Document GK2k1Rn5y0Zpw94mVY0GgQmOv

A A/C Pipe Producers Association Public Affairs Committee International Affairs Committee _________ jC/j. F. Welch, Vice President Internal Correspondence January 19,1982 DATE SUBJECT State of California - Toxic Chemical Alert Plan REF: JFW correspondence, same title, October 22, 1981 ACTION REQUIRED: Review for information On November 24, 1981, the Sacramento Bee ran an article (AttadvfaerTt 1) describing a Brown administration strategy "to deal with cancer causing materials." Winner/Wagner & Associates obtained a copy of the internal memorandum (Attachment 2) describing the "comprehensive new strategy." First, it appears that Samuel Epstein, M.D., an extremely liberal anti-carcinogen advocate, is providing counsel to the Toxic Advisory Group. This does not auger well for the final outcome of these deliberations. c p The strategy appears to be to develop a California version of the Toxic Substances^^l Control Act which would encompass "the manufacture, transportation, use and disposal of toxic chemicals." The proposed program has three parts: > 1. A "cancer prevention policy" on the use and regulation of carcinogens. The most onerous aspect of the policy is that it would ban the use of a carcinogen if safer alternatives were available. Exemption requirements are available but extremely difficult, if not impossible, to meet. Worse, users of carcinogens would be taxed, with proceeds going to a fund for alternatives. 1 2. A workers and consumers "right to know" policy. The workers "right to know" element appears to be met by existing state and federal regulations for asbestos. It is likely, however, that the "right to know" provisions will extend broadly to the public. In that regard, the increased awareness (if it is made) of the presence of asbestos in California drinking water or the potential role of A/C pipe in contributing asbestos to drinking water may bring more adverse publicity to bear on A/C pipe. 3. A toxic waste program, legislation for w'hich already has been signed into law, being administered by the , Department of Health Services. 1982 is an election vear in California and Governor Brown will seek the U.S. Senate seat of S. I. Hayakawa. It is not known what impact the election will have on the progress of this policy. Winner/Wagner & Associates will closely monitor this development and recommend industry counterinitiatives as necessary. rt APr.o .JEN 0002902 2- - If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. JFW/ajb cc: A. Kahn, Esq. N. Rahn, Esq. Special Counsel (Cal., Ariz., Tex.) copies to: Public Affairs Committee International Affairs Committee H. Olson B. Cook R. LeGault W. Perrell J. Woods J. Baker T. Dougherty D. Stinson W. McCallie B. Collier R. Dorner E. van der Rest B. Giboin N. Officer R. Hobbs A. Saoulis R. Jalan V. Pattabhi H. Hudson C. Barton S. Al-Tarkait HEGA/6 Chrono i CAPCO JEN 0002903 ATTACHMENT 1 A4 The Sacramento Bee Tuesday, November 24,198t Brown Memo Details Strategy On Carcinogens Bee Capitol Bureau The Brown administration, according to an internal memo. Is considering a "comprehensive - new strategy" to deal with cancer-causing materi als that could result.in warning labels on fresh -"produce and meats. The strategy was developed out of meetings Oct. 1 and 2, according to the memo, which was written by Ken Finney, a special assistant to Brown. Finney was out of town this week and unrea chable But acting press secretary Lucien Haas downplayed the memo as "a typical staff memo which doesn't have much meaning because II hasn't been adopted. It's a general framework of a working document and all the details haven't been fleshed out." Nonetheless, it has stirred the concern of lob byists for the food and chemical industries, who have circulated it widely. According to the memo, the Brown administra tion would set up a three-part strategy including a toxic hazards program, a "right-to-know" pro gram that would label toxic materials including foodstuffs, and a third program on toxic wastes. Regulations would increase the number of list ed carcinogens "to which humans are exposed via air. water, food or in the workplace", from the current 25 to several hundred, the memo said. White state cancer policy has not been fully developed, it probably would have the following provisions: The use of a carcinogen would be banned If safer alternatives were available for use. Any present or prospective user of a carcino gen would have to prove that no alternatives to proposed or current use exists, that the substance is "efficacious" for the proposed or current use. Users of such substances would have to devel op plans to monitor their use. All users of carcinogens would be taxed with proceeds going to a fund to search for alternatives to the carcinogens. i r.APCO JEN 0002904 'M emorandum Tcxic Advisory Group Members ATTACHMENT 2 Vr ^lr 1 October 16, ISbl hem Govern#*4 OfftCt Kwrn ri:\ney &vbi: proposed toxics actooa (CONSENSUS OF THE OCTOBER 1ST & 2ND KEEPINGS WITH DR. ETSTEIN) The following represents the framework of a comprehensive new strategy to dual with the complex issues that arise from the manufacture, trans- ^ portaticn, use, and disposal of toxic chemicals in California.' The cUMtogy canters on the right to know or toxic hazards and on the control of carcinogenic substances and substances which pose a threat to human repre luctivc Iveulth. Further, the program will sock to identify tdvesc c.'-.oiucals arxl their uses, which adversely affect the productivity of our air, w,,tor, and wildlife nebitat and to develop measures to forestall further degradation. The framework of this strategy has t'urec parts: f ' I. Toxics Hazards Program II. Right-to-Know III. TOxic Wastes < Tlw following !s an outliric of the provisions or each port of the strategy. I. Tosic Hazards Procram For the most part this program will rely on existing regulatory authority of the agencies that new ectrprisc the Toxic Substances Coordinating Council. For the first tine in State goverment, all involved agencies will have a framework within which a cohesive and identifiable State toxic policy can be shaped. However, key elements will involve legislative proposals. T:k program has three major elements: A. Tl\e California Cancer Prevention tv>licy The State will'develop*and the Governor'will institute a single State policy, to be implemented by all agencies with regulatory authority, on the use and regulation of carcino gens. This policy will bo instituted ir tito following stops: (1) Tlx.* existing draft State Carcirogvn Identification policy will be adopted by Ci:l CG11R. (The ID policy lias been prepared and reviewed by all relevant agencies). CAPCO JEN 0002905 -* ' ' Toxic Advisory Group ftembers Pago 2 Vv October 16, 1981 (2) The Hazards Evaluation System and Information Service, using the Carcinogen ID Policy, will develop and publish a list of carcinogens to which humans are exposed via air, water, food, or in the workplace. (Tl>e number of identified carcinogens will probably increase from 20 to several hundred). (3) All carcinogens so identified wil) be placed by regulation on the Cal OSUA carcinogen registry (Health and Safety Code 24204, this will give the State full knowledge of the use and distribution of the carcinogens). (4) All State agencies will be required to regulate the use of carcinogens pursuant to the* State policy (the agencies involved are CDFA, DIR, DUS, SWRC3, and ARB). Tl\e State cancer policy has not yet been fully developed but would probably have the ----following provisions: The use of a carcinogen would be banned if f, safer alternatives were availablei for use. Any present or prospective user of a carcit>ogen would have to demonstrate all of the following: --that jk> alternatives to the proposed or current use exists. --that the carcinogen is efficacious for the proposed or current use. --that the minimum exposure possible, given the use of the best available technology would occur to hununs and the environment. --tluil Utoir exists fast. ajJ accurate iiuthudology fur monitori.ng tlx: substance in all media in which it might tx'cur due bo the projosod or iv.rit-nt --tint' tlx: user develop an extensive nonitoriivg plan. llul Uk-i'i: will be lull |<uh)io diuelo:;iu*e of it:; tux* .irwl potential I'clcase in ait', water, fco.1, ot workplace. 1 CAPCO JEN 0002906 Toxic Advisory Group Members Page 3 October 16, 1981 --that all monitoring data be disclosed to the public. --tint provisions for completing data gaps on the long-range health effects be provided by the user. All users of carcinogens would be taxed; proceeds would go into a fund to search for alternatives to the use of the carcinogen. D. Reproductive Hazards Policy Tlx: State will develop and the Governor institute a single State policy on the use and regulation of substances which pose reproductive hazards (birth defects and sterility). Tlv: policy would develop along lines similar to the Cancer Policy outlined above. This policy would begin with the creation of a Reproductive Hazards Identification Policy by HESIS. r C. Productivity Impairment , The State will seek to identify those chemical pollutants which because of their presence in the environment impair the productivity of cur air, water, soil, and wildlife habitat. The State will adopt measures, based on the best available technology and the availability of safe substitutes to reduce the presence of these chemicals in the environment. 11. Pioht-to-Know All citizens have the right to protect their health and well being against cliemical assaults to which they do not voluntarily submit. I.v. >y day workers and consumers are exposed to chemical hazards of which they are unawute in their hunts, workplaces, atid in the iw.tn.miiy environment. The following activities would form Cite lxtsis >j iJe iknonvjr'K of lorl to provide timely and accurate information to all citizens about the risks of exposure to hazardous substances. is. hi;1.1 'nl at inn _ol_ tlw l.virkors Piit. to K.iow Program 'litis program was er.iaUd by legislation s;oworcd 1 iy the iovunvjr hist year and adi'dnir.u.-rx.d by Die Department of Industrial Relations. Titc louir.lnLiun uroviitcs tliat all t.orkers have access to itutorinl data safety sheets on the chemicals Uioy .ire working witlt. / I ... .continued ^ a n a a icm nnnoQH7 v.y'vige 4 ' D. Extension of Workers Right to Know to Consumers --Labeling of over the counter drugs (Department of Health Services). Of the 1,000 ingredients in 30,000 over the counter drug prepare cions, uterc is no efficacy data for 70 percent and no safety data for 30 percent. --Labeling fresh and c-tnned produce and meat. Label will inform consumers of \ihat carcinogens, neurological toxins and reproductive toxins are routinely applied to the ccnnodity; what tolerance levels are see for each; whether or not monitoring techniques are available to detect them; and vhethur or not residues have been found (DHS, CDFA). --A campaign to disseminate public information on toxic substances in the hone. (Dept, of Consumer Affairs). C. Snixert by the Administration for the Adoption of Local - 6rdinai>oes which provide the public with: --Information on all storage, transportation, use, and emission data on priority toxic chemicals (carcinogens, reproductive health hazards, neurological toxics). r --Information on proposed ground and aerial spraying of priority toxic chemicals and the potential health risks from drift. * D. Tiic development of a consistent Administration policy on the availability to the public of toxic health effect;; data held by State agencies. III. Toxic Wastes Over the last two years, the statutory base for the control of toxic wastes lias been established through the Governor's successful legis lative initiatives on toxics. New, the principal activity of the Gt.it o in tins area is to administratively follow through on those loasJav ivc advances. A. AUvnvn.ivvs to landfills 1. lull iiisclusure of*the alternatives,to toxic landfills. Full jiuLlic participation in selecting and siting nltoinalivon to landfill. *. U-iii tlie latVJ disioiul of curtain vtxLrencly hazardous W.iSlU:*. ' ....continued CAPCO JEN 0002908 foxic Auvu--"j *a.oup Members Pago 5 October 16, 1961 4. Impose increased fees on the landfill disposal of toxic, 4rsistent wastes to encourage alternative disposal. 6. Permit for construction of three to five new alterna tive disposal facilities in the next 18 months. E. Dunn Site Clean-Up and Human Health Effects 1. Ensure full public participation in the identification of abandoned toxic dumps, the decisions to clean up specific sites, and in the work in progress -- all under taken through California's $100 million "Superfund". 2. Implement And provide adequate public notice of the State Board of Control's "Victims of Toxic Exposure" . _ compensation program (part of the Superfund). 0.'-rTEfovidc' Tor' the caavplete public participation in the------toxic dunp and spill related health effects studies uixiortaken through the Superfund. C. kectSonse to Toxic Soills - , I II Tl. II II - LH _ *T * l 1. Prevent spills through the aggressive administration of t)x> two self-funded programs of hazardous waste and hazardous substance hauler inspections and licensing. 2. Effectively coordinate State and local response to toxic spills by expanding the role of the Office of Emergency Services. 3. Ensure that local first responders have adequate emergency response equipment pursuant to the State Superfund. 4. Ensure the provision of adequate training for State and local rospofxlcrs. K1`: J i t * A A iem nnnpQOQ