Orrick QuEaSLMO CeWINENT OF EAM
‘oreo
POvTAL GPO 80% 46
H pmomE (07) 24 O11
Mae men? QUEENSLAND HEALTH See
CENTRAL OFFICE vaunees
7 “e" Dr GR Neville
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH BRANCH (07) 3234 1276
FAX (07) 3234 1480 frosuve letters\95GN170
Tp DEG iy
pbc ]szopoc (ir) |
30 November 1995 Piby. I
+ 6.GRIMCER i
5S 95/359, |
Mr Garth Grainger { u / 7 | acne
‘Standards and Inspection Hie ad D
Queensland Department of Primary Industries ees Bote 9S
Floor 4 :
80-Ann Street oa
BRISBANE Q 4000 cys
4 YO)
i re oe r
Dear Mr Grainger oO? re
ETHYLENE DI E TION
Reference is made to the meeting’tafivéned by.QDPI on 30 November 1995 to discuss
isoues in regard to the post-haryes-Tam ‘Produce within the papaya fruit fly
quarantine area, opt Vv
Or. ¥
This letter is to ci iw ie Qnersad Heats des not suport he conied
use of EDB for -at“As we outlined at the meeting, review of available
toxicological data ai terial demonstrates significant concerns regarding
the potential human carcinogenitity, mutagenicity and adverse effects on the male
reproduction system of EDB.
It is noted that Australia has not set an occupational exposure standard for EDB. As a
guide, the occupational health exposure standard of 0.5 ppm set in the United Kingdom
hhas been used as a reference. However, the toxicological basis for this level is unknown.
There is no standard set for general community exposure to EDB in air. Having reviewed
the available toxicological data, it is our opinion that an appropriate environmental level
should be very low and, based on modelling exercises of dispersal of released fumigant
from chambers, would require very substantial buffer distances, which are unlikely to be
achievable, Further, there is the important issue of potential occupational exposure to
EDB by fumigators and other workers involved with the handling and transport of treated
Produce. Also, there is the concern regarding potential community exposure through
residues in treated produce. It is recognised that monitoring to date has not shown
residues in ripened produce, but to ensure community protection, the avoidance of use of
EDB on produce in the first place would be the ideal control mechanism. :
waar File Page 14.0061-2-
To conclude, EDB is a substance about which there is considerable concern regarding
potential chronic health effects. It has long been the recommendation of the National
Health and Medical Research Council that the use of EDB should be phased out. This
recent increase in the use of EDB for post-harvest treatment raises major concerns about
potential community and worker exposure. Accordingly, we support the cessation of use
of EDB through its deregistration.
Yours sincerely
Schedule 4- CPT
Dr Gerard R Neville
Acting Director Public Health
sr247 Filed age 15.0161