Document wq36NjXdY2mM14D0wDeLLX5dJ

FILE NAME: Brakes (BRK) DATE: 1984 EZ DOC#: BRK2 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION &D^/ZZW ~.--- -$ ..... , TELEPHONE (201) 84!1-0440 FRICTION MATERIALS STANDARDS BERGEN MALL OFFICE CENTER E. 210 ROUTE 4 PARAMUS. N. J. 07652 INSTITUTE, INC. November 13, 1984 United States - Environmental Protection Agency TS - 794 401 M Street - SW Washington, DC 20460 Subject: Natural Resources Defense Council Petition to Prohibit The Use of Asbestos in On-Highway Brakes Gentlemen: The Friction Materials Standards Institute, Inc. (FMSI) is a trade association of twenty-two friction materials manufacturers in the United States, with associate Members worldwide. The FMSI has read the petition submitted by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for the purpose of prohibiting "the use of asbestos in brakes for new cars and trucks and in replacement brakes in existing vehicles." We wish to comment at this time on certain sections of the petition. While we are not now taking a position for or against said petition, we believe it is important to submit the following comments. Should it be deemed appropriate, these comments may be supplemented at a later date by a more in-depth critique. We will refer to the sections as headed in the NRDC petition. I - INTRODUCTION The stated reasons for the submission of the petition do not appear to be based upon irrefutable evidence. Whether or not the occupational asbestos NRDC Petition -2- standards and/or the national emissions standards are insufficient to protect against unreasonable risk posed by asbestos in brakes is highly debatable. Further, the availability of economically and technologfcallY feasible substitutes for asbestos is an issue in which the friction materials manufacturers are deeply involved. The identification of such substitutes is a major ongoing program with the manufacturers, and is not a completed program at this pOint in time. 11 - JURISDICTION The EMSI concerns relate to in-plant regulations versus control of general public exposure to asbestos dust. While one agency has proposed to tighten worker exposure to asbestos, another is being petitioned to eliminate asbestos in friction materials. The disparity between these two situations could well create implementation and economic problems for friction materials manufacturers. If asbestos is to be regulated out of friction materials the manufacturers should not be saddled, in the meantime, with compliance to new tighter regulations of asbestos in the workplace. The industry must know which direction regulatory activity will take. III - DESCRIPTION OF PETITIONER No comment. IV - CONTINUED USE OF ASBESTOS . POSES AN UNREASONABLE RISK TO HEALTH The FMSI clusions section. does not necessarily agree with the credibility of the condrawn from the evidence preeented on friction mat~rials in this Therefore, the FMSI reserves the right to comment in detail on NRDC Petition -3- this section at some future date. v - SUBSTITUTES Sufficient data is not available at this time on the substitute materials to state that they do not pose a hazard in the workplace environment or to the general public. We wish to cite a recent study by the (Canadian) Royal Commission on Matters of Health and Safety Arising from Use of Asbestos in Ontario, and an earlier paper on Non-asbestos Related Malignant Mesothelioma. These comments follow: If the production of substitute fibres in the future should increase the exposure of workers to long, thin, durable fibres of dimensions similar to those we have found hazardous for asbestos, we cannotInbethsuerefacthe aot fsethrieouesxihsteianlgthecvoidnesenqcuee, nwcees would not result. believe it would be risky to allow the exposure of workers to respirable fibres longer than 5 microns, with small diameters, of any material, if those fibres are likely to be very durable in the lungs. 1 It has been generally accepted now that the fibre which is carcinogeniC is a durable long and thin fibre, the diameter of less than 1.5 micron and length of more than 8 micron appearing critical. inA nthumisbesrizoef fainbdrosuhsapme aatnedriianldseeodthhearvethathnus asbestos can appear been established as cause of mesothelioma in animals, such as: glass fibres, aluminum oxide, tremolite~ attapulgite, dawsonite, silicon carbide and potassium titanate. 1Report of the Royal Commission of Matters of Health and Safety Arising from the Use of Asbestos in Ontario (1984) Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General, Toronto 2Non-asbestos Related Malignant Mesothelioma - A Review of the and Medical Literature, Premysl V. Pelnar, MD, citing a paper Scientific by Stanton, Layard, Tegeris, Miller, May and Kent that appeared in the J. Natl. Cancer Inst., March 1977 -. NRDC Petition -4- The advantages of semi-metallic brake linings cited in Section V-A are not necessarily supported by test results generated by friction materials manufacturers. While certain of these claimed advantages may be tru~ where the application generates high braking temperatures, they are not necessarily true for the average consumer. Total endorsement of Section V-B of the petition is not appropriate, since friction materials manufacturers produce disc pads and drum segments for passenger cars and light to medium trucks, as well as brake blocks for heavy trucks. The clai'lllS made in Section V-B relate to brake blocks and cannot be endorsed for all product lines. Further, actual experience to date has proven that substantial processing modifications and new equipment are required for the asbestos substitute materials. VI - A REQUIREMENT UNDER THE TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACf . No connnent. VII - CONCLUSION No comment. * * * * * An immediate ban on the use of asbestos in passenger car and truck brakes cannot be supported because of the importance of safe brake systems on the nation's highways. Brake linings are a safety related product. We stress consideration of these facts: 1. There are legitimate questions on the health hazards of the fibrous substitutes suggested for asbestos replacement in friction materials. NRDC Petition -5- 2. There are programs in place by industry to eliminate the use of asbestos in friction materials, and these programs realistically address health, safety, economic, performance, timing, and. materials availability issues. 3. The industry must be given time to develop a total line of products which will meet all highway safety requirements. We believe the industry will accept a properly planned program pointed towards the eventual elimination of asbestos in its products. We urge that EPA study the suggested substitute materials as well as the feasibility, economic impact, realistic necessity - if it exists, and timing requirements appropriate to the elimination of asbestos in friction materials before responding to the petition or proposing a ban on the use of asbestos in friction materials. Respectfully submitted, FRICTION MATERIALS STANDARDS INSTITUTE E. W. Drislane Executive Director