 |
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only. Although the information provided here was accurate and current when first created, it is now outdated. |
|
Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only. Although the information provided here was accurate and current when first created, it is now outdated. |
Chemicals in Progress Bulletin
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
EPA-745-N-94-003
Vol. 15 / No. 3 FALL 1994
TRI Chemical Expansion Rule Issued
For correspondence and subscriptions: Chemicals in Progress Bulletin,
U.S. EPA (7407), 401 M Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20460. Mike McDonell,
Co-Editor; Wanda Woodburn, Co-Editor; Gilah Langner (Free Hand Press) Layout.
TRI Chemical Expansion Rule Issued
On November 28, 1994, EPA finalized a rule to add 286 chemicals to the list
of chemicals for which Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) reporting is
required. In a related action, EPA also announced a final rule allowing
facilities that report low volumes of chemical releases to TRI to submit a
shorter, less time-consuming form - often compared to the IRS's E-Z tax
form - by establishing "streamlined reporting" of TRI data.
TRI is a database of toxic chemicals maintained by EPA under Section 313 of
the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act. Companies must
report to EPA and the states on their releases of these chemicals into the
environment and their transfer of these chemicals off-site for waste
management. EPA makes the data available to the public, for use in assessing
risks in their communities. The expansion of TRI by 286 chemicals brings the
total number of chemicals or chemical categories on TRI up to 654.
"TRI data has allowed the public to be informed and involved in
environmental decision-making as they never were before," noted Carol
Browner, EPA Administrator, in announcing the expansion. "Expanding the
list of TRI chemicals is a major step forward in increasing the usefulness
of this instrument."
EPA believes that broadening the scope of the chemical list will provide
citizens with a more complete picture of chemicals that impact their
communities. In addition, the expansion will focus industry's attention on
further pollution prevention or source reduction opportunities. Finally,
the expansion will provide a broad, multimedia picture of these additional
chemicals, not currently evident or possible from single-media permitting
or data collection activities.
Over the past year, EPA has added 34 chemicals to the TRI list, including
ozone-depleting HCFCs and chemicals regulated under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). This new addition of 286 chemicals is
based on the acute human health effects of these chemicals, their
carcinogenicity or other chronic health effects, and/or their environmental
effects. Roughly half of the new chemicals added are active ingredients in
pesticides.
In introducing the streamlined reporting rule, Browner said, "We had to
make some difficult decisions as to how to balance the benefits of more
data with our practical concerns associated with data processing and with
concerns on the part of industry about increasing the burden of reporting.
On the one hand, we believe it is appropriate to streamline TRI reporting
by minimizing unnecessary data collection and reporting. On the other, we
are concerned about preserving a substantial amount of detailed data for
the public." Browner stressed that the streamlined reporting rule is a
compromise arrived at following extensive consultation with many parties
including industry, labor unions, and public interest groups.
The streamlined reporting rule has its roots in EPA's need to respond to
petitions from the Small Business Administration and the American Feed
Industry Association that requested relief from the TRI reporting burden.
Under the new rule, facilities meeting the TRI reporting thresholds of
25,000 pounds for the manufacturing and processing of a listed chemical
(and 10,000 for otherwise using a listed chemical), but which estimate that
their annual reportable amount of the listed chemical does not exceed 500
pounds per year, can take advantage of an alternate threshold of 1 million
pounds. Facilities that take advantage of this alternate threshold need
only submit a short certification form instead of the more extensive and
time-consuming TRI reporting form. In other words, the new rule stipulates
that only facilities which report more than 500 pounds of a TRI chemical,
or manufacture, process, or use more than 1 million pounds of a TRI
chemical, need complete the longer form. Prior to the passage of this new
rule, all facilities reporting to the TRI completed the same extensive
form.
Future expansion plans for the TRI include expanding the type of facilities
that are required to report beyond the manufacturing sector. At this point,
EPA plans to include other industrial sectors which appear to have
significant releases of TRI chemicals. These sectors include energy
production (electric utilities), materials extraction (metal and coal
mining), and materials distribution (bulk terminals and freight
transportation), and waste management. Facilities in the transportation
sector, primarily airports, also appear to have significant releases. A TRI
facility expansion rule is scheduled for proposal in the fall. EPA is also
supporting an international effort to promote the concept of toxic chemical
release inventories.
For more information on these TRI rules, contact the EPCRA
Hotline at 1-800-535-0202.
OPPT Director Greenwood Departs
After four years as director of the Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics and 16 years of government service at EPA, Mark
Greenwood announced on October 17 that he was leaving public service at the
end of October to take a position with the Washington office of Ropes & Gray, a
Boston-based law firm. "For me this is an opportunity to return to my
profession, a step I have always expected to do at some point in time,"
Greenwood wrote in an all-hands memo, "From a professional and personal point
of view, I look forward to this new endeavor with great excitement."
Assistant Administrator Lynn Goldman announced that upon Greenwood's departure,
Joe Carra, Deputy Director, will serve as Acting Director. Carra appointed
Susan Hazen, director of the Environmental Assistance Division (EAD), to fill
the deputy's position on an acting basis. Jim Willis, Hazen's second in
command, will be acting division director of EAD during her absence.
Lynn Goldman, Assistant Administrator for Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic
Substances (OPPTS), will be responsible for naming a new director of OPPT,
the sixth since the passage of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and
the creation of the office in 1976. At press time, no successor to
Greenwood had been named.
EPA Holds Public Meeting on TRI "Phase 3"
by Matt Gillen
EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) held a public
meeting on September 28, 1994 to hear input from stakeholders on the concept of
a third phase of TRI expansion that would collect facility-level
chemical use information along with additional information on occupational
demographics. About 125 people attended the meeting, representing trade
associations, environmental and public interest groups, labor organizations,
state and federal agencies, environmental justice groups, and law firms.
TRI-Phase 3 is one of two project tracks that evolved out of earlier
discussions with stakeholders on the creation of a "Chemical Use Inventory"
(CUI). Facility use information refers to data about the throughput of
chemicals at a particular site, also known as materials accounting data. (A
second project track, the TSCA Inventory Update Rule (IUR), would collect data
about the commercial flow and end-use of chemicals once they leave a
manufacturing facility.)
Materials accounting tends to evoke strong opinions from all sides, and
this meeting was no exception. A key focus of comments at the meeting was
the value of materials accounting data, which includes such information as
the amount of a toxic chemical brought on site, the amount consumed, the
amount put into products, etc. Environmental community speakers strongly
supported the collection of such data as a right-to-know issue, claiming
that the data fill in important gaps. To these speakers, disclosure of
these data would lead to accountability on claims of source reduction and
other pollution prevention activities. Thus, it would help make TRI into a
better pollution prevention scorecard. Materials accounting was also seen
as providing important data for chemical accident prevention, and for tracking
the amounts of toxics in products.
Industry and trade association speakers, on the other hand, were skeptical
that materials accounting data would add much value to TRI. These speakers
claimed that the existing pollution prevention data elements were adequate to
allow measurement of pollution prevention progress. Materials accounting data
were characterized as expensive to collect and report, and while not proving
very useful to citizens, could reveal valuable information to competitors.
Industry speakers expressed concern that materials accounting data would
confuse the public about risk, and would be a distraction from the work of
reducing releases and transfers.
Other topics discussed at the meeting included the pros and cons of adding
occupational exposure indicators to TRI; whether EPA has the authority to
add such data elements; the experience of New Jersey and Massachusetts,
which already require materials accounting reporting; the relationship of
use data to risk; and concerns about redundancy in existing agency
information collection. Departing OPPT Office Director Mark Greenwood
provided a series of "tough messages" to both the industry and public
interest community (see box on previous page) on the need to be open at
this early stage of discussion.
As TRI-Phase 3 is in the exploratory stage, future meetings are likely. EPA
has not made any decisions yet on how this issue will be pursued further,
other than that it will follow the chemical and facility expansion efforts
that are already underway.
Additional background information is provided in an OPPT Issues Paper
entitled: "Expansion of the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) to gather
chemical use information: TRI-Phase 3: Use Expansion." An administrative
record (AR 128) has been established to provide public access to comments
provided by various stakeholders. OPPT is reviewing the comments and will
proceed with further evaluation of the issues. Stay tuned.
Matt Gillen works in OPPT's Environmental Assistance Division as a project
manager in charge of exploring options for TRI-Phase 3.
Playback!
In his comments at the public meeting, OPPT Office Director Mark Greenwood
"played back" some of the things that he has been hearing about TRI Phase
3.
To the public interest community, Greenwood stated that EPA strongly
believes that additional information on use and exposure should be
collected. However, he pointed out "that it is not yet clear to a large
group of people that a national materials accounting approach is the best way
to do that." Greenwood described industry's concerns that input and output
information might not "help the public ... answer the question, Am I safe?" and
that only a small number of people might eventually use the data. He also
relayed industry concerns that misuse of the data may occur regardless of
intentions, because it is technically difficult to use the data to make
comparisons across facilities. He suggested that the environmental community
think broadly about how the data will be used, and be flexible at this early
stage about the type of data elements to be considered.
To the business community, Greenwood suggested that engaging the issue of
what is appropriate for reporting in this area even if some would prefer
that the issue just go away. Greenwood called materials accounting "part
of... an inevitable debate about the full extent and outer bounds of right-
to-know." He described right-to-know as a "very powerful policy direction"
that is "going to be part of your world for a long time." Information is a
major element in the evolving self-empowerment approach being taken by the
public, and providing information is seen as a valuable and cost-effective
EPA service. Greenwood predicted that right-to-know would remain a priority
no matter who runs EPA in years to come. Greenwood closed by stating that
he hoped that these "tough messages" would be taken in a way that
encouraged stakeholders to look for consensus opportunities and to avoid
polarization as the issue moves forward.
RTKNet to Offer Speeches
OPPT's Information Management Division is initiating a pilot project on
electronic submissions for public meetings.
Individuals speaking at public meetings will be invited to furnish diskettes
containing their speeches to the Agency; the material will be made available on
the Right-To-Know-Network (RTKNet). For further
information, contact Gwen Shepard at 202-260-1607 or Lisa Flemming at
202-260-1545.
Currently, the TRI Phase 3 issue paper and several speeches presented at
the September 28, 1994 TRI Phase 3 public meeting are available on RTKNet.
Diskettes were supplied to EPA by the Legal Environmental Assistance
Foundation, Environmental Health Coalition, U.S. PIRG, Ecology Center,
National Wildlife Federation and the Louisiana Environmental Action Network.
RTKNet is an on-line, publicly accessible network that transmits
information arising from the right-to-know provisions of the EPCRA
legislation. For access information, contact: RTKNet, Unison Institute,
1731 Connecticut Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20009-1146, tel: 202-797-7200, fax:
202-234-8584. You can also register on-line by modem at 202-234-8570.
1987-1992 TRI Now Available on CD -ROM
by Geraldine Nowak
TRI data from 1987 to 1992 are available on CD-ROMs. The new CD-ROM format
updates and supersedes all previously published TRI data on optical disc.
Beginning in 1991 facilities subjected to TRI reporting also provided data
on their source reduction and recycling activities for past, current, and
projected reporting years.
The CD-ROM disc includes a separate file of information about the health,
safety and ecological effects of TRI chemicals. The information is derived
from the Hazardous Substance Fact Sheet prepared by the New Jersey
Department of Health Right to Know Program and is supplemented by EPA's
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
TRI is updated annually and has many uses. It is an important tool for
national analysis across chemicals and/or industries, and provides a basis
for linking with other environmental data. It is also a good tool for
finding information about toxic chemicals used and released in neighborhoods,
helping grassroots groups as well as EPA work with industry to reduce
emissions, and identifying areas with environmental justice issues. The
software supports search, retrieval, and display of TRI records, export of data
to dBASE or Lotus 1-2-3 format, computing of basic statistics, plus many more
features for accessing specific data.
The CD-ROM operates on an IBM PC or compatible platform, requiring 640K RAM
(with 540K RAM for the TRI files), DOS 3.3 or above, a CD-ROM drive, Microsoft
CD-ROM extensions, monitor, hard disk drive and printer (optional). The CD-ROM
is published by the U.S. Government Printing
Office (GPO) using the KAware Retrieval System developed by Knowledge
Access International of Mountain View, California.
The CD-ROM can be ordered from GPO or the National Technical Information
Service (NTIS). GPO: stock number 055-000-00469-2, $33, tel: 202-512-1800,
fax: 202-512-2250. NTIS: order number PB94-504230, $45, tel: 703-487-4650,
fax: 703-321-8547.
Information about TRI and customer assistance is available from the TRI
User Support (TRI US) desk at 202-260-1531 (tel) or 202-260-4659 (fax). A
limited supply of CDs are available free to EPA staff, other government
offices, and public or academic libraries. Customer comments on the TRI CD-
ROM are welcomed by fax or mail (address: TRI US, 401 M Street SW (7407),
Washington DC 20460).
Geraldine Nowak is project leader for the Information Management Division's
TRI CD-ROM program.
EPA Calls for New Dioxin Data to Complete Reassessment Effort
On September 13, 1994, EPA released a draft reassessment of dioxin risk and
issued a sweeping call to scientists, industries, federal, state, and local
governments, public interest groups, and hospital facilities across the
nation for new data on dioxin. This effort to collect additional data is
designed to fill gaps in EPA's knowledge of dioxin sources and emissions so
that the final dioxin reassessment document is as accurate and up-to-date
as possible.
The draft dioxin reassessment is the result of EPA's three-year scientific
review, the most exhaustive scientific review of a single compound ever
undertaken by the Agency. While it expands EPA's understanding of dioxin
toxicology, the reassessment is not yet complete and is not expected to be
until late 1995, after the completion of scientific peer review.
The draft reassessment comprises six volumes and totals over 2,000 pages.
It deals with both cancer and non-cancer effects, known sources of dioxin
in the environment, and current levels of human exposure. The report
reaffirms the link between dioxin and cancer and concludes that dioxin
exposure at some level may result in a number of non-cancer health effects
in humans. The report also identifies sources of dioxin known to contribute
to environmental contamination.
During the 120-day comment period, EPA will be taking public comments on
the draft document. Early in 1995, the Agency's Science Advisory Board
(SAB) will conduct a formal scientific peer review. The Agency will
conclude the reassessment later in 1995, incorporating appropriate changes
from public comments and the SAB review. Copies of the draft reassessment
are available from:
CERI/ORD Publications Center
U.S. EPA
26 W. Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Tel: 513-569-7562.
Fax: 513-569-7566
OPPTS and Region 5 Convene Mercury Task Force
Dr. Lynn Goldman, Assistant Administrator for OPPTS, and Val Adamkus,
Region 5 Administrator, have formed an EPA-wide task force to improve
coordination within EPA on mercury-related issues and actions. The Great
Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) suggested the need to create such a
national task force as an outgrowth of work underway within Region 5. GLNPO
had developed a series of recommendations designed to help achieve the
virtual elimination of mercury from the Great Lakes ecosystem, and some of
these recommendations, if adopted, may require issuing national policies or
regulations.
OPPTS and Region 5 received nominations to the task force from all major
program offices at EPA Headquarters and from all of the Regional Offices.
The first task force meeting occurred on October 12, 1994 in Washington, D.C.
The task force briefed Lynn Goldman and Val Adamkus on the uses of mercury, the
sources and nature of releases, existing regulations which control mercury, and
current Agency activities involving mercury which need to be coordinated across
EPA. These activities include the Office of Solid Waste's rulemaking on the
disposal of mercury lights, the Office of Air's Report to Congress on Mercury,
and the formulation of an EPA position regarding the sale of mercury from the
National Defense Stockpile.
For further information on the Mercury Task Force, contact Jim Darr
(202-260-3441), Dave Topping (202-260-7737), or Elizabeth LaPlante
(312-353-2694).
TSCA Testing and Product Stewardship Agreements Signed for DGEBPA Three
major manufacturers of the diglycidyl ether of bisphenol A (DGEBPA) have
signed a TSCA Section 4 Enforceable Consent Agreement (ECA) to conduct certain
needed health effects tests as well as glove permeation tests on DGEBPA. The
companies are Shell Chemical Company, the Dow Chemical Company and the
Ciba-Geigy Corporation.
The TSCA Section ECA became effective on August 1, 1994, the date of its
publication in the Federal Register (see 59 FR 38917). This ECA resulted
from OPPT's "Open Season" initiative wherein testing proposals were
solicited from the industry on chemicals for which final TSCA Section 4 test
rules had not as yet been issued (see 57 FR 31714).
A unique feature of the DGEBPA testing program is that it is accompanied by
a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between OPPT and the three DGEBPA
manufacturers. Under the MOU, the companies have agreed to develop and
implement a voluntary DGEBPA Product Stewardship Program. This MOU, which
went into effect on August 1, 1994, reflects OPPT's ongoing efforts to
expand the use of its TSCA Chemical Testing Program to achieve documentable
progress by the industry in important OPPT mission-related activities such
as pollution prevention, waste minimization, risk communication, and risk
reduction. Copies of the DGEBPA TSCA 4 ECA and MOU can be obtained from
OPPT's Public Docket Office (Docket # 542168).
OPPT Launches Information Gathering Effort on the New River
by Michelle Price
EPA has launched an information gathering effort aimed at addressing pollution
in areas near the New River, which flows north from Mexico into the United
States through Mexicali in Baja California and the Imperial Valley of
California. On September 21, 1994, Assistant Administrator Lynn Goldman issued
administrative subpoenas under TSCA section 11 to 95 U.S. parent companies with
facilities in the vicinity of Mexicali, Mexico. The purpose of this information
gathering exercise is to develop information to assist in conducting a
monitoring program for the New River, to ensure citizens in the New River
vicinity are protected in the event an imminent hazard or unreasonable risk
exists, and to ensure that citizens are provided with information on chemicals
released into the New River.
Also on September 21, EPA and Mexico's environmental agency, the
Secretariat for Social Development (SEDESOL), announced a cooperative effort
aimed at addressing pollution in the New River area. Under current
environmental agreements between the U.S. and Mexico regarding industrial waste
management in the border area, EPA and SEDESOL agreed to carry out measures
expanding cooperative efforts to reduce pollution in the New River on both
sides of the border. In this regard, and in accordance with each country's
applicable laws, both agencies agreed to exchange information on industrial
waste generation and management. Citizens living in the vicinity of the New
River have expressed concern about the river's pollution and the threats it
might pose to health and the environment through several citizens' petitions.
Since December 1993, EPA has received three petitions under TSCA
section 21, one from Imperial County, CA, and two joint petitions (EHC et
al.) from the Environmental Health Coalition (EHC), Comite Ciudadano Pro
Restauracion del Canon del Padre y Servicios Comunitarios (Comite Ciudadano),
and the Southwest Network for Environmental and Economic Justice (SNEEJ). EPA
responded to the Imperial County petition in the Federal Register on March 23,
1994. As a result of the action taken on September 21 by EPA and SEDESOL, EHC
et al. withdrew their petitions.
The requested information will allow EPA and SEDESOL to conduct risk
assessments, determine the relative contribution of industries in each country
to the New River pollution, narrow the scope of the monitoring program of the
New River to be conducted by EPA in cooperation with SEDESOL, the State of
California, and the U.S. Geological Survey, and assist in the health
consultation on the New River to be done by the Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry. EPA and SEDESOL plan to make the
information collected through this effort available to the public, to the
extent possible.
Michelle Price works in OPPT's Environmental Assistance Division. She is
project manager on this information gathering effort.
35th ITC Report Transmitted
The 35th Report of the TSCA Interagency Testing Committee (ITC) will be
transmitted to the Administrator of EPA in the near future. In this Report,
the ITC is revising its TSCA section 4(e) Priority Testing List by
designating a group of 25 chemicals for dermal absorption testing because
they are of regulatory interest to the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration. The ITC is also revising its List by removing 110
previously-recommended chemicals, including 28 of 43 isocyanates, 27 of 89
aldehydes, 25 of 26 sulfones, 7 of 11 cyanoacrylates, 4 of 14 diaryl
ethers, and 19 of 35 chemicals originally recommended for subchronic (90-
day) toxicity testing.
Use Cluster Scoring System: A Use-Based Approach to Setting Priorities
EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics is developing a system for
use in screening and prioritizing chemicals, known as the Use Cluster
Scoring System (UCSS). The UCSS was designed around the concept of
identifying and analyzing clusters of chemicals that can be used to perform
a particular task.
For example, instead of considering a single chemical that is used in paint
stripping, a set of chemicals that can perform as paint strippers is
considered. By screening and scoring these "use clusters," EPA can work
directly with industries and users on effective means of risk reduction.
The UCSS may also assist other public and private sector organizations in
identifying clusters of potential concern and providing an initial
indication of potentially safer substitutes for classes of chemicals.
The computerized version of the UCSS contains nearly 400 clusters with over
3700 chemicals. The system is under review by the Engineering Committee of
the Science Advisory Board and has received comments from various EPA
program offices as well as non-EPA interested parties.
DfE Reaches Milestone in Printing Project Screen Printing CTSA Released
EPA's Design for the Environment (DFE) Printing Project recently achieved a
major milestone, releasing a draft analysis, called a Cleaner Technology
Substitutes Assessment (CTSA), on Screen Printing in September 1994. This
CTSA represents the culmination of many months of research into alternative
methods for reclaiming screens in screen printing. This is the first draft CTSA
that EPA has completed, and it will be used as a model for future assessments
of risk reduction and pollution prevention opportunities in other industries.
In screen printing, inks are pressed through a screen mesh to print an
image onto paper, plastic, or electronic equipment. Instead of discarding
screens after each use, printers clean or "reclaim" their screens in order
to print additional images. Screen reclamation involves using a solvent to
remove the ink, stencil, and sometimes a "ghost image" or haze that may
remain on the screen. DfE and the screen printing industry have been
working together to evaluate alternative ways to reclaim screens in order
to make the process more environmentally benign, cost effective, and
productive.
The CTSA closely examines five screen reclamation processes. These
processes were first tested in a laboratory setting. Then, 23 volunteer
printing facilities tested the methods in 30-day production runs.
Information collected included the time spent on ink removal using the
alternative systems, the volume of products used, and the appearance of the
screen following each step in the reclamation process.
Lithography and Flexography are Next
The DfE Program is also planning to complete CTSAs for both the
lithographic and flexographic segments of the printing industry. Draft
CTSAs in these areas are expected to be completed in 1995. Lithography is
a printing process that applies different colors of ink onto paper (such as
posters, reports, and flyers) using large rollers. When a job is completed,
inks must be washed from the rollers using solvents, a process called
"blanket washing," in order to apply a new color or to start a new project.
DfE is working with the lithography industry to identify alternative
blanket washes. Laboratory analysis of 40 alternative blanket washes has
been completed to date. In October, volunteer lithography shops tested these
alternatives, which were donated by suppliers.
DfE is also forging a partnership with the flexography industry to assess
the environmental risk, performance, cost, and pollution prevention
opportunities in using alternative flexographic inks. Flexography is a process
used to print on the packaging of many frozen, boxed, and canned foods. Many
different types of inks can be used for flexography, some of which are
solvent-based. Based on these different technical studies, DfE will develop
several information products to assist the printing industry in making
environmentally informed choices. EPA is producing case studies and a video
highlighting successful pollution prevention and waste minimization strategies
in screen print companies. For more information on these and other technical
assistance tools, call EPA's Pollution Prevention
Information Clearinghouse at 202-260-1023.
Dry Cleaning CTSA in the Works
The DfE Dry Cleaning Project will soon release CTSAs comparing the trade-
offs between traditional and alternative professional garment cleaning
technologies. EPA expects to release a draft CTSA on existing technologies
first, and a second on emerging technologies in late 1995.
The first CTSA will examine traditional, solvent-based technologies. The new or
alternative technologies to be addressed in the second CTSA include the
following:
Multiprocess wet cleaning - A method of customized hand cleaning that
uses soaps and a controlled application of water/steam.
Machine wet cleaning - A mechanized, water-based method that varies
the washing technique based on the type of fabric involved.
Liquid CO2 technology - A technology that uses the solvent properties
of CO2 at high pressures to clean clothes.
Microwave drying - A "quick-dry" technology that uses microwaves instead
of heat, thereby reducing garment shrinkage. Microwave
technology could potentially make water-based techniques more viable.
The CTSA is the culmination of two years of EPA research conducted in a
cooperative partnership with interested parties ranging from Greenpeace to Dow
Chemical. The overall mission of the partnership is to promote pollution
prevention and better work practices within the professional garment cleaning
industry.
The Dry Cleaning Project is also pursuing one promising alternative technology
identified in recent research - multiprocess wet cleaning. A short-term study
on the performance and costs of multiprocess wet cleaning was completed in
1993. To further test the viability of this and other water-based approaches,
EPA will soon launch an 18-month demonstration
project. Three demonstration sites, located in cities across the United
States, will mirror typical neighborhood dry cleaning shops in terms of
size, pounds of clothing cleaned daily, and number of employees. One
facility will offer alternative cleaning technologies only, while the other
two will offer both wet and dry cleaning services.
To advance the use of safer alternative cleaning methods, EPA has also been
working with the Federal Trade Commission to make the garment care label
"Dry Clean Only" less restrictive. Public comment is being received through
October 16, 1994, on a Federal Register notice regarding proposed changes
to the label.
In an ongoing effort to keep the dry cleaning industry and the public up-
to-date on the project, EPA is conducting many outreach activities. These
include developing brochures and fact sheets on alternative cleaning
processes, compiling case studies and success stories, and exhibiting at trade
shows.
EPA Lays Groundwork for PWB Study
Printed wiring boards (PWBs) are the substrates that connect vital
electronic components (e.g., semiconductors, electronic chips) of
electronic assemblies. Several major U.S. industries, including the
automotive, computer, and defense industries, depend on efficient PWB
production for use in their products. Although the electronics industry is
generally thought of as "clean," a 1993 industry-led study found that PWB
manufacture accounts for a majority of the environmental impact associated
with computer workstation production. In fact, 79% of the energy used, 95%
of the water used, and 95% of the hazardous waste generated during the
manufacture of a computer workstation occurs during the production of PWBs.
The results of this study led EPA's DfE Program to form a partnership with the
PWB industry to jointly evaluate ways to minimize the industry's environmental
impacts and yet remain competitive. The DfE project stakeholders are currently
in the process of identifying and engaging other stakeholders in the project,
including representatives of the environmental, environmental justice, and
labor communities. Anyone interested in participating in this project is
encouraged to contact the Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse at
202-260-1023. During the initial phase of this project, EPA, industry, and
other stakeholders have begun to lay the groundwork necessary to begin
developing a CTSA for a key process step in PWB manufacture. At the first
meeting of the DfE PWB Technical Workgroup in September 1994, the workgroup
identified four PWB
manufacturing process steps as candidates for detailed analysis in the
CTSA, based on their perceived environmental and human health risks and
associated regulatory compliance costs to PWB manufacturers. EPA will
evaluate candidate process steps and rank them by relative risk using EPA's
use cluster scoring system-a system for comparing the relative risk of
various process steps (see story, p. 10).
Other documents will be developed during the course of the project, including a
pollution prevention survey of the PWB industry, a profile of the size,
distribution, and economic status of the industry, and
a description of available processes and chemicals used to carry out each
major PWB manufacture process step. After the development of these technical
work products and the CTSA, EPA will assist the PWB industry and other project
stakeholders to demonstrate alternative processes and technologies and to
develop a variety of outreach tools to promote pollution prevention, including
training materials and workshops.
EPA also plans to develop software to help small PWB companies identify and
monitor pollution prevention activities. The long-term goal of the DfE PWB
project is to effect voluntary behavior changes within the PWB industry
that result in the generation of fewer toxic and non-toxic materials,
reductions in workplace exposures, and less use of energy and natural
resources.
CTSA: Key Information Tool
EPA's DfE Program forms cooperative partnerships with industry, government,
institutions, and professional groups to identify pollution prevention and
waste minimization opportunities. In each area of partnership, EPA and its
partners gather information on the performance, cost, and environmental and
health risks of existing and alternative technologies. This information is
then compiled and analyzed in a document known as a Cleaner Technologies
Substitute Assessment (CTSA). A CTSA examines the tradeoffs among different
options and provides DfE partners with the knowledge to make informed decisions
about altering their products and operations.
DfE: The Environmental Paradigm for the 21st Century
by Joe Breen and Paul Anastas
DfE: The Environmental Paradigm for the 21st Century was the subject of an
international symposium at the ACS National Meeting held in Washington, DC
on August 21-25, 1994. The event was sponsored by OPPT in collaboration
with the American Chemical Society's Committee for Environmental
Improvement and Division of Environmental Chemistry, the Dow Corning
Corporation, the Council for Chemical Research, and the Gulf Coast
Hazardous Substance Research Center. The symposium afforded an opportunity
for analytical and synthetic chemists, chemical engineers, economists,
industrial and environmental scientists, management, and policy
makers to report progress and exchange ideas on the implementation of
pollution prevention as an integral part of our national environmental and
economic policies.
Businesses operating in the 1990s face a variety of competing demands to
keep costs low and quality high while staying competitive in a global
marketplace, and meeting consumer preferences for more environmentally friendly
products. Designing for the environment is a real-world strategy for organizing
and managing these demands for the next century. EPA's DfE program, building on
a concept pioneered by industry, aims to help
businesses incorporate environmental considerations into the design and
redesign of products, processes, and technical and management systems.
Businesses design for the environment in a variety of ways:
* By implementing pollution prevention, energy efficiency, and other
resource conservation measures;
* By producing and using fewer toxic and nontoxic materials;
* By making products that can be refurbished, disassembled, and recycled;
and
* By keeping careful track of the environmental costs associated with each
product or process.
Through its DfE program, OPPT creates voluntary partnerships with industry,
professional organizations, state and local governments, other federal
agencies, and the public. OPPT's efforts are directed at giving businesses the
information needed to design for the environment and at helping businesses use
this information to make informed choices. Within each business, the DfE
program works to ensure that information reaches the people who make the
choices - from buyers to industrial design engineers to molecular designers.
The role of the chemist - the Benign By Design Chemist - is central to the
success of the DfE approach, The traditional syntheses of high-volume
industrial chemicals use toxic feedstocks or catalysts, or they create
hazardous and toxic by-products. In cooperation with the National Science
Foundation and the Department of Energy, OPPT is encouraging university
research into alternative production methods that minimize or eliminate
hazardous substances. OPPT is also promoting the fundamental revision of
undergraduate and graduate school curricula in chemistry to promote and
incorporate the concepts of environmentally benign chemical synthesis and
processing.
The DfE Symposium in Washington involved 14 sessions including a plenary,
with some 110 presentations overall. The program included sessions on designing
chemistry curricula to reflect environmentally benign synthesis and processing,
designing safer chemicals for industry and agriculture, and integrating
environmentally concerns into industrial process analytical chemistry. Case
studies from the printing, drycleaning, aerospace, and video film processing
industries were presented. The case studies reported on DfE as the new
environmental paradigm formulated to meet our national goal of "prosperity
without pollution" in the next century.
Highlights of the Symposium
Environmentally Benign Synthesis and Processes in the Chemistry Curriculum.
There are a variety of issues involved in the interface between chemistry and
the environment. These two sessions dealt with different approaches to the
teaching of environmental chemistry; the use of microscale equipment and other
techniques to bring pollution prevention into the laboratory, and ways to bring
environmentally benign synthesis into the
curriculum at different academic levels as well as into in-service training for
industrial professionals. Sunday, August 21st: AM session (2 tapes) and
PM session (2 tapes).
Designing Chemical Synthesis and Processes for the Environment. These two
sessions emphasized practical examples of alternative synthetic pathways
for pollution prevention. Topic explored the use of supercritical fluids
and carbon dioxide as reaction media and spray paint solvents.; reactions
to produce organic isocyanates, oxychemicals, emulsin, and alkylates; and new
efforts to practice pollution prevention through the application of new
process design techniques. Highlights included: "Chemical and Catalytic
Transformations in Supercritical Fluids," by Tumas, et.al., Los Alamos
National Labs.; "Expert System for Solvent Substitution," by Timberlake and
Govind, University of Cincinnati; and "Biocatalytic Conversion of Halogenated
Aromatic Compounds to carbohydrates and Other Chiral Synthons," by Hudlickey,
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Monday,
August 22nd AM session (2 tapes) and PM session (2 tapes).
DfE: Program Overview and Case Studies. This session showcased OPPT's
program on full-cost accounting, cleaner dry cleaning and screen printing
technologies, and the EPA-GSA green cleaning products survey. Non-OPPT
presentations included: "DfE and Industrial Ecology," by Dambach, AT&T;
"Effective Partnering for Improving the Environment," by Koch, Dow Chemical;
and "DfE, by Fiksel, Decision Focus. Tuesday, August 23rd AM session (2 tapes).
DfE and The Stuff of Dreams for The Year 2040. A plenary session featured
two vastly differing perspectives of the 21st century. The futuristic
vision of nanotechnologist, K. Eric Drexler's "Molecular Manufacturing For
the Environment," and the practical insights of global technologist, Joel
S. Hirschhorn's "Enabling Global Implementation of Industrial Pollution
Prevention" offered thought-provoking and exciting challenges to the
audience to stretch their vision of the next century.
Designing Chemical Safety in Communities and Industry and Designing Information
Tools and Data Bases for Better Decisions.
Two mini- sessions presented a combination of industrial efforts to implement
inherently safer chemistry in the real world at Union Carbide, Dow Chemical,
and Rohm and Haas, and of EPA information tools and databases as a basis for
decision making. The Tuesday, August 23rd PM session (2 tapes) included a
plenary and two mini-sessions.
Cleaner Production: The International Perspective.
Italy, Thailand, Japan, The Netherlands, Latin America and France were
represented is this wide ranging day-long program. Six presentations by
industrial and academic researchers from Italy clearly made the point that
cleaner production has a broad base of support from the Italian government and
chemical industry. Presentations included:
"Opportunities for Cleaner Production in Thailand," by de Mesa, Thailand
Environment Institute;
"Caprolactam via Ammoxidation," by Petrini, et.al., ENICHEM, Italy;
"Biodegradation, Enzymes, and Mechanisms," by Bertini and Luchinat,
Universities of Florence and Bologna, Italy; and
"Pollution Prevention in Italy," by Tundo, University of Venice. Wednesday,
August 24th AM session (2 tapes) and PM session (2 tapes).
Designing Safer Chemicals. These two sessions explored approaches to the
design of chemicals that retain their functional efficacy while reducing
their toxicity. Topics covered included bioactivation and its role in toxicity,
retrometabolism, isosterism, and the use computers in toxicology. Safer
nitriles, haloalkanes, marine antifoulants, emulsion polymers, and
high-solids coatings were presented. Highlights were "A Biochemical Based
Approach for Designing Safer Nitriles," by Devito, OPPT; and "Everybody Wins,"
by Sugarman, et.al., Pi-Tech. Thursday, August 25th
AM session (2 tapes) and PM session (2 tapes).
Videotapes of the DfE symposium sessions are available from Films for
Educators, Inc., 420 East 55th Street, New York, NY 10022. (For ordering
and price information, call 1-800-722-7340, NYC local 212-486-6577, fax
212-980-9826.) Extended printed abstracts of the DfE Symposium are
available from the ACS Division of Environmental Chemistry. Contact Dr.
Robert Paddock, Center for Great Lakes Studies, University of Wisconsin-
Milwaukee, 600 E. Greenfield Avenue, Milwaukee, WI 53204-2944
(414-382-1731) for details. Information on the OPPT DfE and Green Chemistry
Programs may be obtained from: Joe Breen, 202-260-1573 or Paul Anastas,
202-260-2257.
Joe Breen will be assuming the duties of chief of the DfE staff. Paul
Anastas will be Acting Chief of the Industrial Chemical Branch.
FY 1994 PPIS Grants Award $6 Million to States
OPPT and the ten EPA Regional Offices have awarded approximately $6 million
to 66 state and tribal organizations under the Pollution Prevention Incentives
for States (PPIS) grant program. These grants and cooperative agreements
support state and tribal programs that address the reduction or elimination of
pollution across all environmental media. Since 1989, over $30 million has been
awarded to support state and tribal pollution prevention efforts. FY 1994
represented the sixth round of awards and was made through the EPA Regional
Offices. The projects may last up to three years. Recipients of the grants are
required to match the federal funds by at least 50 percent. The state and
tribal contributions may come from dollars, in-kind goods and services, or
third party contributions. For more information contact Lena Hann-Ferris,
202-260-2237, in EPA's Pollution Prevention Division.
Below are the FY 1994 PPIS grant recipients:
REGION 1
Connecticut Technical Assistance Program-$66,000
Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians (Maine)-$10,000
Maine Department of Environmental Protection - Green Fund-$60,000
Massachusetts Office of Technical Assistance-$60,000
Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction Institute-$50,000
Mohegan Tribe (Connecticut)-$20,000
New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services-$70,000
Northeast Waste Management Officials' Association (NEWMOA)-$30,000
Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management-$70,000
Vermont Health Department-$12,000
University of Massachusetts Department of Entomology-$50,000
University of Vermont Indoor Air in Schools Conference-$12,000
Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation-$70,000
REGION 2
New York State Department of Health-$86,363
New York State Energy Office-$87,880
New York State Energy Office-$199,937
Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board-$205,820
REGION 3
Delaware Department of Natural Resources & Environmental Control-$90,000
Maryland Department of the Environment-$90,000
Pennsylvania Department of the Environment-$90,000
The Schuylkill Center for Environmental Education (PA)-$130,000
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality-$90,000
West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection-$90,000
REGION 4
Alabama Department of Environmental Management-$80,000
Florida Department of Environmental Protection-$80,000
Georgia Department of Natural Resources-$85,000
Georgia Tech Research Corporation-$9,999
Kentucky Natural Resource & Environmental Protection Cabinet-$80,000
Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality-$65,000
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health & Natural Resources- $40,000
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health & Natural Resources
$80,000
South Carolina Department of Health & Environmental Control-$80,000
Tennessee Department of Environment & Conservation-$79,998
REGION 5
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency-$100,000
Michigan Department of Commerce-$100,000
Minnesota Chippewa Tribe-$80,000
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency-$100,000
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency-$100,000
Purdue University-$100,000
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources-$100,000
REGION 6
City of Austin, Texas-$70,000
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality-$77,000
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality-$80,075
New Mexico Economic Development Department-$200,000
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC)-$92,925
University of Texas at Austin, LBJ School of Public Affairs-$60,000
REGION 7
Iowa Waste Reduction Center-$90,000
Kansas Department of Agriculture-$15,000
Kansas State University-$30,800
Lincoln-Lancaster County Health Department-$28,500
Missouri Department of Natural Resources-$235,937
Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality-$35,100
St. Louis Regional Commerce & Growth Association-$20,000
University of Missouri-Rolla-$27,800
University of Nebraska-Lincoln-$33,000
University of Nebraska-Lincoln-$62,600
REGION 8
Colorado Department of Health-$104,000
Montana State University-$104,000
South Dakota Department of Environment & Natural Resources-$101,996
Three Affiliated Tribes, Fort Berthold Indian Reservation-$60,000
Utah Department of Environmental Quality-$104,400
Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality-$102,000
REGION 9
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality-$180,000
California Department of Toxic Substances Control-$200,000
University of Nevada, Reno-$200,000
REGION 10
Chugachmiut Community Health Services Division-$25,000
State of Alaska, Department of Enviromental Conservation-$100,000
State of Idaho, Department of Health & Welfare-$180,000
State of Oregon, Department of Environmental Quality-$100,000
State of Washington Department of Ecology-$75,000
State of Washington Department of Ecology-$100,000
EPA/GSA Cleaners Project Serves as Pilot for Defining Environmentally
Preferable Products
by Eun-Sook Goidel and Tom Murray
The federal government is the nation's single largest consumer, purchasing
more than $200 billion of goods and services each year. Harnessing federal
purchasing power to reduce or avoid adverse environmental impacts was the
rationale behind President Clinton's Executive Order on Federal
Acquisition, Recycling and Waste Prevention (Executive Order #12873) signed
in October 1993. Consideration is already given to performance, cost and
safety issues. The Executive Order adds environmental considerations to the
purchasing equation. Section 503 of the order requires EPA to "issue
guidance that recommends principles that Executive agencies should use in
making determinations for the preference and purchase of environmentally
preferable products."
But, what is meant by "environmentally preferable?" The Executive Order
defines it as "products or services that have a lesser or reduced effect on
human health and the environment when compared with competing products or
services that serve the same purpose." Translating this into workable
policy is a challenge for OPPT, which has been tasked with writing the
guidance under section 503.
There is no consensus on the meaning of "environmentally preferable," nor is
there a common language or standard by which to make comparisons. Does it mean
the absence or a presence of an attribute? Is one product preferable to another
if it is made with a less toxic material, but requires more energy to perform
its function? Is a product made with 50% recycled content, but contained in a
package with heavy metals, environmentally preferable? Comparisons such as
these often require trade-offs, e.g., less toxic materials for more
energy/material use or less water pollution at the expense of more air
pollution. These examples, apart from showing the complexity of determining
what is "better" for the environment, also illustrate the importance of a life
cycle approach in determining environmental preferability of products and
services. Rather than focusing on a single aspect or single impact, we need to
make environmental improvements in as many life cycle stages and for as many
attributes of a product as possible: from design, raw material and energy
extraction, and natural resource use, through manufacture, distribution, use
and maintenance to ultimate disposal.
Although a life cycle approach is conceptually desirable, tools to
translate these concepts into practice, such as Life Cycle Assessment, are
still under development. Until these tools are more fully developed and
better scientific information is available, defining what is environmentally
preferable will inevitably involve value judgements and subjective decisions.
Even with more refined tools, it is uncertain whether there will ever be a
commonly agreed-upon ranking of environmental problems. Local conditions may
dictate very different rankings. A process that requires large amounts of water
may not be preferable in water-scarce regions of the Southwest; whereas a
process that generates large amounts solid waste may be less desirable in the
landfill-scarce Northeast.
In implementing the section 503 of the Executive Order, EPA will take a
two-pronged approach. First, EPA will issue general umbrella guidance which
will articulate EPA's policy statement on "green" products and will also
serve as a broad framework within which federal agencies can initiate
efforts to orient their purchasing decisons toward environmentally
preferable products. EPA plans to publish this general guidance in draft
form in the Federal Register before the end of this year. At least one
public meeting will be held to solicit comment from interested parties.
EPA will then follow up with more specific guidance for particular product
categories. Product categories could include not just common supplies but
also services, facilities, and/or systems. How such a program might work
for a specific product category is exemplified by the current GSA/EPA
Cleaners project. This project consists of two phases. In the first phase
(nearing completion), EPA and GSA are looking at specific brands of
cleaning products that were field tested by GSA in a courthouse in
Philadelphia. The products are used on windows, bathrooms, and other
situations that require frequent cleaning. The products were tested for
efficacy and reported health impacts when used by maintenance workers to
clean the courthouse. EPA also conducted an assessment of risk to humans
and aquatic life that might arise from product use.
In the second phase, EPA is helping GSA develop guidance that may be used
to purchase environmentally preferable general purpose cleaning products.
Initial guidance has been developed for cleaning products and is being
circulated for review prior to use by GSA. Also in this phase, focus groups
of federal purchasers of cleaning products are being put together to help
EPA and GSA understand the best way to communicate environmental
information about cleaning products.
The primary purpose of pilot projects such as this is to demonstrate the
workability of general guidance and to provide practical, user-friendly
information to procurement and contracting officers, i.e., those "in the
trenches," that will assist them in making environmentally preferable
purchasing decisions. A number of other pilots are envisioned in the short
to medium term. In addition, outreach and training programs tailored to
each federal agency will need to be implemented. For additional
information about environmentally preferable products guidance development,
contact Eun-Sook Goidel at 202-260-3296. For information on the GSA/EPA
cleaners projects, contact Tom Murray at 202-260-1876.
Eun-Sook Goidel is a project manager in OPPT's Pollution Prevention
Division. Tom Murray is a branch chief in OPPT's Economics, Exposure and
Technology Division.
33/50 Case Study Profiles
One of EPA's objectives in implementing the 33/50 Program is to publicize
the actions taken by individual companies, large and small, aimed at
reducing direct environmental releases. EPA has developed a series of
concise profiles of company reduction efforts. Fourteen profiles are
available individually, plus a summary document of all 14 profiles for
quick review.
The following profiles are now complete:
Acme Metals Incorporated
Aldan Rubber Company
Aladdin Industries Inc.
Anchor Fence, Inc.
Carpenter Technology Corporation
Dexter Shoe Company
Douglas & Lomason Company
HADCO Corporation
Johnson & Johnson
Olin Corporation
Parker Hannifin Corporation
Printed Circuit Corporation
Raytheon Company
U.S. Steel Group
Sample contents of one of the profiles is included in the accompanying box.
For more information on 33/50 company profiles, contact Mike Burns at
202-260-6394.
Snapshot of a 33/50 Company
Anchor Fence, Inc. is a manufacturer of high quality link fencing systems,
gates, and specialty fencing products. The company has one facility located
in Baltimore, MD, employing approximately 85 workers.
The company has undertaken the following activities to reduce releases of
selected chemicals:
* Releases of methyl ethyl ketone have been reduced 93% (113,000
pounds) through substitution of water based formulations of primers for
pipes and fittings. This action accounts for all of the observed decrease
in releases of this chemical. In addition, all solvent based paint
applications are being strictly monitored to determine which can be
converted to water based products in the future.
* Improvements in the operation of the company's waste water treatment
system have resulted in a 50% reduction in releases of lead, nickel, and
zinc compounds between 1988 and 1992. These improvements consist primarily
of adjusting the pH of the system to increase efficiency of metals removal.
* Eliminating the use of dichloromethane at the plant by shifting the
PVC stripping process for off-quality products to an off-site cleaning
company that uses a hot salt bath PVC removal process. This change resulted
in cost savings for the company.
* Examination of solvent based cleaning processes using toluene and
methyl ethyl ketone to determine where solvent evaporation can be reduced.
The company intends to install a water-cooled component cleaning tank to
further reduce releases of the solvents.
By 1992, Anchor Fence had reduced release of these chemicals by 87% from
1988 levels. Virtually all of this reduction was a result of substitution
of methyl ethyl ketone-based primers with a water-based formulation.
33/50 Program Hits the Home Stretch: What Next?
As 1995 approaches, the 33/50 Program enters its last TRI reporting year.
The Program is aiming to build on the momentum established with the early
achievement of the interim 33% pollution reduction goal. Nearly 1,300
companies are being asked to boost their commitment to a cleaner
environment in a healthy economy in a number of ways: (a) pushing beyond
the limits of initial goals for reducing toxic releases and transfers; (b)
bringing more of their facilities into the 33/50 Program; (c) expanding
reduction commitments to include chemicals other than the 17 target
pollutants in the 33/50 Program; (d) reducing chemical emissions in
international operations; and (e) reducing toxic wastes at the source.
33/50 Public Recognition Activities
Company participation in the 33/50 Program is recognized officially in
33/50 Certificates of Appreciation. The 33/50 Program also issues
Certificates of Achievement to companies that reach their pollution
reduction goals. Now, the 33/50 Program is working with EPA Regional
Offices and other outside groups to identify categories and criteria for
33/50 Awards in the summer of 1995. The 33/50 certificates and awards serve
as powerful public symbols of going beyond the requirements of
environmental regulations. Like good housekeeping seals of approval, 33/50
certificates are the mark of cleaner companies.
33/50 - The Next Generation
What happens to EPA's 33/50 Program after 1995? Consensus on the value of
voluntary partnerships in promoting pollution prevention is growing. Other
voluntary environmental protection programs are cropping up throughout the
country. A powerful new trend toward environmental stewardship is emerging
in corporate America. Should another national 33/50 Program follow the
current one? If so, what form should it take? EPA is beginning the process
of considering "what next" after 33/50. Ideas and suggestions are welcome;
please contact the 33/50 Program Director at 202-260-6907.
EPA and Industry Associations Meet to Discuss Pollution
Prevention
by Leah Yasenchak
Representatives from EPA, other federal government agencies, and over 120
industry and trade associations met on November 9 to discuss the role of
trade associations in promoting pollution prevention. Many associations
have already taken steps to promote pollution prevention and the
environmentally sound use of chemicals among their members. The meeting
presented an opportunity for associations to learn from one another and to
build partnerships with EPA. This one-day conference sponsored by OPPT was
the first of its kind for the Agency.
New Directions for EPA
EPA and industry have made great strides in environmental improvement
through the traditional command and control method. However, EPA believes
we are reaching the limits of what this approach can accomplish. EPA is
looking at new and more effective approaches to addressing environmental
concerns. The Agency is moving in the direction of voluntary programs,
partnerships with industry, a focus on pollution prevention rather than
pollution treatment, and a focus on chemical use in addition to chemical
production. This meeting was an important step in involving industry
associations in this new direction.
After a keynote address by Dr. Lynn Goldman, EPA Assistant Administrator of
OPPTS, panelists from EPA discussed resources the Agency has available to
help industries engage in pollution prevention. An information fair also
gave participants the opportunity to see the types of resources available,
and to learn about existing pollution prevention initiatives.
Barriers Faced by Associations
A panel of association representatives discussed barriers faced by
associations in encouraging pollution prevention among their member
industries. Many barriers were identified during the discussion. These
included lack of resources, encompassing time, money, and technically
skilled staff; lack of flexibility on the part of government, industry, and
associations alike; and industry confusion over the definition of pollution
prevention. Anti-trust concerns were identified as a barrier to cooperation
across industries, as were the varied characteristics of individual
industries and the different regulations and technologies under which they
operate. Conflicts between EPA's traditional "command and control" approach
and the newer pollution prevention approach were cited as causing distrust
and a drain on resources; technologically specific regulations take away
from the creativity and flexibility needed for a successful pollution
prevention program. In addition, the lack of recognition for pollution
prevention efforts, fear of unknown obstacles, and the low priority given
to pollution prevention by top industry officials all contribute to an
unwillingness to commit to a pollution prevention program. The panel
offered several suggestions on ways to overcome these barriers.
Communication, education, and trust are keys to getting all parties to
discuss problems and work out mutually acceptable solutions. Total
involvement at all levels, meaning top management commitment and complete
employee involvement in the program, is necessary to create a pollution
prevention culture. The use of case studies illustrating successful
pollution prevention programs and linking pollution prevention to bottom
line profits can help to elevate pollution prevention as a priority.
Associations can use their credibility with their members to get the
pollution prevention message across, and can help leverage resources to
accomplish the task.
Effective Association Leadership
Another panel discussed how these groups can effectively provide leadership
for pollution prevention activities. A successful pollution prevention
program for an association should be industry-based and industry-driven.
The partnerships should be based on trust, carefully thought out and
clearly defined, and have the broad involvement of association members.
Associations should strive to provide competent technical assistance and
recognize the importance of industry profits in setting program priorities.
They should focus on obtaining flexible regulation compliance and encourage
industry to improve performance to reduce the need for further legislation.
To leverage resources more effectively, associations can create public
advisory panels or work with existing pollution prevention programs, such
as EPA's Design for the Environment or another of EPA's many voluntary
programs.
Future Activities
The day concluded with discussions on future actions EPA and associations
can take to continue the valuable dialogue and partnership. EPA plans to
establish committees of association representatives to look at different
areas of concern. Proposed follow-up activities include development of a
code of environmental management practices for chemical users, a
recognition program to highlight pollution prevention efforts of individual
companies, and development of a list of pollution prevention experts who
are willing to speak at association meetings. Also under consideration is a
workshop directed at association staff in building a proactive
environmental program, a committee to explore the best ways to improve the
technical ability and resources of associations, and an effort to identify
problems shared by several associations to allow for a coordinated
solution.
A follow-up meeting is planned to continue the momentum from this meeting.
If you are interested in becoming involved in this initiative, please
contact Leah Yasenchak, OPPT, 202-260-7854. Leah Yasenchak recently joined
the Environmental Assistance Division and is working with environmental and
industry groups.
National Pollution Prevention Roundtable 1994 Fall Conference The National
Pollution Prevention Roundtable's fall conference was hosted by the
Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance and the Minnesota Technical
Assistance Program in Minneapolis on November 2-4, 1994. This season's
meeting focused on a variety of pollution prevention issues with sessions
ranging from facility planning to regulatory integration to measurement.
EPA Assistant Administrator Dr. Lynn Goldman provided the opening keynote
with Minnesota Senator Paul Wellstone. David Kling, Director of EPA's
Pollution Prevention Division, and Kirsten Oldenburg, Senior Analyst at the
Office of Technology Assessment, also provided key prevention issue
updates.
A majority of the meeting focused on the creation of partnerships with
other prevention programs and the need to share expertise. Hence, several
sessions involved participants from the Clean Air Act Small Business
Assistance Programs and the National Institute of Standards and
Technologies' Manufacturing Extension Partnership who called for
opportunities to work together, expand the horizons of pollution
prevention, and build on unique programmatic strengths. These groups have
been and will continue to be key stakeholders in assisting business,
providing pollution prevention information, and supporting vital programs
that further the mutual objectives of pollution prevention and business
excellence.
Informing Families about Lead Hazards in Housing
EPA and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) recently
released a joint regulatory proposal requiring the disclosure of lead-based
paint before the sale or lease of most residential housing. The regulation
is required under section 1018 of the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard
Reduction Act of 1992. When final, the rule will provide families with
information on protecting themselves from lead-based paint hazards.
The proposal includes a series of required actions before the sale or lease
of housing built before 1978:
* Sellers, lessors, and agents will be required to provide the lessee
or purchaser with EPA's pamphlet, Protect Your Family From Lead In Your
Home, currently under development.
* Sellers, lessors, and agents will be required to disclose all known
lead-based paint and/or lead-based paint hazards to prospective purchasers
or lessees.
* Purchasers will be entitled to up to 10 calendar days to conduct a
risk assessment or inspection for lead-based paint hazards, unless
otherwise mutually agreed.
* Agents acting on behalf of the seller or lessor will be required to
ensure compliance with these provisions.
Title X also required EPA to issue regulations requiring that owners and
occupants receive EPA's lead information pamphlet before the commencement
of paid renovations in pre-1978 housing. EPA proposed its renovation
regulations in March of 1994 and hopes to issue final regulations in Spring
1995.
To support both rules, EPA is developing a lead hazard information
pamphlet, in consultation with the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and HUD. Recognizing
the expected distribution of the pamphlet under the two rulemakings
(approximately 20-30 million people per year), EPA has taken extensive
measures to craft a pamphlet that is both informative and readable to a lay
audience. These actions have included a 60 day public comment period, focus
test in five cities targeting lower-literacy audiences, and a public
meeting to solicit informal input from stakeholders. EPA's goal in
developing the pamphlet and the regulations is to provide families with
information on lead hazard exposure prevention before they take actions
that may increase their exposure hazards. Approximately three quarters of
the nation's housing stock contains lead-based paint. If properly managed
and maintained, this paint poses little risk. If improperly managed,
however, lead from paint can threaten the health of occupants, especially
children under 6 years of age. Over time, low-level exposure to lead from
paint, dust, and soil can cause a range of health problems including
permanent damage to the brain, nervous system and kidneys. Because of its
effects on fetal development, lead exposure can also be harmful to pregnant
women and women of child-bearing age. In sufficiently high levels, lead can
also cause health problem in adults. Such exposure is largely preventable,
however, if individuals are informed of the need to take precautionary
measures. EPA's and HUD's new regulations will contribute to such an
informed public.
Lead Training & Certification Grants Awarded to States
EPA's Chemical Management Division is pleased to announce the award and
distribution of $11,200,000 in FY 1994 to develop and carry out authorized
state programs for the training of individuals engaged in lead-based paint
activities, the accreditation of training programs for these individuals,
and the certification of contractors engaged in lead-based paint
activities. These activities are authorized under section 404(g) of TSCA as
amended, and will help to achieve the Agency's goal of preventing lead
poisoning.
The new assistance program has now appeared in both the Federal Register
(see 59 FR 10131, March 3, 1994) and in the Federal Catalog of Domestic
Assistance (see 66.707). It provides for non-matching grants in the form of
cooperative agreements. In FY 1994, all parties who applied for assistance
received some level of support, based in part upon a risk-based "lead-
burden" calculation which considered the magnitude of the applicant's lead
problem relative to other eligible jurisdictions. Forty-six states were
awarded funds, along with 18 Indian Governing Bodies and the District of
Columbia. Most recipients began their federally-supported program
activities in mid to late 1994. A wide array of activities are eligible for
funding under the program. These include, but are not limited to,
developing state legislation or regulations, training state employees,
establishing or updating lead-related databases, comprehensive planning to
address lead hazards at the state level, developing procedures for training
and certifying lead abatement professionals, fostering certification
reciprocity with other states, and public education and outreach
activities. The underlying requirement, however, is that all such
activities must lead toward the state obtaining authorization to administer
its own TSCA section 404(g) program at the earliest practicable time.
Worker Training Grants for Lead-Based Paint Abatement
EPA was given $2.8 million in Congressional add-on funds in FY 1994 for
grants to be used for worker training in lead paint abatement. A Federal
Register Notice on April 20, 1994 announced the availability of this money
and solicited preproposals from non-profit organizations with prior
experience in training workers to remove lead-based paint.
Applications were received from 31 eligible organizations. A review team of
six EPA staff members analyzed, rated, and ranked the preproposals
according to the criteria listed in the FR Notice. Eleven organizations,
with scores exceeding 80%, were selected to receive grants which ranged
from $28,000 to $708,000. As specified in the Notice, the groups selected
were environmental equity-based organizations that had experience in
providing safety and/or health services to minorities and other low-income
residents of the community.
The following organizations received grants:
Maine Labor Group on Health-$28,000
The Salvation Army-$71,000
American GI Forum-National Veterans Outreach-$106,000
Center for Health Promotion-Brighton Medical Center-$138,000
Liberty Family Learning Center-$160,000
White Lung Association of New Jersey-$164,000
Plasterers' & Cement Masons' International-$175,000
Midwest Center for Occupational Health & Safety-$245,000
Temple University-$300,000
Laborers-AGC Education & Training Fund-$705,000
United Brotherhood of Carpenters-$708,000
Worker Training Grants for Lead-Based Paint Abatement
Lead Training and Accreditation Requirements: Persevering in the Battle
Against Lead
In a major effort to provide a qualified workforce to assist in eliminating
lead-based paint hazards, EPA has proposed a national program (as required
by sections 402 and 404 of TSCA) to ensure that individuals engaged in
lead-based paint activities are properly trained and certified, that
training program providers are accredited, and that firms engaged in such
activities are certified. The proposed rule also includes provisions for
EPA to establish standards for conducting lead-based paint activities.
Other provisions of the proposal include procedures for states to apply to
EPA for authorization to administer and enforce their own lead training,
certification, and accreditation programs. Under the proposed rule, EPA
would approve state programs that provide "adequate enforcement" and that
are "as protective as" the federal program.
The proposed rule sets up three categories of buildings for which
individuals would be trained and certified to conduct specific lead-based
paint activities. The categories are:
Target Housing (public housing and private residences built before
1978);
Public Buildings, such as daycare centers, schools and other
facilities frequented by children; and
Commercial Buildings and Superstructures, including
facilities such as industrial warehouses, power plants, bridges,
watertowers, and other structures that have been painted with lead-based
paint.
Individuals engaged in lead-based paint activities in these buildings would
be required to obtain training and certification in the appropriate job
category or discipline. Firms would be required to use only trained and
certified workers to conduct lead-based paint activities. Individuals and
firms would apply for certification to an authorized state authority or
EPA. The training individuals receive must be from a training provider that
has been accredited by an authorized state or EPA.
The proposed rule also establishes seven work disciplines. Five disciplines
are in the target housing and public building category. Two disciplines are
in the commercial building and superstructure category. Course curricula
for each of the seven disciplines are also included in the proposed rule.
The disciplines are as follows:
Target Housing and Public Buildings:
1) Inspector Technician
2) Risk Assessor
3) Supervisor
4) Planner/Project Designer
5) Worker
Commercial Buildings and Superstructures:
1) Supervisor
2) Worker
Standards have also been proposed by EPA and would specifically apply to
the lead-based paint activities established in the rule. Additionally the
Agency proposes to segregate lead-based paint activities within the
relevant building category. The lead-based paint activities established in
the proposed rule are:
Target Housing and Public Buildings:
* Inspection
* Identification of lead-based paint
* Risk Assessment
* Abatement
Commercial Buildings and Superstructures:
* Identification of lead-based paint
* Deleading
* Demolition
The proposed standards are performance-based and were developed to ensure
that lead-based paint activities are conducted safely, effectively and
reliably.
Community-Based Lead Abatement Demonstration Project:
A Multi-Agency Approach to Environmental Justice
EPA, along with the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and
Housing and Urban Development have embarked on a Lead Environmental Justice
Initiative. The purpose of the initiative is to support the creation of
state, tribal, and local governmental partnerships with
community/grassroots organizations in order to address the reduction or
elimination of disproportionate lead exposure to disadvantaged communities
through community-based training, education, and abatement
activities.
The initiative makes grants available to support the creation of community-
based activity to:
(1) prevent the poisoning of disadvantaged children via low-cost, leaded-
paint abatements;
(2) empower the targeted, disadvantaged, urban and rural
communities via education and training; and
(3) enable the community economically via further enterprise and employment
opportunities.
The grants will require the state, tribal, or local governmental entity to
identify and enter into a full partnership with grassroots and/or
community-based organizations (CBO) to implement the project in a targeted,
disadvantaged community. Eligible activities under the grants will include
the Government/CBO partnership working together to:
(1) prioritize the targeted community's lead problems;
(2) plan and implement a lead-based paint abatement training program for
selected community residents;
(3) create a community-tailored lead poisoning education
campaign;
(4) devise a scheme whereby the trainees abate the community's lead-based
paint hazards using the entire range of available (from low-cost to full
abatement) abatement methods; and
(5) devise a means to use funds to provide further economic development
and opportunity for the targeted community.
The Administration for Children and Families (HHS), the National Center for
Environmental Health (HHS), the Office of Lead-Based Paint Abatement and
Poisoning Prevention (HUD), and EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics have been cooperating to make the initiative a reality. Currently,
the partnership is working on the creation of a Memorandum of Understanding
to coordinate activity on the initiative, and is investigating the prospect
of releasing a joint Notice of Funds Availability to advertise the
initiative.
New Pollution Prevention Grants for Environmental Justice
EPA is providing grants to help bring pollution prevention
approaches to bear on environmental problems faced by minority and low
income communities. Potential recipients include community groups, service
providers, non-profits, and academic institutions.
Pollution prevention is EPA's preferred approach to environmental
protection, and this grant program is designed to use the principles and
approaches that have evolved under the prevention program to address
environmental justice concerns of various communities. For example, tools
like TRI have been powerful in helping communities to bring information to
bear on environmental questions, and they should be valuable as well for
issues of environmental justice. The new grants are expressly for pollution
prevention and environmental justice. There are other Agency resources for
addressing environmental issues that do not involve prevention.
The following are examples of approaches that demonstrate the value of
pollution prevention approaches for environmental justice issues:
* TRI and Public information: using environmental information to
advance environmental justice, for example, by providing minority and low
income communities with the information, software, or other tools to use
TRI to persuade industries to reduce emissions.
* Financing: providing assistance in obtaining financing community
businesses to implement pollution prevention solutions.
* Education and Outreach: developing and distributing educational and
outreach materials on applying pollution prevention solutions that are
expressly designed for issues faced in particular communities.
* Agriculture: providing funds to address the impact of pesticides and
agricultural chemicals on farmworkers by supporting alternatives to
pesticide and chemical use; and training for field personnel who can
understand and apply integrated pest management in the field.
* Resource efficiency: encourage better use of resources, for example,
by energy efficiency, water conservation, or waste reduction in community
housing and business.
EPA is also open to other prevention approaches that communities might come
up with. The objectives of the program are to:
* Allow experimentation with broad range of prevention approaches.
* Assure that grants are available for the full range of
constituencies involved in the environmental justice activities (eg.:
tribes, rural and urban communities).
* Leverage existing institutions and create partnerships to advance
pollution prevention and environmental justice.
The majority of grants are expected to be under $50K, although larger
grants may be appropriate for service providers that will pass funds
through to the communities. Decisions on grants awards will be made by the
EPA Regional Offices. For further information on this program, please
contact Chen Wen at 202-260-4109, fax 202-260-0178.
OPPT Chemical Factsheets Project
OPPT is developing a series of two-page factsheets on TRI chemicals.
These information summaries describe how people might be exposed to these
chemicals, how exposure to them might affect one's health and the
environment, what happens to the chemicals in the environment, who
regulates them, and whom to contact for additional information. Each fact
sheet has a support document that includes chemical-specific technical
information and references.
Work on these documents began last spring and a draft factsheet on
methylene chloride was prepared by OPPT. A set of five chemical factsheets,
including four previously-available ones, were made available on RTKNet and
the Internet. The purpose was to see which data elements best suited user
needs and how they might be used by the public. A total of 28 commenters
responded with suggestions.
The content and format for the fact sheets are a direct result of workgroup
discussions and public input to the OPPT draft. OPPT has worked together
with program offices (including ORD, OW, OAR, OPPE, OPP, and OSWER) to
reach agreement on the initial selection of chemicals and the content of
the factsheets and support documents.
Plans for the release of the fact sheets and support documents include
electronic means (i.e., Networks, NLM, CD-ROM, diskettes, etc.) with
accompanying user manuals where appropriate, and developing and printing a
brochure (factsheet only) for distribution to the public through the TSCA
Assistance Information Service. Contact: Eileen Gibson at 202-260-6449.
"Common Sense" Work Begins on Electronics Industry
On July 20, EPA Administrator Carol M. Browner announced the selection of
the first six major U.S. industries to participate in a new effort to
transform the current process of environmental regulation into a
comprehensive system for strengthened environmental protection. The new
program, called the Common Sense Initiative, is designed to achieve greater
environmental protection at less cost by creating pollution prevention and
pollution control strategies on an industry-by-industry basis, rather than
by the current pollutant-by-pollutant approach. The six industries
participating in the first phase of the Common Sense Initiative are
automobile assembly, computers and electronics, iron and steel, metal
plating and finishing, petroleum refining, and printing. These six
industries comprise a sizable piece of the American economy, accounting for
over 11% of Gross Domestic Product and employing nearly 4 million people.
They also account for 12.4% of the toxic releases reported by all American
industry in 1992.
For each of the six pilot industries, Administrator Browner will convene a
high-level team of stakeholders, to include industry executives,
environmental leaders, government officials, and labor and environmental
justice representatives. The six Common Sense Teams will examine every
aspect of environmental regulation as it affects an industry and the
environment. Each team will focus its work in the following six
interrelated areas: pollution prevention, regulation, reporting,
compliance, permitting, and environmental technology. Sector teams will use
a consensus based approach so that recommendations developed for achieving
"cleaner, cheaper, and smarter" environmental solutions will have the
momentum to be implemented successfully.
Administrator Browner has designated OPPTS along with EPA Regions 1 and 9
as the co-leads for the Electronics and Computers industry sector. On
September 26 nearly 100 stakeholders, representing environmental,
environmental justice, and labor groups along with state and local
officials and industry representatives, convened in Washington, D.C. for
the first Electronics and Computers Sector Common Sense Initiative meeting.
The purpose of the meeting was to address process issues pertaining to the
initiative and to begin identifying projects to be included in a draft
workplan. The next meeting of electronics sector stakeholders is
tentatively scheduled for December, 1994. For more information regarding
the Electronics Industry Common Sense Initiative, please call John Robison
at 202-260-3590.
CBI Reform: Final Action Plan Progress
One way of looking at OPPT's "Going Public" initiative is as a two-sided
coin. On one side are the Right-to-Know initiatives aimed at making more
useful toxics data available to the public. The other side of the coin is
CBI Reform. The purpose behind this program is to reduce the amount of data
coming into EPA as confidential business information (CBI). The goal of
this effort is to have more information available to the public, thereby
enhancing the public role in environmental decision making. OPPT's TSCA
CBI Final Action Plan, released in June 1994, explicitly incorporates both
sides of the "Going Public" initiative into the various action items.
* Information Dissemination. OPPT has made a concerted effort to
disseminate useful toxics data to the public. Raw sanitized data derived
from the Inventory Update Rule (IUR) have been disseminated to states. The
entire collection of non-CBI IUR data has been made available to the public
through RTKNet.
Additionally, summaries of section 8(e) Notice of Substantial Risk studies
are available. Plans for chemical fact sheets are also being implemented.
* CBI Reform. A variety of regulatory and voluntary
activities related to CBI reform have been identified. In the fall, EPA
released proposed amendments to the Part 2, "Public Information"
regulations. These amendments provide for moderate changes in the way
filings are directed to the Agency and ensure that all requests for
confidential business information protection are carefully considered by
submitters. Additionally a structure is provided for CBI claims to expire
after a period of time.
With regard to voluntary activities, the dialogue OPPT has fostered with
industry and states has begun to pay off. Industry has sponsored a series
of educational activities to advise the regulated community of the
importance of limiting claims to only that information which is actually
confidential. Two more sessions are planned for 1995. As a result of these
activities and EPA's continuing review of CBI claims, inappropriate CBI
claims have been reduced.
One example of the value of the dialogue with states and industry occurred
last May during the Congressional reauthorization hearings when the
Chemical Manufacturers Association acknowledged that a major flaw of TSCA,
as written, was that states did not have access to confidential business
information. Since May, industry and states along with OPPT have been
struggling to come up with ways for states to secure access to state-
specific data which has been claimed as confidential. Several potential
mechanisms have been identified and implementation work is under way.
For further information on TSCA CBI Reform issues, contact Frank Caesar at
202-260-0425 or Scott Sherlock at 202-260-1536, both of the Information
Management Division.
FOSTTA Reports on FY 1994 Progress
The Forum on State and Tribal Toxics Action (FOSTTA) serves as a mechanism
for state and tribal officials to cooperate in addressing toxics-related
issues and to improve communication and coordination among states, tribes,
and EPA. FOSTTA is not a lobbying organization and does not adopt formal
position statements. Members of FOSTTA do not represent their respective
state or tribe's position on toxics issues, but rather their own individual
viewpoints.
In FY 1994, FOSTTA met three times, in October, February, and June. During
the year, two new workgroups were created to deal with pollution prevention
and environmental justice. Each workgroup is comprised of members from the
four existing FOSTTA Projects - TRI, Lead, State and Tribal Enhancement,
and Chemical Management. These workgroups will discuss federal and state
perspectives on pollution prevention and environmental justice and take
these perspectives back to their Projects, thus permitting these two
important cross-program issues to permeate all of FOSTTA's efforts.
The TRI Project provided excellent comments and suggestions to EPA for the
TRI expansion efforts. The Project was also able to have states included on
the TRI facility expansion work group, and obtained a FOSTTA membership on
a subcommittee of the National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy
and Technology (NACEPT).
The Lead Project identified approaches for encouraging reciprocity among
states for training, accreditation, and certification programs, helped
design a lead accreditation program at the state level, worked on
developing a Model State Plan that incorporated the provisions of Title X,
and is working on an approach for involving all fifty states in lead
program design and implementation.
The State and Tribal Enhancement Project worked on developing more flexible
and generic approaches to state toxics grants, developed a state toxics
needs assessment that documents state toxics activities and their perceived
needs for additional control actions, and worked on reforming the TSCA
Confidential Business Information policy to increase state access to CBI.
The Chemical Management Project developed a cooperative data exchange for
selected toxics information for TSCA-regulated facilities, obtained a
commitment from EPA to require companies to notify states of effluent
limits contained in TSCA section 5(e) Consent Orders, and helped develop
procedures for state use of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and TSCA Tracking System (FTTS).
In FY 1995, the first meeting was held on October 24-25 in Alexandria, VA;
another meeting is scheduled for March. All FOSTTA meetings are open to the
public; notifications of these meetings are published in the Federal
Register.
OPPT Explores (and Exploits) the Internet
OPPT has entered the electronic age! In an effort to expand OPPT's
information dissemination initiatives, we are participating in a pilot
project, supported by EPA's Office of Information Resources Management
(OIRM), which offers an EPA public access gopher server as a vehicle to
reach a wide audience via Internet. By now, most people have heard of the
Internet, the network of information sources and services linking over 20
million users worldwide. With a computer, a modem, a telephone line, and
certain types of connectivity software, anyone can be part of the Internet
community. To access EPA's server, a connection which allows gopher access
is required. The address for EPA's public access gopher server is
GOPHER.EPA.GOV.
A gopher server (named after the Golden Gopher, mascot of the University of
Minnesota where the software was developed) can be imagined as an access
door to information organized into layered menu options. EPA's gopher, for
example, offers about fifteen choices on its primary menu, most of which
will lead the user to a secondary level menu with additional choices. The
user signs on to the gopher server, is presented with a top level menu, and
then can "travel" up and down all the menu paths to follow whatever looks
interesting.
OPPT is using the EPA public access gopher to provide frequently requested
documents to the public. One such document is the instruction manual for
the 1994 TSCA Inventory Update Rule, (Instructions for Reporting for the
Partial Updating of the Chemical Inventory Data Base.) This document is
found in the gopher menu area selected from the following menu options
(each level of options is separated by a slash "\"): \EPA Offices and
Regions\ Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances \Toxic
Substances \TSCA Inventory Update Rule (IUR) 1994. The document has been
subdivided into chapters to make it easier to view online or download the
relevant chapters. Several of the figure files must be downloaded to the
local computer to be read.
In the same location is posted a Question and Answers document containing
questions commonly asked of the IUR support staff. It is expected that this
file may be updated regularly during the reporting cycle. Also in this
location are a number of other items of interest:
1992 TRI data available in a number of spread sheet formats which may
be downloaded and read into standard PC spread sheet software. (While the
majority of these data are derived from the 1992 collection, other files
permit comparisons with earlier reporting years.)
Geographical information system (GIS) files, derived on a state-by-
state basis from the TRI data collection, which may be used in mapping
emission patterns.
Minimum Pre-Market Data/Structure Activity Relationships Study, in
which certain endpoints for selected chemicals empirically evaluated in
Europe were compared against the estimated values derived by OPPT using
automated quantitative structure activity relationship (QSAR) techniques.
Chemicals on Reporting Rules (CORR) database, which cross-references
certain chemicals and their corresponding regulations.
OPPT has also placed the text of the proposed TSCA Biotechnology Rule and
related support documents on the public access gopher server. These
documents are found by navigating from the top level menu to Rules,
Regulations, and Legislation\ Toxic Programs\ Proposed Rules\ Biotechnology
Proposed Rule.
With electronic access to documents, the burden of document requests to the
TSCA Hotline should be lessened, fewer photocopies made, and storage of
extra copies will be minimized. Within the next few months, OPPT will be
expanding its electronic document selection. Keep your eyes open for
additional offerings.
Public Access Initiative
by Linda A. Travers
Over the last few months, OPPT has taken a lead role in an
Agency-wide Integrated Public Access Initiative. The three steps of the
initiative are to set information data standards across the Agency, to
create a master facility index to link major databases through a central
facility identification number, and to then provide public access to the
consolidated environmental data. This will be accomplished by creating a
single facility identification number, by regularly collecting facility-
specific identifying information for the entire Agency, and sharing this
information with each specific program. This consolidated approach will
provide increased access to information for the public, reduce the burden
on the regulated community, and increase the utility of the data for EPA.
Why undertake such an initiative? When people ask for information about
environmental risks in their communities, they do not differentiate risks
to the air versus risks to the water, nor do they solely want information
about possible pesticide or chemical exposure. Typically, the public wants
to understand the state of the environment in which they live, including
the hazardous and solid waste in their neighborhoods, the pollution in
their rivers and streams, and quality of the air they breathe.
Unfortunately, the disjointed and overlapping approach of EPA's current
information systems would discourage even the most diligent public user. In
order to provide a comprehensive view of the state of the environment, the
Agency must integrate and make available to the public complete information
about sources of pollution, how people and environmental systems respond to
pollutants and other stresses, and what people can do to lower risks to
their health and environment.
A consolidated master facility index system will reduce the reporting
burden for industry. Currently, each facility or company responding to an
EPA data collection must include similar facility identification data on
every form. Each Agency collection requires a slightly different variation
of the data. A master facility index would allow industry to submit a
single set of identifying information, which can then be referenced through
a common facility ID number on all other Agency submissions. This
streamlining will save industry time and resources, reduce the burden of
the Agency in maintaining duplicative data, and eliminate the confusion of
having conflicting information for the same facility. This integrated
reporting is the first step towards identifying other opportunities for
reduced reporting requirements.
The master facility index used across the Agency's numerous databases would
also provide a complete profile of the environmental status of a facility.
This new linked environmental data will allow EPA to provide meaningful
access to the American people of the environmental state of their
communities.
This project is the logical extension of several Agency initiatives into
the information resources arena. It provides a holistic approach to
environmental information for the entire Agency. Once the environmental
data across all programs can be linked and integrated, a comprehensive view
can be examined on a ecosystem, pollution prevention, or enforcement
approach.
Integrated information will facilitate examination of all
facilities of a particular corporation or of an entire industry.
Integrating environmental data encourages innovative ideas and allows
flexibility in implementing environmental policy, the cornerstone of the
Common Sense Initiative. Without linking cross-media data, it is difficult
if not impossible to implement whole-industry initiatives.
An integrated public access approach builds on the public's right-to-know
and provides all available environmental data to the general public. By
improving public access to and understanding of the data we possess, we
will help improve the effectiveness of citizens in protecting themselves
and their environment and reduce unnecessary fears about environmental
conditions that do not present real risk. The Toxic Release Inventory has
shown us the value to the public of examining all releases together,
whether it is releases into the air, water, or waste disposal. This
approach will be expanded to provide the public with all available data on
specific chemicals, facility profiles, and complete corporate profiles.
In early 1995 EPA will begin a negotiated rulemaking process with our
partners in the states, industry, labor organizations, and
environmentalists. The Agency will concurrently work on technical and data
standards to assist in implementation. We will also continue dissemination
efforts utilizing the Internet, in preparation for more integrated data.
The Agency recognizes the limits of its own capabilities to address the
tremendous range of environmental issues, and the importance of empowering
the public to assist in the protection of their own environment.
Linda Travers is the director of OPPT's Information Management Division.
NHATS FY 1986 Results
Until 1992, EPA conducted an annual National Human Adipose Tissue Survey
(NHATS) to quantify the levels of selected chemicals in the adipose tissue
of humans in the U.S. population. Final results for FY 1986 have been
published in two volumes. Copies of volumes I and II of "Semivolatile
Organic Compounds in the General U.S. Population-NHATS FY86 Results" can be
obtained by calling Khoan T. Dinh of the Technical Programs Branch, CMD, at
202-260-3891.
Index to 1994 Articles
General Information
TSCA Section 21 Petitions-Spring 1994
Lynn Goldman Brings Medical, Health Service, Environmental
Background to OPPTS-Spring 1994
A New Vision For TSCA-Summer 1994
Final Action Plan for TSCA CBI Reform-Summer 1994
OPPT Director Greenwood Resigns-Fall 1994
"Common Sense" Work Begins on Electronics Industry-Fall 1994 CBI Reform:
Final Action Plan Progress-Fall 1994
FOSTTA Reports on FY 1994 Progress-Fall 1994
OPPT Establishes New Chemicals Pollution Prevention Recognition Project-
Spring 1994
TRI
TRI Releases Decline 6.6% in 1992-Spring 1994
TRI Chemical Expansion Rule Issued-Spring 1994
Regions and States Make Broad Use of TRI Data in 1993-Summer 1994 TRI
Industry Expansion Focuses on Five Sectors-Summer 1994
EPA Holds Public Meeting on TRI "Phase 3" by Matt Gillen-Fall 1994
TRI Chemical Expansion Rule Issued by Geraldine Nowak-Fall 1994 1987-1992
TRI Now Available on CD-ROM by Geraldine Nowak-Fall 1994
Existing Chemicals
Existing Chemical Program Establishes Priorities for FY94-Spring 1994
Formaldehyde Exposure Testing in New Housing-Spring 1994
RM2 and POST-RM2 Activity Chart-Spring 1994, Summer 1994
ATSDR Chemicals Added to Master Testing List-Spring 1994
TSCA 1994 Inventory Update Rule Collection-Summer 1994
Q's & A's on the Inventory Update Rule-Summer 1994
Enforcement Initiative Targets Late 1990 IUR Reporters-Summer 1994 SIETIS
Database Created for Silicone-Summer 1994
34th Report of the TSCA Interagency Testing Committee-Summer 1994 Update on
Machine Fluids-UAW Section 21 Petition-Summer 1994 EPA Calls for New Dioxin
Data to Complete Reassessment
Effort-Fall 1994
OPPTS and Region 5 Convene Mercury Task Force-Fall 1994
TSCA Testing and Product Stewardship Agreements Signed for
DGEBPA-Fall 1994
OPPT Launches Information Gathering Effort on the New River by Michelle
Price-Fall 1994
35th ITC Report Transmitted-Fall 1994
Use Cluster Scoring System: A Use-Based Approach to Setting Priorities-Fall
1994
Design for the Environment
Green Chemistry: Benign by Design by Joe Breen-Spring 1994
DfE Printing Project Enters Product Demonstration Phase-Spring 1994
EPA Technology Innovation Strategy Emphasizes Partnerships-Spring 1994 DfE
Assessment on Dry Cleaning Due in August-Summer 1994
DfE Reaches Milestone in Printing Project-Fall 1994
Italics: Screen Printing CTSA Released-Fall 1994
Dry Cleaning CTSA in the Works-Fall 1994
CTSA: Key Information Tool-Fall 1994
EPA Lays Groundwork for PWB Study-Fall 1994
DfE: The Environmental Paradigm for the 21st Century by Joe Breen and Paul
Anastas-Fall 1994
Pollution Prevention
Proposed Pulp and Paper Rule Integrates Multi-Media Source
Reduction Measures-Spring 1994
33/50 Program Achieves '92 Reduction Goal One Year Early-Spring 1994
Conference to Promote Voluntary Initiatives-Spring 1994
Fifty-Two Pollution Prevention Grants Awarded-Spring 1994
Pollution Prevention Clearinghouse Receives High Marks for
Information Services-Spring 1994
National Roundtable of State Pollution Prevention Programs: 1994 Spring
Conference-Spring 1994
Environmental Management Standards: Is EPA ISOlated? by Mary McKiel-Spring
1994
P2 Round-Up of Activities-Summer 1994
10th Annual P2 Conference-Summer 1994
National Pollution Prevention Roundtable 1994 Fall
Conference-Fall 1994
FY 1994 PPIS Grants Award $6 Million to States-Fall 1994
EPA/GSA Cleaners Project Serves as Pilot for Defining
Environmentally Preferable Products by Eun-Sook Goidel and Tom Murray-Fall
1994
33/50 Case Study Profiles-Fall 1994
33/50 Program Hits the Home Stretch: What Next?-Fall 1994
EPA and Industry Associations Meet to Discuss Pollution
Prevention by Leah Yasenchak-Fall 1994
Lead, Asbestos, PCBs
PCB Petition Denied-Spring 1994
Asbestos Accreditation Extended to Public & Commercial Buildings-Summer
1994 Agency Proposes to Simplify Reclassification of PCB
Transformers-Summer 1994
Final Rule on PCB Exemption Petitions Published-Summer 1994 Informing
Families about Lead Hazards in Housing-Fall 1994
Lead Training & Certification Grants Awarded to States-Fall 1994 Worker
Training Grants for Lead-Based Paint Abatement-Fall 1994 Lead Training and
Accreditation Requirements: Persevering in the Battle Against Lead-Fall
1994
Biotechnology
EPA's Proposed TSCA Biotechnology Rule Reviewed at OMB-Summer 1994 TSCA
Approved Field Testing of Genetically-Modified Bacteria-Summer 1994
Ecological Tier Testing Schemes for Microorganisms Workshop-Summer 1994
Environmental Justice
OPPT Signs On for Environmental Justice Strategy-Summer 1994 Community-
Based Lead Abatement Demonstration Project: A
Multi-Agency Approach to Environmental Justice-Fall 1994
Pesticides
Clinton Administration Proposes Reforms in Nation's Pesticide and Food
Safety Laws-Spring 1994
Legal/Enforcement
Enforcement Reorganization-Spring 1994
International
International Community Steps Up Focus on Toxics Inventories-Spring 1994
OECD Member Countries Consider Limiting Lead in Consumer Products-Spring
1994 Report of the 3rd SIDS Review Meeting-Spring 1994
Final Report on Joint U.S./E.U. Study of SAR-Summer 1994
TSCA Hotline Q&A: Exporter Responsibilities-Spring 1994
Exporter Responsibilities: Clarification-Summer 1994
Resources
ECOSAR: New Ecotoxicity Software Available-Spring 1994
OPPT Chemical Factsheets Project-Fall 1994
OPPT Explores (and Exploits) the Internet-Fall 1994
Public Access Initiative by Linda A. Travers-Fall 1994
NHATS FY 1986 Results-Fall 1994