Document re7XjgD4j5NNw50V0GRwvJ9KJ

AN OPEN LETTER TO CUSTOMERS Dear Customer: As you may be aware, the October 4, 1983 issue of Kail Street Journal reported that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is considering a ban on the use of A/C pipe. Ke, the manufacturers of A/C pipe in the United States and Canada -- CAPCO Pipe Co., Inc., CertainTeed Corporation, J-M Manufacturing Co., Inc. and Atlas-Turner, Inc. -- are publishing this advisory to give you the facts and industry's position on this announcement. The Situation EPA recently notified the A/C Pipe Producers Association that under the authority of the Toxic Substances Control Act it plans to publish in the next year a proposed rule banning certain asbestos products. Categories under consideration for a product ban are roofing and flooring felts, asbestos felt-backed vinyl flooring, vinyl-asbestos floor tile and A/C pipe and fittings. The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) TSCA is a far-reaching law. It authorizes EPA to obtain data on production and health effects of chemicals and mixtures. It may require manufacturers to test potentially harmful chemicals before marketing them. And if warranted, it empowers EPA to regulate the manufacture and distribution in commerce of chemical substances. One section of TSCA provides that any person may petition EPA to start a proceeding to require testing or regulation of chemicals and mixtures. Before EPA may impose any regulatory requirements under TSCA, it must show that the manufacture and use of a substance or product, A/C pipe for example, presents an "unreasonable risk or injury to health or the environment." That burden can be upheld only if supported by substantial evidence and only after considering a wide range of risk and benefit factors. Finally, EPA must use the least burdensome requirements to regulate "unreasonable risks." What It All Means This recent action reopens a TSCA rulemaking started in 1979 when EPA published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Commercial and Industrial Use of Asbestos Fibers (Federal Register, pg. 60061, October 17, 1979; as amended by Federal Register, pg. 73127, December 17, 1979; EPA Docket No. OTS-61005). An advance notice is the first step in the regulatory process. It describes EPA's concerns about an issue, discusses generally how it will be studied, defines regulatory options and invites comments on questions raised in the notice. An advance notice is followed by a proposed rule, wherein EPA presents scientific, technical and economic data supporting its proposal. There is a comment period and a public hearing for interested parties. Then, all this input is analyzed by EPA and a final rule issued. i/ZO scr 5~u:e.'0'3 / S,,-`e `X-5 . A*-a*;' \ c 22209/ !703} cA`-'cce CAPCO JEN 0010499 -2- The 1979 advance notice expressed concern that sources of human exposure to asbestos may present unreasonable health risks. Three regulatory options were mentioned: (1) declining limits on asbestos processing or imports, (2) bans on specific products, and (3) a ban on all but essential uses of asbestos. EPA did not intend to include A/C pipe in its initial rulemakings in 1979. However, before the advance notice was published, a citizen petitioned EPA "to initiate a proceeding for the issuance of a rule to prohibit the manufacture and distribution of asbestos cement pipes." TSCA requires EPA to grant or deny a citizen's petition within 90 days. And since the agency was investigating asbestoscontaining products anyway, the petition was granted and incorporated into the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Commercial and Industrial Use of Asbestos Fibers. EPA cautioned, however: Granting a petition to initiate a proceeding to issue a rule does not mean that EPA will promulgate or even propose a rule (for A/C pipe). Such a decision will depend on the outcome of the regulatory analysis. Why A/C Pipe Now? We're asking the same question. One thing is clear: EPA's action is based on a theory that airborne occupational and environmental exposures from A/C pipe manufacture and use create an "unreasonable risk." The potential ingestion of asbestos that may be released from A/C pipe into drinking water is not a concern in this matter. Top officials in the Office of Toxic Substances have stated this without equivocation. In the U.S., A/C pipe manufacturers are already regulated by a number of federal and state laws. Comparable laws exist in Canada. The Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) regulates employee exposures to airborne asbestos. The Clean Air Act controls emissions to the outside air from A/C pipe plants and also imposes disposal requirements for asbestos-containing wastes. The Clean Water Act regulates effluent discharges from A/C pipe manufacturing facilities. These worker,, air and water protection laws have been in place since the mid-1970's. Many, the Clean Water Act for example, require use of best available technology or "zero discharge." In the spirit of industry-government cooperation, we not only complied with these regulations, but bettered them. A/C pipe manufacture became virtually a closed system: asbestos fiber handling and pipe machining are automated; process water and solid waste are recycled; state-of-the-art filtration systems eliminate 99.9% of asbestos in air discharges to the environment. And now, without any scientific justification, EPA theorizes that its own regulations, and those of OSHA as well, are not enough. Industry's Position For over a decade, the A/C pipe industry has shared EPA's interests that the manufacture and use of asbestos and A/C pipe be as safe as scientifically and economically feasible. We have labored responsibly and continuously to comply with the agency's evolving environmental regulations. CAP CO JEN 0010500