Document xzZ8Gend5pkoGb9rZL1jqxerb

C C. T> C *T ^ .' i ~... ki'!/.i ; i'Oi' o. i- . P |Lt [C. CTt ri-w i !,' !J (1 \'. /\ ! I L.: j yf I'AUK AVKNUI . Ml W YGkK, Hi >.'YCuT 1' Mr. A. W. Lutz Messrs. T. W. Carmody J. W. Whittlesey N. L. Zutty August 26, 1974 0/ Hjtl, W//7I, Dvj.l. /" loo; I'JwrLfr Answer(kj Ic-IKn Soft, Sub/it: y Comments On l'ost-Hearing Evaluation of Submissions to Occupational Safety and Health Administration on the Proposed Permanent Standard for Occupational Exposure to Vinyl Chloride Date: August 21, 1974 A review of the evidence put on the Hearing record by Carbide and others interested in the matter of Proposed Permanent Standard for Occupa tional Exposure to Vinyl Chloride supports the following generalizations:* 1. That present medical and scientific knowledge is not sufficient to support any specific level of exposure to vinyl chloride below concentrations of 50 ppm or even to describe the extent to risk to humans from exposure to vinyl chloride at concentrations of 50 ppm and higher. 2. That the critical scientific experiments and epidemiological surveys remain to be completed before any reasoned conclusions, using generally accepted scientific procedures can be made with regard to the effects on humans of occupational exposure to vinyl chloride at low concentration levels (below 200 ppm). 3. That it is not technologically feasible for industry to attain vinyl chloride- exposure concentrations at a nondetectablc level under t|ie 0SHA proposed work practices nor is it possible now to predict whether or not it will ever be technologically feasible to attain vinyl chloride exposure concentrations at any level below 25ppm (TVJA) with excursions to a 40 ppm ceiling under the pro posed work practice rules of 0S11A. 4. That compliance within the language of the proposed Standard is indeterminable; the ambiguity arises from tlv requirement Lliat all regulated areas by monitored for detectable levels UCC 093879 of vinvl chloride (.iiea Hiuui l ur ill;,;) ,md the fuiLhcr roqu i i'liiil-mL Mi.it nionjLui in,' must ins mo I. hat any ex posure be do I e n.i Lned foe e;u I) <mL Lior i zed employee with a confidence level oi 95 per cent (empLoyee moil i tor i ng). No considers t i on Is given by OSHA to a t i me-weigh l:cd avei:aj;,e approach Lo control and regulation of vinyl chloride exposure, 5, That a permanent standard for occupational exposure, to vinyl chloride at a non-detectable level with the OSHA proposed work practices would visit upon Carbide and upon the PVC industry at large an economic disaster by forcing regulation beyond the technical ability of the in dustry to comply; forcing a shutdown, abandonment of in vestment, and major loss of jobs. Carbide, together with other members of the PVC industry, has requested that OSHA adopt as the permanent standard for occupational ex posure to vinyl chloride limits of 25ppm (8-hour TWA) with permissible excurions to a ceiling of 40 ppm, with such limits being maintained until further more definitive medical and scientific data are available. Additionally, Carbide has urged the adoption of a work standard which includes realistic and meaningful work practice rules and monitoring procedures. The limits and the rules are designed to assure the safety and health of industry employees. Based on recent soundings, I believe that OSHA will disregard the prudent advise provided by Carbide and by other PVC producers and will seek to impose limits and work standards beyond the ability of the industry * to comply. Because of the severe economic consequences of an OSHA attempt to force a restrictive Standard unwarranted by the hazard sought to be met, X recommend that the I^w Department be asked to review the requirements of Public Law 91-596 to determine the rights of parties adversely affected by any standard issued under OSHA Act and to propose a course of action to preserve Carbide's investment and competitive position in the PVC industry following the issuance of the Permanent Standard now scheduled for October 5, 1974. ABS/rm A. B, Steele UCC 093880