Tobacco Documents Online

/ p'c.i,~ ,'- ~., I A' DR. $. J, GREEN, IllLI, BANK. S. R. :IASSEY SI~IIVCI62A 2nd Rove~ber, 1976 CURRE,~FI" STATUS OF FREON 11 and FP.EON 12 • a • v ( Concern has been expressed regarding the use o£ Freons 11 and 12 in relation to pollution of the strato- sphere, which i1 has been suggested may lead to a depletion of the eerthts ozone layer. Preens 11 and 12 ~re respectively trichlorofluorenethane and dichlorodi£1uoroc.ethane, md it is understood that Preen 11 is used in the Re)T..olds* G-I3/G-13C processes for the ex~nnsion of tobacco (1). This memo. reviews the current status of Frcons 11 ond 12. Since the situation is so~e~tat conplex a stm~rg o£ Cho essential points is given at the end. In April of this year the Department o£ the Environment (DOE) published a report [2) which was concerned wit!, a prelininary examination of the develp~in~ ~ta~e o~ knol~ledze with re~ard to Preens 11 and 12. This report concluded that scientifically the hypotheses that hnv~ been put ~orward are plausible and that they warrant further serious atten:tion. Th~ report reco.~r, endod two pre- cautionary step~ to be taken in ~he U.K. in advance c~ more gencral decision on the continued use o£ ~reons bein~ made. The recon~endations are as £ollows: (a) Hanufacturers of aerosols and plastic foams using Preens 11 and 12 intensi£y their search for alternative~. They ar~ invited to report the results o£ their studies 5~ J~ne i~78. (b) Ranu£acturers and users 0£ industrial equipment usin~ Freon 11 and 1~ should seek to ninimise leakage o~ the~e materials during operation or maintenance e£ that equ%pment. The report also pointed out ~.hat .- nechanisn already exists £or collaborative research by :'..or:her ,~c,~tes o£ the Euro,ncan Economic Community at~d that discussions ,~.:'_._q taking place witl:h~ "he frar.m,'ork of ~he Orp.'=nisat~cn ,o~" European Co-opeza,:]o:~ and Davelo~n~nt (OECD). This is therefor~ 1:he cur,'eat status o~" rreons in },urol:e. O~ (..2"I O L~4

- 2 - DR. S. J. GRiN 2nd November, 1976 # The situation in the United States, however, is as may be expected a little here complex. On September 13th of this year the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) published its report on Freons and their projected ef2ect on the stratosphere (3). This report runs into two volumes and is a considerably more detailed consideration of the subject than that published by the DOE. Nevertheless, it is understood that the reco~znend=tions made in the ~iAS report are essentially the same is those made in the DOE report as detailed above. However, the NAS did say that in their view selected regulntlons would be required eventually altho1:~h at the ~oment they could not specify what these would be. They qu~lific.~ this by recommending a~ain~t the introduction o2 regulations for up to $~o years with the exception of a requirement to label aerosol cans. Subsequently, on iSth October, A. Schnidt, Administrator o£ the Food and Drug Administration (rDA). sent a letter (4) to Dr. R. W. Peterson, the Chair~_an of the Council on .Environment Quality (CEQ) in which hc said that, based on the ~L~S r~port, "lay conclusion is that the FDA should initiate the regulatory process leadin~ to a phaseout o£ none essential uses o2 £1uoroc~rbon propellants in food, drug, and cosnetic products". Meanwhile (!2th October), Environ~.ental Protection Ad~inistration (E?A) Administrator Russelt Train told a ..'~TO meetinE in Brussels that the EPA v'.~s be~innin?, the regulatory process, and it is "our hope to phase out all none essential uses over the next two years" (S, O). In typical fashion, these various pieces of info.-w.atlon were interpreted by the U.S. pre~s as an FDA ban on Frcons ~s aeroscl propellants. As a result, news of an "PDA ban" was announced by the BBC on October 16th and various press reports to this ef2cct were also in evidence, e.~., Sunday Telegraph, 17th October, pa~e 2. TIlE TRUTH IS, TIIAT NO FDA OR OTI~R U.S. ACE2!CY ~N I;XISTS AT PRH$~:T, BUT %\~OUS ACE~:CI~S ID\VE INDICATED TIIEIR I~T~)~ TO ~NITIJ~T~ TI~ LECAL AND NECESSARY P~GULATORY PROCESSES TO P|~SE OUT HON-ESSE:,~rL~L USE OF FREO~S. From remarks made by Train it has been interpreted that th~ EPA i~ operating on the assu~.ption that it will utilise the n~ Toxic Substances Control Act as its chief regulatory ~ool. It is understood that the relevant part o2 this Act is Section .6. The Act in question received the U.S. Presido~t's signature on October 18th. • ..duct Safety Commission (CPSC) also The Consur.{or ~ has an interest in ~ref, n propellants. The Chnirnmn o~ CPSC, c~ c czD

DR. S. J. CP.,~gN 2nd November, 1976 S. John Byington, has sent a letter (7) to Peterson of the CEQ ex~lninin~ his agency's position. !Io states that the CPSC has before it a ~!ational ~esources Defense Council (~.."%1)C) petition requesting institution o£ proceedings under Section 8 of the Consuner Produht Safety Act, to ban all ~essurised consucer -roducts conzaiuin- Freon ro~ellants. November 26th at the latest. Each of the above mentioned U.S. agencies has sone jurisdiction over separate segments of the aerosol market. l~owever, PDA's authority over hair sprays, deodorants, Bud. antiperspirants gives i~ responsibility over GO% of products using Preens. $chnidt has said that FDA will soon issue a proposal to require "a warning label on Preen-containing aerosol products and will indicate the a~ency's intent to publish further regulations establishing ~ timetable for phasing out of these products within a reasonable ~ime period". It is understood that neither 5chmidt nor Peterson (CEQ) will be around to car%~/ out the nissions they have set for their a~encies. Peter~on's resisnation was effective on October 1st, and Schnidt plans to leave by December. In his address to the NATO Conmittee, Russell Train (5,0) stressed the need for international action, and noted that the U.S. is responsible for only 40% of the suspect fluorocarbons. He further indicated that the U.3. woul4 have to undertake a thorough analysis o£ cost.- and benefits in the case of specific uses. It is understood that t:.e EPA's Office of Toxic Substances has been workirgon econoraic impact matters sh~ce July and plans to have a draft report available in December. Appended to this none. are copies of various documents and letters which give the up to date position in the U.S. ~ese docum~,ts and other infornation wore obtninod from ~Ir. D. Roddy of I.C.I. :~nd Division, who is the Chairman of the Technical and Regulation Committee of the British Aerosol ~!nnufacturers Association. The documents were'supplied to l.C.I, by an azenc7 within th~ U.S. Hr. Reddy also indicated that at phe appropriate tir:o British industrial in~erests would ue represe~ted by the Manufact~rin~ Chemists Association a~d the British Aerosol Hanufactu~ers Association. O cr~ o

- 4 - DR. S. J. GllEII~! _ i 2nd November, 1976 S~RY & CONCLUSIONS t O lo o o @ o ~e In the U.K., and most likely in Europe, a ban on the use of Freons ll and 12 even as aerosol pro~ollsuts will not be Lntroduced, if at all, be£ore 1979. I;o ban on the use o£ Froons even as aerosol propellants exists in tho U.S. at preson¢. Several U.S. Government Agencies incend Co initiate legal and regulatory processes to phase out non- essential use o£ Fr~ons. The most likely agency to co-ordinate these processes will be the U.S. Council on ~nvtronr~ental Quality. The most likely mechanisn for a regulatory process will be the new Toxic Substances Control Act - Section 6. With the exception o£ the FDA's plan to require labollin~ o£ products using ~reon propellants, most regulatory schemes are lon~ tern an~ are in ~ny case pending a final report by the Na~iolml Academy of Science, probably in 197S. 7. The parties interested in introducin~ n resulatory procoss ~re mainly coacen~ed with the use o£ Frcons as propellants for domestic aerosol c~ns. 8. ~te economics o~ industries involved in producin~ and using Freous will bc considered in £ornulating a regulatory process. 9, The heads o£ two o£ ~he interested U.$. Gove~ment Agencies will have retired by December o£ this year. I0. Any ban in the U.S. will not cure the problen since the U.S. is respo;tsible for oniy 40% o£ the world Preen usage. 11. The intern=tional, and internal U.S., efforts to regulate ~he use o~ Freons is likely to lend to consider~ole conflict. This will result in considurablc ~elay before any ban becomes ef=ective. I ; ".'s • .. , /~ "%..~ ,,/ .... <./ % C (3" r~ o" c o

. o; - 5 DR. $. J. G~EEN 2nd 2tovonber, 1976 REFE1~.NCES 2. );oNe. from P. J. Ntchollp PJN/~U/77, 20th October 1975 ~Q 4eQ Department of the Environnent Central Unit on Enviro3mental PoDution, Pollution Pnper lie. S, II.:,!.S.O., Lo,~on, A~ril 1976 ~;ational Academy of Science, "Environmental ~ffects o£ Fluorocarbon Release", 13Oh September 1976 Letter £ron A. Schnidt o~ the FDA to R. W. Peterson 0£ the Council on Environntental Quality, 13th October 1976 S.* ~nvironmental !iews, Press Release, 12th October 1976 6.*~ Transcript o£ 1;he address by R. E. Train o£ the U.S. Environ~.ental Protection A~ency to the .~IATO Cor~ittee in Brussels, iZth October 1976 7e~ Letter fron S. J. Bylngton of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Conuission to R. 'd. Petorson of the Council on Environmental Quality, 14oh October 1976 * Ae£er=nccs 4-7 are aFpended. % mmm~ O C7~ c~

." I.' %1I . DL'I'AiI"I" t,~[;l,q" :.~;" I IEA|.'fl I, IS.I )tICA'I" IO: :, AHt~ %'li~l ! AI~E |'lllll.|l: |11"~.|.'1 II ::I:IIVI('.C • I~"~Ol') /~11il I.II:;J(; Al,J.tl;41.~'l liP~'lrll~'i-I i%D(.K%'I%.L to IPil.ll'fi,~%#l{'l ~1~.'11~1 Dr. ?,u=:ell 11[ Pet nv~c,n ClmJ,~an, C.un:'l'l on "Envit On:-cn :.".1 qua~-ity '%S' |~ 77.2 3ac|:~on i'l."cc, ,•.-. l.lashinzton, D.C. 2000G e • OOT i Z 197G E. . .. m ° °'.. • Dear Dr. Peternon: "I ho',,e eare£ully revleued the llational Academy 0£ Sclencc.': .report.'; reza:~in~ the environ.nental effects of fl,,oroearbon release. Based -- "" ' o. on th. ,~,.d_n,~ p.e~..te., _,~ con..u..}on ~, tha~ .ZDA _1 ..... ld ~n~.~a~e th_~_..T ~Z~u.!z'-o~r~- P!_9_-'9.s s ._l~,'-~.;.-3~,tg_a..,"h~'-~_-"-o__~3 ..u.f n_~..F.e s_s c:~: i n I ~ s .--:. o f flu.~rocarbon pro -llazts in food dtu;',• =~.d eosmet:ie pro-/-zaZs. In the near future TDA ~ill issue 1~ nropos~'rcgul--ti6, that %111 reqt;ize a . "a., = S.n . a e n i ; /: k- G'.&k "oi & i & £.7 % r" &'i;S Z " , = :.::£!£----" • lh~icate the A~,ency's in:eat co publish further regu!a~-o.ns es~abi!shin-~ n t~etabl~., fo- .P.h.-s.~n~.qu~..t,,~$.~..Pr..od'J---.~}3.1.~ :*..~J'J..~-_r_e.~'-:qn_~9.-.~..~..---_.~-_.- .c..-.~-.,- To a~sure.a t~.-.ly and unified ~ed~ral aKency response to this pro~.e.~.. pro,-ose that the Cou.~:i! on Environ.-.en:al Quality coord!na:e :-cdera! re~la~ory :-.~ivity thro.J~h the If-sos Task Zorce and ndv~.se the Cons-_'.-.ar " Product Saf~zy Cor..-~issicn and the Lnvironmzntal..~.-otecti6n A~,enc)'. cf ' 1~DD.ts Latent to =else £-',e4iaze rcGulnto:)- s~eps. ° • In ad~,It!on, I request that the Coxmcil exercise its ~o.I.~. in resoivi.-.5 . q-~s~ions of" enviro.~_--_ntt..1, inpac~ state=eat preparation !nvol','in~ ~:ul~i- a~ency action ~)- dosi£na~i.n~ a iced aKene~ to have supervisory resV:n- slbility over anF ~equired environr.ei,tal docu=entation. A__II~',,~2~h__..~.;..~ ~.~s rc£ulatory au~'ho.-it~- for ---=n:c, xi=at,.-3~" ~,0Z of a~-rnsn.! prolu==~ contain~n~ofh~oroaarbon propellants• ~ is r~y 3uc~,..-.=.'nt ~::a~ ~'-A ".s ~.',," appropriate -~=ncy to be nssizne~ this responsibility. ~is %'ould b--" =onsi=tent uith their £esi-~nation as lead a~.ency in the dcvelo:a.nent and" In2.~•e=,n~ati~.-. o[ th~ Nat,=ha! l:io!O?,:~=-~l ~nd Climatic Z~fccts 3,e~..--':c%, ~rozra.~. FDA's i:,tcnt to take i=~rliatc re~ul--tory a~on n-.kes Lizi~:z 0£ th^.'lead .agent9 designation ex~:cm~ly importnnt. O %. -Q O o< ~O O'- CO • °

• ° ! .° qt .I .! ~ °o! i "i !, J ! ! t ! I ! -! e • ~ ! -f . • • e" °° o °, • - 8 • • dp" tic. Russe.l.1 E. Train "EPA m°; )~r. S. Jolm ~,):~.~r, t0n C~SC. ~. o ° • •• t .e ° ; #e ].:~° . • Sincere ~'uu:s, .. - " ,KI(::v.,~udm: 1!. Sch.-~.dt:, H,D. • ' ~s.~Joner o£ Food ond. Dz"u~ Q - o O'o -, • ° . ° ° = e• °. • ° • ~o ° . j o. • j %o" ° , ° Q I .. °:- , : bI o" ° • ° ° • • . . °o ° ° ~ • f " • ° • . : .. . • .,,2. ":.. • . • ; • , ,° • • . o-o,° • ° ,m ~e ° .~ .e 0

lltitl'l~D ;'fA ! ! ', j,.tlil~s. I'IiI.DI*.i. il')'! k:,,l.|Ir:~" IpA.il$l/Ds'll#e|. |s.t. ~l~ajr.i~ urTI( l~l. I'U'.Ieel ~,% pro#&e ,y l'lBm |'J'l~ i~ . i. ~e'.'r SJ~b IN rle¢,AI. L¢PP~|I'/IlPI)~ • | e,*ke, lel~/l l.(,.B.IAt, r 1,##, i'! #.]I t,~le.. ; ' . ii • • 'i .... 5.. e , ,. • •. "o. • ... . .~L L/LL~ Ly kY ..'_:.: . • .. llaughton (20Z) 755-034~, • FOR !L1HEDIhTE R[LEASE TUESOA.Y~ OCTOBER 12, 1976 "- EPh Ai~HIIIISTP, ATOR CM.LS FOR IlATO /,~ATIONS .TO PI!ASE .OUT ROIIESSEh'TIAL USES OF FLUOROCAP, BO~(S Russell E. Train, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency " kdstntstrator, today announced that the United States ~s initiating its regulatory proeesse,~ to phase out nonessen~.t~l uses of fluorocarbons 1"1 and 12 ' part~cblarly their u~e as aerosol propellants. Empha~ztn~ that the preservation of • the world's protective ozone layer ts a glob,~l problem, F'r. Tr~,~n called on the tIATO member countt-ies to Jofn wtth the Unt*--..d • States in adopting national policy commitments to'phase ¢.ut nonessential aerosol uses of thee fluoroca,"bons. • • Fluorocarbons have a wtde range of coT.=erctol uses (n modern socteti.~s, includi,)g uses in refrigeration and other co~lino syst(.~:,s ~nd as propella,ts for paints, foods, il.s,.,c~Icld.2.-. . purfuutes, deodorants, hair sprays, etc. Recent studies r~.leascd t,.y the U.$. tlatione.1 ^ca.'o.~,y of Sciences cunLluded that thuse fluorocarbon)chemically react in (,,,ore) • o • . .° ° R-2T~) 0 o o',, ¢d'l r',o o", o

•o w • • Q • ~2~ • th~ strato.'.pllere to de;troy ozo.e t~hich screens the surfz, t:,.' oF the. e~.rth fr(;r,~ h,~r,I;ful ultravioluL radiation. Although thu Ac~=dcmy's report indicaLcd that there are Ion0 ti=ne del~y:; betwee, fl,orncarl,o, release arid cventtmal o)one d(:ntr,ction, and also poini.cd nut that uncertainties rcg~rdin!l the amuum, t of ozone•reduction nnd its consequent adverse effects on hum,~il health, ecological systems, and clilnato remain, it .rccon)mcndc'd selective regulation of fluorocarbon u'::.,s end releases. Incre,~sc.d ultraviolet radiation to the surface of the earth will lead to an increase in hum,~n skin cancer. Hr. Train, in his reinarl;s in Brussels, Belgium to MIkTO's Committee on the Challenges of l lodorn Society (CCI.|S) stated that the problem of rcgulotiog fluorocarbon rol-=aso vas the first truly global onviromnentol problem kahicl; the klorld's nation's have faced. The United States, althobgh the single l~rgo:,t user of aerosols, accounts for just over one-third of total vorld aerosol fluorocarbon omissions. Consequently, U.S. ro0u- .latory action~ alone are not sufficient to mitigate pos)iblo serious long-term reductions to the ozon~ 1.~yer. I.O Hr. Train urged the Alllod nations to ~loin the United States in establishing national policies to phase out nonessential uses "of fluorocarbons, alhtough he made clear that the United Statds would proceed with regulatory action in any event. In order to insure that national rcg,~latory approaches ~ere both timely and Karmonized to the extent practicable, ~Ir. Train suggested that the United States ~.as prepared to host a meeting in early spring 1977 of the major fluorocarbon prc ducing nations to discuss the effective coordination of national regulatory policies, l-kr. Trai observed that .the eventual preservation bf the eart!i's stratosphe,~ +~ould probably be best served by the adoption of an intern~tic~.al con'~ontion regulating man's activities ~hich affect the upper atmosphere, as he first suggested at the 1975 Fall Plenary cf .: CCHS Ho+~ever, Train declared that: "Urgent and coordinated national actions are needed im,~ediat=_ly to deal effecti-'ely t~ith fluorocarbon-caused reductions of the ozone layer." %. # # # \ . o. I . • ¶ • -./ •° Z79 0 0 c.ya 0", I~A'lr~= .,m ---- . .--= --A dl=. At, ira m ~,~p~ mJm___L liilmi~nhA

• • 6 • . Ff, UOROCAV[:O;-I DEPLETION 0P TII~ OZO'IJ': ]Ic~uor.,:u by ~.u~':c]l E. Train Admin i..; t~'ator U.S. Environmelltal 1"~'otection Agency . NA'~O/CCMS Fall Plenary g~ssels - October 12, 1976 • i A year ago I invited the attention o Z" CCMS to the v~Z difficult probl.e.m of fluorocarbons, which has also b~cn a,ldressed by others here this" morning. At that time-I described not only %he pgtential'd~ngers as we saw it in the °° continued use of fluorocarbons b.ut also took the occasiq~" ~ze'conm~nd an international convention ta regulate human .activities that may hav~ a slgnlficant long-term effec.t on'. the stratosphere. Z hope that there will be further d~s- cussion of. ~at subject here at this meet.ing. • . I I said• that we i'n the United States were waiting for the completion .of a study, by ~e National Academy of Sc$ences" • • • ° on thQ whole s~ject an8 for its report. As you know, that " study has been completed. I.have a two-volume copy of the . • report here. I believe the shorter version has been dlstri- buted° The zeport of the National Academy "o~ Sciences is not d.simpl¥ on hypothetfcal computations or .laboratory tests b~t also on high altitude test, by the use of balloonz and other means to ac~ually ~_asure eE£ects in the upper a'.-mo's- pho.re. The report, I think, ve~ ~imply confirms the hypothe- % tieal predietiens ~nt: tha intr0duct~cn of fluoroea~'bons inte the upper atmosphere does have ~l:e effee~ oE dcplctin~ t'he ozone layer around the car~h. It likc~s~ con~ir,.~ that the..~..-,~-~,'-- .-% ¢ ! i 1 ? I I r~2