Document L0J19MKO6Lb5omLogaVwdaLg

li/hnsarito trom inami a location) I). B. Hosmer (4-2403) - General Offices, E1SF DATt July 9, 1973 *iUJCCT Effluont Standards and Water Quality Advisory Committee NgrcntNci Meeting on July 5, 1973 TO Crystal Mall - Bldg..#2 Room 1112 J. T. Garrott cc W* R. Corey w. H. Elwood M. Foresman P. B. Hodges C. S. Hoffman R. J. Kozacka M. L. Mullins W. B. Papageorge M. Pierle Since the meeting was quite informal, 1 did not get a complete list of committee members present but here is what I have: Dr. Martha Sager, Chairman Don E. Bloodgood W. W. Eckenfelder, Jr, Ramon Guzman One other member not identified As the mooting opened, Mr. Gus Spcth who represents N.R.D.C. (a consumer environmental group) was permitted to make a statement concerning toxic pollutants as they are involved in soot on 307a of public law 92500. A summary of his remarks i6 outlined btlow. 'Hie agency list of toxic pollutants represents a complete "cop out" from 1 us responsibilities under the act. Ho outlined four points that he thought were important. 1. No toxic pollutant can be eliminated because the agency finds regulation too burdensome. Tho agency appears to have pre conceived ideas about the list but it cannot omit any available information. 2. EPA cannot consider economic implications when considering toxic pollutants. He emphasized that loss stringent standards cannot bo considered because treatment is too expensive.since it was the intent of Congress that toxics must be eliminated regardless of cost. 3. EPA should focus on inherent toxicity of pollutants without re gard to concentration of the pollutant in receiving water. 4. The January 16th EPA Toxic Substances list should not be re stricted to substances known to be discharged by industry. All toxic substances should be listed to prevent them from ever being discharged with no consideration given to whether they are being discharged now. 0053873 lie pointed out that the current list is the shortest and the most limited ho had seon. He said he had soon two lists dated 12/11/72 one of which had pollutants to bo restricted immediately and another for those to be followed up on later. Then on March 1 ho saw "list CM which was several times longer. He said he had complained that: this list was too short. Ke hold it up and from across the rocu I would guess there were 75 - 100 materials listed. Speth thought about 30 more substances should be added to the March 1 list (List C). Finally Speth said the Sager committee reprosentshis last hope of making tho list longer short of litigation. lie suggested that the committee should do at least two things: 1. Issue a decent set of criteria to define Toxic Substances. 2. Get all others involved who have no economic interest in the list. Ho suggested advertising in Science magazine. This was not practical. It was finally suggested that the pollution digests might bef notified as they might mention that meetings wore scheduled. Hr. Sager said meetings were to be held in Jate July and early August in a'Ccw York, San Francisco and Chicago. She irvited Mr. Speth to notify any Uiiviromuntalists or other intere.: toi citizens. He said that he had very limited funds available for this purpose. L>r. Sager stated that her co.uai.ttco also had limited funds. Comments wero then made on the two contractors reports on the Guidelines listed below: 1. Arthur D. Little Plastics and Synthetics Industry 2. Roy F. Weston Organic Chemicals Industry. li was agreed that the comments must be restricted because the contractors reports were received only a short time prior to the meeting. There was a good exchange of information with Prof. Hckenfelder leading the discussion. Cur forward program for the organic chemicals industry report is as follows: 1. Messers Piorle, Hoffman, Foresman and Elwood will meet starting on July 9 to analyze the report to outline solid comments and criticisms we can make , 2. Our comments will bo developed by July 12 - 13 and circulated to each memebor of the MCA fash force committee on Organic Chemicals. 3. Our commonts with amplification will be given to George Itankey to permit him to develop a Monsanto presentation to be givon both to the EPA guidelines group and Martha Sagers Committee 00538? 5 Garrett 4. The MCA task force committee will meet on July 18 at 1 PM to develop the MCA comments for the industry. This will be completed by July 19. 5. Vho MCA task force will ir.ee;; with the Sager committee to present detailed comments on both the Organ!-; Chemicals Industry and the Plastics and Synthetics Industry report? at 9 All on July 23. 6 . llonsanto comments on these reports arc due to EPA on July 22 and July 25. Wo will make comments or. the Organic Chemicals Industry report by July 25 if a good set of comments can bo developed. Professor Eckenfelder went to lunch witn us. He obviously thinks the contractors reports have grave deficiencies and we agree. He said if we thought that the Organic Chemicals Industry reports wore bad we should see some of the others. Ke emphasized the importance of sound detailed comments and suggestions coming frem industry. He stated flatly that the effectiveness of (the committee with EPA was dependent upon our inputs, lie shares our opinion that A1 Cywin is a bureaucrats bureaucrat. It's obvious that Professor Eckenfelder wants to help us to obtain reasonable effecient guidelines. D. B. Hosmer 0053875 TOWOLDMONOQ55428