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 

Rulemaking, 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 have 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 environmentally 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 longstanding regulatory barrier to the beneficial recycling of 

plastics from automobiles and appliances. If you have questions regarding these 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 manner 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 aggregate2

• The separation and recycling of plastics from shredder aggregate 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 this Administration’s National Export 

Initiative (NEI).

brings with it many 

environmental benefits, including 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 from 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 for “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 plastics may be distributed 

in commerce for the purpose of recycling the plastics into feedstock material for the 

manufacture of new plastic products. 

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

ISRI is the “Voice of the Recycling 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, 

plastics, 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 providing 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 rate 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 appliances, each year, producing up to 18 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 the 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 production.

B. Shredding Automobiles/Appliances And Metal Separation

In a typical shredding operation, a mixture of automobiles, appliances, and other such steelbearing products are fed into a hammer mill, where they are shredded into approximately fistsized 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 technologies, 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 content of ASR ranges from 15% - 45%, with a typical range 

of 30% - 40%.

C. Innovations In Shredding And Plastics Recycling

Due to recent technological advances 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 plastic3

that are 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 and 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 growing 

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 nearly 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 Low 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 these 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 recovered 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 processes” 

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 authorizes 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 

manufactured 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 the 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 processing, 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 concentrations > 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 that 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 From 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 unreasonable 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. The average 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 Responsible 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 single 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 the 

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 Source 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 practices. 

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 (“Fluff”) 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 unreasonable 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 and 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 shredder 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 infrastructure, 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 views 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 above, 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 plastics should also be authorized.

This also would be consistent with 

a conclusion thatrecycling 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 reasonably anticipated uses of such plastics. 

 10 EPA’s RCRA hazardous waste regulations 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 PCBs 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 plastics 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 being 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 recycled 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 will 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 summarized 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), 

Congress 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, 

electric 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-ofLife 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 

by 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 below 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 distribution 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. Environmental 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 industry 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 technologies 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 forward 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 RCRA in 2020: “[r]educe waste and increase the efficient and sustainable use of 

resources”.13 ISRI’s initiative to recycle plastics from shredder aggregate 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 implementing 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, recyclability, 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 potential 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 waste 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/celebratingsustainability-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 $540 million on new equipment15 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 sales17

• 9,540 jobs and

• More than $432 million of employee earnings18

These estimates are based on a very conservative assumption of recycling 1 million tons/year of 

plastic from shredder aggregate; ISRI believes that more than double that amount could be 

recycled, which would, of course, produce much larger economic benefits. Additional economic 

and environmental benefits, which are currently being analyzed and quantified, include 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 rulemakings, 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 those 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 This 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.

 Further, EPA in 1988 

16 Id.

17 Sales are defined as gross duplicated output, 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 are 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 human 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 of 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 decline 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 potential 

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 of 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, 1999). 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 hazards 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.