[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 242 (Monday, December 19, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 75059-75070]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-24196]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 710
[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2004-0106; FRL-7743-9]
RIN 2070-AC61
TSCA Inventory Update Reporting Revisions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is amending the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
section 8(a) Inventory Update Reporting (IUR) regulations. The IUR
currently requires manufacturers (including importers) of certain
chemical substances listed on the TSCA Chemical Substances Inventory to
report data on chemical manufacturing, processing, and use every 4
years. In this amendment, EPA is extending the reporting cycle,
modifying the timing of the submission period, further clarifying the
new partial exemption for specific chemicals for which certain IUR data
are of low current interest, amending the petroleum refinery process
streams partial exemption, amending the list of consumer and commercial
product categories, revising the manner in which production volume
would be reported, restricting reporting of processing and use
information to domestic processing and use activities only, clarifying
the polymer exemption definition, and removing a provision regarding
the confidentiality of production volume within specified ranges.
DATES: This final rule is effective on January 18, 2006.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2004-0106. All documents in the
docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov web site. (EDOCKET, EPA's
electronic public docket and comment system was replaced on November
25, 2005, by an enhanced federal-wide electronic docket management and
comment system located at http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the on-
line instructions.) Although listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., confidential business information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, will not be placed on the
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in EDOCKET or in hard copy at the OPPT Docket, EPA Docket Center, EPA
West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The EPA Docket Center Reading Room
telephone number is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the
OPPT Docket, which is located in the EPA Docket Center, is (202) 566-
0280.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information contact:
Colby Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, Environmental Assistance
[[Page 75060]]
Division (7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (202) 554-1404; e-mail
address: [email protected].
For technical information contact: Susan Sharkey, Project Manager,
Economics, Exposure and Technology Division (7406M), Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(202) 564-8789; e-mail address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you manufacture
(defined by statute at 15 U.S.C. 2602(7) to include import) chemical
substances, including inorganic chemical substances, subject to
reporting under the TSCA Inventory Update Reporting (IUR) regulations
at 40 CFR part 710. Any use of the term ``manufacture'' in this
document will encompass ``import,'' unless otherwise stated.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
Chemical manufacturers and importers, including chemical
manufacturers and importers of inorganic chemical substances (North
American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes 325, 32411).
This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The NAICS codes have been provided to assist you and others
in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. To
determine whether you or your business may be affected by this action,
you should carefully examine the applicability provisions at 40 CFR
710.48. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this
action to a particular entity, consult the technical contact person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies of this Document and Other
Related Information?
In addition to using EDOCKET (http://www.epa.gov/edocket), you may
access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA
Internet under the ``Federal Register'' listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. A frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 710
is available on E-CFR Beta Site Two at http:// www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr/.
II. Background
A. What Action is the Agency Taking?
Through this action, EPA is promulgating amendments to the IUR
regulations that were proposed on January 26, 2005 (70 FR 3658) (FRL-
7332-2), taking into consideration comments received on the proposed
rule. The amendments to the IUR regulation that are contained in this
final rule pertain to 40 CFR Part 710, Subpart C--Inventory Update
Reporting for 2006 and Beyond. The following is a brief listing of the
changes made to the IUR regulations via this rule. These changes are
described in more detail in Unit II.D., along with a summary of the
comments received and the Agency's response to those comments.
First, EPA is amending 40 CFR 710.43, 40 CFR 710.46, 40 CFR 710.48,
and 40 CFR 710.52 to change the reporting cycle from 4 years to 5
years.
Second, EPA is amending 40 CFR 710.53 to adjust the dates of the
submission period within which manufacturers and importers must report
IUR data to EPA. For data required to be submitted in 2006, the
submission period remains August 25 to December 23, 2006. Beginning in
2010 and for each subsequent submission period, the submission period
will begin June 1 and end September 30. EPA is also clarifying the
recordkeeping requirements by identifying that the 5-year record
retention period begins on the last day of the submission period.
Third, EPA is clarifying the partial exemption for petroleum
process streams and amending 40 CFR 710.46(b)(1) to add certain
petroleum process streams to the listing.
Fourth, EPA is amending 40 CFR 710.46(b)(2) to add an explanation
that, for the partial exemption for chemicals for which the IUR
processing and use information is of low current interest, petitions
must include a written rationale for suggested additions of a chemical
to or deletions of a chemical from the list of partially exempt
chemical substances.
Fifth, EPA is further amending 40 CFR 710.46 to remove the
references to the 1985 edition of the TSCA Inventory from paragraphs
(a)(1)(i) and (ii).
Sixth, EPA is amending 40 CFR 710.52(c)(4)(ii)(A) to change the
list of commercial and consumer product use categories by adding a new
category.
Seventh, EPA is amending 40 CFR 710.52(c)(3)(iv) to require
separate reporting of manufacture and import volumes.
Eighth, EPA is amending 40 CFR 710.52(c)(4) to limit the reporting
of processing and use information to domestic processing and use
activities only.
Ninth, EPA is removing the provision regarding the confidentiality
of production volume information within specified ranges (40 CFR
710.52(c)(3)(v)).
B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?
EPA is required under TSCA section 8(b), 15 U.S.C. 2607(b), to
compile and keep current an inventory of chemical substances
manufactured or processed in the United States. This inventory is known
as the TSCA Chemical Substances Inventory (the TSCA Inventory). In
1977, EPA promulgated a rule (42 FR 64572, December 23, 1977) under
TSCA section 8(a), 15 U.S.C. 2607(a), to compile an inventory of
chemical substances in commerce at that time. In 1986, EPA promulgated
the initial IUR regulation under TSCA section 8(a) at 40 CFR part 710
(51 FR 21438, June 12, 1986) to facilitate the periodic updating of the
TSCA Inventory and to support activities associated with the
implementation of TSCA. In 2003, EPA promulgated extensive amendments
to the IUR regulation (68 FR 848, January 7, 2003) (FRL-6767-4) (2003
Amendments) to collect exposure-related information associated with the
manufacturing, processing, and use of eligible chemical substances and
to make certain other changes (Ref. 1).
TSCA section 8(a)(1) authorizes the EPA Administrator to promulgate
rules under which manufacturers and processors of chemical substances
and mixtures (referred to hereinafter as chemical substances) must
maintain such records and submit such information as the Administrator
may reasonably require. TSCA section 8(a) generally excludes small
manufacturers and processors of chemical substances from the reporting
requirements established in TSCA section 8(a). However, EPA is
authorized by TSCA section 8(a)(3) to require TSCA section 8(a)
reporting from small manufacturers and processors with respect to any
chemical substance that is the subject of a rule proposed or
promulgated under TSCA section 4, 5(b)(4), or 6, or that is the subject
of an order under TSCA section 5(e), or that is the subject of relief
that has been granted pursuant to a civil action under TSCA section 5
or 7. The standard for determining whether an entity qualifies as a
small
[[Page 75061]]
manufacturer for purposes of 40 CFR part 710 generally is found at 40
CFR 704.3. Processors are not currently subject to the regulations at
40 CFR part 710.
C. What is the Inventory Update Reporting (IUR) Regulation?
The data reported pursuant to the IUR regulations are used to
update the information maintained on the TSCA Inventory. EPA uses the
TSCA Inventory and data reported under the IUR regulation to support
many TSCA-related activities and to provide overall support for a
number of EPA and other federal health, safety, and environmental
protection activities. The IUR regulations, as amended by the 2003
Amendments (Ref. 1), require U.S. manufacturers (including importers)
of chemicals listed on the TSCA Inventory to report to EPA every 4
years the identity of chemical substances manufactured (including
imported) during the reporting year in quantities of 25,000 pounds or
more at any single site they own or control (see 40 CFR part 710,
subpart C). The IUR regulation generally excludes several groups of
chemical substances from its reporting requirements, i.e., polymers,
microorganisms, naturally occurring chemical substances, and certain
natural gas substances (40 CFR 710.46). Persons manufacturing or
importing chemical substances are required to report information such
as company name, site location and other identifying information,
production volume of the reportable chemical substance, and exposure-
related information associated with the manufacture of each reportable
chemical substance, including the physical form and maximum
concentration of the chemical substance and the number of potentially
exposed workers (40 CFR 710.52).
Manufacturers (including importers) of chemicals in larger volumes
(i.e., 300,000 lbs. or more manufactured (including imported) during
the reporting year at any single site) are additionally required to
report certain processing and use information (40 CFR 710.52(c)(4)).
This information includes process or use category, NAICS code,
industrial function category, percent production volume associated with
each process or use category, number of use sites, number of
potentially exposed workers, and consumer/commercial information such
as use category, use in or on products intended for use by children,
and maximum concentration.
For the 2006 submission period, manufacturers (including importers)
of inorganic chemical substances will be required to report for the
first time. However, for the 2006 submission period only, manufacturers
(including importers) of inorganic chemical substances will be
partially exempt from reporting under IUR regulations, regardless of
production volume. A partial exemption means that a submitter is exempt
from the processing and use reporting requirements described in 40 CFR
710.52(c)(4). After the 2006 submission period, the partial exemption
for inorganic chemicals will no longer be applicable and submitters
will fully report information on inorganic chemical substances,
including information on processing and use (40 CFR 710.46(b)(3)). In
addition, specifically listed petroleum process streams and other
specifically listed chemical substances are partially exempt, and
manufacturers of such substances are not required to report processing
and use information during the 2006 or in any subsequent submission
periods, for as long as the chemical substances remain on these partial
exemption lists (40 CFR 710.46(b)(1) and (b)(2)).
D. What Changes are Being Made by the Agency to the IUR regulation?
1. What changes are being made to the chemical substances covered
by the IUR regulations?--a. Partially exempt petroleum process streams.
Certain petroleum process streams listed in 40 CFR 710.46(b)(1) are
exempted from additional reporting requirements under the IUR
regulations for chemical substances manufactured in amounts of 300,000
lbs. or more. EPA is adding chemicals to this list and is clarifying
EPA's intention concerning the scope of this partial exemption.
Additionally, EPA proposed changing the name of this partial exemption
from ``petroleum process streams'' to ``petroleum refinery process
streams'' to clarify the types of covered substances. EPA received
comments which indicated that the proposed change was misunderstood;
EPA, therefore, at this time, is retaining the name ``petroleum process
streams.''
EPA is amending the list of partially exempt substances by adding
the following 25 petroleum refinery process streams, listed by CAS
registry number: 67254-74-4, 67891-81-0, 67891-86-5, 68476-27-7, 68477-
98-5, 68477-99-6, 68478-31-9, 68513-03-1, 68514-39-6, 73138-65-5,
92045-43-7, 92045-58-4, 92062-09-4, 98859-55-3, 98859-56-4, 101316-73-
8, 164907-78-2, 164907-79-3, 178603-63-9, 178603-64-0, 178603-65-1,
178603-66-2, 212210-93-0, 221120-39-4, and 445411-73-4. EPA also is
adding the following two petroleum process streams listed by CAS
registry number: 68919-16-4 and 61789-60-4. They were inadvertently
left off the initial partial exemption list established by the 2003
Amendments
The petroleum process stream partial exemption was established by
the 2003 Amendments (Ref. 1). As described in the preamble to the 2003
Amendments, EPA established the exemption based upon expected exposures
and uses of the listed chemical substances. In the 2003 Amendment
preamble, EPA explained that these chemicals are frequently processed
at the site where they are produced in vessels which are designed to
minimize losses and, coincidentally, the potential for releases and
exposure. Also, in many cases, the flammable nature of these products
requires that they also be transported, processed, and stored in well
controlled vessels. For these reasons, EPA believed worker exposure to
the chemicals termed ``petroleum process streams'' for purposes of IUR
was diminished and thus IUR processing and use reporting was not
considered to be warranted at the time the 2003 Amendments were
promulgated. The initial listing of chemical substances in 40 CFR
710.46(b)(1), was derived from the 1983 publication of the American
Petroleum Institute (API) document entitled Petroleum Process Stream
Terms Included in the Chemical Substances Inventory Under the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA) (API publication) (Ref. 2).
In developing the proposed IUR Revisions rule, EPA considered
adding potential petroleum process streams, identified by API as having
been added to the TSCA Inventory since the 1983 publication was
compiled, to the 40 CFR 710.46(b)(1) listing. As noted in the proposed
rule, in order to determine which of these substances qualified as
petroleum process streams, EPA applied the criteria embodied in the
Agency's petroleum stream descriptions contained in EPA's January 1978
Addendum I to the TSCA Candidate List of Chemical Substances, entitled
Generic Terms Covering Petroleum Refinery Process Streams (Addendum I)
(Ref. 3). Based on Addendum I, EPA described in the proposal the
reasons why several of the suggested chemical substances were not
considered to be petroleum process streams for IUR reporting purposes:
(i) The chemical substance consists of a complex mixture of one class
of hydrocarbons, e.g., all alkanes or all alkenes (with defined carbon
number ranges) and aromatic hydrocarbons (without defined carbon number
range), which do not specify petroleum as a source material in the
chemical name; (ii) the chemical substance is a well defined
[[Page 75062]]
alkylbenzene, or is an alkylbenzene fractionation product or
distillation residues. Alkylbenzenes are typical downstream
petrochemical products that are made synthetically from benzene and
paraffinic hydrocarbons in a chemical process that does not involve
refinery processing; (iii) the chemical substance includes the chemical
modification terms sulfated, bisulfited, sulfurized, sulfonated,
esters, and reaction products etc., are not substances produced within
the scope of petroleum refining operations, but rather they are
considered to be products from other chemical manufacturing processes;
or (iv) the chemical substance is derived using a chemical process (a
Fischer-Tropsch process) from a non-petroleum source (Refs. 1 and 4).
There is one point regarding the petroleum process stream exemption
that EPA wishes to clarify. In the proposed rule, EPA stated that the
decision criteria used to develop both the initial list in 40 CFR
710.46(b)(1) and the then-proposed additions were applied in a
consistent manner. The API document, used to compile the initial list,
and EPA's Addendum I, used to compile today's additions, do vary in
approach. The API document includes a number of substances that would
not be included as petroleum process streams in Addendum I. For
instance, the API publication contained individual light hydrocarbons
and related gases (Class I substances) which were not identified in
Addendum I. EPA intends to revisit the list in 40 CFR 710.46(b)(1)
after the 2006 reporting cycle to ensure that all chemicals listed are
consistent with Addendum I.
The Agency received many comments on the proposed changes to the
petroleum process streams partial exemption. In general, the commenters
supported adding chemicals to the partial exemption chemical list. One
commenter felt that EPA's proposed change in the name of the partial
exemption to ``petroleum refinery process streams'' was constricting.
Another commenter stated that the scope of the proposed change excludes
a variety of substances that are in fact petroleum process streams
produced in a refinery.
EPA is not promulgating the name change and will retain ``petroleum
process streams'' to describe the partial exemption. EPA's inclusion of
the term ``refinery'' was intended to indicate that the streams were
refining streams and to make the title consistent with terms used in
EPA's Addendum I document. This name change was not intended to affect
the scope of the partial exemption nor was it intended to restrict
substances to only those produced at a refinery. Although EPA
acknowledges that petroleum process streams can be manufactured outside
of a refinery, the Agency also notes that some substances produced in a
refinery are petrochemicals and do not qualify as petroleum process
streams.
Two commenters highlighted EPA's statement that ``Qualifying
petroleum process streams are produced only in a petroleum refinery,
are further refined at the same site, and are processed and used in
closed equipment, or are used as fuel.'' 70 FR 3662. According to these
commenters, limiting the scope of the partial exemption to petroleum
refineries was inappropriate because certain chemicals are produced in
closed systems at production facilities other than refineries, in a
manner similar to their production at refineries. One of the commenters
stated that denying the partial exemption to all except petroleum
refineries violates the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) and offers a
competitive advantage to refineries. One commenter requested that, if
EPA implements its proposed definition of petroleum process stream as a
substance produced only in a petroleum refinery, further refined at the
same site, and processed and used in closed equipment or used as fuel,
the Agency should acknowledge that the definition is not intended for
any purpose other than for identifying partially exempt chemicals for
the IUR regulation.
The statement concerning qualifying petroleum process streams was
included in the discussion describing the Agency's decision concerning
whether or not to list certain substances suggested by the API. EPA did
not intend the proposed change to alter the status of chemicals
currently on the list nor did EPA intend to change the exemption to be
based upon the location at which a substance is manufactured. A
chemical substance listed by CAS Registry Number (CASRN) at 40 CFR
710.46(b)(1) is exempt from reporting requirements of 40 CFR
710.52(c)(4), unless the substance is ineligible because of exceptions
noted in the introductory text of 40 CFR 710.46. For example, one of
the commenters noted that calcined petroleum coke (CASRN 64743-05-1)
can be manufactured either in a petroleum refinery or in another type
of facility. This substance, since it is listed by CASRN at 40 CFR
710.46(b)(1), is exempted from reporting IUR processing and use
information regardless of where it is manufactured. Therefore,
refineries are not receiving any competitive advantage over other
manufacturers of these chemicals. As recognized by the commenters, EPA
stated that qualifying petroleum process streams are produced only in a
petroleum refinery. In light of the confusion identified by the
comments, and to recognize that qualifying petroleum process streams
may occur outside of a petroleum refinery, EPA is now stating that
qualifying petroleum process streams to be added in 40 CFR 710.46(b)(1)
are produced within the scope of petroleum refining operations.
Additionally, while EPA did not define the term ``petroleum process
stream'' in its proposal, the Agency agrees that the discussion
included in the proposed revisions preamble is intended solely for
reporting under the IUR regulations.
b. ``Low current interest'' partial exemption. 40 CFR 710.46(b)(2)
exempts manufacturers (including importers) of certain chemical
substances from reporting processing and use information under 40 CFR
710.52(c)(4) if EPA has determined that it has a ``low current
interest'' in the IUR processing and use information for that chemical
substance. The public may request EPA to add a substance to, or remove
a substance from, the list of chemicals partially exempt from reporting
by submitting a petition that addresses the considerations set forth in
40 CFR 710.46(b)(2)(ii).
In the proposed rule, the Agency sought to clarify the process for
petitioning EPA to add a chemical to, or remove it from, the list at 40
CFR 710.46(b)(2)(iv). The revisions were intended to more clearly state
that the burden is on the petitioner to demonstrate that the collection
of information on the production and use of the chemical substance is
or is not of low current interest. The proposed rule also clarified
that it is the petitioner's obligation to address the considerations
set forth in Sec. 710.46(b)(2)(ii) by providing sufficient
information, including documentation and relevant citations to
supporting information. In addition, the proposed rule altered the
consideration of whether a chemical substance was adequately managed by
broadening it to include entities other than Federal agencies. (See 70
FR 3658).
Many persons commented that the proposed change would clarify the
requirements for a petition for partial exemption under the IUR
regulations and supported the change. In addition, one person commented
that the proposed changes support the continued consideration of the
totality of information available on a chemical in deciding to grant or
deny a partial exemption. EPA is finalizing the
[[Page 75063]]
changes to this partial exemption as proposed.
Several comments addressed issues beyond the Agency's proposed
actions, advocating substantive changes to the partial exemption. For
example, two persons believed that EPA should provide additional
certainty to the exemption process. Another commented that, while a
formal risk assessment was not needed, review of requests for partial
exemption must be objective. This commenter supported a delisting
process that incorporated the criteria used for exempting petroleum
streams, described by the commenter as exempting intermediates
processed in closed equipment or burned as fuels. Another commenter
suggested adding additional criteria which promoted pollution
prevention and resource recovery and ongoing programs of other offices
within EPA. Finally, one commenter advocated removing the partial
exemption process entirely. EPA intends to further consider these
suggestions concerning the ``low current interest'' partial exemption.
If change is warranted, EPA will initiate a separate rulemaking.
2. How is this rule changing the data elements reported by all
submitters?--a. Production volume reporting. EPA is requiring that
domestic production volume data be reported separately from import
volume data. Prior to the 2003 Amendments, submitters were required to
report the domestically manufactured volume data separate from the
imported volume data for each reportable substance. With the 2003
Amendments, persons manufacturing and/or importing a reportable
chemical substance were required to aggregate the amounts of a chemical
imported and manufactured domestically and to report the total. In the
proposed rule, EPA suggested a return to the previous method of
reporting data on manufactured volumes separately from imported
volumes. EPA explained that it is frequently useful to distinguish
between the volume of a chemical manufactured in the United States and
imported into this country to understand the nature of chemical
production in the United States, characterize the markets for
chemicals, and assess potential exposures during importation and
domestic manufacture of chemical substances (See 70 FR 3658).
Several persons who commented on the proposed rule agreed with the
proposed change. One person noted that separate reporting of the
manufactured and imported volumes for chemical substances will allow
the Agency to separately evaluate manufacturing and import activities
and assist the Agency in characterizing exposures to these chemical
substances. EPA concurs with these observations and is promulgating the
proposed change.
b. Production volume range confidentiality claims. EPA is removing
the requirement that submitters who claim production volume as TSCA
confidential business information (CBI) must indicate whether they are
also claiming a specified range within which the production volume
falls as confidential (40 CFR 710.52 (c)(3)(v)).
EPA received 11 comments on the proposed removal of the requirement
that submitters indicate whether or not production volumes submitted in
ranges should be treated as CBI. While one commenter supported this
change, the others opposed it. Commenters that opposed the change
expressed concern that such a change would decrease the protection of
CBI, and several proposed that EPA simply adjust the ranges that it
uses to publicly release aggregated production volume data to match
those of the IUR regulation.
EPA believes that many of the objections to this proposed change
result from a misunderstanding of EPA's intent in removing this
requirement. As a general matter, EPA releases IUR production volume
range information for a chemical only after aggregating the data across
all reporting sites. In the 2003 Amendments, EPA included a provision
requiring each IUR submitter to report whether its production volume,
when considered in a range specified in Sec. 710.52(c)(3)(v), should
be treated as CBI. This amendment was included in the 2003 final rule
as part of an effort to make available to the public site- and
chemical-specific production volume range information from the IUR that
was not claimed as CBI.
Upon consideration of various public comments and internal
discussion, the Agency has decided that a submitter may no longer claim
as CBI a specified production volume range that corresponded to the
submitter's site-specific production volume data. Submitters will be
able to continue to claim their actual production volume as CBI. EPA's
decision not to allow confidentiality claims for the standardized
production volume ranges in 40 CFR 710.52(c)(3)(v) is based on several
concerns, most importantly issues inherent in releasing both aggregated
data and site-specific production volume ranges. Because of this
difficulty, the Agency has determined that this provision regarding the
confidentiality of production volume information within specified
ranges is not likely to result in greater availability of production
volume information to the public, which was the goal of this data
element as expressed in the 2003 Amendments (Ref. 1). Additionally,
several commenters suggested that EPA should not release these
standardized production volume ranges. It is important to note that, by
this change, EPA is not presuming consent to release these production
volume ranges for site-specific production volume ranges or otherwise
lessening any CBI protections. Any production volume information
released to the public will be in the form of production volume data
that is aggregated and ranged.
3. How have the data elements reported only by larger production
volume manufacturers changed?--a. Reporting processing and use
information for domestic activities only. Persons manufacturing 300,000
lbs. or more of a reportable chemical substance were required to report
processing and use information for that chemical substance to the
extent that the information is readily obtainable. EPA is restricting
the processing and use information reported under 40 CFR 710.52(c)(4)
to domestic processing and use activities for two reasons. First, EPA
is primarily focused on exposures to chemical substances resulting from
domestic processing and use of the chemicals. Second, EPA anticipates
that restricting the processing and use information that must be
reported by larger production volume manufacturers to that associated
with domestic activities will reduce the burden associated with
reporting this information. The Agency estimates that the average
burden for reporting the IUR processing and use information is reduced
by about 15%, resulting in a total savings of approximately $8 million
per reporting period (Ref. 5).
Many commenters supported limiting reported processing and use
information to that associated with domestic activities. Those
commenters supported this proposal as narrowly tailored to satisfy the
Agency's data needs while reducing the burden on entities subject to
reporting under the IUR regulations. They noted that chemicals sold in
international commerce are frequently distributed through brokers and
as a consequence the information on processing and use of exported
chemicals is, in their view, not readily obtainable. In addition, the
commenters stated that information from foreign sources may be less
easily verified and therefore could reduce the accuracy of the data
collected. One person commented that tracking the processing
[[Page 75064]]
and use of domestically manufactured volumes separately from exported
volumes would require separate tracking systems and would increase the
burden associated with larger production volume manufacturers'
reporting under the IUR regulations. EPA anticipates that, for most
submitters, limiting the reporting of processing and use information to
that associated with domestic activities will decrease the burden
associated with reporting under the IUR regulation. For these reasons,
EPA is finalizing the proposal to restrict information reported in
response to 40 CFR 710.52(c)(4) to domestic processing and use of
chemical substances.
b. Consumer and commercial product categories. Persons
manufacturing 300,000 lbs. or more of a reportable chemical substance
must report the commercial and consumer product category or categories
that best describe the commercial and consumer products in which each
reportable chemical substance is used (see 40 CFR 710.52(c)(4)(ii)(A)).
EPA proposed the following changes to the list of categories:
(i) Combine the categories for ``Soaps and Detergents'' and
``Polishes and Sanitation Goods'' to form a new category called
``Cleaning Products (non-pesticidal).''
These two categories are quite similar and this change was intended to
assist submitters who might have difficulty differentiating between
them. EPA believed that both categories relate, at least to a certain
extent, to cleaning goods. EPA is not finalizing this proposed change.
EPA received comments supporting the consolidation of these two
categories, however no specific reasons were provided for their
support. EPA also received a comment stating that combining these
categories will result in a loss of information. The latter commenter,
Environmental Defense, et.al., (ED) provided specific information on
the ``Soaps and Detergents'' and ``Polishes and Sanitation Goods''
categories, noting that these categories have distinct six-digit North
American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes and showing that
these categories are readily distinguishable from each other. EPA found
the same information provided by ED at the following U.S. Census
Bureau's web site: http://www.census.gov/epcd/naics02/def/NDEF325.HTM#N3256. The website defines ``soaps and detergents'' and
``polishes and sanitation goods'' by further breaking those categories
into more distinct subcategories, demonstrating that there are real
differences between those two categories. For instance, ``Soaps and
Detergents'' contains bar soaps manufacturing; dentifrices
manufacturing; dishwasher detergents manufacturing; hand soaps (e.g.,
hard, liquid, soft) manufacturing; toothpastes, gels, and tooth powders
manufacturing; and other categories. ``Polishes and Sanitation Goods''
contains air fresheners manufacturing; ammonia, household-type,
manufacturing; brass polishes manufacturing; floor polishes and waxes
manufacturing; shoe polishes and cleaners manufacturing; wallpaper
cleaners manufacturing; and other categories. Please note that, as
described in the preamble to the 2003 Amendments, submitters under the
IUR will not be required to report on non-TSCA downstream uses of the
TSCA chemicals that they manufacture (See 68 FR 871, Unit III.B.3.b.).
Additionally, ED stated that ``the two different types of uses may
have significant implications for exposure patterns. For example, the
former category primarily includes products that many people would use
several times a day, while the latter includes products that most
consumers would use considerably less frequently'' (Ref. 6). EPA more
carefully considered the way in which it would utilize these categories
in a screening-level exposure assessment. While there are products in
the ``Polishes and Sanitation Goods'' category that could be used on a
daily basis in similar quantities as products in the ``Soaps and
Detergents'' category, there are also products with very different use
scenarios. For instance, EPA has developed default scenarios in the
Agency's screening level Consumer Exposure Module, which is embedded
into the Agency's Exposure, Fate Assessment Screening Tool (E-FAST)
(see http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/exposure/docs/efast.htm), for laundry
detergent (in the ``Soap and Detergent'' category) and for solid air
fresheners (in the ``Polishes and Sanitation Goods'' category). These
use scenarios are different from each other and therefore would
generate different potential exposure results. Therefore, based upon a
further analysis of the NAICS Index Entries and EPA's screening models,
EPA has decided not to combine the two categories and will maintain
separate reporting categories for ``Soaps and Detergents'' and
``Polishes and Sanitation Goods.''
(ii) Add a category called ``Agricultural Products (non-
pesticidal).'' Comments addressing this addition were all favorable,
and EPA is finalizing the addition of this category. Without this
category, agricultural uses of chemicals would have been reported under
the miscellaneous ``Other'' category.
One commenter requested a definition for ``non-pesticidal,'' which
is used in the ``Agricultural Products'' category as well as the
existing ``Lawn and Garden Products (non-pesticidal)'' category. For
guidance as to what substances are considered to be ``pesticides'' and
information as to what uses are considered to be pesticidal uses, refer
to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
definition of ``pesticide'' (7 U.S.C. 136(u) or FIFRA section 2(u)),
which generally defines the term as ``(1) any substance or mixture of
substances intended for preventing, destroying, repelling, or
mitigating any pest, (2) any substance or mixture of substances
intended for use as a plant regulator, defoliant, or desiccant, and (3)
any nitrogen stabilizer. . .'' If the subject persons find that the
agricultural or lawn and garden product on which they are reporting
does not meet the definition under FIFRA section 2(u), their product
will fall into the ``Agricultural Products (non-pesticidal)'' or the
``Lawn and Garden Products (non-pesticidal) category.
(iii) The Agency had also proposed removing the category
``Photographic Chemicals,'' due to the expected decline in the
traditional film photofinishing industry, which indicates that
consumer/commercial exposure issues associated with photographic
chemicals may be of diminished importance. Six commenters stated their
general support of changes made to the commercial and consumer product
categories, although no commenter specifically mentioned photographic
chemicals or provided any specific reason for their support. One
comment supported maintaining the ``Photographic Chemicals'' category,
stating that any burden associated with the reporting of a category
covering uses that are less prevalent over time ought to also decline,
and that there are indications of a relatively stable remaining core of
film users and therefore the associated chemicals will continue to be
used. Upon further investigation, EPA has decided to maintain this
category. According to several industry sources, despite the
displacement of analog photography by digital imaging, U.S. consumption
of film and paper chemicals is projected to remain relatively stable.
Included in this category are many substances that have a role in
digital as well as analog imaging. Also, toners and resins for copiers
included in this category are continuing to increase in volume. Thus,
while specific types of photographic
[[Page 75065]]
chemicals may decrease in use, it seems unlikely that use of chemical
substances in the ``Photographic Chemicals'' category as a whole will
drastically decrease, as EPA originally thought (Ref. 7).
4. What other changes are being made?--a. Reporting frequency and
recordkeeping. The IUR regulations require reporting every 4 years. The
first submission period to occur after the 2003 Amendments will be in
2006, at which time submitters will report information based on the
2005 reporting year. EPA proposed to change the reporting frequency so
that, after the 2006 submission period, the reporting frequency will be
every 5 years instead of every 4 years. This means that the second
submission period after the 2003 Amendments would be 2011 (i.e., 5
years after 2006) and would then occur every 5 years thereafter. The
reporting year would continue to occur in the calendar year immediately
preceding the submission period, i.e., 2010, 2015, etc.
EPA received a variety of comments on the proposed change to the
IUR reporting cycle from every 4 years to every 5 years. Several
companies and trade associations supported this extension to the
reporting cycle. Those who supported the change generally recognized
that the extended reporting cycle would result in burden reduction,
particularly in the wake of the amended reporting requirements
promulgated in 2003 (68 FR 848, January 7, 2003), while agreeing that
the extended reporting cycle would still meet EPA's data needs. Certain
commenters correctly understood that the extended cycle would allow
inorganic chemical manufacturers to become familiar with IUR reporting
(which will be required for inorganic chemical substances for the first
time as of the 2006 submission period) before having to report
processing and use information during submission periods after 2006.
One company indicated that, although it was supportive of changing from
a 4-year to a 5-year reporting cycle, such a change would not result in
a reduced (or increased) burden to industry because the 4-year
reporting cycle has been in effect for some time, and companies have
this frequency integrated into their regulatory compliance calendars.
Other commenters did not support the proposed change in reporting
frequency. A group of organizations and individuals indicated that
reporting every 5 years will not meet the Agency's and others' critical
data needs. They suggested that the large fluctuation in the universe
of high production volume chemicals from 1990-2002 indicates a need for
more frequent, rather than less frequent, reporting, and they also
provided an analysis of publicly available IUR information to bolster
the assertion that the chemical industry is dynamic and that production
volumes change dramatically over the 4 years between reporting cycles.
These commenters suggested that annual reporting of production volume
data would be more appropriate, but if EPA chose not to require annual
reporting of this data, it should require the reporting of yearly
production volume data every 5 years. They also recognized that EPA
bases many of its actions on information reported under the IUR
regulation, and contended that more accurate reporting will lead to
better risk management at a lower cost.
EPA intends to consider further the suggestion to adopt a provision
requiring persons to report their annual production volumes for each of
the 5 years preceding the submission period. If the reporting of annual
volumes appears to be an appropriate change to the IUR regulations, EPA
may initiate a separate rulemaking.
EPA recognizes that more frequent reporting could track more
closely the actual amounts of IUR reportable chemical substances
manufactured (including imported) in the U.S. In this rule, the Agency
is incorporating its proposed change to IUR reporting frequency in an
effort to reduce burden to industry while still meeting the Agency's
basic information needs. The Agency believes that reporting every 5
years will meet EPA's most critical needs, particularly given that the
information that will be reported under the newly amended IUR will be
significantly more useful for exposure and risk screening purposes than
the information that was reported under IUR in the past. EPA also
agrees that the extended reporting cycle will allow increased time for
industry (particularly inorganic chemical manufacturers) to learn how
to comply with the amended IUR, and may result in submissions with
fewer errors.
EPA disagrees with the comment that the change from a 4-year
reporting cycle to a 5-year reporting cycle does not affect industry
burden. Over a 20-year period, a 5-year frequency results in 4
submission periods while a 4-year frequency results in 5 submission
periods. As a result of requiring one less submission period over the
course of 20 years, EPA estimates that a 5-year frequency will save
regulated entities from $59.3 to $75.7 million over 20 years at a 3%
discount rate (about a 16% reduction), and from $41.2 to $52.6 million
over 20 years at a 7% discount rate (Ref. 5), and would still meet
EPA's most critical data needs.
Currently, submitters are required to retain records relevant to
reporting during a submission period for a period of 5 years beginning
with the effective date of that submission period. EPA is clarifying
this requirement by changing ``beginning with the effective date'' to
``beginning on the last day'' of that submission period (i.e., for a
submission period ending December 23, 2006, submitters would be
required to retain records relevant to that submission until December
23, 2011). EPA is also adding a sentence to the recordkeeping
provisions to encourage submitters to retain records longer than 5
years to ensure that past records are available as a reference when
submitters are generating subsequent submissions.
One commenter noted that, under the current IUR regulations,
persons submitting their information at the beginning of the submission
period rather than at the end will have to review their records twice,
once in preparation for making the submission and then again for
records retention purposes at the end of the submission period. The
commenter stated that this could result in submitters who report early
in the submission period keeping all IUR records from two submission
periods for a period of time, even if the submitter determines the
older records are not necessary to help guide subsequent reporting. The
commenter suggests that to reduce burden and encourage early reporting,
the required period for record retention be changed from 5 years from
the last day of the submission period to ``5 years or until the date of
their next IUR submission to EPA, whichever is less.'' In addition to
the submitter having its past records to refer to, EPA proposed the
change from ``beginning with the effective date'' to ``beginning on the
last day'' of the submission period to clarify the records retention
requirement. EPA is concerned that following the commenter's suggestion
would result in a lack of clarity concerning what date is considered
the date of submission or when the 5-year period begins. Additionally,
EPA suspects that most submitters review past submissions well before
submitting their information to EPA. A submitter can identify records
it no longer finds useful at the time of review for the current
submission and will easily be able to later identify those records. EPA
does not require that a submitter destroy records by a certain date,
and believes the method and timing of such an action is entirely up to
the submitter, as long as the IUR
[[Page 75066]]
regulations record retention requirement is met.
b. Submission period. Under the current IUR rule, submitters are
required to report on a recurring basis every 4 years, and that report
is required to be submitted to EPA during the period of August 25
through December 23 in the year immediately following each reporting
year. In today's action, for the submission period in 2006, EPA is
retaining August 25 through December 23 as the submission period, but
for future submission periods beginning in 2011 and thereafter, the
submission period will be moved up to June 1 through September 30. This
means that in the next submission period in 2011, submitters are
required to submit reports between June 1 and September 30, 2011.
In the proposed rule, EPA solicited comment on its proposal to move
the submission period to January 1 through April 30 of the year
following the reporting year. The 2003 amendment to the IUR regulation
also changed the reporting year from the company's fiscal year to the
calendar year beginning in 2005. Therefore, all of the information
required to be submitted to EPA should be available early in 2006 for
all companies. Moving the submission period to earlier in the calendar
year would allow the Agency to obtain and process the information in a
more timely manner, and therefore make the information available for
use closer in time to the period in which it was generated.
The Agency received many comments on its proposal to move the
submission period to a point earlier in the year. The majority of
commenters opposed the change to the submission period, stating:
(1) The proposed submission period of January 1 to April 30
coincides with the time when many other reports must be filed, and the
current period (August 25 through December 23) works well allowing
reporting companies time to generate accurate data. A trade group
indicated that all of its members surveyed reported to the IUR in
December.
(2) It is unreasonable for EPA to shorten the submission period in
light of the increased reporting requirements enacted by the 2003
Amendments to the IUR. Inorganic chemical producers, who will be
reporting for the first time under the IUR regulation in 2006, felt
that adjusting to the reporting requirements would take considerable
time. Most suggested that respondents will struggle to collect the
required data in time. Firms reporting on a large number of chemicals
were of the opinion that the complexity of their reporting would make
meeting the April 30 deadline difficult due to obligations of other
forms of regulatory compliance occurring early in the calendar year.
Importers pointed out the complexity of their situation, especially
because they will often have to rely on Customs Entry forms that can be
delayed up to 30 days.
(3) Numerous other EPA reporting programs require reporting in the
first half of the year, such as the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), as
do other state and federal environmental programs. This would strain
staff responsible for reporting, and lead to inaccuracy. Some
commenters identified approximately 30 additional federal, state and
local reporting programs that require their attention. Other commenters
stated that they believe the coordination of these IUR and TRI
reporting deadlines may encourage submitters to coordinate their data
collection processes.
(4) Several persons commenting on the proposal believed that
delaying the reporting until later in calendar year 2006 would improve
the accuracy of the information reported. These persons pointed out
that import notifications are often delayed by up to 30 days after the
chemical is imported thereby reducing the time available to incorporate
this information into IUR reporting. In addition, those firms whose
byproducts are either beneficially reused or disposed as wastes will
need additional time to report because the determination of beneficial
use may be made months after the byproducts are manufactured.
(5) Requiring accelerated submissions based on ``timeliness'' of
the data is inconsistent with EPA's proposal to extend the reporting
cycle from 4 to 5 years because a delay of several additional months is
insignificant when compared to the extension of the reporting cycle by
an additional year. Some commenters pointed out that by waiting an
extra few months, EPA would collect more accurate data. One commenter
questioned EPA's rationale for moving up the submission period to
better coincide with the change of the reporting year from the fiscal
year to the calendar year. This commenter suggested that EPA's
reasoning was erroneous because many businesses, in their experience,
had fiscal years ending significantly before July and therefore, for
those companies, the period to prepare and submit IUR reports has been
reduced from approximately 1 year (for companies with a fiscal year
coinciding with the calendar year) to only 4 months.
(6) Almost all of the commenters objected to the change in the
submission period for the 2006 reporting cycle. Based on the comments,
EPA believes these objections are due to the commenter's unfamiliarity
with the new requirements imposed by the amended IUR regulations. Many
commenters mentioned that EPA guidance for the 2006 reporting period is
not yet available (though several mentioned and appreciated that EPA
was conducting IUR training), noted that EPA's electronic reporting
program for 2002 was flawed, and questioned whether the 2006 materials
would be ready in time to be adequately tested before reporting is
required. Others stated that they were already planning IUR
information-gathering activities around the August-December timeframe.
Most commenters, while preferring that EPA retain the current
submission period, suggested alternatives. These included deadlines of
October 31, August 31, July 1 (to coincide with TRI reporting), and May
1, and a submission period from July 1 through October 31.
In response to the many objections to the proposed change to the
submission period, EPA has reconsidered its proposal to move the
submission period to January 1 through April 30. The proposed change
was not intended to place additional burdens on industry, but to remove
an unnecessary delay in collecting the IUR data. In light of the
commenters' concerns about their ability to collect accurate data in a
timely fashion and submit them during the proposed submission period,
EPA will maintain the current submission period of August 25 through
December 23 for the 2006 reporting cycle, and switch to a June 1
through September 30 submission period for all future reporting cycles
beginning in 2011. Recognizing that companies may have already begun
planning data collection activities around the August to December
submission period for the 2006 reporting cycle, and that the data
collection will include new requirements resulting from the 2003
Amendments, EPA recognizes that altering the 2006 IUR submission period
at this time could be overly burdensome to some reporters. Beginning in
2011, and for all future reporting cycles thereafter, EPA believes that
the June 1 through September 30 submission period balances industry's
needs in collecting the data with EPA's desire to begin analyzing the
data in a timely manner.
c. Polymer exemption. Chemical substances meeting the definition
for polymers included in 40 CFR 710.46(a)(1) are fully exempt from
reporting under the IUR regulations. EPA is changing the references
included
[[Page 75067]]
in the polymer definition from the ``1985 edition of the Inventory or
the Master Inventory File'' to the more general and current ``Master
Inventory File'' by removing the reference to the 1985 edition of the
Inventory. The Master Inventory File has been regularly updated since
the 1985 edition of the Inventory was published, and is the more
appropriate reference for use within the IUR polymer exemption. All who
commented on this subject agreed with this change, and EPA is
finalizing the definition as proposed.
III. Materials in the Rulemaking Record
An official docket was established under docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OPPT-2004-0106. The official public docket includes information
considered by EPA in developing this final rule, such as the documents
specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received,
and other information related to this action. In addition, interested
parties should consult documents that are referenced in the documents
that EPA has placed in the docket, regardless of whether these
referenced documents are physically located in the docket. For
assistance in locating documents that are referenced in documents that
EPA has placed in the docket, but that are not physically located in
the docket, please consult the technical person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. The official public docket is available
for review as specified in ADDRESSES. The following is a listing of the
documents referenced in this preamble that have been placed in the
official docket for this final rule:
1. USEPA, ``TSCA Inventory Update Rule Amendments'' (68 FR 848,
January 7, 2003) (FRL-6767-4).
2. American Petroleum Institute, ``Petroleum Process Stream Terms
Included in the Chemical Substances Inventory Under the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA),'' Health and Safety Regulation Committee
Task Force on Toxic Substances Control, February 1985.
3. USEPA, ``Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) PL 94-469 Candidate
List of Chemical Substances Addendum I Generic Terms Covering Petroleum
Refinery Process Streams,'' January 1978.
4. USEPA, ``Technical Support Document Inventory Update Reporting
Rule Petroleum Process Stream Partial Exemption Added Petroleum Process
Chemicals'' OPPT, April 17, 2004. Revised, July 6, 2005.
5. USEPA, ``Economic Analysis of the IUR Revisions Final Rule,''
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, July 2005.
6. Comment from Denison, Richard A., Environmental Defense, on
Comments on Proposed Rule, TSCA Inventory Update Reporting Revisions
(70 FR 3658, 26 January 2005). Submitted via EDOCKET on 18 February,
2005.
7. USEPA, ``Summary of Information on Photographic Chemicals,''
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, July 2005.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has determined that this action is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' subject to review by OMB because it does not meet
the criteria in section 3(f) of the Executive Order.
EPA has prepared an economic analysis of the potential impacts of
this action, which is contained in a document entitled Economic
Analysis of the IUR Revisions Final Rule (Ref. 1). This document is
available as a part of the public version of the official record for
this action and is briefly summarized here.
These revisions will reduce IUR reporting costs. The quantified
portions of the rule are estimated to save $6 million to $7 million per
year when annualized over the next 20 years at a 3% or a 7% discount
rate. Most of the savings of these revisions will accrue to the
chemical industry in the form of decreased costs of complying with the
IUR regulations. There will also be some savings to EPA in the form of
decreased costs to administer the regulation and maintain the collected
data.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
According to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to a collection of information that requires OMB
approval under the PRA, unless it has been approved by OMB and displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations, after initial display in the Federal Register and in
addition to its display on any related collection instrument, are
listed in 40 CFR part 9.
The information collection requirements related to the IUR
regulations have already been approved by OMB pursuant to the PRA under
OMB control number 2070-0162. This action would not impose any burden
requiring additional OMB approval. Instead, this action would reduce
reporting burden by 113,000 to 123,000 hours in the 2006 reporting
cycle and 112,000 to 121,000 hours in subsequent reporting cycles. This
reduction is out of a total burden of 1,300,000 to 1,658,000 hours in
the 2006 reporting cycle, and 1,189,000 to 1,516,000 in future
reporting cycles.
Send any comments about the accuracy of the burden estimate, and
any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including
through the use of automated collection techniques, to the Director,
Collection Strategies Division (2822), Office of Environmental
Information, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please remember to include the OMB control
number in any correspondence, but do not submit any completed forms to
this address.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Agency hereby certifies that this action
will not have a significant adverse economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The factual basis for the Agency's
determination is summarized below.
The term ``small entities'' includes small businesses, small not-
for profit organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions, but
because not-for-profit organizations and governmental jurisdictions
will not be affected by this rule, ``small entity'' in this analysis is
synonymous with small business.
Small manufacturers that fully meet the 40 CFR 704.3 definition are
generally exempt from reporting under the IUR regulations, and thus are
not significantly impacted by IUR reporting. Nevertheless, this
rulemaking is expected to reduce IUR reporting costs for businesses of
all sizes. Thus, EPA concludes that these revisions will not result in
significant adverse effects on a substantial number of small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Pursuant to Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Public Law 104-4) (UMRA), EPA has determined that this regulatory
action does not contain a Federal mandate that may result in
expenditures of $100 million or more for state, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or for the private sector in any 1 year.
As described in Unit IV.A., the rule is expected to decrease
expenditures by $6 million to $7 million per year. EPA has
[[Page 75068]]
also determined that the rule would not significantly or uniquely
affect small governments and is not subject to the requirements of
sections 202, 203, 204, and 205 of UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132
This rule will not have a substantial direct effect on states, on
the relationship between the national government and the states, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).
F. Executive Order 13175
This rule will not have tribal implications because it is not
expected to have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments
(65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000).
G. Executive Order 13045
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045, entitled
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because this is not an economically
significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866, and
this action does not address environmental health or safety risks
disproportionately affecting children.
H. Executive Order 13211
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled
Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because this action
is not expected to affect energy supply, distribution, or use.
I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
Since this action does not involve any technical standards, section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note), does
not apply to this action.
J. Executive Order 12898
This action does not involve special considerations of
environmental justice related issues as required by Executive Order
12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February
16, 1994).
K. Executive Order 12988
In issuing this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to
eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation,
and provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct, as required by
section 3 of Executive Order 12988, entitled Civil Justice Reform (61
FR 4729, February 7, 1996).
V. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the Agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and the Comptroller General of the United
States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 710
Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous materials, Inventory
Update Reporting, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, TSCA.
Dated: December 5, 2005.
Susan B. Hazen,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and
Toxic Substances.
0
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 710--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 710 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2607(a).
Sec. 710.43 [Amended]
0
2. Section 710.43 is amended by revising the phrase ``4-year
intervals'' to read ``5-year intervals'' in the definition for
``reporting year.''
0
3. Section 710.46 is amended as follows:
0
a. By removing the phrase ``the 1985 edition of the Inventory or in''
in paragraph (a)(1)(i).
0
b. By removing the phrase ``the 1985 edition of the Inventory or'' in
paragraph (a)(1)(ii).
0
c. By relisting in ascending order the entries for 68514-36-3, 68514-
37-4, 68514-38-5, 68814-87-9, and 68921-09-5 and adding entries in
ascending order to the table in paragraph (b)(1).
0
d. By revising paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(F).
0
e. By removing the third, fourth, and fifth sentences in paragraph
(b)(2)(iii)(A) and adding a new third sentence.
0
f. By revising the phrase ``4-year intervals'' to read ``5-year
intervals'' in paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(C).
Sec. 710.46 Chemical substances for which information is not
required.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
CAS Numbers of Partially Exempt Substances Termed ``Petroleum Process
Streams'' for Purposes of Inventory Update Reporting
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAS No. Product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
61789-60-4................................ Pitch
* * * * *
67254-74-4................................ Naphthenic oils
* * * * *
67891-81-0................................ Distillates (petroleum),
oxidized light, potassium
salts
* * * * *
67891-86-5................................ Hydrocarbon waxes
(petroleum), oxidized,
compds. with
diisopropanolamine
* * * * *
68476-27-7................................ Fuel gases, amine system
residues
* * * * *
68477-98-5................................ Gases (petroleum),
hydrotreater blend oil
recycle, hydrogen-nitrogen
rich
68477-99-6................................ Gases (petroleum),
isomerized naphtha
fractionater, C4-rich,
hydrogen sulfide- free
* * * * *
68478-31-9................................ Tail gas (petroleum),
isomerized naphtha
fractionates, hydrogen
sulfide-free
* * * * *
68513-03-1................................ Naphtha (petroleum), light
catalytic reformed, arom.-
free
* * * * *
68514-39-6................................ Naphtha (petroleum), light
steam-cracked, isoprene-
rich
* * * * *
68919-16-4................................ Hydrocarbons, catalytic
alkylation, by-products, C3-
6
* * * * *
73138-65-5................................ Hydrocarbon waxes
(petroleum), oxidized,
magnesium salts
[[Page 75069]]
92045-43-7................................ Lubricating oils
(petroleum), hydrocracked
nonarom. solvent
deparaffined
92045-58-4................................ Naphtha (petroleum),
isomerization, C6-fraction
92062-09-4................................ Slack wax (petroleum),
hydrotreated
* * * * *
98859-55-3................................ Distillates (petroleum),
oxidized heavy, compds.
with diethanolamine
98859-56-4................................ Distillates (petroleum),
oxidized heavy, sodium
salts
101316-73-8............................... Lubricating oils
(petroleum), used,
noncatalytically refined
164907-78-2............................... Extracts (petroleum),
asphaltene-low vacuum
residue solvent
164907-79-3............................... Residues (petroleum),
vacuum, asphaltene-low
178603-63-9............................... Gas oils (petroleum),
vacuum, hydrocracked,
hydroisomerized,
hydrogenated, C10-25
178603-64-0............................... Gas oils (petroleum),
vacuum, hydrocracked,
hydroisomerized,
hydrogenated, C15-30,
branched and cyclic
178603-65-1............................... Gas oils (petroleum),
vacuum, hydrocracked,
hydroisomerized,
hydrogenated, C20-40,
branched and cyclic
178603-66-2............................... Gas oils (petroleum),
vacuum, hydrocracked,
hydroisomerized,
hydrogenated, C25-55,
branched and cyclic
212210-93-0............................... Solvent naphtha (petroleum),
heavy arom., distn.
residues
221120-39-4............................... Distillates (petroleum),
cracked steam-cracked, C5-
12 fraction
445411-73-4............................... Gas oils (petroleum),
vacuum, hydrocracked,
hydroisomerized,
hydrogenated, C10-25,
branched and cyclic
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) * * *
(F) Whether the potential risks of the chemical substance are
adequately managed.
(iii) * * *
(A) * * * Requests must identify the chemical in question, as well
as its CAS number or other chemical identification number as identified
in Sec. 710.52(c)(3)(i), and must contain a written rationale for the
request that provides sufficient specific information, addressing the
considerations listed in Sec. 710.46(b)(2)(ii), including cites and
relevant documents, to demonstrate to EPA that the collection of the
information in Sec. 710.52(c)(4) for the chemical in question either
is or is not of low current interest. * * *
* * * * *
Sec. 710.48 [Amended]
0
4. Section 710.48 is amended by revising the phrase ``4-year
intervals'' to read ``5-year intervals'' in paragraph (a).
0
5. Section 710.52 is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising the phrase ``4-year intervals'' to read ``5-year
intervals'' in the first and last sentences of the introductory text,
and in the introductory text of paragraphs (c)(2), (c)(3), and (c)(4).
0
b. By revising paragraph (c)(3)(iv).
0
c. By removing paragraph (c)(3)(v) and redesignating existing
paragraphs (c)(3)(vi), (c)(3)(vii), (c)(3)(viii), and (c)(3)(ix) as
paragraphs (c)(3)(v), (c)(3)(vi), (c)(3)(vii), and (c)(3)(viii),
respectively.
0
d. By revising the phrase ``paragraph (c)(3)(viii)'' to read
``paragraph (c)(3)(vii)'' in newly designated paragraph (c)(3)(viii).
0
e. By adding a sentence after the third sentence in paragraph (c)(4).
0
f. By revising the table in paragraph (c)(4)(ii)(A).
Sec. 710.52 Reporting information to EPA.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) * * *
(iv) The total volume (in pounds) of each reportable chemical
substance manufactured and imported at each site. The total
manufactured volume (not including imported volume) and the total
imported volume must be separately reported. This amount must be
reported to two significant figures of accuracy provided that the
reported figures are within 10% of the actual volume.
* * * * *
(4) * * * Information required to be reported under this paragraph
is limited to domestic (i.e., within the custom territory of the United
States) processing and use activities. * * *
* * * * *
(ii) * * *
(A) * * *
Codes for Reporting Commercial and Consumer Product Categories
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Codes Category
------------------------------------------------------------------------
C01....................................... Adhesives and sealants
C02....................................... Agricultural products (non-
pesticidal)
C03....................................... Artists' supplies
C04....................................... Automotive care products
C05....................................... Electrical and electronic
products
C06....................................... Fabrics, textiles and
apparel
C07....................................... Glass and ceramic products
C08....................................... Lawn and garden products
(non-pesticidal)
C09....................................... Leather products
C10....................................... Lubricants, greases and fuel
additives
C11....................................... Metal products
C12....................................... Paints and coatings
C13....................................... Paper products
C14....................................... Photographic supplies
C15....................................... Polishes and sanitation
goods
C16....................................... Rubber and plastic products
C17....................................... Soaps and detergents
C18....................................... Transportation products
C19....................................... Wood and wood furniture
C20....................................... Other
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
0
6. By revising Sec. 710.53 to read as follows:
[[Page 75070]]
Sec. 710.53 When to report.
All information reported to EPA in response to the requirements of
this subpart must be submitted during an applicable submission period.
The first submission period is from August 25, 2006, to December 23,
2006. Subsequent recurring submission periods are from June 1 to
September 30 at 5-year intervals after the first submission period. Any
person described in Sec. 710.48(a) must report during each submission
period for each chemical substance described in Sec. 710.45 that the
person manufactured (including imported) during the preceding calendar
year (i.e., the ``reporting year'').
0
7. By revising Sec. 710.57 to read as follows:
Sec. 710.57 Reporting requirements.
Each person who is subject to the reporting requirements of this
subpart must retain records that document any information reported to
EPA. Records relevant to reporting during a submission period must be
retained for a period of 5 years beginning on the last day of the
submission period. Submitters are encouraged to retain their records
longer than 5 years to ensure that past records are available as a
reference when new submissions are being generated.
[FR Doc. 05-24196 Filed 12-16-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S