l ^ 'ej S'j'es Oi'-ce o* Er>/ro^nepta. Prc'r;'!OP P j b11 c A,;a's ! A -" 0 7 j A:je":v Wafning'.on DC 2r.'^6'j Environmental News d «at sr c' '-e.v: ad»-so' es to tht press ana otre' timely irs|orr-,3t,or Fc* ce-.s ,t c:.202 382-4355 RRLFASK: Aiu»nqf |, 1 q«8 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today announced new domestic regulations limiting the produc- tion and consumption of certain stratospheric-ozone- depleting chemicals called chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and halons. The rules fulfill the U.S. commitment under the Montreal Protocol, which has now been signed by 37 nations and ratified by six. The rule, under the authority of the Clean Air Act, allocates quotas to each of the firms engaged in pro- duction and consumption of CFCs and halons in 1986. "This regulation provides a low-cost means of achieving our goal of reducing CFC and halon damage to stratospheric ozone," said EPA Administrator Lee M. Thomas. "It also spurs technological innovation, which is critical to the eventual elimination of these chemicals from our environment." In addition to the final rule, EPA also seeks public comment on adding a regulatory fee to its use of quotas to capture the multi-billion-dollar windfall profits to CFC and halon producers which might be an unintended result of the allocated quota system. The agency is concerned that the existence of such windfalls would create a potential economic incentive for the producers to delay the introduction of chemical substi- tutes. The agency also seeks comment on shifting to auctions or further supplementing its quota system with specific-use controls or bans. The final rules require a freeze at 1986 production and consumption levels of CFC-11, -12, -113, -114 and -115 on the basis of their relative ozone-depletion weights. This freeze will be followed in mid-1993 by a (more) R 1 16 FDR EPA SETS FINAL RULES FOR CUTS IN CFC PRODUCTION TO PROTECT OZONE LAYER ------- -2- 20-percent reduction from the 1986 levels and in mid-1998 by a 50-percent redaction from the 1986 levels. The rules also prohibit production and consumption of Halon 1211, 1301 and 2402 from exceeding 1986 levels on a weighted basis beginning in approxi- mately 1992. The agency received almost 500 comments in response to its proposed rule last December. Today's final rule contains only minor changes from that pro- posal. A public hearing on the proposal was held in Washington in February. U.S. producers of CFCs are E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co Inc, Allied-Signal Inc., Pennwalt Corp., Kaiser Chemicals and Racon Inc. In addition to Dupont, Great Lakes Chemical Corp. and ICI Americas Inc. are U.S. producers of halons. The Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking which accompanies the final rule provides the rationale and EPA's intention to develop possible regula- tions to remedy the potential windfall-profit consequences of the final rule. Such windfalls would accrue to the CFC and halon producers because of future price increases in their chemicals due to EPA's limits on their supply. The agency is seeking comment on the appropriate structure and legal issues related to a regulatory fee to address this concern. EPA's regulatory-impact analysis estimates windfall profits of between $1.8 to $7.2 billion through the end of the century depending on the rate at which firms employed low-cost technologies to replace CFCs. EPA is also seeking public comment on the use of auctions as an alterna- tive to its rule which allocates rights to past producers and importers. An auction system would also shift windfalls from producers to the U.S. Treasury- Second, EPA is concerned that some industries, particularly those in which CFCs and halons are a small part of the price of the final goods, e.g., a refrigerator or computer, may be slow to respond to market-driven price increases and may delay their shift away from these chemicals. The agency is considering requiring certain user groups to increase recycling or to switch to alternative chemicals or processes to decrease their use of these chemicals to prevent unexpected price increases. Finally, recent new scientific evidence contained in the summary of the Ozone Trends Panel Report issued this spring suggests that EPA may have underestimated the risks of depletion. The notice describes the findings contained in the summary and states that EPA will make the full report of the "•zone Trends Panel available to the public upon its release and seek public -omment. The control requirements in today's rule are scheduled to take effect at the same time they are required under the Montreal Protocol. Article 16 of the Protocol provides that the Protocol will enter into force on Jan. l, 1989, provided that 11 nations or regional economic-integration organizations representing two-thirds of 1986 global consumption have ratified the Protocol by that date and that the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer has entered into force. Otherwise, the Protocol will enter into force 90 days after that condition has been satisfied. As of July 30, six nations R-136 (more) ------- -3- (Mexico, the United States, Norway, Sweden, Canada and New Zealand) had ratified the Protocol. The Vienna Convention has been ratified by the requisite number of nations and enters into force on Sept. 22, 1988. Concern about possible depletion of the ozone layer from CFCs was first raised in 1974 with publication of research which theorized that chlorine released from CFCs could migrate to the stratosphere and reduce the amount of ozone which shields the planet from harmful ultraviolet radiation. Because some of the CFCs have an atmospheric lifetime of over 120 years and do not break down in the lower atmosphere, they migrate slowly to the stratosphere where higher energy radiation strikes them, releasing chlorine. Once freed, the chlorine acts as a catalyst repeatedly combining with and breaking apart ozone molecules. If ozone depletion occurs, because of the long atmospheric lifetimes of CFCs, it will take from many decades to over a century for the ozone layer to return to past concentrations. In 1978, EPA and the Food and Drug Administration banned the use of CFCs as aerosol propellents in all but essential applications. During the early 1970s, CFCs used as aerosol propellents constituted over 50 percent of total CFC consumption in the United States. This particular use of CFCs now has been reduced by approximately 95 percent of the amount consumed in aerosols in 1974. Today's proposal does not affect the 1978 regulations. Since 1978, CFC use has continued to expand in other applications (e.g., as a foam-blowing agent, refrigerant and solvent). Total production in the United States now has surpassed pre-1974 levels. Since 1983, worldwide production of CFCs has grown at an average annual rate of five percent. EPA has conducted environmental- and economic-impact analyses of the regulation. Approximately 3.7 million deaths will be avoided in the United States for the population alive today or born by the year 2075. These deaths would have occurred due to increases in various skin cancers. Other health effects, such as cataracts and suppression of the immune system, will also be reduced. Stratospheric-ozone depletion and increased incidence of damaging ultraviolet radiation have been linked to such ecological and welfare effects as crop loss, aquatic damage and materials damage. CFCs also contribute to climate change (CFCs are a greenhouse gas) and associated impacts on health and the environment. EPA estimates that the total social cost of this regulation through 2075 is approximately $20-40 billion, depending on the rate at which firms adopt low-cost reductions, while the estimated benefits under a wide range of assumptions would far outstrip the costs. Today's rule and notice will appear in the Federal Register within the next several days. # » » R-136 ------- United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Public Affairs (A-107) Washington DC 20460 vvEPA Environmental News MITSUBISHI MOTORS TO CORRECT VEHICLE- EMISSIONS PROBLEM TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 1988 The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency said that Mitsubishi Motors Corp. is recalling approximately 100,000 1984 and 1985 passenger cars because the vehicles are exceeding the federal carbon monoxide exhaust-emission s tandard. EPA said the cars were built by Mitsubishi, but the majority of the vehicles in the United States were sold by Chrysler with Dodge or Plymouth nameplates. Others were sold by Mitsubishi and bear Mitsubishi model names. The affected 1984 models are the Dodge and Plymouth Colt and Mitsubishi Precis (sold in Puerto Rico) with 1.4-liter engines. The 1985 models are the Dodge and Plymouth Colt and the Mitsubishi Mirage with 1.5-liter engines. California models are not included in the The repair involves modifications to the air- injection system, which will provide more complete combustion of the carbon monoxide emissions, and recalibrat ion of the automatic choke. The manufacturer will also service the exhaust-gas-recirculation system. The 1984 model year will also receive a new carburetor main air jet. Chrysler dealers will handle repairs for the Dodge and Plymouth models and Mitsubishi will repair the Precis and Mirage models. Owners of recall models purchased outside the United States will be given repair locations in the manufacturer's notification letter. recall R-168 # # # ------- Office of Public Affairs (A-107) Washington DC 20460 vvEPA Environmental News F 0R RELEASE: WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 1988 EPA PROPOSES The U.S. Env i ronmental Protection Agency has pro- PCcs TRACKING SYSTEM posed to establish a tracking system for the transport, storage ur.c disposal of polychlor i nated biphenyls (PCBs). "Tr.:s proposal will establish, for the first time ever, a crjdle-to-grave tracking system for PCBs," said Charles El Kins, Director of the Office of Toxic Sab- stances. "The tracking system will help us catch fly- by-night operators and illegal dumpers who are putting Oui environment and health in jeopardy." The proposed tracking system, proposed under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), is based on the Resource Conservation Recovery Act's (RCRA) tracking system, for hazardous wastes. The new PCB rule would require certain PCB waste handlers, who are disposers, commercial storers, transporters and generators with FCB storage areas, to notify EPA of their PCB waste activities and use the RCRA uniform manifest in con- nection with their shipments of regulated PCB wastes. Under the notification requirement, PCB waste handlers must file a "notification of PCB activity" form with EPA before engaging in PCB waste activities. The form is similar to the RCRA notification form and the require- ments are similar to those in RCRA. The notification requirement will provide EPA with basic information on the location and activities of those who handle PCB wastes. The rule also proposes that generators of PCB waste will only be permitted to turn over their waste to com- mercial storers, transporters and disposers of PCB waste who have notified EPA of their PCB waste activities and received EPA identification numbers and any required approvals. In addition, commercial storers, trans- porters and disposers of PCB waste will be permitted to accept only PCB waste from other commercial storers, transporters and disposers who have notified EPA of their PCB waste activities. R-164 (more) ------- -2- The recordkeeping and reporting requirements of this rule would physi- cally track the PCB waste from point of generation to the site of storage or disposal. This proposal requires that the manifests themselves be retained as records by waste handlers and that EPA be notified in the event of irregularities in the transport of the regulated waste. There are three proposed waste-tracking reports: ° "exception report" that is to be filed with EPA whenever a generator has not received verification of delivery within 45 days; ° "discrepancy report" that will be required of storage or disposal facilities in such cases when the waste actually delivered does not correspond exactly with the t>pes and quantities described on the manifest; and ° "unmanitested waste report" that will be required of disposers or storers in such cases when waste arrives at a facility unaccompanied by a required man i fest . In audition, a "one-year exception report" will track compliance with the requirement under TSCA that limits storage of PCBs priur to disposal to no more than one year. Information on when items of PCB waste have been removed from use will te included with the manifests that accompany the waste from generation to disposal. Disposers will be required to certify the oate of PCB disposal, and if more than one year elapses since the PCBs were removed intially from use, a report will be filed with EPA. Finally, the annual documents that disposers and commercial storers of PCB wastes are already required to prepare and keep on site will now be submitted on July 15 of every year to EPA regional aarn i n i s t r a t or s . After PCB waste handlers no'ily EPA of their PCB waste activities, they will bt assigned unique identification numbers that will identity then, in the manifests, EPA's data base and in other records. PCB waste handlers who have previously notified and received identification numbers urtoer kCKA would not need to obtain new identification numbers from EPA, but will instead ut;e on their manifests the numbers pre vi ou&ly issued to them. These waste handlers would still have to notify EPA of their activities in order to be enrolled in the national TSCA data case of PCB waste handlers and to receive verification of their existing EPA icentificatiun numbers. The identification numbers that EPA would issue under this proposal would be based upon the same 12—digit numbering system used uncier RCKA to designate hazardous waste facilities. This proposal will have an expedited public comment perioc of 30 days in order to implement the tracking system as soon as possible. EPA intends to promulgate a final rule within six months of this proposed rule. R-164 # * 4 ------- United States Office of Environmental Protection Public Affair* (A-107) Agency Washington DC 20400 *>EPA Environmental News FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 1988 EPA SETS The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today issued STAM DARDS FOR UNDERGROUND comprehensive and stringent requirements for nearly STORAGE TANKS two million underground storage tanks, half of which are used to store gasoline at service stations. EPA Administrator Lee M. Thomassaid : "Today's action will ensure that underground storage tanks no longer pose a public health or environmental threat. EPA's new controls will protect local water supplies from contamination by petroleum and chemical products stored underground. The standards will ensure that tanks are operated safely during their lifetime and closed properly when removed from service. For the thousands of tanks which are now leaking, EPA is providing funds to states to identify and clean up existing contamination." EPA's new rules require owners and operators of under- ground tanks containing petroleum products or certain hazardous chemicals (not hazardous wastes, which are regulated separately) to monitor tanks for leaks and, in the event of a leak, notify appropriate authorities and clean up the contamination. In October, EPA expects to issue financial standards requiring owners and operators to maintain the financial capability to clean up contami- nation and to compensate third parties for damages. Underground storage tanks are those with 10 percent or more of their volume underground, including pipes. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) excludes a number of tanks from federal requirements, including farm and residential tanks storing less than 1,100 gallons of motor fuel for non-commercial purposes, tanks storing heating oil for use on the premises and tanks on or above floors in underground areas, such as basements or tunnels. (more) p-: ------- - 2 - EPA estimates that over 95 percent of the nation's two million underground storage tanks hold petroleum products. Of all tanks in use, an estimated 80 percent are unprotected bare-steel tanks, which are most likely to corrode and leak; the other 20 percent are protected tanks, either steel, fiberglass or some combination of both. Rased on a study of the causes of releases from underground storage tanks, EPA has determined that corrosion of bare steel accounts for almost all leaks from underground tanks and a significant portion of the leaks from connected bare-steel pipes. Improper installation and structural failure due to accidents also cause leaks. The most frequent types of leaks are caused by spills and overfills. Some standards concerning underground storage tanks are already in effect. Under a congressional mandate effective May 7, 1985, under RCRA, all newly installed tanks now must he protected from corrosion, either through "cathodic" protection (preventing the electrical charge which leads to the corrosion of bare steel when placed in the ground) or through the use of corrosion-resistant materials, such as fiberglass. In addition, the materials must be compatible with the stored products, and the tanks must be installed using certain procedures to prevent damage. Notification requirements also are in effect. Owners of all new tanks brought into use after May 8, 1986, must notify their states within 30 days. The notifications require information about the age, size, type, location and use of each tank. Today's rule additionally requires owners or operators to certify that the tanks are installed properly. The new rules differ for new and existing petroleum storage tanks and new and existing chemical storage tanks. PETROLEUM TANKS Tank owners installing new, corrosion-protected tanks will have to certify that the tank was installed correctly to ensure the structural integrity of the system to provide leak-free performance. Owners of existing tanks (defined as those tanks in service before December 1988) will have to provide corrosion protection within 10 years. t Leak detection methods will have to be developed or installed at all tanks. Leak detection can be accomplished by a variety of methods ranging from tank testing with inventory controls (requiring daily measurements) to the installation of monitoring wells around the tank. Existing petroleum tanks must use a leak-detection system within five years, depending on the age of the tank. For example, bare-steel tanks 25 years old or older have only until December 1989 to begin to use, at the minimum, monthly testing methods using leak-detection equipment or annual tightness testing combined with daily inventory controls to detect leaks. Tanks less than 10 years old have until 1993 to provide leak detect ion. R-163 (more) ------- - 3- If a leak is detected from any tank, the tank must be repaired in accordance with established industry standards. Piping cannot be repaired and must be replaced, with the exception of loose fittings which can be t ightened. Within 10 years, existing tanks must be equipped with devices that prevent spills and overfills, such as overfill alarms and catch basins. Correct tank-filling practices must be immediately followed at all tanks. Stored products are often spilled during transfer operations from the delivery t:uck to the tank. Although these spills are often small, they can build up over time and become an environmental threat. Lpik-ietection, corrosion-protection and spill- and over fill-prevention equipment must be used immediately at installation of new tanks. f-HEMTCAL TAMKS Underground tanks holding one or more of 701 chemicals listed under the Superfund law a i e affected by today's rules. There are an estimated ,000 chemical tanks, accounting for nearly four percent of the total tank oopulation. Mew chemical tanks are now required to have dual containment (called secondary containment), either through the installation of double-walled tanks, or concrete vaults or impenetrable liners around the tank. In addition, they must have leak-detection systems installed between the two layers of containment. Spill and overfill equipment is also required, some variances are allowed. At the end of 10 years, existing chemical tanks must meet the same dual-containment and leak-detection requirements as new tanks. In the meantime, the same leak-detection requirements are imposed for existing chemical tanks as for existing petroleum tanks, including the same schedule, depending on the age of the tank. All requirements apply to new tanks at the time of installation. CLEANUP 4 EPA is requiring certain actions by tank owners to ensure that leaks and any resulting contamination are cleaned up. Petroleum tank owners and operators who discover a leak, or an above-ground spill over 25 gallons, are required to report the leak to state regulatory authorities within 24 hours. Chemical tank owners also must report all leaks; spills and overfill must be reported in accordance with certain Superfund requirements. In all cases, the ownar may want to check with the local fire department to ensure there is no fire hazard. Any fire or explosive threats and free product must be removed and, under certain circumstances, a more thorough investigat must be conducted to confirm the leak and whether there is any damage to nearby soil and groundwater. All additional information on the leak or spil must be reported to the appropriate regulatory agency within 20 days and again at 45 days from the spill. At 45 days, the owner must report whether or not groundwater has been contaminated and, if necessary, submit a plan for recovering any free product. More extensive examination of soil and groundwater contamination may be required, as well as a corrective-action plan for cleaning up groundwater. ------- -4- TANK CLOSURE AND RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS Any tank temporarily not used must maintain leak-detection (unless the tank is emptied) and corrosion-protection systems. All temporarily closed bare-stiael tanks must be permanently closed after 12 months, unless the temporary closure period is extended by the implementing agency. Regulatory authorities must be notified 30 days prior to permanent closure of the tank. At final closure, the tank must be emptied and cleaned. Also, the owner must determine if there is any environmental damage at the site and either remove the tank or fill it with inert materia Is. Certain recordkeeping is required, including the maintenance of leak-detection reports and information on corrosion-protection systems, repairs and closure. EXISTING CONTAMINATION/TRUST FUND EPA is Droviding all states with federal funds to identify and address leaking tanks and to ensure cleanup. In most cases, the cleanup will be accomplished by the responsible private party. The funds are available from the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund, set up by Congress in October 1986. The fund will collect $500 million over five years through a tax of one-tenth of a cent on gasoline. COMPLIANCE COSTS EPA estimates the incremental cost to industry of the technical standards to be $2.5 billion a year, with an incremental benefit of S2.8 billion. The net benefit is estimated to be SO.3 billion a year. A leak detection system could cost a typical gas station with three 5,000 gallon tanks between S3,000 to S8,000. The cost of retrofitting cathodic protection to existing tanks could range anywhere from 510,000 to 548,000. Costs of installing three new 10,000 gallon.tanks can range from S76,000 to $100,000, depending on the level of leak detection. Secondary containment can cost up to one-third more than single-wall tanks. However, the increased cost should be weighed against the significant cost of cleanup from leaks into the environment, which could approach S225,000 or more in cases of groundwater contamination. ENFORCEMENT Violators of the regulations can be fined up to S10,000 per violation per day for each tank. Pines up to $25,000 can be assessed for violations of enforcement orders for each day of continued non-compliance. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The final rules are effective 90 days after publication in the Federal Register, which is expected in mid-September. For more infor- mation on how to comply with the rules, the public can call EPA's RCUA Hotline at 800-424-9346 or 382-3000 in Washington, D. C. R-163 ««# ------- Un led States Office of ir.r-T-ienta! Protection Public Affairs (A-107j Agency Washington DC 20460 <>f:PA Environmental News FCF R ELEASE: MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 LEA AND ASSISTANT I'. S . En v i ronmental Protection Agency Administrator M KGEON GENERAL CALL F"R Lee M. T'o.tcS an j Dr. Vernon J. Houk, Assistant Surgeon RADON HOXE T LSI I NG G e•: : 1 of the Pufclic Health Service today announced a n = : i 1 advisory urging the testing of most homes in tL is ccuntry for radon. "Radon-induced lung cancer is one of today's most svrioj.- {..jolic health issues," Dr. Houk said. Next to sn.ok i no , radon is the second leading contributor to lung cancer. EPA estimates it causes as many as 20,000 lung cancer deaths each year. The national radon health advisory from the Public Health Service states, "Indoor radon gas is a national hea2 th problem. Radon causes thousands of deaths each year Millions of homes have elevated radon levels. Most homes should be tested for radon. When elevated levels are confirmed, the problem should be corrected." The advisory was issued in conjunction with EPA's release today of the most recent survey results on indoor radon in seven states and Indian lands. The agency found that nearly one in three homes in these seven states had screening levels over four picocuries per liter (pCi/L), the agency's guidance level. (A picocurie, or one- trillionth of a curie, is a common measurement of radia- tion.) "Through this year's study, we have identified an area similar in severity to the Reading Prong," Thomas said. "This new area extends from Minnesota to North Dakota. More than 45 percent of the houses tested in Minnesota and 60 percent tested in North Dakota have screening levels over four pCi/L." R-160 (mare) ------- The Reading Prong is the area in Pennsylvania, New York, and New Jersey where the radon problem first cair.e to national attention several years ago. The seven states surveyed were Arizona, Indiana, Massachusetts, Min- nesota, Missouri, North Dakota and Pennsylvania and Indian lands in Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin. EPA also announced the seven states that will be surveyed this winter. They are Alaska, Iowa, Maine, New Mexico, Ohio ana Vermont and Kest Virginia and Indian lands in New Mexico, Colorado, North Dakota, South Dakota and Iowa. State health or env i r on jr. en tal agencies conducted the seven state surveys last winter. Tne surveys are done during winter months when houses are closed to obtain measurements of the highest dectectable radon levels. The surveys measured a total of 11,000 homes over the seven states. Vvhil only five readings exceeded 100 pCi/L, a significant percentage of screening measurements exceeded 20 pCi/L, the level at which EPA recommends immediate follow-up. EPA estimates that over 200 , 000 homes in ttiese states will have levels greater than 20 pCi/L, a level that exceeds current hea 1 tn-pr o tec t i or, standards for uranium, miners. The data from this year's study, when acaed to i nlormat ion gathered in last year's 10-state survey, allow EPA to predict that over three million houses in the 17 states surveyec will have screen;;.-; levels greater than pCi/L. (Ihe states surveyed last year were Alabama, Colorado, Connecticut, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Rhode Island , Tennessee, K i scons i n and V\'\on. i n) EPA recommends tnat everyone living in detached houses (including trailer homes with permanent foundations) shoula test f o r r wjon. Residents living in townhouses or rowho^ses should test as we 11 as people i i v in- in bo sement, first- or second-floor apartments. Having e home tested involves a the non.eow.ner ana can cost as little levels can be fixes easily for about their appropriate state agencies for simple procedure that c a n be done r>j as $10-$25. houses with eievat-rj racer, $ $00 to $1,0(¦¦(.. Horn- owner s snjclc cor, tic more i ntorma*.. i on on r au on .x i 11 a a 1i or. . Rao or, is an ir.v i si cie, odor less radioactive g a.- p r ao u r e u cy tr.e cec^y of uranium, in rock ana soil. Radon decays into radioactive particles, which, if inhaled, may cause damage to lung tissu-.s, i v: i ta i ng the risk of lung cancer. Scientists estimate that about 2G,0o0 lurvj Ca;,;tr aeaths a year in the United Statc-s ma> Le attributed to r ctuor.. tint.- 3-:^^ General attributes roughly 8 5 percent of all lung-cancer aeaths to s;t;c * i n ^ . ) R-l 6 0 # # * ------- United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Public Affairs (A-107) Washington DC 20460 *>EPA Environmental News CHLORDIMEFORM PESTICIDE VOLUNTARILY CANCELLED BY REGISTRANTS FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 1988 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has received requests from the registrants of the pesticide chlordimeform to voluntarily cancel all registrations of these products effective Feb. 19, 1989. Chlordimeform is used on cotton to destroy eggs and larvae of the tobacco budworm and the cotton hoilworm. EPA has amended the chlordimeform registrations so that they will terminate on Feb. 19, 1989, and will prohibit all sale, distribution and use after that date. The voluntary cancellation of chlordimeform was made by Ciba-Geigy Corp. and Nor-Am Chemical Co., the only registrants of this product. Roth companies have stated that they will recall any unused stocks down to the user level and will dispose of those stocks. Because of the voluntary cancellation action, EPA is proposing not to initiate a special review (an intensive risk/benefit review process) of chlordimeform. A preliminary notification to chlordimeform registrants of the agency's intention to commence a special review was issued in 1985 based on evidence that this pesticide induced tumors in laboratory animals. Again in 1986, the agency indicated its intention in a draft registration standard to place chlordimeform in the special review process. The agency has analyzed the data regarding the risks associated with chlordimeform use on cotton. Although its use appears to have significant risks for applicators exposed over a lifetime, the available data do not support initiation of an emergency suspension of R-159 (more) ------- -2- this pesticide. Therefore, the use of chlordimeform during the 1988 use season would occur even if the agency could ultimately conclude that the risks of such use outweighed the benefits and proposed to cancel the registrations of chlordimeform. The agency does not believe that the risk of chlordimeform from dietary exposure is significant. In a separate action, the agency is proposing to revoke or reduce most tolerances (maximum allowable residue levels in food or feed) of chlordime- form. The agency expects to revoke all tolerances of chlordimeform within several years or as soon as the cotton-related products with residues of chlordimeform have been used up. In early September, the agency will also take action related to certain industrial intermediate chemicals closely related to chlordimeform. These chemicals are no longer manufactured or imported into the United States. A proposed Significant Mew Use Rule under the Toxic Substances Control Act will require notification to EPA and review by the agency before manufacture or imports of these chemicals could begin again. EPA is aware of some recent evidence that production workers exposed over long periods to a chemical closely related to chlordimeform may be at increased risk of bladder cancer. Bladder cancer can be relatively easily detected by examination of urine, and early treatment is likely to be , successful. Representatives of EPA, the federal Centers for Disease Control and the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials recently met to share risk information and to discuss possible notification of workers who may have had significant exposure to chlordimeform and related compounds. In addition, the agency has contacted the registrants concerning potential notification of exposed workers. Chlordimeform was first registered in 1968. Its two most common trade names are Galecron® (Ciba-Geigy) and Fundal® (Nor-Am). Makers of the product also claim that using it increases product yield. Estimated annual usage ranges from 0.8 to 1.3 million pounds on approximately 1.3 million acres (12 percent of the n_-"ional cotton acreage). Forty percent of all chlordimeform applications are made in combination with other insecticides. R-159 # # # ------- United States Office of Environmental Protection Public Affairs (A-107) Agency Washington DC 20460 &EPA Environmental News EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE UNTIL NOON, AUGUST 29, 1988 CONGRESSIONAL MORATORIUM CMOS ON CLEAN AIR SANCTIONS R-155 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today said construction bans will be imposed on major new pollution sources in as many as four areas before the end of this year, and 10 additonal areas also may become subject to the same sanctions. The action is required by the Clean Air Act for failure to devise adequate clean air plans for meeting ozone or carbon monoxide standards by last year's Dec. 31 attainment date. In late 1987, Congress passed the Nitchell-Conte amendment. It prohibited EPA from imposing the otherwise mandatory sanctions prior to Aug. 31, 1988. The ban on construction of major new sources will automatically go into effect for the South Coast area of California (all or portions of Los Angeles, San Bernadino, Riverside and Orange counties) on Aug. 31. EPA disapproved the South Coast clean air plan in January, and the sanction will take effect automatically upon the expiration of the moratorium. "Los Angeles is the first of a number of areas that will have sanctions imposed on them for failure to develop and implement adequate plans to address ozone or carbon monoxide problems," said Lee M. Thomas, EPA Administrator. "The Clean Air Act requires that bans on construction of major new sources of these pollutants be placed on those areas nat in compliance." Thomas called on Congress to reauthorize the Clean Air Act so areas not meeting the standards could move ahead in their planning to cut ozone and carbon monoxide (more) ------- -2- pollution. The present Clean Air Act is unclear on what cities must do if attainment was not reached by Dec. 31, 1987. EPA has identified about 100 cities that failed to achieve one or both of those clean air standards by the Dec. 31 deadline. "This summer# especially in the East, many cities have experienced severe ozone problems. While weather conditions have played a large role, it is indisputable that the pollutants leading to the formation of ozone must be reduced, in some cases substantially, 30 everyone can breathe healthful air," Thomas said. "Failure to reauthorize the Act could lead to many more sanctions on areas as well as mandatory federal pollution plans and litigation, which will only further delay reaching the goal we all want—clean air," Thomas said. The ban on construction of major industrial sources that may add to the urban ozone problem also will be placed in effect for Ventura County, Calif., as early as late October. EPA also will decide by the end of October whether to disapprove the Indiana and Illinois ozone plans for the Chicago metropolitan area (which includes Lake and Porter counties in Indiana and Cook, DuPage, Kane and Lake counties in Illinois) and impose bans there. These areas were originally part of a group of 14 areas that the agency proposed to sanction in July 1987. However, because of litigation involving these areas and Los Angeles, sanctions will be imposed on them prior to final action on the remaining 10. The agency intends to finalize its July 1987 proposals to disapprove clean air plans for the remaining cities at the same time it finalizes its policy on dealing with all 100 areas that have not attained the standards The 10 cities for which the agency proposed disapproval of plans include Denver (carbon monoxide)(CO); Washoe County (Reno), Nev. (CO); Kern County (Bakersfield), Calif, (ozone); East St. Louis, 111. (ozone); Clark and Floyd counties, Indiana (suburbs of Louisville)(ozone); Cleveland (CO); Sacramento (ozone); Fresno (ozone and CO); Dallas (ozone) and Atlanta (ozone). EPA has indicated that Dallas may escape sanctions on the basis of new elements added to its clean air plana since the proposed disapprovals. Although EPA has no immediate plans for imposing sanctions elsewhere, other non-attaining areas* depending upon the agency's ultimate decision on their pending attainment plans, could be subject to sanctions in the future. "It is absolutely essential that Congress revise the existing law so states and cities with EPA assistance can begin to compile accurate information on sources of pollution and develop reliable plans to reduce these emissions as quickly as possible," Thomas said. If Congress fails to amend the Clean Air Act this session, EPA has indicated it intends later this year to finalize its policy under the existing law for dealing with cities that failed to meet the standards by the Dec. 31 deadline. That policy, which was proposed last November, would require that areas failing to meet the ozone or carbon monoxide standards by the Dec. 31 deadline submit to EPA for approval stringent (mare) ------- -3- plans on how and when they expect to achieve the standard. The November proposal stated that EPA would call for states to adopt new plans to bring about attainment by roughly 1994-96 or face construction bans similar to those being imposed or considered for the areas mentioned above. The proposal also stated BPA's intent to impose additional sanctions on any area that fails to submit a new plan achieving at least a three-percent-per-year reduction in volatile organic compounds (precursors of ozone) or carbon monoxide, as applicable. In May, EPA listed 68 areas of the country, mostly major metropolitan areas, that failed to achieve the ozone standard by the Dec. 31 deadline and 59 areas that failed to achieve the carbon monoxide standard. In all, about 100 areas are on one or both lists. EPA also sent letters in late May to the governors of 44 states and the ¦nayor of the District of Columbia telling them their plans were inadequate for achieving the standard and to begin planning for submittal of State Implementation Plans (SIPs), or clean air plans, indicating how and when they would meet the standard(s) for areas that failed to meet one or both of them. In that May announcement, the agency indicated that an "extended planning area," which adds additional counties to the ring around the urban core, should be taken into account in devising the plan. R-L55 ------- United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Public Affairs (A-107) Washington DC 20460 oEPA Environmental News EPA PROPOSES MEW STANDARDS FOR MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE LANDFILLS FOR RELEASE: WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 24, 1988 The fJ.S. Environmental Protection Agency today took its first major regulatory action to control the disposal of municipal garbage. In this effort, the agency proposed standards to upgrade the condition and help ensure the safety of municipal landfills used to dispose of solid Under the proposal, states would use the standards to ensure protection of the environment from the operation of the landfills. In addition, landfill operators would be required to set up groundwater-monitoring systems and clean up contamination at operating landfills as well as close down within five years landfills located in unstable areas; landfills in some restricted areas would reguire special controls. The proposed new standards for both new and existing municipal solid waste landfills also include location restrictions, facility-design and operation standards, closure, post-closure care for at least 30 years and financial-responsibility requirements. The standards also include requirements for day-to-day management of both new and existing landfills, including waste-handling procedures, daily cover, rodent control, access control, liquids management, explosive-gas control, control of open burning, run-on/run-off controls and recordkeeping. The proposal specifies a risk-based performance standard for landfill design. Dr. J. Winston Porter, EPA's Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste and Emergency Response, said "These standards will help states protect the public from the adverse effects of improperly operated landfills and will provide a framework for designing sound new landfills. waste (more) ------- - 2 - "Landfills will continue to play an important role in the future for garbage disposal, in conjunction with other options now available, such as recycling and incineration with energy recovery," Porter said. "However, we continue to encourage cities to explore all available options in addition to landfills to help reduce the environmental impacts of garbage disposal. Within the next few weeks, we will announce additional steps to help states address their continuing solid waste management and disposal-capacity crunch." Once the federal standards are issued in final form, states must adopt and implement a permit or similar program within 18 months to ensure that facilities comply with the standards. In the event a state declines to incorporate the standards in its current solid waste regulatory program, EPA now has the authority to enforce the use of the federal standards. EPA set general criteria for solid waste landfills in 1979 under the solid waste provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). At that time, RCRA did not provide authority to set federally enforceable regulations. Amendments to RCRA passed in 1984 required EPA to develop regulations for solid waste landfills to include standards for location, groundwater monitoring and corrective action. However, RCRA envisions state and locally implemented solid waste programs. Today's proposal applies to an estimated 6,000 municipal solid waste landfills. Over 80 percent of the 160 million tons of solid waste produced each year by this country is landfilled; about 10 percent is incinerated; and another 10 percent is recycled. Municipal solid waste landfills are located throughout the country. They are owned predominantly by local governments (78 percent), with 17 percent owned by private entitites, four percent by the federal government and one percent by states. Nearly one-half are relatively small (less than 10 acres), disposing of small amounts of waste, or less than 18 tons a day. States report that only 15 percent of the landfills have liners, and only five percent have leachate-collection systems. Less than a third have some type of groundwater-monitoring system. At least a quarter of these are reported to be violating one or more state groundwater-protection standards. EPA today also is proposing reporting requirements for industrial solid waste and construction/demolition-debris facilities to gather information for possible regulation of these facilities at a later date. EPA estimates that more than seven billion tons of industrial solid waste is disposed annually in over 27,000 industrial solid waste facilities. In addition, nearly 2500 landfills receive construction and demolition debris. EPA is seeking information on ownership, location, size, type and amount of waste, among other information. Under the proposal, landfills near airports, in floodplains, wetlands, fault areas and seismic impact zones must incorporate special controls. The agency also is proposing to close within five years existing landfills in unstable areas prone to landslides and excessive soil settlement. The proposed groundwater monitoring standards require, at a minimum, semi-annual monitoring for a limited set of key contaminants. If significant levels of the contaminants are detected, quarterly monitoring wn'ild be required for those substances. R- . ,7. (more) ------- - 3 - Actual costs of the proposed rule will vary significantly depending on the design and operating controls states specify to meet the minimum performance standards in the proposal. EPA estimates, for one possible control scenario, that the proposed rule will result in a median cost per landfill of $43,600 per year. This cost corresponds to an average annual cost of $11 per household or a total annualized cost of $880 million at the national level. EPA determines that for most communities and house- holds these costs are reasonable. The proposal will be published in the Federal Register next week. EPA will provide a 60-day public-comment period and hold four public meetings: one in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 11; one in Chicago on Oct. 13; one in Atlanta on Oct. 18; with the final hearing in Los Angeles on Oct. 20. For further information, the public can call EPA's hazardous waste hotline at 800-424-9346 or 382-3000 in Washington, D.C. R-152 ### ------- United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Public Affairs (A-107) Washington DC 20460 &EPA Environmental News FORD MOTOR CO. CITED FOR EMISSIONS- WARRANTY VIOLATIONS FOR RELEASE: MONDAY, AUGUST 15, 1988 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced today that it has issued a Notice of Violation to Ford Motor Co. for its failure to provide coverage under the federally mandated emission-control warranty. This is the first such action taken by EPA for violations of the warranty provisions. The agency has proposed a penalty of $230,000 for these violations. The Clean Air Act requires motor vehicle manufacturers to warrant that each vehicle is designed, built and equip- ped to comply with the federal emission standards and free from defects in materials and workmanship which could cause the vehicle to fail to comply with applicable emission standards. The emissions warranty applies to motor vehicles manufactured since 1972. The warranty covers passenger cars and light trucks for five years or 50,000 miles, whichever comes first. The emissions-defect warranty provides an incentive for manufacturers to design, build and equip their vehicles to comply with the federal emission standards. The violation notice against Ford resulted from its implementation of a policy which the agency believes is inconsistent with the warranty requirements of the Act. Ford's policy provides limited warranty coverage only for emission-control components, but not for other compon- ents which significantly affect emissions. EPA said it believes Congress intended coverage for any parts which would cause vehicles to fail to comply with the applicable emission standards. R-147 (more) ------- -2- Don Clay, EPA Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, said "We are concerned that Ford, after this many years, continues to implement a warranty policy which is clearly in violation of the Clean Air Act." As a result of the increasing number of local emissions-inspection programs, the agency is taking a closer look at this time at all manu- facturers' emissions-defect warranty policies and the information they provide to vehicle owners regarding the warranties. The agency will be taking additional actions if similar problems are found. Currently, approximately 100 areas across the country violate the ozone and carbon monoxide air-quality standards. Sixty-four areas presently have local emissions-inspection programs. The EPA Notice of Violation alleges that Ford denied emissions- defect-warranty claims for carburetor replacements, fuel-injector pumps, catalytic converters, intake manifolds, turbo chargers and other compon- ents which can cause a vehicle to exceed the emission standards. Clay advised motorists to check their owner's manual for information on the manufacturer's emission-warranty policy and the coverage to which they are entitled. Additiortal information can also be obtained from two EPA brochures: "What You Should Know About Your Auto Emissions Warranty" and "If Your Car Just Failed An Emission Test." For copies, write to U.S. EPA, Warranty Compliant, EN-397F, 401 M St. S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460. R-147 # # # ------- United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Public Affairs (A-107) Washington DC 20460 oEPA Environmental News FOR RELEASE: FRIDAY, AUGUST 12, 1988 RECORD SETTLEMENT OBTAINED IN BROWNING-FERRIS HAZARDOUS WASTE CASE in Livingston, La. Of that amount, $2 million represents the highest penalty ever obtained in a hazardous Waste court case, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said today. In addition, EPA said the defendants could spend another million dollars to install groundwater monitoring wells, verify proper closure of certain landfill cells, implement a computerized waste tracking system, and conduc an independent environmental audit, as required under the settlement. The companies will arrange and pay for the audit, to be approved by EPA and the State of Louisiana. The audit will assess compliance with the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), EPA's hazardous waste management law, the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act, as well as assessing management systems, policies and practices at the Livingston facility and at corporate offices. The staffs of EPA's Region 6 Hazardous Waste Division in Dallas and the National Enforcement Investi- gations Center in Denver will oversee the work conducted at the facility. EPA Administrator Lee M. Thomas said, "EPA will not tolerate hazardous waste mismanagement in this country, especially by the nation's major disposal companies. This significant penalty should send a signal to all wast< handlers that the cost of noncompliance with our require- ments will be more costly than compliance." Subsidiaries of Houston-based Browning-Ferris Indus- tries will pay $2.5 million to settle a federal and state lawsuit against their commercial hazardous waste facility (more) R-146 ------- -2- EPA found that over 1,700 violations of RCRA occurred between November 1980 and January 1986 at the Browning-Ferris Industries, Chemical Services, Inc. and CECOS International, Inc. (CECOS) commercial hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal facility in Livingston. The facility is located about 40 miles east of Baton Rouge. EPA inspections of the facility in 1985 and again in 1986 revealed such violations as landfilling of ignitable waste and hazardous waste containing liquids, failure to properly analyze hazardous waste, unauthor- ized waste piles, inadequate facility closure plan and record-keeping, and failure to conduct facility inspections and personnel training. Under the terms of a Consent Decree, filed today in federal District Court in Baton Rouge, the penalty will be divided as follows: $1,100,000 to the United States, $900,000 to the State of Louisiana, co-plaintiff in the action, and $500,000 to Louisiana State University to start an endow- ment for research into hazardous waste disposal. The Consent Decree, a legal document settling the lawsuit -- which all parties sign -- becomes final after a 30-day public review and comment period and approval by the Court. EPA filed suit against the companies on April 28, 1987. In March 1988, EPA also filed suit against the companies for viola- tions at their commercial hazardous waste facility in Lake Charles, La. That case is pending. # # # R-146 ------- United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Public Affairs (A-107) Washington DC 20460 <&EPA Environmental News EPA PROPOSES TO CONCLUDE SPECIAL REVIEW OF LINURON PESTICIDE PRODUCTS FOR RELEASE: FRIDAY, AUGUST 12, 1988 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is proposing to conclude the special review of the pesticide linuron after determining that exposure to this chemical does not pose unreasonable risks to-.public Linuron is registered for pre-emergent and post- emergent control of annual grasses and broadleaf weeds and is used primarily on soybeans. EPA began a special review of linuron pesticide products in 1984 to assess the risks and benefits associated with their use based on evidence that they cause tumors in laboratory animals and may pose a hazard to public health from both dietary and work-place exposure. Subsequent to initiating the special review, EPA received additional exposure and toxicity data. Based on the data available, EPA and the Scientific Advisory Panel (established under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act and comprised of independent scientists who advise the agency on its pesticide program) agree that the evidence of oncogenicity in laboratory animals caused by linuron is limited and have classified this pesticide as a possible human carcinogen (a Group C oncogen). This assessment is based on findings that tumors observed in rat and mouse studies were benign, showed a definite lack of malignant progression, occurred late in the life cycle, were not life-threatening and are known to form spantaneously in the test animals used. Further, there is no positive evidence of mutagenicity (mutagenicity data are used as an indicator of oncogenic potential). In announcing its decision on linuron, the health (more) ------- agency said that it would not regulate linuron as a carcinogen because evidence of its human carcinogenic potential is low. After concluding that the evidence supporting linuron's carcinogenicity in humans is not strong enough to support a continuation of the special review, EPA examined the other toxicological effect of possible concern from exposure to linuron, hematotoxicity, or toxic blood effects. After examining the actual residue levels of linuron consumed by the U.S. population in its diet, the agency determined that the potential risk of hematotoxicity is not significant. Although not a basis for special review, the agency noted that dietary exposure through water contamination was possible. Linuron runoff into rivers and leaching into aquifers could contaminate drinking water which is drawn from either groundwater or surface water. Data submitted to the agency indicate that linuron leaches moderately. Additional data to clarify further the leaching potential of linuron are under assessment. In May 1987, the National Academy of Sciences (MAS) issued a report, "Regulating Pesticides in Food." In the report, NAS estimated that the potential lifetime risk of cancer to the U.S. population from dietary exposure to linuron is one in a thousand. That estimate was based on the assumptions that linuron was used on 100 percent of the crops for which it is registered and that residues were at tolerance or maximum allowable residue limits. The agency considers these assumptions unrealistic. Using assumptions which the agency considers more realistic, namely maximum residue levels expected and the percentage of crops treated, would result in a decrease in the MAS risk estimate of approximately two orders of magnitude to one in one hundred thousand. However, for reasons noted above, EPA now believes that the evidence of linuron's carcinogenicity is weak enough that it should not be regulated as a carcinogen. Registered since 1966, linuron is produced by E.I. du Pont de Memouts & Co. Inc., Drexel Chemical Co., Griffin Corp., Hoechst AG, Makhteshim-Agan, and Mippon Kayaku Co. Ltd. Approximately 84 percent of linuron, or 5.8 million pounds, is used annually on soybeans. Other food sites include field and sweet corn, cotton, sorghum, wheat, asparagus, corrots, celery, parsnips and potatoes. Non-food sites include fence rows, fairways and highway rights-of-way. Public comments on EPA's proposal to conclude the special review of linuron should bear the control number OPP-3000/41B and must be submitted within 60 days to: Information Service Section Program Management and Support Division (TS-757C) U.S. EPA 401 M St. S.W. Washington, D.C. 20460 R-144 # # # ------- United States Office of Environmental Protection Public Affairs (A-107) Agency Washington DC 20460 &EPA Environmental News FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, AUGUST 9, 1988 EPA RESTRICTS The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today LAND DISPOSAL OF ONE-THIRD OF ALL restricted the land disposal of nearly one-third of all HAZARDOUS WASTES regulated hazardous wastes. The action is part of the agency's effort to restrict the land disposal of most hazardous wastes by 1990, unless the wastes are first treated to reduce their toxicity or potential for migration. EPA today is requiring prior treatment for 39 significant hazardous waste streams. EPA is specifying treatment standards for these wastes and establishing effective dates based on the availability of treatment capacity. Today's action restricts the land disposal of nearly 861 million gallons of a wide range of industrial wastes produced annually, including 172 million gallons of petroleum-refinery wastes, 129 million gallons of electroplating wastes and 83 million gallons of electric-arc-furnace dust from emission-control devices at steel mills. The federal hazardous waste management law, the Resource conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), requires treatment, if available, or restricted disposal of 14 additional waste streams and 107 untreated, discarded commercial chemical products and small-volume wastes. When fully effective in two years, the restric- tions are expected to cost the industry up to $950 million a year. Dr. J. Winston Porter, EPA's Assistant Adminis- trator for Solid Waste and Emergency Response, said, "Today's action will require that nearly a third of all hazardous wastes be de-toxified or restricted in some way when disposed of on land. This action provides R-1A0 (more) ------- - 2 - significant protection to the public from the potential hazards of land disposal. These restrictions have prompted technological advances and increased the availability of treatment to de-toxify"these wastes. Although more costly, treatment ultimately provides far greater levels of environ- mental protection." EPA is not setting specific treatment standards for 14 wastes commonly produced by certain manufacturing industrial processes and by certain industries, nor for 107 smal1-volume, discarded commercial chemical products and spill residue and other products. Where treatment is available, such treatment must be used. If treatment is not available, the generator must certify this to EPA and send the waste to disposal facilities which meet state-of-the-art technological requirements. In 1984, Congress gave EPA the authority under RCRA to grant two-year extensions for those wastes for which treatment capacity is not available. EPA is allowing two-year extensions today for petroleum refinery wastes, brine-purification muds generated in chlorine production and contaminated soils and debris requiring incineration. The treatment standards set for most wastes with high concentrations of organics are based on incineration. Treatment standards set for organics in the the five petroleum-refinery wastes affected today are based on incineration and solvent extraction. Treatment standards for wastes containing metals, such as electric-arc- furnace dust, are based on metals recovery or stabilization. Most of the metals in the furnace dust, such as zinc, can be recovered, but a two-year interim treatment standard based on stabilization will apply for dust with 15-percent or greater zinc levels until sufficient recovery capacity is created. No capacity extension is being granted for furnace dust with less than 15-percent zinc. This waste must be stabilized, for example, with cement-kiln dust or lime/fly ash. Electroplating sludges must be stabilized, which can be accomplished by using cement-kiln dust as a binding agent. EPA today is rescinding a two-year variance granted July 1987 for hazardous wastes containing halogenated organic compounds (HOCs). HOCs are a wide-ranging group of commonly used organic chemicals that contain, among other substances, chlorine, bromine and fluorine. The variance, granted last year for lack of incineration capacity, is no longer effective after Nov. 8, 1988, since new information indicates that sufficient incineration capacity for the compounds now is available. In July 1987, EPA also restricted the land disposal of an annually produced 15 billion gallons of liquid wastes containing cyanides, metals and polychlorinated byphenyls (PCBs) and one-billion gallons of corrosive wastes. No extensions for these wastes were granted. In November 1986, EPA restricted the land disposal of spent solvents and dioxins, granting two-year extensions through Nov. 8 of this year. Today's rule will be published in the Federal Register this week. For additional information, the public can call EPA's hazardous waste hotline 800-424-9346, or 382-3000 in Washington, D. C. ------- United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Public Affairs (A-107) Washington DC 20460 oEPA Environmental News FOR RELEASE: WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 10, 1988 EPA PROPOSES TO MINIMIZE LEAD IN DRINKING WATER The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today proposed new requirements to minimize lead in the nation's drinking water. EPA Administrator Lee M. Thomas said, "This proposal will reduce lead in the drinking water of 138-million Americans and will be especially beneficial to young children, who are at much greater risk than adults." Health effects from exposure to lead depend upon total exposure from all sources—air, food, dust and drinking water. Exposure is measured in terms of the concentration of lead in blood in units of micrograms of lead per deciliter of blood (ug/dl). For example, at relatively low exposures (down to 10-15 ug/dl in some cases), lead can interfere with the formation of red blood cells, reduce birth weight, cause premature birth, delay physical and mental development in babies and young children, impair mental abilities in children in general, interfere with hearing, and increase blood pressure in adults. At high levels of exposure, lead can cause anemia, kidney damage and mental retardation. EPA's proposal addresses the two main contributors of lead in drinking water—corrosion and source-water contamination. The rule imposes three types of requirements on public water supplies. It requires them to ensure water delivered to customers is minimally corrosive to lead in the distribution system. It requires them to remove lead from their source-water supplies. Finally, it calls for education of the public on how to protect itself from remaining problems with lead found at the tap. R-143 (more) ------- -2- Lead usually does not occur naturally in source waters. Lead gets into drinking water after it leaves the local treatment plant. Most lead sumer minimizing corrosivity of the water tap by treat- at the consumer ment plant. Under the proposal, corrosion-control treatment would be required if average lead levels are greater than 10 parts per billion (ppb) or if the acidity is too high (pH less than eight). Acidity is an indicator of corro- sive water. If the average lead levels are greater than 10 ppb, or if more than five percent of the samples are greater than 20 ppb, the water suppliers must conduct a public-education program to provide information to consumers on how to reduce lead exposure. As part of the education program, suppliers would be required to assist interested consumers in getting their homes tested for lead. Corrosion-control treatments include using substances such as caustic soda to reduce pH, increasing alkalinity with a substance such as soda ash or adding corrosion inhibitors such as zinc orthophosphate. Up to 53,000 public drinking-water supply systems in the United state.s might be affected by the corrosion-control proposal, including the public- education requirements. Compared to corrosion, contamination of source water is a relatively small contributor to lead in drinking water. EPA is proposing a Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of five ppb lead in water distributed by water suppliers. This part of the proposal is expected to affect about 900 water systems nationwide. Compliance with this proposed standard would be monitored in water just as it leaves treatment plants and before it enters distribution pipes. Besides the federally enforceable MCL of five ppb, EPA also is pro- posing a Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) of zero for lead. Enforceable standards are set as close to the MCLG (a purely health-based target) as feasible. Under the Safe Drinking Water Act, EPA must set MCLGs and enforceable standards simultaneously. The current MCL for lead in drinking water, originally set in 1975, is 50 ppb. A 20 ppb MCLG was proposed in 1985. Today's action re-proposes a more stringent goal of zero, based on more recent health-effects informa- tion. Today's proposal will reduce lead exposure for many people in this country. Of children six-months to five-years old, 100,000 to 700,000 may have their blood-lead levels brought below 10-15 milligrams per deciliter (10-15 ug/dl), the range above which adverse health effects begin. R-143 (more) ------- -3- The proposed corrosion—control requirements also will prolong the life of plumbing and pipes, saving about $500 million per year. The total annualized cost of this proposal (operation and maintenance, etc.) is estimated at $267 million per year. The estimate for capital costs is $1 billion. Today's proposal also regulates copper, which, like lead, drinking water primarily as a corrosion by-product. Copper is tionally essential element which causes gastric disturbances doses. The proposed MCLG and MCL for copper is 1300 ppb. occurs in a nutri- at high Today's proposal will appear soon in the Federal Register R-143 * # FOR RELEASE: THURSDAY, AUGUST 25, 1988 GM RECALLS OVER The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today said A HALF MILLION OLDSMOBILES AND that General Motors Corp. began notifying more than a half BUrCKS million owners of 1983 Oldsmobiles and Buicks to bring their cars in for emissions repairs. The agency said the cars are being recalled because a defective thermal vacuum switch in the evaporative- emissions-control system causes the vehicles to exceed the evaporative-emission and carbon monoxide standards. Over a million 1982 and 1983 Chevrolet, Pontiac and GMC vehicles were recalled by GM in 1987 for the same problem. In March, EPA ordered GM to recall another half million 1985- model-year Chevrolet, Pontiac and GMC vehicles with defective thermal vacuum switches. EPA said 613,582 vehicles, 26,238 of which are Cali- fornia cars, are affected by today's action. The models are the 1983 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme, Cutlass Cruiser, Delta 88, Ninety-Eight, Toronado and Custom Cruiser. The 1983 Buick models are the Le Sabre, Estate Wagon, Electra and Riviera. All models have five-liter engines. An improved thermal vacuum switch will be installed on all vehicles. The actual repair will take about 20 minutes. GM suggests vehicle owners schedule repair appointments with dealers. R-15 3 # # « ------- |