforcement of Customs
regulations. In that ruling, ALM was
found guilty of falsely certifying that
seven shipments of chemical sub-
stances it imported were in compli-
ance with U.S. Customs regulations
and of falsely certifying that two
other shipments were not subject to
the regulations.
The Customs regulations, promul-
gated pursuant to section 13 of
TSCA, require that any person who is
importing a chemical substance
certify that it is being imported in
compliance with TSCA regulations or
that it is not subject to TSCA or any
of its regulations.
At the hearing on penalties, the
president of ALM Corporation
testified he had never seen the notice
of noncompliance sent for an earlier
violation and had "little to gain"
from the violation. He also said that
someone at EPA had told him the
substances "were not subject to TSCA
if they were nontoxic." Judge Greene
reduced the fine to $2,500 for each of
the seven false import counts and
imposed fines of $1,000 for the two
counts of certifying that the sub-
stances were not subject to TSCA-
"Inaccurate advice received from
someone at U.S. EPA, possibly an
outside contractor, does not excuse
violations of TSCA," the judge said.
"In the interest of justice," however,
she said, the fines would be reduced.
18
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
I Enforcement Actions
Ruling Allows EPA to Sue Contractors for AHERA Violations
'Inspectors, management planners, or
any other persons holding responsi-
bilities under the Asbestos Hazard
Emergency Response Act (AHERA)
may be held liable for violations of
EPA's asbestos management rules, an
administrative law judge has ruled in
a Montana case. More than 50 other
cases involving third parties are
pending.
EPA sought a $50,000 penalty from
William Garvin, an accredited
asbestos contractor, after an employee
of Garvin failed to inspect 6,000 feet
of debris under a school building.
The debris was later found to contain
asbestos and had to be removed. The
employee also failed to prepare an
adequate AHERA management plan.
Garvin filed a motion to dismiss the
penalty, saying that he was improp-
erly named as a respondent in the
case. He asserted that the Montana
School Boards Association was the
contractor for the school district and
that he acted only as a "sort of
foreman" for the association. In
response, EPA amended its complaint
to include the association as another
liable party that hired Garvin
Engineering as an asbestos manage-
ment contractor.
AHERA, which is title II of the
Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA), specifically states that only
local educational agencies (LEAs) can
be sued for violations of the regula-
tions. In his order, Administrative
Law Judge Spencer Nissen noted,
"Although the penalty provision of
AHERA refers only to LEAs, the
TSCA civil penalty provision provides
in pertinent part that any person who
violates a provision of section 2614 of
this title shall be liable to the United
States for a civil penalty in an amount
not to exceed $25,000 for each
violation." Garvin meets the defini-
tion of a "person" as defined in title I
of TSCA, the judge said in denying
Garvin's motion to dismiss.
EPA is working to resolve remaining
questions about the relationship
between the school boards association,
Garvin, and the employee. The case
will move to settlement or to trial.
Other Enforcement Actions
¦ A Federal District Court judge in
the Southern District of Ohio
sentenced John Pizzuto to place $1
million in escrow for use in cleaning
up a New Boston, Ohio, site where
his firm dumped PCBs. If Pizzuto,
who was given five years of proba-
tion, fails to clean up the contami-
nated soil to the satisfaction of the
U.S. EPA and the Ohio EPA, his
probation will be revoked and he will
face an 18-month jail term.
¦ Two Midwest manufacturers are
installing pollution controls in
exchange for reduced penalties under
section 313 of the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-
Know Act (EPCRA). EPA reduced a
penalty from $25,000 to $5,000 in
the case of an Ohio firm, Lesco Inc.,
which is installing about $85,000 of
equipment to incorporate pesticides
into the firm's fertilizer product in
lieu of a manually operated system.
The agency also reduced a proposed
penalty of $51,000 to $16,363 for
Aquarius Plastic Finishers after the
Indiana company spent $45,674 to
convert from solvent-based to water-
based coatings, which will benefit the
environment.
¦ EPA reduced a proposed fine from
$60,000 to $21,200 after the
Cavedon Chemical Co. "thoroughly
demonstrated" that paying it would
put the four-employee company out
of business. The Rhode Island-based
firm was charged with making and
selling four chemicals without first
notifying EPA through the new
chemicals review program, as re-
quired by TSCA. EPA had proposed
a $120,000 penalty, which it first
reduced to $60,000 based on the
company's ability to pay and because
the company promptly and voluntarily
reported the violations. Cavedon will
pay the $21,200 fine over three years.
¦ American Cyanamid and EPA have
settled the first case the agency
brought for a violation of a TSCA
section 5
-------
Toxics Release Inventory
How to Obtain TRI Data
¦ Through a computer network. Online access to national and state TRI data is
available from the National Library of Medicine's TOXNET. To obtain an
account, call (301) 496-6531, or write TRI Representative, Specialized Infor-
mation Services, National Library of Medicine, 8600 Rockville Pike, Bethesda,
MD 20894. Account holders also have access to other National Library of
Medicine databases on toxicology, health, and chemical substances.
¦ At the library. Access to state TRI data is available at most federal depository
and county public libraries. The names and addresses of the public libraries
that have TRI on fiche are listed in the Directory of Public Libraries; depository
libraries holding the fiche or CD-ROM in their collections are listed in Federal
Depository Libraries: Your Source for the Toxic Release Inventory. This information
is also available from the TRI Hotline.
¦ By purchasing one of these formats: CD-ROM, COMfiche, diskette, magnetic tape,
Or written report. The CD-ROM (compact disk - read only memory) contains
the complete public database for all reporting years, as well as fact sheets that
describe the health and ecological effects of the regulated chemicals.
The complete national or individual state TRI is available on COMfiche for
each reporting year. The TRI is indexed in a variety of ways, and a practical
user guide on how to search the fiche is included.
Information about specific states or EPA regions is available on diskette.
Complete state-by-state information is available on 5 1/4-inch diskette for use
with an IBM PC-compatible microcomputer in dBASE IV or Lotus 1-2-3
format. Mailing labels and the names and addresses of reporting facilities in
each EPA region are available on diskette in dBASE IV.
1989 TRI Results To Be Released Soon
The 1989 Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) will be released soon. The
inventory includes information about releases of toxic chemicals to the
nation's air, water, and land. It provides a detailed picture of the sources and
types of toxic chemical releases that took place during 1989 throughout the
country.
The data are publicly available. To learn how to obtain the data, see the
above article.
Where to purchase
TRI data
State and EPA regional diskettes,
CD-ROM, COMfiche, magnetic tape, and
written report can be purchased from:
National Technical
Information Service
U.S. Department of Commerce
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
Phone: (703) 487-4650
CD-ROM, COMfiche, magnetic tape, and
written report can be purchased from:
U.S. Government Printing Office
710 North Capitol Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20401
Phone: (202) 783-3238 (COMfiche
and report form); (202)275-0186
(CD-ROM and magnetic tape)
TRI Hotline
For a list of the libraries that provide
TRI access to their communities or to
obtain the brochure, "Public Access
to the Toxic Release Inventory," call
EPA's Community Right-to-Know
Hotline at (800) 535-0202. In
Washington, D.C., and Alaska, call
(202) 479-2449.
IS IN PROGRESS
-------
I
New Chemicals
Tips for Filling Out Form
When errors occur on premanufacture notice (PMN) forms, the form may be
declared incomplete, which delays commencement of the review period. To
avoid the errors that are most frequently made on PMN submissions, PMN
submitters should review the following list.
¦ Be certain the chemical identity is sufficiently reported. Particular problems
are that the chemical identity is ambiguous; information on the molecular
weight and residuals of polymers is missing or incomplete; and trade names
are used instead of specific chemical identities.
¦ Make sure to complete the required certification statements.
¦ Do not forget to provide user fee identification numbers.
¦ Submit all copies of the PMN form that must be sanitized of confidential
business information with all notices.
¦ Verify that an authorized company official has signed the form.
¦ Include a generic chemical identity and a generic use statement for those
notices in which these categories of information have been claimed as
confidential.
¦ Submit all test data on the PMN substance that are in the company's posses-
sion or control. These data must be submitted in English. Summary reports
are insufficent.
Revisions made
Use of the revised PMN form and of the new Instructions Manual are expected
to reduce the number of errors made on submissions. Revisions to the form
include (1) addition of a separate page to provide a menu of certification state-
ments required for section 5 notices; (2) inclusion of space for entering user fee
identification numbers; and (3) requests for more specific responses throughout
the form and provision of ample space to enter the requested information.
As of June 1, Updated
Form Required for PMN
Submissions
The revised premanufacture notice
(PMN) form must be used for any
submissions EPA receives on or after
June 1, 1991. However, submitters
do not have to wait until June to use
the form. It is available now and can
be substituted for the old form
immediately.
EPA is mailing the updated PMN
Form for New Chemical Substances
(EPA Form #7710-25) and the
Instructions Manual for
Premanufacture Notification of New
Chemical Substances to potential
submitters, trade groups, environ-
mental groups, EPA regional offices,
and labor unions. Single copies of
the PMN form and manual are
available through the TSCA Assis-
tance Information Service (TSCA
hotline). Submitters can photocopy
the form if additional copies are
needed. See page 27 for information
about how to contact the hotline.
Audit Proaram Modified
Availability of 8(e) Notices and FYI Submissions
¦ See pages 22 through 25 for the lists of TSCA section 8(e) and FYI submissions.
Section 8(e) notices and FYI submissions are located in the OTS Public Reading
Room, NE-G004, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460. Single
copies of section 8(e) submission summaries are available from the TSCA
Assistance Information Service (TSCA hotline). For information about contact-
ing the TSCA hotline, see page 27.
To obtain a copy of a full section 8(e) or FYI submission, write to EPA, Free-
dom of Information (A-101), Washington, D.C., 20460. Duplication of the
first 166 pages of any document is free. At the 167th page, there is a $25 fee
|^nd an additional $0.15 charge for each page. For example, duplication of a
167-page document will cost $25.15.
EPA has announced the modification
of its one-time, voluntary Compli-
ance Audit Program (CAP). The
program is designed to obtain
outstanding section 8 (e) data and to
encourage companies to audit their
files for information reportable under
section 8 (e).
Copies of the Federal Register notice
of the modifications are available
from the TSCA hotline. See page 27
for information about the hotline.
N0.2 APRIL 1991
-------
TSCA Section 8(e) Notices
Under section 8(e) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), anyone who
obtains information that indicates a chemical might pose a substantial risk to
human health or the environment must report that information to EPA within
15 working days of obtaining it.
The Office of Toxic Substances (OTS), which responds to TSCA section 8(e)
submissions, has recently changed its format for doing so. As of October 1,
1990, OTS began issuing "submission summaries," rather than "status reports, "
following section 8(e) notices. Submission summaries contain a detailed
accounting of the toxicological and other data in the 8(e) submission, but no
information regarding EPA's evaluation or disposition of the case.
Below is a list of TSCA section 8(e) notices received between October 1, 1990,
and December 31, 1990. In the list, "S" indicates that a sanitized, or
nonconfidential, version of the document is available, and "P" indicates that a
portion of the submission is protected under the Privacy Act.
Log No. 8EHQ-
Chemical Name
CAS No.
Type of Information
1090-1085 S
1090-1086
1090-1087
1090-1088
1090-1089 S
1090-1090
1090-1091 S
1090-1092
1080-1093 S
1090-1094 S
Calcium Chloride, (CaCI2) 10043-52-4
2-Propen-1-Aminium, N,N-Dimethyl-N- 26062-79-3
2-Propenyl-, Chloride, Homopolymer
Acetamide, N-Methyl- 79-16-3
Mineral Oil 8042-47-5
Aidoxkne, P-Hydroxyphenolglyoxal 22288-50-2
Beraenesulfonic Acid, Substituted-, Confident
Alkali Metal Salt
Sulfur-Containing Compounds None
Propane, 1,2-Dimethoxy- 7778-85-0
Trifluoromethanesulfonic Acid,- 6226-25-1
2,2,2-Trifluoroethyl Ester
Petroleum Hydrocarbons Unknown
Pesticides None
Metals None
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) 1336-36-3
Acrylate Confident
Alkylphenol Confident
Aniline, Substituted Confident
Cycolor Copying Process None
Formaldehyde 50-00-0
Ecotoxicity/Aquatic Toxicity
Env. Occurrence/Release/Fate
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Subchronic Toxicity (Animal)
Allergenicity (Animal)
Allergenicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Chronic Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Human)
Epidemiology/Clinical
Env. Occurrence/Release/Fate
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato.(Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Env. Occurrence/Release/Fate
Acute Toxicity (Human)
Epidemiology/Clinical
LS IN PROGRESS
-------
Log No. 8EHQ-
Chemical Name
TSCA Section 8(e) Notices
CAS No.
Type of Information
*1090-1095
Phenol, 5-Amino-2-Chloro-
6358-06-1
1090-1096 S
Pyrimidine, Substituted
Confident
1090-1097 S
Benzoheterocycle
Confident
1090-1098 S
Benzoheterocycle
Hydrazine, Substituted
Pyrimidine, Substituted
Confident
Confident
Confident
1090-1099 S
Sulfonate, Neutral Calcium
Confident
1090-1100 S
Siloxanes and Silicones, DI-ME
(Decomposition Products)
None
1090-1101 S
Sulfonamide, Alkyl
Confident
1090-1102 S
Hydroxylated Heterocycle
Confident
1090-1103 S
Phenyl Azole, Substituted
Confident
1090-1104 S
S-Triazine, Substituted
Confident
1090-1105 S
Halogenated Substituted Heterocycle
Confident
1090-1106
Benzene
71-43-2
1090-1107 S
Sulfonate, Neutral Calcium Petroleum
61789-86-
1090-1108 S
Quinoline, 2-(Tribromomethyl)-
613-53-6
1190-1109
Thianthrene, 2,3,7,8-Tetrachloro-
Thianthrene, 2,7-Dimethyl-3,8-Dichloro-
Aluminum Chloride, (AICI3)
Unknown
Unknown
7446-70-0
1190-1110
Benzenamine, 5,5'-Oxybis-
(3-Trifluoromethyl)-
Unknown
1190-1111 S
Amino Acid Ester, Aryl Substituted
Confident
1190-1112 S
Propanoic Acid Ester, Aryloxy Halo
Confident
1190-1113
Diamine, 3,5-Benzotrifluoro-
368-53-6
1190-1114
Benzamide, N-(((3,3-Dichloro-4-
(1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoroethoxy)Phenyl)-
Amino)Carbonyl-2,6-Difluoro-
Unknown
1190-1115 S
Amide, Substituted Halo
Confident
1190-1116
1,3-Benzenediamine, 4-Methyl-
Benzene, 2,4-Diisocyanato-1-Methyl-
95-80-7
584-84-9
1190-1117 S
1 H-Pyrazole, 3-Methyl-
1453-58-3
1190-1118 S
Fluorinated Aromatic Diamine Ether
Confident
190-1119
2-Propenoic Acid, 2-(Dimethylamino)-
Ethyl Ester
2439-35-2
VOL.12/NO.2 APRIL 1991
Mutagenicity (In Vitro)
Clastogenicity (In Vitro)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Subchronic Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Allergenicity (Human)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Groundwater Contamination
Mutagenicity (In Vitro)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Human Exposure (Product Contamination)
Mutagenicity (In Vitro)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Mutagenicity (In Vitro)
Clastogenicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Ecotoxicity/Aquatic Toxicity
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Metabolism/Pharmacokinetics (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Mutagenicity (In Vitro)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
-------
1120 S
1121
1122 S
1123
1124 S
1125
1126 S
1127 S
128 S
1129 S
130 S
131 S
132
133
134
135 S
136
137
138
139
140 S
141 S
142 S
143
144
Chemical Name
TSCA Section 8(e) Notices
CAS No.
Type of Information
Nitrodiol Confident
2-Pentenenitrile 13284-42-9
Indenoheterocycle Confident
Ethane, 1,1,1-Trifluoro- 420-46-2
Alkylamine Derivative Confident
2-Pyrrolidone, N-(N-Octyl)- 2687-94-7
Diphenyl Ether, Substituted Confident
Sulfonamide, Substituted Aromatic Confident
Pyridine, Halogenated Confident
Halogenated Benzoyl Phenylurea Confident
Polyol/Amine Blend I None
Polyol/Amine Blend II None
Polyol/Amine Blend III None
Alkylaryl Sulfonates, Sodium Salt Confident
Methane, Bromodifluoro- 1511-62-2
Morpholine, Modified Unknown
Dibenzofurans, Chlorinated None
Dioxins, Chlorinated None
Carboxamide, Haloheterocyclic Confident
C.I. Solvent Yellow 56 2481-94-9
Styrene, T-BOC- 87188-51-0
Diphenyl Ether, Substituted Confident
1,3-Dioxolan-2-one 96-49-1
Pyridine, Substituted Confident
Pyrimidine, Substituted Confident
Benzenemethanol, 4-(Acetyloxy)- 53744-50-6
Alpha-Methyl-
Misc. Chemicals None
Methylene Chloride 75-09-2
3-(2H)-Furanone15-(Methylamino)- 96525-23-4
2-Phenyl-4-(3-Trifluoromethylphenyl)-
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Subacute Toxicity (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Subchronic Toxicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Oncogenicity (Animal)
Chronic Toxicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Ecotoxicity/Aquatic Toxicity
Env. Occurrence/Release/Fate
Allergenicity (Animal)
Allergenicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Env. Occurrence/Release/Fate
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
DNA Damage/Repair
Allergenicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Chronic Toxicity (Animal)
Subchronic Toxicity (Animal)
Reproductive Toxicity/Terato. (Animal)
Metabolism/Pharmacokinetics (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
Allergenicity (Animal)
Env. Occurrence/Release/Fate
Oncogenicity (Animal)
Chronic Toxicity (Animal)
24
CHEMICALS IN PROGRESS
-------
FYI Submissions
For Your Information (FYI) submissions are voluntary submissions that cover a
wide variety of information and may include data on chemical toxicity and
exposure, epidemiology, monitoring, and environmental fate. FYIs are submit-
ted by chemical manufacturers, processors, federal, state, or local agencies,
foreign governments, academic institutions, public interest and environmental
groups, and the general public.
The FYI classification system was established by the Office of Toxic Substances
to distinguish such submissions from notices submitted formally to EPA under
section 8(e) of the Toxic Substances Control Act.
Listed below are the FYI submissions received between October 1, 1990, and
February 28, 1991. In the list, "S" indicates that a sanitized, or
nonconfidential, version of the document is available, and "P" indicates that a
portion of the submission is protected under the Privacy Act.
FYI No.
Chemical Name
CAS No.
Type of Information
1000-0792
Benzene, 1 -Fluoro-4-Methyl-
Benzene, Fluoro-
352-32-9
462-06-6
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
1090-0793 S
Confidential Mixture
None
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
1090-0794
Petroleum Industry Chemicals
None
Oncogenicity (Human)
Epidemiology/Clinical
1190-0795
Miscellaneous Chemicals
None
Env. Occurrence/Release/Fate
1190-0796
Oioxazines
Dioxins
None
None
Env. Occurrence/Release/Fate
Product Contamination
1190-0797 S
Triaryl Phosphate Esters
Unknown
Neurotoxicity (Animal)
Acute Toxicity (Animal)
0191-0798 S
Pyrimidine-Type Herbicide
Unknown
Column Leaching Study
0191-0799
Ammonium Persulfates
None
Epidemiology/Clinical
Human Exposure
0191-0800
Produced Water
None
Oncogenicity (Human)
Oncogenicity (Animal)
Env. Occurrence/Release/Fate
0191-0801
Polyurethane Foam
None
Oncogenicity (Human)
Human Exposure (Accidental)
Epidemiology/Clinical
25
VOL.12/N0.2 APRIL 1991
-------
General Information
Carpet Industry Agrees to Test Products for Emissions
Using a standardized testing proce-
dure agreed to through EPA's carpet
dialogue project, the carpet industry
will voluntarily test a representative
sample of carpet products to deter-
mine the total emissions of volatile
organic compounds from those
products. Members of the Carpet and
Rug Institute will begin the testing
program this summer.
The carpet dialogue project stems
from a petition filed in January 1990
under section 21 of the Toxic Sub-
stances Control Act (TSCA) by Local
2050 of the National Federation of
Federal Employees (NFFE). Local
2050 represents about 1,100 profes-
sional employees at EPA headquar-
ters. The petitioner sought
rulemaking under sections 4, 6, and 8
of TSCA to reduce chemical emissions
from new carpets. EPA denied the
petition on the ground that there
were insufficient data to support the
conclusions and remedies requested
by NFFE. The agency recognized,
however, that new carpet may be a
significant source of volatile organic
compounds and judged it prudent to
reduce exposures to these chemicals
where reasonable. Therefore, the
agency requested that carpet manu-
facturers conduct periodic voluntary
testing of their products to determine
total emissions of volatile organic
compounds.
At the same time, the agency an-
nounced it would initiate and
participate as a member in a public
dialogue with representatives from
industry, public interest groups,
labor, and other federal agencies.
The public dialogue has two purposajip
(1) to develop specific goals and
procedures for an industrywide testing
program and (2) to identify and
evaluate ways to reduce emissions
through manufacturing and installa-
tion modifications. The carpet
dialogue began in August 1990 and is
expected to run for about one year.
Through the dialogue process, work
continues on developing voluntary
testing agreements to determine total
emissions of volatile organic com-
pounds from carpet adhesives and
carpet cushion and to develop recom-
mendations for possible process
changes that could reduce exposure to
volatile organic compound emissions
from carpet and carpet-related
materials.
EPA Denies Greenpeace Petition on Dioxin
In April 1991, EPA denied
Greenpeace USA's petition asking
the agency to take four specific
actions related to dioxin. The agency
concluded that only one of the
requests—to eliminate dioxin emis-
sions by the year 2000—was
petitionable under the authorities
cited. EPA turned down this request
for several reasons: (1) the agency
already has under way an active
program to control dioxin sources, as
specified in a 1988 consent decree
between EPA and the Environmental
Defense Fund and National Wildlife
Federation; (2) the information
Greenpeace provided to the agency
provided no new data on dioxin
exposure that would support a
significant expansion of the current
program; and (3) since EPA is in the
midst of a major reassessment of
dioxin toxicity, it would be prema-
ture to undertake a major expansion
of the program without the results of
that evaluation.
The Greenpeace petition, which was
filed on November 30, 1990, under
section 21 of the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) and the Admin-
istrative Procedure Act (APA), also
asked EPA to (1) investigate whether
allegedly fraudulent studies were
submitted to EPA in support of
agency permits, licenses, or registra-
tions and, if so, to refer the matter to
the Department of Justice; (2)
promulgate a rule prohibiting EPA
and states from considering certain
industry studies; and (3) promulgate
a rule requiring EPA to consider
information submitted by
Greenpeace in any reassessment of
EPA's current cancer potency factor
for dioxin. EPA concluded that these
matters were not petitionable under
section 21 of TSCA because none
pertained to the issuance, amend-
ment, or repeal of a rule or order
under TSCA section 4, 6, 8, or 5(e).
The agency also concluded that the
APA authority cited was not appli-
cable to the petitioner's requests.
LS IN PROGRESS
-------
For More Information
TSCA Hotline: Call (202) 554-1404
The TSCA Assistance Information Service (TSCA hotline) operates Monday
through Friday, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Eastern time. Call (202) 554-1404.
FAX requests for documents are received every day, at all times, on (202)
554-5603.
To request assistance by mail, write to Environmental Assistance Division
(TS-799), Office of Toxic Substances, U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20460.
New Publications Available from OTS
¦ Comparisons of Airborne Asbestos Levels Determined by TEM Using Direct
and Indirect Transfer Techniques
¦ Asbestos-Containing Thermal System Insulation: Facts and Figures
¦ U.S. EPA Strategy for Reducing Lead Exposures
You may request single copies of these publications by contacting the TSCA
hotline or by filling out and mailing the form below.
I Would You Like to Receive the Chemicals-in-Progress Bulletin?
The Chemicals-in-Progress Bulletin is
published by EPA's Office of Toxic
Substances. To receive the bulletin,
please send your name, company/
organization name, and address with
zip code to
Environmental Assistance Division
(TS-799)
Office of Toxic Substances
U.S. EPA
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Do you want to be taken off our
mailing list?
If you would like your name to be
taken off our mailing list, please fill
out the form or tape onto it the
mailing label from your issue of
Chemicals-in-Progress Bulletin. Then
mail it to the address shown above.
J0.2 APRIL 1991
Name
Company / Organization Name
Street Address
City, State, Zip Code
Please check one or more of the boxes.
~ I'd like to receive the Chemlcals-ln-Progress Bulletin.
GI no longer want to receive your publication.
O I'd like a copy of the following OTS publication^):
-------
Valley Watch Section 21 Petition Denied
In January 1991, Indiana-based Valley
Watch, Inc., petitioned EPA under
section 21 of the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) to prohibit the
manufacture, processing, distribution
in commerce, use, and disposal of
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene (TCB) as a
retrofill transformer fluid. TCB is a
constituent in an interim transformer
fluid mixture, called TF-1, and
therefore resides for a limited time in
transformers.
Valley Watch based its request for
action on a previous determination by
EPA that (1) TCB may present an
unreasonable risk of cancer to humans
and (2) there is sufficient human
exposure to TCB to make a "may
present unreasonable risk" finding
under section 4(a)(1)(A) of TSCA.
In its petition, Valley Watch main-
tained that use of TCB as a retrofill
transformer fluid increases human
exposure to TCB. The organization
also said TCB presents an unreason-
able risk to the environment and
humans because of the likelihood that
combustion of the TCB during a
transformer fire would create dioxins
and furans.
Section 21 of TSCA authorizes any
person to petition the agency to issue,
revise, or repeal rules issued under
section 4, 6, or 8 or an order under
section 5(e) or 6(b)(2). The Valley
Watch petition asked that EPA issue
an order controlling the use of TCB
under section 5(e) of TSCA, the
section that governs regulation of new
chemicals of concern.
EPA denied the petition because the
petitioner did not request relief that
can be properly granted under TSCA
section 5(e) and because there is
insufficient information to make an
unreasonable risk determination under
TSCA section 6.
EPA has jurisdiction to issue section^
5(e) orders only for a chemical sub-
stance subject to section 5(a) notifica-
tion requirements. These require-
ments apply only to new chemicals,
however; since TCB is not a new
chemical, it is not subject to section
5(a). Nor does the requested relief
involve issuance, amendment, or repeal
of a rule under section 4, 6, or 8 or an
order under section 6(bX2).
In addressing the question of whether
TCB presents an unreasonable risk to
health or the environment under
TSCA section 6, which applies to
existing chemicals, EPA found that
Valley Watch provided no definitive
evidence that (1) the trace amounts of
TCB that might remain after
retrofilling would create dioxins or
furans during a transformer fire or (2)
that fires in retrofilled transformers
were likely.
First Class Mail
Postaga and Fats Paid
EPA
Parffllt No. G-35
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSISTANCE DIVISION
Office of Toxic Substances (TS-799)
U.S. EPA
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
------- |