**Suite 600**   **1615 L Street, NW**  **Washington, DC 20036** 

**- 5610**   **Tel: 202/ 662** 

**- 8500**   **Fax: 202/626**

**- 0900**   **isri @isri.org** 



### 1 August 20, 2010

Document Control Office (7407M) Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20460

– 0001

Re: Docket ID No. EPA

- HQ

- OPPT

- 2009

- 0757

— Advance Notice Of Proposed
Rulema king, Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs); Reassessment of Use Authorizations

To whom it may concern:

On behalf of The Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, Inc. (ISRI), we are pleased to offer the following comments on EPA's Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs); Reassessment of Use Authorizations , published on April 7, 2010 in 66 Fed. Reg. 17645 (“ANPRM ”). 1

It has been more than 30 years since the passage of TSCA and the subsequent promulgation of regulations implementing the statute. In the interim period, there ha ve been significant developments in our understanding of PCBs in the environment, as well as their presence in the stream of commerce. During this time there also have been technological developments within the recycling industry that now allow for the env ironmentally beneficial separation and recycling of plastics from the shredding of automobiles and appliances, using processes that also are able to reduce the level of PCBs that may be present to a level at or below that which poses no
unreasonable risk. ISRI’s welcomes this proceeding and the opportunity it presents to work with the Agency to address a longstandin g regulatory barrier to the beneficial recycling of plastics from automobiles and appliances. If you have questions regarding the se comments, please do not hesitate to contact Robin Weiner, President of ISRI, at 202

- 662

- 8512.

EPA has clearly stated that Agency policy and rulemaking are to be informed by sound science and the evolution of new information, as well as consideration of technological feasibility, costs and other factors that affect our quality of life and standard of living. Through our comments today, ISRI is asking the Agency to apply these principles and address the regulatory uncertainty that is preventing the capital necessary and available to invest in the recycling of plastics from

1 EPA initially set the comment period to expire on July 6, 2010. On June 16, 2010 EPA extended the comment period to August 20, 2010. 75 Fed. Reg. 34076.**Suite 600**   **1615 L Street, NW**  **Washington, DC 20036** 

**- 5610**   **Tel: 202/ 662** 

**- 8500**   **Fax: 202/626**

**- 0900**   **isri @isri.org** 



### 2 shredder aggregate in a ma nner that is both environmentally and economically beneficial, and does not pose an unreasonable risk.

The central points of these comments are:

**•** The separation and recycling of plastics from shredder aggregate 2

**•** The separation and recycling of plastics from shredder aggre gate has many economic benefits, including increased capital investment, sales, jobs, and employee earnings in the U.S.; promotion of innovative “green technology;” and an enhanced balance of trade through the potential export of plastics consistent with t his Administration’s National Export Initiative (NEI). brings with it many environmental benefits, i ncluding avoided landfill disposal and reduced use of natural
resources such as non

- renewable fossil fuels. Recycling these plastics will also reduce greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change by using less energy to manufacture plastics f rom recyclables than to manufacture plastics from virgin materials. These benefits are achieved while also helping to maintain a steady supply of sustainable raw materials for America’s economy.

**•** Under existing PCB regulations, it is possible that recycled plastics containing low levels of PCBs might be authorized for distribution in commerce and use under various provisions, including those fo r “excluded manufacturing processes” and “excluded PCB products.” However, there is sufficient uncertainty as to the applicability of these provisions to discourage the investment of hundreds of millions of dollars of investments necessary to
conduct this activity.

**•** Accordingly, EPA should either (1) clarify that the existing PCB regulations allow for the separation, recycling, distribution in commerce and re

- use of plastics recycled from shredder aggregate, or (2) establish PCB levels below which such plas tics may be distributed in commerce for the purpose of recycling the plastics into feedstock material for the
manufact ure of new plastic products.

1. The Environmental And Economic Benefits Created By ISRI’s Members

ISRI is the “Voice of the Recycli ng Industry,” representing more than 1,550 private, for

- profit companies at more than 7,000 facilities located here in the U.S. and in more than 35 countries that process, broker, and industrially consume scrap commodities, including metals, paper, plastic s, glass, rubber, electronics, and textiles. Our members range from small, family

- owned businesses to large, multi

- billion dollar, multinational companies. ISRI’s mission is to provide education, advocacy, and compliance assistance to all these members; and to promote public awareness of the vital role recycling plays in the U

. S

. economy, global trade, the environment and sustainable development.

2 Shredder aggregate is the stream of in

- process material separated during the shredding of automobiles and appliances but prior to the generation of the automobile shredder residue (ASR, or “fluff”) requiring disposal.**Suite 600**   **1615 L Street, NW**  **Washington, DC 20036** 

**- 5610**   **Tel: 202/ 662** 

**- 8500**   **Fax: 202/626**

**- 0900**   **isri @isri.org** 



### 3 ISRI members are the first link in the manufacturing supply chain, supplying 40% of manufacturing’s global raw material needs. The scrap recycling industry annually transforms more than 130 million metric tons of obsolete materials from consumers, businesses, and manufacturers into useful raw materials. Last year alone, the industry recycled more than $54

billion of scrap into specification grade commodities for productive economic use as feedstock materials by steel mills, foundries, paper mills, smelters, reformulators and other consumers in the United States and throughout the world. To accomplish this task, last year the industry employed over 100,000 Americans, continuing its tradition of creating “green jobs,” even during tough economic times.

The scrap industry is an important contributor to the nation’s international competitiveness: in

2009 , the industry exported $21.4 billion of recyclable materials to 154 countries. At a time when the U.S. economy is struggling, and a premium is being placed on creating economically and environmentally sustainable jobs, the scrap recycling industry is pro viding solutions.

2. Separating Plastic From Automobile/Appliance Shredder Aggregate

A. Automobile and Appliance Recycling

ISRI’s members play a major role in the recycling of vehicles, appliances and other manufactured products. The recycling rat e for appliances in the US is 90%, and for automobiles it is 106% (more automobiles are recycled than are manufactured in the U

. S

. ). This is accomplished through a long

- standing, market

- driven recycling infrastructure, with no added cost to
consumers or taxpayers . Most recently, this recycling infrastructure was central to the U

. S

. government’s “cash for clunkers” programs for automobiles, intended to create jobs and conserve energy through the sale of new and more efficient products.

The scrap recycling industry operates over 240 automobile/appliance shredders in the U

. S. Their operations are responsible for the recycling of between 12 and 17 million automobiles, as well as 45 million appliance s, each year, producing up to 1 8 million tons of the approximately 80 million tons of ferrous scrap produced in the U

. S

. every year. Shredded scrap metal is the primary, if not only, feedstock to the mini

- mill (electric arc furnace) steel industry, and is the source for two out of every three pounds of new steel produced in t he U

. S. The recycling of metals produced from shredding operations eliminates the need to mine, transport, and refine vast quantities of metal ore, thus significantly decreasing the environmental impacts and energy consumption associated with virgin metal p roduction.

B. Shredding Automobiles/Appliances And Metal Separation

In a typical shredding operation, a mixture of automobiles, appliances, and other such steel

bearing products are fed into a hammer mill, where they are shredded into approximately fist

sized pieces of steel. The steel or ferrous metal is separated from the remaining shredded material through a series of magnets. The remaining material

– the shredder aggregate

– is then separated by size and processed through a variety of different tec hnologies, most commonly eddy current separators, to recover the nonferrous metals (e.g., aluminum, stainless steel and copper).**Suite 600**   **1615 L Street, NW**  **Washington, DC 20036** 

**- 5610**   **Tel: 202/ 662** 

**- 8500**   **Fax: 202/626**

**- 0900**   **isri @isri.org** 



### 4 After separation of the nonferrous metals the remaining material is known as automobile shredder residue (“ASR”, also known as “shredder fluff”), even though sources include products other than automobiles, such as appliances. ASR contains a wide range of materials, including foam, glass, textiles, rubber, plastics, and residual dirt. Of the total amount material fed into the shredder, approximately 25% by weight ends up as ASR. Approximately five million tons of ASR are landfilled annually. The plastic conten t of ASR ranges from 15%

- 45% , with a typical range
of 30%

- 40%.

C. Innovations In Shredding And Plastics Recycling

Due to recent technological ad vances in shredding and downstream processing, the scrap industry has the potential to do for plastics what it has successfully done for metals. These technologies have the potential to separate and recycle the more than 1 million tons of plastic 3

that ar e now in the shredder residue stream and sent to landfills for disposal. These plastics separated from shredder aggregate can be processed into specification grade commodities for which domestic and overseas markets exist today.

A number of shredders a nd others in the U .S. have made multi

- million dollar investments in research and development to determine the most economical and technologically feasible manner for the separation of the plastics out of the shredder aggregate stream to meet growi ng market demand for the material. A number of proprietary technologies have been developed for successfully recycling the plastic into commercial grade feedstock. The U

. S

. government itself, led by Argonne National Laboratory, has been involved in a nearl y 20

- year effort to develop such technologies, and has evaluated a variety of technologies that can separate many types of polymers from shredder aggregate. 4

3. Potential Barriers to Recycling Plastic From Shredder Aggregate

A. Potential Presence Of L ow Concentrations Of PCBs In Plastics

The composition of the plastics that can be separated from the shredder aggregate reflects both the global supply chain and consumer purchasing preferences that are the inputs to the shredding process. It is for thes e reasons that the plastics separated from shredder aggregate may contain low levels of non

- liquid PCBs.

3 This figure conservatively assumes the low end of the range of plastic content in the shredder aggregate. It is likely that more than 2 million tons/year of plastics could be recycled from shredder aggregate. The polymers found in the plastics r ecovered from aggregate include polypropylene, polyethylene, acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS), nylons, high impact polystyrene (HIPS), and a variety of other polymers.

4 Recovering Plastics From Retired Vehicles , U.S. Dept. of Energy (March 2009) ( http://www.transportation.anl.gov/pdfs/R/560.pdf ); End

- of

- Life Vehicle Recycling: The State of the Art of Resource Recovery from Shredder Residue , Argonne National Laboratory (Sept. 25, 2006).**Suite 600**   **1615 L Street, NW**  **Washington, DC 20036** 

**- 5610**   **Tel: 202/ 662** 

**- 8500**   **Fax: 202/626**

**- 0900**   **isri @isri.org** 



### 5 The specific sources of these low concentration PCBs cannot be precisely identified. It is very likely, however, that PCBs in plastics separated from shredder aggregate come from uses or sources currently authorized by EPA. For example:

**•** EPA authorizes an annual average of 25 ppm PCBs, with a maximum concentration of 50 ppm PCB, in materials or products that are created by “excluded manufacturing pro cesses” as defined by 40 CFR 761.3. Such materials are generally excluded from TSCA’s prohibition on the distribution in commerce so long as the manufacturer meets certain conditions. 40 CFR 761.2(f)(1) and (2); 761.20(a)(1); 761.20(b); 761.20(c). 5

**•** EPA author izes the use and distribution in commerce of “excluded PCB products” as defined by 40 CFR 761.3, which are products that contain < 50 ppm PCBs and meet certain other conditions (including that the products or the source of the < 50 ppm PCBs was
manufacture d before Oct. 1, 1984, and the < 50 ppm PCBs were not caused by a spill or
release of > 50 ppm PCBs). 40 CFR 761.2(f)(4); 761.20(a)(2) and (3); 761.20(c). In promulgating this authorization, EPA stated: In t he preamble to the rule establishing this provision, EPA stated that “the PCB concentration in plastic building products will be limited to an annual average of 25 ppm PCBs with a 50 ppm maximum. 49 Fed. Reg. 28172, 28175 (July 10, 1984).

EPA is adopting the generic 50 ppm exclusion for pr ocessing, distribution in commerce, and use, based on the Agency’s determination that the use, processing, and distribution in commerce of products with less than 50 ppm PCB concentration will not generally present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment.

53 Fed. Reg. 24206, 24210 (June 27, 1988)

**•** EPA authorizes the use and distribution in commerce of “recycled PCBs” as defined in 40 CFR 761.3, which include paper products containing an annual average PCB concentration of 25 ppm, with a maximum allowable concentration of 50 ppm. 40 CFR 761.2(f)(3); 761.20(a)(2); 761.20(c). Asphalt roofing materials may also be used and distributed in commerce so long as they do not contain “detectable” levels of PCBs, which are defined as

PCBs in conc entrations > 2 ppm. 40 CFR 761.3. 6

5 In the preamble to the proposed rule, EPA identified at least 70 chemical manufacturing processes that it concluded had a high potential for inadvertently generating PCBs. 48 Fed. Reg. 55076 (December 8, 1983).

6 EPA has in prior statements indicated t hat 2 ppm PCBs might be viewed as a cut

- off level for regulation under TSCA. For example, EPA’s 1994 guidance suggested that the manufacture of transformers containing > 2 ppm PCBs was prohibited. PCB Q & A Manual at p. 28 (EPA, 1994). In a November 21, 2000 letter, EPA stated, in the context of concluding that EPA approval is not necessary to physically separate components of shredder residue, that “non

- PCB material (i.e., < 2 parts per million (ppm) may then be used in the recycling process.” Letter F rom John Melone, Director of the National Program Chemicals Division for EPA’s Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances to Jeffrey Longsworth, Kelley, Drye and Warren LLP (November 21, 2000).**Suite 600**   **1615 L Street, NW**  **Washington, DC 20036** 

**- 5610**   **Tel: 202/ 662** 

**- 8500**   **Fax: 202/626**

**- 0900**   **isri @isri.org** 



### 6 From the above it is clear that EPA has long authorized the use and distribution in commerce of a wide range of products and materials containing up to 50 ppm PCBs, determined that such uses do not pose an unreasonabl e risk, and has explicitly stated that plastics used as building materials may contain an annual average of 25 ppm (with a maximum concentration of 50 ppm). As a result, these materials may still be legally manufactured, distributed in commerce, and used
in the U

. S. Accordingly, the PCB content of plastics available for recycling may be expected to reflect the PCB content of the materials legitimately containing PCBs that are inputs to the recycling process.

It is unlikely, for a number of reasons, that liquid PCBs from electrical equipment such as small capacitors in appliances is a significant source of the PCBs in shredder aggregate. First, source control is a critical step in any shredding operation. Scrap and shredding facilities typically specify “acceptance criteria” by contract, including prohibitions on items such as mercury switches, batteries, gas tanks, containerized liquids, refrigerants and PCB capacitors. These acceptance criteria are enforced through a series of actions that significantly reduce the likelihood of a capacitor finding its way into the recycling stream. 7 Second, it has now been more than 30 years since liquid PCB capacitors have been used in home appliances, and the occurrence of these in the recycling stream is now very rare. T he ave rage life expectancy of a home appliance is around 10

- 15 years, making it highly unlikely that home appliances are currently entering shredding operations with PCB

- containing capacitors. 8

A recent study (the “SAFE Report”) conducted by the Responsibl e Shredders Alliance (of which ISRI is part) in cooperation with EPA and focused on the disposal of ASR revealed that the leachate from ASR, which includes many materials that are much more absorbent than plastics, rarely contains detectable levels of PCBs and, when it does, those levels are extremely low. 9 The SAFE Report observed that of the 131 ASR fluff leachate samples analyzed for PCBs, PCBs were not detected in 95% of the samples, and for the 7 samples where PCBs were detected (all but
one from a si ngle facility), the reported concentrations ranged from 1.16

– 2.37 μg/L.

The relative absence of quantifiable concentrations of PCBs in the leachate from the ASR, combined with the very low concentrations when quantifiable levels were detected (below t he concentrations EPA allows to be discharged to the waters of the United States, 40 CFR 761.79(b)(1)(ii)), suggests that spills or releases of > 50 ppm of liquid PCBs from electrical equipment are not a significant source of PCBs in shredder aggregate.

7 S ource control is typically reinforced by signage to remind suppliers and customers of such prohibitions, as well as employee training in identifying and rejecting unacceptable items. Shredders also conduct routine inspections of the infeed material to help ensure compliance with the source control pract ices.

8 End

- of Life Vehicle Recycling: The State of the Art of Resource Recovery from Shredder Residue , Argonne National Laboratory, p. 28 (Sept. 25, 2006).

9 See

, Application For Risk

- Based Approval For Storage And Disposal Of Shredder Residue (“Fluf f”) under the Toxic Substances Control Act, 40 CFR 761.62(c) including Shredder Assessment Fluff Evaluation (“SAFE”) Report: Data Collected For EPA pursuant to EPA protocols at EPA

- selected facilities , (March 31, 2009).**Suite 600**   **1615 L Street, NW**  **Washington, DC 20036** 

**- 5610**   **Tel: 202/ 662** 

**- 8500**   **Fax: 202/626**

**- 0900**   **isri @isri.org** 



### 7 B. Potential Regulatory Barriers To Recycling Plastics From Shredder Aggregate

TSCA prohibits the use or distribution in commerce of PCBs in any concentration unless EPA has authorized such activities, based upon a finding that they do not pose an unreaso nable risk. As detailed above, EPA has authorized the use and distribution in commerce of a number of products containing PCBs that are potentially applicable to plastics recycled from shredder aggregate, including “excluded manufacturing processes” and “ excluded PCB products.” To the extent that plastic separated from shredder aggregate contains PCBs from these and other authorized sources, EPA could conclude that the authorizations to use and distribute in
commerce “follows the PCBs” and thus the use an d distribution in commerce of the recycled plastics should likewise be authorized.

However, the regulations are sufficiently unclear on this issue to discourage the significant capital investments necessary for the widespread recycling of plastics from sh redder aggregate and to reap the environmental and economic benefits that would result. The construction and implementation of a plastics separation and recycling plant requires multimillion dollar investments in highly technical equipment as well as infr astructure, buildings, land and labor. No one is willing to make that kind of investment without the certainty that doing so will not run afoul of EPA’s regulations governing PCBs.

The regulatory ambiguities preventing investment (along with ISRI’s vie ws on those ambiguities)
include:

**•** EPA has defined “PCB bulk product waste” to include PCB

- containing waste from shredding automobiles, appliances and other products. 40 CFR 761.3. This may be addressed by clarifying that plastic recycled from shredder aggregate is not “waste” and therefore the PCB bulk product waste requirements do not apply to this material. ISRI has long maintained that scrap is not “waste” and recycling is not “disposal. 10

**•** “Recycled PCBs” may be used and distributed in commerce, but EPA has limited this authorization to asphalt building materials and paper: plastics are not explicitly mentioned. However, as noted abov e, EPA has observed that plastic building materials containing PCBs that meet the applicable criteria could be used or distributed in commerce pursuant to the “excluded manufacturing processes” provision. This would suggest that recycling these same plast ics should also be authorized. This also would be consistent with
a conclusion that recycl ing the plastic is an “excluded manufacturing process.”

**•** In the ANPRM, EPA has suggested that it is considering significantly lowering the allowable PCB concentrations for excluded PCB manufacturing processes and excluded PCB products, potentially decreasing the usefulness of those provisions as a basis for investing in and expanding the recycling of plastics. Should EPA go down this path, ISRI proposes that any restrictions on recycled plastics be based on an assessment of the risks posed by possible exposures associated with reas onably anticipated uses of such plastics.

10 EPA’s RCRA hazardous waste regul ations provide a clear precedent for such a clarification. Under RCRA, processed scrap metal that is recycled is excluded from the definition of solid (and thus also hazardous) waste. 40 CFR § 261.4(a)(13).**Suite 600**   **1615 L Street, NW**  **Washington, DC 20036** 

**- 5610**   **Tel: 202/ 662** 

**- 8500**   **Fax: 202/626**

**- 0900**   **isri @isri.org** 



### 8 Therefore, while there is regulatory support for the recycling and distribution and use in commerce of plastics containing low concentrations of PCBs, there is sufficient regulatory ambiguity to discourage the investment necessary for the widespread recycling of this material, and to achieve the significant environmental and economic benefits of so doing.

Technologies exist today to separate recyclable plastics from shredder aggregate and reduce
levels of P CBs in the plastic down to trace levels. For example, grants from the U.S. Department of Commerce have helped fund the development of a proprietary technology by one private company based in the United States that reduces the concentrations of PCBs in pla stics recycled from shredder aggregate down to trace levels. That technology , developed in part with the assistance of the U.S. government, is now used commercially in Europe, but is difficult to fund
and install in the U

. S

. because of the uncertainty over the TSCA regulations.

Other technologies have been and are b eing developed in the private sector that are the result of ingenuity and innovation both within the scrap recycling industry itself and by others using quite advanced proprietary technology available for use in Europe and elsewhere but not in the
U.S. due to the existing regulatory barriers. The U.S. government, through the Argonne National Laboratory, has worked closely with the recycling industry to evaluate some of these technologies, finding that they can consistently reduce PCB concentrations in recy cled plastics to very low levels. 11 However, these opportunities cannot effectively be financed and realized here
in the U

. S

. without changes in the TSCA regulations (or EPA’s interpretations or clarification of them) in order to provide the certainty that w ill support the hundreds of millions of dollars in capital investments necessary to commercialize this technology.

4. The Recycling, Distribution In Commerce And Use Of Plastics From Aggregate Will Not
Pose An Unreasonable Risk

In the ANPRM, EPA summa rized the criteria it would use to evaluate the continued (or new)
authorization of PCBs:

EPA seeks information that will be useful in making the findings required by TSCA section 6. By prohibiting the use of PCBs (except in a totally enclosed manner),

C ongress established a statutory presumption that use of PCBs poses an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. In order to assess whether a use poses ‘‘no unreasonable risks,’’ EPA would include an assessment of impacts on the economy,
el ectric energy availability, and all other health, environmental, or social impacts that could be expected from adoption of alternatives to PCBs.

11 Recycling End

- of

- Life Vehicles of the Future

, Argonne National Laboratory (December 1, 2009); End

- of

Life Recycling: The State of the Art of Resource Recovery from Shredder Residue , Argonne National Laboratory (September 25, 2006). ISRI does not endorse any particular method or technology reviewed
b y Argonne, and understands that some technologies reviewed by Argonne may compromise the structural integrity and commercial value of certain plastics. In any event, the technologies reviewed by Argonne result in residual trace PCB concentrations well bel ow the 50 ppm level that EPA has already found does not pose an unreasonable risk in products

.**Suite 600**   **1615 L Street, NW**  **Washington, DC 20036** 

**- 5610**   **Tel: 202/ 662** 

**- 8500**   **Fax: 202/626**

**- 0900**   **isri @isri.org** 



### 9 75 Fed. Reg. 17645, 17650 (April 7, 2010). Clarifying the regulations to explicitly allow the recycling and d istribution and use in commerce of plastics from shredder aggregate meets each of these criteria. Recycling these plastics will provide environmental and economic benefits, and will not pose unreasonable risks to human health or the environment.

A. En vironmental And Economic Benefits Of Recycling Plastic From Shredder Aggregate

Shredder aggregate is a valuable source of plastics for recycling. The plastics in the shredder aggregate are currently finding their way into ASR, requiring disposal. The in dustry currently generates nearly 5,000,000 tons of ASR annually for disposal, which contains 15%

- 45% plastic. As a result, approximately 1,000,000

– 2,000,000 tons of plastic annually are landfilled as part of ASR. Using various proprietary technologie s being developed, funded or considered by ISRI members, most of this plastic could be separated from the shredder aggregate and recycled.

Using these plastics productively rather than the current practice of land filling them, would be a large step forwa rd towards achieving material sustainability. It would require, as described in
EPA’s RCRA Vision Paper , the kinds of “[t]echnology improvements [needed to] open new doors to reuse, reclamation, and recycling of materials that are now viewed as wastes.” 12 The technology improvements achieved by ISRI’s members, which exist today, support EPA’s primary goal for RCR A in 2020: “[r]educe waste and increase the efficient and sustainable use of
resources”. 13 ISRI’s initiative to recycle plastics from shredder ag gregate is part of the answer to a basic question posed by EPA: “[w]hy handle and dispose of growing amounts of waste when we can more efficiently manage materials that eliminate, reduce, or recycle waste?” 14 If the current uncertainty with TSCA and its i mplementing regulations remains, the lost opportunity to recycle these plastics and to reap the associated material, economic, energy, carbon, and other environmental benefits will only grow in time.

As it is, the demands of increased fuel efficiency, rec yclability, safety, and costs, are driving auto manufacturers to continually increase the percentage of light weight materials, including plastics, in the vehicles they produce. There is a choice here. In the best case scenario there is a growing potenti al volume of plastics available for recycling. In the worst case scenario, should EPA choose not to clarify or amend the TSCA regulations to allow for the recycling of this material, this growing stream of plastics will simply become a growing stream of w aste requiring landfill disposal.

12 Beyond RCRA: Waste and Materials Management in the Year 2020 (U.S. EPA April, 2003) ( http://www.epa .gov/wastes/inforesources/pubs/vision.pdf )

13 Id

.

14 Science Wednesday: Celebrating Sustainability and the Environment . Greenversations: The Official Blog of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ( http://blog.epa.gov/blog/2009/05/06/celebrating

sustainability

- and

- the

- environment

- year

- of

- science

- may

- is

- sustainability

- month/ ). As viewed on August 12, 2010.**Suite 600**   **1615 L Street, NW**  **Washington, DC 20036** 

**- 5610**   **Tel: 202/ 662** 

**- 8500**   **Fax: 202/626**

**- 0900**   **isri @isri.org** 



### 10 A preliminary analysis conducted by the economics research firm Nathan Associates Inc. found that the separation and recycling of plastics from the shredder aggregate would require capital expenditures of approximately $5 40 million on new equipment 15 and additional new construction expenditures of $230 million. 16 Moreover, 1 million tons of plastic material separated from the aggregate would have an annual value of $250 million or more. These additional amounts of spending in the U.S. economy would generate approximately an
additional:

**•** $2.9 billion of total sales 17

**•** 9,540 jobs and

**•** More than $432 million of employee earnings 18

The se estimates are based on a very con servative assumption of recycling 1 millio n tons/year of plastic from shredder aggregate; ISRI believes that more than dou ble that a mount could be

rec ycl ed, which would, of course, produce much larger economic benefit s. Additional economic and environmental benefits, which are currently being analyzed and quantified, i nclude savings
associated with transporting and disposing of less waste in landfills , energy savings from recycled plastics replacing plastics from virgin production, and reductions in greenhouse gas

emissions.

B. Clarify Existing Regulations

EPA has, in prior PCB r ulemakings, repeatedly found that the exposures associated with excluded manufacturing processes and excluded PCB products, both of which can include plastics, do not pose an unreasonable risk. ISRI is not aware of any new information indicating
that thos e findings were incorrect or that these authorized uses have caused any risks. In fact, available evidence indicates that since the enactment of the TSCA prohibitions in the 1970s, human and environmental exposure to PCBs has dramatically decreased. 19

15 Th is analysis does not include investments in pre

- processing equipment that can separate small pieces of metal from the shredder aggregate, leaving the material better prepared for the separation of plastic. Fur ther, EPA in 1988

16 Id.

17 Sales are defined as gross duplicated outp ut, that is, industry

- to

- industry sales for intermediate use and industry

- to

- consumer sales for final use,

18 Excludes rail transportation employee earnings, as well as employee earnings of government workers and workers in agricultural industries. Data ar e not available to include these effects.

19 Food consumption has always been a significant source of human PCB exposure. The dietary intake for the average adult decreased 30

- fold in the first 13 years of the TSCA PCB program, from 1978 to 1991.
The huma n body burden of PCBs (in tissue fat) declined 62% by 1984, only 6 years after the implementation of TSCA. These values have surely declined even more in the past 20 years. ISRI also notes the submissions of other commenters indicating that EPA has been overestimating the toxicity of

PCBs.**Suite 600**   **1615 L Street, NW**  **Washington, DC 20036** 

**- 5610**   **Tel: 202/ 662** 

**- 8500**   **Fax: 202/626**

**- 0900**   **isri @isri.org** 



### 11 made a risk

- based determination, in the “excluded PCB product” rule, that products containing < 50 ppm PCBs do not pose an unreasonable risk. EPA should re

- affirm these determinations, and explicitly confirm and clarify, that recycling o f plastics from shredder aggregate, and its distribution in commerce, is authorized under existing regulations (i.e., “excluded manufacturing processes” and “excluded PCB products”).

C. Performance

- Based Standards For Unreasonable Risk

Should EPA decli ne to clarify that separating, recycling and distributing in commerce plastics from shredder aggregate is permissible under existing law, or choose to re

- visit its previous unreasonable risk determinations, any such re

- evaluation should be related to poten tial exposure to PCBs associated with the reasonably anticipated uses of plastics recycled from shredder aggregate. The trace levels of PCBs remaining in plastics recycled from shredder aggregate are far below the concentrations EPA has long authorized in its regulations and do not, ISRI believes, pose an unreasonable risk. Accordingly, ISRI believes that EPA may, based on the existing state of knowledge, determine that the recycling of plastics from shredder aggregate does not pose an unreasonable risk.

Further, the mere presence of any remaining low

- concentration PCBs that are bound in the solid “matrix” of plastics is not necessarily an accurate predictor of actual exposure to or risk from PCBs. Rather, the question is whether the anticipated uses o f plastics recycled from shredder aggregate will result in exposure to PCBs at levels of concern. This approach is consistent with long

- standing EPA practice.

In 1999, EPA specifically requested exposure

- related data as part of its long

- standing effort to determine which uses of “non

- liquid” PCBs should be authorized. Use Authorization for, and Distribution in Commerce of, Non

- liquid Polychlorinated Biphenyls; Notice of Availability; Partial Reopening of Comment Period

, 64 Fed. Reg. 69358 (Dec. 10, 199 9). At that time, EPA requested bulk, wipe and air sampling data from a range of non

- liquid PCB uses in order to assist the Agency in determining which of these uses it should authorize. EPA noted that if the sampled
material contained detectable levels of PCBs in bulk samples, but PCBs were not detected on the surface of the material, EPA would most likely authorize that use. 64 Fed. Reg. at 69361

– 69362. If PCBs were detected on the surface, then the authorization decision would be based
on the level of risk posed by the surface concentration of PCBs that would give rise to potential
dermal contact. Id . In the 1999 request for data, EPA stated that it was interested in being able
to detect cancer risks at or below 10 - 6 levels, and non

- carcinogenic h azards at or below a hazard
index of 1. Id

.

Accordingly, consistent with the direction EPA laid out in 1999, should the Agency conclude that a separate evaluation of plastics recycled from shredder aggregate is necessary, that evaluation
should address potential exposures to PCBs associated with the reasonably anticipated uses of such plastics. ISRI is ready to work with EPA to develop such an analysis.**Suite 600**   **1615 L Street, NW**  **Washington, DC 20036** 

**- 5610**   **Tel: 202/ 662** 

**- 8500**   **Fax: 202/626**

**- 0900**   **isri @isri.org** 



### 12 5. Conclusion

EPA should clarify the PCB regulations to allow for the separation and recycling of plastics from the shredding of automobiles and appliances. Providing this regulatory certainty will enable the capital investments necessary to engage in this activity in a manner that is both environmentally and economically beneficial, and does not pose an unreasonable risk. ISRI looks forward to working with EPA on this important initiative.