Asbestos; Significant New Use Rule, 26922-26933 [2018-12513]
Download as PDF
26922
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules
Congress, through OMB, explanations
when the Federal agency decides not to
use available and applicable voluntary
consensus standards. This authorization
does not involve technical standards.
Therefore, EPA is not considering the
use of any voluntary consensus
standards.
10. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801–808, 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 to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report
containing this document 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 in the
Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is
published in the Federal Register. This
action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined
by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information,
Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste
transportation, Indian lands,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Jkt 244001
Dated: May 2, 2018.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA Region III.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
11. The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801–808
17:25 Jun 08, 2018
Authority: This proposed action is issued
under the authority of sections 2002(a), 3006
and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act,
as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b).
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 721
[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2018–0159; FRL–9978–76]
RIN 2070–AK45
Asbestos; Significant New Use Rule
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
Under the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA), EPA is proposing a
significant new use rule (SNUR) for
asbestos as defined under the Asbestos
Hazard Emergency Response Act. The
proposed significant new use of asbestos
(including as part of an article) is
manufacturing (including importing) or
processing for certain uses identified by
EPA as no longer ongoing. The Agency
has found no information indicating
that the following uses are ongoing, and
therefore, the following uses are subject
to this proposed SNUR: Adhesives,
sealants, and roof and non-roof coatings;
arc chutes; beater-add gaskets; extruded
sealant tape and other tape; filler for
acetylene cylinders; high-grade
electrical paper; millboard; missile
liner; pipeline wrap; reinforced plastics;
roofing felt; separators in fuel cells and
batteries; vinyl-asbestos floor tile; and
any other building material (other than
cement). Persons subject to the SNUR
would be required to notify EPA at least
90 days before commencing any
manufacturing (including importing) or
processing of asbestos (including as part
of an article) for a significant new use.
The required notification initiates EPA’s
evaluation of the conditions of use
associated with the intended use within
the applicable review period.
Manufacturing (including importing)
and processing (including as part of an
article) for the significant new use may
not commence until EPA has conducted
a review of the notice, made an
appropriate determination on the notice,
and taken such actions as are required
in association with that determination.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Comments must be received on
or before August 10, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2018–0159, 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.
DATES:
[FR Doc. 2018–12507 Filed 6–8–18; 8:45 am]
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) establishes Federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
Federal agencies, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the United States. EPA
has determined that this authorization
will not have disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority or
low-income populations. This
authorization does not affect the level of
protection provided to human health or
the environment because this document
authorizes pre-existing State rules
which are equivalent to and no less
stringent than existing Federal
requirements.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For technical information contact:
Robert Courtnage, National Program
Chemicals Division (Mail Code 7404T),
Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone
number: (202) 566–1081; email address:
courtnage.robert@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. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you manufacture
(including import), process, or
distribute in commerce asbestos as
defined by TSCA Title II, Section 202
(15 U.S.C. 2642) (including as part of an
article). The following list of North
American Industrial 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:
• Construction (NAICS code 23)
• Manufacturing (NAICS codes 31–
33)
• Wholesale Trade (NAICS code 42)
E:\FR\FM\11JNP1.SGM
11JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
• Transportation (NAICS code 48)
This action may also affect certain
entities through pre-existing import
certification and export notification
rules under TSCA (15 U.S.C.2601 et
seq.). Persons who import or process
any chemical substance governed by a
final SNUR are subject to the TSCA
section 13 (15 U.S.C. 2612) import
certification requirements and the
corresponding regulations at 19 CFR
12.118 through 12.127 (see also 19 CFR
127.28). Those persons must certify that
the shipment of the chemical substance
complies with all applicable rules and
orders under TSCA, including any
SNUR requirements. The EPA policy in
support of import certification appears
at 40 CFR part 707, subpart B.
In addition, asbestos, as defined in
this proposed rule, is already subject to
TSCA section 6(a) (40 CFR part 763,
subparts G and I) rules that trigger the
export notification provisions of TSCA
section 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611(b); see also
40 CFR 721.20). Any person who
exports or intends to export asbestos
must comply with the export
notification requirements in 40 CFR part
707, subpart D; however, although EPA
is proposing to make inapplicable the
exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f) for
persons who import or process any
asbestos as part of an article in a
category listed in Table 2, the Agency is
not proposing to require export
notification for articles containing
asbestos.
If you have any questions regarding
the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the technical
information contact listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. What is the Agency’s authority for
taking this action?
Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA (15 U.S.C.
2604(a)(2)) authorizes EPA to determine
that a use of a chemical substance is a
‘‘significant new use.’’ EPA must make
this determination by rule after
considering all relevant factors,
including those listed in TSCA section
5(a)(2) (see Unit IV). Once EPA
determines that a use of a chemical
substance is a significant new use,
TSCA section 5(a)(1) requires persons to
submit a significant new use notice
(SNUN) to EPA at least 90 days before
they manufacture (including import) or
process the chemical substance for that
use (15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(1)(B)(i)). TSCA
further prohibits such manufacturing
(including importing) or processing
from commencing until EPA has
conducted a review of the notice, made
an appropriate determination on the
notice, and taken such actions as are
required in association with that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:25 Jun 08, 2018
Jkt 244001
determination (15 U.S.C.
2604(a)(1)(B)(ii)). As described in Unit
V., the general SNUR provisions are
found at 40 CFR part 721, subpart A.
C. What action is the Agency taking?
EPA is proposing a SNUR for
asbestos, using the definition in TSCA
Title II, Section 202, which defines
asbestos as the ‘‘asbestiform varieties of
six fiber types—chrysotile (serpentine),
crocidolite (riebeckite), amosite
(cummingtonite-grunerite),
anthophyllite, tremolite or actinolite.’’
The proposed significant new use of
asbestos (including as part of an article)
is manufacturing (including importing)
or processing for certain uses no longer
ongoing. The Agency found no
information indicating that the
following uses are ongoing, and
therefore, the following uses are subject
to this proposed SNUR: Adhesives,
sealants, and roof and non-roof coatings;
arc chutes; beater-add gaskets; extruded
sealant tape and other tape; filler for
acetylene cylinders; high-grade
electrical paper; millboard; missile
liner; pipeline wrap; reinforced plastics;
roofing felt; separators in fuel cells and
batteries; vinyl-asbestos floor tile; and
any other building material (other than
cement).
The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical
Safety for the 21st Century Act (Pub. L.
114–182, 130 Stat. 448) amended TSCA
in June 2016. The new law includes
statutory requirements related to the
risk evaluations of conditions of use for
existing chemicals. Based on the 2014
update of EPA’s TSCA Work Plan for
Chemical Assessments, in December of
2016, EPA designated asbestos as one of
the first 10 chemical substances subject
to the Agency’s initial chemical risk
evaluations (81 FR 91927), as required
by TSCA section 6(b)(2)(A) (15 U.S.C.
2605(b)(2)(A)).
EPA is separately conducting a risk
evaluation of asbestos under its
conditions of use, pursuant to TSCA
section 6(b)(4)(A). Through scoping and
subsequent research for the asbestos risk
evaluation, EPA identified several
conditions of use of asbestos to include
in the risk evaluation. Those include
imported raw bulk chrysotile asbestos
for the fabrication of diaphragms for use
in chlorine and sodium hydroxide
production and several imported
chrysotile asbestos-containing materials,
including sheet gaskets for use in
titanium dioxide chemical production,
brake blocks for use in oil drilling,
aftermarket automotive brakes/linings
and other vehicle friction products,
other gaskets and packing, cement
products, and woven products. This
proposed significant new rule would
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
26923
not identify as significant new uses
those uses that EPA believes are
currently ongoing. EPA is requesting
public comment on this proposal and
welcomes specific and verifiable
documentation of any ongoing uses not
identified by the Agency as well as
additional uses not identified as no
longer ongoing. This proposed SNUR
would require persons that intend to
manufacture (including import) or
process any form of asbestos as defined
under Title II of TSCA (including as part
of an article) for a significant new use,
consistent with the requirements at 40
CFR 721.25, to notify EPA at least 90
days before commencing such
manufacturing (including importing) or
processing. This proposed SNUR would
preclude the commencement of such
manufacturing (including importing) or
processing until EPA has conducted a
review of the notice, made an
appropriate determination on the notice,
and taken such actions as are required
in association with that determination.
D. Why is the Agency taking this action?
This proposed SNUR is necessary to
ensure that EPA receives timely advance
notice of any future manufacturing
(including importing) or processing of
asbestos (including as part of an article)
for new uses that may produce changes
in human and environmental exposures,
and to ensure that an appropriate
determination (relevant to the risks
associated with such manufacturing
(including importing), processing, and
use) has been issued prior to the
commencement of such manufacturing
(including importing) or processing.
Today’s action is furthermore necessary
to ensure that manufacturing (including
importing) or processing for the
significant new use cannot proceed
until EPA has responded to the
circumstances by taking the required
actions under Sections 5(e) or 5(f) of
TSCA in the event that EPA determines
any of the following: (1) That the
significant new use presents an
unreasonable risk under the conditions
of use (without consideration of costs or
other non-risk factors, and including an
unreasonable risk to a potentially
exposed or susceptible subpopulation
identified as relevant by EPA); (2) that
the information available to EPA is
insufficient to permit a reasoned
evaluation of the health and
environmental effects of the significant
new use; (3) that, in the absence of
sufficient information, the
manufacturing (including importing),
processing, distribution in commerce,
use, or disposal of the substance, or any
combination of such activities, may
present an unreasonable risk (without
E:\FR\FM\11JNP1.SGM
11JNP1
26924
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
consideration of costs or other non-risk
factors, and including an unreasonable
risk to a potentially exposed or
susceptible subpopulation identified as
relevant by EPA); or (4) that there is
substantial production and sufficient
potential for environmental release or
human exposure (as defined in TSCA
section 5(a)(3)(B)(ii)(II)).
There is a strong causal association
between asbestos exposure and lung
cancer and mesotheliomas (tumors
arising from the thin membranes that
line the chest (thoracic) and abdominal
cavities and surround internal organs)
(Ref. 1; Ref. 2; Ref. 3; Ref. 4; Ref. 5; Ref.
6). In addition, other cancers, as well as
non-cancer effects, such as respiratory
and immune effects, have been
associated with asbestos exposure (Ref.
7).
Agency research conducted in
support of the TSCA risk evaluation of
asbestos revealed that the use of
asbestos has declined dramatically in
the United States since the 1970s when
asbestos use was at its peak. EPA is
taking action in this proposed rule to
ensure that EPA receives timely advance
notice and makes an appropriate
determination prior to the
commencement of manufacturing
(including importing) or processing for
any significant new use of asbestos
(including as part of an article) as
identified in Table 2. The rationale and
objectives for this proposed SNUR are
explained in detail in Unit III.
E. What are the estimated incremental
impacts of this action?
EPA has evaluated the potential costs
of establishing SNUR reporting
requirements for potential
manufacturers (including importers)
and processors of the chemical
substance included in this proposed
rule. This Economic Analysis (Ref. 8),
which is available in the docket, is
discussed in Unit IX. and is briefly
summarized here.
In the event that a SNUN is
submitted, costs are estimated to be less
than $10,000 per SNUN submission for
large business submitters and $8,000 for
small business submitters. In addition,
for persons exporting a substance that is
the subject of a SNUR, a one-time notice
to EPA must be provided for the first
export or intended export to a particular
country, which is estimated to be
approximately $96 per notification.
However, asbestos is already subject to
TSCA section 6(a) rules (40 CFR part
763, subparts G and I) that trigger the
export notification provisions of TSCA
section 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611(b); see also
40 CFR 721.20), and the Agency is not
proposing to require export notifications
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:25 Jun 08, 2018
Jkt 244001
for articles containing asbestos as
articles are generally excluded from the
TSCA section 12(b) export notification
requirements. Therefore, EPA assumes
no additional costs under TSCA section
12(b) for this proposed rule.
The proposed rule may also affect
firms that plan to import or process
articles that may be subject to the
SNUR. Although there are no specific
requirements in the rule for these firms,
they may choose to undertake some
activity to assure themselves they are
not undertaking a new use. In the
accompanying Economic Analysis for
this proposed SNUR (Ref. 8), example
steps (and their respective costs) that an
importer or processor might take to
identify asbestos in articles are
provided. These steps can include
gathering information through
agreements with suppliers, declarations
through databases or surveys, or use of
a third-party certification system.
Additionally, importers may require
suppliers to provide certificates of
testing analysis of the products or
perform their own laboratory testing of
certain articles. EPA is unable to
predict, however, what, if any,
particular steps an importer might take;
thus, potential total costs were not
estimated.
II. Chemical Substances Subject to This
Proposed Rule and Associated
Background Information
A. What chemicals are included in the
proposed SNUR?
This proposed SNUR applies to
asbestos, using the definition in TSCA
Title II (added to TSCA in 1986),
Section 202, which defines asbestos as
the ‘‘asbestiform varieties of six fiber
types—chrysotile (serpentine),
crocidolite (riebeckite), amosite
(cummingtonite-grunerite),
anthophyllite, tremolite or actinolite.’’
This proposed SNUR Applies to the
manufacturing (including importing) or
processing of asbestos (including as part
of an article) for certain uses no longer
ongoing. EPA found no information
indicating that the following uses are
ongoing, and therefore, the following
uses are subject to this proposed SNUR:
Adhesives, sealants, and roof and nonroof coatings; arc chutes; beater-add
gaskets; extruded sealant tape and other
tape; filler for acetylene cylinders; highgrade electrical paper; millboard;
missile liner; pipeline wrap; reinforced
plastics; roofing felt; separators in fuel
cells and batteries; vinyl-asbestos floor
tile; and any other building material
(other than cement). Under this
proposed SNUR, the exemption at 40
CFR 721.45(f) would not apply to
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
persons who import or process asbestos
as part of an article (which includes as
a component of an article) because there
is reasonable potential for exposure to
asbestos if the substance is incorporated
into articles and then imported or
processed. However, in accordance with
the impurity exclusion at 40 CFR
721.45(d), this proposed significant new
use rule would not apply to persons
who manufacture (including import) or
process asbestos (including as part of an
article) only as an impurity.
B. What are the production volumes and
uses of asbestos?
Asbestos has not been mined or
otherwise produced in the United States
since 2002; therefore, any new raw bulk
asbestos used in the United States is
imported. According to the U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS),
approximately 300 metric tons of raw
bulk asbestos was imported into the
United States in 2017 (Ref. 9).
Chrysotile is the only form of raw bulk
asbestos currently imported, and the
chlor-alkali industry is the only known
importer (Ref. 9). EPA did not identify
any domestic entity that uses raw bulk
asbestos other than the chlor-alkali
industry, which uses chrysotile asbestos
to fabricate diaphragms for use in
chlorine and sodium hydroxide
production.
In an effort to identify national import
volumes and conditions of use for the
asbestos risk evaluation under TSCA
section 6(b)(4)(A), EPA searched a
number of available data sources
including EPA’s Chemical Data
Reporting (CDR) database, USGS’s
Mineral Commodities Summary and the
Minerals Yearbook, the U.S.
International Trade Commission’s
Dataweb, the U.S. Customs and Border
Protection’s Automated Commercial
Environment (ACE) System, and the Use
and Market Profile for Asbestos (EPA–
HQ–OPPT–2016–0736–0085). Based on
this search, EPA published a
preliminary list of information and
sources related to asbestos conditions of
use (see Preliminary Information on
Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution,
Use, and Disposal: Asbestos, EPA–HQ–
OPPT–2016–0736–0005) prior to a
February 2017 public meeting on the
scoping efforts for the risk evaluation
convened to solicit public comment.
EPA also convened meetings with
companies, associated industry groups,
chemical users and other stakeholders
to aid in identifying conditions of use
and verifying conditions of use
identified by EPA. On June 22, 2017,
EPA published the Scope of the Risk
Evaluation for Asbestos (EPA–HQ–
OPPT–2016–0736–0086), which further
E:\FR\FM\11JNP1.SGM
11JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules
provided opportunity for the public and
private sector to identify conditions of
use of asbestos in the United States.
During the public comment period for
the Preliminary Information on
Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution,
Use, and Disposal: Asbestos (EPA–HQ–
OPPT–2016–0736–0005), one company
identified the use of asbestos-containing
gaskets, which are imported, for use
during the production of titanium
dioxide. During stakeholder discussions
another company confirmed importing
and distributing brake blocks for use in
drawworks by the oil industry. EPA
believes that aftermarket automotive
brakes/linings and other vehicle friction
products, other gaskets and packing,
cement products, and woven products
containing asbestos could also be
imported, as reported by USGS (Ref. 10)
and also appear in data from ACE (Ref.
11); however, the volume of products
and the quantity of asbestos within
imported products is unknown. ACE is
not a publicly accessible database
because it contains information that is
protected under the provisions of
Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C.
552), the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a),
and the Trade Secrets Act (18 U.S.C.
1905), and the information in ACE
related to importer identity cannot be
released.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
C. What are the potential health effects
of asbestos?
Asbestos was listed as a known
human carcinogen in the National
Toxicology Program’s First Annual
Report on Carcinogens in 1980 (Ref. 1).
In 1988, EPA assessed the health
hazards and effects caused by exposure
to asbestos under the Integrated Risk
Information System (IRIS) program, and
determined that asbestos exposure can
lead to lung cancer and mesotheliomas
(tumors arising from the thin
membranes that line internal organs)
(Ref. 2). Many authorities have
established that there is causal
association between asbestos and lung
cancer and mesotheliomas (Ref. 1; Ref.
3; Ref. 4). EPA also noted in the Scope
of the Risk Evaluation for Asbestos that
there is a causal association between
exposure to asbestos and cancer of the
larynx and cancer of the ovary (Ref. 4).
There is also suggestive evidence of a
positive association between asbestos
and cancer of the pharynx (Ref. 4; Ref.
12), stomach (Ref. 3; Ref. 4), and
colorectum (Ref. 1; Ref. 3; Ref. 4; Ref.
12; Ref. 13; Ref. 14). All types of
asbestos fibers have been reported to
cause mesothelioma. (Ref. 4).
Increases in lung cancer mortality
have been reported in both workers and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:25 Jun 08, 2018
Jkt 244001
residents exposed to various asbestos
fiber types as well as fiber mixtures (Ref.
4). There is evidence in in-vitro, animal,
and human studies that asbestos is
genotoxic, meaning asbestos can damage
an organism’s genetic material (Ref. 3).
There is also evidence that asbestos
exposure is associated with adverse
respiratory system effects, such as
asbestosis and immunotoxicity (Ref. 3;
Ref. 7).
D. What are the potential routes and
sources of exposure to asbestos?
The greatest risk of exposure to
asbestos occurs when the substance is in
a friable state, meaning the fibers can be
crumbled, pulverized or reduced to a
powder under hand pressure (Ref. 3).
During use and over time, non-friable
asbestos has the potential to become
friable (Ref. 3). For example, testing has
shown that non-friable asbestoscontaining material can become friable
during use such as cutting, crumbling,
and tearing, and as a result of such use,
asbestos fibers can be released into the
air (Ref. 15). Similarly, non-friable
asbestos-containing building materials
can release fibers if disturbed during
building repair or demolition (Ref. 16).
Exposures to workers, consumers and
the general population, as well as
environmental receptors, may occur
from industrial releases and use of
asbestos-containing products. Based on
EPA’s research conducted during the
early stages of the TSCA risk evaluation,
most of the ongoing uses of asbestos
pertain to industrial and commercial
uses (Ref. 7).
The primary exposure route for
asbestos is inhalation. Asbestos fibers
can be released into the air during
processing of raw bulk asbestos and
asbestos-containing products.
Weathering and the disturbance and/or
degradation of asbestos-containing
products can also cause asbestos fibers
to be suspended in air (Ref. 3). Fibers
can then enter the lungs through
inhalation. Exposures to asbestos can
potentially occur via oral and dermal
routes; however, EPA anticipates that
the most likely exposure route is
inhalation.
III. Rationale and Objectives
A. Rationale
EPA is concerned about the potential
for adverse health effects of asbestos
based on established sound scientific
data indicating that asbestos is a known
human carcinogen. Asbestos was listed
as a human carcinogen in the National
Toxicology Program’s First Annual
Report on Carcinogens in 1980 (Ref. 1).
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
26925
Asbestos, in particular chrysotile
asbestos, has several unique properties,
including low electrical conductivity
while maintaining high tensile strength,
high friction coefficient, and high
resistance to heat (Ref. 17). These
properties made asbestos ideal for use in
friction materials (e.g., brakes),
insulation (e.g., sound, heat, and
electrical), and building materials (e.g.,
cement pipes, roofing compounds,
flooring) over the past century.
However, the use of asbestos has
declined dramatically due to health
concerns and consumer preference (Ref.
17), which has led to the elimination of
some exposure scenarios associated
with such uses. According to USGS, in
1973, national consumption, including
manufacturing/importing and
processing, of raw bulk asbestos peaked
around 800,000 metric tons and has
since fallen approximately 99 percent to
between 300 and 800 metric tons in
recent years (Ref. 9). Today, most
manufactured products in the United
States are now asbestos-free (Ref. 17).
In 1989, EPA published a final rule
Asbestos: Manufacture, Importation,
Processing, and Distribution in
Commerce Prohibitions (54 FR 29460,
July 12, 1989) (FRL–3476–2), which was
intended ‘‘to prohibit, at staged
intervals, the future manufacture,
importation, processing and distribution
in commerce of asbestos in almost all
products, as identified in the rule . . .’’
and to ‘‘reduce the unreasonable risks
presented to human health by exposure
to asbestos during activities involving
these products.’’ The 1989 final rule
applied to the asbestos product
categories identified in the Regulatory
Impact Analysis of Controls on Asbestos
and Asbestos Products, which was
conducted in support of the rule (Ref.
20). However, the ban against most of
the asbestos product categories was
overturned by the Fifth Circuit Court of
Appeals in 1991. In addition to the
asbestos products that remain banned
after the court ruling, which are
identified in Table 1 below, any new
use of asbestos was also banned. The
prohibition on any new uses of asbestos
is for uses initiated for the first time
after August 25, 1989. As a point of
clarification, in this proposed
rulemaking, a significant new use of
asbestos addresses multiple uses that
were initiated prior to August 25, 1989,
for which manufacturing and processing
are no longer ongoing in the United
States.
E:\FR\FM\11JNP1.SGM
11JNP1
26926
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—ASBESTOS CONTAINING PRODUCT CATEGORIES BANNED UNDER TSCA SECTION 6
Product category
Definition
(40 CFR 763.163)
Corrugated Paper ...........................
Corrugated paper means an asbestos-containing product made of corrugated paper, which is often cemented to a flat backing, may be laminated with foils or other materials, and has a corrugated surface.
Major applications of asbestos corrugated paper include: Thermal insulation for pipe coverings; block insulation; panel insulation in elevators; insulation in appliances; and insulation in low-pressure steam, hot
water, and process lines.
Rollboard means an asbestos-containing product made of paper that is produced in a continuous sheet, is
flexible, and is rolled to achieve a desired thickness. Asbestos rollboard consists of two sheets of asbestos paper laminated together. Major applications of this product include: Office partitioning; garage paneling; linings for stoves and electric switch boxes; and fire-proofing agent for security boxes, safes, and
files.
Commercial paper means an asbestos-containing product that is made of paper intended for use as general insulation paper or muffler paper. Major applications of commercial papers are insulation against
fire, heat transfer, and corrosion in circumstances that require a thin, but durable, barrier.
Specialty paper means an asbestos-containing product that is made of paper intended for use as filters for
beverages or other fluids or as paper fill for cooling towers. Cooling tower fill consists of asbestos paper
that is used as a cooling agent for liquids from industrial processes and air conditioning systems.
Flooring felt means an asbestos-containing product that is made of paper felt intended for use as an
underlayer for floor coverings, or to be bonded to the underside of vinyl sheet flooring.
The commercial uses of asbestos not identified in § 763.165 the manufacture, importation or processing of
which would be initiated for the first time after August 25, 1989.
Rollboard .........................................
Commercial Paper ..........................
Specialty Paper ...............................
Flooring Felt ....................................
New Uses * ......................................
* Note: A ‘‘new use’’ as defined in 40 CFR 763.163 is distinct from a significant new use per TSCA section 5(a)(2), which is explained for the
purposes of this proposed rule in Table 2.
As part of the information gathering
activity associated with the current
asbestos risk evaluation, the Agency
researched market availability for the
asbestos product categories subject to
the 1989 asbestos ban and phase-out
rule that was later overturned. EPA
identified several asbestos product
categories where manufacturing
(including importing) and processing for
the use is no longer ongoing. Through
further refinement of the Scope of the
Risk Evaluation for Asbestos, the
Agency determined that asbestoscontaining cement products (e.g., pipe,
shingles and replacement parts) are the
only condition of use of asbestos in
building materials; therefore, this
proposed SNUR also applies to all
asbestos-containing building materials
other than asbestos cement products.
These product categories and
descriptions are listed in Table 2, and
manufacturing and processing for these
product categories are significant new
uses subject to this proposed
rulemaking. The product category
descriptions are based on the product
category descriptions presented in the
Regulatory Impact Analysis of Controls
on Asbestos and Asbestos Products for
the 1989 final rule (Ref. 20) and may not
be all-encompassing.
TABLE 2—PRODUCT CATEGORIES OF PROPOSED SIGNIFICANT NEW USES OF ASBESTOS
Product category
Description of the product category
Arc Chutes ......................................
Ceramic arc chutes containing asbestos were used to guide electric arcs in motor starter units in electric
generating plants.
Asbestos fibers were incorporated within various elastomeric binders and other fillers to form the beateradd paper. These products were used extensively for internal combustion applications and for the sealing component of spiral wound gaskets. Gaskets were used to seal one compartment of a device from
another in non-dynamic applications such as engine and exhaust manifolds.
Sealant tape was made from a semi-liquid mixture of butyl rubber and asbestos. On exposure to air, the
sealant solidified forming a rubber tape about an inch wide and an eighth of an inch thick. The tape
acted as a gasket for sealing building windows, automotive windshields, and mobile home windows. It
was also used in the manufacture of parts for the aerospace industry and in the manufacture of insulated glass.
Asbestos was used to produce a sponge-like filler, which held the liquefied acetylene gas (acetone) in suspension in the steel cylinder and puled the acetone up through the tank as the gas was released
through the oxyacetylene torch. The torch was used to weld or cut metal and sometimes used as an illuminant gas. The filler also acted as an insulator that offered fire protection in case the oxidation of the
acetylene became uncontrollable.
The major use of asbestos electrical paper was insulation for high temperature, low voltage applications
such as in motors, generators, transformers, switch gears, and other heavy electrical apparatuses.
Asbestos millboard was essentially a heavy cardboard product that was used for gasketing, insulation, fireproofing, and resistance against corrosion and rot. Millboard was used in many industrial applications to
include linings in boilers, kilns, and foundries; insulation in glass tank crowns, melters, refiners, and sidewalls in the glass industry; linings for troughs and covers in the aluminum, marine, and aircraft industries; and thermal protection in circuit breakers in the electrical industry. In addition, thin millboard was
inserted between metal to produce gaskets. Commercial applications for millboard included fireproof linings for safes, dry-cleaning machines, and incinerators.
A missile liner was an asbestos and rubber compound used to insulate the outer casing of the rocket from
the intense heat generated in the rocket motor while the rocket fuel was burned. Rockets and rocket
boosters were used to propel a number of objects including military weapons and the space shuttle.
Beater-Add Gaskets ........................
Extruded Sealant Tape and Other
Tape.
Filler for Acetylene Cylinders ..........
High-Grade Electrical Paper ...........
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Millboard ..........................................
Missile Liner ....................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:25 Jun 08, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\11JNP1.SGM
11JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules
26927
TABLE 2—PRODUCT CATEGORIES OF PROPOSED SIGNIFICANT NEW USES OF ASBESTOS—Continued
Product category
Description of the product category
Adhesives, Sealants, and Roof and
Non-Roof Coatings.
The automobile industry historically used asbestos in a wide variety of adhesive, sealant, and coating applications. The aerospace industry used asbestos in extremely specialized applications such as firewall
sealants and epoxy adhesives. Non-roof coatings were used to prevent corrosion (e.g., as vehicle undercoatings and underground pipe coatings). Roof coatings were used to repair and patch roofs, seal
around projections such as chimneys and vent pipes, and bond horizontal and vertical surfaces.
Pipeline wrap was an asbestos felt product primarily used by the oil and gas industry for coating its pipelines. Asbestos pipeline wrap was also used in the coal tar enamel method of coating pipes, some
above-ground applications (such as for special piping in cooling towers), and was also used by the
chemical industry for underground hot water and steam piping.
Asbestos-reinforced plastics were used for electro-mechanical parts in the automotive and appliance industries and as high-performance plastics for the aerospace industry. Asbestos-reinforced plastic was typically a mixture of some type of plastic resin (usually phenolic or epoxy), a general filler (often chalk or
limestone), and raw asbestos fiber.
Asbestos roofing felt was single or multi-layered grade and used for built-up roofing. Asbestos was used in
roofing felts because of its dimensional stability and resistance to rot, fire, and heat.
In very specialized aerospace applications, asbestos functioned as an insulator and separator between the
negative and positive terminals of a fuel cell/battery.
Vinyl-asbestos floor tile was used in commercial, residential, and institutional buildings in heavy traffic
areas such as supermarkets, department stores, commercial plants, kitchens, and ‘‘pivot points’’—entry
ways and areas around elevators
Examples include insulation, plasters, mastics, textured paints (e.g., simulates stucco), and block filler
paints (e.g., for coating masonry).
Pipeline Wrap ..................................
Reinforced Plastics .........................
Roofing Felt .....................................
Separators in Fuel Cells and Batteries.
Vinyl-Asbestos Floor Tile ................
Any Other Building Materials (other
than cement) *.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
* Note: Not a product category described in the same terms in the Regulatory Impact Analysis; this broader product category is used generally
to describe a number of specific product categories identified during the TSCA section 6 risk evaluation process.
As part of the current asbestos risk
evaluation process, the Agency
identified conditions of use to be
considered under the TSCA risk
evaluation. Those include: Imported
raw bulk chrysotile asbestos for the
fabrication of diaphragms for use in
chlorine and sodium hydroxide
production and several imported
chrysotile asbestos-containing materials
including sheet gaskets for use in
titanium dioxide chemical production,
brake blocks for use in oil drilling,
aftermarket automotive brakes/linings
and other vehicle friction products,
other gaskets and packing, cement
products, and woven products. These
ongoing uses identified by EPA are not
among the significant new uses
identified in this proposal and therefore
would not require a significant new use
notification submission to the Agency.
EPA requests comment regarding any
ongoing uses not identified by the
Agency and welcomes specific and
verifiable documentation. EPA also
requests comment on additional uses
not identified as no longer ongoing.
In the absence of this proposed rule,
the importing or processing of asbestos
(including as part of an article) for the
significant new uses proposed in this
rule may begin at any time, without
prior notice to EPA. Thus, EPA is
concerned that commencement of the
manufacturing (including importing) or
processing for the significant new uses
of asbestos identified in Table 2 could
significantly increase the volume of
manufacturing (including importing)
and processing of asbestos as well as the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:25 Jun 08, 2018
Jkt 244001
magnitude and duration of exposure to
humans over that which would
otherwise exist currently. EPA has
preliminarily concluded that action on
this chemical substance is warranted
and therefore proposes that any
manufacturing (including importing) or
processing of asbestos (including as part
of an article), using the definition under
Title II of TSCA, for any use identified
in Table 2 would be a significant new
use.
Consistent with EPA’s past practice
for issuing SNURs under TSCA section
5(a)(2), EPA’s decision to propose a
SNUR for a particular chemical use
need not be based on an extensive
evaluation of the hazard, exposure, or
potential risk associated with that use.
If a person decides to begin
manufacturing (including importing) or
processing asbestos (including as part of
an article) for a use identified in Table
2, the notice to EPA allows the Agency
to evaluate the use according to the
specific parameters and circumstances
surrounding the conditions of use.
B. Rationale for Making Inapplicable the
Exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f) for
Persons Who Import or Process Asbestos
Chemical substances that are part of
an article may still result in exposure if
the chemical substance has certain
physical-chemical properties—as in the
case of asbestos, fibers can degrade with
use and become friable over time where
human exposures can occur leading to
increased risks for disease (Ref. 3; Ref.
15; Ref. 16). During use and over time,
non-friable asbestos has the potential to
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
become friable (Ref. 3). For example,
testing has shown that non-friable
asbestos-containing material can
become friable during use such as
cutting, crumbling, and tearing, and as
a result of such use, asbestos fibers can
be released into the air (Ref. 15).
Similarly, non-friable asbestoscontaining building materials can
release fibers if disturbed during
building repair or demolition (Ref. 16).
Therefore, EPA is proposing to make
inapplicable the exemption at 40 CFR
721.45(f) for persons who import or
process any asbestos as part of an article
for the proposed significant new uses,
which are identified in Table 2. A
person who imports or processes
asbestos (including as part of an article)
for a proposed significant new use
identified in Table 2 would be subject
to the significant new use notification
requirements in this proposed rule. No
person would be able to begin importing
or processing asbestos (including as part
of an article) for a proposed significant
new use without first submitting a
SNUN to EPA and until the Agency has
conducted a review of the notice, made
an appropriate determination on the
notice, and taken such actions as are
required in association with that
determination.
As requested in Unit XII., EPA asks
for comment on the Agency’s
understanding of ongoing uses. When
submitting a comment to the Agency,
EPA requests specific and verifiable
information that provides evidence of
ongoing uses beyond those identified in
this proposed rule.
E:\FR\FM\11JNP1.SGM
11JNP1
26928
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules
C. Objectives
Based on the considerations in Unit
III.A., EPA wants to achieve the
following objectives with regard to the
significant new use of asbestos
(including as part of an article) as
designated in this proposed rule:
1. EPA would receive notice of any
person’s intent to manufacture
(including import) or process asbestos
(including as part of an article) for the
described significant new use before
that activity begins.
2. EPA would have an opportunity to
review and evaluate data submitted in a
SNUN before the notice submitter
begins manufacturing (including
importing) or processing asbestos
(including as part of an article) for the
described significant new use.
3. EPA would be able to either
determine that the significant new use
is not likely to present an unreasonable
risk, or take necessary regulatory action
associated with any other determination
before the described significant new use
of asbestos (including as part of an
article) occurs.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
IV. Significant New Use Determination
Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA states that
EPA’s determination that a use of a
chemical substance is a significant new
use must be made after consideration of
all relevant factors including:
1. The projected volume of
manufacturing and processing of a
chemical substance.
2. The extent to which a use changes
the type or form of exposure of human
beings or the environment to a chemical
substance.
3. The extent to which a use increases
the magnitude and duration of exposure
of human beings or the environment to
a chemical substance.
4. The reasonably anticipated manner
and methods of manufacturing,
processing, distribution in commerce,
and disposal of a chemical substance.
In addition to these factors
enumerated in TSCA section 5(a)(2), the
statute authorizes EPA to consider any
other relevant factors.
Both federal and state environmental
protection agencies and occupational
safety and health organizations provide
existing regulation pertaining to certain
aspects of the manufacturing (including
importing), processing, use, and/or
disposal of asbestos in order to protect
consumers, workers, and the
environment. EPA believes the
significant new uses of asbestos
identified in Table 2 could increase the
volume of manufacturing (including
importing) and processing of asbestos,
as well as the duration and magnitude
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:25 Jun 08, 2018
Jkt 244001
of human and environmental exposure
to the substance, reverse the declining
trend of national import volumes of the
substance, and reintroduce exposure
scenarios that have become obsolete
over the past several decades. It is
imperative that EPA be notified of any
intended significant new use of asbestos
identified in Table 2 and be provided
the opportunity to evaluate such
proposed new use. Once a SNUR is
finalized, failure to notify EPA and file
a SNUN prior to manufacturing or
processing for the significant new uses
would constitute a violation of TSCA
and would be subject to penalties,
accordingly.
To determine what would constitute a
significant new use of asbestos as
discussed in this unit, EPA considered
relevant information about the toxicity
or expected toxicity of the substance,
likely human exposures and
environmental releases associated with
possible uses, and the four factors listed
in Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA. In addition
to these factors enumerated in TSCA
section 5(a)(2), the statute authorizes
EPA to consider any other relevant
factors.
The article exemption at 40 CFR
721.45(f) is based on an assumption that
people and the environment will
generally not be exposed to chemical
substances in articles (Ref. 18).
However, even when contained in an
article, asbestos can become friable over
time with use (Ref. 3; Ref. 15; Ref. 16).
Based on this understanding, upon
submission of a SNUN, EPA intends to
evaluate the potential risk of exposure
to human health and the environment
for any proposed significant new use of
asbestos (including as part of an article).
This understanding warrants making the
exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f)
inapplicable to importers or processors
of articles containing asbestos.
Considering the potential friability of
asbestos, even when incorporated in
articles, and the health risks associated
with exposure to asbestos, EPA
proposes to affirmatively find under
TSCA section 5(a)(5) that notification is
justified by the reasonable potential for
exposure to asbestos through the articles
subject to this SNUR. EPA intends to
evaluate such potential uses whether in
the form of an article or not before those
uses would begin for any associated
risks or hazards that might exist. EPA
has reason to anticipate that importing
or processing asbestos as part of an
article would create the potential for
exposure to asbestos, and that EPA
should have an opportunity to review
the intended use before such use could
occur. Persons subject to this proposed
SNUR are required to notify EPA at least
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
90 days prior to commencing
manufacturing (including importing) or
processing of the substance for the new
use. This required notification provides
EPA with the opportunity to evaluate an
intended significant new use of the
regulated chemical substance and, if
necessary, an opportunity to protect
against potential unreasonable risks.
V. Applicability of General Provisions
General provisions for SNURs appear
under 40 CFR part 721, subpart A.
These provisions describe persons
subject to the rule, recordkeeping
requirements, and exemptions to
reporting requirements.
Provisions relating to user fees appear
at 40 CFR part 700. According to 40 CFR
721.1(c), persons subject to SNURs must
comply with the same notice
requirements and EPA regulatory
procedures as submitters of
Premanufacture Notices (PMNs) under
TSCA section 5(a)(1)(A). In particular,
these requirements include the
information submission requirements of
TSCA sections 5(b) and 5(d)(1), the
exemptions authorized by TSCA
sections 5(h)(1), (h)(2), (h)(3), and (h)(5),
and the regulations at 40 CFR part 720.
Once EPA receives a SNUN, EPA must
either determine that the significant
new use is not likely to present an
unreasonable risk of injury or take such
regulatory action as is associated with
an alternative determination before the
manufacturing (including importing) or
processing for the significant new use
can commence. If EPA determines that
the significant new use is not likely to
present an unreasonable risk, EPA is
required under TSCA section 5(g) to
make public, and submit for publication
in the Federal Register, a statement of
EPA’s finding.
VI. Applicability of Rule to Uses
Occurring Before Effective Date of the
Final Rule
EPA designates June 1, 2018 (the date
of web posting of this proposed rule) as
the cutoff date for determining whether
the new use is ongoing. The objective of
EPA’s approach is to ensure that a
person cannot defeat a SNUR by
initiating a significant new use before
the effective date of the final rule. In
developing this proposed rule, EPA has
recognized that, given EPA’s general
practice of posting proposed and final
SNURs on its website a week or more
in advance of Federal Register
publication, this objective could be
thwarted even before that publication.
Persons who begin commercial
manufacturing (including importing) or
processing of the chemical substance (to
include importing or processing articles
E:\FR\FM\11JNP1.SGM
11JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
and components thereof containing the
chemical substance) for a significant
new use identified as of June 1, 2018
would have to cease any such activity
upon the effective date of the final rule.
To resume their activities, these persons
would have to first comply with all
applicable SNUR notification
requirements and wait until all TSCA
prerequisites for the commencement of
manufacturing (including importing) or
processing have been satisfied (see
Federal Register documents of April 24,
1990 (55 FR 17376) (FRL–3658–5) and
November 28, 2016 (81 FR 85472) (FRL–
9945–53) for additional information).
VII. Development and Submission of
Information
EPA recognizes that TSCA section 5
does not usually require developing
new information (e.g., generating test
data) before submission of a SNUN;
however, there is an exception:
Development of information is required
where the chemical substance subject to
the SNUR is also subject to a rule, order,
or consent agreement under TSCA
section 4 (see TSCA section 5(b)(1)).
Also pursuant to TSCA section 4(h),
which pertains to reduction of testing of
vertebrate animals, EPA encourages
consultation with the Agency on the use
of alternative test methods and
strategies (also called New Approach
Methodologies or NAMs), if available, to
generate any recommended test data.
EPA encourages dialogue with Agency
representatives to help determine how
best the submitter can meet both the
data needs and the objective of TSCA
section 4(h).
In the absence of a TSCA section 4
test rule covering the chemical
substance, persons are required to
submit only information in their
possession or control and to describe
any other information known to or
reasonably ascertainable by them (15
U.S.C. 2604(d); 40 CFR 721.25, and 40
CFR 720.50). However, as a general
matter, EPA recommends that SNUN
submitters include information that
would permit a reasoned evaluation of
risks posed by the chemical substance
during its manufacturing (including
importing), processing, use, distribution
in commerce, or disposal. EPA
encourages persons to consult with the
Agency before submitting a SNUN. As
part of this optional pre-notice
consultation, EPA would discuss
specific information it believes may be
useful in evaluating a significant new
use.
Submitting a SNUN that does not
itself include information sufficient to
permit a reasoned evaluation may
increase the likelihood that EPA will
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:25 Jun 08, 2018
Jkt 244001
either respond with a determination that
the information available to the Agency
is insufficient to permit a reasoned
evaluation of the health and
environmental effects of the significant
new use or, alternatively, that in the
absence of sufficient information, the
manufacturing (including importing),
processing, distribution in commerce,
use, or disposal of the chemical
substance may present an unreasonable
risk of injury.
SNUN submitters should be aware
that EPA will be better able to evaluate
SNUNs and define the terms of any
potentially necessary controls if the
submitter provides detailed information
on human exposure and environmental
releases that may result from the
significant new uses of the chemical
substance.
VIII. SNUN Submissions
EPA recommends that submitters
consult with the Agency prior to
submitting a SNUN to discuss what
information may be useful in evaluating
a significant new use. Discussions with
the Agency prior to submission can
afford ample time to conduct any tests
that might be helpful in evaluating risks
posed by the substance. According to 40
CFR 721.1(c), persons submitting a
SNUN must comply with the same
notice requirements and EPA regulatory
procedures as persons submitting a
PMN, including submission of test data
on health and environmental effects as
described in 40 CFR 720.50. SNUNs
must be submitted on EPA Form No.
7710–25, generated using e-PMN
software, and submitted to the Agency
in accordance with the procedures set
forth in 40 CFR 721.25 and 40 CFR
720.40. E–PMN software is available
electronically at https://www.epa.gov/
opptintr/newchems.
IX. Economic Analysis
A. SNUNs
EPA has evaluated the potential costs
of establishing SNUR reporting
requirements for potential
manufacturers (including importers)
and processors of the chemical
substance included in this proposed
rule (Ref. 8). In the event that a SNUN
is submitted, average costs are estimated
at approximately $9,937 per SNUN
submission for large business submitters
and $7,537 for small business
submitters. These estimates include the
cost to prepare and submit the SNUN,
and the payment of a user fee.
Businesses that submit a SNUN would
be subject to either a $2,500 user fee
required by 40 CFR 700.45(b)(2)(iii), or,
if they are a small business with annual
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
26929
sales of less than $40 million when
combined with those of the parent
company (if any), a reduced user fee of
$100 (40 CFR 700.45(b)(1)). On February
26, 2018, EPA proposed raising the fee
for SNUNs to $2,800 for small
businesses and $16,000 for other
businesses (83 FR 8212). Further, on
November 30, 2017, EPA determined
that revisions to the current small
business size standards for TSCA
reporting and recordkeeping
requirements are warranted (82 FR
56824). Businesses that submit a SNUN
are also estimated to incur average costs
of $67 for rule familiarization. First time
submitters will incur an average cost of
$128 for Central Data Exchange (CDX)
registration and associated activities.
Companies manufacturing, importing,
or processing asbestos or articles
containing asbestos will incur an
average cost of $80 for notifying their
customers of SNUR regulatory activities.
The costs of submitting a SNUN will
not be incurred by any company unless
a company decides to pursue a
significant new use as defined in this
proposed SNUR. Additionally, these
estimates reflect the costs and fees as
they are known at the time this rule is
promulgated. EPA’s complete economic
analysis is available in the public docket
for this proposed rule (Ref. 8).
B. Export Notification
Under Section 12(b) of TSCA and the
implementing regulations at 40 CFR part
707, subpart D, exporters must notify
EPA if they export or intend to export
a chemical substance or mixture for
which, among other things, a rule has
been proposed or promulgated under
TSCA section 5. As explained in Unit I.,
export notifications are required for
asbestos, but not for articles containing
asbestos. EPA is not proposing that
asbestos-containing articles be subject to
the export notification requirements;
therefore, EPA assumes no additional
costs under TSCA section 12(b) for this
proposed rule.
In general, for persons exporting a
substance that is the subject of a SNUR,
a one-time notice to EPA must be
provided for the first export or intended
export to a particular country. The total
costs of export notification will vary by
chemical, depending on the number of
required notifications (i.e., the number
of countries to which the chemical is
exported). While EPA is unable to make
any estimate of the likely number of
export notifications for the chemical
covered in this proposed SNUR, as
stated in the accompanying economic
analysis of this proposed SNUR, the
estimated cost of the export notification
E:\FR\FM\11JNP1.SGM
11JNP1
26930
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules
requirement on a per unit basis is
approximately $96.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
C. Import or Processing Chemical
Substances as Part of an Article
In making inapplicable the exemption
relating to persons that import or
process certain chemical substances as
part of an article, this action may affect
firms that plan to import or process
types of articles that may contain the
asbestos. Some firms have an
understanding of the contents of the
articles they import or process.
However, EPA acknowledges that
importers and processors of articles may
have varying levels of knowledge about
the chemical content of the articles that
they import or process. These parties
may need to become familiar with the
requirements of the rule. And, while not
required by the SNUR, these parties may
take additional steps to determine
whether the subject chemical substance
is part of the articles they are
considering for importing or processing.
This determination may involve
activities such as gathering information
from suppliers along the supply chain
and/or testing samples of the article
itself. Costs vary across the activities
chosen and the extent of familiarity a
firm has regarding the articles it imports
or processes. Cost ranges are presented
in the Understanding the Costs
Associated with Eliminating
Exemptions for Articles in SNURs (Ref.
19). Based on available information,
EPA believes that article importers or
processors that choose to investigate
their products would incur costs at the
lower end of the ranges presented in the
Economic Analysis. For those
companies choosing to undertake
actions to assess the composition of the
articles they import or process, EPA
expects that importers or processors
would take actions that are
commensurate with the company’s
perceived likelihood that a chemical
substance might be a part of an article
for the significant new uses subject to
this proposed rulemaking (identified in
Table 2) and the resources it has
available. Example activities and their
costs are provided in the accompanying
Economic Analysis of this proposed rule
(Ref. 8).
X. Alternatives
Before proposing this SNUR, EPA
considered the following alternative
regulatory action: Promulgate a TSCA
section 8(a) Reporting Rule.
Under a TSCA section 8(a) rule, EPA
could, among other things, generally
require persons to report information to
the Agency when they intend to
manufacture (including import) or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:25 Jun 08, 2018
Jkt 244001
process a listed chemical for a specific
use or any use. However, for asbestos,
the use of TSCA section 8(a) rather than
SNUR authority would have several
limitations. First, if EPA were to require
reporting under TSCA section 8(a)
instead of TSCA section 5(a), that action
would not ensure that EPA receives
timely advance notice of future
manufacturing (including importing) or
processing of asbestos (including as part
of an articles and components thereof)
for new uses that may produce changes
in human and environmental exposures.
Nor would action under 8(a) ensure that
an appropriate determination (relevant
to the risks of such manufacturing
(including importing) or processing) has
been issued prior to the commencement
of such manufacturing (including
importing) or processing. Furthermore, a
TSCA section 8(a) rule would not
ensure that manufacturing (including
importing) or processing for the
significant new use cannot proceed
until EPA has responded to the
circumstances by taking the required
actions under Sections 5(e) or 5(f) of
TSCA in the event that EPA determines
any of the following: (1) That the
significant new use presents an
unreasonable risk under the conditions
of use (without consideration of costs or
other non-risk factors, and including an
unreasonable risk to a potentially
exposed or susceptible subpopulation
identified as relevant by EPA); (2) that
the information available to EPA is
insufficient to permit a reasoned
evaluation of the health and
environmental effects of the significant
new use; (3) that in the absence of
sufficient information, the manufacture
(including import), processing,
distribution in commerce, use, or
disposal of the substance, or any
combination of such activities, may
present an unreasonable risk (without
consideration of costs or other non-risk
factors, and including an unreasonable
risk to a potentially exposed or
susceptible subpopulation identified as
relevant by EPA); or (4) that there is
substantial production and sufficient
potential for environmental release or
human exposure (as defined in TSCA
section 5(a)(3)(B)(ii)(II)).
In addition, EPA may not receive
important information from small
businesses, because such firms generally
are exempt from TSCA section 8(a)
reporting requirements (see TSCA
sections 8(a)(1)(A) and 8(a)(1)(B)). In
view of the level of health concerns
about asbestos if used for a proposed
significant new use, EPA believes that a
TSCA section 8(a) rule for this
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
substance would not meet EPA’s
regulatory objectives.
XI. Scientific Standards, Evidence, and
Available Information
EPA has used scientific information,
technical procedures, measures,
methods, protocols, methodologies, and
models consistent with the best
available science, as applicable. These
sources supply information relevant to
whether a particular use would be a
significant new use, based on relevant
factors including those listed under
TSCA section 5(a)(2). As noted in Unit
III., EPA’s decision to promulgate a
SNUR for a particular chemical use
need not be based on an extensive
evaluation of the hazard, exposure, or
potential risk associated with that use.
The clarity and completeness of the
data, assumptions, methods, quality
assurance, and analyses employed in
EPA’s decision are documented, as
applicable and to the extent necessary
for purposes of this proposed significant
new use rule, in Unit II. and in the
references cited throughout the
preamble of this proposed rule. EPA
recognizes, based on the available
information, that there is variability and
uncertainty in whether any particular
significant new use would actually
present an unreasonable risk. For
precisely this reason, it is appropriate to
secure a future notice and review
process for these uses, at such time as
they are known more definitively. The
extent to which the various information,
procedures, measures, methods,
protocols, methodologies or models
used in EPA’s decision have been
subject to independent verification or
peer review is adequate to justify their
use, collectively, in the record for a
significant new use rule.
XII. Request for Comment
A. Do you have comments or
information about ongoing uses?
EPA welcomes comment on all
aspects of this proposed rule. EPA based
its understanding of the use profile of
this chemical on the published
literature, the 2016 Chemical Data
Reporting submissions, market research,
review of Safety Data Sheets, and
extensive research conducted during the
early stages of the TSCA risk evaluation
for asbestos. To confirm EPA’s
understanding, the Agency is requesting
public comment on all aspects of this
proposed rule. In providing comments
on an ongoing use of asbestos, it would
be helpful to provide specific
information and documentation
sufficient for EPA to substantiate any
assertions of use.
E:\FR\FM\11JNP1.SGM
11JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules
B. What should I consider as I prepare
my comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. It is EPA’s policy
to include all comments received in the
public docket without change or further
notice to the commenter and to make
the comments available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless a
comment includes information claimed
to be CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do
not submit this information to 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 that you
mail to EPA 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, a
copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked
will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2, subpart B.
2. Tips for preparing your comments.
When preparing and submitting your
comments, see the commenting tips at
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets#tips.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
XIII. References
The following is a listing of the
documents that are specifically
referenced in this document. The
docket, EPA–HQ–OPPT–2018–0159,
includes these documents and other
information considered by EPA,
including documents that are referenced
within the documents that are included
in the docket, even if the referenced
document is not physically located in
the docket. For assistance in locating
these other documents, please consult
the technical person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
1. National Toxicology Program. (NTP, 2016).
Report on Carcinogens, Fourteenth
Edition.; Research Triangle Park, NC:
U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, Public Health Service.
Retrieved from https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/
ntp/roc/content/profiles/asbestos.pdf.
2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
(EPA, 1988). IRIS summary for asbestos
(CASRN 1332–21–4). Washington, DC:
Integrated Risk Information System.
Retrieved from https://cfpub.epa.gov/
ncea/iris/iris_documents/documents/
subst/0371_summary.pdf.
3. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry. (ATSDR, 2001). Toxicological
profile for asbestos (update). Retrieved
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:25 Jun 08, 2018
Jkt 244001
from https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/
ToxProfiles/tp.asp?id=30&tid=4.
4. International Agency for Research on
Cancer. (IARC, 2012). A review of human
carcinogens. Part C: Arsenic, metals,
fibres, and dusts [IARC Monograph].
Lyon, France: World Health
Organization. Retrieved from https://
monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/
vol100C/mono100C.pdf.
5. International Agency for Research on
Cancer. (IARC, 1977). IARC monographs
on the evaluation of carcinogenic risk of
chemicals to man: Asbestos. Lyon,
France: World Health Organization.
Retrieved from https://
monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/
vol1-42/mono14.pdf.
6. International Agency for Research on
Cancer. (IARC, 1987). Asbestos and
certain asbestos compounds [IARC
Monograph]. In IARC Monographs on the
Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to
Humans (pp. 106–116). Lyon, France.
Retrieved from https://
monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/
suppl7/index.php.
7. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
(EPA, 2017). Scope of the Risk
Evaluation for Asbestos. Retrieved from
https://www.regulations.gov/
document?D=EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-07360086.
8. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
(EPA, 2018). Economic Analysis for the
Proposed Significant New Use Rule for
Asbestos.
9. U.S. Geological Survey. (USGS, 2018).
Mineral Commodity Summaries 2018.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the
Interior. Retrieved from https://
minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/mcs/
2018/mcs2018.pdf.
10. U.S. Geological Survey. (USGS, 2017).
Mineral Commodity Summaries:
Asbestos. Retrieved from https://
minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/
commodity/asbestos/mcs-2017asbes.pdf.
11. U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
(2017). Automated Commercial
Environment System (ACE).
12. National Research Council. (NRC, 2006).
Asbestos: Selected cancers. Institute of
Medicine (US) Committee on Asbestos:
Selected Health Effects. Washington, DC:
The National Academies Press.
13. National Research Council. (NRC, 1983).
Drinking Water and Health. Washington,
DC: Safe Drinking Water Committee,
Board on Toxicology and Environmental
Health Hazards. Retrieved from https://
dx.doi.org/10.17226/326.
14. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
(EPA, 1980). Ambient water quality
criteria for asbestos [EPA Report]. (EPA/
440/5–80/022). Washington, DC.
15. Anderson, P.H. and Farino, W.J. (1982).
Analysis of Fiber Release from Certain
Asbestos Products. Draft Final Report.
Prepared by GCA Corporation for the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Retrieved from https://nepis.epa.gov/
Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/9101PBZ6.PDF?Dockey=
9101PBZ6.PDF.
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
26931
16. 40 CFR part 61, subpart M, Asbestos
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP).
17. Virta, R. (2011). Asbestos. Kirk-Othmer
Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology.
Retrieved from https://
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/
0471238961.01190205
10151209.a01.pub3/pdf.
18. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
(EPA, 1984). Significant New Uses of
Chemical Substances; Certain Chemicals.
49 FR 35014, September 5, 1984 (FRL–
2541–8).
19. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
(EPA, 2013). Understanding the Costs
Associated with Eliminating Exemptions
for Articles in SNURs. May 1, 2013.
20. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
(EPA, 1989). Regulatory Impact Analysis
of Controls on Asbestos and Asbestos
Products: Final Report: Volume III.
(5601989ICF001). Washington, DC:
Office of Toxic Substances, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.
XIV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Additional information about these
statutes and Executive Orders can be
found at https://www2.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant
regulatory action and was therefore not
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011).
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing
Regulations and Controlling Regulatory
Costs
This action is not expected to be a
regulatory action subject to Executive
Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3,
2017), because this action is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose any new
information collection burden under the
PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is
defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(b). The
information collection activities
associated with existing chemical
SNURs are already approved under
OMB control number 2070–0038 (EPA
ICR No. 1188); and the information
collection activities associated with
export notifications are already
approved under OMB control number
2070–0030 (EPA ICR No. 0795). If an
entity were to submit a SNUN to the
Agency, the burden is estimated to be
approximately 100 hours per response
E:\FR\FM\11JNP1.SGM
11JNP1
26932
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
(slightly less for submitters who have
already registered to use the electronic
submission system).
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 in Title
40 of the CFR, after appearing in the
Federal Register, are listed in 40 CFR,
part 9, and included on the related
collection instrument, or form, as
applicable.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
Pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA,
5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., I certify that
promulgation of this SNUR would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
The rationale supporting this
conclusion is as follows.
A SNUR applies to any person
(including small or large entities) who
intends to engage in any activity
described in the rule as a ‘‘significant
new use.’’ By definition of the word
‘‘new’’ and based on all information
currently available to EPA, it appears
that no small or large entities presently
engage in such activities. Since this
proposed SNUR will require a person
who intends to engage in such activity
in the future to first notify EPA by
submitting a SNUN, no economic
impact will occur unless someone files
a SNUN to pursue a significant new use
in the future or forgoes profits by
avoiding or delaying the significant new
use. Although some small entities may
decide to conduct such activities in the
future, EPA cannot presently determine
how many, if any, there may be.
However, EPA’s experience to date is
that, in response to the promulgation of
SNURs covering over 1,000 chemical
substances, the Agency receives only a
handful of notices per year. During the
six-year period from 2005–2010, only
three submitters self-identified as small
in their SNUN submissions (Ref. 8). EPA
believes the cost of submitting a SNUN
is relatively small compared to the cost
of developing and marketing a chemical
new to a firm or marketing a new use
of the chemical and that the
requirement to submit a SNUN
generally does not have a significant
economic impact.
Therefore, EPA believes that the
potential economic impact of complying
with this proposed SNUR is not
expected to be significant or adversely
impact a substantial number of small
entities. In a SNUR that published as a
final rule on August 8, 1997 (62 FR
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:25 Jun 08, 2018
Jkt 244001
42690) (FRL–5735–4), the Agency
presented its general determination that
proposed and final SNURs are not
expected to have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
Based on EPA’s experience with
proposing and finalizing SNURs, State,
local, and Tribal governments have not
been impacted by these rulemakings,
and EPA does not have any reason to
believe that any State, local, or Tribal
government would be impacted by this
rulemaking. As such, the requirements
of sections 202, 203, 204, or 205 of
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, do not
apply to this action.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action will not have federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999), because it will not have
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.
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), because it will not have any
effect on tribal governments, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and the Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997), because this action does not
address environmental health or safety
risks, and EPA interprets Executive
Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern
environmental health or safety risks that
EPA has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per
the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory
action’’ in section 2–202 of the
Executive Order.
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This action is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ as defined in Executive
Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22,
2001), because it is not likely to have
any effect on energy supply,
distribution, or use.
J. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve any
technical standards, and is therefore not
subject to considerations under section
12(d) of NTTAA, 15 U.S.C. 272 note.
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
This action will not have
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects
on minority or low-income populations
as specified in Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). This
action does not affect the level of
protection provided to human health or
the environment.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 721
Environmental protection, Asbestos,
Chemicals, Hazardous substances,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: May 31, 2018.
Tala R. Henry,
Acting Director, Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics.
Therefore, for the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Environmental Protection
Agency proposes that 40 CFR chapter I
be amended as follows:
PART 721—SIGNIFICANT NEW USES
OF CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES
1. The authority citation for part 721
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2604, 2607, and
2625(c).
2. Add § 721.11095 to subpart E to
read as follows:
■
§ 721.11095
Asbestos.
(a) Chemical substance and
significant new use subject to reporting.
(1) The chemical substance identified as
asbestos (as defined by 15 U.S.C.
2642(3) as the asbestiform varieties of
chrysotile (serpentine), crocidolite
(riebeckite), amosite (cummingtonitegrunerite), anthophyllite, tremolite or
actinolite) is subject to reporting under
this section for the significant new use
E:\FR\FM\11JNP1.SGM
11JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules
described in paragraph (a)(2) of this
section.
(2) The significant new use is:
Manufacturing (including importing) or
processing for any of the following uses:
(i) Arc chutes;
(ii) Beater-add gaskets;
(iii) Extruded sealant tape and other
tape;
(iv) Filler for acetylene cylinders;
(v) High grade electrical paper;
(vi) Millboard;
(vii) Missile liner;
(viii) Adhesives, sealants, roof and
non-roof coatings;
(ix) Pipeline wrap;
(x) Reinforced plastics;
(xi) Roofing felt;
(xii) Separators in fuel cells and
batteries;
(xiii) Vinyl-asbestos floor tile; or
(xiv) Other building products (other
than cement products).
(b) Specific requirements. (1) Section
721.45(f) does not apply to this section.
A person who intends to manufacture
(including import) or process the
substance identified in paragraph (a)(1)
of this section for the significant new
use identified in (a)(2) of this section as
part of an article is subject to the
notification provisions of § 721.25.
(2) [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2018–12513 Filed 6–8–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Table of Contents for Preamble
Coast Guard
46 CFR Parts 10, 11, and 15
[Docket No. USCG–2018–0100]
RIN 1625–AC46
Amendments to the Marine Radar
Observer Refresher Training
Regulations
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard proposes to
revise its merchant mariner
credentialing regulations to remove
obsolete portions of the radar observer
requirements and harmonize the radar
observer endorsement with the
merchant mariner credential. Under this
proposed rule, an active mariner who
serves in a relevant position for 1 year
in the previous 5 years using radar for
navigation and collision avoidance
purposes on vessels equipped with
radar, or has served as a qualified
instructor for a Coast Guard-approved
radar course at least twice within the
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:25 Jun 08, 2018
Jkt 244001
past 5 years, would not be required to
complete a Coast Guard-approved radar
refresher or re-certification course in
order to renew his or her radar observer
endorsement. This proposed rule would
not change the existing requirements for
mariners seeking an original radar
observer endorsement or mariners who
do not have either 1 year of relevant sea
service on board radar-equipped vessels
in the previous 5 years or service as a
qualified instructor for a Coast Guardapproved radar course at least twice
within the past 5 years. Elimination of
the requirement to take a radar refresher
or re-certification course every 5 years
would reduce burden on affected
mariners without impacting safety.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before July 11, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2018–0100 using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public
Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
further instructions on submitting
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
information about this document call or
email Mr. Davis Breyer, Coast Guard;
telephone 202–372–1445, email
davis.j.breyer@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
II. Abbreviations
III. Basis and Purpose
IV. Background
V. Discussion of Proposed Rule
VI. Regulatory Analyses
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Small Entities
C. Assistance for Small Entities
D. Collection of Information
E. Federalism
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
G. Taking of Private Property
H. Civil Justice Reform
I. Protection of Children
J. Indian Tribal Governments
K. Energy Effects
L. Technical Standards
M. Environment
I. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
The Coast Guard views public
participation as essential to effective
rulemaking, and will consider all
comments and material received during
the comment period. Your comment can
help shape the outcome of this
rulemaking. If you submit a comment,
please include the docket number for
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
26933
this rulemaking, indicate the specific
section of this document to which each
comment applies, and provide a reason
for each suggestion or recommendation.
We encourage you to submit
comments through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. If your material
cannot be submitted using https://
www.regulations.gov, contact the person
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this proposed rule
for alternate instructions. Documents
mentioned in this proposed rule, and all
public comments, are available in our
online docket at https://
www.regulations.gov, and can be viewed
by following that website’s instructions.
Additionally, if you go to the online
docket and sign up for email alerts, you
will be notified when comments are
posted or a final rule is published.
We accept anonymous comments. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and
the docket, visit https://
www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice.
We do not plan to hold a public
meeting but we will consider doing so
if public comments indicate that a
meeting would be helpful. We would
issue a separate Federal Register notice
to announce the date, time, and location
of such a meeting.
II. Abbreviations
BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CGAA 2015 Coast Guard Authorization Act
of 2015
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
MERPAC Merchant Marine Personnel
Advisory Committee
MMLD Merchant Mariner Licensing and
Documentation
MMC Merchant Mariner Credential
OMB Office of Management and Budget
§ Section
STCW International Convention on the
Standards of Training, Certification and
Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, as
amended
STCW Code Seafarers’ Training,
Certification and Watchkeeping Code
U.S.C. United States Code
III. Basis and Purpose
The purpose of this proposed rule is
to amend the radar observer
endorsement requirements by removing
obsolete portions and harmonizing the
expiration dates of the radar observer
endorsement and the merchant mariner
credential (MMC).
The Coast Guard is authorized to
determine and establish the experience
and professional qualifications required
E:\FR\FM\11JNP1.SGM
11JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 112 (Monday, June 11, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26922-26933]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12513]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 721
[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2018-0159; FRL-9978-76]
RIN 2070-AK45
Asbestos; Significant New Use Rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), EPA is
proposing a significant new use rule (SNUR) for asbestos as defined
under the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act. The proposed
significant new use of asbestos (including as part of an article) is
manufacturing (including importing) or processing for certain uses
identified by EPA as no longer ongoing. The Agency has found no
information indicating that the following uses are ongoing, and
therefore, the following uses are subject to this proposed SNUR:
Adhesives, sealants, and roof and non-roof coatings; arc chutes;
beater-add gaskets; extruded sealant tape and other tape; filler for
acetylene cylinders; high-grade electrical paper; millboard; missile
liner; pipeline wrap; reinforced plastics; roofing felt; separators in
fuel cells and batteries; vinyl-asbestos floor tile; and any other
building material (other than cement). Persons subject to the SNUR
would be required to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing any
manufacturing (including importing) or processing of asbestos
(including as part of an article) for a significant new use. The
required notification initiates EPA's evaluation of the conditions of
use associated with the intended use within the applicable review
period. Manufacturing (including importing) and processing (including
as part of an article) for the significant new use may not commence
until EPA has conducted a review of the notice, made an appropriate
determination on the notice, and taken such actions as are required in
association with that determination.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 10, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2018-0159, 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: Robert Courtnage, National
Program Chemicals Division (Mail Code 7404T), Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(202) 566-1081; 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. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you manufacture
(including import), process, or distribute in commerce asbestos as
defined by TSCA Title II, Section 202 (15 U.S.C. 2642) (including as
part of an article). The following list of North American Industrial
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:
Construction (NAICS code 23)
Manufacturing (NAICS codes 31-33)
Wholesale Trade (NAICS code 42)
[[Page 26923]]
Transportation (NAICS code 48)
This action may also affect certain entities through pre-existing
import certification and export notification rules under TSCA (15
U.S.C.2601 et seq.). Persons who import or process any chemical
substance governed by a final SNUR are subject to the TSCA section 13
(15 U.S.C. 2612) import certification requirements and the
corresponding regulations at 19 CFR 12.118 through 12.127 (see also 19
CFR 127.28). Those persons must certify that the shipment of the
chemical substance complies with all applicable rules and orders under
TSCA, including any SNUR requirements. The EPA policy in support of
import certification appears at 40 CFR part 707, subpart B.
In addition, asbestos, as defined in this proposed rule, is already
subject to TSCA section 6(a) (40 CFR part 763, subparts G and I) rules
that trigger the export notification provisions of TSCA section 12(b)
(15 U.S.C. 2611(b); see also 40 CFR 721.20). Any person who exports or
intends to export asbestos must comply with the export notification
requirements in 40 CFR part 707, subpart D; however, although EPA is
proposing to make inapplicable the exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f) for
persons who import or process any asbestos as part of an article in a
category listed in Table 2, the Agency is not proposing to require
export notification for articles containing asbestos.
If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this
action to a particular entity, consult the technical information
contact listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?
Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(2)) authorizes EPA to
determine that a use of a chemical substance is a ``significant new
use.'' EPA must make this determination by rule after considering all
relevant factors, including those listed in TSCA section 5(a)(2) (see
Unit IV). Once EPA determines that a use of a chemical substance is a
significant new use, TSCA section 5(a)(1) requires persons to submit a
significant new use notice (SNUN) to EPA at least 90 days before they
manufacture (including import) or process the chemical substance for
that use (15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(1)(B)(i)). TSCA further prohibits such
manufacturing (including importing) or processing from commencing until
EPA has conducted a review of the notice, made an appropriate
determination on the notice, and taken such actions as are required in
association with that determination (15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(1)(B)(ii)). As
described in Unit V., the general SNUR provisions are found at 40 CFR
part 721, subpart A.
C. What action is the Agency taking?
EPA is proposing a SNUR for asbestos, using the definition in TSCA
Title II, Section 202, which defines asbestos as the ``asbestiform
varieties of six fiber types--chrysotile (serpentine), crocidolite
(riebeckite), amosite (cummingtonite-grunerite), anthophyllite,
tremolite or actinolite.'' The proposed significant new use of asbestos
(including as part of an article) is manufacturing (including
importing) or processing for certain uses no longer ongoing. The Agency
found no information indicating that the following uses are ongoing,
and therefore, the following uses are subject to this proposed SNUR:
Adhesives, sealants, and roof and non-roof coatings; arc chutes;
beater-add gaskets; extruded sealant tape and other tape; filler for
acetylene cylinders; high-grade electrical paper; millboard; missile
liner; pipeline wrap; reinforced plastics; roofing felt; separators in
fuel cells and batteries; vinyl-asbestos floor tile; and any other
building material (other than cement).
The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act
(Pub. L. 114-182, 130 Stat. 448) amended TSCA in June 2016. The new law
includes statutory requirements related to the risk evaluations of
conditions of use for existing chemicals. Based on the 2014 update of
EPA's TSCA Work Plan for Chemical Assessments, in December of 2016, EPA
designated asbestos as one of the first 10 chemical substances subject
to the Agency's initial chemical risk evaluations (81 FR 91927), as
required by TSCA section 6(b)(2)(A) (15 U.S.C. 2605(b)(2)(A)).
EPA is separately conducting a risk evaluation of asbestos under
its conditions of use, pursuant to TSCA section 6(b)(4)(A). Through
scoping and subsequent research for the asbestos risk evaluation, EPA
identified several conditions of use of asbestos to include in the risk
evaluation. Those include imported raw bulk chrysotile asbestos for the
fabrication of diaphragms for use in chlorine and sodium hydroxide
production and several imported chrysotile asbestos-containing
materials, including sheet gaskets for use in titanium dioxide chemical
production, brake blocks for use in oil drilling, aftermarket
automotive brakes/linings and other vehicle friction products, other
gaskets and packing, cement products, and woven products. This proposed
significant new rule would not identify as significant new uses those
uses that EPA believes are currently ongoing. EPA is requesting public
comment on this proposal and welcomes specific and verifiable
documentation of any ongoing uses not identified by the Agency as well
as additional uses not identified as no longer ongoing. This proposed
SNUR would require persons that intend to manufacture (including
import) or process any form of asbestos as defined under Title II of
TSCA (including as part of an article) for a significant new use,
consistent with the requirements at 40 CFR 721.25, to notify EPA at
least 90 days before commencing such manufacturing (including
importing) or processing. This proposed SNUR would preclude the
commencement of such manufacturing (including importing) or processing
until EPA has conducted a review of the notice, made an appropriate
determination on the notice, and taken such actions as are required in
association with that determination.
D. Why is the Agency taking this action?
This proposed SNUR is necessary to ensure that EPA receives timely
advance notice of any future manufacturing (including importing) or
processing of asbestos (including as part of an article) for new uses
that may produce changes in human and environmental exposures, and to
ensure that an appropriate determination (relevant to the risks
associated with such manufacturing (including importing), processing,
and use) has been issued prior to the commencement of such
manufacturing (including importing) or processing. Today's action is
furthermore necessary to ensure that manufacturing (including
importing) or processing for the significant new use cannot proceed
until EPA has responded to the circumstances by taking the required
actions under Sections 5(e) or 5(f) of TSCA in the event that EPA
determines any of the following: (1) That the significant new use
presents an unreasonable risk under the conditions of use (without
consideration of costs or other non-risk factors, and including an
unreasonable risk to a potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation
identified as relevant by EPA); (2) that the information available to
EPA is insufficient to permit a reasoned evaluation of the health and
environmental effects of the significant new use; (3) that, in the
absence of sufficient information, the manufacturing (including
importing), processing, distribution in commerce, use, or disposal of
the substance, or any combination of such activities, may present an
unreasonable risk (without
[[Page 26924]]
consideration of costs or other non-risk factors, and including an
unreasonable risk to a potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation
identified as relevant by EPA); or (4) that there is substantial
production and sufficient potential for environmental release or human
exposure (as defined in TSCA section 5(a)(3)(B)(ii)(II)).
There is a strong causal association between asbestos exposure and
lung cancer and mesotheliomas (tumors arising from the thin membranes
that line the chest (thoracic) and abdominal cavities and surround
internal organs) (Ref. 1; Ref. 2; Ref. 3; Ref. 4; Ref. 5; Ref. 6). In
addition, other cancers, as well as non-cancer effects, such as
respiratory and immune effects, have been associated with asbestos
exposure (Ref. 7).
Agency research conducted in support of the TSCA risk evaluation of
asbestos revealed that the use of asbestos has declined dramatically in
the United States since the 1970s when asbestos use was at its peak.
EPA is taking action in this proposed rule to ensure that EPA receives
timely advance notice and makes an appropriate determination prior to
the commencement of manufacturing (including importing) or processing
for any significant new use of asbestos (including as part of an
article) as identified in Table 2. The rationale and objectives for
this proposed SNUR are explained in detail in Unit III.
E. What are the estimated incremental impacts of this action?
EPA has evaluated the potential costs of establishing SNUR
reporting requirements for potential manufacturers (including
importers) and processors of the chemical substance included in this
proposed rule. This Economic Analysis (Ref. 8), which is available in
the docket, is discussed in Unit IX. and is briefly summarized here.
In the event that a SNUN is submitted, costs are estimated to be
less than $10,000 per SNUN submission for large business submitters and
$8,000 for small business submitters. In addition, for persons
exporting a substance that is the subject of a SNUR, a one-time notice
to EPA must be provided for the first export or intended export to a
particular country, which is estimated to be approximately $96 per
notification. However, asbestos is already subject to TSCA section 6(a)
rules (40 CFR part 763, subparts G and I) that trigger the export
notification provisions of TSCA section 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611(b); see
also 40 CFR 721.20), and the Agency is not proposing to require export
notifications for articles containing asbestos as articles are
generally excluded from the TSCA section 12(b) export notification
requirements. Therefore, EPA assumes no additional costs under TSCA
section 12(b) for this proposed rule.
The proposed rule may also affect firms that plan to import or
process articles that may be subject to the SNUR. Although there are no
specific requirements in the rule for these firms, they may choose to
undertake some activity to assure themselves they are not undertaking a
new use. In the accompanying Economic Analysis for this proposed SNUR
(Ref. 8), example steps (and their respective costs) that an importer
or processor might take to identify asbestos in articles are provided.
These steps can include gathering information through agreements with
suppliers, declarations through databases or surveys, or use of a
third-party certification system. Additionally, importers may require
suppliers to provide certificates of testing analysis of the products
or perform their own laboratory testing of certain articles. EPA is
unable to predict, however, what, if any, particular steps an importer
might take; thus, potential total costs were not estimated.
II. Chemical Substances Subject to This Proposed Rule and Associated
Background Information
A. What chemicals are included in the proposed SNUR?
This proposed SNUR applies to asbestos, using the definition in
TSCA Title II (added to TSCA in 1986), Section 202, which defines
asbestos as the ``asbestiform varieties of six fiber types--chrysotile
(serpentine), crocidolite (riebeckite), amosite (cummingtonite-
grunerite), anthophyllite, tremolite or actinolite.'' This proposed
SNUR Applies to the manufacturing (including importing) or processing
of asbestos (including as part of an article) for certain uses no
longer ongoing. EPA found no information indicating that the following
uses are ongoing, and therefore, the following uses are subject to this
proposed SNUR: Adhesives, sealants, and roof and non-roof coatings; arc
chutes; beater-add gaskets; extruded sealant tape and other tape;
filler for acetylene cylinders; high-grade electrical paper; millboard;
missile liner; pipeline wrap; reinforced plastics; roofing felt;
separators in fuel cells and batteries; vinyl-asbestos floor tile; and
any other building material (other than cement). Under this proposed
SNUR, the exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f) would not apply to persons who
import or process asbestos as part of an article (which includes as a
component of an article) because there is reasonable potential for
exposure to asbestos if the substance is incorporated into articles and
then imported or processed. However, in accordance with the impurity
exclusion at 40 CFR 721.45(d), this proposed significant new use rule
would not apply to persons who manufacture (including import) or
process asbestos (including as part of an article) only as an impurity.
B. What are the production volumes and uses of asbestos?
Asbestos has not been mined or otherwise produced in the United
States since 2002; therefore, any new raw bulk asbestos used in the
United States is imported. According to the U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS), approximately 300 metric tons of raw bulk asbestos was imported
into the United States in 2017 (Ref. 9). Chrysotile is the only form of
raw bulk asbestos currently imported, and the chlor-alkali industry is
the only known importer (Ref. 9). EPA did not identify any domestic
entity that uses raw bulk asbestos other than the chlor-alkali
industry, which uses chrysotile asbestos to fabricate diaphragms for
use in chlorine and sodium hydroxide production.
In an effort to identify national import volumes and conditions of
use for the asbestos risk evaluation under TSCA section 6(b)(4)(A), EPA
searched a number of available data sources including EPA's Chemical
Data Reporting (CDR) database, USGS's Mineral Commodities Summary and
the Minerals Yearbook, the U.S. International Trade Commission's
Dataweb, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection's Automated Commercial
Environment (ACE) System, and the Use and Market Profile for Asbestos
(EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0736-0085). Based on this search, EPA published a
preliminary list of information and sources related to asbestos
conditions of use (see Preliminary Information on Manufacturing,
Processing, Distribution, Use, and Disposal: Asbestos, EPA-HQ-OPPT-
2016-0736-0005) prior to a February 2017 public meeting on the scoping
efforts for the risk evaluation convened to solicit public comment. EPA
also convened meetings with companies, associated industry groups,
chemical users and other stakeholders to aid in identifying conditions
of use and verifying conditions of use identified by EPA. On June 22,
2017, EPA published the Scope of the Risk Evaluation for Asbestos (EPA-
HQ-OPPT-2016-0736-0086), which further
[[Page 26925]]
provided opportunity for the public and private sector to identify
conditions of use of asbestos in the United States.
During the public comment period for the Preliminary Information on
Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution, Use, and Disposal: Asbestos
(EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0736-0005), one company identified the use of
asbestos-containing gaskets, which are imported, for use during the
production of titanium dioxide. During stakeholder discussions another
company confirmed importing and distributing brake blocks for use in
drawworks by the oil industry. EPA believes that aftermarket automotive
brakes/linings and other vehicle friction products, other gaskets and
packing, cement products, and woven products containing asbestos could
also be imported, as reported by USGS (Ref. 10) and also appear in data
from ACE (Ref. 11); however, the volume of products and the quantity of
asbestos within imported products is unknown. ACE is not a publicly
accessible database because it contains information that is protected
under the provisions of Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552), the
Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a), and the Trade Secrets Act (18 U.S.C.
1905), and the information in ACE related to importer identity cannot
be released.
C. What are the potential health effects of asbestos?
Asbestos was listed as a known human carcinogen in the National
Toxicology Program's First Annual Report on Carcinogens in 1980 (Ref.
1). In 1988, EPA assessed the health hazards and effects caused by
exposure to asbestos under the Integrated Risk Information System
(IRIS) program, and determined that asbestos exposure can lead to lung
cancer and mesotheliomas (tumors arising from the thin membranes that
line internal organs) (Ref. 2). Many authorities have established that
there is causal association between asbestos and lung cancer and
mesotheliomas (Ref. 1; Ref. 3; Ref. 4). EPA also noted in the Scope of
the Risk Evaluation for Asbestos that there is a causal association
between exposure to asbestos and cancer of the larynx and cancer of the
ovary (Ref. 4). There is also suggestive evidence of a positive
association between asbestos and cancer of the pharynx (Ref. 4; Ref.
12), stomach (Ref. 3; Ref. 4), and colorectum (Ref. 1; Ref. 3; Ref. 4;
Ref. 12; Ref. 13; Ref. 14). All types of asbestos fibers have been
reported to cause mesothelioma. (Ref. 4).
Increases in lung cancer mortality have been reported in both
workers and residents exposed to various asbestos fiber types as well
as fiber mixtures (Ref. 4). There is evidence in in-vitro, animal, and
human studies that asbestos is genotoxic, meaning asbestos can damage
an organism's genetic material (Ref. 3). There is also evidence that
asbestos exposure is associated with adverse respiratory system
effects, such as asbestosis and immunotoxicity (Ref. 3; Ref. 7).
D. What are the potential routes and sources of exposure to asbestos?
The greatest risk of exposure to asbestos occurs when the substance
is in a friable state, meaning the fibers can be crumbled, pulverized
or reduced to a powder under hand pressure (Ref. 3). During use and
over time, non-friable asbestos has the potential to become friable
(Ref. 3). For example, testing has shown that non-friable asbestos-
containing material can become friable during use such as cutting,
crumbling, and tearing, and as a result of such use, asbestos fibers
can be released into the air (Ref. 15). Similarly, non-friable
asbestos-containing building materials can release fibers if disturbed
during building repair or demolition (Ref. 16). Exposures to workers,
consumers and the general population, as well as environmental
receptors, may occur from industrial releases and use of asbestos-
containing products. Based on EPA's research conducted during the early
stages of the TSCA risk evaluation, most of the ongoing uses of
asbestos pertain to industrial and commercial uses (Ref. 7).
The primary exposure route for asbestos is inhalation. Asbestos
fibers can be released into the air during processing of raw bulk
asbestos and asbestos-containing products. Weathering and the
disturbance and/or degradation of asbestos-containing products can also
cause asbestos fibers to be suspended in air (Ref. 3). Fibers can then
enter the lungs through inhalation. Exposures to asbestos can
potentially occur via oral and dermal routes; however, EPA anticipates
that the most likely exposure route is inhalation.
III. Rationale and Objectives
A. Rationale
EPA is concerned about the potential for adverse health effects of
asbestos based on established sound scientific data indicating that
asbestos is a known human carcinogen. Asbestos was listed as a human
carcinogen in the National Toxicology Program's First Annual Report on
Carcinogens in 1980 (Ref. 1).
Asbestos, in particular chrysotile asbestos, has several unique
properties, including low electrical conductivity while maintaining
high tensile strength, high friction coefficient, and high resistance
to heat (Ref. 17). These properties made asbestos ideal for use in
friction materials (e.g., brakes), insulation (e.g., sound, heat, and
electrical), and building materials (e.g., cement pipes, roofing
compounds, flooring) over the past century. However, the use of
asbestos has declined dramatically due to health concerns and consumer
preference (Ref. 17), which has led to the elimination of some exposure
scenarios associated with such uses. According to USGS, in 1973,
national consumption, including manufacturing/importing and processing,
of raw bulk asbestos peaked around 800,000 metric tons and has since
fallen approximately 99 percent to between 300 and 800 metric tons in
recent years (Ref. 9). Today, most manufactured products in the United
States are now asbestos-free (Ref. 17).
In 1989, EPA published a final rule Asbestos: Manufacture,
Importation, Processing, and Distribution in Commerce Prohibitions (54
FR 29460, July 12, 1989) (FRL-3476-2), which was intended ``to
prohibit, at staged intervals, the future manufacture, importation,
processing and distribution in commerce of asbestos in almost all
products, as identified in the rule . . .'' and to ``reduce the
unreasonable risks presented to human health by exposure to asbestos
during activities involving these products.'' The 1989 final rule
applied to the asbestos product categories identified in the Regulatory
Impact Analysis of Controls on Asbestos and Asbestos Products, which
was conducted in support of the rule (Ref. 20). However, the ban
against most of the asbestos product categories was overturned by the
Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in 1991. In addition to the asbestos
products that remain banned after the court ruling, which are
identified in Table 1 below, any new use of asbestos was also banned.
The prohibition on any new uses of asbestos is for uses initiated for
the first time after August 25, 1989. As a point of clarification, in
this proposed rulemaking, a significant new use of asbestos addresses
multiple uses that were initiated prior to August 25, 1989, for which
manufacturing and processing are no longer ongoing in the United
States.
[[Page 26926]]
Table 1--Asbestos Containing Product Categories Banned Under TSCA
Section 6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Product category Definition (40 CFR 763.163)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corrugated Paper.................. Corrugated paper means an asbestos-
containing product made of
corrugated paper, which is often
cemented to a flat backing, may be
laminated with foils or other
materials, and has a corrugated
surface. Major applications of
asbestos corrugated paper include:
Thermal insulation for pipe
coverings; block insulation; panel
insulation in elevators; insulation
in appliances; and insulation in
low-pressure steam, hot water, and
process lines.
Rollboard......................... Rollboard means an asbestos-
containing product made of paper
that is produced in a continuous
sheet, is flexible, and is rolled
to achieve a desired thickness.
Asbestos rollboard consists of two
sheets of asbestos paper laminated
together. Major applications of
this product include: Office
partitioning; garage paneling;
linings for stoves and electric
switch boxes; and fire-proofing
agent for security boxes, safes,
and files.
Commercial Paper.................. Commercial paper means an asbestos-
containing product that is made of
paper intended for use as general
insulation paper or muffler paper.
Major applications of commercial
papers are insulation against fire,
heat transfer, and corrosion in
circumstances that require a thin,
but durable, barrier.
Specialty Paper................... Specialty paper means an asbestos-
containing product that is made of
paper intended for use as filters
for beverages or other fluids or as
paper fill for cooling towers.
Cooling tower fill consists of
asbestos paper that is used as a
cooling agent for liquids from
industrial processes and air
conditioning systems.
Flooring Felt..................... Flooring felt means an asbestos-
containing product that is made of
paper felt intended for use as an
underlayer for floor coverings, or
to be bonded to the underside of
vinyl sheet flooring.
New Uses *........................ The commercial uses of asbestos not
identified in Sec. 763.165 the
manufacture, importation or
processing of which would be
initiated for the first time after
August 25, 1989.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Note: A ``new use'' as defined in 40 CFR 763.163 is distinct from a
significant new use per TSCA section 5(a)(2), which is explained for
the purposes of this proposed rule in Table 2.
As part of the information gathering activity associated with the
current asbestos risk evaluation, the Agency researched market
availability for the asbestos product categories subject to the 1989
asbestos ban and phase-out rule that was later overturned. EPA
identified several asbestos product categories where manufacturing
(including importing) and processing for the use is no longer ongoing.
Through further refinement of the Scope of the Risk Evaluation for
Asbestos, the Agency determined that asbestos-containing cement
products (e.g., pipe, shingles and replacement parts) are the only
condition of use of asbestos in building materials; therefore, this
proposed SNUR also applies to all asbestos-containing building
materials other than asbestos cement products. These product categories
and descriptions are listed in Table 2, and manufacturing and
processing for these product categories are significant new uses
subject to this proposed rulemaking. The product category descriptions
are based on the product category descriptions presented in the
Regulatory Impact Analysis of Controls on Asbestos and Asbestos
Products for the 1989 final rule (Ref. 20) and may not be all-
encompassing.
Table 2--Product Categories of Proposed Significant New Uses of Asbestos
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Product category Description of the product category
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arc Chutes........................ Ceramic arc chutes containing
asbestos were used to guide
electric arcs in motor starter
units in electric generating
plants.
Beater-Add Gaskets................ Asbestos fibers were incorporated
within various elastomeric binders
and other fillers to form the
beater-add paper. These products
were used extensively for internal
combustion applications and for the
sealing component of spiral wound
gaskets. Gaskets were used to seal
one compartment of a device from
another in non-dynamic applications
such as engine and exhaust
manifolds.
Extruded Sealant Tape and Other Sealant tape was made from a semi-
Tape. liquid mixture of butyl rubber and
asbestos. On exposure to air, the
sealant solidified forming a rubber
tape about an inch wide and an
eighth of an inch thick. The tape
acted as a gasket for sealing
building windows, automotive
windshields, and mobile home
windows. It was also used in the
manufacture of parts for the
aerospace industry and in the
manufacture of insulated glass.
Filler for Acetylene Cylinders.... Asbestos was used to produce a
sponge-like filler, which held the
liquefied acetylene gas (acetone)
in suspension in the steel cylinder
and puled the acetone up through
the tank as the gas was released
through the oxyacetylene torch. The
torch was used to weld or cut metal
and sometimes used as an illuminant
gas. The filler also acted as an
insulator that offered fire
protection in case the oxidation of
the acetylene became
uncontrollable.
High-Grade Electrical Paper....... The major use of asbestos electrical
paper was insulation for high
temperature, low voltage
applications such as in motors,
generators, transformers, switch
gears, and other heavy electrical
apparatuses.
Millboard......................... Asbestos millboard was essentially a
heavy cardboard product that was
used for gasketing, insulation,
fireproofing, and resistance
against corrosion and rot.
Millboard was used in many
industrial applications to include
linings in boilers, kilns, and
foundries; insulation in glass tank
crowns, melters, refiners, and
sidewalls in the glass industry;
linings for troughs and covers in
the aluminum, marine, and aircraft
industries; and thermal protection
in circuit breakers in the
electrical industry. In addition,
thin millboard was inserted between
metal to produce gaskets.
Commercial applications for
millboard included fireproof
linings for safes, dry-cleaning
machines, and incinerators.
Missile Liner..................... A missile liner was an asbestos and
rubber compound used to insulate
the outer casing of the rocket from
the intense heat generated in the
rocket motor while the rocket fuel
was burned. Rockets and rocket
boosters were used to propel a
number of objects including
military weapons and the space
shuttle.
[[Page 26927]]
Adhesives, Sealants, and Roof and The automobile industry historically
Non-Roof Coatings. used asbestos in a wide variety of
adhesive, sealant, and coating
applications. The aerospace
industry used asbestos in extremely
specialized applications such as
firewall sealants and epoxy
adhesives. Non-roof coatings were
used to prevent corrosion (e.g., as
vehicle undercoatings and
underground pipe coatings). Roof
coatings were used to repair and
patch roofs, seal around
projections such as chimneys and
vent pipes, and bond horizontal and
vertical surfaces.
Pipeline Wrap..................... Pipeline wrap was an asbestos felt
product primarily used by the oil
and gas industry for coating its
pipelines. Asbestos pipeline wrap
was also used in the coal tar
enamel method of coating pipes,
some above-ground applications
(such as for special piping in
cooling towers), and was also used
by the chemical industry for
underground hot water and steam
piping.
Reinforced Plastics............... Asbestos-reinforced plastics were
used for electro-mechanical parts
in the automotive and appliance
industries and as high-performance
plastics for the aerospace
industry. Asbestos-reinforced
plastic was typically a mixture of
some type of plastic resin (usually
phenolic or epoxy), a general
filler (often chalk or limestone),
and raw asbestos fiber.
Roofing Felt...................... Asbestos roofing felt was single or
multi-layered grade and used for
built-up roofing. Asbestos was used
in roofing felts because of its
dimensional stability and
resistance to rot, fire, and heat.
Separators in Fuel Cells and In very specialized aerospace
Batteries. applications, asbestos functioned
as an insulator and separator
between the negative and positive
terminals of a fuel cell/battery.
Vinyl-Asbestos Floor Tile......... Vinyl-asbestos floor tile was used
in commercial, residential, and
institutional buildings in heavy
traffic areas such as supermarkets,
department stores, commercial
plants, kitchens, and ``pivot
points''--entry ways and areas
around elevators
Any Other Building Materials Examples include insulation,
(other than cement) *. plasters, mastics, textured paints
(e.g., simulates stucco), and block
filler paints (e.g., for coating
masonry).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Note: Not a product category described in the same terms in the
Regulatory Impact Analysis; this broader product category is used
generally to describe a number of specific product categories
identified during the TSCA section 6 risk evaluation process.
As part of the current asbestos risk evaluation process, the Agency
identified conditions of use to be considered under the TSCA risk
evaluation. Those include: Imported raw bulk chrysotile asbestos for
the fabrication of diaphragms for use in chlorine and sodium hydroxide
production and several imported chrysotile asbestos-containing
materials including sheet gaskets for use in titanium dioxide chemical
production, brake blocks for use in oil drilling, aftermarket
automotive brakes/linings and other vehicle friction products, other
gaskets and packing, cement products, and woven products. These ongoing
uses identified by EPA are not among the significant new uses
identified in this proposal and therefore would not require a
significant new use notification submission to the Agency. EPA requests
comment regarding any ongoing uses not identified by the Agency and
welcomes specific and verifiable documentation. EPA also requests
comment on additional uses not identified as no longer ongoing.
In the absence of this proposed rule, the importing or processing
of asbestos (including as part of an article) for the significant new
uses proposed in this rule may begin at any time, without prior notice
to EPA. Thus, EPA is concerned that commencement of the manufacturing
(including importing) or processing for the significant new uses of
asbestos identified in Table 2 could significantly increase the volume
of manufacturing (including importing) and processing of asbestos as
well as the magnitude and duration of exposure to humans over that
which would otherwise exist currently. EPA has preliminarily concluded
that action on this chemical substance is warranted and therefore
proposes that any manufacturing (including importing) or processing of
asbestos (including as part of an article), using the definition under
Title II of TSCA, for any use identified in Table 2 would be a
significant new use.
Consistent with EPA's past practice for issuing SNURs under TSCA
section 5(a)(2), EPA's decision to propose a SNUR for a particular
chemical use need not be based on an extensive evaluation of the
hazard, exposure, or potential risk associated with that use. If a
person decides to begin manufacturing (including importing) or
processing asbestos (including as part of an article) for a use
identified in Table 2, the notice to EPA allows the Agency to evaluate
the use according to the specific parameters and circumstances
surrounding the conditions of use.
B. Rationale for Making Inapplicable the Exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f)
for Persons Who Import or Process Asbestos
Chemical substances that are part of an article may still result in
exposure if the chemical substance has certain physical-chemical
properties--as in the case of asbestos, fibers can degrade with use and
become friable over time where human exposures can occur leading to
increased risks for disease (Ref. 3; Ref. 15; Ref. 16). During use and
over time, non-friable asbestos has the potential to become friable
(Ref. 3). For example, testing has shown that non-friable asbestos-
containing material can become friable during use such as cutting,
crumbling, and tearing, and as a result of such use, asbestos fibers
can be released into the air (Ref. 15). Similarly, non-friable
asbestos-containing building materials can release fibers if disturbed
during building repair or demolition (Ref. 16). Therefore, EPA is
proposing to make inapplicable the exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f) for
persons who import or process any asbestos as part of an article for
the proposed significant new uses, which are identified in Table 2. A
person who imports or processes asbestos (including as part of an
article) for a proposed significant new use identified in Table 2 would
be subject to the significant new use notification requirements in this
proposed rule. No person would be able to begin importing or processing
asbestos (including as part of an article) for a proposed significant
new use without first submitting a SNUN to EPA and until the Agency has
conducted a review of the notice, made an appropriate determination on
the notice, and taken such actions as are required in association with
that determination.
As requested in Unit XII., EPA asks for comment on the Agency's
understanding of ongoing uses. When submitting a comment to the Agency,
EPA requests specific and verifiable information that provides evidence
of ongoing uses beyond those identified in this proposed rule.
[[Page 26928]]
C. Objectives
Based on the considerations in Unit III.A., EPA wants to achieve
the following objectives with regard to the significant new use of
asbestos (including as part of an article) as designated in this
proposed rule:
1. EPA would receive notice of any person's intent to manufacture
(including import) or process asbestos (including as part of an
article) for the described significant new use before that activity
begins.
2. EPA would have an opportunity to review and evaluate data
submitted in a SNUN before the notice submitter begins manufacturing
(including importing) or processing asbestos (including as part of an
article) for the described significant new use.
3. EPA would be able to either determine that the significant new
use is not likely to present an unreasonable risk, or take necessary
regulatory action associated with any other determination before the
described significant new use of asbestos (including as part of an
article) occurs.
IV. Significant New Use Determination
Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA states that EPA's determination that a use
of a chemical substance is a significant new use must be made after
consideration of all relevant factors including:
1. The projected volume of manufacturing and processing of a
chemical substance.
2. The extent to which a use changes the type or form of exposure
of human beings or the environment to a chemical substance.
3. The extent to which a use increases the magnitude and duration
of exposure of human beings or the environment to a chemical substance.
4. The reasonably anticipated manner and methods of manufacturing,
processing, distribution in commerce, and disposal of a chemical
substance.
In addition to these factors enumerated in TSCA section 5(a)(2),
the statute authorizes EPA to consider any other relevant factors.
Both federal and state environmental protection agencies and
occupational safety and health organizations provide existing
regulation pertaining to certain aspects of the manufacturing
(including importing), processing, use, and/or disposal of asbestos in
order to protect consumers, workers, and the environment. EPA believes
the significant new uses of asbestos identified in Table 2 could
increase the volume of manufacturing (including importing) and
processing of asbestos, as well as the duration and magnitude of human
and environmental exposure to the substance, reverse the declining
trend of national import volumes of the substance, and reintroduce
exposure scenarios that have become obsolete over the past several
decades. It is imperative that EPA be notified of any intended
significant new use of asbestos identified in Table 2 and be provided
the opportunity to evaluate such proposed new use. Once a SNUR is
finalized, failure to notify EPA and file a SNUN prior to manufacturing
or processing for the significant new uses would constitute a violation
of TSCA and would be subject to penalties, accordingly.
To determine what would constitute a significant new use of
asbestos as discussed in this unit, EPA considered relevant information
about the toxicity or expected toxicity of the substance, likely human
exposures and environmental releases associated with possible uses, and
the four factors listed in Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA. In addition to
these factors enumerated in TSCA section 5(a)(2), the statute
authorizes EPA to consider any other relevant factors.
The article exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f) is based on an assumption
that people and the environment will generally not be exposed to
chemical substances in articles (Ref. 18). However, even when contained
in an article, asbestos can become friable over time with use (Ref. 3;
Ref. 15; Ref. 16). Based on this understanding, upon submission of a
SNUN, EPA intends to evaluate the potential risk of exposure to human
health and the environment for any proposed significant new use of
asbestos (including as part of an article). This understanding warrants
making the exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f) inapplicable to importers or
processors of articles containing asbestos. Considering the potential
friability of asbestos, even when incorporated in articles, and the
health risks associated with exposure to asbestos, EPA proposes to
affirmatively find under TSCA section 5(a)(5) that notification is
justified by the reasonable potential for exposure to asbestos through
the articles subject to this SNUR. EPA intends to evaluate such
potential uses whether in the form of an article or not before those
uses would begin for any associated risks or hazards that might exist.
EPA has reason to anticipate that importing or processing asbestos as
part of an article would create the potential for exposure to asbestos,
and that EPA should have an opportunity to review the intended use
before such use could occur. Persons subject to this proposed SNUR are
required to notify EPA at least 90 days prior to commencing
manufacturing (including importing) or processing of the substance for
the new use. This required notification provides EPA with the
opportunity to evaluate an intended significant new use of the
regulated chemical substance and, if necessary, an opportunity to
protect against potential unreasonable risks.
V. Applicability of General Provisions
General provisions for SNURs appear under 40 CFR part 721, subpart
A. These provisions describe persons subject to the rule, recordkeeping
requirements, and exemptions to reporting requirements.
Provisions relating to user fees appear at 40 CFR part 700.
According to 40 CFR 721.1(c), persons subject to SNURs must comply with
the same notice requirements and EPA regulatory procedures as
submitters of Premanufacture Notices (PMNs) under TSCA section
5(a)(1)(A). In particular, these requirements include the information
submission requirements of TSCA sections 5(b) and 5(d)(1), the
exemptions authorized by TSCA sections 5(h)(1), (h)(2), (h)(3), and
(h)(5), and the regulations at 40 CFR part 720. Once EPA receives a
SNUN, EPA must either determine that the significant new use is not
likely to present an unreasonable risk of injury or take such
regulatory action as is associated with an alternative determination
before the manufacturing (including importing) or processing for the
significant new use can commence. If EPA determines that the
significant new use is not likely to present an unreasonable risk, EPA
is required under TSCA section 5(g) to make public, and submit for
publication in the Federal Register, a statement of EPA's finding.
VI. Applicability of Rule to Uses Occurring Before Effective Date of
the Final Rule
EPA designates June 1, 2018 (the date of web posting of this
proposed rule) as the cutoff date for determining whether the new use
is ongoing. The objective of EPA's approach is to ensure that a person
cannot defeat a SNUR by initiating a significant new use before the
effective date of the final rule. In developing this proposed rule, EPA
has recognized that, given EPA's general practice of posting proposed
and final SNURs on its website a week or more in advance of Federal
Register publication, this objective could be thwarted even before that
publication.
Persons who begin commercial manufacturing (including importing) or
processing of the chemical substance (to include importing or
processing articles
[[Page 26929]]
and components thereof containing the chemical substance) for a
significant new use identified as of June 1, 2018 would have to cease
any such activity upon the effective date of the final rule. To resume
their activities, these persons would have to first comply with all
applicable SNUR notification requirements and wait until all TSCA
prerequisites for the commencement of manufacturing (including
importing) or processing have been satisfied (see Federal Register
documents of April 24, 1990 (55 FR 17376) (FRL-3658-5) and November 28,
2016 (81 FR 85472) (FRL-9945-53) for additional information).
VII. Development and Submission of Information
EPA recognizes that TSCA section 5 does not usually require
developing new information (e.g., generating test data) before
submission of a SNUN; however, there is an exception: Development of
information is required where the chemical substance subject to the
SNUR is also subject to a rule, order, or consent agreement under TSCA
section 4 (see TSCA section 5(b)(1)). Also pursuant to TSCA section
4(h), which pertains to reduction of testing of vertebrate animals, EPA
encourages consultation with the Agency on the use of alternative test
methods and strategies (also called New Approach Methodologies or
NAMs), if available, to generate any recommended test data. EPA
encourages dialogue with Agency representatives to help determine how
best the submitter can meet both the data needs and the objective of
TSCA section 4(h).
In the absence of a TSCA section 4 test rule covering the chemical
substance, persons are required to submit only information in their
possession or control and to describe any other information known to or
reasonably ascertainable by them (15 U.S.C. 2604(d); 40 CFR 721.25, and
40 CFR 720.50). However, as a general matter, EPA recommends that SNUN
submitters include information that would permit a reasoned evaluation
of risks posed by the chemical substance during its manufacturing
(including importing), processing, use, distribution in commerce, or
disposal. EPA encourages persons to consult with the Agency before
submitting a SNUN. As part of this optional pre-notice consultation,
EPA would discuss specific information it believes may be useful in
evaluating a significant new use.
Submitting a SNUN that does not itself include information
sufficient to permit a reasoned evaluation may increase the likelihood
that EPA will either respond with a determination that the information
available to the Agency is insufficient to permit a reasoned evaluation
of the health and environmental effects of the significant new use or,
alternatively, that in the absence of sufficient information, the
manufacturing (including importing), processing, distribution in
commerce, use, or disposal of the chemical substance may present an
unreasonable risk of injury.
SNUN submitters should be aware that EPA will be better able to
evaluate SNUNs and define the terms of any potentially necessary
controls if the submitter provides detailed information on human
exposure and environmental releases that may result from the
significant new uses of the chemical substance.
VIII. SNUN Submissions
EPA recommends that submitters consult with the Agency prior to
submitting a SNUN to discuss what information may be useful in
evaluating a significant new use. Discussions with the Agency prior to
submission can afford ample time to conduct any tests that might be
helpful in evaluating risks posed by the substance. According
to[emsp14]40 CFR 721.1(c), persons submitting a SNUN must comply with
the same notice requirements and EPA regulatory procedures as persons
submitting a PMN, including submission of test data on health and
environmental effects as described in 40 CFR 720.50. SNUNs must be
submitted on EPA Form No. 7710-25, generated using e-PMN software, and
submitted to the Agency in accordance with the procedures set forth in
40 CFR 721.25 and 40 CFR 720.40. E-PMN software is available
electronically at https://www.epa.gov/opptintr/newchems.
IX. Economic Analysis
A. SNUNs
EPA has evaluated the potential costs of establishing SNUR
reporting requirements for potential manufacturers (including
importers) and processors of the chemical substance included in this
proposed rule (Ref. 8). In the event that a SNUN is submitted, average
costs are estimated at approximately $9,937 per SNUN submission for
large business submitters and $7,537 for small business submitters.
These estimates include the cost to prepare and submit the SNUN, and
the payment of a user fee. Businesses that submit a SNUN would be
subject to either a $2,500 user fee required by 40 CFR
700.45(b)(2)(iii), or, if they are a small business with annual sales
of less than $40 million when combined with those of the parent company
(if any), a reduced user fee of $100 (40 CFR 700.45(b)(1)). On February
26, 2018, EPA proposed raising the fee for SNUNs to $2,800 for small
businesses and $16,000 for other businesses (83 FR 8212). Further, on
November 30, 2017, EPA determined that revisions to the current small
business size standards for TSCA reporting and recordkeeping
requirements are warranted (82 FR 56824). Businesses that submit a SNUN
are also estimated to incur average costs of $67 for rule
familiarization. First time submitters will incur an average cost of
$128 for Central Data Exchange (CDX) registration and associated
activities. Companies manufacturing, importing, or processing asbestos
or articles containing asbestos will incur an average cost of $80 for
notifying their customers of SNUR regulatory activities.
The costs of submitting a SNUN will not be incurred by any company
unless a company decides to pursue a significant new use as defined in
this proposed SNUR. Additionally, these estimates reflect the costs and
fees as they are known at the time this rule is promulgated. EPA's
complete economic analysis is available in the public docket for this
proposed rule (Ref. 8).
B. Export Notification
Under Section 12(b) of TSCA and the implementing regulations at 40
CFR part 707, subpart D, exporters must notify EPA if they export or
intend to export a chemical substance or mixture for which, among other
things, a rule has been proposed or promulgated under TSCA section 5.
As explained in Unit I., export notifications are required for
asbestos, but not for articles containing asbestos. EPA is not
proposing that asbestos-containing articles be subject to the export
notification requirements; therefore, EPA assumes no additional costs
under TSCA section 12(b) for this proposed rule.
In general, for persons exporting a substance that is the subject
of a SNUR, a one-time notice to EPA must be provided for the first
export or intended export to a particular country. The total costs of
export notification will vary by chemical, depending on the number of
required notifications (i.e., the number of countries to which the
chemical is exported). While EPA is unable to make any estimate of the
likely number of export notifications for the chemical covered in this
proposed SNUR, as stated in the accompanying economic analysis of this
proposed SNUR, the estimated cost of the export notification
[[Page 26930]]
requirement on a per unit basis is approximately $96.
C. Import or Processing Chemical Substances as Part of an Article
In making inapplicable the exemption relating to persons that
import or process certain chemical substances as part of an article,
this action may affect firms that plan to import or process types of
articles that may contain the asbestos. Some firms have an
understanding of the contents of the articles they import or process.
However, EPA acknowledges that importers and processors of articles may
have varying levels of knowledge about the chemical content of the
articles that they import or process. These parties may need to become
familiar with the requirements of the rule. And, while not required by
the SNUR, these parties may take additional steps to determine whether
the subject chemical substance is part of the articles they are
considering for importing or processing. This determination may involve
activities such as gathering information from suppliers along the
supply chain and/or testing samples of the article itself. Costs vary
across the activities chosen and the extent of familiarity a firm has
regarding the articles it imports or processes. Cost ranges are
presented in the Understanding the Costs Associated with Eliminating
Exemptions for Articles in SNURs (Ref. 19). Based on available
information, EPA believes that article importers or processors that
choose to investigate their products would incur costs at the lower end
of the ranges presented in the Economic Analysis. For those companies
choosing to undertake actions to assess the composition of the articles
they import or process, EPA expects that importers or processors would
take actions that are commensurate with the company's perceived
likelihood that a chemical substance might be a part of an article for
the significant new uses subject to this proposed rulemaking
(identified in Table 2) and the resources it has available. Example
activities and their costs are provided in the accompanying Economic
Analysis of this proposed rule (Ref. 8).
X. Alternatives
Before proposing this SNUR, EPA considered the following
alternative regulatory action: Promulgate a TSCA section 8(a) Reporting
Rule.
Under a TSCA section 8(a) rule, EPA could, among other things,
generally require persons to report information to the Agency when they
intend to manufacture (including import) or process a listed chemical
for a specific use or any use. However, for asbestos, the use of TSCA
section 8(a) rather than SNUR authority would have several limitations.
First, if EPA were to require reporting under TSCA section 8(a) instead
of TSCA section 5(a), that action would not ensure that EPA receives
timely advance notice of future manufacturing (including importing) or
processing of asbestos (including as part of an articles and components
thereof) for new uses that may produce changes in human and
environmental exposures. Nor would action under 8(a) ensure that an
appropriate determination (relevant to the risks of such manufacturing
(including importing) or processing) has been issued prior to the
commencement of such manufacturing (including importing) or processing.
Furthermore, a TSCA section 8(a) rule would not ensure that
manufacturing (including importing) or processing for the significant
new use cannot proceed until EPA has responded to the circumstances by
taking the required actions under Sections 5(e) or 5(f) of TSCA in the
event that EPA determines any of the following: (1) That the
significant new use presents an unreasonable risk under the conditions
of use (without consideration of costs or other non-risk factors, and
including an unreasonable risk to a potentially exposed or susceptible
subpopulation identified as relevant by EPA); (2) that the information
available to EPA is insufficient to permit a reasoned evaluation of the
health and environmental effects of the significant new use; (3) that
in the absence of sufficient information, the manufacture (including
import), processing, distribution in commerce, use, or disposal of the
substance, or any combination of such activities, may present an
unreasonable risk (without consideration of costs or other non-risk
factors, and including an unreasonable risk to a potentially exposed or
susceptible subpopulation identified as relevant by EPA); or (4) that
there is substantial production and sufficient potential for
environmental release or human exposure (as defined in TSCA section
5(a)(3)(B)(ii)(II)).
In addition, EPA may not receive important information from small
businesses, because such firms generally are exempt from TSCA section
8(a) reporting requirements (see TSCA sections 8(a)(1)(A) and
8(a)(1)(B)). In view of the level of health concerns about asbestos if
used for a proposed significant new use, EPA believes that a TSCA
section 8(a) rule for this substance would not meet EPA's regulatory
objectives.
XI. Scientific Standards, Evidence, and Available Information
EPA has used scientific information, technical procedures,
measures, methods, protocols, methodologies, and models consistent with
the best available science, as applicable. These sources supply
information relevant to whether a particular use would be a significant
new use, based on relevant factors including those listed under TSCA
section 5(a)(2). As noted in Unit III., EPA's decision to promulgate a
SNUR for a particular chemical use need not be based on an extensive
evaluation of the hazard, exposure, or potential risk associated with
that use.
The clarity and completeness of the data, assumptions, methods,
quality assurance, and analyses employed in EPA's decision are
documented, as applicable and to the extent necessary for purposes of
this proposed significant new use rule, in Unit II. and in the
references cited throughout the preamble of this proposed rule. EPA
recognizes, based on the available information, that there is
variability and uncertainty in whether any particular significant new
use would actually present an unreasonable risk. For precisely this
reason, it is appropriate to secure a future notice and review process
for these uses, at such time as they are known more definitively. The
extent to which the various information, procedures, measures, methods,
protocols, methodologies or models used in EPA's decision have been
subject to independent verification or peer review is adequate to
justify their use, collectively, in the record for a significant new
use rule.
XII. Request for Comment
A. Do you have comments or information about ongoing uses?
EPA welcomes comment on all aspects of this proposed rule. EPA
based its understanding of the use profile of this chemical on the
published literature, the 2016 Chemical Data Reporting submissions,
market research, review of Safety Data Sheets, and extensive research
conducted during the early stages of the TSCA risk evaluation for
asbestos. To confirm EPA's understanding, the Agency is requesting
public comment on all aspects of this proposed rule. In providing
comments on an ongoing use of asbestos, it would be helpful to provide
specific information and documentation sufficient for EPA to
substantiate any assertions of use.
[[Page 26931]]
B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. It is EPA's policy to include all comments
received in the public docket without change or further notice to the
commenter and to make the comments available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless a comment includes information claimed to be CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit
this information to 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 that you mail to EPA 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, a copy of the comment that
does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for
inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be
disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part
2, subpart B.
2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting
your comments, see the commenting tips at https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets#tips.
XIII. References
The following is a listing of the documents that are specifically
referenced in this document. The docket, EPA-HQ-OPPT-2018-0159,
includes these documents and other information considered by EPA,
including documents that are referenced within the documents that are
included in the docket, even if the referenced document is not
physically located in the docket. For assistance in locating these
other documents, please consult the technical person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
1. National Toxicology Program. (NTP, 2016). Report on Carcinogens,
Fourteenth Edition.; Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. Retrieved from
https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/content/profiles/asbestos.pdf.
2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (EPA, 1988). IRIS summary
for asbestos (CASRN 1332-21-4). Washington, DC: Integrated Risk
Information System. Retrieved from https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/iris/iris_documents/documents/subst/0371_summary.pdf.
3. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. (ATSDR, 2001).
Toxicological profile for asbestos (update). Retrieved from https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ToxProfiles/tp.asp?id=30&tid=4.
4. International Agency for Research on Cancer. (IARC, 2012). A
review of human carcinogens. Part C: Arsenic, metals, fibres, and
dusts [IARC Monograph]. Lyon, France: World Health Organization.
Retrieved from https://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol100C/mono100C.pdf.
5. International Agency for Research on Cancer. (IARC, 1977). IARC
monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risk of chemicals to
man: Asbestos. Lyon, France: World Health Organization. Retrieved
from https://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol1-42/mono14.pdf.
6. International Agency for Research on Cancer. (IARC, 1987).
Asbestos and certain asbestos compounds [IARC Monograph]. In IARC
Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans (pp.
106-116). Lyon, France. Retrieved from https://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/suppl7/index.php.
7. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (EPA, 2017). Scope of the
Risk Evaluation for Asbestos. Retrieved from https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0736-0086.
8. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (EPA, 2018). Economic
Analysis for the Proposed Significant New Use Rule for Asbestos.
9. U.S. Geological Survey. (USGS, 2018). Mineral Commodity Summaries
2018. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior. Retrieved
from https://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/mcs/2018/mcs2018.pdf.
10. U.S. Geological Survey. (USGS, 2017). Mineral Commodity
Summaries: Asbestos. Retrieved from https://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/asbestos/mcs-2017-asbes.pdf.
11. U.S. Customs and Border Protection. (2017). Automated Commercial
Environment System (ACE).
12. National Research Council. (NRC, 2006). Asbestos: Selected
cancers. Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Asbestos: Selected
Health Effects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
13. National Research Council. (NRC, 1983). Drinking Water and
Health. Washington, DC: Safe Drinking Water Committee, Board on
Toxicology and Environmental Health Hazards. Retrieved from https://dx.doi.org/10.17226/326.
14. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (EPA, 1980). Ambient water
quality criteria for asbestos [EPA Report]. (EPA/440/5-80/022).
Washington, DC.
15. Anderson, P.H. and Farino, W.J. (1982). Analysis of Fiber
Release from Certain Asbestos Products. Draft Final Report. Prepared
by GCA Corporation for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Retrieved from https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/9101PBZ6.PDF?Dockey=9101PBZ6.PDF.
16. 40 CFR part 61, subpart M, Asbestos National Emission Standards
for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP).
17. Virta, R. (2011). Asbestos. Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical
Technology. Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/0471238961.0119020510151209.a01.pub3/pdf.
18. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (EPA, 1984). Significant
New Uses of Chemical Substances; Certain Chemicals. 49 FR 35014,
September 5, 1984 (FRL-2541-8).
19. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (EPA, 2013). Understanding
the Costs Associated with Eliminating Exemptions for Articles in
SNURs. May 1, 2013.
20. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (EPA, 1989). Regulatory
Impact Analysis of Controls on Asbestos and Asbestos Products: Final
Report: Volume III. (5601989ICF001). Washington, DC: Office of Toxic
Substances, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
XIV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993)
and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
This action is not expected to be a regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017), because this
action is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order
12866.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose any new information collection burden
under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is defined in 5 CFR
1320.3(b). The information collection activities associated with
existing chemical SNURs are already approved under OMB control number
2070-0038 (EPA ICR No. 1188); and the information collection activities
associated with export notifications are already approved under OMB
control number 2070-0030 (EPA ICR No. 0795). If an entity were to
submit a SNUN to the Agency, the burden is estimated to be
approximately 100 hours per response
[[Page 26932]]
(slightly less for submitters who have already registered to use the
electronic submission system).
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 in Title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal
Register, are listed in 40 CFR, part 9, and included on the related
collection instrument, or form, as applicable.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
Pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., I
certify that promulgation of this SNUR would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The
rationale supporting this conclusion is as follows.
A SNUR applies to any person (including small or large entities)
who intends to engage in any activity described in the rule as a
``significant new use.'' By definition of the word ``new'' and based on
all information currently available to EPA, it appears that no small or
large entities presently engage in such activities. Since this proposed
SNUR will require a person who intends to engage in such activity in
the future to first notify EPA by submitting a SNUN, no economic impact
will occur unless someone files a SNUN to pursue a significant new use
in the future or forgoes profits by avoiding or delaying the
significant new use. Although some small entities may decide to conduct
such activities in the future, EPA cannot presently determine how many,
if any, there may be. However, EPA's experience to date is that, in
response to the promulgation of SNURs covering over 1,000 chemical
substances, the Agency receives only a handful of notices per year.
During the six-year period from 2005-2010, only three submitters self-
identified as small in their SNUN submissions (Ref. 8). EPA believes
the cost of submitting a SNUN is relatively small compared to the cost
of developing and marketing a chemical new to a firm or marketing a new
use of the chemical and that the requirement to submit a SNUN generally
does not have a significant economic impact.
Therefore, EPA believes that the potential economic impact of
complying with this proposed SNUR is not expected to be significant or
adversely impact a substantial number of small entities. In a SNUR that
published as a final rule on August 8, 1997 (62 FR 42690) (FRL-5735-4),
the Agency presented its general determination that proposed and final
SNURs are not expected to have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
Based on EPA's experience with proposing and finalizing SNURs,
State, local, and Tribal governments have not been impacted by these
rulemakings, and EPA does not have any reason to believe that any
State, local, or Tribal government would be impacted by this
rulemaking. As such, the requirements of sections 202, 203, 204, or 205
of UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, do not apply to this action.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action will not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it will
not have 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.
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because it will
not have any effect on tribal governments, on the relationship between
the Federal Government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), because this action does not address environmental
health or safety risks, and EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as
applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental
health or safety risks that EPA has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per the definition of ``covered
regulatory action'' in section 2-202 of the Executive Order.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it is not
likely to have any effect on energy supply, distribution, or use.
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve any technical standards, and is
therefore not subject to considerations under section 12(d) of NTTAA,
15 U.S.C. 272 note.
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
This action will not have disproportionately high and adverse human
health or environmental effects on minority or low-income populations
as specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
This action does not affect the level of protection provided to human
health or the environment.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 721
Environmental protection, Asbestos, Chemicals, Hazardous
substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: May 31, 2018.
Tala R. Henry,
Acting Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, the
Environmental Protection Agency proposes that 40 CFR chapter I be
amended as follows:
PART 721--SIGNIFICANT NEW USES OF CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES
0
1. The authority citation for part 721 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2604, 2607, and 2625(c).
0
2. Add Sec. 721.11095 to subpart E to read as follows:
Sec. 721.11095 Asbestos.
(a) Chemical substance and significant new use subject to
reporting. (1) The chemical substance identified as asbestos (as
defined by 15 U.S.C. 2642(3) as the asbestiform varieties of chrysotile
(serpentine), crocidolite (riebeckite), amosite (cummingtonite-
grunerite), anthophyllite, tremolite or actinolite) is subject to
reporting under this section for the significant new use
[[Page 26933]]
described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(2) The significant new use is: Manufacturing (including importing)
or processing for any of the following uses:
(i) Arc chutes;
(ii) Beater-add gaskets;
(iii) Extruded sealant tape and other tape;
(iv) Filler for acetylene cylinders;
(v) High grade electrical paper;
(vi) Millboard;
(vii) Missile liner;
(viii) Adhesives, sealants, roof and non-roof coatings;
(ix) Pipeline wrap;
(x) Reinforced plastics;
(xi) Roofing felt;
(xii) Separators in fuel cells and batteries;
(xiii) Vinyl-asbestos floor tile; or
(xiv) Other building products (other than cement products).
(b) Specific requirements. (1) Section 721.45(f) does not apply to
this section. A person who intends to manufacture (including import) or
process the substance identified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section
for the significant new use identified in (a)(2) of this section as
part of an article is subject to the notification provisions of Sec.
721.25.
(2) [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2018-12513 Filed 6-8-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P