Document bamQogz8VMDGoGJLZ6J5mnJy3

m L A ASBESTOS INFORMATION ASSOCIATION 1745 Jefferson Davis Highway. Crystal Square 4. Suite 509 Arlington. Virginia 22202 (703) 979-1150 March 22, 1984 HAND Lliam D. Ruckelshaus ninistrator /ironmental Protection Agency m W1200 L M Street, S.W. shington, D. C. 20460 ir Mr. Ruckelshaus: 2 Asbestos Information Association/North America (AIA/NA) views -h increasing concern EPA's plans to ban various asbestosltaining products and, thereafter, to phase-out the remaining oestos uses. Because AIA/NA considers such actions unwise and appropriate, we respectfully request the opportunity for a all industry delegation, including counsel, to meet with you i your staff to discuss EPA's plans. At that meeting, we will ge that EPA reconsider its course and, at a minimum, postpone aceedings under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) until e completion of the Occupational Safety and Health Administraon's (OSHA's) ongoing asbestos rulemaking. preparation for the requested meeting, I have asked our ecial legal counsel, Kirkland & Ellis, to summarize in the fcached letter to Dr. Moore and Mr. Barnes the concerns we have, t only about EPA's legal authority under TSCA, but also about e wisdom and appropriateness of EPA regulating "life-cycle" bestos exposures while the most important such exposures are rrently the subject of a comprehensive OSHA rulemaking, tting aside questions of EPA's legal authority, we would like address the following issues in our proposed meeting with you i your staff: 1) Assuming worker "life cycle" exposures play a significant role in EPA's thinking, do tighter OSHA controls lessen the need for product bans and caps? 2) How does EPA plan to take the risk reduction measures likely to be achieved by OSHA into account in its risk estimation and risk benefit balancing under TSCA? 'i ii CAPCO JEN 0032166 2 3) Should EPA refer its concern about "life cycle" exposures to OSHA under Section 9 of TSCA or simply defer to OSHA until completion of its proceedings? 4) Has EPA given consideration to how it might participate directly in OSHA's ongoing proceedings to achieve reductions in "life-cycle" asbestos exposures? 5) Has EPA calculated the risks to asbestos workers likely to remain after imposition of tighter OSHA controls and compared those risks with the "life cycle" risks posed by products competing with asbestos? 6) What alternatives, short of a ban, is EPA considering? sse issues/ as well as concrete illustrations of how OSHA risk luction measures might affect EPA's justification for banning aestos cement pipe, are discussed in the attached letter. \/NA wishes to stress that its request for a meeting with you i your staff comports with AIA/NA's long-standing policy of operating to the maximum extent possible with EPA and other julatory agencies. It is our hope that, by continuing the irit of cooperation and openness that have heretofore characrized our dealings with your staff, we may persuade EPA to consider its plans and, at a minimum, to postpone its "ban" and ap" proceedings until after the completion of OSHA's ongoing oceedings. will be contacting your office early next week to see if a tually convenient date can be arranged for a meeting. ncerely. ecutive Director .tachment :: Acting OSHA Administrator Tyson (w/Attachment) Assistant Administrator Moore General Counsel Barnes i CAPCO JEN 0032167