From: W

To: mm;W

Cc: fiddsteimJescha; Gatdnenfiemldme; mm;mm;W; mattinsjteohen;

W;W;m: SiLagLJMiflam;WM;WW;

Subject: RE. Asbestos SNUR new approach- OECA comments.

Date: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 2:48:48 PM

Robert—

I‘ echo the concerns raised by OAQPS and OECA about the revised approach (as of 4/25) in the

Asbestos SNUR. OPPT has provided the workgroup no clear explanation of why the new approach is

preferable to the approach shared with the workgroup for review in a draft 3/19 FRN, and the new

approach raises significant concerns about the potential public health impacts of the SNUR as

articulated by OECA and OAQPS.

I currently do not have a sense of how the draft notice will seek to ensure that the list of

discontinued uses provided in your 4/25 notice is exhaustive and does not omit other uses that are

not currently ongoing. Can you provide us a sense of how that will be done?

I request that you hold an ADP workgroup meeting ASAP to talk through workgroup concerns and to

explain the policy objective of the revised approach. i think this is especially important in light of the

extremely hazardous nature of the substance in question.

Please let me know your thoughts on holding a workgroup meeting. Also, do you have a sense yet of

when the workgroup will have a draft notice for review?

Thanks for letting us all know about this significant change in direction and for sharing the rule for

review. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Sharon

Sharon CooperstcinEnvironmental Protection AgencyOffice of Policy

WjC North 3521B |Mafl Code 1803A

202—564—7051

From: Seltzer, Mark

Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 11:37 AM

To: Courtnage, Robert <Courtnage.Robert@EPA.GOV>

Cc: Goldstein, Jessica <goldstein.jessica@epa.gov>; Gardner, Geraldine

<Gardner.GeraIdine@epa.gov>; Fairchild, Susan <Fairchild.Susan@epa.gov>; Seltzer, Mark

<Se|tzer.Mark@epa.gov>; Gardner, Geraldine <Gardner.Geraldine@epa.gov>; Flaherty, Colleen

<Flaherty.Colleen@epa.gov>; Watkins, Stephen <watkins.stephen@epa.gov>; Cooperstein, Sharon

<Cooperstein.Sharon@epa.gov>; Gallagher, Kathryn <Gal|agher.Kathryn@epa.gov>; Anderson, Steve

<Anderson.Steve@epa.gov>; Smith, Peterj <Smith.Peterj@epa.gov>; Silagi, William

<Si|agi.William@epa.gov>; Pfahles—Hutchens, Andrea <Pfahles—Hutchens.Andrea@epa.gov>;

Carmichael, Lea <Carmichael.Lea@epa.gov>; Winchester, Erik <Winchester.Erik@epa.gov>

Subject: RE: Asbestos SNUR new approach- OECA comments.

Robert——

Thank you for your April 25th email providing background on the new approach OPPT is

considering regarding the drafting of the asbestos Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) proposal. OECA

(OCE and OCEFT) workgroup members have concerns regarding the proposal; these concerns are

similar to those that OAQPS expressed in their reply email. OPPT initially requested the asbestos

SNUR agency workgroup review a proposed SNUR which would request comment from the

regulated industry what other uses of asbestos are presently ongoing. In the April 25th email, the

workgroup learned that the OPPT is taking a new approach for the proposed SNUR where the

Agency would list approximately 15 uses which it believes are not ongoing and receiving comment

on whether the list is accurate.

Asbestos is an extremely dangerous substance with no safe exposure amount. Asbestos

exposure therefore continues to be an important public health concern, underscoring the need to

improve and enhance regulatory efforts to prevent human exposures. We are particularly

concerned about the proposed SNUR approach. Based on our experience, we believe that the

asbestos SNUR should ensures that (1) all uses which are not presently in commerce are prevented

from entering commerce in the future without a Significant New Use Notice (SNUN) and (2) EPA is

aware of all existing uses for risk assessment purposes. We outline several concerns outlined below

regarding new approach and concerns that such approach hampers enforcement, compliance, and

information gathering.

Enforcement and Compliance Concerns

This new approach allows asbestos-containing products that are not currently used to be

used in the future. There are many uses of asbestos beyond the 15 identified in the proposed

SNUR. 40 CFR 763.165; Manufacture and Importation prohibitions lists select asbestos containing

products which are no longer permitted to be used in the United States or exported. From an

enforcement and compliance perspective, the former SNUR approach (requiring companies to notify

the EPA of asbestos uses) may have provided EPA a list of potential company manufacturing

asbestos and a means for identifying compliance with the 1994 ban. The current approach OPPT is

proposing will not facilitate this data collection and potentially leave holes for legacy uses to be

reinstated. Many manufacturers have stopped using asbestos in their products but would be allowed

to through this SNUR if it is not one of the approximately 15 types that the SNUR requires a SNUN

for.

Another tool in the TSCA enforcement toolkit is TSCA Section 7 Imminent and Substantial

Engagement (ISE) authority. This infrequently used provision provides EPA authority for preventing a

release or continued release of a substance meeting the definition of a ”imminently hazardous

chemical substance or mixture” in TSCA 7(f). The new SNUR approach will not require entities to

submit current asbestos uses which are unknown to the agency. OPPT as a result will not be aware

of these uses for the asbestos problem formulation and subsequent risk assessment. Failure to have

resulting risk information will make an ISE proceeding far more challenging to pursue given that risk

information had not been collected and fully evaluated ahead of time.

Information Gathering Limitations

One of the main impetuses for the SNUR was to gather all existing ongoing uses for the

purpose of the risk evaluation data by requiring companies to provide clear evidence whether any

uses are existing rather than legacy uses. Under the new proposed approach as of April 25th,

companies are not required and, therefore, not motivated to voluntarily .report any ongoing uses

except select companies commenting on the 15 uses for which OPPT intends to cover in the

proposed SNUR.

in addition, the SNUR does not require the specific asbestos product to be disclosed.

Therefore, while a product might fall into a broader class, EPA will not receive specific information

on that underlying product and, thus, not gather relevant data on potential exposures that endanger

human health and the environment.

Based on the approach proposed on April 25th, OECA workgroup members requests that the

workgroup be provided some background on the new SNUR approach. What is OPPT’s goal from

shifting the SNUR to a finite list of 15 known uses and requesting comment on these uses? How will

the gaps OAQPS and OECA raised be addressed by OPPT?

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposed rule and we look forward to

hearing from you. Feel free to reach out to Jessica Goldstein, Geraldine Gardner or me if you have

any questions.

Mark Seltzer, Attorney Advisor

Chemical Risk and Reporting Enforcement Branch

Waste and Chemical Enforcement Division

Office of Civil Enforcement

US Environmental Protection Agency

Phone: 202-564-2901

From: Courtnage, Robert

Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2018 3:14 PM

To: Fairchild, Susan <Fairchild.Susan@epa.gov>; Seltzer, Mark <Selt;er.Mark@epa,goy>; Gardner,

Geraldine <g3ardner Geraldine@epa.gov>; Flaherty, Colleen <Flaherty §;Ql|een@epa ng>; Watkins,

Stephen <watkins stephen@epa.gov>; Cooperstein, Sharon<WW>;

Gallagher, Kathryn <§allagherKathryn@epa.gov>; Anderson, Steve<Wz

Smith, Peterj <sm'th.Peter’@epa.ng>; Silagi, William <Silagi.\_/Milliam@epa gov>; Pfahles—Hutchens,

Andrea < - h n An r v>

Cc: Carmichael, Lea <Carmichae ,Lea@epa ng>; Winchester, Erik <Win'

>

Subject. RE. Update on Status of Asbestos SNUR.

Hi Susan— At the staff level our recommendation was to structure the SNUR as previously shared with'

the workgroup as that would prevent any uses that are no longer ongoing from not being captured

by the SNUR. However, this is the direction we received from our upper management.

Regards-

Robert T. Courtnage

Associate Chief

Fibers and Organics Branch

National Program Chemicals Division

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics/OCSPP

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

202.566.1081 (Desk)

202.740.2993 (Mobile)

From: Fairchild, Susan

Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2018 7:52 AM

TO: Courtnage, Robert<QMW>; Seltzer, Mark <5eltzetMa$®ettangx

Gardner, Geraldine <§id£eLG£LaidLWQQQDjsgflx Flaherty, Colleen <F| h r l n . v>;

Watkins, Stephen <watkinsstephen@epa.gov>; Cooperstein, Sharon

<mmsmtmmgm2 Gallagher, Kathryn <Gallagher1<athryn@epa.gov>; Anderson, Steve

<WW>; Smith, Peterj <Smith.Peter'@epa.gov>; Silagi, William

<3 ag',Will’am@epa.gov>; Pfahles—Hutchens, Andrea <Efah es—tlutchens,Andrea@epa.gov>

Cc: Carmichael, Lea <WM§QMX Winchester, Erik <‘

r r‘k e a. v>

Subject: RE: Update on Status of Asbestos SNUR

But isn’t the list of uses that are no longer ongoing actually a very, very long list? And

wouldn’t it include not only the list of manufactured asbestos containing products

listed prior to the ban and phase out rule, but also any other new product? (see the

attached 55 FR 5144 Notice from 1990 in which we published the final results of a

section 114 lCR that listed all the then uses of asbestos.)

So under this new SNUN approach, if EPA failed to list one of the old uses that has

been discontinued, or failed to correctly anticipate some other new use, then it seems

to me that the manufacture of such a product would not be subject to the SNUR.

Susan Fairchild

Senior Environmental Scientist l US Environmental Protection Agency | Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

] Minerals and Manufacturing Group 1 Mail Code D 243—04 |Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 I (919) 541—5167

From: Courtnage, Robert

Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2018 4:24 PM

To: Seltzer, Mark <Seltzer.bzark@epa.gov>; Gardner, Geraldine < r n | in . v>;

Flaherty, Colleen <Flaherty.g;Qlleen@gpa.gov>; Watkins, Stephen <watkins.stephen@epa.gov>;

Cooperstein, Sharon <§;Qoperstein.Sharon@epa.gov>; Gallagher, Kathryn

<g5al|agher Kathryn@epa.gov>; Anderson, Steve <Anderson.Steve@epa.gov>; Fairchild, Susan

<Fairgb'ld.§usan@epa gov; Smith, Peterj <§mitb,Eeter'@epa gop; Silagi, William

<3lagi.William@epa,ng>; Pfahles—Hutchens, Andrea <Efahles‘tlutcbens Andreaccyega ng>

Cc: Carmichael, Lea <Carmichael Lea@epa gov; Winchester, Erik <Wingbester Er‘lg@epa ggy>

Subject: Update on Status of Asbestos SNUR

Workgroup Members—

l wanted to give everyone an update of the status of the proposed asbestos significant new use rule

(SNUR). As mentioned previously, the proposed SNUR is tentatively to be released in conjunction

with the asbestos problem formulation document. The problem formulations have taken longer to

complete than originally anticipated. As such, the release of the proposed SNUR is also delayed.

After sharing a draft of the proposed SNUR, OCSPP upper management asked us to take a different

approach. Instead of requiring a significant new notice (SNUN) for all uses that are not ongoing, after

listing and clarifying the currently ongoing uses would not require a SNUN, they have instead asked

us to specifically list out certain uses that are no longer ongoing that will require a SNUN. This

currently includes: arc chutes; reinforced plastics; pipeline wrap; separators in fuel cells and

batteries; filler for acetylene cylinders; high grade electrical paper; millboard; missile liner; roofing

felt; vinyl-asbestos floor tile; beater—add gaskets; extruded sealant tape; non—roofing adhesives,

sealants, and coatings; and any building material other than asbestos cement.

The tentative plan is to post on the EPA website a signed pre-publication version of the proposed

SNUR in Mid-may to coincide with the release of the asbestos problem formulation document. I’ll

have more on process and how much final review time the workgroup will have based on how things

proceed with the internal OCSPP review. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Regards—

-Robert

Robert T. Courtnage

Associate Chief

Fibers and Organics Branch

National Program Chemicals Division

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics/OCSPP

US. Environmental Protection Agency

202.566.1081 (Desk)

202.740.2993 (Mobile)