From:
Lynn
Dail
Sent:
06/
17/
03
08:
29
AM
To:
Anne
Pope/
RTP/
USEPA/
US@
EPA
cc:
Maria
Pimentel/
RTP/
USEPA/
US@
EPA
Subject:
Re:
Briefing
for
Magnetic
Tape
Residual
Risk:
Test
Results
(
Document
link:
Anne
Pope)

Thanks
Anne
for
reviewing
the
presentation.
I
have
some
answers
to
your
questions
below:

In
our
effort
to
gather
data,
there
were
four
facilities
on
the
NEI
list
we
originally
received
from
ERG­­
Sony
(
Carrollton,
GA),
Digital
Audio
Disc
(
Terre
Haute,
IN),
Sonopress
(
Weaverville,
NC),
and
Wea
Manufacturing.
Based
on
information
we
have
received
from
States,
Sony­
Carrollton
has
shut
down,
and
the
other
three
facilities
do
not
manufacture
magnetic
tape.

We
went
to
the
TRI
in
an
attempt
to
identify
more
facilities.
We
can
compare
what
we
have
now
with
your
draft
1999
NEI
and
later
with
the
final
1999
NEI
when
it
is
released
in
July
2003.
Could
you
provide
me
with
the
latest
copy
of
the
1999
NEI
or
do
I
just
go
to
the
website?

Regarding
the
presence
of
1,1,2­
trichloroethane
and
trichloroethylene
in
the
NEI
database
for
Imation:

(
1)
No
1,1,2­
trichloroethane
emissions
were
reported
in
the
TRI
after
1997
for
Imation.
For
the
years
after
1997,
the
TRI
listed
1,1,2­
trichloroethane
as
"
NR,"
which
signifies
that
nothing
was
reported
forthis
facility.

(
2)
No
trichloroethylene
emissions
were
reported
in
the
TRI
for
any
year
for
Imation.
The
pollutant
was
not
even
listed
in
the
TRI
as
ever
having
been
emitted
from
this
facility.

(
3)
Only
a
portion
of
the
Imation
facility
is
dedicated
to
magnetic
tape
manufacturing.
Based
on
information
from
Imation,
the
total
VOC
associated
with
magnetic
tape
operations
is
less
than
9
percent.
So
even
if
the
se
two
HAP
are
emitted
from
Imation,
they
may
not
be
from
the
magnetic
tape
manufacturing
operation
at
the
facility.

(
4)
The
Magnetic
Tape
BID
does
not
include
these
two
HAP
in
the
list
of
HAP
used
in
the
magnetic
tape
manufacturing
industry.
(
It
does
mention
that
1,1,1­
trichloroethane
is
used
to
a
lesser
extent.)

(
5)
The
TRI
results
for
the
three
facilities
(
Quantegy,
JVC,
and
Sony­
Dothan)
that
manufacture
only
magnetic
tape
do
not
show
any
1,1,2­
trichloroethane
or
trichloroethylene
listed.
(
The
TRI
results
for
Sony­
Dothan
list
1,1,1­
trichloroethane,
but
indicate
it
has
not
been
reported
since
1992.)

Let
me
know
if
you
have
any
other
questions
and
if
you
would
like
us
to
contact
Anne
Pope
directly
about
getting
a
copy
of
the
1999
NEI.

Regarding
the
presence
of
1,1,2­
trichloroethane
and
trichloroethylene
in
the
NEI
database
for
Imation:
(
1)
No
1,1,2­
trichloroethane
emissions
were
reported
in
the
TRI
after
1997
for
Imation.
For
the
years
after
1997,
the
TRI
listed
1,1,2­
trichloroethane
as
"
NR,"
which
signifies
that
nothing
was
reported
for
this
facility.

(
2)
No
trichloroethylene
emissions
were
reported
in
the
TRI
for
any
year
for
Imation.
The
pollutant
was
not
even
listed
in
the
TRI
as
ever
having
been
emitted
from
this
facility.

(
3)
Only
a
portion
of
the
Imation
facility
is
dedicated
to
magnetic
tape
manufacturing.
Based
on
information
from
Imation,
the
total
VOC
associated
with
magnetic
tape
operations
is
less
than
9
percent.
So
even
if
the
se
two
HAP
are
emitted
from
Imation,
they
may
not
be
from
the
magnetic
tape
manufacturing
operation
at
the
facility.

(
4)
The
Magnetic
Tape
BID
does
not
include
these
two
HAP
in
the
list
of
HAP
used
in
the
magnetic
tape
manufacturing
industry.
(
It
does
mention
that
1,1,1­
trichloroethane
is
used
to
a
lesser
extent.)

(
5)
The
TRI
results
for
the
three
facilities
(
Quantegy,
JVC,
and
Sony­
Dothan)
that
manufacture
only
magnetic
tape
do
not
show
any
1,1,2­
trichloroethane
or
trichloroethylene
listed.
(
The
TRI
results
for
Sony­
Dothan
list
1,1,1­
trichloroethane,
but
indicate
it
has
not
been
reported
since
1992.)

H.
Lynn
Dail,
Environmental
Scientist
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
OAQPS/
ESD/
CCPG
(
C539­
03)
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC
27711
Phone:
919­
541­
2363
FAX:
919­
541­
5689
e­
mail:
dail.
lynn@
epa.
gov
