User Fees for the Administration of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 17782-17783 [2018-08427]

Download as PDF 17782 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 24, 2018 / Proposed Rules 5. Amend §§ 17.64 through 17.74 by removing the statutory authority citation at the end of each section. ■ [FR Doc. 2018–08386 Filed 4–23–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8320–01–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 700, 720, 723, 725, 790, and 791 [EPA–HQ–OPPT–2016–0401; FRL–9976–74] RIN 2070–AK27 User Fees for the Administration of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule; availability of supplemental information and extension of comment period. AGENCY: jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:31 Apr 23, 2018 Jkt 244001 For technical information contact: Mark Hartman, Immediate Office, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone number: (202) 564–3810; email address: hartman.mark@epa.gov. For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202) 554– 1404; email address: TSCA-Hotline@ epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Executive Summary A. Does this action apply to me? EPA is extending the comment period for 30 days and is providing notice that EPA has added a supplemental analysis, titled ‘‘Supplemental Analysis of Alternative Small Business Size Standard Definitions and their Effect on TSCA User Fee Collection’’, to the rulemaking docket for the proposed rule that published in the Federal Register on February 26, 2018. The supplemental analysis provides additional estimates for the impact of setting the small business definition based on an employee-based threshold. DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 24, 2018. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2016–0401, by one of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: https:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. • Mail: Document Control Office (7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001. • Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the instructions at https:// www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at https:// www.epa.gov/dockets. SUMMARY: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: This action is directed to the public in general. This action may be of particular interest to anyone who manufactures (including imports), distributes in commerce, or processes a chemical substance (or any combination of such activities) or submits or is required to submit information to the EPA under TSCA sections 4 or 5 or anyone who manufactures a chemical substance that is the subject of a risk evaluation under TSCA section 6(b). The following list of North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to, companies found in major NAICS groups: • Chemical Manufacturers (NAICS code 325), • Petroleum and Coal Products (NAICS code 324), and • Chemical, Petroleum and Merchant Wholesalers (NAICS code 424). B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA? 1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to the EPA through regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD–ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD–ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. A copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. 2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing, and submitting your comments, see the commenting tips at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ comments.html. II. What action is the Agency taking? In the Federal Register of February 26, 2018 (83 FR 8212) (FRL–9974–31), EPA proposed to establish and collect fees from certain manufacturers (including importers) and processors to defray some of the Agency costs related to activities under TSCA sections 4, 5, 6 and 14. EPA also proposed to revise the size standard used to identify businesses that can qualify as a ‘‘small business concern’’ under TSCA for the purposes of fee collection. A regulatory definition for a small business for a submission under TSCA section 5 was promulgated in 1988 and is based on the annual sales value of the business’s parent company. 40 CFR 700.43 currently states: ‘‘Small business concern means any person whose total annual sales in the person’s fiscal year preceding the date of the submission of the applicable section 5 notice, when combined with those of the parent company (if any), are less than $40 million.’’ EPA proposed several changes to this definition. Consistent with the definition of small manufacturer or importer at 40 CFR 704.3, EPA proposed to increase the current revenue threshold of $40 million using the Producer Price Index (PPI) for Chemicals and Allied Products, as compiled by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (Data series WPU06 at https:// data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/srgatet.). Using a base year of 1988 and inflating to 2015 dollars resulted in a value of approximately $91 million. EPA also proposed to change the time frame over which annual sales values are used when accounting for a business’s revenue. Instead of using just one year preceding the date of submission, the Agency is proposing to average annual sales values over the three years preceding the submission. EPA proposed to apply this updated definition—adjusted for inflation and averaging sales revenue over three years—to not only TSCA section 5 submissions, but also to TSCA sections 4 and 6 submissions as well. Pursuant to Executive Order 12866, EPA submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) an economic analysis of the potential costs and benefits associated with the proposed rulemaking. The Agency has since completed supplemental analysis that estimates the impact of setting the E:\FR\FM\24APP1.SGM 24APP1 jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 24, 2018 / Proposed Rules small business definition based on an employee-based threshold. Specifically, EPA estimated the impact when the small business definition is set using the following: (a) A fixed employee-based threshold that defines small businesses as those firms with 500 or fewer employees, and (b) the thresholds set by the Small Business Administration, which vary by industry sector. A copy of the analysis, titled ‘‘Supplemental Analysis of Alternative Small Business Size Standard Definitions and their Effect on TSCA User Fee Collection’’, is now available in the docket for this action (EPA–HQ–OPPT–2016–0401). EPA requests comment on this analysis and whether an employeebased size standard would be more appropriate than a receipts-based size standard and what that employee level should be; whether the size standard, be it receipts-based or employee-based, should vary from industry to industry to reflect differences among the impacted industries; and what other factors and data sources the Agency should consider, besides inflation, when developing the size standard to qualify for reduced fee amounts. The supplemental analysis estimates the impact on fee amounts should an employee-based size standard be used to determine eligibility for reduced fees. In order to ensure that EPA meets the statutory requirement that fees are sufficient to defray 25% of the estimated Agency costs, EPA would need to recoup the revenue loss resulting from moving to one of the two employeebased small business definitions presented in the analysis by increasing the TSCA section 5 proposed general industry fees. The revenue losses would likely arise from TSCA section 5 submissions, given that EPA estimates more businesses would qualify for the lower fee levels under the employeebased definitions. Impacts to TSCA section 4 and 6 fee collections are unlikely as EPA expects that consortia will ensure that the full fee amount is remitted regardless of the proportion of small businesses participating in the consortia. In the supplemental analysis EPA estimated the impact on fees if the revenue loss is recouped by allocating it proportionally among the proposed TSCA section 5 general fees. In this case, in order to recoup the entire amount, the general fee for PMN/ MCAN/SNUN would increase by $413, from $16,000 to a new fee of $16,413, and the general fee for Exemptions would increase by $122, from $4,700 to a new fee of $4,822. If rounding to the nearest $100, this results in new fees of $16,400 and $4,800, respectively, with VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:31 Apr 23, 2018 Jkt 244001 93% ($196,000) of the $211,000 fee revenue deficit recovered. EPA requests comments on this approach of ensuring that EPA continues to collect 25% of applicable Agency costs. Comments on this supplemental analysis document should be submitted to the docket for the proposed rule. In addition, in order to give interested parties the opportunity to consider this additional analysis and prepare meaningful comments, EPA is hereby extending the comment period, which is set to end on April 27, 2018, until May 24, 2018. List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 700 Chemicals, Environmental protection, Hazardous substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, User fees. 40 CFR Part 720 Chemicals, Environmental protection, Hazardous substances, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 40 CFR Part 723 Chemicals, Environmental protection, Hazardous substances, Phosphate, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 40 CFR Part 725 Administrative practice and procedure, Chemicals, Environmental protection, Hazardous substances, Imports, Labeling, Occupational safety and health, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 40 CFR Part 790 Administrative practice and procedure, Chemicals, Confidential business information, Environmental protection, Hazardous substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 40 CFR Part 791 Administrative practice and procedure, Chemicals, Environmental protection, Hazardous substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: April 10, 2018. Charlotte Bertrand, Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. [FR Doc. 2018–08427 Filed 4–23–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 17783 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 42 CFR Part 88 [NIOSH Docket 094] World Trade Center Health Program; Petition 018—Hypertension; Finding of Insufficient Evidence Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, HHS. ACTION: Denial of petition for addition of a health condition. AGENCY: On January 5, 2018, the Administrator of the World Trade Center (WTC) Health Program received a petition (Petition 018) to add hypertension (high blood pressure) to the List of WTC-Related Health Conditions (List). Upon reviewing the scientific and medical literature, including information provided by the petitioner, the Administrator has determined that the available evidence does not have the potential to provide a basis for a decision on whether to add hypertension to the List. The Administrator also finds that insufficient evidence exists to request a recommendation of the WTC Health Program Scientific/Technical Advisory Committee (STAC), to publish a proposed rule, or to publish a determination not to publish a proposed rule. DATES: The Administrator of the WTC Health Program is denying this petition for the addition of a health condition as of April 24, 2018. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rachel Weiss, Program Analyst, 1090 Tusculum Avenue, MS: C–48, Cincinnati, OH 45226; telephone (855) 818–1629 (this is a toll-free number); email NIOSHregs@cdc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: Table of Contents A. WTC Health Program Statutory Authority B. Procedures for Evaluating a Petition C. Petition 018 D. Review of Scientific and Medical Information and Administrator Determination E. Administrator’s Final Decision on Whether To Propose the Addition of Hypertension to the List F. Approval To Submit Document to the Office of the Federal Register A. WTC Health Program Statutory Authority Title I of the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111–347, as amended by Pub. L. 114–113), added Title XXXIII to the E:\FR\FM\24APP1.SGM 24APP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 24, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17782-17783]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-08427]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 700, 720, 723, 725, 790, and 791

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0401; FRL-9976-74]
RIN 2070-AK27


User Fees for the Administration of the Toxic Substances Control 
Act (TSCA)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; availability of supplemental information and 
extension of comment period.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is extending the comment period for 30 days and is 
providing notice that EPA has added a supplemental analysis, titled 
``Supplemental Analysis of Alternative Small Business Size Standard 
Definitions and their Effect on TSCA User Fee Collection'', to the 
rulemaking docket for the proposed rule that published in the Federal 
Register on February 26, 2018. The supplemental analysis provides 
additional estimates for the impact of setting the small business 
definition based on an employee-based threshold.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 24, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification 
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0401, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit 
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business 
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted 
by statute.
     Mail: Document Control Office (7407M), Office of Pollution 
Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand 
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the 
instructions at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along 
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
    For technical information contact: Mark Hartman, Immediate Office, 
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection 
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone 
number: (202) 564-3810; email address: [email protected].
    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 
422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202) 
554-1404; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Executive Summary

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. This action may 
be of particular interest to anyone who manufactures (including 
imports), distributes in commerce, or processes a chemical substance 
(or any combination of such activities) or submits or is required to 
submit information to the EPA under TSCA sections 4 or 5 or anyone who 
manufactures a chemical substance that is the subject of a risk 
evaluation under TSCA section 6(b). The following list of North 
American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes is not intended 
to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help readers determine 
whether this document applies to them. Potentially affected entities 
may include, but are not limited to, companies found in major NAICS 
groups:
     Chemical Manufacturers (NAICS code 325),
     Petroleum and Coal Products (NAICS code 324), and
     Chemical, Petroleum and Merchant Wholesalers (NAICS code 
424).

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to the EPA 
through regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the 
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or 
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as 
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the 
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as 
CBI, information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance 
with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. A copy of the comment that 
does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for 
inclusion in the public docket.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing, and submitting 
your comments, see the commenting tips at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

II. What action is the Agency taking?

    In the Federal Register of February 26, 2018 (83 FR 8212) (FRL-
9974-31), EPA proposed to establish and collect fees from certain 
manufacturers (including importers) and processors to defray some of 
the Agency costs related to activities under TSCA sections 4, 5, 6 and 
14. EPA also proposed to revise the size standard used to identify 
businesses that can qualify as a ``small business concern'' under TSCA 
for the purposes of fee collection. A regulatory definition for a small 
business for a submission under TSCA section 5 was promulgated in 1988 
and is based on the annual sales value of the business's parent 
company. 40 CFR 700.43 currently states: ``Small business concern means 
any person whose total annual sales in the person's fiscal year 
preceding the date of the submission of the applicable section 5 
notice, when combined with those of the parent company (if any), are 
less than $40 million.'' EPA proposed several changes to this 
definition. Consistent with the definition of small manufacturer or 
importer at 40 CFR 704.3,
    EPA proposed to increase the current revenue threshold of $40 
million using the Producer Price Index (PPI) for Chemicals and Allied 
Products, as compiled by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (Data 
series WPU06 at https://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/srgatet.). Using a base 
year of 1988 and inflating to 2015 dollars resulted in a value of 
approximately $91 million.
    EPA also proposed to change the time frame over which annual sales 
values are used when accounting for a business's revenue. Instead of 
using just one year preceding the date of submission, the Agency is 
proposing to average annual sales values over the three years preceding 
the submission. EPA proposed to apply this updated definition--adjusted 
for inflation and averaging sales revenue over three years--to not only 
TSCA section 5 submissions, but also to TSCA sections 4 and 6 
submissions as well.
    Pursuant to Executive Order 12866, EPA submitted to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) an economic analysis of the potential costs 
and benefits associated with the proposed rulemaking. The Agency has 
since completed supplemental analysis that estimates the impact of 
setting the

[[Page 17783]]

small business definition based on an employee-based threshold. 
Specifically, EPA estimated the impact when the small business 
definition is set using the following: (a) A fixed employee-based 
threshold that defines small businesses as those firms with 500 or 
fewer employees, and (b) the thresholds set by the Small Business 
Administration, which vary by industry sector. A copy of the analysis, 
titled ``Supplemental Analysis of Alternative Small Business Size 
Standard Definitions and their Effect on TSCA User Fee Collection'', is 
now available in the docket for this action (EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0401).
    EPA requests comment on this analysis and whether an employee-based 
size standard would be more appropriate than a receipts-based size 
standard and what that employee level should be; whether the size 
standard, be it receipts-based or employee-based, should vary from 
industry to industry to reflect differences among the impacted 
industries; and what other factors and data sources the Agency should 
consider, besides inflation, when developing the size standard to 
qualify for reduced fee amounts. The supplemental analysis estimates 
the impact on fee amounts should an employee-based size standard be 
used to determine eligibility for reduced fees. In order to ensure that 
EPA meets the statutory requirement that fees are sufficient to defray 
25% of the estimated Agency costs, EPA would need to recoup the revenue 
loss resulting from moving to one of the two employee-based small 
business definitions presented in the analysis by increasing the TSCA 
section 5 proposed general industry fees. The revenue losses would 
likely arise from TSCA section 5 submissions, given that EPA estimates 
more businesses would qualify for the lower fee levels under the 
employee-based definitions. Impacts to TSCA section 4 and 6 fee 
collections are unlikely as EPA expects that consortia will ensure that 
the full fee amount is remitted regardless of the proportion of small 
businesses participating in the consortia. In the supplemental analysis 
EPA estimated the impact on fees if the revenue loss is recouped by 
allocating it proportionally among the proposed TSCA section 5 general 
fees. In this case, in order to recoup the entire amount, the general 
fee for PMN/MCAN/SNUN would increase by $413, from $16,000 to a new fee 
of $16,413, and the general fee for Exemptions would increase by $122, 
from $4,700 to a new fee of $4,822. If rounding to the nearest $100, 
this results in new fees of $16,400 and $4,800, respectively, with 93% 
($196,000) of the $211,000 fee revenue deficit recovered. EPA requests 
comments on this approach of ensuring that EPA continues to collect 25% 
of applicable Agency costs.
    Comments on this supplemental analysis document should be submitted 
to the docket for the proposed rule. In addition, in order to give 
interested parties the opportunity to consider this additional analysis 
and prepare meaningful comments, EPA is hereby extending the comment 
period, which is set to end on April 27, 2018, until May 24, 2018.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 700

    Chemicals, Environmental protection, Hazardous substances, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, User fees.

40 CFR Part 720

    Chemicals, Environmental protection, Hazardous substances, Imports, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 723

    Chemicals, Environmental protection, Hazardous substances, 
Phosphate, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 725

    Administrative practice and procedure, Chemicals, Environmental 
protection, Hazardous substances, Imports, Labeling, Occupational 
safety and health, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 790

    Administrative practice and procedure, Chemicals, Confidential 
business information, Environmental protection, Hazardous substances, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 791

    Administrative practice and procedure, Chemicals, Environmental 
protection, Hazardous substances, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    Dated: April 10, 2018.
Charlotte Bertrand,
Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical 
Safety and Pollution Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2018-08427 Filed 4-23-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.