\

33Ui

£

I tW? I UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY



WASHINGTON B.C. 20460

April 21, 1992

OFFICE or
THE ADMINISTRATOR
SCIENCE advisory BOARD

EPA-SAB-IAQC-COM-92-005

Honorable William K. Reilly
Administrator

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460

Re: Science Advisory Board Commentary on the Agency's Asbestos Program
Dear Mr. Reilly;

As we expressed in our letter to you of April 20, 1990, the SAB is concerned that the
scientific basis for EPA's regulatory actions and guidance documents on asbestos have not had
the benefit of review by the Science Advisory Board (SAB), You yourself indicated some
concerns about past Agency decisions on asbestos in your address of June 12, 1990 to the
American Enterprise Institute (AEI) entitled "Asbestos, Sound Science, and Public
Perceptions." The report you received in September of 1991 from the Health Effects Institute
(HE!) - Asbestos Research on "Asbestos in Public and Commercial Buildings: A Literature
Review and Synthesis of Current Knowledge" is a comprehensive, up-to-date, and objective
summary of the available data on human exposure, effectiveness of remediation procedures,
and critical issues in toxicity assessment and exposure-response relationships.

In view of these concerns and developments, the Indoor Air Quality and Total Human
Exposure Committee (IAQTHEC) of the SAB invited representatives of the Office of Research
and Development (ORD) and the Program Offices having significant asbestos interests and
responsibilities to provide a briefing on their current asbestos-related activities. The briefing
was held during the Committee's public meeting in Arlington, Virginia on February 24-25,
1992, Presentations were made by Mr. Michael Beard (Atmospheric Research and Exposure
Assessment Laboratory, Research Triangle Park - ORD) on asbestos and substitute libers
monitoring methods research, by Mr. Roger Wilmoth (Environmental Monitoring Systems
Laboratory, Cincinnati - ORD) on asbestos control technology, and by Dr. Joe Schecter
(Environmental Assistance Division - OPP&T) on regulatory concerns and actions currently


-------
being considered, including coordination with OSHA, and possible responses to recent court
decisions. Although representatives of OAR and GSWER were not present, some of their
current and recent activities were discussed briefly by the ORD and OFP&T representatives in
yrms of their knowledge of past liaisons and cooperation.

We wish to commend Mr. Beard, Mr. Wilmoth, and Dr. Schecter for the time and effort
that they made in preparing their presentations, and for their candor and responsiveness in the
discussions with the members of the Committee that followed. Based on these discussions, the
Committee was able to come to consensus on some preliminary concerns about the Agency's
asbestos program and its capacity to meet its regulatory responsibilities and commitments to
reducing future risk in cost-effective ways.

Our preliminary consensus concerns are as follows:

1)	We heard no evidence that there is any strategic planning for addressing either
important research needs or the implications of past research concerning the
importance of fiber dimensions on inhalation hazard. The ORD programs for
measurements and controls appear to be based on outmoded notions of which
fibers need to be measured and controlled, and the scientists and engineers in
ORD have not redirected, nor have been requested to redirect, resources to what
they acknowledge is a critical need. In fact, there is an absence of guidance, in
general, from the Agency's health scientists on the specification of the factors
that govern toxicity.

2)	There appears to be little, if any ongoing research on the critical issue of fiber
properties affecting toxicity since the retirement of Dr. David Coffin from the
Health Effects Research Laboratory (HEEL). It is possible that replacement
fibers for asbestos in products and buildings may be as hazardous or more
hazardous than the asbestos products they replace. Such research is needed if
the Agency is to make scientifically sound policy regarding asbestos and
substitute products.

3)	There does not seem to be any formal mechanism for coordination on hazard
ranking, monitoring methodology, or control technology on an Agency-wide
basis. It is necessary to bring together the expertise and insights of OED,
OAR, OSWER, OPP&T, and other Agency units having related interests in

2


-------
asbestos. Further, there is no evidence of such coordination between
involved Federal agencies.

Given the preliminary nature and incomplete coverage of our initial review of
Agency programs in asbestos, we propose that the above concerns receive a more
thorough İsam-ination at the next meeting of the IAQTHE Committee, which is
tentatively scheduled for June-July 1992. We urge you to attend if your schedule
permits, and to advise us if you have any particular concerns regarding asbestos
which you would like us to examine. We hope that a further dialogue will prove
valuable to you as you come to grips with the difficult issues in asbestos risk
assessment and risk management that will confront the Agency in the near future,
and for many years to come.

Sincerely,

Dr. Eaymond Loehr, Chair
Executive Committee
Science Advisory Board

Dr, Morton Lippmann, Chair
Indoor Air Quality and Total

Human Exposure Committee
Science Advisory Board

3


-------
NOTICE

This report has been written as a part of the activities of the Science Advisory Board, a
public advisory group providing extramural scientific information and advice to the
Administrator and othe> officials of the Environmental Protection Agency. The Board is
structured to provide balanced, expert assessment of scientific matters related to problems
facing the Agency, This report has not been reviewed for approval by the Agency and,
hence, the contents of this report do not necessarily represent the views and policies of the
Environmental Protection Agency, nor of other agencies in the Executive Branch of the
Federal government, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute a
recommendation for use,


-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Science Advisory Board
Indoor Air Quality and Total Human Exposure Committee

fhalrman

Dr. Morton T.ippmann, Institute of Environmental Medicine, New York University
Medical Center, Tuxedo, NY

Vim Chairman

Br. Jail AJ. Stolwijk, School of Medicine, Department of Epidemiology and Public
Health, Yale University, New Haven, CT

Members/Consultants

Br, Joan Baisey, Indoor Environment Program, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory,
Berkeley, CA

Br. Timothy Larson, Environmental Engineering and Science Program, Department of
Civil Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA

Br. Victor G. Laties, Environmental Health Science Center, University of Rochester
Medical Center, Rochester, NY

Dr. Paul Lioy, Department of Environmental and Community Medicine, Robert Wood
Johnson School of Medicine, Piscataway, NJ

Mr. Roger G. Morse, ENTEK, _*ivironmental and Technical Services, Inc., Troy, NY

Dr. Jonathan M. Samet, The University of New Mexico School of Medicine, New
Mexico Tumor Registry, Albuquerque, NM

Dr. Jerome J. Wesolowski, Air and Industrial Hygiene Lab., California Department of
Health, Berkeley, CA

Br. James E. Woods, Jr., College of Architecture and Urban Studies, Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA

Science Advisory Board Staff

Mr. A. Robert Flaak, Assistant Director, Science Advisory Board (A-10IF), U.S. EPA,
Washington, DC 20460

Ms. Carolyn Osborne, Program Assistant, Science Advisory Board


-------
Distribution List

Administrator
Deputy Administrator
Assistant Administrators
EPA Regional Administrators
EPA Laboratory Directors

Deputy Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste and

Emergency Response
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation
EPA Headquarters Library
EPA Regional Libraries
EPA Laboratory Libraries


-------