Document baZJRq5D6VbjLK9j7QbXnKxm1

09/03/93 14:52 0203 794 5275 itram UCC&P HS&EA t/C P* t/c @002/009 UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION 30 Cfl_Q RDGeeURY ROAD, DANBURY, CT aar?-0001 August 12, 1993 CERTIFIED MAH RECEIVED - 0 1993 Document Processing Center (TS-790) Office of Pollution Prevention & Toxics U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 401 M Street, SW Washington, DC 20460 Attn: TSCA 8(e) Coordinator Dear Sir or Madam: Union Carbide Corporation ("Union Carbide") herewith submits the following information concerning an epidemiology study at Union Carbide's Bound Brook; NJ plant which the Agency may regard as being subject to TSCA 8(e) reporting under its current guidelines. A nested case-control study was conducted to investigate whether an excess of pancreatic cancer, identified in a cohort mortality study, was associated with potential workplace exposures. The attached draft report (identified below) concludes that: "[o]ver the study period, significant exposure-related process changes occurred... Although PVC [polyvinyl chloride] and PE [polyethylene] processing operations could not be analyzed separately, the pancreatic cancer excess is more likely to be related to PVC processing, since this operation started earlier and involved more numerous potentially hazardous raw materials and exposures. Identification of a causative agent or combination of agents would require investigations with more detailed exposure information". "Pancreatic Cancer Among Workers Processing Synthetic Resins", S.L. Selenskas, M. J. Teta, J. N, Vitale, Draft Business Confidential Report, Union Carbide Corp., July 23,1993. j While no assertion of confidentiality is made, the Agency is advised that the publication rights to this information arc the property of Union Carbide. 21723001 epapc SEP 3 '93 15:52 203 794 5275 PflGE.002 10/01/63 11:21 2ie 447 640S Post-ItTM brand fax transmittal memo 7671 oi pg .. ^ *74nh Co. Dept. fhrt4e<K- Co. * Phono ft Fai * Fa* ft BFG GEON VINYL /"T Vle/fS V (~^hJ -tCsSrT CU-a43MlMMiMLtwwCr7r- se 77/hS. fobyg . icxff 0001 tntaroNki Communication From: Pate: Subject: B.. Penney (^September 16, 1993 VISTA Union Carbide report of Pancreatic Cancers in a PVC processing operation I spoke with Dr. lane Tcta of Union Carbide about a.repeat of ar) increased risk of pancreatic cancer in workers involved in PVC processing. Dr. Teta said that Carbide had recently reported the study to EPA, however, she was not wil ihg to make a copy of the study available for wider distribution before it was accepted for publication. However, Dr. Teta offered to meet with the Vinyl Institute to discus:; jher findings. I told her that I would contact her if such a meeting was desired. Dr. Teta briefly summarized the study as follows. Twenty*eight male pancreatic cancer cases which were compared td 140 control cases with no pancreatic tumors were included in the study. Workers wale assigned to work areas where both PVC and polyethylene were processed. Men assigned for more than sixteen years to these areas experienced slightly over a seven-fold increased incidence of pancreatic cancer. No excess was seen amongst workers with Shorter duration of assignments. Seven of the nine cases of pancreatic cancer began working in this area in the 1940s, All but three cases had worked 20 years or more. While recognizing that the workers in this study were assigned toj umts in which both PVC and polyethylene were processed, Teta places most of the blame for the excess pancreatic tumor rate on the PVC processing. She believes this is because PVC processing practices of the time resulted in higher chemical exposures and involved working with more hazardous raw materials than polyethylene. Teta jdoes not believe the increase of pancreatic tumors was due to vinyl chloride exposure. This ts primarily because there were no cases of angiosarcoma of the liver. She insie|ad points the finger at the phthaiate plasricizers used in PVC, citing diethylhexyl phthalake being reported as carcinogenic in mice and rats. Teta also expressed concern for stabilizers, some of which contain cadmium and lead, which have been demonstrated to produce cancer in animals. Teta maintains that chemical exposure of workers during PVC pi ojeessing prior to the 1950s was very high because materials were weighed and fed mawuially into a blender. Workers climbed inside the blenders to scrape off excess chemicaal| residues whenever different additives were required for different vinyl products. She saiv s that this occurred 21724001 j.... 10/01/93 11:21 0216 447 640S ,SEP-20-1993 10:29 UISTfl RSD BFG GEON VINYL @002 512 331 2594 P.002^023 as often as twice a day. Teta pointed out that the blenders that were Used in polyethylene processing were not cleaned very often because there was little vari lbon in the additives used. Teta cites, as confirmatory evidence, four previous studies which ;>ljie says have shown elevated risk of digestive cancer linked to PVC processing. ! COMMENTS The results of this new study bear careful consideration due to the strong excess cancer risk reported. However, its interpretation is complicated by the fa :t that, as with many other epidemiological studies, all the workers were exposed to variety of different chemicals in the work place. This makes it impossible to prove ti lit the excess cancer risk is associated with a specific chemical or combination of chemi al5. Dr. Teta stated that the observed excess in pancreatic cancer risk my have been due to practices early on in the industry which resulted in workers be ujig exposed to high concentrations of a variety of chemicals associated with PVC mar factoring. Dr. Teta acknowledged that she was not very familiar with current ff\ C processing and formulating operations, such as the phasing out of lead and cadmi l n-based stabilizers It would be helpful for the industry to document the changes in processes and work practice which have occurred over the years I am not aware to what degree Dr. Teta is aware of the toxicologicil controversy about the potential human carcinogenicity of diethylhexyl phthalate. Mari;} reputable scientists question whether the results obtained in animal studies on this mat:eiialare applicable to humans. I think we should ask Dr. Teta to give a presentation on her study the Vinyl Institute. K IN) 10/01/93 11:22 SEP-28-1993 10! 29 216 447 6408 UISTR P&D BFG GEON VINYL @003 512 331,2594 P. 06)3/003 A Division of The Society at The Plastics Industry, Inc. VINYL INSTITUTE XSaOEfl KMTAaEMENT COMMITTEE Michael Barish Borden Chemicals and Plastics P-O. Box 427, Highway 73 Geismar, Louisiana 70734 Phone: (504)-673-0684 Pax: (504)-673-0672 Frank Borrelli Georgia Gulf Corporation 42C Reads way Newcastle, Delaware 19720 Phone: (302)-323-8116 Fax: (302)-323-8105 William Carroll Occidental Chemical corporation 5005 LBJ Freeway Dallas, Texas 75244 Phone: (214)-404-2845 Fax: (214)-404-2884 Beverly Gholson Georgia Gulf Corporation P.O. Box 105197 Atlanta, Georgia 30348 Phone: (404)-395-4521 Fax: (404)-393-2597 Fred Krause (Chairman) The Geon company 6100 Oak Tree Boulevard Cleveland, Ohio 44131 Phone: (216)-447-6214 Fax: (216)-447-6408 Kim Mathieu Elf Atoehem 617 Valley Road Havertown, Pennsylvania 19083 Phone: (215)-449-7184 Fax: (215)-449-7184 Ron McCreed Dow Chemical cbmpany 2020 WillarSj hJ Dow Center Midland, Michigan 48674 Phone: (517)-636-1824 Fax: (5J7H636-9899 Dave Penne' Vista Chemi al Company P.O. Box 20 135 Austin, Te::. s I 78720 Phone: (51 >4331-2468 Fax: (5 ?)4331-2560 Mike Reynolds ! Vista Chemibal Company 900 Threadneegle Houston, Texas 77224 Phone: (7i3)+588-3210 Fax: (7 jl|3) +588-3119 Margaret Ri gets Dow Chemic| I Company 1776 Eye stL iet, NW, St. 575 Washington Phone: (2 V 20006 12) M29-34Q3 Fax: (2(1 j2) j-429-3467 Rick-Siw/th llcatL (7|2 7 F=3S22 -3067 Peter de )a qruz Keller anc: Heckman 1001 G Street, N.W. Washington] D.C. 20001 Phone: (::02)l-434-4l41 Fax: (I!).5)J-434-4646 5/93 Wayne interchange Plaza II 1SS Pouts 46 West Wayne, NJ 07470 (201) 390 ~S2p$ fax ft (201) 290-7Q29 21724003