Document n6DVz13OVo5rydK7Qog4O44z

Message From: Sent: To: CC: Subject: Daguillard, Robert [/0=EXCHANGELABS/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=BBE9682B940C4F2C90732E4D37355DD4-DAGUILLARD,] 8/21/2017 11:37:59 AM Press [/o=ExchangeLabs/ou=Exchange Administrative Group (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=b293283291dc44eOb5dlc36be9281d8a-Press] FW: FOR REVIEW: Architect Magazine (Chris Bentley) TSCA & the built environment- DEADLINE 8/15 Good morning Chris, For attribution to "an EPA spokesperson," please. Thanks, R. Robert Daguillard Office of Media Relations U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, DC +1 (202) 564-6618 (O) Al: At any one time, EPA typically has an average of 300 new chemical cases under review. As the Agency makes final determinations on chemicals already in the review process, decreasing the case load, new requests are being submitted which increases the case load. With the new law's passage cases in the review pipeline on June 22, 2016 needed to be reassessed under the new statutory requirements, adding to the Agency's average case load and creating a "backlog" which grew to almost 600 cases. For more information: https://www.epa.gov/reviewing-new-chemicals-under-toxicsubstances-control-act-tsca/statistics-new-chemicals-review A2: EPA took many steps. This included redeploying staff to increase the number of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) staff working on new chemicals and streamlining work processes around new chemicals review. With regard to your second question, as stated in the press release (https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-eliminatesnew-chemical-backiog-announces-improvements-new-chemical-safety-reviews) the Agency is committed to a transparent process which includes providing more certainty and clarity to the public in making new chemical determinations. The Agency hopes this clarity will alleviate concern regarding public health. A3: The publication of the asbestos scope document (which lays out the scope of the risk evaluation) is just the beginning of the risk evaluation process. If EPA finds an unreasonable risk under the conditions of use from asbestos then the Agency will move to eliminate the risk during a 2 to 4 year risk management process. At this time EPA cannot comment on how this chemical will be regulated. Existing regulations will be considered in the risk evaluation. The Chloralkali industry is within the scope of the abestos risk evaluation. The scope document (https://www.epa.gov/sites/prodyction/files/2017-06/docyrnents/asbestos scope 06~22~17.pdf) provides additional information as to which uses will be considered in this risk evaluation. From: Chris Bentley [mailto Ex. 6 Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2017 12:57 PM To: Press <Press@epa.gov> Subject: TSCA & the built environment-Architect magazine inquiry Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA Tier 13 ED 002061 00026921-00001 Hello, I'm writing for Architect magazine about the Toxic Substances Control Act with a deadline of Tuesday, and I'm hoping you can offer some more detail about Tuesday's EPA announcement that "the backlog [of new chemical cases] is eliminated." 1. Could you clarify what that means, exactly? To what backlog are you referring? Which chemicals? 2. How did you eliminate that backlog so quickly? Do you worry you're cutting corners on matters of public health? 3. With regards to the built environment, some architects are particularly concerned about asbestos. What is EPA's intent with asbestos regulations? Do you intend to exclude from TSCA chlorine manufacturing, which involves asbestos? Thank you for your help. Chris Bentley Ex. 6 ____________________________________ i cabentley.com @cement! ey Sierra Club v. EPA 18cv3472 NDCA Tier 13 ED 002061 00026921-00002