Document qkOMLL7ZwdOKpBXYXYx0Doepk

3744 Federal Register / Vol. 51. Nu. IS / WwJncsdtiy. |Hnunry 2. IHHit / Proposed Rules nxpoKur*! ostinuitm. tor euch product using <i weighting chme basail <hi the reUMvf production vuUimee of each o) the friction products which arc ihn Miurueii or Ihw Hxpupvre. Similarly, U is common for many of the pubaeios wofflrnoon products to be used at one 'aiihfiag site. making il difficult to a-tribute fiber mtease to imc portmuiur product. The ostknHtiun of ambtonl exposures duo ic reicuBiw from individual conduction products, such as the various flooring products, was difficult since monitoring data were gathered it* buddings whvre more thnn one type uf asbestos flooring product was in place. tor these reasons, CPA believes that it may W appropriate to consider a cnlegodal approach to anatyte ihu risk presented by eabnatoR products end to control that risk. TaWe IV lists thtt products that are included in the construction products and friction products categories. Tx3LE IV -14UPlS OF AS&rSTOU PrtOOUCT CateocwuEa 4*03 (kOik.'1. ***W4 potfud Uwtecite p*oMr< C*9ory. F**<** p*nV4 l.'MttAM ML SWrt M Wht Ml FU*U M vy Htmtov rv mb. f%n. feefcM wp tirong. A<C pip*. Cunupod A/r; ***. fUJ */ C w*#t vc *m*i bran t0 Mop Doc prate, !LV|, One urate lWV, *tf OiucW. U>Wt3i lnrgi* FrcAor r*pworan*O.rtwllFtaa-ro*vvt>DvM'oicajcMnm-cihaun ti QdCHUitjiiva uutuztr ri&ft estimate. As d'scv-nsed above, there exis! many asbeslns KAjNsure-produuing acholic* lu which many kinds of populations are exposed. Applying the cancer models described above to the available data an exposure and populations, hPA ha# estimated VhR number of cancers that may be avoided by Implementing the EPA's proposed regulatory program. (A full discussion of the risk estimates is contained in the ``Regulatory impact Analysts of Controls on Asbestos end Asbestos Products (Ref. 3)". Using uvuiluble data and ssi-urning current exposure levels, EVA calculates that about 2.880 lung cancers and mnmtheliomas in.the United S.uta> would result from production of estteslos products over l.r years without EVA action imderTSCA.EPA calculates thiit this rule would 'avoid' about 1,1*30 of those potential concurs. Assuming thel OS1IA achieves strict compliance with a VFU* of 0.2 f/cc. EVA caloulntan that about 1.32$ lung cancers ami mesotheliomas would result unless RVA takes action under TSCA. EVA nth.ubt've t.h: tbiK rule would avoid about t/SW of those potential cancer* F.PA uluo calculated the number of potential cancers avoided by (he regulatory alternatives discussed luu-r. Assuming current exposure levels, alternative 1, which would bun the asbestos constructum products category and asbestos clothing soon after promulgation of the role and bun the jtslmsu* friction products category sbnut s years later. would avoid about 2.ICO cancers; alternative 2, which would ban the asbestos construction products category and asbestos clothing soon after promulgation of the rule, ban the asbestos friction products category* about 5 years later, and ban the remaining wthcwlos products about 10 yearn later, would avoid nboot 2,120 airitero; end alternative u. which would tom the asbestos construction products attitfiory and asbestos clothing soon after promulgation of the rule and cover all other abaUis products under the phnetHtuvi'n would avoid about 2.020 CKin.ers. KPA believes iho&e estimates of potential number of cancers, and therefore the potential number of cancers avoided, may be low for the following reasons: a. The estimate is bused only on exposures resulting from manufacture of asbostns products through the year 2000. Without regulatory action, manufacture of asbestos products may continue beyond that dale. b. The riel estimates oftan do not include cancan from consumer and other nonncccpation*) exposures to Bsbcsro* since data are either unavHilbb!* ur uncertain. However. H'A believes that many people in these CBltguries are ui risk. An estimated lifetime risk of cancer of about \ in 100,000 lu obout 7 hi IOO.CjOO exists fur anyone who morety resides in a ma|or cay hum PKpusure to asbestos in the ambient air both irulur/rs and outsidR of buildings. (Ref. Gj. Any edditlonst expi;uurr from usbeslos products, such as ransomer renovation of a house containing asliestos products, residlog or working nf-ar plantu Utst manufacture ashiistos products, or residing or wcrVing in t;h-. viciolty of a construction project where esbactos<mitainmg products era Iwing Installed or removed, v. [|( odd to tlto risk of cancer. Thin additional oxposuiY could increase the iifotimr: risk of caoccr by more than m order of magnitude The rtak oalirnatea did nut include aU w orkers whose occupation causes them to come in contact with asbeslo* products. Fur example, the estimates do not Include occupational exposure 'Ju'hig repair, removal, and dispose) nf usitastos r^1 'duett other then friction irofjjrta ^nd doth. cL FPA did not tnake m worst Hxlimate of asbestos risk. Rather. th<> risk estimates ware based on n relatively conservaUve int^rprclatinn cf the duw-respcmse relutlonsblp for aiPfutheliomK and lung rerteftr, Risk estimates more than four times as high could be justified (Ref. J1J. e FJ^A did not attempt to uuuiitify reduction* of cases of atheaioiit and cancers other than mesothelioma and lung uancor. These diseases muy add Hi to 20 percent more deaths to the total. 09HA estimates that at an expouure of D.5 ifcr. over a working career, 12 . workers per 1.0^0 will develop asbestos!* (Ref. 12). Thus, Incttfoucn of aebestosis could be cignlllcant among worker populations and possibly among other populations as well In addition, in n major study nf insulation workers exposed tn asbestos, about 10 percent (if ail e\<*ss deaths were attributed tn cancers other (ban lung cancer and mesothelioma (Ref. 11). fi. Euviainnu'tiiaf Effecln SeclioH Ole] of TSCA requires that ERA state the relevant environmental factors ond key considerations which form the ban!* for regulatory action under section 8(e). The unreasonable risk finding of this proposal Is based solely on risks to human health since these risks are by far the most serious consequence nf commercial use of asbestos and are sufficient tn support (hta proposed action. C Benefit*ofAsbtstas Fiwiucivend Ava'lobHily of Substitute* The benefits of the asbestos' containing products affected by the proposed role arddiscuseed below. Overall. EPA finds that the benefits U> society of these atbeolos-containing products are small since suitable substitutes are now evailulde for mbu! uses and application* of asbsetos. and products ore being developed that will replace almost alf uses end applications of u*hr*tos during tbe phaae-down period of ibis proposal. 1. Substitutes. Tho detailed results of EPA's analysts of the availability of suitable substitutes for esbesloscontaining products are reported in Appendix H. "Asbeato* Products and Their Substitutos," of the RIA (Ref. 3} and am summarized in Table V. FMSl 02435