Procedures for Review of CBI Claims for the Identity of Chemicals on the TSCA Inventory, 16826-16833 [2019-07920]
Download as PDF
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
16826
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules
9606, 9607, 9621. In CERCLA, Congress
explicitly provided that in remedial
actions, the clean-up level for
groundwater must be that ‘‘which at
least attains Maximum Contaminant
Level Goals established under [SDWA]
and water quality criteria established
under . . . the Clean Water Act’’ where
such goals or criteria are relevant and
appropriate under the circumstances of
the release or potential release.’’ Id.
§ 9621(d)(2)(A). EPA’s National
Contingency Plan regulations
implementing CERCLA also provide
that ‘‘EPA expects to return usable
ground waters to their beneficial uses
wherever practicable, within a
timeframe that is reasonable given the
particular circumstances of the site.’’ 40
CFR 300.430(a)(1)(iii)(F). The
determination of a ‘‘beneficial use’’ of
groundwater is tied to state and local
classifications (unless the state
classification is less stringent than the
EPA classification scheme), evidencing
EPA’s recognition of the state-specific
nature of groundwater regulation. See
Preamble to the National Contingency
Plan, 55 FR 8733 (Mar. 8, 1990).
Finally, as the Agency has recognized,
‘‘CERCLA cleanup levels are designed to
address all reasonably anticipated
routes of exposure that may pose an
actual or potential risk to human health
or the environment.’’ EPA Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Directive 9283.1–33 at 9. These routes of
exposure include ‘‘groundwaters as a
source of contamination to other media’’
including intrusion into surface waters.
Id. In determining clean-up standards,
CERCLA and the National Contingency
Plan require the identification of
‘‘applicable or relevant and appropriate
requirements,’’ 42 U.S.C. 9621(d); 40
CFR 300.400(g), which, for remedying
discharges to groundwater that reaching
surface water, could include CWA
requirements that are specifically
addressed at the receiving surface water.
See Directive 9283.1–33 at 8 (‘‘Where
groundwaters may impact surface water
quality, water quality criteria under
sections 304 or 303 of the Clean Water
Act, may be relevant and appropriate
standards[.]’’). Thus, both CERCLA and
EPA’s regulations and guidance clearly
address and provide for remediation of
not only discharges to groundwater, but
specifically impacts to surface water
from polluted groundwater.
Dated: April 12, 2019.
David P. Ross,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Water.
[FR Doc. 2019–08063 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 Apr 22, 2019
Jkt 247001
[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2018–0320; FRL–9992–05]
South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY
14620; telephone number: (202) 554–
1404; email address: TSCA-Hotline@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
RIN 2070–AK21
I. Executive Summary
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 710
Procedures for Review of CBI Claims
for the Identity of Chemicals on the
TSCA Inventory
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The 2016 amendments to the
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
require EPA to establish a plan to
review all confidential business
information (CBI) claims for specific
chemical identity asserted in a Notice of
Activity (NOA) Form A. EPA is
proposing a rule to establish the plan,
including the procedures for
substantiating and reviewing these
claims.
SUMMARY:
Comments must be received on
or before June 24, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2018–0320, 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/where-sendcomments-epa-dockets. 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: Scott M.
Sherlock, Environmental Assistance
Division (Mail code 7408M), Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460–0001; telephone number: (202)
564–8257; email address:
sherlock.scott@epa.gov.
For general information contact: The
TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be affected by this action if
you reported a confidential chemical
substance under the TSCA Inventory
Notification (Active-Inactive)
Requirements rule (hereinafter ‘‘ActiveInactive rule’’) (Ref. 1) (40 CFR part 710,
subpart B) through a Notice of Activity
(NOA) Form A (Ref. 2) and sought to
maintain an existing CBI claim for a
specific chemical identity. The
following North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes are
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this action may
apply to them:
• Chemical manufacturing or
processing (NAICS code 325).
• Petroleum and Coal Products
Manufacturing (NAICS code 324).
The discussion in Unit III.A. and the
proposed regulatory text describe in
more detail the circumstances in which
entities might be subject to this
proposed action. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular entity, consult
the technical person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Note that TSCA’s statutory definition
of ‘‘manufacture’’ includes importing.
Accordingly, the regulatory definition of
‘‘manufacture’’ for this rule includes
importation. Since ‘‘manufacture’’ is
itself defined at 40 CFR 710.3(d) and at
TSCA section 3(9) (15 U.S.C. 2602(9)) to
include ‘‘import,’’ it is clear that
importers are a subset of manufacturers.
All references to manufacturing in this
document should be understood to also
encompass importing. Where EPA’s
intent is to specifically refer to domestic
manufacturing or importing (both
activities constitute ‘‘manufacture’’),
this rule will do so expressly.
B. What is the agency’s authority for
taking this action?
EPA is proposing this rule pursuant to
the authority in TSCA section 8(b), 15
U.S.C. 2607(b). See also the discussion
in Unit II.B.
In addition, the Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.,
requires Federal agencies to manage
information resources to reduce
information collection burdens on the
public (including through the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology);
E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM
23APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
increase program efficiency and
effectiveness; and improve the integrity,
quality, and utility of information to all
users within and outside an agency,
including capabilities for ensuring
dissemination of public information,
public access to Federal Government
information, and protections for privacy
and security (44 U.S.C. 3506).
TSCA section 2 expresses the intent of
Congress that EPA carry out TSCA in a
reasonable and prudent manner and in
consideration of the impacts that any
action taken under TSCA may have on
the environment, the economy, and
society. EPA is proposing to manage and
leverage its information resources,
including information technology, to
require the use of electronic reporting to
implement this proposed rulemaking in
a reasonable and prudent manner.
C. What action is the agency taking?
Pursuant to TSCA sections 8(b)(4)(C)
through (E), EPA is proposing to amend
40 CFR part 710 to establish a new
subpart C that sets forth the Agency’s
plan to review certain CBI claims to
protect the specific chemical identities
of substances on the confidential
portion of the TSCA Inventory. The CBI
claims that would be reviewed under
this plan are those that were asserted on
NOA Form A’s filed in accordance with
the requirements in the Active-Inactive
rule (40 CFR part 710, subpart B).
In accordance with TSCA section
8(b)(4)(D), EPA is proposing
substantiation requirements for
manufacturers (including importers)
and processors who filed NOA Form A’s
with assertions that they seek to
maintain CBI claims to protect the
specific chemical identities of chemical
substances on the confidential portion
of the TSCA Inventory. Manufacturers
and processors who provided
substantiations pursuant to the
voluntary substantiation process in the
Active-Inactive rule NOA collection, or
who identify a previous substantiation
for the claim made to EPA during the 5year period ending on the substantiation
deadline specified by EPA, would be
exempt from this requirement. EPA
would review each specific chemical
identity CBI claim and substantiation,
and approve or deny each claim
consistent with the procedures and
substantive criteria in TSCA sections
8(b)(4) and 14 and 40 CFR part 2,
subpart B. Also included in this
proposed rule are provisions clarifying
the duration of protection for approved
CBI claims, and providing for the
publication of annual review goals and
results.
As described in Unit III.D., EPA is
proposing to apply the electronic
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 Apr 22, 2019
Jkt 247001
reporting requirement at 40 CFR 710.39
to the substantiation requirements of the
CBI review plan. The Agency is
proposing to require submitters to use
EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX), the
Agency’s electronic reporting portal, for
reporting information.
D. Why is the agency taking this action?
TSCA section 8(b)(4)(C) requires EPA
to promulgate a rule that establishes a
plan to review all CBI claims to protect
the specific chemical identities of
chemical substances on the confidential
portion of the TSCA Inventory that were
asserted in an NOA Form A pursuant to
the Active-Inactive rule. This proposed
rule is a follow-on regulation to the
Active-Inactive rule that would require
substantiation of CBI claims for specific
chemical identity from any reporters
who asserted such a claim as part of the
NOA Form A submission, but did not
provide (voluntary) upfront
substantiation at that time. TSCA
section 8(b)(4)(C) further requires EPA
to promulgate this rule not later than
one year after the date that the Agency
published the first TSCA Inventory
containing all ‘‘active’’ substance
designations. EPA announced the
release of the updated TSCA Inventory
on February 19, 2019. To download the
public version of the TSCA Inventory,
get more information about the TSCA
Inventory Notification (Active-Inactive)
Requirements rule, or requirements to
notify EPA going forward, go to https://
www.epa.gov/tsca-inventory.
E. What are the estimated incremental
impacts of this action?
EPA has evaluated the potential costs
of establishing the proposed reporting
requirements for manufacturers and
processors. An economic analysis titled
‘‘Economic Analysis for the Proposed
Rule: Procedures for Review of CBI
Claims for the Identity of Chemicals on
the TSCA Inventory’’ has been prepared
for the proposed rule, is available in the
docket, and is briefly summarized here
(Ref. 3). The proposed rule requirements
involve a one-time reporting effort with
activities that are the same, or similar to
those in the Active-Inactive rule. All
respondents would already have
submitted at least one NOA under the
Active-Inactive rule, and therefore
should know whether any actions are
necessary under this proposed rule.
Moreover, an exemption included in
this proposed rule would allow certain
submitters to reference a previously
submitted chemical identity CBI
substantiation (in the last five years), in
lieu of providing a full CBI
substantiation for the NOA Form A
chemical identity information.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
16827
Companies potentially affected by this
proposed rule fall into three groups of
potential NOA Form A reporters who
made a CBI claim for a specific chemical
identity. The first group (Group (1))
consists of those reporters who already
voluntarily submitted upfront CBI
substantiation as part of the NOA
submission process, who therefore do
not need to take further action. The
second group (Group (2)) consists of
those reporters who will be able to use
the exemption offered under this
proposed rule by referencing a previous
substantiation, such as one submitted
through the 2016 Chemical Data
Reporting (CDR) rule (40 CFR part 711).
The third group (Group (3)) consists of
the remaining reporters who did not
submit prior chemical identity CBI
substantiations and would be required
to provide full substantiation as
proposed in this rule. The average
incremental burden and cost estimates
include rule familiarization,
recordkeeping and submission of
applicable CBI substantiations (i.e., onetime form completion). For Group (1),
the burden and costs for this group are
minimal and were not calculated
because the reporters have already
voluntarily submitted upfront CBI
substantiation as part of the NOA
submission process for the ActiveInactive rule and would not need to take
further action. For Group (2), the
average burden and costs per company
are estimated at 5.1 hours and $390,
respectively per submission (involving
on average four chemicals per
company), for rule familiarization and
substantiation using a previous
reference. For Group (3), the average
burden and costs per company are
estimated at 34.1 hours, and $2,641
respectively per submission (involving
on average 27 chemicals per company),
for rule familiarization and full
substantiation. An estimated 126
companies would be expected to report,
with an estimated 23 companies in
Group (2), and 103 companies in Group
(3), resulting in an estimated total
incremental burden and costs expected
over 60 days of 3,629 hours and
$280,981 for this proposed rule (Ref. 3).
F. What should I consider as I prepare
my comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. 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 in a CD–
ROM or other electronic media that you
mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
media as CBI and then identify
electronically within the media the
specific information that is claimed as
E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM
23APP1
16828
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules
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://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.html.
II. Background
A. The TSCA Inventory and ActiveInactive Rule
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
EPA is required under TSCA section
8(b) to compile and keep current a list
of chemical substances manufactured or
processed in the United States. This list,
the TSCA Chemical Substance
Inventory (TSCA Inventory), is EPA’s
comprehensive list of confidential and
non-confidential substances
manufactured or processed in the
United States for nonexempt
commercial purposes (Ref. 4). EPA
promulgated the Active-Inactive rule to
obtain the information necessary for
EPA to designate as ‘‘active’’ chemical
substances that had been manufactured
or processed for a nonexempt
commercial purpose during the 10-year
time period ending on June 21, 2016.
Respondents (manufacturers and
processors) reported these chemical
substances through the process set forth
in 40 CFR part 710, subpart B, by filing
an NOA Form A with EPA. Consistent
with TSCA section 8(b)(4)(B)(ii),
respondents who manufactured or
processed an active chemical substance
listed on the confidential portion of the
TSCA Inventory prior to June 22, 2016,
could seek to maintain an existing claim
for protection against disclosure of the
specific chemical identity of the
substance as confidential by voluntarily
filing an NOA Form A that included
such request. Through this process
established in 40 CFR 710.37(a),
manufacturers and processors secured
an opportunity to maintain the
confidential status of a specific
chemical identity on the confidential
portion of the TSCA Inventory.
B. Statutory Requirements for the CBI
Review Plan
TSCA section 8(b)(4)(C) requires EPA
to promulgate a rule establishing a plan
to review all CBI claims to protect the
specific chemical identities of chemical
substances on the confidential portion
of the TSCA Inventory that were
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 Apr 22, 2019
Jkt 247001
asserted in an NOA Form A. TSCA
requires that EPA promulgate this rule
not later than one year after the
publication of the first TSCA Inventory
containing all ‘‘active’’ substance
designations (TSCA section 8(b)(4)(C)).
TSCA also requires the Agency to
implement the CBI review plan so as to
complete all CBI claim reviews not later
than five years after such TSCA
Inventory publication, with the
possibility of a two-year extension
(TSCA section 8(b)(4)(E)). Since the
updated TSCA Inventory was released
on February 19, 2019, the deadline for
issuing a final rule is February 19, 2020,
and the deadline for completing all the
CBI claim reviews is February 19, 2024.
If EPA determines in the future to
invoke the 2-year extension under
TSCA, the deadline for completing all
the CBI claim reviews would then
become February 19, 2026.
Other types of CBI claims are outside
the scope of the review plan under
TSCA section 8(b)(4)(C) through (E), and
hence are outside the scope of this
proposed rule. Those claims are
governed by other statutory and
regulatory provisions. Substantiation
and review of CBI claims for other data
elements in an NOA Form A are
governed by TSCA section 14(g) and 40
CFR 710.37(b) and (c)(1). Substantiation
and review of CBI claims for specific
chemical identity in an NOA Form B—
a forward-looking reporting form
required when reintroducing an
‘‘inactive’’ chemical substance into U.S.
commerce for a nonexempt commercial
purpose—are governed by TSCA section
8(b)(5) and 40 CFR 710.37(a)(2).
TSCA section 8(b)(4)(D) provides the
parameters of the review plan for
specific chemical identity CBI claims
asserted in NOA Form A’s.
1. Requirement to provide
substantiations. TSCA section
8(b)(4)(D)(i) provides that in
establishing the review plan, EPA must
require all manufacturers and
processors to substantiate their CBI
claims for specific chemical identities in
accordance with TSCA section 14 and at
a time specified by EPA, unless the
manufacturer or processor has
previously substantiated the claim in a
submission made to EPA during the 5year period ending on the substantiation
deadline specified by EPA.
2. EPA review of confidentiality
claims and substantiations. TSCA
section 8(b)(4)(D)(ii) requires that EPA
review each CBI claim and
substantiation for a specific chemical
identity to determine if such claim
qualifies for protection from disclosure.
The Agency must then approve or deny
each claim. TSCA section
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
8(b)(4)(D)(ii)(III) further provides that if
the information is approved for CBI
status, then, except as otherwise
provided in TSCA sections 8 and 14,
EPA must protect such information from
disclosure for a period of 10 years,
unless the claim is withdrawn, or EPA
becomes aware that the information
does not qualify for protection from
disclosure, in which latter case EPA
must take the actions described in TSCA
section 14(g)(2) (i.e., to notify the
claimant of EPA’s intent to disclose the
information).
3. Completion of reviews. TSCA
section 8(b)(4)(E) provides that the
Agency must implement the review
plan so as to complete all of the reviews
not later than five years after the date on
which the Agency has compiled the
initial list of active substances. With
adequate public justification, the
Agency may extend the deadline for
completion of reviews for not more than
two years.
4. Posting of annual goals and
numbers of reviews completed. TSCA
section 8(b)(4)(E) further requires that at
the beginning of each year, EPA publish
an annual goal for reviews and the
number of reviews completed in the
prior year.
5. Record retention requirement.
TSCA section 8(b)(9)(B) provides that
records relevant to compliance with this
rule must be retained for a period of 5
years beginning on the last day of the
submission period.
III. Summary of Proposed Rule
The TSCA section 8(b)(4)(D) and (E)
provisions regarding the Review Plan
are prescriptive and the proposed rule
closely follows the statutory text.
A. What confidentiality claims for
specific chemical identities would be
substantiated under this rule?
1. CBI claims subject to
substantiation. Subject to the
exemptions described in this unit, the
substantiation requirement in this
proposed rule would apply to all CBI
claims for specific chemical identities
that manufacturers or processors
requested to maintain in NOA Form A’s
filed in accordance with the ActiveInactive rule.
2. Exemptions from substantiation
requirement. Pursuant to TSCA section
8(b)(4)(D), EPA is proposing exemptions
from the requirement to submit new
substantiation in certain cases where the
CBI claims have already been
substantiated in a recent submission to
EPA. The proposed exemptions would
be available to manufacturers or
processors who provided
substantiations for specific chemical
E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM
23APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
identity CBI claims either: (1) Pursuant
to the voluntary substantiation process
associated with the Active-Inactive rule,
or (2) in another submission made to
EPA less than five years before the
substantiation deadline that will be set
in the final rule.
For those manufacturers or processors
who filed voluntary substantiations
with their NOA Form A’s pursuant to
the process set forth in the ActiveInactive rule, codified at 40 CFR
710.37(a)(1), no further action would be
required. Those persons would
automatically be deemed exempt from
the substantiation requirement under
this proposed rule.
EPA is proposing to require
manufacturers and processors who wish
to establish eligibility for an exemption
based upon any other recentlysubmitted substantiation to report and
identify for EPA the following about
that recently-submitted substantiation:
Submission date; submission type; and
case number, transaction ID, or
equivalent identifier that uniquely
identifies the previous submission that
includes the substantiation upon which
the manufacturer or processor is relying.
Previously submitted substantiations
might include, for example, those
submitted pursuant to a regulatory upfront substantiation requirement (such
as 40 CFR 711.30(b)(1) or 40 CFR
720.85(b)(3)(iv)), the statutory
substantiation requirement at TSCA
section 14(c)(3) (see 82 FR 6522, January
19, 2017), or the comment process
described in 40 CFR 2.204(e).
B. When would substantiation be
required?
EPA is proposing to require that all
substantiations be filed not later than 90
days after the effective date of the final
rule. EPA is proposing the same filing
deadline for submissions identifying a
previously submitted substantiation for
purposes of establishing eligibility for
an exemption. If a substantiation or
notice of prior CBI substantiation was
not filed within the 90-day filing period
in accordance with all requirements of
this proposed rule or voluntarily filed in
accordance with all requirements of 40
CFR 710.37(a)(1), EPA is proposing to
consider the confidentiality claim to be
deficient and would treat the specific
chemical identity as not subject to a
confidentiality claim, such that EPA
may make the information public
without further notice. This treatment of
unsubstantiated confidentiality claims
as deficient would be consistent with
how EPA has handled unsubstantiated
confidentiality claims in other
regulations, e.g., 40 CFR 710.37(a)(2)
and (b) (Active-Inactive rule) and 40
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 Apr 22, 2019
Jkt 247001
CFR 711.30(e) (Chemical Data Reporting
rule). EPA nevertheless requests
comment on the validity of making this
information public without further
notice, particularly where a claimant
may have previously submitted a
substantiation to EPA less than five
years before the substantiation deadline
that will be set in the final rule, but
failed to report and identify that
previously-submitted substantiation to
EPA within the 90-day filing period.
C. How would CBI claims be
substantiated?
EPA is proposing to require that nonexempt manufacturers and processors
substantiate any CBI claim for a specific
chemical identity that they requested to
maintain in an NOA Form A by
submitting answers to the questions
identified in Unit III.C.1, by providing
the certification statement identified in
Unit III.C.2, and by requiring that the
submission be signed and dated by an
authorized official.
1. Substantiation questions. a. Do you
believe that the information is exempt
from substantiation pursuant to TSCA
section 14(c)(2)? If you answered yes,
you must individually identify the
specific information claimed as
confidential and specify the applicable
exemption(s).
b. Will disclosure of the information
likely result in substantial harm to your
business’s competitive position? If you
answered yes, describe with specificity
the substantial harmful effects that
would likely result to your competitive
position if the information is made
available to the public.
c. To the extent your business has
disclosed the information to others
(both internally and externally), what
precautions has your business taken?
Identify the measures or internal
controls your business has taken to
protect the information claimed as
confidential: Non-disclosure agreement
required prior to access; access is
limited to individuals with a need-toknow; information is physically
secured; other internal control
measure(s). If yes, explain.
d. Does the information appear in any
public documents, including (but not
limited to) safety data sheets,
advertising or promotional material,
professional or trade publication, or any
other media or publications available to
the general public? If you answered yes,
explain why the information should be
treated as confidential.
e. Is the claim of confidentiality
intended to last less than 10 years? If so,
indicate the number of years (between
1–10 years) or the specific date/
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
16829
occurrence after which the claim is
withdrawn.
f. Has EPA, another federal agency, or
court made any confidentiality
determination regarding information
associated with this chemical
substance? If you answered yes, explain
the outcome of that determination and
provide a copy of the previous
confidentiality determination or any
other information that will assist in
identifying the prior determination.
g. Is the confidential chemical
substance publicly known to have ever
been offered for commercial distribution
in the United States? If you answered
yes, explain why the information should
be treated as confidential.
2. Certification Statement. An
authorized official of a manufacturer or
processor substantiating a request to
maintain an existing claim of
confidentiality for specific chemical
identity would be required to certify
that the submission complies with the
requirements of the rule by signing and
dating the following certification
statement:
‘‘I certify that all claims for confidentiality
made or sought to be maintained with this
submission are true and correct, and all
information submitted herein to substantiate
such claims is true and correct. Any knowing
and willful misrepresentation is subject to
criminal penalty pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1001.
I further certify that it is true and correct that:
• My company has taken reasonable
measures to protect the confidentiality of the
information;
• I have determined that the information is
not required to be disclosed or otherwise
made available to the public under any other
Federal law;
• I have a reasonable basis to conclude that
disclosure of the information is likely to
cause substantial harm to the competitive
position of my company; and
• I have a reasonable basis to believe that
the information is not readily discoverable
through reverse engineering.’’
D. How would information be submitted
to EPA?
The proposed rule would require
persons submitting substantiations or
information on previously submitted
substantiations to follow the electronic
reporting procedures set forth in the
Active-Inactive rule at 40 CFR 710.39.
Any person submitting a substantiation
under this proposed rule could claim
any part or all of the substantiation as
confidential business information.
Submitters would be required to use
EPA’s electronic reporting portal,
Central Data Exchange (CDX), and EPA’s
web-based reporting tool, Chemical
Information Submission System (CISS).
Because all submitters under this
proposed rule would have previously
E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM
23APP1
16830
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
filed NOA Form A’s under the ActiveInactive rule using these electronic
reporting procedures, EPA expects that
all submitters are already registered
with CDX and familiar with the
electronic reporting procedures. EPA is
proposing mandatory electronic
reporting because it is expected to allow
for more efficient data transmittal,
support improved data quality, and
minimize respondent burden and
reduce EPA administrative costs
associated with information submission
and recordkeeping.
E. How would EPA review claims of
confidentiality for specific chemical
identities?
Consistent with how EPA handles the
review of other TSCA confidentiality
claims, EPA would carefully consider
the facts provided in the
substantiations, any pertinent
previously issued confidentiality
determinations, and other reasonably
available information that EPA finds
appropriate to determine the
information’s entitlement to
confidential treatment. See 40 CFR
2.204(f), 2.205(d)(2) and 2.306. EPA
would apply the substantive criteria for
confidentiality determinations set forth
in 40 CFR 2.208 and 2.306(g), which
provide in relevant part that information
is entitled to confidential treatment for
the benefit of a particular business if: (a)
The business has asserted a
confidentiality claim which has not
expired by its terms, nor been waived
nor withdrawn; (b) the business has
satisfactorily shown that it has taken
reasonable measures to protect the
confidentiality of the information, and
that it intends to continue to take such
measures; (c) the information is not, and
has not been, reasonably obtainable
without the business’s consent by other
persons (other than governmental
bodies) by use of legitimate means
(other than discovery based on a
showing of need in a judicial or quasijudicial proceeding); (d) no statute
specifically requires disclosure of the
information; and (e) the business has
satisfactorily shown that disclosure of
the information is likely to cause
substantial harm to the business’s
competitive position.
In instances where there are multiple
NOA Form A’s asserting the
confidentiality of the same chemical
identity, the Agency may choose to
review these NOA Form A’s together as
a matter of efficiency.
In instances where a CBI claim is
denied, the Agency would notify the
submitter, in writing, of EPA’s intent to
disclose the specific chemical identity
and of EPA’s reasons for denying the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 Apr 22, 2019
Jkt 247001
claim. The notice would be furnished by
certified mail (return receipt requested),
by personal delivery, or by other means
that allows verification of the fact and
date of receipt. EPA would not disclose
the specific chemical identity until the
date that is 30 days after the date on
which the submitter receives the denial
notice. Submitters can challenge EPA’s
denial of a CBI claim by commencing an
action to prevent disclosure in an
appropriate Federal district court. See
generally TSCA section 14(g) and 40
CFR 2.306(e). In instances where a CBI
claim is approved, EPA would so inform
the submitter, and the chemical
substance will be identified in
subsequent publications of the TSCA
Inventory by a unique identifier
assigned under TSCA section 14(g)(4),
in addition to the accession number,
generic name, and, if applicable,
premanufacture notice case number.
Further information about the
assignment and application of unique
identifiers for confidential chemical
substances may be found in the Federal
Register of June 27, 2018 (83 FR 30168).
F. Annual Review Goals and Results,
Extension
EPA is proposing to use the Agency’s
website to publish its annual goal for
reviews completed under this review
plan at the beginning of each calendar
year, starting with its goals for 2020,
which the Agency anticipates would be
posted in February 2020 on the Agency
web page. EPA is also proposing to track
the number of CBI reviews completed
under this review plan each year and is
proposing to use the Agency’s website
to publish that number at the beginning
of the following year, starting with the
number of reviews completed in 2020,
which the Agency anticipates would be
posted on the Agency web page in
February 2021. These activities will
address the requirements of TSCA
section 8(b)(4)(E)(ii)(II).
EPA intends to implement the CBI
review plan described in this proposed
rule to complete reviews of all CBI
claims for specific chemical identities
not later than five years after the
publication of the first TSCA Inventory
containing all ‘‘active’’ substance
designations based on NOA Form A’s,
as required under TSCA section
8(b)(4)(E)(i). Since the initial list of
active substances published on February
19, 2019, EPA intends to complete all
reviews by February 19, 2024. EPA
intends the annual review goals to take
into consideration this target
completion date, the number of claims
needing review, and available resources.
Before the effective date of this rule’s
finalization, EPA may begin reviewing
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and deciding claims that were
voluntarily substantiated under the
Active-Inactive rule (subject to the
outcome of pending litigation involving
that rule), or that appear to be clearly
not entitled to protection from
disclosure based upon other information
available to the Agency. TSCA section
14(i)(2) expressly permits EPA to
review, require (re)substantiation of,
and decide TSCA CBI claims before the
effective date of such rules applicable to
those claims as EPA may promulgate
after June 22, 2016. EPA believes that
TSCA section 14(i)(2) clearly authorizes
the Agency to begin its reviews under
TSCA section 8(b)(4) prior to
publication of this final rule, and that
doing so is appropriate in light of the
Congressionally-mandated timeline for
the completion of reviews.
TSCA section 8(b)(4)(E)(ii)(I) provides
that after an adequate public
justification, the Agency may extend the
five-year deadline for completion of
reviews for not more than two
additional years. While the Agency does
not currently anticipate a need for an
extension, possible justifications for an
extension might include, among other
things, competing TSCA obligations
which prevent the Agency from
completing the reviews within five
years, intervening events that divert the
Agency’s resources from completing the
required reviews, or litigation involving
the claim substantiation and review
process that may delay EPA’s
commencement of CBI claim reviews.
Should an extension become necessary,
EPA is proposing to announce the
extension and its justification to the
public via a notice in the Federal
Register.
G. Duration of Protection From
Disclosure
TSCA section 8(b)(4)(D)(ii)(III)
provides that specific chemical
identities for which EPA has approved
a CBI claim under TSCA section
8(b)(4)(D) must be protected from
disclosure for a period of 10 years,
unless, prior to the expiration of that
period, the claimant notifies EPA that
they are withdrawing the confidentiality
claim, in which case the Agency cannot
protect the information from disclosure;
or the Agency otherwise becomes aware
that the information does not qualify for
protection from disclosure, in which
case the Agency must take the actions
described in TSCA section 14(g)(2) (i.e.,
to notify the claimant of EPA’s intent to
disclose the information). TSCA section
8(b)(4)(D)(ii)(III) does not explicitly state
when the 10-year period of protection
begins, but TSCA section 8(b)(4)(D)(ii)
provides as a general matter that EPA’s
E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM
23APP1
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules
actions under the review plan must be
‘‘in accordance with section 14.’’ Under
TSCA section 14(e)(1)(B)(i), as amended
on June 22, 2016, the duration of
protection from disclosure lasts ‘‘for a
period of 10 years from the date on
which the person asserts the claim with
respect to the information submitted to
the Administrator.’’
Notably, all specific chemical identity
CBI claims subject to review under
TSCA section 8(b)(4) and this proposed
rule had already been asserted by one or
more persons prior to June 22, 2016,
resulting in the placement of the
chemical substance on the confidential
portion of the TSCA Inventory. Pursuant
to TSCA section 8(b)(4)(B)(ii) and the
Active-Inactive rule, manufacturers and
processors submitting NOA Form A’s
were only permitted to indicate that
they seek to maintain an existing claim
for protection against disclosure of the
specific chemical identity of the
chemical substance. TSCA section
8(b)(4)(C) describes these requests to
maintain existing claims as ‘‘claims . . .
asserted pursuant to [TSCA section
8(b)(4)(B)],’’ and TSCA section
8(b)(4)(D)(i) refers to ‘‘manufacturers or
processors asserting claims under
[TSCA section 8(b)(4)(B)]’’ (emphasis
added). Thus, EPA believes Congress
intended that the filing date of the
request seeking to maintain the CBI
claim (i.e., the filing date of the NOA
Form A) may function as the date of
claim assertion for purposes of
determining the period of protection
from disclosure. However, in cases
where the same specific chemical
identity was subject to a CBI claim in
another submission filed on or after
June 22, 2016, EPA believes it would be
incongruous to effectively re-start the
10-year period of protection from
disclosure based upon the subsequent
submission of a request (i.e., an NOA
Form A) seeking to maintain that claim.
Accordingly, EPA proposes to interpret
the date of assertion for purposes of
calculating the duration of protection
under TSCA section 8(b)(4)(D)(ii)(III) as
the date of submission of the first filing
in which the specific chemical identity
was claimed as CBI after June 22, 2016.
This interpretation would impact the
calculation of the period of protection
from disclosure where there are
multiple submitters of the NOA Form A
that are asserting confidentiality claims
on the same specific chemical identity,
as well as where one or more submitters
of information to EPA outside the
context of the NOA Form A has asserted
a specific chemical identity
confidentiality claim after June 22,
2016. Companies will be notified of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 Apr 22, 2019
Jkt 247001
date from which the 10-year period of
protection will be calculated.
For example, if on July 1, 2016, a
company addressing a CDR rule
reporting requirement filed a report for
a subject chemical substance and
asserted a CBI claim for the specific
chemical identity, and if EPA
subsequently approved the company’s
confidentiality claim, then the 10-year
time period of protection from
disclosure would begin on July 1, 2016.
If that company subsequently filed an
NOA Form A on January 1, 2018 and
sought to maintain the confidentiality
claim for that specific chemical identity,
and if EPA subsequently approved that
claim, the 10-year period of protection
from disclosure would continue to run
from July 1, 2016, and would not restart
on the date of NOA filing. If a second
company then filed an NOA Form A on
February 1, 2018 seeking to maintain a
CBI claim for that same specific
chemical identity, and the second
company’s claim were approved, the 10year period of protection from
disclosure would still run from July 1,
2016. In cases where an NOA Form A
was the first submission to assert the
CBI claim for a specific chemical
identity after June 22, 2016, the 10-year
period of protection for an approved
claim would begin on the date of that
NOA filing.
16831
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 contact listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
1. EPA. TSCA Inventory Notification
(Active-Inactive) Requirements Rule. Federal
Register, 82 FR 37520, August 11, 2017
(FRL–9964–22).
2. EPA. Notice of Activity Form A; Final,
2017.
3. EPA. Economic Analysis for the
Proposed Rule: Procedures for Review of CBI
Claims for the Identity of Chemicals on the
TSCA Inventory—RIN 2070–AK21—Office of
Pollution Protection and Toxics. Washington,
DC, February 2019.
4. EPA. TSCA Chemical Substance
Inventory. 2018. https://www.epa.gov/tscainventory/how-access-tsca-inventory.
5. EPA. ICR No. 2594.01 Information
Collection Request for TSCA Review Plan
CBI Substantiation Supporting Statement for
a Request for OMB Review under the
Paperwork Reduction Act. February 2019.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Additional information about these
statutes and Executive Orders can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
H. What are the record retention
requirements?
EPA is proposing to require that
persons subject to the finalized rule
retain records that document any
information reported to EPA. The
proposed rule would require such
records to be retained for a period of 5
years beginning on the last day of the
submission period, which is consistent
with the statutory mandate in TSCA
section 8(b)(9)(B).
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review.
This action is a significant regulatory
action that was 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).
Any changes made in response to OMB
recommendations have been
documented in the docket for this action
as required by section 6(a)(3)(E) of
Executive Order 12866.
IV. Request for Comments
EPA is seeking public comment on all
aspects of this proposed rule, including
filing requirements, the exemptions
process, annual goal setting, duration of
protection from disclosure, Agency
reviews, economic burden, and the
scope of the substantiation questions
described in Unit III.C and referenced in
the proposed regulatory text at section
710.45, as well as other issues discussed
in this document.
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing
Regulations and Controlling Regulatory
Costs
This action is expected to be subject
to the requirements for regulatory
actions specified in Executive Order
13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017).
EPA prepared an analysis of the
estimated costs and benefits associated
with this action (Economic Analysis,
Ref. 3), which is available in the docket
and is summarized in Unit I.E.
V. References
The following is a listing of the
documents that are specifically
referenced in this document. The docket
includes these references and other
information considered by EPA,
including documents that are referenced
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
The information collection activities
in this proposed rule have been
submitted for approval to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The
Information Collection Request (ICR)
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM
23APP1
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
16832
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules
document that the EPA prepared has
been assigned EPA ICR number ICR No.
2594.01 and OMB Control No. 2070–
NEW (Ref. 5). You can find a copy of the
ICR in the docket for this rule, and it is
briefly summarized here.
The reporting requirements identified
in the proposed rule would provide EPA
with information necessary to evaluate
confidentiality claims and determine
whether the claims qualify for
protection from disclosure.
Manufacturers and processors who
provided substantiations pursuant to the
voluntary substantiation process in the
Active-Inactive rule NOA collection
would be exempt from the proposed
substantiation requirements. EPA would
review each specific chemical identity
CBI claim and substantiation, and
approve or deny each claim consistent
with the procedures and substantive
criteria in TSCA sections 8(b)(4) and 14
and 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.
Respondent’s obligation to respond:
Mandatory.
Frequency of response: Once per
chemical.
Estimated total number of potential
respondents: 126.
Estimated total burden: 3,629 hours
(one time). Burden is defined at 5 CFR
1320.3(b).
Estimated total costs: $ 280,981 (one
time), includes no annualized capital
investment or maintenance and
operational costs.
Under PRA, an agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
The OMB control numbers are
displayed either by publication in the
Federal Register or by other appropriate
means, such as on the related collection
instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers for
certain EPA regulations is consolidated
in 40 CFR part 9.
Submit your comments on the
Agency’s need for this information, the
accuracy of the provided burden
estimates and any suggested methods
for minimizing respondent burden to
EPA using the docket identified at the
beginning of this proposed rule. You
may also send your ICR-related
comments to OMB’s Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs via
email to OIRA_submission@
omb.eop.gov, Attention: Desk Officer for
EPA. Since OMB is required to make a
decision concerning the ICR between 30
and 60 days after receipt, OMB must
receive comments no later than May 23,
2019. EPA will respond to any ICRrelated comments in the final rule.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 Apr 22, 2019
Jkt 247001
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
Pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA,
5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., I certify that this
action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The small
entities subject to the requirements of
this action are manufacturers (including
importers) and processors of chemical
substances. EPA estimates that a total of
126 companies are expected to be
impacted by this proposed rule, of
which 121 are identified as small
entities. Given the estimated per
submission burden and costs range from
5.1 hours and $390 (for Group (2)) to
34.1 hours and $ 2,640 (for Group (3)),
as presented in Unit 1.E. EPA has
determined that all 121 of the identified
small entities considered in this
analysis will experience an impact of
less than 1% of revenues.
In the affected universe of small
entities, there are two groups of entities
affected by this proposed rule (Groups
(2) and (3)), based on the extent of
substantiation information involved in
the submission. Entities of Group (3) are
expected to incur the highest burden
under this proposed rule, as they are
required to submit full confidentiality
substantiations (each submission
involving an average of 27 chemicals
per entity) in response to the regulatory
requirements. As a conservative
approach, in this small entity analysis
the higher unit cost from Group (3), as
the most affected group, is applied to all
small entities. Details of this analysis
are included in the accompanying
Economic Analysis for this proposed
rule (Ref. 3).
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This action does not contain an
unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does
not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The action is not expected
to impose enforceable duty on any state,
local or tribal governments, and the
requirements imposed on the private
sector are not expected to result in
annual expenditures of $100 million or
more for the private sector. As such,
EPA has determined that the
requirements of UMRA sections 202,
203, 204, or 205 do not apply to this
action.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999). It will not have substantial direct
effects on the states, on the relationship
between the national government and
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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). It will not have substantial direct
effects 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. Thus,
E.O. 13175 does not apply to this action.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), as
applying only to those regulatory
actions that concern health or safety
risks, such that the analysis required
under section 5–501 of Executive Order
13045 has the potential to influence the
regulation. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it does
not establish an environmental standard
intended to mitigate health or safety
risks.
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 a
significant adverse effect on energy
supply, distribution, or use.
J. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
Since this action does not involve any
technical standards, NTTAA section
12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272 note, does not
apply to this action.
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
This action does not entail special
considerations of environmental justice
related issues as delineated by
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994), because it does not
establish an environmental health or
safety standard. This action establishes
an information requirement and does
not affect the level of protection
provided to human health or the
environment.
E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM
23APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 78 / Tuesday, April 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 710
Environmental Protection, Chemicals,
Confidential Business Information,
Hazardous substances, Reporting and
Recordkeeping Requirements.
Dated: April 10, 2019.
Andrew R. Wheeler,
Administrator.
Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR
chapter I be amended as follows:
PART 710—COMPILATION OF THE
TSCA CHEMICAL SUBSTANCE
INVENTORY
§ 710.45
1. The authority citation for part 710
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2607(a) and (b).
■
2. Add subpart C to read as follows:
Subpart C—Review Plan
Sec.
710.41 Scope.
710.43 Persons subject to substantiation
requirement.
710.45 Contents of substantiation.
710.47 When to submit substantiation or
information on previous substantiation.
710.49 No confidentiality claim.
710.51 Electronic filing.
710.53 Record-keeping requirements.
710.55 Claim review, duration of
protection, TSCA Inventory
maintenance, posting results, and
extension.
§ 710.41
Scope.
This part applies to the substantiation
and review of claims of confidentiality
asserted in Notices of Activity Form A
to protect the specific chemical
identities of chemical substances.
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
substantiation requirement of this
subpart if both of the following
conditions are met:
(i) The previous substantiation was
submitted to EPA on or after [insert date
five years before the date that is 90 days
after effective date of final rule]; and
(ii) The person reports to EPA the
submission date; submission type; and
case number, transaction ID, or
equivalent identifier for the previous
submission that contained the
substantiation, not later than the
deadline specified in § 710.47.
§ 710.47 When to submit substantiation or
information on previous substantiation.
(a) All persons required to
substantiate a confidentiality claim
pursuant to § 710.43(a) must submit
their substantiation not later than [insert
date that is 90 days after effective date
of final rule].
(b) All persons who seek an
exemption under § 710.43(b)(2) must
submit the information specified in
§ 710.43(b)(2)(iii) not later than [date
that is 90 days after effective date of
final rule].
§ 710.43 Persons subject to substantiation
requirement.
§ 710.49
(a) Any person who filed a Notice of
Activity Form A requesting to maintain
an existing confidentiality claim for a
specific chemical identity must
substantiate that confidentiality claim as
specified in §§ 710.45 and 710.47 unless
eligible for an exemption.
(b) Exemptions. (1) Any person who
completed the voluntary substantiation
process set forth in § 710.37(a)(1) by
submitting with the Notice of Activity
Form A answers to the questions in
§ 710.37(c)(1) and (2), signed and dated
by an authorized official, and
completing the certification statement
for claims specified in § 710.37(e), is
exempt from the substantiation
requirement of this subpart.
(2) A person who has previously
substantiated the confidentiality claim
for a specific chemical identity that the
person requested to maintain in a Notice
of Activity Form A is exempt from the
§ 710.51
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:17 Apr 22, 2019
Jkt 247001
Contents of substantiation.
A person substantiating a
confidentiality claim for a specific
chemical identity must submit answers
to the questions in § 710.37(c)(1) and
(2), signed and dated by an authorized
official, and complete the certification
statement in § 710.37(e). If any of the
information contained in the answers to
the questions listed in § 710.37(c)(1) or
(2) is claimed as confidential, the
submitter must clearly indicate such by
marking the substantiation as
confidential business information.
No confidentiality claim.
If substantiation required under
§ 710.43(a) is not submitted to EPA in
accordance with the provisions of this
subpart, and no exemption under
§ 710.43(b) applies, EPA will consider
the confidentiality claim as deficient, so
that the specific chemical identity is not
subject to a confidentiality claim, and
EPA may make the information public
without further notice to the Notice of
Activity Form A submitter.
Electronic filing.
EPA will accept information
submitted under this subpart only if
submitted in accordance with § 710.39.
§ 710.53
Record-keeping requirements.
Each person who is subject to this
part must retain records that document
any information reported to EPA.
Records must be retained for a period of
5 years beginning on the last day of the
submission period.
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
16833
§ 710.55 Claim review, duration of
protection, TSCA Inventory maintenance,
posting results, and extension.
(a) Review criteria and procedures.
Except as set forth in this subpart,
confidentiality claims for specific
chemical identities asserted in Notices
of Activity Form A will be reviewed and
approved or denied in accordance with
the criteria and procedures in 40 CFR
part 2, subpart B.
(b) Duration of protection from
disclosure. Except as provided in 40
CFR part 2, subpart B, and section 14 of
TSCA, a specific chemical identity that
is the subject of an approved
confidentiality claim under this subpart
will be protected from disclosure for a
period of 10 years from the date on
which the confidentiality claim was first
asserted by any submitter after June 22,
2016, unless, prior to the expiration of
the period, the claimant notifies EPA
that the person is withdrawing the
confidentiality claim, in which case
EPA will not protect the information
from disclosure; or EPA otherwise
becomes aware that the information
does not qualify for protection from
disclosure, in which case EPA will take
the actions described in TSCA section
14(g)(2) to notify the claimant of EPA’s
intent to disclose the information.
(c) Updating the TSCA Inventory. EPA
will periodically update the TSCA
Inventory based on the results of the
reviews of the confidentiality claims
asserted in Notices of Activity Form A.
(d) Posting of annual goals and
numbers of reviews completed. At the
beginning of each calendar year, EPA
will publish an annual goal for reviews
and the number of reviews completed in
the prior year on the Agency website.
Determination of annual review goals
will take into consideration the number
of claims needing review, available
resources, and a target completion date
for all reviews under this subpart not
later than February 19, 2024.
(e) Extension. If EPA determines that
the target completion date in paragraph
(d) of this section cannot be met based
on the number of claims needing review
and the available resources, then EPA
will publish a document in the Federal
Register announcing the extension of
the deadline to complete its review of
all confidentiality claims under this
subpart for not more than two
additional years, together with an
explanation of the reasons for the
extension.
[FR Doc. 2019–07920 Filed 4–22–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM
23APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 78 (Tuesday, April 23, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16826-16833]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-07920]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 710
[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2018-0320; FRL-9992-05]
RIN 2070-AK21
Procedures for Review of CBI Claims for the Identity of Chemicals
on the TSCA Inventory
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The 2016 amendments to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
require EPA to establish a plan to review all confidential business
information (CBI) claims for specific chemical identity asserted in a
Notice of Activity (NOA) Form A. EPA is proposing a rule to establish
the plan, including the procedures for substantiating and reviewing
these claims.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 24, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2018-0320, 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/where-send-comments-epa-dockets. 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:
Scott M. Sherlock, Environmental Assistance Division (Mail code 7408M),
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number: (202) 564-8257; email address: [email protected].
For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill,
422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202)
554-1404; email address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Executive Summary
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be affected by this action if you reported a confidential
chemical substance under the TSCA Inventory Notification (Active-
Inactive) Requirements rule (hereinafter ``Active-Inactive rule'')
(Ref. 1) (40 CFR part 710, subpart B) through a Notice of Activity
(NOA) Form A (Ref. 2) and sought to maintain an existing CBI claim for
a specific chemical identity. The following North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes are not intended to be exhaustive,
but rather provides a guide to help readers determine whether this
action may apply to them:
Chemical manufacturing or processing (NAICS code 325).
Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing (NAICS code
324).
The discussion in Unit III.A. and the proposed regulatory text
describe in more detail the circumstances in which entities might be
subject to this proposed action. If you have any questions regarding
the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Note that TSCA's statutory definition of ``manufacture'' includes
importing. Accordingly, the regulatory definition of ``manufacture''
for this rule includes importation. Since ``manufacture'' is itself
defined at 40 CFR 710.3(d) and at TSCA section 3(9) (15 U.S.C. 2602(9))
to include ``import,'' it is clear that importers are a subset of
manufacturers. All references to manufacturing in this document should
be understood to also encompass importing. Where EPA's intent is to
specifically refer to domestic manufacturing or importing (both
activities constitute ``manufacture''), this rule will do so expressly.
B. What is the agency's authority for taking this action?
EPA is proposing this rule pursuant to the authority in TSCA
section 8(b), 15 U.S.C. 2607(b). See also the discussion in Unit II.B.
In addition, the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., requires Federal agencies to manage information resources to
reduce information collection burdens on the public (including through
the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology);
[[Page 16827]]
increase program efficiency and effectiveness; and improve the
integrity, quality, and utility of information to all users within and
outside an agency, including capabilities for ensuring dissemination of
public information, public access to Federal Government information,
and protections for privacy and security (44 U.S.C. 3506).
TSCA section 2 expresses the intent of Congress that EPA carry out
TSCA in a reasonable and prudent manner and in consideration of the
impacts that any action taken under TSCA may have on the environment,
the economy, and society. EPA is proposing to manage and leverage its
information resources, including information technology, to require the
use of electronic reporting to implement this proposed rulemaking in a
reasonable and prudent manner.
C. What action is the agency taking?
Pursuant to TSCA sections 8(b)(4)(C) through (E), EPA is proposing
to amend 40 CFR part 710 to establish a new subpart C that sets forth
the Agency's plan to review certain CBI claims to protect the specific
chemical identities of substances on the confidential portion of the
TSCA Inventory. The CBI claims that would be reviewed under this plan
are those that were asserted on NOA Form A's filed in accordance with
the requirements in the Active-Inactive rule (40 CFR part 710, subpart
B).
In accordance with TSCA section 8(b)(4)(D), EPA is proposing
substantiation requirements for manufacturers (including importers) and
processors who filed NOA Form A's with assertions that they seek to
maintain CBI claims to protect the specific chemical identities of
chemical substances on the confidential portion of the TSCA Inventory.
Manufacturers and processors who provided substantiations pursuant to
the voluntary substantiation process in the Active-Inactive rule NOA
collection, or who identify a previous substantiation for the claim
made to EPA during the 5-year period ending on the substantiation
deadline specified by EPA, would be exempt from this requirement. EPA
would review each specific chemical identity CBI claim and
substantiation, and approve or deny each claim consistent with the
procedures and substantive criteria in TSCA sections 8(b)(4) and 14 and
40 CFR part 2, subpart B. Also included in this proposed rule are
provisions clarifying the duration of protection for approved CBI
claims, and providing for the publication of annual review goals and
results.
As described in Unit III.D., EPA is proposing to apply the
electronic reporting requirement at 40 CFR 710.39 to the substantiation
requirements of the CBI review plan. The Agency is proposing to require
submitters to use EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX), the Agency's
electronic reporting portal, for reporting information.
D. Why is the agency taking this action?
TSCA section 8(b)(4)(C) requires EPA to promulgate a rule that
establishes a plan to review all CBI claims to protect the specific
chemical identities of chemical substances on the confidential portion
of the TSCA Inventory that were asserted in an NOA Form A pursuant to
the Active-Inactive rule. This proposed rule is a follow-on regulation
to the Active-Inactive rule that would require substantiation of CBI
claims for specific chemical identity from any reporters who asserted
such a claim as part of the NOA Form A submission, but did not provide
(voluntary) upfront substantiation at that time. TSCA section
8(b)(4)(C) further requires EPA to promulgate this rule not later than
one year after the date that the Agency published the first TSCA
Inventory containing all ``active'' substance designations. EPA
announced the release of the updated TSCA Inventory on February 19,
2019. To download the public version of the TSCA Inventory, get more
information about the TSCA Inventory Notification (Active-Inactive)
Requirements rule, or requirements to notify EPA going forward, go to
https://www.epa.gov/tsca-inventory.
E. What are the estimated incremental impacts of this action?
EPA has evaluated the potential costs of establishing the proposed
reporting requirements for manufacturers and processors. An economic
analysis titled ``Economic Analysis for the Proposed Rule: Procedures
for Review of CBI Claims for the Identity of Chemicals on the TSCA
Inventory'' has been prepared for the proposed rule, is available in
the docket, and is briefly summarized here (Ref. 3). The proposed rule
requirements involve a one-time reporting effort with activities that
are the same, or similar to those in the Active-Inactive rule. All
respondents would already have submitted at least one NOA under the
Active-Inactive rule, and therefore should know whether any actions are
necessary under this proposed rule. Moreover, an exemption included in
this proposed rule would allow certain submitters to reference a
previously submitted chemical identity CBI substantiation (in the last
five years), in lieu of providing a full CBI substantiation for the NOA
Form A chemical identity information.
Companies potentially affected by this proposed rule fall into
three groups of potential NOA Form A reporters who made a CBI claim for
a specific chemical identity. The first group (Group (1)) consists of
those reporters who already voluntarily submitted upfront CBI
substantiation as part of the NOA submission process, who therefore do
not need to take further action. The second group (Group (2)) consists
of those reporters who will be able to use the exemption offered under
this proposed rule by referencing a previous substantiation, such as
one submitted through the 2016 Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) rule (40
CFR part 711). The third group (Group (3)) consists of the remaining
reporters who did not submit prior chemical identity CBI
substantiations and would be required to provide full substantiation as
proposed in this rule. The average incremental burden and cost
estimates include rule familiarization, recordkeeping and submission of
applicable CBI substantiations (i.e., one-time form completion). For
Group (1), the burden and costs for this group are minimal and were not
calculated because the reporters have already voluntarily submitted
upfront CBI substantiation as part of the NOA submission process for
the Active-Inactive rule and would not need to take further action. For
Group (2), the average burden and costs per company are estimated at
5.1 hours and $390, respectively per submission (involving on average
four chemicals per company), for rule familiarization and
substantiation using a previous reference. For Group (3), the average
burden and costs per company are estimated at 34.1 hours, and $2,641
respectively per submission (involving on average 27 chemicals per
company), for rule familiarization and full substantiation. An
estimated 126 companies would be expected to report, with an estimated
23 companies in Group (2), and 103 companies in Group (3), resulting in
an estimated total incremental burden and costs expected over 60 days
of 3,629 hours and $280,981 for this proposed rule (Ref. 3).
F. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. 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 in a CD-ROM or other
electronic media that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the media as
CBI and then identify electronically within the media the specific
information that is claimed as
[[Page 16828]]
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://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.html.
II. Background
A. The TSCA Inventory and Active-Inactive Rule
EPA is required under TSCA section 8(b) to compile and keep current
a list of chemical substances manufactured or processed in the United
States. This list, the TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory (TSCA
Inventory), is EPA's comprehensive list of confidential and non-
confidential substances manufactured or processed in the United States
for nonexempt commercial purposes (Ref. 4). EPA promulgated the Active-
Inactive rule to obtain the information necessary for EPA to designate
as ``active'' chemical substances that had been manufactured or
processed for a nonexempt commercial purpose during the 10-year time
period ending on June 21, 2016. Respondents (manufacturers and
processors) reported these chemical substances through the process set
forth in 40 CFR part 710, subpart B, by filing an NOA Form A with EPA.
Consistent with TSCA section 8(b)(4)(B)(ii), respondents who
manufactured or processed an active chemical substance listed on the
confidential portion of the TSCA Inventory prior to June 22, 2016,
could seek to maintain an existing claim for protection against
disclosure of the specific chemical identity of the substance as
confidential by voluntarily filing an NOA Form A that included such
request. Through this process established in 40 CFR 710.37(a),
manufacturers and processors secured an opportunity to maintain the
confidential status of a specific chemical identity on the confidential
portion of the TSCA Inventory.
B. Statutory Requirements for the CBI Review Plan
TSCA section 8(b)(4)(C) requires EPA to promulgate a rule
establishing a plan to review all CBI claims to protect the specific
chemical identities of chemical substances on the confidential portion
of the TSCA Inventory that were asserted in an NOA Form A. TSCA
requires that EPA promulgate this rule not later than one year after
the publication of the first TSCA Inventory containing all ``active''
substance designations (TSCA section 8(b)(4)(C)). TSCA also requires
the Agency to implement the CBI review plan so as to complete all CBI
claim reviews not later than five years after such TSCA Inventory
publication, with the possibility of a two-year extension (TSCA section
8(b)(4)(E)). Since the updated TSCA Inventory was released on February
19, 2019, the deadline for issuing a final rule is February 19, 2020,
and the deadline for completing all the CBI claim reviews is February
19, 2024. If EPA determines in the future to invoke the 2-year
extension under TSCA, the deadline for completing all the CBI claim
reviews would then become February 19, 2026.
Other types of CBI claims are outside the scope of the review plan
under TSCA section 8(b)(4)(C) through (E), and hence are outside the
scope of this proposed rule. Those claims are governed by other
statutory and regulatory provisions. Substantiation and review of CBI
claims for other data elements in an NOA Form A are governed by TSCA
section 14(g) and 40 CFR 710.37(b) and (c)(1). Substantiation and
review of CBI claims for specific chemical identity in an NOA Form B--a
forward-looking reporting form required when reintroducing an
``inactive'' chemical substance into U.S. commerce for a nonexempt
commercial purpose--are governed by TSCA section 8(b)(5) and 40 CFR
710.37(a)(2).
TSCA section 8(b)(4)(D) provides the parameters of the review plan
for specific chemical identity CBI claims asserted in NOA Form A's.
1. Requirement to provide substantiations. TSCA section
8(b)(4)(D)(i) provides that in establishing the review plan, EPA must
require all manufacturers and processors to substantiate their CBI
claims for specific chemical identities in accordance with TSCA section
14 and at a time specified by EPA, unless the manufacturer or processor
has previously substantiated the claim in a submission made to EPA
during the 5-year period ending on the substantiation deadline
specified by EPA.
2. EPA review of confidentiality claims and substantiations. TSCA
section 8(b)(4)(D)(ii) requires that EPA review each CBI claim and
substantiation for a specific chemical identity to determine if such
claim qualifies for protection from disclosure. The Agency must then
approve or deny each claim. TSCA section 8(b)(4)(D)(ii)(III) further
provides that if the information is approved for CBI status, then,
except as otherwise provided in TSCA sections 8 and 14, EPA must
protect such information from disclosure for a period of 10 years,
unless the claim is withdrawn, or EPA becomes aware that the
information does not qualify for protection from disclosure, in which
latter case EPA must take the actions described in TSCA section
14(g)(2) (i.e., to notify the claimant of EPA's intent to disclose the
information).
3. Completion of reviews. TSCA section 8(b)(4)(E) provides that the
Agency must implement the review plan so as to complete all of the
reviews not later than five years after the date on which the Agency
has compiled the initial list of active substances. With adequate
public justification, the Agency may extend the deadline for completion
of reviews for not more than two years.
4. Posting of annual goals and numbers of reviews completed. TSCA
section 8(b)(4)(E) further requires that at the beginning of each year,
EPA publish an annual goal for reviews and the number of reviews
completed in the prior year.
5. Record retention requirement. TSCA section 8(b)(9)(B) provides
that records relevant to compliance with this rule must be retained for
a period of 5 years beginning on the last day of the submission period.
III. Summary of Proposed Rule
The TSCA section 8(b)(4)(D) and (E) provisions regarding the Review
Plan are prescriptive and the proposed rule closely follows the
statutory text.
A. What confidentiality claims for specific chemical identities would
be substantiated under this rule?
1. CBI claims subject to substantiation. Subject to the exemptions
described in this unit, the substantiation requirement in this proposed
rule would apply to all CBI claims for specific chemical identities
that manufacturers or processors requested to maintain in NOA Form A's
filed in accordance with the Active-Inactive rule.
2. Exemptions from substantiation requirement. Pursuant to TSCA
section 8(b)(4)(D), EPA is proposing exemptions from the requirement to
submit new substantiation in certain cases where the CBI claims have
already been substantiated in a recent submission to EPA. The proposed
exemptions would be available to manufacturers or processors who
provided substantiations for specific chemical
[[Page 16829]]
identity CBI claims either: (1) Pursuant to the voluntary
substantiation process associated with the Active-Inactive rule, or (2)
in another submission made to EPA less than five years before the
substantiation deadline that will be set in the final rule.
For those manufacturers or processors who filed voluntary
substantiations with their NOA Form A's pursuant to the process set
forth in the Active-Inactive rule, codified at 40 CFR 710.37(a)(1), no
further action would be required. Those persons would automatically be
deemed exempt from the substantiation requirement under this proposed
rule.
EPA is proposing to require manufacturers and processors who wish
to establish eligibility for an exemption based upon any other
recently-submitted substantiation to report and identify for EPA the
following about that recently-submitted substantiation: Submission
date; submission type; and case number, transaction ID, or equivalent
identifier that uniquely identifies the previous submission that
includes the substantiation upon which the manufacturer or processor is
relying.
Previously submitted substantiations might include, for example,
those submitted pursuant to a regulatory up-front substantiation
requirement (such as 40 CFR 711.30(b)(1) or 40 CFR 720.85(b)(3)(iv)),
the statutory substantiation requirement at TSCA section 14(c)(3) (see
82 FR 6522, January 19, 2017), or the comment process described in 40
CFR 2.204(e).
B. When would substantiation be required?
EPA is proposing to require that all substantiations be filed not
later than 90 days after the effective date of the final rule. EPA is
proposing the same filing deadline for submissions identifying a
previously submitted substantiation for purposes of establishing
eligibility for an exemption. If a substantiation or notice of prior
CBI substantiation was not filed within the 90-day filing period in
accordance with all requirements of this proposed rule or voluntarily
filed in accordance with all requirements of 40 CFR 710.37(a)(1), EPA
is proposing to consider the confidentiality claim to be deficient and
would treat the specific chemical identity as not subject to a
confidentiality claim, such that EPA may make the information public
without further notice. This treatment of unsubstantiated
confidentiality claims as deficient would be consistent with how EPA
has handled unsubstantiated confidentiality claims in other
regulations, e.g., 40 CFR 710.37(a)(2) and (b) (Active-Inactive rule)
and 40 CFR 711.30(e) (Chemical Data Reporting rule). EPA nevertheless
requests comment on the validity of making this information public
without further notice, particularly where a claimant may have
previously submitted a substantiation to EPA less than five years
before the substantiation deadline that will be set in the final rule,
but failed to report and identify that previously-submitted
substantiation to EPA within the 90-day filing period.
C. How would CBI claims be substantiated?
EPA is proposing to require that non-exempt manufacturers and
processors substantiate any CBI claim for a specific chemical identity
that they requested to maintain in an NOA Form A by submitting answers
to the questions identified in Unit III.C.1, by providing the
certification statement identified in Unit III.C.2, and by requiring
that the submission be signed and dated by an authorized official.
1. Substantiation questions. a. Do you believe that the information
is exempt from substantiation pursuant to TSCA section 14(c)(2)? If you
answered yes, you must individually identify the specific information
claimed as confidential and specify the applicable exemption(s).
b. Will disclosure of the information likely result in substantial
harm to your business's competitive position? If you answered yes,
describe with specificity the substantial harmful effects that would
likely result to your competitive position if the information is made
available to the public.
c. To the extent your business has disclosed the information to
others (both internally and externally), what precautions has your
business taken? Identify the measures or internal controls your
business has taken to protect the information claimed as confidential:
Non-disclosure agreement required prior to access; access is limited to
individuals with a need-to-know; information is physically secured;
other internal control measure(s). If yes, explain.
d. Does the information appear in any public documents, including
(but not limited to) safety data sheets, advertising or promotional
material, professional or trade publication, or any other media or
publications available to the general public? If you answered yes,
explain why the information should be treated as confidential.
e. Is the claim of confidentiality intended to last less than 10
years? If so, indicate the number of years (between 1-10 years) or the
specific date/occurrence after which the claim is withdrawn.
f. Has EPA, another federal agency, or court made any
confidentiality determination regarding information associated with
this chemical substance? If you answered yes, explain the outcome of
that determination and provide a copy of the previous confidentiality
determination or any other information that will assist in identifying
the prior determination.
g. Is the confidential chemical substance publicly known to have
ever been offered for commercial distribution in the United States? If
you answered yes, explain why the information should be treated as
confidential.
2. Certification Statement. An authorized official of a
manufacturer or processor substantiating a request to maintain an
existing claim of confidentiality for specific chemical identity would
be required to certify that the submission complies with the
requirements of the rule by signing and dating the following
certification statement:
``I certify that all claims for confidentiality made or sought
to be maintained with this submission are true and correct, and all
information submitted herein to substantiate such claims is true and
correct. Any knowing and willful misrepresentation is subject to
criminal penalty pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1001. I further certify that
it is true and correct that:
My company has taken reasonable measures to protect the
confidentiality of the information;
I have determined that the information is not required
to be disclosed or otherwise made available to the public under any
other Federal law;
I have a reasonable basis to conclude that disclosure
of the information is likely to cause substantial harm to the
competitive position of my company; and
I have a reasonable basis to believe that the
information is not readily discoverable through reverse
engineering.''
D. How would information be submitted to EPA?
The proposed rule would require persons submitting substantiations
or information on previously submitted substantiations to follow the
electronic reporting procedures set forth in the Active-Inactive rule
at 40 CFR 710.39. Any person submitting a substantiation under this
proposed rule could claim any part or all of the substantiation as
confidential business information. Submitters would be required to use
EPA's electronic reporting portal, Central Data Exchange (CDX), and
EPA's web-based reporting tool, Chemical Information Submission System
(CISS). Because all submitters under this proposed rule would have
previously
[[Page 16830]]
filed NOA Form A's under the Active-Inactive rule using these
electronic reporting procedures, EPA expects that all submitters are
already registered with CDX and familiar with the electronic reporting
procedures. EPA is proposing mandatory electronic reporting because it
is expected to allow for more efficient data transmittal, support
improved data quality, and minimize respondent burden and reduce EPA
administrative costs associated with information submission and
recordkeeping.
E. How would EPA review claims of confidentiality for specific chemical
identities?
Consistent with how EPA handles the review of other TSCA
confidentiality claims, EPA would carefully consider the facts provided
in the substantiations, any pertinent previously issued confidentiality
determinations, and other reasonably available information that EPA
finds appropriate to determine the information's entitlement to
confidential treatment. See 40 CFR 2.204(f), 2.205(d)(2) and 2.306. EPA
would apply the substantive criteria for confidentiality determinations
set forth in 40 CFR 2.208 and 2.306(g), which provide in relevant part
that information is entitled to confidential treatment for the benefit
of a particular business if: (a) The business has asserted a
confidentiality claim which has not expired by its terms, nor been
waived nor withdrawn; (b) the business has satisfactorily shown that it
has taken reasonable measures to protect the confidentiality of the
information, and that it intends to continue to take such measures; (c)
the information is not, and has not been, reasonably obtainable without
the business's consent by other persons (other than governmental
bodies) by use of legitimate means (other than discovery based on a
showing of need in a judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding); (d) no
statute specifically requires disclosure of the information; and (e)
the business has satisfactorily shown that disclosure of the
information is likely to cause substantial harm to the business's
competitive position.
In instances where there are multiple NOA Form A's asserting the
confidentiality of the same chemical identity, the Agency may choose to
review these NOA Form A's together as a matter of efficiency.
In instances where a CBI claim is denied, the Agency would notify
the submitter, in writing, of EPA's intent to disclose the specific
chemical identity and of EPA's reasons for denying the claim. The
notice would be furnished by certified mail (return receipt requested),
by personal delivery, or by other means that allows verification of the
fact and date of receipt. EPA would not disclose the specific chemical
identity until the date that is 30 days after the date on which the
submitter receives the denial notice. Submitters can challenge EPA's
denial of a CBI claim by commencing an action to prevent disclosure in
an appropriate Federal district court. See generally TSCA section 14(g)
and 40 CFR 2.306(e). In instances where a CBI claim is approved, EPA
would so inform the submitter, and the chemical substance will be
identified in subsequent publications of the TSCA Inventory by a unique
identifier assigned under TSCA section 14(g)(4), in addition to the
accession number, generic name, and, if applicable, premanufacture
notice case number. Further information about the assignment and
application of unique identifiers for confidential chemical substances
may be found in the Federal Register of June 27, 2018 (83 FR 30168).
F. Annual Review Goals and Results, Extension
EPA is proposing to use the Agency's website to publish its annual
goal for reviews completed under this review plan at the beginning of
each calendar year, starting with its goals for 2020, which the Agency
anticipates would be posted in February 2020 on the Agency web page.
EPA is also proposing to track the number of CBI reviews completed
under this review plan each year and is proposing to use the Agency's
website to publish that number at the beginning of the following year,
starting with the number of reviews completed in 2020, which the Agency
anticipates would be posted on the Agency web page in February 2021.
These activities will address the requirements of TSCA section
8(b)(4)(E)(ii)(II).
EPA intends to implement the CBI review plan described in this
proposed rule to complete reviews of all CBI claims for specific
chemical identities not later than five years after the publication of
the first TSCA Inventory containing all ``active'' substance
designations based on NOA Form A's, as required under TSCA section
8(b)(4)(E)(i). Since the initial list of active substances published on
February 19, 2019, EPA intends to complete all reviews by February 19,
2024. EPA intends the annual review goals to take into consideration
this target completion date, the number of claims needing review, and
available resources. Before the effective date of this rule's
finalization, EPA may begin reviewing and deciding claims that were
voluntarily substantiated under the Active-Inactive rule (subject to
the outcome of pending litigation involving that rule), or that appear
to be clearly not entitled to protection from disclosure based upon
other information available to the Agency. TSCA section 14(i)(2)
expressly permits EPA to review, require (re)substantiation of, and
decide TSCA CBI claims before the effective date of such rules
applicable to those claims as EPA may promulgate after June 22, 2016.
EPA believes that TSCA section 14(i)(2) clearly authorizes the Agency
to begin its reviews under TSCA section 8(b)(4) prior to publication of
this final rule, and that doing so is appropriate in light of the
Congressionally-mandated timeline for the completion of reviews.
TSCA section 8(b)(4)(E)(ii)(I) provides that after an adequate
public justification, the Agency may extend the five-year deadline for
completion of reviews for not more than two additional years. While the
Agency does not currently anticipate a need for an extension, possible
justifications for an extension might include, among other things,
competing TSCA obligations which prevent the Agency from completing the
reviews within five years, intervening events that divert the Agency's
resources from completing the required reviews, or litigation involving
the claim substantiation and review process that may delay EPA's
commencement of CBI claim reviews. Should an extension become
necessary, EPA is proposing to announce the extension and its
justification to the public via a notice in the Federal Register.
G. Duration of Protection From Disclosure
TSCA section 8(b)(4)(D)(ii)(III) provides that specific chemical
identities for which EPA has approved a CBI claim under TSCA section
8(b)(4)(D) must be protected from disclosure for a period of 10 years,
unless, prior to the expiration of that period, the claimant notifies
EPA that they are withdrawing the confidentiality claim, in which case
the Agency cannot protect the information from disclosure; or the
Agency otherwise becomes aware that the information does not qualify
for protection from disclosure, in which case the Agency must take the
actions described in TSCA section 14(g)(2) (i.e., to notify the
claimant of EPA's intent to disclose the information). TSCA section
8(b)(4)(D)(ii)(III) does not explicitly state when the 10-year period
of protection begins, but TSCA section 8(b)(4)(D)(ii) provides as a
general matter that EPA's
[[Page 16831]]
actions under the review plan must be ``in accordance with section
14.'' Under TSCA section 14(e)(1)(B)(i), as amended on June 22, 2016,
the duration of protection from disclosure lasts ``for a period of 10
years from the date on which the person asserts the claim with respect
to the information submitted to the Administrator.''
Notably, all specific chemical identity CBI claims subject to
review under TSCA section 8(b)(4) and this proposed rule had already
been asserted by one or more persons prior to June 22, 2016, resulting
in the placement of the chemical substance on the confidential portion
of the TSCA Inventory. Pursuant to TSCA section 8(b)(4)(B)(ii) and the
Active-Inactive rule, manufacturers and processors submitting NOA Form
A's were only permitted to indicate that they seek to maintain an
existing claim for protection against disclosure of the specific
chemical identity of the chemical substance. TSCA section 8(b)(4)(C)
describes these requests to maintain existing claims as ``claims . . .
asserted pursuant to [TSCA section 8(b)(4)(B)],'' and TSCA section
8(b)(4)(D)(i) refers to ``manufacturers or processors asserting claims
under [TSCA section 8(b)(4)(B)]'' (emphasis added). Thus, EPA believes
Congress intended that the filing date of the request seeking to
maintain the CBI claim (i.e., the filing date of the NOA Form A) may
function as the date of claim assertion for purposes of determining the
period of protection from disclosure. However, in cases where the same
specific chemical identity was subject to a CBI claim in another
submission filed on or after June 22, 2016, EPA believes it would be
incongruous to effectively re-start the 10-year period of protection
from disclosure based upon the subsequent submission of a request
(i.e., an NOA Form A) seeking to maintain that claim. Accordingly, EPA
proposes to interpret the date of assertion for purposes of calculating
the duration of protection under TSCA section 8(b)(4)(D)(ii)(III) as
the date of submission of the first filing in which the specific
chemical identity was claimed as CBI after June 22, 2016. This
interpretation would impact the calculation of the period of protection
from disclosure where there are multiple submitters of the NOA Form A
that are asserting confidentiality claims on the same specific chemical
identity, as well as where one or more submitters of information to EPA
outside the context of the NOA Form A has asserted a specific chemical
identity confidentiality claim after June 22, 2016. Companies will be
notified of the date from which the 10-year period of protection will
be calculated.
For example, if on July 1, 2016, a company addressing a CDR rule
reporting requirement filed a report for a subject chemical substance
and asserted a CBI claim for the specific chemical identity, and if EPA
subsequently approved the company's confidentiality claim, then the 10-
year time period of protection from disclosure would begin on July 1,
2016. If that company subsequently filed an NOA Form A on January 1,
2018 and sought to maintain the confidentiality claim for that specific
chemical identity, and if EPA subsequently approved that claim, the 10-
year period of protection from disclosure would continue to run from
July 1, 2016, and would not restart on the date of NOA filing. If a
second company then filed an NOA Form A on February 1, 2018 seeking to
maintain a CBI claim for that same specific chemical identity, and the
second company's claim were approved, the 10-year period of protection
from disclosure would still run from July 1, 2016. In cases where an
NOA Form A was the first submission to assert the CBI claim for a
specific chemical identity after June 22, 2016, the 10-year period of
protection for an approved claim would begin on the date of that NOA
filing.
H. What are the record retention requirements?
EPA is proposing to require that persons subject to the finalized
rule retain records that document any information reported to EPA. The
proposed rule would require such records to be retained for a period of
5 years beginning on the last day of the submission period, which is
consistent with the statutory mandate in TSCA section 8(b)(9)(B).
IV. Request for Comments
EPA is seeking public comment on all aspects of this proposed rule,
including filing requirements, the exemptions process, annual goal
setting, duration of protection from disclosure, Agency reviews,
economic burden, and the scope of the substantiation questions
described in Unit III.C and referenced in the proposed regulatory text
at section 710.45, as well as other issues discussed in this document.
V. References
The following is a listing of the documents that are specifically
referenced in this document. The docket includes these references 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 contact listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
1. EPA. TSCA Inventory Notification (Active-Inactive)
Requirements Rule. Federal Register, 82 FR 37520, August 11, 2017
(FRL-9964-22).
2. EPA. Notice of Activity Form A; Final, 2017.
3. EPA. Economic Analysis for the Proposed Rule: Procedures for
Review of CBI Claims for the Identity of Chemicals on the TSCA
Inventory--RIN 2070-AK21--Office of Pollution Protection and Toxics.
Washington, DC, February 2019.
4. EPA. TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory. 2018. https://www.epa.gov/tsca-inventory/how-access-tsca-inventory.
5. EPA. ICR No. 2594.01 Information Collection Request for TSCA
Review Plan CBI Substantiation Supporting Statement for a Request
for OMB Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act. February 2019.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www.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 a significant regulatory action that was 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). Any changes made in response to OMB recommendations
have been documented in the docket for this action as required by
section 6(a)(3)(E) of Executive Order 12866.
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
This action is expected to be subject to the requirements for
regulatory actions specified in Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339,
February 3, 2017). EPA prepared an analysis of the estimated costs and
benefits associated with this action (Economic Analysis, Ref. 3), which
is available in the docket and is summarized in Unit I.E.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
The information collection activities in this proposed rule have
been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The Information Collection
Request (ICR)
[[Page 16832]]
document that the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR number ICR No.
2594.01 and OMB Control No. 2070-NEW (Ref. 5). You can find a copy of
the ICR in the docket for this rule, and it is briefly summarized here.
The reporting requirements identified in the proposed rule would
provide EPA with information necessary to evaluate confidentiality
claims and determine whether the claims qualify for protection from
disclosure. Manufacturers and processors who provided substantiations
pursuant to the voluntary substantiation process in the Active-Inactive
rule NOA collection would be exempt from the proposed substantiation
requirements. EPA would review each specific chemical identity CBI
claim and substantiation, and approve or deny each claim consistent
with the procedures and substantive criteria in TSCA sections 8(b)(4)
and 14 and 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.
Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory.
Frequency of response: Once per chemical.
Estimated total number of potential respondents: 126.
Estimated total burden: 3,629 hours (one time). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
Estimated total costs: $ 280,981 (one time), includes no annualized
capital investment or maintenance and operational costs.
Under PRA, an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is
not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers
are displayed either by publication in the Federal Register or by other
appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or
form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers for certain EPA
regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
Submit your comments on the Agency's need for this information, the
accuracy of the provided burden estimates and any suggested methods for
minimizing respondent burden to EPA using the docket identified at the
beginning of this proposed rule. You may also send your ICR-related
comments to OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs via
email to [email protected], Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.
Since OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR between 30
and 60 days after receipt, OMB must receive comments no later than May
23, 2019. EPA will respond to any ICR-related comments in the final
rule.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
Pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., I
certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities. The small entities subject to
the requirements of this action are manufacturers (including importers)
and processors of chemical substances. EPA estimates that a total of
126 companies are expected to be impacted by this proposed rule, of
which 121 are identified as small entities. Given the estimated per
submission burden and costs range from 5.1 hours and $390 (for Group
(2)) to 34.1 hours and $ 2,640 (for Group (3)), as presented in Unit
1.E. EPA has determined that all 121 of the identified small entities
considered in this analysis will experience an impact of less than 1%
of revenues.
In the affected universe of small entities, there are two groups of
entities affected by this proposed rule (Groups (2) and (3)), based on
the extent of substantiation information involved in the submission.
Entities of Group (3) are expected to incur the highest burden under
this proposed rule, as they are required to submit full confidentiality
substantiations (each submission involving an average of 27 chemicals
per entity) in response to the regulatory requirements. As a
conservative approach, in this small entity analysis the higher unit
cost from Group (3), as the most affected group, is applied to all
small entities. Details of this analysis are included in the
accompanying Economic Analysis for this proposed rule (Ref. 3).
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain an unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The action is not expected to impose enforceable
duty on any state, local or tribal governments, and the requirements
imposed on the private sector are not expected to result in annual
expenditures of $100 million or more for the private sector. As such,
EPA has determined that the requirements of UMRA sections 202, 203,
204, or 205 do not apply to this action.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). It will not have
substantial direct effects on the 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). It will not have
substantial direct effects 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. Thus, E.O. 13175 does not apply to this
action.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997),
as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or
safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of
Executive Order 13045 has the potential to influence the regulation.
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not
establish an environmental standard intended to mitigate health or
safety risks.
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 a significant adverse effect on energy supply,
distribution, or use.
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
Since this action does not involve any technical standards, NTTAA
section 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272 note, does not apply to this action.
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
This action does not entail special considerations of environmental
justice related issues as delineated by Executive Order 12898 (59 FR
7629, February 16, 1994), because it does not establish an
environmental health or safety standard. This action establishes an
information requirement and does not affect the level of protection
provided to human health or the environment.
[[Page 16833]]
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 710
Environmental Protection, Chemicals, Confidential Business
Information, Hazardous substances, Reporting and Recordkeeping
Requirements.
Dated: April 10, 2019.
Andrew R. Wheeler,
Administrator.
Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR chapter I be amended as
follows:
PART 710--COMPILATION OF THE TSCA CHEMICAL SUBSTANCE INVENTORY
0
1. The authority citation for part 710 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2607(a) and (b).
0
2. Add subpart C to read as follows:
Subpart C--Review Plan
Sec.
710.41 Scope.
710.43 Persons subject to substantiation requirement.
710.45 Contents of substantiation.
710.47 When to submit substantiation or information on previous
substantiation.
710.49 No confidentiality claim.
710.51 Electronic filing.
710.53 Record-keeping requirements.
710.55 Claim review, duration of protection, TSCA Inventory
maintenance, posting results, and extension.
Sec. 710.41 Scope.
This part applies to the substantiation and review of claims of
confidentiality asserted in Notices of Activity Form A to protect the
specific chemical identities of chemical substances.
Sec. 710.43 Persons subject to substantiation requirement.
(a) Any person who filed a Notice of Activity Form A requesting to
maintain an existing confidentiality claim for a specific chemical
identity must substantiate that confidentiality claim as specified in
Sec. Sec. 710.45 and 710.47 unless eligible for an exemption.
(b) Exemptions. (1) Any person who completed the voluntary
substantiation process set forth in Sec. 710.37(a)(1) by submitting
with the Notice of Activity Form A answers to the questions in Sec.
710.37(c)(1) and (2), signed and dated by an authorized official, and
completing the certification statement for claims specified in Sec.
710.37(e), is exempt from the substantiation requirement of this
subpart.
(2) A person who has previously substantiated the confidentiality
claim for a specific chemical identity that the person requested to
maintain in a Notice of Activity Form A is exempt from the
substantiation requirement of this subpart if both of the following
conditions are met:
(i) The previous substantiation was submitted to EPA on or after
[insert date five years before the date that is 90 days after effective
date of final rule]; and
(ii) The person reports to EPA the submission date; submission
type; and case number, transaction ID, or equivalent identifier for the
previous submission that contained the substantiation, not later than
the deadline specified in Sec. 710.47.
Sec. 710.45 Contents of substantiation.
A person substantiating a confidentiality claim for a specific
chemical identity must submit answers to the questions in Sec.
710.37(c)(1) and (2), signed and dated by an authorized official, and
complete the certification statement in Sec. 710.37(e). If any of the
information contained in the answers to the questions listed in Sec.
710.37(c)(1) or (2) is claimed as confidential, the submitter must
clearly indicate such by marking the substantiation as confidential
business information.
Sec. 710.47 When to submit substantiation or information on previous
substantiation.
(a) All persons required to substantiate a confidentiality claim
pursuant to Sec. 710.43(a) must submit their substantiation not later
than [insert date that is 90 days after effective date of final rule].
(b) All persons who seek an exemption under Sec. 710.43(b)(2) must
submit the information specified in Sec. 710.43(b)(2)(iii) not later
than [date that is 90 days after effective date of final rule].
Sec. 710.49 No confidentiality claim.
If substantiation required under Sec. 710.43(a) is not submitted
to EPA in accordance with the provisions of this subpart, and no
exemption under Sec. 710.43(b) applies, EPA will consider the
confidentiality claim as deficient, so that the specific chemical
identity is not subject to a confidentiality claim, and EPA may make
the information public without further notice to the Notice of Activity
Form A submitter.
Sec. 710.51 Electronic filing.
EPA will accept information submitted under this subpart only if
submitted in accordance with Sec. 710.39.
Sec. 710.53 Record-keeping requirements.
Each person who is subject to this part must retain records that
document any information reported to EPA. Records must be retained for
a period of 5 years beginning on the last day of the submission period.
Sec. 710.55 Claim review, duration of protection, TSCA Inventory
maintenance, posting results, and extension.
(a) Review criteria and procedures. Except as set forth in this
subpart, confidentiality claims for specific chemical identities
asserted in Notices of Activity Form A will be reviewed and approved or
denied in accordance with the criteria and procedures in 40 CFR part 2,
subpart B.
(b) Duration of protection from disclosure. Except as provided in
40 CFR part 2, subpart B, and section 14 of TSCA, a specific chemical
identity that is the subject of an approved confidentiality claim under
this subpart will be protected from disclosure for a period of 10 years
from the date on which the confidentiality claim was first asserted by
any submitter after June 22, 2016, unless, prior to the expiration of
the period, the claimant notifies EPA that the person is withdrawing
the confidentiality claim, in which case EPA will not protect the
information from disclosure; or EPA otherwise becomes aware that the
information does not qualify for protection from disclosure, in which
case EPA will take the actions described in TSCA section 14(g)(2) to
notify the claimant of EPA's intent to disclose the information.
(c) Updating the TSCA Inventory. EPA will periodically update the
TSCA Inventory based on the results of the reviews of the
confidentiality claims asserted in Notices of Activity Form A.
(d) Posting of annual goals and numbers of reviews completed. At
the beginning of each calendar year, EPA will publish an annual goal
for reviews and the number of reviews completed in the prior year on
the Agency website. Determination of annual review goals will take into
consideration the number of claims needing review, available resources,
and a target completion date for all reviews under this subpart not
later than February 19, 2024.
(e) Extension. If EPA determines that the target completion date in
paragraph (d) of this section cannot be met based on the number of
claims needing review and the available resources, then EPA will
publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the extension of
the deadline to complete its review of all confidentiality claims under
this subpart for not more than two additional years, together with an
explanation of the reasons for the extension.
[FR Doc. 2019-07920 Filed 4-22-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P