Document rBnoY9nark427M1zKejEMv1gJ

The Institute April 4, 1985 To: FROM: SUBJECT: Vinyl Institute Manufacturing Pr; Vinyl Institute Communications C< Vinyl Institute Legal Committee Roy T. Gottesman New York Times Aritcle on Propost Vinyl Chloride Emission Standard As some of you may be aware, the New York Times carried an article in its Friday, March 29 edition concerning proposed changes in the vinyl chloride emission standard by E.P.A. The metropolitan New York edition carried this article (copy enclosed) with the head "E.P.A. Proposes Allowing Emissions of Cancer-Causing Substance." The issue I picked up in Houston was titled "E.P.A. Would Allow Vinyl Chloride Emissions" but the stories are identical. As the newspaper article indicates, the reporter did not speak with anyone associated with the Vinyl Institute. I was en route to Houston when he was working on the story. Since the newspaper account contained numerous errors, I phoned the writer, Philip Shabecoff, at the New York Times Washington Bureau, (202) 802-0373, upon my return to the office on April 1. Meredith Scheck had requested input from members of the Manufacturing Practices Committee regarding errors in the story and, armed with their input and my own review of the article, I felt it desireable to call Shabecoff and correct the erroneous information. Mr. Shabecoff, who was unavailable at the time of my two calls, did return my last call. I told Shabecoff I was sorry that he had not been able to reach me and that I wanted to advise him of several errors of fact in the story he had written. Among the items I discussed with him were: 1. The statement that the E.P.A. "has proposed changing its rules to allow some uncontrolled air emissions of VCM is in error. I ponted out that even under the current standard, certain emissions of vinyl chloride are allowed such as from relief valves and drier exhausts. I noted that the purpose of the proposed changes was to clarify what constituted an emergency relief valve discharge and to remove any ambiguity in the current regulations. a O'vston oi THE SOCIETY OF THE PLASTICS INDUSTRY. INC. TEN 4196 *; I FYINOTON AVFNUF NEW YORK. N Y 10017 (212) 573-9400 VI Manufacturing Pr. jices Committee VI Communications Committee VI Legal Committee April 4, 1985 Page 2 2. The changes proposed are not meant to make the rules easier to enforce but rather to provide the regulators and industry a set of understandable standards or guidelines that will be unambiguous, clear, and should result in better compliance. 3. I referred Shabecoff to the January 9, 1985 Federal Register Notice on the proposed changes which would allow 0.035 lbs. VCM discharged per 100 batches to a maximum of 4 lbs. per year. I specifically noted that this was not location dependent ~as the article states. He stated he had gotten his information on 1-7 lbs. permissible emissions from an E.P.A. informant and seemed upset that he had been misinformed. 4. The number of VCM plants stated in the article as "some 50" is in error as is the information on the number of such plants in New Jersey. There are no VCM plants in New Jersey, only PVC plants. When I mentioned this to Shabecoff, he wanted to know whether these plants emit vinyl chloride. I replied that I didn't know whether any individual plant emitted vinyl chloride or not, but that all had the potential to have such emissions. Shabecoff was sorry that these errors had crept into his story, but he is not planning a follow-up since there is no "news peg" to hang a new story on. He now has contact information for the Vinyl Institute, and I would expect that he would call me in the future should he be writing about this issue again. You should also be aware that the Vinyl Institute has filed a "Motion forLeave to Intervene" in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in the litigation brought by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) against E.P.A. challenging the Agency's withdrawl of its 1977 proposed amendments to the vinyl chloride regulations. The battle on this issue will therefore be fought in the court-room, and I would prefer that we not try to fight the battle in the newspapers since the issues will be in litigation. cc: Meredith Scheck Peter de la Cruz Frank Corbin T. J. McGrath L. Freeman, Jr. enclosure TEN 4197 ft - II? THB NEW YORK TIMES, FRIDAY, MARCH If* IM3 E.P.A. Proposes Allowing Emissions of Cancer-Causing Substance By PHILIP 3HABEC0FF plant. The rules conges would set no leases, but the law also permits crimi E.P.A. data. tfinil u n Nn York Tlaa limit on the amount of the Individual nal penalties. _ David D. Danlger, a lawyer for the WASHINGTON. March23 -- The En discharges. The proposed rules changes were Natural Resources Defense Council, an vironmental Protection Agency has `Aggressive Enforcement' proposed changing Its rules to allow tome controlled air emissions of vinyl chloride, a cancer-causing substance. The agency said It was planning the changes to make the rules easier to en force and therefore more likely to pro Charles L. Elkins, the environmental agency's acting assistant administra tor for alT and radiation, said that the change was being proposed "so we can have an efficient, aggressive enforce tect health. ment program without having to look Under current rules, discharges of at every single Incident" Involving the vtnvt chloride into the air are prohib discharge of vinyl chloride. Now, each ited except In `'emergencies" that are not preventable by the producing plant. If emissions can be prevented, they are eat considered emergencies and are time there Is such an Incident, the staff of the environmental agency must in vestigate to determine whether or not It was an emergency. Mblect to penalties. According to E.P.A. ftguree. nearly a published In the Federal Register In environmental group, said the pro January and the comment period posed rule changes meant that the en ended Monday. Final proposed rules vironmental agency, as s matter of must be Issued and comments must be policy, would permit discharges of s taken before any charges an Is pul into known cancer-causing substance, into effect. the sir, even though "the best scientific Critics, Including environmentalists evidence Is that there is no safe level ol and the environmental agency official exposure for any carcinogen." said today that the changes would per mit more vinyl chloride pollution of the `Screw Down EoUaalass' air and thus Increase the threat of can cer to people In the vicinity of plants. Vinyl chloride, which la used In the manufacture of plastics and other ma terials, has been found to cause brain "If the Bhopal accident and ' the new Information about release lew Jersey and eleawhais have shown any thing this winter. It Is that the E-P.A has to screw down on emissions of Unde The agency has proposed that In million pounds of vinyl chloride was and liver cancer In humans and Is cur air pollutants, not ease controls," Mr stead of prohibiting all but emergency discharged into the air from 1F77 to rently one of live trade air pollutants Doniger said. releases, plants making vinyl chloride 1980. According to an agency official In regulated by the Environmental Pro The official In the E.P.A. office thsi be permitted a certain number of dis the office that prepared the proposed tection Agency. prepared the changes said that the cur charges of the substances each year. changes, who asked not to be identified, There are about SO plants producing rent rules did take up a considerable The number of permissible emissions none of the discharges were a result of vinyl chloride around the country. In amount of time and money to enforce would range from four to seven, de an emergency and they were acciden cluding five In New Jersey and one In and that the changes would free re pending on the alse and location of the tal. Fines have been levied for the re Niagara Falls, N.Y., according to sources to concentrate on variety of other enforcement actions. But the official aald that If the changes wars adopted, "There wilt definitely be more vinyl chloride In the air and we will be able to take much fewer enforcement aedam." "This Is not sinister," the official said, "but It Just so happens the effect la a loosening of the regulations." Mr. Elkina said that la view of the criticism ha had asked the ages'*** of fice of air quality standard to an other look el the proposed chaste "to make sure It is the bast we caa coma up with.'' Efforts to reach officials of the Vinyl Institute, the Industry group that rep resents manufacturers of the subject, were unsuccessful. The (asthma's pub lic affaire official said that the execu tives who could hwmi were travel ing and could not bo reached. The .agency official said that the Institute | (upjtofte^tbe rules ebsages. t e n 4198