Advisory Committee Regulatory Re-evaluation Report - Office of Children's 

Health Protection

Report of the

Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee

to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Regarding the Selection of Five Regulations

for Re-Evaluation

Submitted by

Dr. J. Routt Reigart, Chair

Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee

May 28, 1998

Report of the Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee

to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Regarding the Selection of Five Regulations for Re-Evaluation

PREAMBLE

The Children's Health Protection Advisory Committee (CHPAC) was formed to advise, consult with, 

and make recommendations to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on issues associated 

with the development of regulations to address the prevention of adverse health effects to children. One 

of the CHPAC's primary missions is to identify five existing EPA regulations, which if re-evaluated, 

could lead to better protection for children. The CHPAC established a highly iterative process, which 

involved the development of guiding criteria, review of potential environmental health risks to children, 

and an assessment of the status of regulation, enforcement, and implementation. The CHPAC, with its 

broad representation of industry, environmental, health, and children's organizations, arrived at 

consensus agreements through its deliberations. This reflected the CHPAC members' common 

commitment to find better ways to incorporate children's health concerns into environmental regulatory

decision making.

One key tool used by the CHPAC in its deliberations was the development of seven screening criteria to 

select rules for re-evaluation that would positively impact children's health protection either 

substantively or procedurally (Attachment A). The CHPAC approached the assignment to identify five 

existing regulations from a holistic, health-based strategy. First, the CHPAC considered specific 

substances and routes of exposure that may pose a greater health risk to children and second, determined 

which regulatory provisions were applicable. For instance, if the CHPAC determined that new evidence 

suggests a reanalysis because of a potential risk to children for a particular substance, then it 

recommended that this information should be considered in all regulations of that chemical. In re-
evaluating regulations, children's differential and cumulative routes of exposure should be considered. 

Thus, the CHPAC's recommendations are listed as issues of concern with the specific regulations 

identified under each heading.

The five issues selected by the CHPAC are:

1. Mercury

2. (Farm) Worker Protection Standard

3. Triazine Pesticides

4. Organophosphates and Carbamates

5. Air Quality and Asthma

During the CHPAC's deliberation process, several critical issues that impact children's health were 

identified but not selected because they were beyond the immediate task of identifying five existing 

regulations for expedited review or because of regulatory timing conflicts.

These issues represent important opportunities for EPA to address serious potential health risks to 

children, but broader agency policies, authorities, or structure may need to be reconsidered. Therefore, 

the CHPAC also provided broad recommendations that merit the attention of EPA. The CHPAC is 

hopeful that the broad recommendations for process improvements will receive expeditious action and 

contribute meaningful long term enhancements to EPA's efforts to protect children's health. The 

CHPAC expects EPA to report back on its recommendations to repropose or not repropose the selected 

regulations by December 1998, and is also hopeful that it will continue to advise EPA throughout its 

regulatory re-evaluation process.

MERCURY

Specific Standard to Re-Evaluate:

National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for 

Chloralkali Plants

Other Focus Areas for Multimedia Strategy:

Water Quality Criteria Standard

Regulatory Determination for Electric (Coal-Burning) Utility Boilers

Hazardous Waste Combustion Rule

Medical Waste Combustion Rule

Municipal Waste Combustion Rule

The CHPAC recommends that EPA take a holistic approach to evaluate all sources of mercury 

emissions. Mercury is a relevant issue to more than one media (air, water), which contributes to its entry

into the environment, for example, by electricity (coal-burning) generation, incineration and discharge 

into water sources. Human exposure occurs primarily through fish consumption. Mercury exposure is 

associated with adverse health effects in humans. Depending on dose, the effects can range from severe 
to less severe, most notably, neurological, developmental, and reproductive effects.

By the end of 1998, EPA is scheduled to complete a multimedia strategy addressing mercury. We 

support EPA's multimedia approach and schedule for the issuance of this strategy.

We encourage EPA to proceed diligently with implementation to protect children from mercury 

emissions, including those from municipal, medical, and hazardous waste combustion.

Although the CHPAC selected the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) 

for Chloralkali Plants for re-evaluation, EPA resources should not be diverted from the evaluation of 

other larger sources of mercury emission. Important criteria for its selection are that the standard has not 

been re-evaluated or revised since its promulgation in 1973, children's health was not considered in the 

original development of the standard, and new information and data based on peer reviewed science 

suggest that risks to children and the persistent and bioaccumulative nature of mercury were not 

considered during the setting of the standard.

The CHPAC recognizes the Water Quality Criteria Standard as one means by which the EPA can 

regulate the prevention of contaminated fish by mercury and ensure children's protection from 

hazardous levels of mercury. The CHPAC recommends that EPA address the largest sources of mercury

emissions expeditiously and prevent further contamination of fish by revising the Water Quality Criteria 

Standard. Studies have shown that once mercury enters water, either directly or through air deposition, 

it can bioaccumulate in fish and animal tissue at the top of the food chain in concentrations much greater

than those found in water.

Another specific concern is the emission of mercury from Electric (Coal-Burning) Utility Boilers 

(regulatory determination by the EPA is due in November 1998). Important criteria for its selection are 

that there is currently no regulation of hazardous air pollutant emissions, such as mercury, from electric 

utility boilers, and electric utility boilers are the largest contributor of overall anthropogenic sources of 

mercury emissions in the United States (EPA Mercury Report to Congress 1997).

(FARM) WORKER PROTECTION STANDARD

Specific Regulations/Standards:

Worker Protection Standards (WPS)

Children may be exposed to pesticides through employment in farm work, by eating fruits and 

vegetables directly from the fields while at work, or by drift from field applications to neighboring 

residential areas and schools. Pregnant and lactating women who work in farm fields or reside in 

neighboring areas can also expose fetuses and neonates to pesticides.

The current (farm) worker protection standard has not considered these pesticide exposures to children. 

Under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), EPA has the authority to 

regulate these childhood and prenatal exposures to pesticides through the worker protection standard 
including labeling, reentry intervals, personal protective equipment, worker education and training, and 

posting and signs.

The CHPAC recommends that EPA expeditiously re-evaluate the worker protection standard in order to 

determine whether it adequately protects children's health. In its re-evaluation, EPA should, for 

example, consider using standardized data on size and age-specific weight and height for modeling 

children's exposure when more specific data on children's exposure to individual pesticides may be 

lacking.

TRIAZINE PESTICIDES

Specific Regulations/Standards:

Atrazine Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL)

Atrazine Pesticide Tolerance

Atrazine is an herbicide that belongs to the triazine class. Atrazine has been linked to adverse health 

effects including cancer and birth defects. Atrazine has been detected in drinking water throughout the 

midwest and other parts of the nation. When EPA established the tolerance and 1991 drinking water 

standards for atrazine, children's differential exposure was not considered and children's differential 

susceptibility was not fully evaluated. New information has since becomeavailable to the EPA 

concerning the mechanism of action underlying its carcinogenic effect. Hormonal effects were further 

investigated and triggered the need for the re-evaluation of both the carcinogenic effects of this 

compound as well as the developmental and reproduction studies. Reviewing the tolerances and the 

established drinking water standard in concert will provide EPA with an opportunity to evaluate a 

chemical's impact on children's health via aggregate routes of exposure. Reconsideration of the 

tolerances and drinking water standard for atrazine should be given top priority in EPA's 

implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Food Quality Protection Act.

ORGANOPHOSPHATES AND CARBAMATES

Specific Regulations/Standards:

Pesticide Tolerances for Methyl Parathion, Dimethoate, and Chlorpyrifos

EPA scientific panels have found that organophosphate and carbamate insecticides disrupt the central 

nervous system via a cholinesterase inhibition mechanism of toxicity. Because children's central 

nervous systems continue to develop until puberty, they are particularly vulnerable to the effects of 

some neurotoxins. Children can be exposed to these insecticides through food, homes, schools, 

employment, and other sources.

Data indicate that children's patterns of dietary intake are distinct from adults' patterns. When EPA 
established the tolerances for these insecticides, children's differential exposure was not considered and 

children's differential susceptibility was not fully evaluated. Of the 39 pesticides registered for use on 

food, thirteen are detected in food according to FDA and USDA pesticide residue data. Five of these 

account for 90 percent of the dietary risk of neurotoxicity and three (methyl parathion, dimethoate, and 

chlorpyrifos) represent the bulk of that risk. Reconsideration of the tolerances for these three pesticides 

should be given top priority in terms of data collection and other necessary steps in EPA's 

implementation of the Food Quality Protection Act.

AIR QUALITY AND ASTHMA

Areas for Review:

Indoor Air Quality

Ambient Air Quality Standards (Particulate Matter (PM), Sulphur Dioxide 

(SO2))