1. PBT Initiative and PCBs Spokane River Regional Toxics Task Force Holly Davies, Ph.D. April 24 th, 2013

2. Reducing Toxic Threats Identify & Gather Data on Chemicals of Concern Benign design Kids & environment protected Manufacturers share the responsibility MANAGEMENT Needed but costly strategies to prevent the release of toxics to the environment. PREVENTION Safer Alternatives Green Chemistry Phase out PBTs Averting toxic exposures and avoiding future costs is the smartest, cheapest and healthiest approach. CLEANUP Needed but costly solutions to avoidable contamination.

3. PBTs Persistent- they remain in the environment for a long time Bioaccumulative- they build up in organisms and in the food chain Toxic- they are harmful to the health of humans and/or other species

4. Why are PBTs a priority? Travel long distances and cross media Span the boundaries of programs, geography and generations. Traditional single-media approaches won’t solve the whole problem. We need to address PBTs through integrated use of all agency tools and programs.

5. Environment Degradation and Dispersal Non-PBT chemical release PBT chemical release Sources Increasing Concentrations

6. 2006 PBT Rule (Chapter 173-333 WAC) Goal is to reduce and phase-out PBT uses, releases, and exposures in Washington List of 27 individual PBTs and groups Chemical Action Plans (CAPs) – Process to prioritize and schedule – Content Procedural rule

7. What is a CAP? Chemistry Health effects – Human – Wildlife Monitoring Sources Laws and Regulations Policy Options – costs Recommendations – Agency actions – New laws – Education – Partners Chemical Action Plan identifies, characterizes, and evaluates uses and releases of a PBT and recommends actions to protect human health and the environment

8. Process for Preparing CAPs Plan and collect information with Different programs within Ecology and DOH Other agencies as appropriate Experts Work with external advisory committee Review and collect more information Develop draft recommendations Public review and comment on draft CAP Final recommendations and Final CAP

9. Selected CAP Actions Mercury (2003) – Ban on some uses – An agreement with dentists to collect mercury amalgam waste PBDEs (2006) – Ban on some uses, after an alternatives assessment Lead (2009) – Lead-based paint assessment and remediation Commerce and Health – Toxic Metals focus for pollution prevention planning PAH (2012)- continued agency work on – Wood smoke – Creosote treated wood – Vehicles 9

10. PCBs Chemistry Health effects Monitoring TSCA, CWA, and other regulations

11. Production, Uses, and Releases Puget Sound Toxics Loading Study Sources (2011) – Large capacitors – Small capacitors – Residential trash burning – Transformers – Sealants in older buildings Pigments and Dyes Salmon Spills Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) – Hazardous waste treatment and disposal Other legacy products? Other inadvertent production? Total 2,200 kg/yr

12. Inadvertent production List of 77 “likely” to produce PCBs – Many chlorinated compounds Titanium dioxide – TiCl 4 intermediate in chlorine process involves inadvertent production of PCBs – Sulphate process involves more spent acid waste

13. How much PCBs are… In the environment? Being released from legacy products? Being inadvertently generated?

14. Resources Holly Davies Senior Scientist (360) 407-7398 Holly.Davies@ecy.wa.gov Carol Kraege Toxics Coordinator (360) 407-6906 Carol.Kraege@ecy.wa.gov 14 Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxic chemicals http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/swfa/pbt/ Reducing Toxic Threats http://www.ecy.wa.gov/toxics/index.htm Puget Sound Toxics Loading Assessment http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/pstoxics/index.html