Document rEJvvvmR8L09JZmyYVdnOdNr

V ,<r _ ' cTiX l received nrc <> n 1975 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY u " ^ J WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460 J.uuHm f Dear Mr. Hanley December 22, 1975 OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR For at least five years, the Federal Government and the manufacturing industry have been aware that polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) pose a threat to human health and the environment. Last month, at EPA's National Conference on Polychlorinated Biphenyls in Chicago, leading experts clearly documented the fact that PCBs are pervasive In the environment, are causing disruption and economic harm to commercial fishing in many areas and are creating a serious potential health hazard to the public. Vhile certain voluntary measures have been initiated in the past, the widespread and persistent occurrence of PCBs underscores the failure of existing practices to adequately control the escape of PCBs into the environment. iUl .1 Today I announced a broad EPA program of regulatory and non- regulatory actions to reduce the levels of PCBs in the environment. My statement, (which is enclosed), stated that we must, as a society, accept and work toward a goal of totally eliminating the production, Importation and use of PCBs as rapidly as possible. Toward that end, I am asking you, as a principal member of the PCB industry, to commit yourself to a deliberate and expeditious search for alternatives. X recognize that this effort will not be easy. A careful examination and balancing of the environmental consequences of alternatives will be required. The economic impacts of the changeover will have to be considered. X also recognize that such an effort cannot be accomplished overnight. Nevertheless, X have confidence that American Industry has the capacity to solve this difficult task, and X solicit your full cooperation and participation In this effort. So that ve can begin this undertaking as soon as possible, X am inviting you and other representatives of your Industry to meet with me on January 14 to discuss this undertaking and work towards the f development of plans on how It can be accomplished as smoothly and rapidly as possible. X have also asked representatives of the principal users of PCBcontaining transformers and large capadters to meet with me on January 22 to discuss ways that we can effectively manage and control PCBs in current use. 1 am enclosing a copy of'my letter to these companies. At our meeting on January 14, we might also discuss some of the matters outlined in that letter. DSW 012433 STLCOPCB4002358 I am looking forward to meeting with you at EPA in Room 1112, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway, Crystal Mall #2, Arlington, Virginia, on January 14, from two to five in the afternoon. If you have any questions concerning the arrangements for this meeting, you may contact Dr. I. E. Wallen, (202) 755-6956. Sincerely yours, TtLu/ ? Mr. John W. Hanley - President Monsanto Chemical Company 800 N. Lindbergh Boulevard St. Louis, Missouri 63166 Enclosures Russell E. Train Administrator . I >. i DSW 012434 i J STLCOPCB4002359 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460 ' THE ADMINISTRATOR Dear Mr. ' ' . *. For at least five years, the Federal Government and the tnanufac- turing Industry have been aware that polychlorinated' biphenyls (PCBs) pose a threat to human health and the environment. Last month, at EPA's Kational Conference on Polychlorinated Biphenyls in Chicago, leading experts clearly documented the fact that PCBs-are pervasive in the environment, are endangering many wildlife species, are creating a . . serious potential health hazard to the public and are causing consider-' able disruption and economic harm to commercial fishing in many areas. While certain voluntary measures have been initiated in the past, the widespread and persistent occurrence of PCBs underscores the failure of existing practices to adequately control the escape of PCBs into the ' environment. .. . ' * '. . Today I announced a broad EPA program of regulatory and nonregu- ' latory actions (copy enclosed) to reduce the levels of PCBs in the environment. Because our ability to reach PCBs already in the environ- went is extremely limited, we must concentrate our efforts on preventing additional PCB contamination from the estimated 300 million pounds of . PCBs currently in use and Inventory, primarily in closed electrical and hydraulic equipment, and the approximately 40 million pounds of new PCBs that are Introduced into commerce each year. .-' In this regard, 1 recognize that the manufacturers and users of electrical and other equipment containing PCBs.have taken steps to limit - the discharge of PCBs into the environment. The-guidelines that the National Electrical Manufacturers Association and others Issued under the auspices of the American National Standards Institute last January represent a good start in developing Industry standards for good house- * keeping, labeling, and other practices to minimize release of PCBs. I believe, however, that these guidelines need to be strengthened and expanded if they are to be effectively employed to virtually eliminate the escape of PCBs into the environment. Therefore, I am pleased to learn that the industry is scheduled to revise these guidelines over the next several months. 1 strongly encourage the vigorous pursuit of this undertaking. EPA will be glad to assist in any way it can in this OS* 012435 STLCOPCB4002360 -2- r . effort. My staff will be participating in the meeting to be held in Chicago on January 13, 1976, to suggest areas for amendment to strengthen y and broaden the present guidelines and will be available to help draft specific guidelines in the coming months. ' Strengthening of the guidelines, however, is only the first step in controlling and managing the.use of PCBs.- The ultimate step is to put these guidelines to use in operating and procurement practices. The proper labeling, transportation, maintenance, repair, and ultimate disposal or salvaging of PCB-contaminated wastes and PCB-containing equipment is essential to minimize environmental harm. Accordingly, I am asking each of you to personally initiate an examination of your company's operating.and procurement practices to assure that they comply with the current guidelines and are otherwise environmentally accept able. .1 am further asking you to commit your company to correcting these practices where they are found deficient and to implement fully the revised guidelines after they are Issued. . Recognizing the impossibility of designing any procedures which will fully guarantee that no PCBs will enter the environment, I have - .concluded that the industry must develop alternatives for PCBs and ultimately phase out all uses of these chemicals. I recognize that alternatives cannot be developed overnight and I am aware that the 'environmental impacts of all potential alternatives must be.carefully . examined and properly weighed. Nevertheless, I believe it is essential' that your industry commit itself to a deliberate and expeditious search ... I would like to discuss these matters with you. Therefore, I am ^inviting you to meet with me on January 22, 1976. It is my hope that if ;ve work together ve can accomplish our common goals of eliminating r ..present practices which result in environmental contamination and of . Joshing.progress in finding alternatives for the future. . If you have any questions concerning the arrangements for this v .meeti^n..g,___y_o_ u may contact Dr. I.E. Wallen, . (202) 755-6956. * * electrics.', the Vi ; Sincerely yours. Natier.p'. !.. 'the zi.)**: repi os i keeping . Russell E. Train jfijlciosure the C!iC.-r lcar: : nei:: ur.c;: DSW 012436 STLCOPCB4002361 WASHINGTON, D.C. I am announcing today an EPA iction plan to reduce, as rapidly and effectively as we can, the serious threat of polychlorinated biphenyls (or PCB's) to hunv.n health and the environment. Since their Introduction some 45 years ago, PCB's have beer used in a variety of commercial and industrial products such as transiormers, capacitors, paints, inks, paper plastics, adhesives, sealants and hydraulic fluids. Because of this wide use and because PCB's do not readily degrade, we find, today, that they are widely dispersed throughout the environment--in landfills, soils, river and lake sediments, in our air and water and in wildlife and human tissue. Of particular concern, we are currently finding PCB levels exceeding the FDA Unit of five parts per million in fish taken from the Great Lakes, the upper Mississippi River, off the Southern California coast, the-Gulf cf Merino and in the Hudson River and other waterways in New York State. PCB's are known to cause significant adverse effects in fish and aquatic life at these and lesser levels. In addition, they have been cound in laboratory tests to cause reproductive failures, gastric disorders, skin.lesions and tumors in mammals. Consequently, we believe that PCB's constitute a significant hazard to human health and the environment and must be immediately and effectively controlled with every neans at our disposal. Because of this hazard and ou-' finding that the environmental burden from PCB's is already too great and is growing, it is plain to me that we must, as a society, accent and work toward a goal of totally eliminating the production, importation and use of PCB's as rapidly as possible. Furthermore, we must make e.ery effort to assure that those PCB's now in use do not enter the environment. At the same time, the public should be under no illusion: as to the difficulty of dealing with this problem. We have absolutely no authority under existing law to stop or restrict uses of PCB's. Until the passage of Toxic Substances Control legislation by the Congress, we must rely heavily on voluntary actions by Industry. In any event, It wil' not be possible to eliminate the use of PCB's overnight. Even if we coild eliminate these uses immediately, we would have to face the fact tha : there are hundreds of millions of pounds of PCB's out there in the environment--in landfills, soils and the bottom sediments of rivers, lakes, and estuaries--which will be there for years, like a delayed-action time bomb, and which we have no way to keep from moving into life systems, including humans.. With all that we can do. It may take many years before we <>re able to see a significant decline . In the levels of PCB's in the env ronment. Nevertheless, we must begin at once. Even though our authori ses are inadequate, we must do all that we can. I am, therefore, taking the following steps: DSW 012437 STLCOPCB4002362 -2- 1. I am directing our regional offices, in active cooperation ' with the states, tr* itmediately establish requirements to virtually eliminate PCB's from the process wastes of all manufacturers of PCB's an 1 of capacitors and transformers that utilize PCB's. 2. I am calling on th>' leadership of the manufacturers of PCB's and the major manufacturers of transformers and capacitors to develop safe and envir>nmentally acceptable alternatives for PCB's as rapidly as pisslble. I am scheduling a meeting in January with representatives of these manufacturers to discuss and lay out specific plans to achieve this end. 3. I am calling on the presidents of major electric utility companies and other major users of large capacitors and transformers, such as railroads, to assume responsibility for controlling the use and disposal of their PCB's. To this end, I am writting representatives of the companies and their principal Industrial associations i:o meet with me in January to discuss how this might be accomp 1 shed as rapidly and effectively as possible. 4. I am proposing regulations to control the environmental damage that results from spills of hazardous substances. Including PCB's EPA will move as npldly as possible to finalize these regulations after a public comment pe-iod. 5. I am writing State Governors to as'; them to carefully examine and apply their authorities to deal with the PCB problem. 6. I am writing the heads of selected Federal agencies to ask them to Inmediately inventory their uses of PCB's and PCB-containing materials and to develop plans to assure adequate management and safe disposal of these materials. 7. In addition to these stefs, I am Initiating a number of other programs to find ways of eliminating the environment discharges from other sources of PCt's including paper recycling operations, the Investment casting industry, and the disposal of electrical consumer products wh;ch contain PCB's. Before I describe these and other actions in more detail, let me describe the history of past efforts to deal with PCB's and the nature of the problem. DSW 012438 STLCOPCB4002363 -3- EARLY EFFORTS ' In 1972, a federal interagency task force was formed to address the question: what do we know and what should be done about PCBs in the environment? At that time, PCBs had been in wide industrial use in the United States for about 40 years. Approximately 80 million pounds were being domestically produce! annually. These PCBs were used in various commeric'al and industrial products including electrical equipment, printing inks, carbonless copy paper, paints, sealants, adhesives, plastics, and heat transfer and hydraulic machinery fluids. The task foice concluded that PCBs were highly persistent, could be found in r.ll part.'- of the enviroimment, could "bioaccumulate" to unacceptably high levels in fish, and could have serious adverse effects on human health. The task force also recognized, that PCBs had significant ad vantages over other materials for uses in closed electrical systems. They conduct heat but not electricity, ?nd in 1972 it appeared that the only available substitutes for PCBs in capacitors and in trans formers --which are widely used in indoor electrical systems--were too flanmable. To have prohibited PCBs for these uses would, in effect," have substituted a safety haza-d for a health hazard. The task force reconmended--and the Federal Government adopted--a policy of confining PCB use to closed electrical systems. The Monsanto Company, the sole Ameri :an producer of PCBs voluntarily restricted sales of PCBs, prior to the task force report, to uses in closed electrical systems. The American National Standards Institute issued guidelines for industry on the use, disposal- and labelling of PCBs. The Environmental Protection Agency announced that it would take steps to limit disciarges of industrial effluents of PCBs into rivers and lakes. The F( od and Drug Administration established temporary tolerances for PCBs in several types of food and set limits on PCB contamination in iood packaging and in food processing plants . In addition, the General Services Administration banned PCBs in paper, purchased by the Federal government and the Department of the Interior prohibited future use of PCBs in off-shore oil operations. In February, 1973, in the lirst international agreement aimed at limiting the production and use of chemicals in order to protect the environment, the Organization <'or Economic Cooperation and Development announced a decision to recommend to member countries that the use of PCBs be prohibited for industrial or commercial purposes except in certain closed systems. One member country, Japan, subsequently banned the future production or import of PCBs for all uses, after PCB contamination of rice oil adversely affected 1000 people* DSW 012439 n STLCOPCB4002364 -4- At that time, we believed that these measures would "take care" of the PCB problem and enable us to continue to take advantage of the unique properties of PCBs while insulating the public and the environment against exposure to hazardous levels of these chemicals. Since 1971, annual U.S. sales of PCBs ha* been cut in half - from approximately 80 million pounds to about 40 million pounds. In retrospect, it is apparent that we could and should have done more. In 1975 we find that althouj i PCB levels in most foods have steadily declined, l*CBs rema: n present in our environment to a far greater degree and at higher levels than we would have thought. PCBs are highly persistent - f;ir more sc than HUT - and bio-accumulate in the food chain. PCB contarn: nation t) reatens to become pervasive in the environment. We have fount high PQ levels -- levels greatly ex ceeding FDA guidelines of 5 ppn -- in frsh taken from the Great Lakes, the upper Mississippi Rf'er, o 'f the Sc* them California coast, <he<Culf ef' McwiBg, in t'ie Hud ;on River and other waterways in New York State. Specifically, high concentrations of PCBs have been detected in recent months in f sh in Lake Michigan (up to 165 ppm), Lake Pepin (up to 40 ppm), and in the Hudson River (up to 350 ppm), although the average levels are significantly lower. The presence of PCBs in these waters threaten* to destroy commercial and sport fishing and associated industries, sirce contaminated fish are often rendered incapable of effective reproduction and become unfit for human con sumption. The evidence v.e have accumulated over the past three years has underscored our original concern over the toxicity of PCBs and over the potential health hazard posed by the presence of high PCB concentrations in water and in fish. It indicates that the most serious potential health probelm from PCBs which we are able to identify today, would come from eating fish which contain PCBs exceeding the FDA tolerance. Until environmental levels go down substantially, the human health threat from PCBs can only be controlled through not eating fish that exceed the limits prescribed by FDA. PCB compounds have also been shown to cause reproductive failure:., gastric disorders, skin lesions, and tumors in manuals. As a Tesult of this new evidence, I called a National Conference on PCBs in Chicago last month, to examine the latest scientific findings on environmental and health effects of PCBs and to identify actions that might be taken to control the problem. Let me summarize what we have learned. DSW 012440 r STLCOPCB4002365 -5- PRESENT ENVIRONMENTAL BURDEN We estimate that over the past 45 years, sane 700 million pounds of PCBs have been produced and used in the United States. Of that amount more than half has already entered the environment through discharges to the air, water and land. Although sane of this has been chemically or biologically degraded, the vast majority is contained in landfills, contaminated soils, bottom sediments of rivers, lakes and coastal wattrs and in air and water concentrations where they are available for uptake into fish, and shellfish. Un fortunately, there appears to be relatively little we can do to remove PCBs from the environment. We find ourselves in a situation similar to the one we faced with DDT. The environmental contaminant is, practically speaking, beyond our reach through known cleanup techniques and may take many yuars to degrade to any substantial de gree. This means, that it may be 10 to 20 years before some of our waters will be suitable cornnercial fisheries. POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL BURDEN At present there are several hundred million pounds of PCBs current ly in use or inventory in closed electrical equipment, hydraulic equip ment, paper products, and other cornnercial and industrial products. Without preventive measures, essentially all of these PCBs will ultimate ly enter the environment and add to the existing soil, sediment, air and water concentrations that I just described. A large part of this amount can be kept, from entering the environment if effective disposal and use practices are followed. The remainder may be virtually uncontrollable and will result, in a continuing addition to the environmental burden. FUTURE PRODUCTION In addition to the amounts already in the environment and in use, we are domestically producing 35-4t' million pounds per year and are importing at least 1 trillion pounds, and perhaps a great deal more if account is made cf PCB - containing products entering the country. Only a relatively small amount - perhaps as much as 10,000 pounds annually is discharged directly into the environ ment (in wastewater, air or solid vaste discharges) in the course of production and manufacturing processes. H e remainder is going to uses where it could ultimately be discharged into the environment. We can probably fully control the d irect discharges but can only par tially control the ultimate discharges from that amount going into use. 012441 r STLCOPCB4002366 -6- CORRECTIVE MEASURES . These facts lead me to two conclusions: First, we must as a nation commit ourselves now to phasing out the production and importation of PCBs if we are ever to ar est the growing concentxi - ^ tions of PCBs in our environment. Secon l, we must assure that th[ise PCBs in use do not enter the environment to the extent this can b|> done. With respect to phasing out PCBs in the United States, I havfj invited the heads of companies which manufacture electrical equipment containing PCBs to meet with m-- in January 1976. I will ask then! to accelerate their research, esting, and development of alternatives for PCBs. At the meeting I will be looking for a plan from this industry an how they will proceed and on what schedule. I will Jilso offer EPA's assistance in the .issessment of industry's test dataito establish the environmental acceptability of proposed alternatives. In this regard I am directing our Office of Toxic Substances to ' proceed at maximum speed to fu -nish industry information on the 1 ests that we believe should be cond'cted to assess those substitutes row on the horizon and those yet to be developed. I should point ou; that this will be a difficult and t .me consuning effort, the results >f Which cannot be expected to be achieved overnight. In my view, however, it is the only approach to an eventual permanent solution to the PCB problem. I should note that a phase-out of PCBs will wholly depimd cn the voluntary cooperation of industry in the absence of any statutory authority for EPA to rec uire a restrict ion of production, importation of use of PCBs. Over the five year? since Toxic Substances legislation was first proposed, an estimated (00 chemical compounds are introduced into the commercial market each ) ear. We do so without any systematic advance assessment of their potential impact upon public health. Yet, as we have learned thro gh our experience with such materials a:| vinyl chloride, we may rot discover how harmful a compound can 'te until years after it has becorr 3 a rather camnonplace item in ouc everyday life, even a significant facto in our economy. And w|>, again and again, find ourselves engaged in an extremely difficult and drawn-out struggle to protect the public from a hazard to which it has already been exposed while at the same time trying to avoid putting people out of business or out of work. We find ourselves DSW 012442 STLCOPCB4002367 -7- c./// trying to choose between a health hazard and a safety hazard. We find ourselves without the authority we need to really cope with the problems like those posed by PCBs -- the authority to limit selected uses and distribution of toxic chemcials as well as to require testing concerning the health and ecological effects of proposed substitutes. Enactment of a Toxic Substances Control Act would substantially strengthen my ability to achieve a phase-out. I will therefore continue to press for passage of such an Act. We also plan to con luct a thorough review ofjje<Japanese experience in Mpl^nentijig their ban on thejjsedc?tion and use of PCBs, We have recentiy^invited repres>wives of Japanese industry, and they have agreed to nteet^witi>S'in Washington early next year to discuss this matter. be asking the environmental ccrmittee of the OTgU-arrits next mStefcitigto reassess and strengthen their previous^yecSninendations on PCBs. Through this mechanism, I hope tp^ertCourage world-wide phase-out of PCfe. Pending success of a national and, hopefully, world-wide phase out of PCBs, it is imperative that we take aggressive action to minimize the environmental impact of ex sting and future uses and disposal of these chemicals. Accordingly, I intend to proceed with the following specific actions. SPECIFIC ACTIONS 1. In order to reduce total contamination of the environment from 37 plants that manufacture transformers and capacitors using PCBs as well as from the PCB manufacturing plant of Monsanto in Sauket, Illinois, I have directed our regional offices to complete ongoing surveys of these plants within the next 60 days to determine the precise manner in which PCBs enter the land, air and water from each plant and what precise measures can be taken at each plant to eliminate or drastically minimize such PCB contamination. I have further directed our regional offices to assure immediately thereafter that all water discharge permits issued to these facilities are revised to require that all those measures affecting water discharges are undertaken expeditiously, and to further assure that such measures are also undertaken by facilities which discharge into munici] il treatment works and are not therefore required to procure such permits. The results of those surveys will also be used to determine whether an air enmision standard for PCBs should be developed and, if so, what it should be. Finally, the surveys will alsc enable our regional offices, in cooperation with State and local solid waste disposal authorities, to assure that land disposal c f wastes from these plants will not cause additional land contamination from PCBs. DSW 012443 STLCOPCB4002368 8- - I believe these negligible levels can be attained at reasonable cost in most instances through process changes, substitution and/or installation of control technology. I would hope that these actions can proceed expeditiously and that industry will cooperate. If not, I am prepared to exercise my authority under Section 504 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to ensure immediate action in individual cases. 2. In order to ensure the safe handling and disposal of PCBs now in service, I have called on the president:; of major electric utility companies and other major users of largd capacitors and transformers to assume responsiblity for controlling the use and disposal of their PGB's, To this end, I have written representatives of the companies and their principal industrial associations to meet Vith me in January to discuss how this might be accomplished as Tapidly and effectively as possible. We will offer to assist them in these efforts and if appropriate, I intend to follow the voluntary industry effort with any needed regulatiansv-Where'1 have the authority. We would expect these actions to substantially reduce the potential risk from the large quantities of PCBs which are presently in use, and to thereby avoid their eventual addition to the existing environmental burden. At the same time, 1 will ask the American National Standards Institute at its forthcoming meeting in January to assist in this effort to develop and implement necessary guidelines and a code of good practice for the maintenance handling, servicing, and disposing of existing equipment containing PCBs. 3. I have signed propo: ed Tegolations under Section 311 of the FWPCA to control spills of th ee hundred identified hazardous substances, including PCBs. These regulations will establish reporting require ments, civil penalties, and hazardous quantities, and ultimately will enable the Agency to TequiTe industry to prepare spill prevention control plans. I will press for rapid finalization of these regu lations after appropriate public review and comment. 4. I am writing the State Governors to ask them to carefully examine and apply their authorities to deal with the PCB problem. 5. I am writing ihe heads of selected federal agencies to ask them to immediately inventory their uses of PCBs and PCB-containing materials, and to develop plans to assure adequaye management and safe disposal of these materials. 6. I intend to investigate the PCB discharges from major waste paper recycling plants to develop appropriate effluent guidelines and establish appropriate effluent limitations in NPDES permits. OSW 012444 f STLCOPCB4002369 -9- 7. I intend to investigate th^ investment casting industry to develop appropriate standards .uid guidelines for its air, water and solid waste discharges. 8. I intend to examine the amounts and types of PCBs in municipal and industrial solid wastes an I to develop guidance for the proper disposal of these wastes. 9. I intend to work with the li.S. Army Corps of Engineers under the Section 404 Permits for Dredged or Fill Material program and to give special attention in our Clean Laies and In-place Toxics Program to deal with the difficult problems of PCBcontaminated sediments in rivers, lakes and coastal waters. With regard to all of these action?, I would again like to caution that they will not lead to a quick and easy reduction of the current levels of PCB's in our environment and particularly in the commerical and sports iish taken from waters most contam inated. Hopefully, the control of discliaTges will arrest the rapid growth of the problem. ' Dtimatel'", however, only the reduced use. of PCB's will yield a signi ficant and permanent solution. DSW 012445 iri STLCOPCB4002370