Toxic Substances Control Act Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements for Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances, 70516-70559 [2023-22094]
Download as PDF
70516
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
I. Executive Summary
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 705
[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0549; FRL–7902–02–
OCSPP]
RIN 2070–AK67
Toxic Substances Control Act
Reporting and Recordkeeping
Requirements for Perfluoroalkyl and
Polyfluoroalkyl Substances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is finalizing reporting and
recordkeeping requirements for per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)
under the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA). In accordance with obligations
under TSCA, as amended by the
National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020, EPA is requiring
persons that manufacture (including
import) or have manufactured these
chemical substances in any year since
January 1, 2011, to submit information
to EPA regarding PFAS uses, production
volumes, byproducts, disposal,
exposures, and existing information on
environmental or health effects. In
addition to fulfilling statutory
obligations under TSCA, this rule will
enable EPA to better characterize the
sources and quantities of manufactured
PFAS in the United States.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
November 13, 2023.
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0549, is
available online at https://
www.regulations.gov. Additional
instructions for 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: Alie
Muneer, Data Gathering and Analysis
Division (7406M), Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001;
telephone number: (202) 564–6369;
email address: muneer.alie@epa.gov.
For general information contact: The
TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422
South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY
14620; telephone number: (202) 554–
1404; email address: TSCA-Hotline@
epa.gov.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
SUMMARY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
A. Does this action apply to me?
This action may apply to you if you
have manufactured (defined by statute
at 15 U.S.C. 2602(9) to include import)
PFAS for a commercial purpose at any
time since January 1, 2011. The
following list of North American
Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
to help readers determine whether this
document applies to them. Potentially
affected entities may include:
• Construction (NAICS code 23);
• Manufacturing (NAICS code 31
through 33);
• Wholesale trade (NAICS code 42);
• Retail trade (NAICS code 44
through 45); and
• Waste management and
remediation services (NAICS code 562).
This list details the types of entities
that EPA is aware could potentially be
regulated by this action. Other types of
entities not listed could also be
regulated. To determine whether your
entity is regulated by this action, you
should carefully examine the
applicability criteria found in 40 CFR
705.10 and 705.12. If you have
questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular entity, consult
the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
B. What is the Agency’s authority for
taking this action?
EPA is promulgating this rule
pursuant to its authority in TSCA
section 8(a)(7) (15 U.S.C. 2607(a)(7)).
The National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2020 (FY 2020 NDAA)
(Pub. L. 116–92, section 7351) amended
TSCA section 8(a) in December 2019,
adding section 8(a)(7), titled ‘‘PFAS
Data.’’ TSCA section 8(a)(7) requires
EPA to promulgate a rule ‘‘requiring
each person who has manufactured a
chemical substance that is a [PFAS] in
any year since January 1, 2011’’ to
report information described in TSCA
section 8(a)(2)(A) through (G). This
includes a broad range of information,
such as information related to chemical
identity and structure, production, use,
byproducts, exposure, disposal, and
health and environmental effects.
TSCA section 14 imposes
requirements for the assertion,
substantiation, and review of
information that is claimed as
confidential business information (CBI).
C. What action is the Agency taking?
In this action, EPA is promulgating
reporting and recordkeeping
requirements for entities who have
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
manufactured (including imported) a
PFAS for commercial purposes at any
point since January 1, 2011. This rule
takes into consideration comments
received on the proposed rule (86 FR
33926, June 28, 2021 (FRL–10017–78))
input from the Small Business
Advocacy Review (SBAR) Panel that
was convened following publication of
the proposed rule, and comments
received on the SBAR Panel Report and
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA), which EPA published with a
Notice of Data Availability (NODA) (Ref.
1). Details on the final rule
requirements, including modifications
from the proposal, are explained in Unit
III.
EPA is finalizing this rule both to
fulfill its obligations under TSCA
section 8(a)(7), as amended by the FY
2020 NDAA, and to create a more
comprehensive database of previously
manufactured PFAS to improve the
Agency’s understanding of PFAS in
commerce and to support actions to
address PFAS exposure and
contamination.
D. Why is the Agency taking this action?
TSCA section 8(a)(7) requires EPA to
promulgate a rule requiring each person
who has manufactured a PFAS in any
year since January 1, 2011, to report
certain information for each year since
January 1, 2011.
E. What are the incremental economic
impacts?
EPA has evaluated the costs and
benefits of this rulemaking and
provided an Economic Analysis of the
potential impacts associated with this
rule (Ref. 2). The primary benefit of this
rule is providing EPA with data on
PFAS which have been manufactured,
including imported, for commercial
purposes since 2011; the Agency is not
currently aware of any similar source of
information for these substances of
interest. Subsequently, EPA will use
these data to support activities
addressing PFAS under TSCA, as well
as activities and programs under other
environmental statutes. The additional
data on the production, use, exposure,
and environmental and health effects of
PFAS in the United States may allow
EPA to more effectively determine
whether additional risk assessment and
management measures are needed. This
information may lead to reduced costs
of risk-based decision making and
improved decisions concerning PFAS.
EPA has evaluated the potential costs
of this reporting and recordkeeping
requirement for manufacturers and
article importers. Since the notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
published on June 28, 2021 (86 FR
33926 (FRL–10017–78)), EPA found
additional data and received feedback
via public comments to update its
economic analysis, including estimating
the number of PFAS article importers.
EPA revised cost estimates from $10.8
million in industry costs detailed in the
draft Economic Analysis for the
proposed rule to $876 million detailed
in the IRFA and NODA (Ref. 1), to $843
million using a 3 percent discount rate
and $800 million using a 7 percent
discount rate at the final rule stage. The
final Economic Analysis (Ref. 2), which
is available in the docket, is briefly
summarized here. The regulated
community is expected to incur onetime burdens and costs associated with
rule familiarization, compliance
determination, form completion, CBI
claim substantiation, recordkeeping,
and electronic reporting activities.
Industry is estimated to incur a burden
of approximately 11.6 million hours,
with a cost of approximately $843
million and $800 million under a 3
percent and 7 percent discount rate,
respectively. The Agency is expected to
incur a cost of $1.6 million. The total
social cost is therefore estimated to be
approximately $844.8 million and
$801.7 million under a 3 percent and 7
percent discount rate, respectively.
II. Background
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
A. What are PFAS?
PFAS are a group of synthetic
chemicals that have been in use since
the 1940s and can be found in a wide
array of industrial and consumer
products (Refs. 2 and 3). PFAS are
synthesized for many different uses,
ranging from firefighting foams to
coatings for clothes and furniture, to
food contact substances, to the
manufacture of other chemicals and
products. They are used in a wide
variety of products, including textiles,
electronics, wires and cables, pipes,
cooking and bakeware, sport articles,
automotive products, toys,
transportation equipment, and musical
instruments, which may be imported
into the United States as finished
articles (Ref. 2). PFAS can be released to
the environment throughout the
lifecycle of manufacturing, processing,
distribution, use, and disposal (Refs. 3
and 4). There is evidence that exposure
to some PFAS in the environment may
be linked to harmful health effects in
humans and animals, and that
continued exposure above specific
levels to certain PFAS may lead to
adverse health effects (Refs. 2, 3, and 4).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
B. What is TSCA section 8(a)(7)?
On December 20, 2019, the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2020 (NDAA) was signed into law
(Pub. L. 116–92). Among other
provisions, section 7321 of NDAA
added TSCA section 8(a)(7) which states
that the Administrator shall promulgate
a rule in accordance with this
subsection requiring each person who
has manufactured a chemical substance
that is a perfluoroalkyl or
polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS) in any
year since January 1, 2011, to submit to
the Administrator a report that includes,
for each year since January 1, 2011, the
information described in subparagraphs
(A) through (G) of paragraph (2). The
categories of information described in
sections 8(a)(2)(A) through (G) are:
• The common or trade name,
chemical identity and molecular
structure of each chemical substance or
mixture for which a report is required;
• Categories or proposed categories of
use for each substance or mixture;
• Total amount of each substance or
mixture manufactured or processed, the
amounts manufactured or processed for
each category of use, and reasonable
estimates of the respective proposed
amounts;
• Descriptions of byproducts
resulting from the manufacture,
processing, use, or disposal of each
substance or mixture;
• All existing information concerning
the environmental and health effects of
each substance or mixture;
• The number of individuals exposed,
and reasonable estimates on the number
of individuals who will be exposed, to
each substance or mixture in their
places of work and the duration of their
exposure; and
• The manner or method of disposal
of each substance or mixture, and any
change in such manner or method.
Finally, in carrying out TSCA section
8, section 8(a)(5) requires EPA, to the
extent feasible, to (A) not require
unnecessary or duplicative reporting,
(B) minimize compliance costs on small
manufacturers and processors, and (C)
apply any reporting obligations to those
persons likely to have information
relevant to effective implementation of
TSCA.
C. What did EPA propose?
In the proposed rule, EPA published
for the reporting and recordkeeping
requirements for PFAS manufacturers
under TSCA section 8(a)(7). EPA
proposed to require any entity who had
commercially manufactured a PFAS that
is a TSCA chemical substance at any
time since January 1, 2011, to
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70517
electronically report certain information
to EPA regarding PFAS identity,
production volumes, industrial uses,
commercial and consumer uses,
byproducts, worker exposure, disposal,
and any existing information related to
environmental and health effects. Such
information would be reported for each
year since 2011 in which a covered
PFAS was manufactured, to the extent
such information were known to or
reasonably ascertainable by the reporter.
EPA also proposed a five-year
recordkeeping period following the
submission date.
EPA also proposed the following
structural definition of PFAS: per- and
polyfluorinated substances that
structurally contain the unit R-(CF2)–
C(F)(R′)R″. Both the CF2 and CF
moieties are saturated carbons and none
of the R groups (R, R′, or R″) can be
hydrogen. Under the proposal, reporting
would have been required for any TSCA
chemical substance (including any
mixture with a chemical substance)
which met the proposed structural
definition and had been manufactured
for a commercial purpose at any time
since January 1, 2011.
EPA did not propose any reporting
exemptions or production volume
thresholds. The scope of covered
chemical substances under the proposed
rule included any amounts of PFAS
which were known to or reasonably
ascertainable by the manufacturer,
including PFAS-containing articles,
byproducts, and impurities. EPA also
did not propose any exemptions or
flexibilities for small manufacturers.
EPA proposed a six-month
information collection period following
the effective date of the final rule, after
which the reporting tool would open for
a six-month reporting period. Thus, the
proposed rule stipulated a reporting
deadline one year from the effective
date of the final rule.
III. Final PFAS Reporting and
Recordkeeping Requirements
In this unit, EPA discusses in detail
the final reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, including changes from
the proposed rule in response to public
input.
A. What substances are covered by this
rule?
1. The Scope of PFAS for the Purpose
of This Rule
Under TSCA section 8(a)(7), EPA
must collect information on chemical
substances manufactured (including
imported) for commercial purposes,
including chemical substances present
in a mixture, that are ‘‘perfluoroalkyl or
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
70518
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
polyfluoroalkyl substances,’’ or PFAS.
TSCA section 8(a)(7) does not define or
characterize ‘‘PFAS.’’ EPA has
determined that any TSCA chemical
substance (as that term is defined by
TSCA section 3(2); see Unit IV.A.2.) that
falls within the structural definition at
40 CFR 705.3 is subject to reporting
under TSCA section 8(a)(7), if it has
been manufactured for commercial
purposes in any year since January 1,
2011. The proposed definition defined
PFAS as a substance that includes the
following structure: R-(CF2)–C(F)(R′)R″,
in which both the CF2 and CF moieties
are saturated carbons and none of the R
groups (R, R′ or R″) can be hydrogen.
EPA found that at least 1,364 substances
from both the TSCA Inventory
(Inventory) and Low-Volume Exemption
(LVE) claims would meet the proposed
structural definition. Separately, a count
of chemicals meeting the proposed
definition on EPA’s CompTox
Chemicals Dashboard (Ref. 6) found
approximately 9,400 structures, though
many of those structures are not known
TSCA chemical substances and would
be out of scope of reporting for this rule,
as explained in section III.A.2 of this
rule.
EPA determined that a structural
definition was more appropriate for this
rule than a discrete list of specifically
identified substances. Other TSCA
requirements have relied on a structural
definition when appropriate (e.g., the
long-chain perfluoroalkyl carboxylate
(LCPFAC) significant new use rule
(SNUR) defines covered substances
using a structural definition (40 CFR
721.10536) (Ref. 7), and the polymer
exemption rule for new chemical premanufacture notices (PMNs) defines
covered PFAS polymers using structural
definitions (40 CFR 723.250)).
Additionally, other scientific and
regulatory bodies, such as the
Organization of Economic Cooperation
and Development (OECD) (Refs. 8 and
9), have defined PFAS using various
structural definitions. Thus, there is
clear precedent for using a structural
definition both for TSCA rules and for
actions addressing PFAS, and a
structural definition is consistent with
the text of TSCA section 8(a)(7). EPA
also determined that limiting the scope
of reporting to a discrete list of
chemicals would eliminate reporting on
substances of interest to the Agency.
Given various reporting exemptions for
both existing chemicals (e.g., certain
byproducts and research and
development (R&D) substances are
exempt from reporting in the Chemical
Data Reporting (CDR) rule) and new
chemicals (e.g., byproducts and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
impurities that are not listed on the
Inventory), and with minimum
reporting thresholds under other rules,
EPA may be unaware of some TSCA
chemical substances which meet this
structural definition of PFAS. Providing
a discrete list based on substances
currently on the Inventory and in LVEs
likely limits EPA’s ability to capture all
substances that meet the structural
definition, and which may present
properties similar to perfluorooctanoic
acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane sulfonic
acid (PFOS), and hexafluoropropylene
oxide dimer acid (HFPO–DA) and its
ammonium salt (popularly known as
‘‘GenX’’). Therefore, EPA is defining
PFAS for this TSCA section 8(a)(7) rule
using a structural definition to avoid
inadvertently limiting the scope of
reporting to substances on a discrete
list.
After reviewing public comments,
EPA determined that the proposed
definition may not include all
substances for which EPA believes
reporting of information is necessary
(see additional discussion of relevant
public comment in Unit IV.A).
Therefore, EPA is modifying the
definition of PFAS from the proposal.
For the purpose of this TSCA section
8(a)(7) reporting rule, EPA is defining
‘‘PFAS’’ using a structural definition.
PFAS is defined as including at least
one of these three structures:
• R-(CF2)-CF(R′)R″, where both the
CF2 and CF moieties are saturated
carbons;
• R–CF2OCF2-R′, where R and R′ can
either be F, O, or saturated carbons; and
• CF3C(CF3)R′R″, where R′ and R″ can
either be F or saturated carbons.
Manufacturers of substances that do
not meet this structural definition are
not required to report under this rule.
EPA is providing a list of substances
that meet this definition, gathered from
the Inventory, LVEs, and the CompTox
Chemicals Dashboard; this list will be
available in the CompTox Chemicals
Dashboard at https://comptox.epa.gov/
dashboard. A substance that is not on
this list but still falls under the
definition of a ‘‘chemical substance’’
under TSCA (see Unit III.A.2) is subject
to this rule if the substance has been
manufactured for a commercial purpose
since 2011.
EPA is modifying the proposed
definition first to remove the R group
requirements, resulting in the first substructure of this rule’s definition of
PFAS (i.e., R-(CF2)-CF(R′)R″, where both
the CF2 and CF moieties are saturated
carbons). The removal of the R group
requirements from the proposed
definition will expand the universe of
PFAS to include additional substances
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
of potential concern because they are
likely to be persistent. While the
proposed definition was developed to
focus on substances most likely to be
persistent in the environment while
excluding those substances that are
‘‘lightly’’ fluorinated (i.e., the molecule
only contains unconnected CF2 or CF3
moieties), EPA acknowledges that
substances that are not fully fluorinated
may still be persistent in the
environment. This is because the
persistence of organofluoro compounds
is more related to the density of C–F
bonds within the molecule than simply
the existence of fully fluorinated
carbons (Ref. 10). The final definition,
which does not include the proposed
definition’s R group requirements
focuses the definition on those
substances most likely to persist in the
environment. The final definition does
not include substances that only have a
single fluorinated carbon, or
unsaturated fluorinated moieties (e.g.,
fluorinated aromatic rings and olefins).
The latter set of substances are more
susceptible to chemical transformation
than their saturated counterparts, and
therefore, are less likely to persist in the
environment (Ref. 10). EPA has
determined that, for the purpose of this
rule, it is unnecessary to extend
reporting requirements to substances
that only have a single fluorinated
carbon or unsaturated fluorinated
moieties and are therefore less likely to
persist in the environment, unlike
substances like PFOA, PFOS, and GenX.
In addition to modifying the proposed
definition by removing the R group
requirements, EPA determined that the
definition should be further expanded
by adding two sub-structures that will
include certain substances of interest to
the Agency and to public commenters.
Furthermore, the additional two substructures will encompass other
chemical substances that are persistent
in the environment but were not
covered by the proposed definition. The
second sub-structure (R–CF2OCF2-R′,
where R and R′ can either be F, O, or
saturated carbons) aims to capture
certain fluorinated ethers. EPA believes
that these ethers are likely to be found
in water; for example, perfluoro-2methoxyacetic acid (PFMOAA)
(Chemical Abstracts Service Registry
Number (CASRN) 674–13–5) and other
chemicals with structures similar to
GenX found in the Cape Fear River.
However, they may not have been
reported to the Inventory or as an LVE,
and therefore would not have been
considered when developing the
proposed definition, which focused on
substances in the known TSCA universe
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
(i.e., the Inventory and LVEs).
Additionally, it is possible that such
substances are not on the Inventory due
to TSCA reporting exemptions (e.g.,
byproducts, or certain R&D substances).
Based on these ethers’ properties and
the lack of prior TSCA reporting, EPA
believes that data related to the
manufacturing of these PFAS is
necessary to carry out TSCA section
8(a)(7) and would not be duplicative of
other reporting. Thus, EPA is interested
in known or reasonably ascertainable
information on substances meeting this
sub-structure definition, as it meets
EPA’s threshold of focusing on
chemicals more likely to exhibit
properties similar to GenX (along with
PFOA and PFOS), including their likely
presence in the environment.
Finally, the third sub-structure
(CF3C(CF3)R′R″, where R′ and R″ can
either be F or saturated carbons) aims to
capture a different type of branching for
highly fluorinated substances that
would not meet the proposed definition
due to their non-adjacent fluorinated
carbons. These substances are likely to
be persistent, and EPA believes that
reporting for these more branched
substances is necessary to collect the
information described in TSCA section
8(a)(2)(A)–(G) for substances with
similar persistence properties as PFOA,
PFOS, or GenX. For instance, 4,4,4Trifluoro-2,2,3,3tetra)kis(trifluoromethyl)butanoic acid
(CASRN 1882109–62–7) would not have
met the proposed definition due to its
non-adjacent fluorinated carbons, but it
has the same number of carbon,
fluorine, and oxygen atoms as PFOA,
and has been identified as an isomer of
PFOA under the Stockholm Convention
(Ref. 11). Further, this substance, like
other substances meeting this substructure, has many highly fluorinated
moieties such that EPA believes it is
likely to be persistent in the
environment. EPA is interested in
known or reasonably ascertainable
information on substances meeting this
sub-structure definition, as these
chemicals are likely to persist in
environments to which they are
released.
Under this rule’s definition of PFAS,
EPA identified additional substances
that may be subject to the rule from the
Inventory and LVEs, i.e., ‘‘known TSCA
chemical substances.’’ Specifically, EPA
identified an additional 22 chemical
substances on the Inventory and 19
LVEs, all of which are now covered
under the first sub-structure of this
rule’s definition. To date, EPA has not
identified any additional substances on
the Inventory or as an LVE under the
second and third sub-structures. This
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
70519
relatively modest increase of 41 known
TSCA chemical substances would bring
the known universe of TSCA chemical
substances meeting this rule’s definition
of PFAS to 1,462, from 1,364 known
TSCA PFAS identified by the proposed
definition. However, as discussed
previously, a substance’s absence on the
Inventory or LVEs may be due, at least
in part, to several exemptions for
Inventory and new chemicals reporting
(e.g., byproducts, impurities, certain
R&D substances). In the absence of those
exemptions, a PFAS meeting the
definition under TSCA section 3(2) may
be subject to reporting under this rule.
EPA is also affirming that
fluoropolymers which meet this rule’s
definition of PFAS are reportable under
this rule; this includes higher molecular
weight fluoropolymers. EPA does not
believe the requested data on
fluoropolymers would be considered
duplicative or unnecessary: this
information is not reported to EPA
otherwise, and any manufacturers’
existing information on such
fluoropolymers will inform EPA’s
understanding of such types of PFAS
within U.S. commerce, including their
downstream uses and their disposal
methods.
EPA notes that this definition may not
be identical to other definitions of PFAS
used within EPA and/or by other
organizations. The term ‘‘PFAS’’ has
been used broadly by many
organizations for their individual
research and/or regulatory needs.
Various programs or organizations have
distinct needs or purposes apart from
this TSCA section 8(a)(7) reporting rule,
and therefore, different definitions of
the term ‘‘PFAS’’ may be appropriate for
other purposes. The Agency notes that
this perspective, that different users
may have very different needs and no
single PFAS characterization or
definition meets all needs, is shared by
many other organizations, including
OECD (see page 29, Ref. 8). EPA has
determined the final definition of
‘‘PFAS’’ is the most appropriate
definition for this TSCA section 8(a)(7)
rule and acknowledges that there may
be other rules or programs who apply
different definitions to meet their own
needs.
occurring in whole or in part as a result
of a chemical reaction or occurring in
nature, and (2) Any element or
uncombined radical. This rule does not
require reporting on activities that are
excluded from the definition of
‘‘chemical substance’’ in TSCA section
3(2)(B).
Even though the definition of
chemical substance excludes mixtures,
PFAS as a chemical substance may be
present in a mixture. Therefore, this rule
requires reporting on each chemical
substance that is a PFAS, including as
a component of a mixture. This rule
does not require reporting on
components of a mixture that do not fall
under the structural definition of PFAS,
as explained in Unit III.A.1.
2. Definition of ‘‘Chemical Substance’’
Under TSCA and PFAS in Mixtures
This rule is limited to manufacturers
(including importers) of PFAS that are
considered a ‘‘chemical substance.’’
Under TSCA section 3(2), ‘‘chemical
substance’’ means any organic or
inorganic substance of a particular
molecular identity, including: (1) Any
combination of such substances
2. Scope of ‘‘Manufacture for
Commercial Purposes’’
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
B. Which entities are covered by this
rule?
1. Scope of Covered Entities
Anyone who has manufactured
(including imported) a PFAS for a
commercial purpose in any year since
January 1, 2011, is covered by this rule.
As noted in Unit III.B.2, ‘‘manufacture
for a commercial purpose’’ includes the
coincidental manufacture of PFAS as
byproducts or impurities. EPA believes
at least portions of the NAICS codes
listed in Unit I.A. may be covered by
this rule. This rule extends to
manufacturers (including importers)
only. Importers of PFAS in articles are
considered PFAS manufacturers.
Persons who have only processed,
distributed in commerce, used, and/or
disposed of PFAS are not required to
report under this rule, unless they also
have manufactured PFAS for a
commercial purpose. If an entity (such
as a wastewater treatment plant) is
simply processing PFAS they received
domestically, and not also
manufacturing PFAS, including as a
byproduct, then the entity is not
covered by this rule. Although EPA
received several public comments about
extending the rule to cover processors
(see Unit IV.), TSCA section 8(a)(7) only
refers to manufacturers and expanding
the rule to processors would be
pursuant to EPA’s separate rulemaking
authority at TSCA section 8(a)(1), which
the Agency is not pursuing at this time.
Pursuant to TSCA section 8(f), the
scope of ‘‘manufacturing’’ for the
purposes of this rule is limited to
entities manufacturing for a commercial
purpose. EPA is defining ‘‘manufacture
for commercial purposes’’ to align with
definitions used in other rules.
Specifically, ‘‘manufacture for
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
70520
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
commercial purposes’’ includes the
import, production, or manufacturing of
a chemical substance or mixture
containing a chemical substance with
the purpose of obtaining an immediate
or eventual commercial advantage for
the manufacturer. This includes, but is
not limited to, the manufacture of
chemical substances or mixtures for
commercial distribution, including test
marketing, or for use by the
manufacturer itself as an intermediate or
for product research and development.
‘‘Manufacture for commercial purposes’’
also includes the coincidental
manufacture of byproducts and
impurities that are produced during the
manufacture, processing, use, or
disposal of another chemical substance
or mixture. As described in Unit III.B.1,
simply receiving PFAS from domestic
suppliers or other domestic sources is
not, in itself, considered manufacturing
PFAS for commercial purposes. Entities
that process and/or use PFAS only need
to report on PFAS they have
manufactured (including imported), if
any.
However, certain activities are not
considered ‘‘manufacture for
commercial purposes’’ under TSCA
section 8(f) (e.g., non-commercial R&D
activities such as scientific
experimentation, research, or analysis
conducted by academic, government, or
independent not-for-profit research
organizations, unless the activity is for
eventual commercial purposes) and are
not subject to the reporting
requirements in this rule. For example,
reporting would not be required for a
Federal agency which manufactures or
imports PFAS when it is not for any
immediate or eventual commercial
advantage.
3. Non-Reportable Activities
As discussed in Unit III.B.2, entities
who have manufactured PFAS for a
commercial purpose include those who
have imported PFAS (including in
wastes), or those who have
coincidentally produced PFAS during
the manufacture, processing, use, or
disposal of another chemical substance
or mixture. EPA noted in the proposed
rule that this may include certain waste
management companies, if they have
imported PFAS in a waste or produced
PFAS at their site during the disposal of
another chemical substance or mixture.
Through public comments and input
during the SBAR Panel, EPA
understands that entities engaged in
certain waste management activities are
in the unique position of not having
knowledge of PFAS they may have
manufactured for commercial purposes.
Entities that import municipal solid
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
wastes (MSW) for the purpose of
disposal or destruction cannot know or
reasonably ascertain that they imported
PFAS in the MSW streams. MSW
streams are heterogeneous and generally
difficult to characterize, in the absence
of notification or labeling requirements
related to the content of the waste.
There were no Federal labeling or
notification requirements for PFAS in
wastes concurrent with this reporting
period, nor are there general labeling
practices for PFAS in MSW streams that
are sent for disposal or destruction.
Additionally, standard analytical
methods for PFAS in MSW streams
were not available during this reporting
period. Because no PFAS was listed as
a hazardous waste and subject to
notification requirements under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) or other Federal laws during
this rule’s lookback period (i.e., since
January 1, 2011), and due to general
industry practices, EPA understands
that importers of MSW streams for
disposal or destruction would not have
any records or data that they had
imported PFAS or any other information
relevant to TSCA section 8(a)(7).
Therefore, EPA has determined that
waste management activities involving
importing municipal solid waste
streams for the purpose of disposal or
destruction are not within scope of this
rule’s reporting requirements, per EPA’s
obligations under TSCA section
8(a)(5)(C).
However, EPA is not broadly
exempting all waste management
facilities from this rule. Facilities that
have imported waste containing PFAS,
other than in MSW streams for
destruction or disposal, are likely to
have information relevant to this rule.
Other waste management sites may have
relevant information regarding PFAS
contents in waste they have imported
outside of MSW, or for the purpose of
recycle or reuse; thus, EPA is required
to apply reporting requirements to such
entities who may have relevant
information, pursuant to TSCA section
8(a)(5)(C). This would include waste
management sites who import PFAScontaining waste (including in MSW)
for the purpose of recycling or reuse for
PFAS-containing products, as well as
waste management sites who import
PFAS in wastes that are not municipal
solid waste streams. In the former
activity, entities who import wastes that
may contain PFAS, such as some
carpets and rugs, for the purpose of
recycling or reusing the PFAScontaining material, may be aware of the
general nature of those materials and the
downstream processing and use
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
information that is responsive to this
rule (see Table 14, Ref. 12). In the latter
activity, importers of PFAS-containing
wastes that are not MSW (such as
industrial wastes) may also have
knowledge of the contents of the waste
they have imported due to labeling or
notification practices, including under
international agreements affecting
transboundary movement of wastes (Ref.
13). Because certain importers of waste
(besides MSW that is imported for the
purpose of disposal or destruction) are
anticipated to know or reasonably
ascertain that they have manufactured
PFAS, EPA is extending reporting
requirements to manufacturers
(including importers) of PFAS in
wastes, unless they have imported PFAS
in municipal solid waste streams for the
purpose of disposal or destruction.
C. What is the reporting standard of this
rule?
For the purpose of this rule, the
reporting standard is information
known to or reasonably ascertainable by
the manufacturer, which is the standard
used in other TSCA section 8 rules,
including CDR since 2011 (see TSCA
section 8(a)(2)). ‘‘Known to or
reasonably ascertainable by’’ is defined
to include ‘‘all information in a person’s
possession or control, plus all
information that a reasonable person
similarly situated might be expected to
possess, control, or know’’ (40 CFR
704.3). This reporting standard requires
reporting entities to evaluate their
current level of knowledge of their
manufactured products (including
imports), as well as evaluate whether
there is additional information that a
reasonable person, similarly situated,
would be expected to know, possess, or
control. This standard carries with it an
exercise of due diligence, and the
information-gathering activities that
may be necessary for manufacturers to
achieve this reporting standard may
vary from case-to-case.
This standard would require that
submitters conduct a reasonable inquiry
within the full scope of their
organization (not just the information
known to managerial or supervisory
employees). This standard may also
entail inquiries outside the organization
to fill gaps in the submitter’s
knowledge. Such activities may, though
not necessarily, include phone calls or
email inquiries to upstream suppliers or
downstream users or employees or other
agents of the manufacturer, including
persons involved in the research and
development, import or production, or
marketing of the PFAS. Examples of
types of information that are considered
to be in a manufacturer’s possession or
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
control, or that a reasonable person
similarly situated might be expected to
possess, control, or know include: files
maintained by the manufacturer such as
marketing studies, sales reports, or
customer surveys; information
contained in standard references
showing use information or
concentrations of chemical substances
in mixtures, such as a Safety Data Sheet
(SDS) or a supplier notification; and
information from the CAS or from Dun
& Bradstreet (D–U–N–S). However, if
particular information cannot be
derived or reasonably estimated without
conducting further customer surveys
(i.e., without sending a comprehensive
set of identical questions to multiple
customers), it would not be ‘‘reasonably
ascertainable’’ to the submitter. Thus,
there is not a need to conduct new
surveys for purposes of this rule. As
described previously, however, existing
survey data may nevertheless be
‘‘known to’’ the organization. This
information may also include
documented knowledge gained through
discussions, conferences, and technical
publications. In addition, this is the
same reporting standard employed in
the TSCA section 8(a) CDR rule (40 CFR
711.15). In response to public comments
and input received through the SBAR
Panel, EPA has also created additional
compliance guidance related to this
reporting standard, including for small
entities and for article importers (Ref.
14). Therefore, EPA anticipates many
reporters under this rule are familiar
with this reporting standard, and
resources are available to support those
reporters who may not be familiar with
the standard.
In the event that a manufacturer
(including importer) does not have
actual data (e.g., measurements or
monitoring data) to report to EPA, the
manufacturer (including importer)
should consider whether ‘‘reasonable
estimates’’ of such information are
ascertainable. ‘‘Reasonable estimates’’
may rely, for example, on approaches
such as mass balance calculations,
emissions factors, or best engineering
judgment. EPA notes that many of the
data elements requested under this rule,
including production volumes or
environmental release volumes,
incorporate a level of estimation by
requiring only two significant figures.
Other data elements, including worker
exposure, are reported as ranges, as with
CDR. For instance, a manufacturer may
be able to estimate the range of number
of workers reasonably likely to be
exposed for each commercial use based
on the manufacturer’s knowledge of the
commercial sites’ sizes, without specific
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
workplace monitoring data; the
manufacturer, would report the
estimated range, rather than reporting
that the information is not known. In
general, EPA believes that industry
possesses a greater knowledge than EPA
about its own supply chain and
operations related to the chemical
substances it manufactures and the
downstream uses, even if they do not
control their customers’ sites. However,
if manufacturers do not know nor can
reasonably make estimates for certain
data elements, except for production
volumes, they may indicate such
information is ‘‘Not Known or
Reasonably Ascertainable’’ (NKRA) to
them in lieu of the requested estimate or
range. For instance, if a manufacturer
does not know and cannot reasonably
ascertain (including, having no basis for
a reasonable estimate or assumption
based on past experiences for the same
or similar substances) how a PFAS is
disposed of as a waste in a given year,
the manufacturer may submit ‘‘NKRA’’
for that information. Reporters are also
advised that ‘‘NKRA’’ designations
cannot be claimed as CBI under TSCA
section 14. Reporting NKRA should
only happen when data are truly not
reasonably ascertainable or are
unattainable (e.g., when the appropriate
recordkeeping period has lapsed and a
past record is no longer available).
EPA has published reporting
instructions and a Small Entity
Compliance Guide, which include
information related to this reporting
standard and the activities that small
entities, including article importers,
may take to meet the due diligence
requirement (Ref. 14).
If, after conducting due diligence and
reviewing known or reasonably
ascertainable existing information, a
manufacturer, particularly an importer
of articles containing PFAS, may not
have knowledge that they have
manufactured or imported PFAS and
thus need not report under this rule.
EPA encourages such an entity to
document its activities to provide
evidence of due diligence. Additionally,
consistent with their own business
practices, companies may elect to retain
documentation of their conclusion that
they were not subject to reporting
requirements.
D. What information must be reported
under this rule?
1. General Reporting Form
EPA is requiring that PFAS
manufacturers submit the following
information for each PFAS, for each
year in which that substance was
manufactured since January 1, 2011, to
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70521
the extent the information is known or
reasonably ascertainable. For the
purposes of this rule, EPA is requiring
this information to be submitted for
each chemical substance that is a PFAS.
For mixtures that contain at least one
chemical substance that is a PFAS,
manufacturers must submit information
for each chemical substance in the
mixture that is a PFAS. For example, a
mixture comprised of PFAS A and
PFAS B would result in the submission
of two forms containing the information
described later in this unit for each
PFAS. For chemical substances of
unknown or variable compositions,
complex reaction products, and
biological materials (UVCBs), including
polymers, a single form may be
submitted for that UVCB. EPA
encourages submitters of mixtures and
UVCBs that contain PFAS to provide
additional information in the optional
free text box related to the composition
of that mixture or UVCB at the time of
manufacture, if known.
EPA is largely finalizing the proposed
reporting requirements, with a few
modifications based on public
comments. Changes to the proposed
requirements include: removing the
requirements for reporting maximum
production volume in the first 12
months and maximum yearly
production volume in any 3 years;
removing the requirement for reporting
the maximum quantity on-site at any
time (including storage); modifying the
requirement to submit the molecular
structure for each substance by making
the submission optional for any Class 1
chemical substance on the Inventory
(but required for all others); requiring
submitters to provide a generic name or
description (which indicates, at least,
that the substance is fluorinated) in lieu
of the specific chemical identity or trade
name when neither are known;
reporting analytical methods, if any;
adding optional comment boxes to
provide any additional information or
clarification to EPA.
A spreadsheet containing the
reporting requirements is also available
in the docket (Ref. 15).
2. Streamlined Reporting Form Option
for Article Importers
Article importers are not exempt from
this rule. Given the reporting
exemptions in other TSCA reporting
rules, exempting imported articles from
the scope of this TSCA section 8(a)(7)
reporting rule would perpetuate data
gaps in EPA’s level of knowledge related
to PFAS manufactured for a commercial
purpose since 2011. EPA cannot know
what requested information is
‘‘reasonably ascertainable’’ to all article
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
70522
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
importers without knowing the full
range of potentially available
information to be reported. Thus, EPA
does not otherwise have the information
outlined in TSCA section 8(a)(7) on
PFAS within imported articles, and the
Agency cannot justify a broad
exemption of imported articles under
TSCA section 8(a)(5)(A), which requires
EPA, to the extent feasible, to not
require unnecessary or duplicative
reporting. However, after considering
public input on the information that
may be known to or reasonably
ascertainable by some PFAS article
importers, EPA is finalizing a reporting
option for article importers to provide
data to EPA on a streamlined form, if
they do not know or cannot reasonably
ascertain information requested on the
longer standard form described in Unit
III.D.1.
If an article importer determines they
have imported a covered substance in
an article, they would have the option
to provide information to EPA through
the streamlined form. The information
requested through this streamlined form
would still include chemical identity,
processing and use information, and
production volume, as well as the
option to provide any additional
information to EPA that the entity may
have (e.g., SDS, disposal information).
The production volume requested is
the volume of the imported article,
rather than the PFAS. EPA believes it is
more likely that an article importer is
able to determine the total imported
production volume of articles rather
than the volume related to just the PFAS
contained within the article. For
instance, an article importer may submit
as the production volume the total
weight of the PFAS-containing imported
articles (e.g., in tons or pounds).
Alternatively, the article importer could
report the production volume in terms
of quantity of the article imported (e.g.,
number of vehicles). The reporter would
also be required to specify the unit of
measurement reflected in the imported
production volume. Based on
information provided from article
importers during the public comment
period and the SBAR Panel, EPA
believes that many article importers
would have more difficulty providing
precise production volumes of just the
PFAS within an article. Industry input
indicated that the historical
documentation provided to article
importers would not always or reliably
include the weight or concentration of
a PFAS contained in the article, making
it more difficult for article importers to
precisely calculate the production
volume of just the PFAS contained
within the article. Based on public input
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
on the historical reporting practices and
knowledge of PFAS in imported articles,
and the fact that this rule is not a
product testing requirement, EPA
believes that article importers are more
easily able to determine the imported
production volume of the article itself.
EPA acknowledges that it would be
preferable to have the production
volume of the chemical itself, though
having the production volume of the
imported article would still confer
meaningful information to EPA for the
purpose of chemical assessments under
TSCA and other programs. Because EPA
would rather have data on the
production volume of the imported
article, rather than many ‘‘NKRA’’
responses related to the production
volume of the PFAS itself, EPA is
requiring article importers to submit the
production volume information on the
whole article rather than the PFAS
contained within the article.
The streamlined article importer form
would require the following information
to the extent it is known or reasonably
ascertainable:
1. Chemical identity:
a. Specific chemical name, or
b. Generic name(s) or description(s) if
the specific chemical name(s) is claimed
as CBI and/or when a manufacturer
knows they have a PFAS but is unaware
of its specific chemical identity. A
generic name must meet the naming
requirements for this rule and indicate
the substance is a fluorinated substance
(i.e., contain ‘‘fluor’’).
2. Chemical identification number:
a. CASRN, or
b. Accession or LVE case number, if
applicable, and if the specific CASRN is
unknown. EPA notes that this rule does
not require manufacturers to obtain a
CASRN or other identifier for a
substance without such a number for
the purpose of complying with this rule.
3. Trade name or common name, if
applicable.
4. Representative molecular structure,
for any PFAS that is not a Class 1
substance on the Inventory. And
optional free text for further clarification
on the chemical identity or molecular
structure (such as for Class 2 substances,
or where the molecular structure is of
unknown or variable composition).
5. Import production volume of the
imported article and the unit of
measurement for that production
volume (e.g., quantity of the imported
article, pounds, tons).
6. Industrial processing and use:
a. Type of process or use;
b. Sector(s);
c. Functional use category(ies); and
d. Percent of production volume for
each use.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
7. Consumer and commercial use:
a. indicator for whether this is a
consumer and/or commercial product;
b. Product category;
c. Functional use category(ies);
d. Percent production volume for each
use;
e. Maximum concentration in any
product;
f. Indicator for use in products
intended for children;
g. Indicator for imported but never
physically at site; and
h. Any optional information the
article importer wishes to provide.
Under TSCA section 8(a)(5)(C), EPA
must, to the extent feasible, ‘‘apply any
reporting obligations to those persons
likely to have information relevant to
the effective implementation of
[TSCA].’’ EPA believes that this
streamlined reporting form option for
any article importer would still provide
necessary information to EPA under
TSCA section 8(a)(7), while reducing
the reporting burden for the data
elements that EPA understands may not
be known to or reasonably ascertainable
by article importers. However, to the
extent any additional information
requested on the longer forms is known
to or reasonably ascertainable by the
article importer (e.g., information on
disposal of that PFAS, or an SDS or
other existing information regarding
environmental or health effects), the
reporter would have the option and
ability to submit that information to
EPA through the ‘‘optional’’ field. EPA
also notes that it is possible that a
manufacturer both imports a PFAS
within an article, and otherwise
manufactures (including imports) the
same PFAS beyond an article. In such
scenarios, the reporter would still have
to provide information on the longer
standard form for the non-imported
article and would have the option to
report on the PFAS within the imported
article either on the streamlined form or
within the longer standard form. The
reporting tool for this rule will enable
multiple form options for the same
PFAS if appropriate.
3. Streamlined Reporting Form Option
for R&D Substances Manufactured
Below 10 Kilograms
EPA is also including R&D substances
that were manufactured, including
imported, for a commercial purpose
within the scope of this rule. EPA notes
that the scope of ‘‘manufacture for
commercial purposes’’ encompasses any
importing, production, or other
manufacturing activities with the
purpose of obtaining an immediate or
eventual commercial advantage and
includes chemicals ‘‘for use by the
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
manufacturer, including use for product
research and development’’ (40 CFR
704.3). R&D substances which meet the
scope of ‘‘manufacture for commercial
purposes’’ must be reported under this
rule, even if the PFAS itself was not
later commercialized. However, R&D
substances which have not been
manufactured for commercial purposes
(such as for scientific experimentation,
research, or analysis conducted by
academic, government, or independent
not-for-profit research institutions,
unless the activity is for eventual
commercial purposes) would not be
within scope of this rule (40 CFR
720.30(i)).
EPA believes that the submission of
information related to the commercial
manufacture of PFAS as R&D substances
is necessary to understand the scope of
PFAS manufactured in the United
States. With existing R&D reporting
exemptions under other TSCA rules
(including CDR and PMN submissions),
EPA does not have a dataset of PFAS
manufactured as R&D substances.
Therefore, reporting on such substances
is necessary to the effective
implementation of TSCA. Further, EPA
understands that manufacturers of R&D
substances that have been exempt under
other reporting rules should have
certain documentation available to
support those exemption claims, in
accordance with their recordkeeping
requirements.
However, EPA understands through
input from public commenters and the
SBAR Panel that much of the
information requested for this rule is
unknown and not reasonably
ascertainable to manufacturers of R&D
substances, particularly small entities
who may manufacture R&D substances
in small quantities. EPA believes that
manufacturers of R&D substances in
such low quantities are likely to have
manufactured those substances purely
for laboratory analytical purposes,
which may be at their own site or their
customers’ sites. As such, these
manufacturers are aware of the R&D
chemical identity and production
volume but are unlikely to have any
other information requested. However,
EPA believes that manufacturers of R&D
chemicals manufactured in larger
quantities (i.e., greater than 10
kilograms per year) are more likely to
have the other information requested,
including worker exposure information,
disposal information, and health or
environmental effects information (such
as monitoring or toxicity data). Given
EPA’s understanding of typical
recordkeeping practices of R&D
activities, it is likely that a manufacturer
with greater quantities of R&D
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
substances would know the requested
information on those substances beyond
their identities and production volumes.
Under TSCA section 8(a)(5)(C), EPA
shall, to the extent feasible, apply
reporting requirements to those persons
likely to have relevant information.
Therefore, EPA is providing another
streamlined reporting option to
manufacturers of R&D substances that
were manufactured in volumes under 10
kilograms per year, if they do not know
or cannot reasonably ascertain
information requested on the longer
standard form described in Unit III.D.1.
Information requested on this form,
for each R&D PFAS manufactured below
10 kilograms per year, will include the
following to the extent it is known or
reasonably ascertainable:
1. Chemical identity:
a. Specific chemical name, or
b. Generic name(s) or description(s) if
the chemical name(s) is claimed as CBI
and/or when a manufacturer knows they
have a PFAS but is unaware of its
specific chemical identity. A generic
name must meet the naming
requirements for this rule and indicate
the substance is a fluorinated substance
(i.e., contain ‘‘fluor’’).
2. Chemical identification number:
a. CASRN, or
b. TSCA Accession Number or LVE
case number, if applicable, and if the
specific CASRN is unknown. EPA notes
that this rule does not require
manufacturers to obtain a CASRN or
other identifier for a substance without
such a number for the purpose of
complying with this rule.
3. Trade name or common name, if
applicable.
4. Representative molecular structure,
for any PFAS that is not a Class 1
substance on the Inventory. With
optional free text for further clarification
on the chemical identity or molecular
structure (such as for Class 2 substances,
or where the molecular structure is of
unknown or variable composition).
5. Production volume:
a. Domestically manufactured.
b. Imported.
6. Indicator for imported but never
physically at site.
7. Any optional information the
manufacturer wishes to provide.
EPA believes that this streamlined
reporting form option for any
manufacturer of R&D substances in low
volumes (i.e., below 10 kilograms per
year) would still provide necessary
information to EPA under TSCA section
8(a)(7), while minimizing the cost of
compliance for certain small
manufacturers, consistent with TSCA
section 8(a)(5), for the data elements
that EPA understands may not be
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70523
known to or reasonably ascertainable by
such manufacturers. However, to the
extent any additional information
requested on the longer forms is known
to or reasonably ascertainable by the
manufacturer (e.g., information on
disposal of that PFAS, or existing
information regarding environmental or
health effects), the manufacturer would
be required to submit that information
to EPA through the ‘‘optional’’ field on
the streamlined reporting form.
E. What must be submitted as ‘‘all
existing information concerning the
environmental and health effects’’ of a
chemical substance?
Pursuant to TSCA section 8(a)(2)(E),
EPA is requiring the submission of ‘‘all
existing information concerning the
environmental and health effects’’ of the
chemical substances covered by this
rule. ‘‘All existing information
concerning environmental and health
effects’’ is defined as ‘‘any information
of any effect of a chemical substance or
mixture on health or the environment or
both’’ (to be codified at 40 CFR 705.3)
and is intended to be interpreted
broadly. The scope of ‘‘all existing
information concerning environmental
and health effects’’ includes all health
and safety studies but is not limited to
formal studies. Chemical identity is
always part of a health and safety study,
and TSCA section 14(b) limits the extent
to which health and safety studies and
information from studies may be
withheld from the public as confidential
business information (CBI). Any
information that bears on the effects of
a PFAS on human health or the
environment would be included,
including information on the chemical
substance developed or generated prior
to the year 2011. The codified definition
of ‘‘all existing information concerning
environmental and health effects’’ at 40
CFR 705.3 provides non-exhaustive
examples, such as:
• Toxicity information (e.g., long- and
short-term tests of mutagenicity,
carcinogenicity, teratogenicity;
pharmacological effects; acute,
subchronic, and chronic effects);
• Ecological or other environmental
effects on fish, invertebrates, or other
animals and plants, such as
bioconcentration or bioaccumulation
tests;
• Human and environmental
exposure assessments, including
workplace exposure, and the impacts of
a chemical substance or mixture on the
environment; and
• Other data relevant to
environmental and health effects
including monitoring data to measure
the exposure of humans or the
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
70524
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
environment or a chemical substance,
range-finding studies, preliminary
studies, adverse effects reports, and any
information, including medical
screening or surveillance, such as under
the American Conference of
Government Industrial Hygienists
(ACGIH).
Following public comments, EPA is
also clarifying that the scope of ‘‘all
existing information concerning
environmental and health effects’’ is
information in the submitter’s
possession or control. For the purpose
of requiring existing information related
to health or environmental effects, EPA
is adopting the same definition of
‘‘possession or control’’ as in the TSCA
Pre-Manufacture Notice (PMN)
regulations (40 CFR 720.3(y)). Thus, a
PFAS manufacturer would not
necessarily be searching all information
in the public realm but would be
submitting information in their
possession or control, or other
information for which they are
responsible. This includes any data or
other information in files maintained by
the submitter’s employees, or the
employees of a submitter’s subsidiary or
partnership which is associated with
research and development, test
marketing or commercial marketing of
the PFAS, regardless of the publication
status. EPA is not requiring
manufacturers to search open scientific
literature to find relevant information
on a PFAS that was previously not in
their possession or control for the
purpose of this rule. EPA believes that
implementing such a requirement may
result in duplicative information, if
multiple PFAS manufacturers are
submitting the same studies or other
information that are available publicly
(including in EPA’s scientific literature
databases).
EPA considered ways to avoid
requiring the submission of potentially
duplicative information concerning
health and environmental effects (see
TSCA section 8(a)(5)(A)), while still
fulfilling EPA’s obligation under TSCA
section 8(a)(7) to require reporting of
such information. Such information
concerning environmental or health
effects may have been submitted to EPA
previously under either TSCA section
8(d) rules (as unpublished health and
safety information) or TSCA section 8(e)
(as a substantial risk notice). If a
reporter has already submitted
information concerning environmental
or health effects to EPA under specific
TSCA submissions, they need not resubmit that information if they provide
the details of to which program (or
under which rule) that information was
submitted and in which year (e.g., TSCA
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
section 8(e), in 2010). In the event of a
reporter having previously submitted
relevant environmental and health
effects information, the reporter must
ensure that the previous submission
included all existing underlying
information, including test data. Note
that a previous submission of
information concerning environmental
or health effects does not relieve a
manufacturer of providing all existing
information concerning environmental
or health effects that has not previously
been submitted to EPA. See Unit III.F
for more discussion on how EPA is
mitigating potentially duplicative
reporting for this rule.
For environmental and health effects
information that was previously
submitted to EPA as CBI, the reporter
would need to resubmit if that
information predated the 2016
Lautenberg Act amending TSCA and its
CBI submission requirements and
reassert the CBI claim (see §§ 705.22(f)
and 705.30). If a reporter has submitted
environmental and health effects
information as CBI since the 2016
Lautenberg Amendments to TSCA were
implemented, then the manufacturer
must provide EPA with details
regarding when, how, and under which
title and/or statutory authority the CBI
claim was submitted, and the TSCA
section 14 certification. In order for a
reporter to earn an exemption from
resubmitting that environmental and
health effects information and reasserting a CBI claim, the reporter must
be able to point to a previous claim that
adequately covers the current claim. In
any event of a reporter having
previously submitted environmental or
health effects information as CBI,
whether pre- or post-Lautenberg
Amendments, they must adequately
substantiate their CBI claim. EPA
encourages all reporters who have
previously submitted environmental or
health effects information as CBI to
carefully review their previous
submissions and determine whether the
previous claims satisfy current CBI
substantiation requirements, and to
assert a new claim and substantiate if
appropriate. More discussion on
submitting CBI under this rule is in Unit
III.G.
Additionally, EPA is finalizing the
requirement to submit all existing
information concerning health and
environmental effects in the format of
OECD-harmonized templates, where
such templates exist for the type of data
(to be codified at 40 CFR 705.15(f)).
OECD templates are accessible to the
public online at https://oecd.org/ehs/
templates/harmonised-templates.htm
(Ref. 16). This can be accomplished by
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
using the freely available IUCLID6
software by exporting the dossier in the
OECD Harmonized Template working
context. At the time of this rule
publication, EPA can accept any
dossiers generated using any version of
IUCLID6. Users should refer to EPA web
pages (to be identified) for updates on
which version of IUCLID files will be
accepted.
A standardized format such as the
OECD templates will improve the
efficiency of review and organization of
the submitted data. EPA believes that
some of the data will already be
available as an OECD template if the
company had already submitted the
studies under the European Union’s
Registration, Evaluation, Authorization
and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)
regulation (Ref. 16). In addition to the
required template format, those subject
to this rulemaking must submit any
associated full study reports or
underlying data as support documents.
The full study reports and support
documents are necessary for EPA to
understand the full context and evaluate
the quality of the data, which is
necessary for the Agency to review to
determine whether such data may be
used for any future Agency actions.
If an OECD-harmonized template is
not available for a particular endpoint
for which the manufacturer has relevant
information, then the manufacturer
must still submit the data. Such
information may include, but is not
limited to, raw monitoring data
(regardless of having been aggregated or
analyzed) of human or environmental
exposure assessments and toxicity tests
for either human health effects or
ecological other environmental effects.
F. What steps is the Agency taking to
reduce potentially ‘‘duplicative’’
reporting? Does information need to be
reported on the basis that it has already
been reported to the Agency?
TSCA section 8(a)(5)(A) requires EPA,
to the extent feasible when carrying out
TSCA section 8, to avoid requiring
unnecessary or duplicative reporting.
The Agency seeks to avoid collecting
data on PFAS that would duplicate
information already reported to the
Agency, while ensuring EPA obtains all
data required to be collected under
TSCA section 8(a)(7) and that such data
are submitted in a format that is
conducive to the collection and review
of a manufactured PFAS dataset. While
developing this rule, EPA reviewed the
data elements submitted under the CDR
Rule to evaluate whether there may be
some overlap with the information
requested under this rule. Through
internal review, and from input received
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
during the public comment periods and
the SBAR Panel, the Agency has
identified the following data elements
that may have some overlap with CDR
requirements:
• Physical state of the chemical or
mixture;
• Production volume (domestically
manufactured);
• Production volume (imported);
• Volume directly exported;
• Indicator for imported but never
physically at site;
• Industrial processing and use type,
sector(s), functional category(ies), and
percent of production volume for each
use;
• Consumer and/or commercial
indicator, product category(ies),
functional category(ies), percent of
production volume for each use,
indicator for use in products intended
for children, and maximum
concentration in the product; and
• Number of workers reasonably
likely to be exposed for each
combination of industrial processing or
use operation, sector, and function, and
the number of commercial workers
reasonably likely to be exposed if the
PFAS is contained in a commercial
product.
However, EPA notes that even though
there are some potentially overlapping
data elements between this rule and
CDR, any duplication of reporting
requirements is likely to be narrower in
scope. For instance, CDR is limited to
chemical substances on the Inventory.
In contrast, the reporting requirements
in this rule extend beyond chemicals on
the Inventory and may cover chemicals
subject to LVEs, byproducts, and other
chemicals that may not have been
reported on or added to the Inventory.
In addition, CDR has a reporting
threshold of 25,000 pounds (or 2,500
pounds for chemicals subject to certain
TSCA actions), along with several
reporting exemptions, including for
imported articles, certain byproducts,
non-isolated intermediates, and small
quantities of R&D substances, while this
reporting rule does not incorporate any
such thresholds or exemptions. Finally,
while this rule requests the same data to
be submitted for each year in which a
PFAS has been manufactured since
2011, CDR requires different
information to be submitted in different
years: for instance, reporters submit the
total annual domestically manufactured
production volume and the total annual
imported volume separately only for the
principal reporting year (e.g., 2019 for
the 2020 reporting cycle), but only the
combined total annual production
volume is required reporting for the
intervening years. Additionally, the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
CDR rule has been amended over the
course of this reporting period, meaning
certain data elements were not
requested or submitted for all CDR
cycles overlapping this rule’s lookback
period. Specifically, the CDR industrial
processing and use codes and
consumer/commercial processing and
use codes did not align with the OECDharmonized use codes until the 2020
reporting cycle. While CDR submitters
may have provided certain processing
and use information related to PFAS
they manufactured during previous CDR
cycles, any CDR responses that do not
sufficiently respond to this data call by
providing the required OECD codes
would not be duplicative of the
information being reported under this
rule. Therefore, while some data
elements of this rule may be considered
duplicative of CDR requirements,
differences between CDR and this rule’s
requirements (including reporting
thresholds and reporting exemptions)
may limit the scope of what is
duplicative and duplicative information
does not need to be re-reported for this
rule. If the previous submission for the
same data element under a different
reporting rule was not accurate for
purposes of this rule (e.g., by not
reporting volumes related to an activity
exemption that does not apply to this
rule, or by reporting industrial
processing and use information that
does not align with the OECDharmonized use codes required under
this rule), then the submitter must
report the accurate information and
cannot rely on their prior submission to
satisfy this rule’s requirements.
Beyond the CDR rule, some
commenters and participants in the
SBAR Panel suggested that other
information requested under this rule
may have been reported to EPA through
a TSCA section 8(d) rule. Under TSCA
section 8(d), EPA has the authority to
request unpublished health and safety
data studies, or lists of such studies,
known to or reasonably ascertainable by
manufacturers, processors, and
distributors of certain chemical
substances or mixtures. Commenters
suggested that some ‘‘existing
environmental and health effects
information’’ on PFAS may have already
been submitted to EPA through a TSCA
section 8(d) rule and would be
duplicative of information requested
under this rule.
While EPA agrees that any previous
submissions of unpublished studies
under TSCA section 8(d) need not be
resubmitted under this TSCA section
8(a)(7) rule, EPA does not anticipate that
there will be much overlap between
information requested under this rule
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70525
and information that may have already
been submitted through the reporting
requirements related to the TSCA
section 8(d) rule codified in 40 CFR part
716. First, only a few substances already
listed in a section 8(d) rule would meet
this rule’s definition of PFAS; out of the
many examples of PFAS, only oxirane,
2-(2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,7tridecafluoroheptyl)- (CASRN 38565–
52–5), hexane, 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,6tetradecafluoro- (CASRN 355–42–0),
and 1-butanamine, 1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,4nonafluoro-N,N-bis(1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,4nonafluorobutyl)- (CASRN 311–89–7)
are listed as PFAS, which can be found
in 40 CFR 716. Secondly, the substances
which are listed in 40 CFR part 716
have sunset dates, or reporting
deadlines. The PFAS that have
previously been listed in a section 8(d)
rule have sunset dates between 1988
and 1995; therefore, potentially
duplicative section 8(d) reporting stops
decades short of the scope of reporting
for this rule (40 CFR 716) (53 FR 38645,
September 30, 1988 (FRL–3439–9)).
Finally, the scope of ‘‘unpublished
health and safety studies’’ requested
under a TSCA section 8(d) rule may not
be as inclusive as the scope of ‘‘all
existing information concerning the
environmental and health effects’’
requested for the substances under this
TSCA section 8(a)(7) rule. This rule’s
scope of all existing information
concerning environmental and health
effects is intended to be broadly
interpreted and is inclusive of any
health and safety study, regardless of
the date the information was collected
or generated; see the discussion in Unit
III.E.
Similarly, ‘‘all existing information
concerning the environmental and
health effects’’ of a PFAS may include
previous submissions to EPA pursuant
to TSCA section 8(e). TSCA section 8(e)
requires manufacturers, processors, and
distributors of chemicals to notify EPA
immediately of information that
reasonably supports the conclusion that
their substances or mixtures present a
substantial risk of injury to health or the
environment. To the extent that a
substantial risk notification under TSCA
section 8(e) may be duplicative with
this rule’s requirements, the reporter
need not resubmit such information, but
will be required to indicate when they
had previously provided that
notification under TSCA section 8(e) so
that EPA is able to locate that previous
submission and satisfy the requirements
of TSCA section 8(a)(7). Manufacturers
who have previously submitted
information to EPA under TSCA section
8(d) or TSCA section 8(e) that may be
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
70526
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
considered ‘‘existing information
concerning the environmental and
health effects’’ of a PFAS for which they
are reporting under this TSCA section
8(a)(7) rule need not resubmit the
duplicative information. However, the
manufacturer must indicate in the
reporting form the year in which they
had previously provided that
information and under which rule (e.g.,
TSCA section 8(d), section 8(e)). If EPA
has previously collected information
relevant to the implementation of TSCA
section 8(a)(7) and is able to locate that
information based on the reporter’s
submission, then EPA would be able to
meet the information collection
obligations under TSCA section 8(a)(7)
without requiring potentially
duplicative reporting.
EPA also considered other, non-TSCA
reporting rules’ potential overlap with
this rule. These include the Toxics
Release Inventory (TRI) and the
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program
(GHGRP). Under the TRI, certain
industrial and Federal facilities are
required to report their annual releases
and other waste management quantities
and activities for TRI-listed toxic
chemicals that are manufactured,
processed, or otherwise used above the
respective threshold. Information
reported to TRI that is also requested
under this rule includes:
• Total volume recycled on-site;
• Description of disposal process(es);
• Total volume released to land;
• Total volume released to water;
• Total volume released to air; and
• Total volume incinerated on-site.
However, in the same vein as the
limitations on potentially duplicative
reporting with CDR and TSCA section
8(d) rules, EPA does not anticipate
much, if any, overlap in reporting
between this rule and TRI. First, PFAS
were not on the TRI chemical list until
the FY 2020 NDAA automatically added
172 PFAS effective calendar year 2020,
with additional PFAS added annually
since 2020 (Ref. 17). Therefore, the only
potentially overlapping reporting of
PFAS releases and other waste
management quantities would be since
2020, instead of the entire lookback
period of this rule. Additional
limitations in the potential overlap
between this rule and TRI include the
PFAS reporting threshold for TRI of 100
pounds manufactured, processed, or
otherwise used and certain TRI
reporting exemptions for quantities
below de minimis concentrations and in
articles. Without a reporting threshold
or similar reporting exemptions
applicable for this rule, there may be
more PFAS releases and other waste
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
management activities reportable for
this rule than for TRI.
EPA also considered potential
overlaps with GHGRP. The GHGRP
requires annual reporting of greenhouse
gas (GHG) data and other information
from large GHG emissions sources (i.e.,
those that emit at least 25,000 tons of
CO2-equivalent, any electricity
generation site, aluminum, ammonia or
cement production facility, and some
municipal solid waste landfills), fuel
and industrial gas suppliers, and carbon
dioxide injection sites (Ref. 18) (40 CFR
part 98). 111 compounds covered as
GHGs and heat transfer fluids (HTF)
would also be considered PFAS under
this rule. Between this rule and the
GHGRP, the following data elements
may be duplicative for at least some
GHGRP reporters:
• Production volume (imported);
• Volume directly exported; and
• Total volume incinerated on-site.
Besides the limited number of PFAS
covered by GHGRP, other limitations on
the potential overlap between this rule
and GHGRP include the exemption of
GHGRP reporting for quantities
imported or exported below 25
kilograms. Additionally, not all
coincidentally manufactured chemicals
(such as byproducts) are covered by
GHGRP, though they fall under the
definition of ‘‘manufacture for a
commercial purpose’’ under this rule
(40 CFR 705.3). Overall, there is a
significant difference between the
reporting requirements in the GHGRP
and this rule, though EPA is allowing
reporters to abstain from re-reporting
any of the information listed previously
in this unit for a PFAS that was
previously reported to GHGRP, unless
the GHGRP submission did not account
for all quantities that are covered by this
rule.
EPA also notes the potential for
duplicative reporting of environmental
releases of certain byproducts within
this rule. Pursuant to TSCA section
8(a)(2)(D), EPA is requiring PFAS
manufacturers to provide a ‘‘description
of the byproducts resulting from the
manufacture, processing, use, or
disposal of each [PFAS].’’ However,
EPA notes there may be occasions
where a byproduct that resulted from
the manufacture, processing, use, or
disposal of a reported PFAS also meets
this rule’s definition of PFAS. Because
‘‘manufacture for commercial purposes’’
includes the coincidental manufacture
of byproducts, that byproduct would
also need to be reported under this rule
to the extent data are known or
reasonably ascertainable. As a
reportable PFAS, information on that
byproduct’s environmental releases
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
would be requested twice, both as a
byproduct of the originally
manufactured PFAS and as a
commercially manufactured PFAS itself.
To mitigate potentially duplicative
reporting concerns in such situations,
manufacturers of byproducts that are
also reportable PFAS under this rule
need not re-report the environmental
release information of that byproduct on
the original PFAS’s form.
To address potentially duplicative
reporting, EPA is identifying specific
types of information that need not be
reported if the reporting entity indicates
in the reporting tool that they have
previously provided such information to
EPA and provides information sufficient
to allow the agency to locate that
information. Pursuant to TSCA section
8(a)(5)(A), EPA is limiting the
requirement for reporting ‘‘duplicative’’
information if a PFAS manufacturer has
previously submitted the requested
information to EPA for that same PFAS
in that same year through CDR, TRI,
GHGRP, or TSCA sections 8(d) and 8(e),
or is also reporting a PFAS byproduct
on its own reporting form. Only the
aforementioned data elements from
CDR, TRI, and GHGRP; studies
submitted under TSCA section 8(d) or
8(e); and certain byproduct release
information may be exempt from rereporting under this rule as potentially
duplicative information. In these cases,
the manufacturer would be required to
indicate to which program (and in
which year) that information was
submitted (e.g., CDR, in 2016).
Additionally, EPA notes that a
manufacturer’s previous submission for
the same data element under a different
reporting rule (e.g., a manufacturer
previously reported the production
volume to CDR for a particular year)
does not necessarily mean that the same
quantity or information would be
accurate for this rule’s purposes.
Because this rule does not provide for
the same exemptions as the rules
discussed in Unit III.F., the
manufacturer must ensure that all
quantities and other requested
information for that PFAS are reported
under this rule to the extent such
information is known or reasonably
ascertainable. In the previous example
of a CDR reporter who had previously
reported a PFAS’s production volume,
the reporter must ensure that all
manufactured quantities covered under
this rule (including those that are
exempt from CDR, such as impurities or
imported articles) are accounted for. If
a previous submission for a data
element does not account for all covered
volumes or activities, then the submitter
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
may not rely on that prior submission to
satisfy the reporting requirements of this
rule.
EPA considered other previous
information collection requests related
to PFAS but did not determine those to
be ‘‘duplicative’’ such that reporting
may be exempt under TSCA section
8(a)(5)(A). For instance, EPA received
many public comments asserting that
information submitted through a PMN is
duplicative of the information that
would be collected through this rule.
EPA disagrees. Information collected
through a PMN (or an LVE) reflects
information before manufacture of a
substance commences.
EPA notes that the Agency has also
required the submission of information
on PFAS using a variety of enforcement
authorities under different
environmental statutes. However, most,
if not all, of the information collected in
the course of investigating potential
non-compliance with, or liability under,
TSCA or other statutes is different in
numerous respects from information
requested pursuant to this rule. EPA
does not anticipate there to be
duplicative reporting as the enforcement
requests are generally narrower in
scope. The enforcement requests
generally focus on fewer years than this
rule’s reporting period, and those
requests tend to focus on far fewer
substances. Additionally, the requested
data for enforcement authorities is both
aggregated and reported in formats
differently than this rule’s requirements.
While this rule requires data to be
reported for each year over the reporting
period in which the PFAS was
manufactured, some enforcement
requests have focused on just single
years, or have requested quantities to be
reported to reflect cumulative totals
over multiple years. In that latter
example, such a submission would not
satisfy EPA’s obligations under TSCA
section 8(a)(7) requesting certain
information ‘‘for each year since January
1, 2011.’’ In terms of information
reporting formats, EPA notes that
enforcement requests may often ask for
responses in a narrative format, distinct
from this rule’s requests for information
in quantities or within specific ranges.
For these discrepancies, EPA does not
believe that most information requested
through previous enforcement request
letters is duplicative of information
requested under this rule.
The only information that may have
been submitted in response to past
enforcement letters that may be
potentially duplicative of this rule
relates to ‘‘all existing information
concerning environmental and health
effects.’’ Such information includes but
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
is not limited to environmental
monitoring, sampling, or worker
exposure data. Thus, if a manufacturer
has previously submitted certain
information concerning environmental
or health effects of a PFAS to EPA under
an enforcement authority, that
manufacturer does not need to resubmit
that environmental or health effects
information to EPA under this rule,
provided that the manufacturer
indicates to which program or office and
in which year such information was
submitted to EPA.
While the use of those enforcement
authorities may be duplicative in some
cases, the information is needed to
ensure protection of public health and
the environment in instances where the
Agency feels it needs information from
an entity to make that judgment call and
determine if action is needed. Therefore,
information duplication between
previous enforcement requests and this
rule is unlikely for many reasons,
including various limitations on
information gathered under the
enforcement authorities and the
fundamental differences in the type of
information sought under this rule as
compared with the information gathered
under the other authorities. While
information from PFAS manufacturers
requested by EPA is, in all cases, needed
to ensure the protection of public health
and the environment, the information
requested under the different authorities
serves different purposes. EPA has
determined that the information
submitted in response to an
enforcement letter is not duplicative of
the information requested under this
rule, except for certain information
concerning environmental and health
effects.
Finally, some reporters may also have
submitted certain information
concerning environmental or health
effects of a PFAS pursuant to either a
TSCA section 4 action or voluntarily, in
conjunction with EPA’s National PFAS
Testing Strategy. To the extent a
reporting entity has already provided
information concerning environmental
or health effects (such as chemical and
physical properties, hazard testing, or
exposure testing), that entity need not
resubmit the information to this
reporting rule. Instead, the reporter
should indicate that they have already
submitted such information to EPA and
provide the program, the specific
chemical identity, the date, and an
associated case number, if available, of
that submission.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70527
G. What are the requirements for
submitting CBI claims?
The 2016 amendments to TSCA
included new procedural requirements
for the submission and Agency
management of CBI claims, including
new substantiation requirements,
generic name requirements, a
certification requirement, and a
requirement for Agency review of
specified CBI claims within 90 days
after receipt of the claim (15 U.S.C.
2613). In accordance with the 2016
TSCA amendments, the Agency recently
proposed a rule addressing the
procedures for submitting CBI claims to
EPA under TSCA and the procedures for
EPA’s review of such claims (87 FR
29078, May 6, 2022 (FRL–8223–01–
OCSPP)). PFAS manufacturers reporting
under this rule may claim certain
portions of the reporting form are CBI
confidential business information,
consistent with TSCA section 14, such
as specific chemical identities that are
not on the public Inventory, company
identifier, and production volumes.
Only confidentiality claims made
through this rule’s PFAS reporting tool
will be considered properly asserted;
any additional TSCA CBI claims made
elsewhere will be considered
improperly presented and will not be
treated as having asserted a CBI claim
under TSCA, and the information may
be disclosed to the public without
further notice. In addition to the
requirement that CBI claims be
submitted through the PFAS reporting
tool, TSCA requires the reporter to
certify that it has: (1) Taken reasonable
measures to protect the confidentiality
of the information; (2) Determined the
information is not required to be
disclosed or made public under Federal
law; (3) A reasonable basis to believe
that disclosure of the information is
likely to cause substantial competitive
harm; and (4) A reasonable basis to
believe that the information is not
readily discoverable through reverse
engineering; and, (5) To certify that
these statements and any information
provided are true and correct.
Consistent with the format of other
TSCA reporting forms, the statements
and certification would be combined
into a single certification statement.
Information under this rule that may
not be asserted as CBI includes:
• Specific chemical identity if the
chemical is on the public (nonconfidential) Inventory or reported as
non-confidential in an LVE;
• All generic chemical names;
• For any PFAS that are on the public
(non-confidential) Inventory, the
chemical’s CASRN;
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
70528
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
• For PFAS that are on the
confidential Inventory, the Inventory
Accession Number cannot be claimed as
CBI (but the underlying chemical
identity can be claimed as CBI);
• LVE numbers;
• The following categories of use
information: industrial processing and
use type, sector, and functional
categories, whether a chemical is in a
consumer and/or commercial product,
the consumer/commercial product
categories and functional categories, and
its presence in products for children; or
• Any blank or NKRA designation or
response.
Any entity that claims a specific
chemical identity as CBI must also
submit a generic name pursuant to
TSCA section 14(c)(1)(C). This includes
reporting a PFAS by either an Accession
number or LVE number (assuming that
the specific chemical identity is not on
the public Inventory), or reporting by a
CAS name on a PFAS for which the
CASRN, Accession number, and LVE
number are not known to be assigned
(i.e., the CASRN and specific identifiers
have not been created or generated).
Entities must ensure that that any such
generic name is consistent with EPA’s
Generic Name Guidance (Ref. 19). The
generic name must also ‘‘describe the
chemical structure of the chemical
substance as specifically as practicable
while protecting those features of the
chemical structure that are claimed as
confidential; and the disclosure of
which would be likely to cause
substantial harm to the competitive
position of the person.’’ 15 U.S.C.
2613(c)(1)(C)(ii). Generic names must be
sufficiently detailed to identify the
reported chemical as a PFAS.
Specifically, any generic name reported
for a PFAS that does not contain ‘‘fluor’’
in the name would be rejected by EPA
as insufficient under TSCA section
14(c)(1)(C). As the Agency described in
the NODA published for this rule (Ref.
1), any generic name for a PFAS
(including previously existing generic
names from earlier TSCA section 5
submissions) that does not contain
‘‘fluor’’ in the name is inconsistent with
this provision and will be rejected.
Ultimately, if a generic name reported
under the TSCA section 8(a)(7) rule
lacks the structural unit ‘‘fluor,’’ the
Agency will publicly identify the
chemical substance as a PFAS.
TSCA section 14 further requires that
substantiation be provided for each data
element claimed as CBI. The
substantiation must be provided at the
time of submission. However, TSCA
section 14(c)(2) exempts certain
information from the substantiation
requirements (e.g., specific production
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
volume). Under this rule, CBI claims for
specific production or import volumes
of the manufacturer need not be
substantiated. Additionally, the specific
chemical identity and molecular
structure need not be substantiated
when the substance has not been
introduced into commerce (e.g., an R&D
substance manufactured in small
quantities meeting the new chemical
reporting exemption under section
5(h)(3)). No other TSCA section 14(c)(2)
exemptions apply to information
requested under this rule, so CBI claims
must be substantiated for all other such
information. Any information which is
claimed as CBI will be disclosed by EPA
only in accordance with the procedures
and requirements of TSCA section 14
and 40 CFR parts 2 and 703. TSCA
limits CBI protections for information in
health and safety studies.
Generally, information from health
and safety studies is not protected from
disclosure, except to the extent such
studies or information reveal
information ‘‘that discloses processes
used in the manufacturing or processing
of a chemical substance or mixture or,
in the case of a mixture, the portion of
the mixture comprised by any of the
chemical substances in the mixture,’’ 15
U.S.C. 2613(2)(B). Additional
information, listed in the rule’s
definition of health and safety study, are
not part of a health and safety study
(e.g., names of laboratory personnel).
Submitters asserting a CBI claim for
information under § 705.15(f) are
required to submit a sanitized copy,
removing only the information that is
claimed as CBI.
EPA expects that article importers
generally do not know the Accession
number or other specific identifiers
(e.g., PMN or LVE number) for a
confidential Inventory chemical that
may be included in the article they are
importing. As a result, article importers
must report chemical identities to the
extent that they are known to or
reasonably ascertainable (generic name,
trade name, or CASRN if it is a publicly
known chemical substance) and use the
article importer streamlined form.
Public identifiers like generic names
and public Inventory CASRNs may not
be claimed as CBI and it is unnecessary
for article importers to assert CBI claims
for the specific identities of substances
that are not reported by a specific
identifier (i.e., Accession number or
LVE number). EPA would not be able to
determine an underlying confidential
chemical identity from this generic
identifying information, so could not
disclose that specific chemical identity,
regardless of whether the submitter
asserted a CBI claim. It would be
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
purposeless for the submitter to assert a
CBI claim for this information or for
EPA to review such claims. In this
TSCA section 8(a)(7) rule, and for these
reasons, EPA believes that it is
appropriate to differentiate article
importers from other reporters with
respect to chemical identity CBI claims.
However, all other entities (i.e., other
than article importers) who report a
CAS name, CASRN, or specific
identifier (i.e., Accession number, LVE
number) must assert and substantiate a
CBI claim for the specific chemical
identity if the reporter wants the
chemical identity to receive confidential
treatment. A person or entity (other than
an article importer) who does not have
knowledge of such an identifier (CAS
name, CASRN, Accession number, or
LVE number) must initiate a joint
submission with its supplier or other
entity who can provide this identifying
information, if such an entity is known
to or reasonably ascertainable by the
manufacturer. In these cases, the
secondary submitter would be
responsible for providing the CAS
name, CASRN, Accession number, or
LVE number and for asserting and
substantiating any CBI claims
concerning the chemical identity (see
e.g., 40 CFR 711.15(b)(3); 711.30(c)). In
light of the extended timeframe (11
years) covered by this reporting rule, it
is possible that the submitter’s supplier
is unknown or no longer exists (e.g.,
supplier has gone out of business
without a successor entity). As applied
to this reporting rule only, a submitter
who lacks knowledge of the CAS name,
CASRN or a specific identifier (i.e.,
Accession number or LVE number) and
who—after conducting due diligence
and reviewing known or reasonably
ascertainable existing information—
cannot identify a supplier or any other
entity who could provide this
information in a joint submission, the
submitter would indicate that secondary
submitter information is not known or
reasonably ascertainable and therefore
does not need to initiate a joint
submission.
Generally, reporting entities will not
have an opportunity to add or modify
substantiations once the reporting
period concludes. Therefore, reporting
entities should communicate with
suppliers, or any other entities with CBI
concerns (e.g., non-disclosure
agreements) and carefully consider the
CBI implications of this rule. However,
reporting entities may amend their
submission to withdraw CBI claims at
any time during the reporting period.
In response to comments received on
CBI claims concerning the specific
chemical identity, following the
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
conclusion of the reporting period for
this rule, EPA will compile a list of
reported substances it plans to move to
the public Inventory because either no
chemical identity CBI claim was
asserted, or the claim was denied.
Similar to past compilations, EPA will
publish a list of Accession numbers
associated with these substances on the
EPA website for several months in
advance of any update to the Inventory.
Interested parties will have an
opportunity to review the list for
possible errors and contact EPA with
any questions or concerns about specific
candidates. In some cases, there may be
assertions by a company that a mistake
has been made (e.g., the wrong chemical
identity was reported by a third party)
or that a waiver of a CBI claim was
made by a company that may not know
the specific chemical identity, in which
case EPA will undertake appropriate
factual investigations as necessary to
confirm whether EPA should reconsider
whether the chemical is no longer
entitled to confidential Inventory
protection. Where EPA determines that
a chemical identity was identified as a
candidate for disclosure because there
was an error or because the sole basis
for the proposed move to the public
portion of the Inventory was a waiver of
a CBI claim by an entity that did not
know the specific chemical identity, it
will not move the chemical identity to
the public portion of the Inventory. This
investigation would take place prior to
the point that the specific chemical
identity would be disclosed on the
public Inventory.
Pesticide Program (CSPP)’’ CDX flow.
Users who have previously submitted
under TSCA through CDX, including
submitting information under sections 4
and 5, or CDR, will already have the
CSPP flow linked to their account. Users
reporting to EPA using other CDX
housed applications, including the
Toxics Release Inventory TRI–MEweb,
would be able to add the CSPP flow to
their existing CDX accounts.
EPA is developing a rule-specific
reporting tool within CISS, which
reporters must use to submit the
required information. This tool will be
available in CISS prior to the start of the
reporting period (see the discussion in
Unit III.I on reporting deadlines). EPA
believes that electronic reporting
reduces the reporting burden for
submitters by reducing the cost and
time required to review, edit, and
transmit data to the Agency. It also
allows submitters to share a draft
submission within their organization
and more easily save a copy for their
records or future use. Additionally, EPA
believes that many of the anticipated
reporters under this rule have
experience with reporting electronically
to EPA through CDX. For those reporters
who do not have experience submitting
information to EPA via CDX, EPA has
provided guidance documents and
support via a help desk to assist users
with technical questions related to CDX.
The resource and time requirements to
review and process data by the Agency
will also be reduced, and document
storage and retrieval will require fewer
resources.
H. What are the electronic reporting
requirements?
EPA is requiring all information to be
submitted electronically, similar to the
requirements established in 2013 for
submitting other information under
TSCA (see 40 CFR 704.20(e)). Reporters
must use EPA’s Central Data Exchange
(CDX), the Agency’s electronic reporting
portal, to submit all information under
this rule. EPA developed the Chemical
Information Submission System (CISS)
for use in submitting data electronically
to the Agency for TSCA sections 4, 5, 6,
8(a), 8(b), 8(d), and 8(e) and Title VI.
CISS, a web-based reporting tool housed
within the CDX environment, provides
submitters with user-friendly
applications to build and submit data
packages to EPA within a secure,
encrypted environment. CISS
applications provide for the capture of
both fielded data as well as the
attachment of additional information
using a wide variety of file types.
Within CDX, CISS is available under the
‘‘Submission for Chemical Safety and
I. What if an entity who knows the
specific chemical identity will not
disclose it to the PFAS manufacturer
(including importer)?
In response to public comment, EPA
is also enabling joint submissions for
PFAS manufacturers (including
importers) other than article importers
who do not know the CASRN,
Accession Number, and/or LVE number
and whose suppliers will not disclose
the identity to the PFAS reporter.
Similar to the 2020 CDR cycle, this joint
submission tool would allow
manufacturers (including importers) to
submit all importing, processing, use,
and other information to the extent it is
known or reasonably ascertainable and
to send a request to the appropriate
supplier or other entity to create a
submission to supply the PFAS identity
to EPA through the reporting tool. The
joint submission process does not
require the supplier or other entity to
disclose the specific chemical identity
to their customer, thus maintaining
confidentiality between the two entities.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70529
The joint submission tool would be
relevant when a manufacturer
(including importer) cannot provide the
CAS name, CASRN, Accession number,
or LVE number of a chemical substance
it manufactures, generally because it is
unknown to the manufacturer
(including importer) and claimed in part
or in its entirety as CBI by the supplier
of the chemical substance or mixture.
In a joint submission, the primary
submitter (i.e., the PFAS manufacturer)
may assert CBI claims over some of their
supplier information, including the
supplier identity and the chemical
substance or mixture trade name (or
other designation). Substantiation of the
CBI claims for this information will not
be required at the time of the primary
submitter’s submission. The secondary
submitter of the joint submission must
register with CDX if they have not
previously and provide its company
name and location, a technical contact,
trade name, chemical identity, function,
and, for PFAS in mixtures, the
percentage of each PFAS in the mixture
represented by the trade name. The
secondary submitter is responsible for
asserting all confidentiality claims for
the data elements that it submits
directly to EPA and for substantiating
those claims not exempt under 40 CFR
705.30(a)(2). The specific chemical
identity may be claimed as CBI by the
secondary submitter following the
provisions in 40 CFR 705.30. If the
secondary submitter does not assert and
substantiate a CBI claim for the identity
of the chemical substance in its
response to the Agency, then the
chemical is not entitled to confidential
treatment. Except for the percentage
composition information, which is
generally exempt from substantiation
pursuant to TSCA section 14(c)(2)(D),
all other reported data elements are
subject to substantiation at the time the
information is submitted.
Similar to the CDR joint submissions,
any secondary submitter in this rule
will be able to request the chemical
information from their own suppliers as
needed, should the importer’s direct
supplier not have the information.
There may be instances where a foreign
supplier purchases a mixture, under a
trade name, from another company
(tertiary company) and does not know
the chemical components of the
mixture. The foreign supplier can ask
the tertiary company manufacturing the
trade secret mixture or PFAS within the
mixture to directly provide EPA with
the correct chemical identity in the
reporting tool. In this case, the tertiary
company would register with CDX and
use the Unique Identifier for Joint
Submissions, sent to the tertiary
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
70530
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
company by the secondary company
(i.e., the foreign supplier), to complete
the reporting form.
Under this scenario, the foreign
supplier does not have access to any of
the information submitted to EPA by the
tertiary company. Likewise, the tertiary
company cannot see the information the
foreign supplier or the primary
company (i.e., the U.S. manufacturer
(including importer)) reports to EPA.
This way, the confidentiality of
information for all parties is protected.
EPA believes this functionality
addresses some concerns that have been
voiced from stakeholders, including an
importer’s direct (or immediate)
supplier may not have knowledge of the
PFAS identity. By allowing a foreign
supplier (secondary submitter) to
request the required information from
their own supplier (a tertiary submitter)
as needed, EPA believes this will
capture more information related to
specific PFAS identities that may not be
known to the importer due to
confidentiality or trade secret claims,
while not requiring suppliers to share
any information they wish to protect
from their customers.
Joint submissions are to be used only
in cases when the PFAS reporter does
not know the CAS name, CASRN,
Accession number, or LVE number for
the PFAS, but another entity (e.g., a
supplier or other manufacturer) does
and will not disclose it to the reporter.
If a reporter (including importer) or joint
reporter (secondary or tertiary
submitter) actually knows or can
reasonably ascertain the CAS name,
CASRN, Accession number, or LVE
number of a PFAS, the reporter
(including importer) must provide that
information irrespective of others’
confidentiality claims. If the reporter
wishes to claim the specific chemical
identity as confidential, the chemical
substance must not be listed on the
public portion of the Inventory, the
submitter must check the CBI box in the
reporting tool and provide the
appropriate substantiation. Such a CBI
claim only relates to the specific
chemical identity as listed on the
confidential portion of the Inventory
(i.e., CAS name and/or CASRN) and
does not apply to the Accession number
and generic name listed on the public
portion of the Inventory.
Because article importers are not
required to assert or substantiate CBI
claims for the chemical identity for this
rule, EPA is not requiring or enabling
joint submissions for article importers
when they do not know the CAS name,
CASRN, Accession number, or LVE
number of the PFAS. Additionally, in
scenarios where a secondary submitter
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
is not known or existent (e.g., a supplier
has gone out of business and does not
have a successor entity), the primary
submitter would indicate in the
reporting tool that the secondary
submitter is ‘‘not known or reasonably
ascertainable.’’ In this case, however,
the PFAS manufacturer would be
required to provide as much identifying
detail as they have regarding the PFAS
identity (e.g., trade name), but would be
able to report to EPA without initiating
a joint submission.
J. When are reports due?
EPA proposed a six-month
information collection period following
the effective date of the final rule, then
a six-month reporting period. Thus, the
proposed rule stipulated a reporting
deadline one year following the
effective date of the final rule. EPA
received many public comments on the
reporting timeframe, which are detailed
in Unit IV.K.
In response to public comment, EPA
has decided to finalize a one-year
information collection period following
the effective date of this rule, which will
then be followed by a six-month
reporting period. Further, EPA is
granting an additional six months for
reporting to small manufacturers (as
defined at 40 CFR 704.3) whose
reporting obligations under this rule are
exclusively from article import. ‘‘Small
manufacturers’’ as defined at 40 CFR
704.3 include manufacturers who meet
one of two standards: (1) a manufacturer
(including importer) whose total annual
sales, when combined with those of its
parent company, are less than $120
million, and the annual production
volume of a chemical substance is less
than 100,000 lbs; or (2) a manufacturer
(including importer) whose total annual
sales, when combined with those of its
parent company, are less than $12
million. EPA acknowledges that the
scope of reporting for this rule is
broader than for CDR, and that there
may be some reporting entities who
have not submitted information to EPA
under a TSCA section 8(a) reporting rule
before (e.g., some small manufacturers).
Therefore, EPA agrees that additional
time is warranted for PFAS
manufacturers to familiarize themselves
with the scope of the reporting rule and
reporting standard, as well as begin to
collect the required information and
create a CDX account if necessary. The
extended time period for information
collection also benefits both EPA and
the reporting community by providing
the Agency with additional time to
develop and test the CDX reporting
application for this rule. Thus, reporting
forms will be due 18 months following
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
the effective date of this rule, except for
small article importers (as defined at 40
CFR 704.3), whose reporting forms are
due 24 months following the effective
date of this rule.
K. What are the recordkeeping
requirements?
EPA is finalizing the proposed
recordkeeping requirements. Each
person who is subject to the reporting
requirements must retain records that
document any information reported to
EPA for five years, beginning on the last
date of the information submission
period. The five-year retention
requirement is consistent with the CDR
rule and corresponds with the statute of
limitations for violations and is
necessary to preserve records to support
future regulatory activities that will be
informed by this information collection.
Further, EPA believes the burden of
retaining these records, which are likely
electronic, is minimal.
L. Which proposed requirements are not
being finalized as proposed?
EPA is modifying the following items
from the proposed rule: the definition of
‘‘PFAS’’; the reporting deadline; some of
the data elements requested; enabling
streamlined reporting options for article
importers and manufacturers of R&D
substances below 10 kilograms; enabling
joint submissions; and [certain waste
management/disposal facility
exemptions].
As noted in Unit III.A.1, this rule
defines ‘‘PFAS’’ as including at least
one of these three structures:
• R-(CF2)-CF(R′)R″, where both the
CF2 and CF moieties are saturated
carbons;
• R–CF2OCF2-R′, where R and R′ can
either be F, O, or saturated carbons; and
• CF3C(CF3)R′R″, where R′ and R″ can
either be F or saturated carbons.
This definition is an expansion of the
proposed definition of ‘‘PFAS’’, which
was defined as R-(CF2)-CF(R′)R″, where
both the CF2 and CF moieties are
saturated carbons, and none of the R
groups can be hydrogen. The proposed
definition defined PFAS as a substance
that includes the following structure: R(CF2)-C(F)(R′)R″, in which both the CF2
and CF moieties are saturated carbons
and none of the R groups (R, R′ or R″)
can be hydrogen. The proposed
definition, which existed previously in
EPA’s Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics (OPPT), was developed to
focus on chemical substances in the
Inventory with properties similar to
PFOA, PFOS, and GenX. EPA notes that
the proposed definition of ‘‘PFAS’’ had
previously been used by OPPT,
although this definition has changed
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
over time. For instance, the polymer
exemption for PMNs provided a
different definition of ‘‘perfluoroalkyl’’
in its PFAS exception rule in 2010 (40
CFR 723.250) (Ref. 20). Over many years
of research and data collection, EPA
continues to learn more about these
substances and may consider whether
modifications to the definition are
appropriate. See Unit IV.A.1 for a more
detailed discussion of EPA’s reasons for
modifying this definition for this rule.
EPA is also modifying the reporting
deadline from the proposed rule. As
noted in Unit III. J, EPA believes
additional time for rule familiarization
and data collection is warranted given
the lookback period of this rule and that
there are entities that are potentially
covered by this rule which have not
been previously required to respond to
other TSCA section 8 reporting rules,
such as CDR. Given public comments
and input during the SBAR Panel, EPA
is providing a one-year period following
the effective date of this rule for data
collection, followed by a six-month
reporting period during which the
reporting application will be open. EPA
is further granting an additional six
months for reporting to small
manufacturers (as defined at 40 CFR
704.3) who would report exclusively as
article importers for the purpose of this
rule. Thus, reporting forms are due 18
months following the effective date of
this rule, except for small article
importers, which are due 24 months
from the effective date of this rule.
EPA is slightly modifying the data
elements requested by PFAS
manufacturers. Based on public
comments, EPA is not including the
following proposed data elements
within this rule: the maximum quantity
on-site at any time, including storage;
the maximum first 12 months
production volume, and the maximum
yearly production volume in any 3
years. EPA received public comment
that it is unlikely that manufacturers
have information related to the storage
quantities, and other comments stated
that requesting the maximum
production quantities in either the first
12 months or in any three years may be
duplicative of other production volume
data requested. Therefore, EPA is
removing these three items from the
scope of the final rule. For more
discussion on the comments received on
the scope of data elements, see the
Response to Comments document (Ref.
21).
Pursuant to public comments, EPA is
also modifying the request for the
molecular structure of the PFAS in all
reports: submitting molecular structure
of the reported PFAS is optional for any
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
Class 1 PFAS on the Inventory. Class 1
chemical substances are those chemical
substances composed of molecules with
particular atoms arranged in a definite,
known structure. If a Class 1 substance
is also on the Inventory, EPA knows its
particular molecular structure.
However, many commerciallymanufactured chemicals are not Class 1
substances (i.e., they are Class 2
substances comprised of specific
molecular formula representations in
variable structures, or they have
unknown or indefinite molecular
formulas and/or incomplete structural
diagrams). Additionally, not all
commercially-manufactured substances
that are subject to TSCA may be on the
Inventory due to various reporting
exemptions. While EPA has the
authority and obligation to request the
molecular structure of any reported
PFAS pursuant to TSCA section
8(a)(2)(A), EPA does already know the
structure of Class 1 substances on the
Inventory; thus, pursuant to TSCA
section 8(a)(5)(A), EPA is limiting the
scope of this reporting requirement in
cases where the information would be
duplicative of information EPA has
obtained through TSCA reporting.
Therefore, EPA is modifying the
proposed rule by limiting the reporting
requirement of molecular structures to
those PFAS that are not Class 1
substances on the Inventory.
Finally, EPA is also modifying the
proposed data elements for worker
exposure duration. EPA proposed to
request information on worker exposure
for the manufacturing site, each
industrial process and use, and each
commercial use. For all three categories,
EPA proposed to request ‘‘maximum
duration of exposure for any worker’’ in
both hours per day and days per year.
However, following the publication of
the proposed rule, EPA understands that
the worker exposure duration
information, as proposed, could lead to
a manufacturer reporting unassociated
variables; that is, the worker with the
maximum duration of exposure in hours
per day is not the same as the worker
with the maximum duration of exposure
in days per year. Without additional
clarifying information on which
worker(s) the reported durations reflect,
such a request may not yield data useful
for EPA’s assessments. EPA is therefore
modifying the proposed request for the
worker exposure duration data by
clarifying the workers for whom the
maximum exposure durations or
frequency must be reported. EPA is
requesting worker exposure duration
information (in hours per day and days
per year) both for the worker with the
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70531
greatest daily exposure duration (i.e.,
the worker with the greatest exposure in
hours per day) and for the worker with
the greatest annual exposure frequency
(i.e., the worker exposed during the
most days per year).
Additionally, EPA is modifying the
scope of data elements requested for
some article importers and
manufacturers of R&D substances in
quantities below 10 kilograms annually.
Based on feedback through public
comments and the SBAR Panel, EPA
understands that some article importers
and some manufacturers of R&D
substances may not know or be able to
ascertain all information being
requested. Therefore, EPA is offering
two streamlined reporting options for
those manufacturers. (For more
information on these reporting options,
see additional discussions in Units
III.D.2 and III.D.3.)
EPA is also modifying the proposed
rule by enabling joint submissions. In
the proposed rule, EPA did not propose
joint submissions, but did specifically
request comment on whether to enable
them for this rule in cases where a
supplier may not disclose the chemical
identity to an importer who is covered
by this reporting rule. Following public
comments, EPA is finalizing this rule to
include joint submissions for situations
in which an importer does not know the
CASRN or specific identifier (i.e.,
Accession number or LVE number) (see
Unit III.I.). EPA further discussed
requiring submitters who lack
knowledge of a chemical’s specific
chemical identity to initiate a joint
submission in the NODA.
Finally, EPA is modifying the scope of
reportable activities under this rule to
clarify that importing municipal solid
waste streams for the purpose of
disposal or destruction is not a
reportable activity under this rule. As
explained in Unit III.B.3., EPA learned
through public comments and the SBAR
Panel that entities engaged in certain
municipal solid waste management
activities are in the unique position of
not having any knowledge of the
contents of the municipal solid waste
they have imported. Therefore,
extending reporting requirements to
such sites would not result in any
responsive information under TSCA
section 8(a)(7), and EPA does not
consider the import of municipal solid
waste for the purpose of disposal or
destruction to be a reportable activity.
IV. Summary of Comments and Other
Public Input and EPA’s Response
EPA received 109 unique public
comments during the proposed rule’s
public comment period. Following
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
70532
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
publication of the proposed rule, EPA
received more data related to the
proposed rule’s burden and cost
estimates. At the time of the proposed
rule’s publication, EPA did not have
sufficient and reliable data to inform an
estimate of the scope of article importers
that may be affected by the proposed
rule’s requirements. However, after
receiving comments through the docket
related to the scope of article importers
(including estimates provided by
companies and industry trade
associations), and through the discovery
of additional information and data
sources related to the scope of
potentially affected article importers,
EPA determined the proposed rule
could no longer support a certification
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., that there
would be no significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Specifically, the number of
small businesses who may be
considered importers of PFAScontaining articles and therefore
potentially affected by the proposed rule
was estimated to be approximately
130,000. Thus, EPA convened an SBAR
Panel under the RFA to hear directly
from small entities on the anticipated
impact of the proposed rule on their
organizations, and to hear feedback
regarding recommended paths forward
to finalize a rulemaking that would
minimize the burden of compliance on
small entities while still achieving the
objectives of TSCA section 8(a)(7). This
Panel convened in April 2022, with a
Panel Outreach meeting conducted on
April 20, 2022. The Panel (which
included EPA, Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), and Small Business
Administration (SBA) representatives)
used feedback from the small entity
representatives submitted during and
after the Outreach meeting to develop
its Panel Report (Ref. 22), which
included recommendations for EPA to
consider in its final rule.
Along with public comments on the
overall cost estimates of the 2021
proposed rule, EPA received many
public comments both in support of and
against EPA’s position to not exempt
entities or activities that are often
exempt under CDR, including small
manufacturers and article importers,
and the use of a structural definition for
PFAS rather than a discrete list of
substances.
Following this Panel, EPA published
a NODA (Ref. 1) to solicit public
comment on the rule’s IRFA and other
aspects of the proposed rule that may
have been impacted by EPA actions or
proposed actions since the public
comment period had closed for the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
proposed rule in September 2021. EPA
also published the SBAR Panel Report
(Ref. 22) for public comment. The notice
was published on November 25, 2022
(Ref.1), for a 33-day public comment
period ending on December 27, 2022.
EPA received 44 unique public
comments during the public comment
period following the publication of the
NODA (Ref. 1). Comments largely
focused on different regulatory
alternatives presented in the Panel
Report (including certain exemptions, or
using a discrete list of covered PFAS)
and on EPA’s discussion of its approach
to CBI claims of the chemical identity.
EPA considered all comments and
other stakeholder input, including from
the SBAR Panel, in the development of
this final rule. This unit discusses many
of the comments on the proposed rule
received through both avenues and the
Agency’s responses; however, the more
comprehensive response to comments
related to this rule can be found in the
Response to Comments document,
which is available in the docket for this
rulemaking (Ref. 21).
A. What is the proposed definition of
covered substances?
1. Summary of Public Input
Many commenters provided feedback
on the specific definition of PFAS in the
proposed rule. These commenters either
were unsupportive of EPA’s definition
and requested that the Agency narrow
the proposed definition of PFAS or
requested that EPA broaden their
definition of PFAS, while generally
supporting EPA’s proposed structural
definition.
Commenters who were generally
unsupportive of EPA’s proposed
definition of PFAS noted that ‘‘the
proposed rule contains a definition of
‘PFAS’ not recognized by any other
federal agency or international
organization, and which EPA itself does
not use consistently.’’ One commenter
mentioned that treating PFAS as a single
group or class of chemicals is ‘‘not
scientifically sound or appropriate’’ due
to it being ‘‘over- and under-inclusive.’’
Another commenter stated that EPA’s
proposed definition of PFAS is overly
expansive ‘‘because it includes
molecules that are not obviously PFAS’’
such as ‘‘highly fluorinated molecules
that are not PFAS by any common
understanding of PFAS.’’ This
commenter suggested that the definition
of PFAS in the final rule ‘‘hew much
more closely to the types of PFAS
molecules that motivated Section 7351
of the NDAA 2020.’’ Commenters who
suggested that EPA’s proposed PFAS
definition is overly broad, also
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
suggested that an overly broad PFAS
definition will ‘‘almost certainly’’ result
in unnecessary reporting of ‘‘PFAS
molecules’ that are ‘‘likely unrelated to
the underlying problems.’’
Some commenters suggested that EPA
use the OECD definition of PFAS, with
a few commenters recommending that
EPA define PFAS ‘‘at least as broadly as
the recent OECD definition.’’ Supporters
of adopting the OECD definition
claimed that the OECD definition
incorporates sound science based on
input from the ‘‘world’s leading
developed countries, including
scientists from EPA’’ and mentioned
that it might make reporting compliance
easier for PFAS manufacturers who
have a global presence. Another
commenter who supported use of the
OECD definition mentioned that EPA’s
proposed definition excludes ‘‘many
PFAS of known concern, undercutting
the benefits of the Agency’s actions.’’
A few commenters who claimed that
EPA’s proposed PFAS definition is
overly narrow, mentioned that other
regulatory agencies in some states have
taken a ‘‘class-based approach’’ to PFAS
by regulating them as a chemical class.
Commenters specifically cited Vermont,
Massachusetts, and California as
examples of States that are regulating
PFAS in this way, ‘‘given that all PFAS,
or their degradation, reaction, or
metabolism products, display
commonly hazardous traits.’’ Some
commenters pointed to additional States
(Colorado, Maine, Washington) that
have adopted or are considering
adopting a broader definition of PFAS
similar to the OECD definition.
2. EPA’s Response
EPA appreciates that there are
differences between the definition of
PFAS used for this rule, for other
actions in the Agency, and by non-EPA
entities. While EPA’s rule is not dictated
by the definitions used by other
regulatory bodies or international
organizations, the Agency did consider
adopting the different definitions
suggested by the commenters, but
ultimately determined those definitions
would not satisfy EPA’s obligations
under TSCA section 8(a)(7). In the
development of this proposed
definition, EPA intended to include
substances with a strong electron
withdrawing nature as this greatly
effects the chemistry of the substituted,
adjacent and nearby atoms, meaning
they would have a minimum of two
fluorine atoms on at least one carbon
(e.g., -CF2-). Additionally, EPA wanted
the covered substances to be unlikely to
degrade or metabolize, so an adjacent
CF group was added to the requirement/
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
definition, with the stipulations that the
substitutions could not be H and both
carbons must be saturated (e.g., -CF2CFR-). EPA also thought that branching
might make a chemical less susceptible
to degradation and metabolism, so EPA
also removed the option for -CF2-CF2when developing the proposed
definition.
After reviewing public comments,
EPA is modifying the proposed
definition of PFAS. For the purposes of
this section 8(a)(7) reporting rule, EPA
is defining ‘‘PFAS’’ using a structural
definition. PFAS is defined as including
at least one of these three structures:
• R-(CF2)-CF(R′)R″, where both the
CF2 and CF moieties are saturated
carbons;
• R-CF2OCF2-R′, where R and R′ can
either be F, O, or saturated carbons; and
• CF3C(CF3)R′R″, where R′ and R″ can
either be F or saturated carbons.
For the purposes of this rule, EPA has
defined PFAS to include chemical
substances whose structures or substructures resemble, at least in part,
chemicals widely known to be of
concern to human health and/or the
environment, i.e., PFOA, PFOS, and
GenX. The definition also captures
substances that may metabolize or
degrade to PFAS which may present
similar properties to PFOA, PFOS, or
GenX. This definition is focused on
substances likely to be present in the
environment, thereby focusing on
substances with greater potential for
exposures to people and/or the
environment and by extension more
potential to present risks.
EPA considered adopting OECD’s
definition for the purpose of this rule,
but for the reasons provided in this unit,
determined it is not appropriate to do
so. First, EPA notes that ‘‘alkyl’’ means
an alkane missing one hydrogen, and
acyclic alkyl has the general formula of
CnH2(n∂1), while a cycloalkyl has the
general formula CnH2(n¥1). Rather than
limiting the definition of PFAS to alkyl
chains, the OECD definition covers,
with certain exceptions, any chemical
with one or more fluorinated alkyl
groups (i.e., -CF2-, -CF3). Many chemical
substances covered by the OECD
definition are unlike the structures of
the PFAS of concern (i.e., PFOA, PFOS,
GenX), which have more fluorinated
carbons and are more likely to be
present in the environment. The
substances with only single fluorinated
alkyl groups and no additional
fluorinated moieties do not share the
same environmental and/or human
health impacts (including
bioaccumulation, persistence, or
toxicity) as substances such as PFOA,
PFOS, or GenX. Further, many
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
substances with one terminal -CF3 (e.g.,
trifluoroacetic acid (TFA)) are wellstudied. Using structures in the
CompTox Chemicals Dashboard, EPA
estimates that approximately 23,000
additional substances would be
captured by the OECD definition,
though approximately 17,000 of those
would be covered only due to having
one terminal -CF3 and no additional
fluorine. Thus, adopting the OECD
definition of PFAS in this rule would
mainly serve to significantly add
reporting burden on many substances
whose only fluorine atom is in a
terminal -CF3 and that do not share a
fluorinated substructure that is likely to
result in their persistence in the
environment, nor to degrade to a
substance that shares toxicological or
physiochemical properties with PFOA,
PFOS, or GenX. Therefore, EPA is using
its authority under TSCA section
8(a)(5)(A) to focus reporting on
structures that contain at least one
fluorinated alkyl chain rather than
isolated fluorinated alkyl groups.
Information on structures that would
meet the OECD definition due to an
isolated fluorinated alkyl group is
considered ‘‘unnecessary’’ for the
purpose of this rule and is out of scope
of reporting requirements under EPA’s
authority under TSCA section
8(a)(5)(A).
Further, OECD’s general definition is
‘‘based on molecular structure alone’’
(Ref. 8). In its 2021 terminology
document, OECD notes that the current
definition ‘‘serves as a starting and
reference point to guide individual
users to have a comprehensive
understanding of the PFAS universe and
to keep the big picture of the PFAS
universe in mind. At the same time,
individual users may define their own
working scope of PFASs for specific
activities according to their specific
needs by combining the general
definition of PFASs with additional
considerations (e.g., specific properties,
use areas)’’ (Ref. 8). Accordingly, EPA
determined it is appropriate to define
‘‘PFAS’’ differently for this rule and to
establish a definition which
characterizes PFAS based on predefined traits. Substances which meet
the OECD’s definition of PFAS but that
would not be considered PFAS under
this rule do not share properties with
substances of concern to EPA (i.e.,
PFOA, PFOS, and GenX). As noted
previously, EPA is defining PFAS for
this rule to focus on reporting that is
necessary under TSCA section 8(a)(7),
while reducing unnecessary or
duplicative reporting pursuant to EPA’s
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70533
obligations under TSCA section
8(a)(5)(A).
Additionally, while the OECD
definition of PFAS is broader than other
entities’ definitions of PFAS, EPA is
aware of some TSCA chemical
substances which would meet this rule’s
definition of PFAS but not OECD’s. In
comparing the universe of PFAS that
would be subject to EPA’s proposed
definition and those substances
captured by OECD’s definition, EPA
determined that some substances with
halogens (e.g., iodine, chlorine,
bromine) on the same carbon as the CF
or CF2 moiety would be in scope of
EPA’s proposed definition but not
OECD’s. Examples of substances which
are considered PFAS under this rule’s
definition but not OECD’s definition
include 1-chloro-1,1,2,2tetrafluoroethane (CASRN 354–25–6) or
1,2-dichloro-1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane
(CASRN 76–14–2). Because all
substances which were captured by the
proposed definition are still captured in
this final rule, EPA points out that
adopting the OECD definition would
still have excluded some substances that
are captured by this rule’s definition.
Many commenters also suggested that
trifluoroacetyl fluoride (TFA; CASRN
354–34–7) should be included within
the scope of this rule. Under this rule’s
definition of PFAS, TFA is not within
scope. EPA believes TFA does not meet
the threshold for reporting under TSCA
section 8(a)(7), as it is a short-chain
molecule (C2) with only one terminal
-CF3, and no other fluorine atom, unlike
substances such as PFOA, PFOS, and
GenX. TFA is naturally occurring in
some instances or is produced as an
environmental degradant of many other
substances, especially those with only
one terminal carbon (-CF3) (Refs. 23, 24,
and 25). EPA understands that the
manufacture of TFA would not always
be considered ‘‘manufactured for
commercial purposes’’ under TSCA,
such as its production as an
environmental degradant or its presence
as a naturally-occurring substance, and
therefore EPA would not receive any
TSCA section 8(a)(7) reporting on those
quantities. Additionally, as EPA has
noted in responding to a request for
testing on PFAS, TFA is ‘‘a well-studied
substance’’ with ‘‘relatively robust
toxicity information available’’ (Ref. 25).
Therefore, EPA believes that reporting
on TFA under a TSCA section 8(a) rule
(i.e., one in which the scope is limited
to those substances manufactured for
commercial purposes and does not
include environmental degradants) is
not warranted as such requirements
would be ‘‘unnecessary’’ and
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
70534
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
‘‘duplicative’’ under TSCA section
8(a)(5)(A).
EPA also disagrees with commenters
who expressed that the scope of
substances reportable under this rule
should be a discrete list and not a
structural definition. EPA points out
that other TSCA requirements have
relied on a structural definition when
appropriate (e.g., the LCPFAC SNUR
defines covered substances using a
structural definition (40 CFR 721.10536)
(Ref. 7), and the polymer exemption rule
for new chemical pre-manufacture
notices (PMNs) defines covered PFAS
polymers using structural definitions
(40 CFR 723.250). As some commenters
pointed out, reporting exemptions for
both existing chemicals (e.g., certain
byproduct exemptions in the CDR rule)
and new chemicals (e.g., byproducts
and impurities not listed on the
Inventory) mean that EPA may be
unaware of some substances which meet
this definition of PFAS, and which
would also meet the TSCA definition of
‘‘chemical substance.’’ Therefore, EPA
has chosen to define the scope of
covered substances for the purpose of
this rule using a structural definition
and not inadvertently limit the scope of
reporting to a discrete list.
B. What is the inclusion for articles?
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
1. Summary of Public Input
Several commenters provided
feedback on the inclusion of articles
(whether imported or domestically
produced) in the proposed reporting
requirements.
Commenters who expressed support
for the inclusion of articles in the
proposed reporting requirements
provided the following rationales:
• It is necessary that EPA include
articles in the scope of reporting
requirements to better understand
where PFAS are used in products and
the extent of human exposure.
Additionally, EPA has recognized that
PFAS in articles can be released during
use and disposal, and therefore it is
necessary for EPA to gather this
information.
• Information on PFAS-containing
articles is critical to states that are
beginning to regulate PFAS-containing
items.
• Even if there are data gaps related
to the presence of PFAS in articles, EPA
would benefit from knowing the
existence of these gaps, and therefore,
EPA should move forward with
requiring reporting on articles.
• Congress has authorized inclusion
of articles in the reporting requirements;
reporting of ‘‘known or reasonably
ascertainable information’’ is not an
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
excessive burden. Commenters argued
that excluding articles from the scope of
the final rule would be inconsistent
with Congressional intent.
• The definition of ‘‘chemical
substance’’ under TSCA is not
incompatible with the inclusion of
articles. Further, in other sections of
TSCA, Congress specified distinct
requirements for chemical substances
depending on their presence in articles,
though it did not do so in TSCA section
8(a)(7).
Commenters who suggested that EPA
exempt articles from the proposed
reporting requirements provided the
following rationales:
• The proposed requirements are at
odds with regulatory practices;
historically, EPA has not included
articles in reporting requirements.
Additionally, CDR does not include
reporting on imported articles, and
some commenters stated that EPA
should be consistent with those
requirements. Some commenters
suggested that the reasons EPA has
provided in the past for certain CDR
exemptions, including imported
articles, are relevant here (i.e., the
potential for exposure to chemicals
contained in articles is ‘‘limited’’) and
encouraged EPA to incorporate an
imported article exemption under this
rule. Several of these comments also
mentioned previous EPA actions, such
as the TSCA Fees Rule and the phenol,
isopropylated phosphate (3:1) (PIP (3:1))
rule, in which EPA initially aimed to
include articles but eventually changed
course due to ‘‘workability’’ issues of
including articles (Refs. 26 and 27).
• EPA did not provide sufficient
justification in the proposed rule for
requiring article reporting, and there is
no mandate in the FY 2020 NDAA for
inclusion of articles. Commenters
claimed that EPA underestimated or
failed to account for the burden this
reporting will have on article importers,
and EPA is unable to accurately
estimate how many importers this
proposed rule would affect.
• Under TSCA, the definition of
‘‘chemical substance’’ has not been
interpreted to include articles which
contain the chemical substance.
Commenters argue that TSCA section 8
implementing regulations also
distinguish ‘‘articles’’ from ‘‘chemical
substances.’’
• Requiring reporting on articles
would place undue burden on industry
and for manufacturers or importers to
obtain the information EPA seeks is very
difficult given the absence of historical
PFAS reporting requirements.
Commenters claimed that there will be
significant data gaps if EPA requires
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
article information, and that EPA will
not be able to obtain the information it
seeks. Additionally, reporting on
articles going back ten years is
impractical.
• EPA has acknowledged that article
manufacturers and importers likely will
not have the information EPA seeks, and
therefore, manufacturers and importers
should be exempt. These commenters
also cite their foreign suppliers’
confidentiality or trade secret claims
over their products and indicate that it
is unlikely their suppliers will divulge
the information necessary to comply
with this rule.
• Supply chains are too broad and
requiring articles reporting will result in
duplicative information, especially for
more complex articles or finished
products.
Neutral comments suggested that if
EPA is going to require reporting on
articles, they should require reporting
for domestic article manufacturers only
and not article importers, and that even
beyond this rule, EPA should fully
consider the complexities associated
with collecting data on articles under
TSCA. One commenter stated that EPA
should consider focusing its reporting
requirements on articles with the
greatest potential for human exposure.
The commenter offered as an example
the differences between articles
containing PFAS on its surface due to
the properties that PFAS would impart
on the product (such as carpets or
cookware) and articles containing PFAS
within resins of multi-component parts.
The commenter suggested that EPA
exclude articles containing PFAS unless
the PFAS was intentionally added to the
article due to properties imparted on the
article.
2. EPA’s Response
EPA appreciates the broad interest in
the general topic of requiring reporting
on PFAS within articles (either
imported articles or articles that are
domestically produced). This topic was
also discussed at length during the
SBAR Panel, and EPA considered all
public input on the proposed inclusion
of PFAS-containing articles in this rule.
EPA is finalizing the requirement to
include PFAS-containing articles within
the scope of this rule, to the extent that
the manufacturer (including importer)
of PFAS within articles knows or can
reasonably ascertain the requested
information. EPA disagrees with
commenters who stated that the Agency
does not have the authority to collect
information on PFAS-containing articles
given the language in the FY 2020
NDAA. While the FY 2020 NDAA did
not explicitly direct EPA to collect data
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
on articles containing PFAS, the FY
2020 NDAA also did not explicitly
prevent EPA from collecting
information on PFAS-containing
articles. Further, EPA notes that it is
within the Agency’s authority to collect
information on chemical substances
which are manufactured or imported
through articles. Thus, the FY 2020
NDAA’s direction to EPA to require data
from PFAS manufacturers necessarily
includes those PFAS manufactured
(including imported) within articles.
Although EPA has not typically
included articles in some other TSCA
section 8 reporting rules, the Agency
both has the authority and has
previously done so. Other TSCA rules,
including other TSCA section 8
reporting rules (such as the Preliminary
Assessment Information Reporting rule
under TSCA section 8(a) (40 CFR part
712) and the TSCA section 8(d) Health
and Safety Data Reporting rule (40 CFR
part 716) include reporting on articles as
needed for EPA to fulfill its
responsibilities under TSCA.
Additionally, EPA points out that the
TSCA Fees and PIP 3:1 rules (Refs. 26
and 27) are authorized under separate
sections of TSCA. This PFAS reporting
rule was proposed and required under
TSCA section 8(a), which authorizes
EPA to require reporting and
recordkeeping requirements of
manufacturers and/or processors, to the
extent such information is known to or
reasonably ascertainable by the reporter.
The requirements and compliance
standards of the PIP 3:1 (use in article
prohibition) (Ref. 27) and Fees (selfidentification of manufacture) rules
were different (Ref. 26).
EPA disagrees with the commenters
that under TSCA, the definition of
‘chemical substance’ ‘‘cannot be and has
never been interpreted to include
articles that contain the regulated
chemical substance.’’ TSCA section 3(2)
does not define ‘‘chemical substance’’ to
exclude articles. Generally speaking,
articles are manufactured goods or
finished products—and the chemicals in
them are subject to TSCA. The law is
clear that when a chemical substance is
manufactured (including imported into
the United States) or is distributed or
processed in the United States—
whether in bulk form or in an article—
it can be subject to regulation under
TSCA. As such, EPA can and has
imposed regulatory requirements on
chemical substances in articles under
TSCA. Further, no TSCA section 8
regulations exclude articles from the
definition of ‘‘chemical substances.’’
While implementing regulations for
other TSCA section 8 rules may exempt
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
reporting for activities related to a
covered chemical substance in an article
(e.g., general reporting and
recordkeeping provisions for TSCA
section 8(a) information-gathering rules
(40 CFR part 704) or the Chemical Data
Reporting rule (40 CFR part 711)), there
is no definitional distinction for a
chemical substance depending on
whether it is incorporated into an
article; nothing says that an ‘‘article’’ is
exclusive or distinct from a ‘‘chemical
substance.’’ While the CDR rule has
exempted the import of articles from
reporting, the domestic manufacture of
a chemical substance within an article
is still subject to CDR. Further, EPA
points out that the introductory
paragraph of 40 CFR 704.5 for
exemptions states this section is
superseded by any TSCA section 8(a)
rule that adds to, removes, or revises the
exemptions described in this section.
Thus, the commenters’ reliance on
precedent under 40 CFR part 704 fails
to acknowledge that EPA has long
allowed for different exemptions (or
lack thereof) to apply under different
TSCA section 8(a) rules as appropriate.
EPA also disagrees with commenters’
statements that reporting on articles
would place undue burden on industry.
EPA points out that the reporting
standard of TSCA section 8(a) rules is
limited to information which is known
to or reasonably ascertainable by the
manufacturer. Thus, if requested
information is beyond that scope of
known or reasonably ascertainable, the
reporting entity would not be required
to submit anything beyond indicating
that such information is not known or
reasonably ascertainable to them. In
other words, this reporting standard is
not a testing requirement; rather it asks
reporters to share with EPA the
information they already have (or can
reasonably determine) on their
manufactured and imported PFAS.
Regarding comments on the lookback
period for article importers, EPA points
out that the lookback period proposed is
consistent with Congress’s direction to
EPA in TSCA section 8(a)(7). EPA is not
changing the proposed requirement to
provide any known or reasonably
ascertainable information for the period
beginning in 2011.
Regarding comments stating that
requiring reporting on articles may
result in duplicative information for
complex articles or products that are reimported, EPA disagrees that the
information reported will result in
duplicative information, especially
given the reporting standard applicable
to this rule. EPA acknowledges that
some supply chains of manufacturers
reporting under this rule are complex.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70535
However, EPA believes that information
known to or reasonably ascertainable by
an article manufacturer at the first
instance the PFAS is imported into the
United States is likely different than the
scope of information known to an article
importer farther down the supply chain
who may re-import that PFAS later, as
the article is incorporated into more
complex articles or products. For
instance, the person who imports a
PFAS within an article in the first
instance may have different worker
exposure information to report than a
person who may later re-import that
PFAS-containing article as part of a
more complex product. In another
example, information related to the
known industrial or consumer uses of a
PFAS within an article may be clearer
to the person who re-imports a PFAS
within a larger complex product than it
is to the person who first manufactured
the PFAS within the article. Thus, EPA
does not believe that the information
requested of PFAS article manufacturers
would be duplicative, given the
different steps of a supply chain and
manufacturing processes, and is
requiring all PFAS-containing article
manufacturers to report the requested
data to EPA to the extent it is known or
reasonably ascertainable. EPA also
believes that applying the reporting
requirements each time a PFAS is
imported into the United States is
consistent with TSCA’s definition of
manufacturing under TSCA section 3(9)
(which means ‘‘to import into the
customs territory of the United States
(as defined in general note 2 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the
United States), produce, or
manufacture’’) and the directive under
TSCA section 8(a)(7). EPA also believes
that if a PFAS is imported, exported,
then re-imported, limiting the scope of
reporting to just one instance of
importation into the United States may
result in certain burden on
manufacturers within the supply chain
who need to further communicate with
each other to determine whether a PFAS
within an article has already been
reported and who is responsible for
reporting. Further, with respect to
comments claiming that the inclusion of
articles will necessarily result in
significant data gaps, EPA respectfully
points out that there is no current
database with comparable information
on PFAS in commerce, including within
articles, over the reporting timeframe.
EPA cannot make an assessment of
potential PFAS data gaps without
considering all reasonably available
information. Additionally, as noted by
other commenters, EPA would benefit
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
70536
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
from better characterizing any data gaps
after receipt of all reasonably known
information.
EPA disagrees with commenters’
suggestions to limit the scope of
reporting on PFAS in articles by
extending reporting requirements to
only those articles ‘‘with the greatest
exposure potential.’’ For the purpose of
a TSCA section 8 information reporting
rule, there is no requirement for EPA to
determine which substances or types of
articles may pose greater exposure
potential, unlike some other sections of
TSCA (e.g., TSCA section 6 Significant
New Use Rules). This TSCA section
8(a)(7) rule in particular aims to provide
EPA with a greater understanding of the
scope of existing information of PFAS
within the supply chain and the
quantities and uses of commercially
manufactured PFAS, which may
include PFAS manufactured or
imported within a variety of articles or
products.
Finally, EPA took appropriate and
necessary steps to consult with the
public and consider stakeholder input
on the proposed rule, including
reporting on PFAS-containing articles.
These steps included convening an
SBAR Panel and meeting with
stakeholders to discuss the proposed
rule and potential reporting obligations.
EPA has considered all input for this
rule, including the complexity of
different supply chains with respect to
collecting data on articles. While EPA
was not able to estimate the burden on
article importers given the data
limitations at the time of the proposed
rule’s publication, the Agency has since
been able to provide such estimates,
including input from public
commenters, peer-reviewed journals,
other government datasets, and input
from the SBAR Panel. EPA has now
remedied this omission in the Economic
Analysis.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
C. What are the exclusion of processors
from rule?
1. Summary of Public Input
EPA received comments both in
support of and in opposition to the
addition of processors to the proposed
rule. Ten commenters stated that EPA
should expand the rule beyond
manufacturers (including importers) to
cover all facilities processing PFAS.
Two of these commenters expressed that
processors are often in the best position
to provide the information required
under TSCA section 8(a). Several
commenters emphasized the importance
of collecting information on the full life
cycle of PFAS, including from
processing operations. Some
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
commenters were concerned with a
potential data gap of PFAS exposures if
processors are omitted from the final
rule. Another commenter highlighted
the importance of tracking the PFAS
solid waste stream to enhance
understanding of health risks associated
with PFAS and to inform other actions
under environmental regulations such
as the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
and Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA). Many commenters in
support of adding processors also stated
that EPA has the authority to require
reporting from processors, citing both
the FY 2020 NDAA and TSCA section
8(a)(1).
Four commenters indicated that the
Congress did not intend for the
proposed rule to include processors and
that EPA should not require them to
report. Two of these commenters
referred to the FY 2020 NDAA section
7351 language stating that the Act does
not identify manufacturers that process
PFAS substances as entities that would
be subject to the rule. Commenters in
opposition to adding processors also
claimed that EPA would be creating
confusion and the potential for
duplicative reporting. One commenter
urged EPA to clarify in the final rule
that reporting is limited to only the
initial importers of PFAS-containing
products and not any downstream
processors or users. Commenters also
said that such reporting would create
unnecessary burden for both EPA and
processors.
2. EPA’s Response
EPA appreciates commenters’
perspectives on extending reporting
requirements to processors for this rule
under TSCA section 8(a)(7). However,
the Agency’s reading of the text in
TSCA section 8(a)(7) and the FY 2020
NDAA’s legislative history conclude
that the intended scope of this rule is to
only require reporting from
manufacturers (including importers),
distinct from processors. EPA is
clarifying that entities who solely
process, distribute, and/or use PFAS,
and do not manufacture (including
import) PFAS for a commercial purpose,
are not required to report under this
rule.
As some commenters noted, the
Agency would have the authority to
promulgate such a rule for processors
under TSCA section 8(a)(1). However,
this rule is being promulgated under
TSCA section 8(a)(7). EPA also notes
that the exclusion of processors from the
scope of this rule does not preclude any
potential future rulemaking under TSCA
section 8(a)(1), should the Agency
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
determine such data are needed. EPA
will review the data submitted by
manufacturers under this rule and
reserves the right to promulgate a rule
under TSCA section 8(a)(1) to capture
information from PFAS processors if
appropriate. EPA disagrees with
commenters who noted that including
processors in the scope of this rule
would lead to confusion and duplicative
reporting. EPA points out that other
TSCA section 8(a) rules have included
processors, such as the nanoscale
materials reporting rule (40 CFR
740.20).
D. What were the small business
considerations?
1. Summary of Public Input
Many commenters opined on the
inclusion of small businesses, including
small manufacturers, under the
proposed rule. Several commenters
stated that EPA should exempt small
businesses from reporting under the
proposed rule. Some of these
commenters said that small businesses
are not likely to provide useful
information and will be
disproportionately affected by the rule
(including potentially being forced out
of business) because fewer resources are
available to them. Others expressed that
they thought EPA had not evaluated
whether small businesses would
actually contribute meaningful data to
EPA as a result of the rule.
Four commenters disagreed with
EPA’s position that the FY 2020 NDAA
authorizes data collection from all
manufacturers, including small
manufacturers. Two of these
commenters felt that, by not providing
relief for small manufacturers, EPA did
not appropriately apply TSCA section
8(a)(5) requirements. Some commenters
referred to TSCA section 8(a)(1), which
they state excludes small manufacturers
from reporting rules. Another
commenter stated that EPA needs to
consider the historical lack of TSCA
section 8 reporting requirements on
small manufacturers or article
importers, including from CDR.
Other commenters said that EPA
should collect the information required
under the proposed rule from all
businesses regardless of size. While one
commenter acknowledged that the rule
could be burdensome for small entities,
they also said that the health risks
associated with PFAS are significant
and warrant the data collection from
small businesses. Another commenter
described EPA’s definition of small
manufacturer under TSCA section 8 as
‘‘expansive’’ and noted that the existing
‘‘small manufacturer’’ definition would
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
result in omitting reporting from
significant PFAS manufacturing and
importing activities such that it would
undermine this data collection effort.
One commenter stated that EPA could
help small businesses comply with the
proposed rule in lieu of a small
manufacturer exemption by extending
other reporting exemptions to them,
including R&D substances, non-isolated
intermediates, impurities, byproducts,
and articles, as well as a minimum
reporting threshold.
2. EPA’s Response
EPA disagrees with commenters’
positions that a broad small business or
a small manufacturer exemption is
appropriate for this rule. EPA
appreciates that small businesses,
especially those which have not
previously reported under CDR or other
TSCA section 8(a) rules, may not have
the same resources that are available to
large companies. This feedback was also
voiced through the rule’s SBAR Panel,
and EPA is greatly appreciative of the
input related to small businesses’
resources and ability to respond to the
rule. To that end, EPA has modified the
proposed rule to include options that
provide some relief to all manufacturers,
including small entities. Specifically,
article importers and manufacturers of
R&D substances in quantities below 10
kilograms per year will have the option
to submit more streamlined reporting
forms than the longer, standard form for
all other PFAS manufacturers.
Additionally, EPA is extending the
deadline for reporting forms by at least
six months from what was proposed, so
that all entities, including small entities,
have 18 months from the effective date
of this rule to submit the requested
information. For small manufacturers
(as defined at 40 CFR 704.3) whose
reporting obligations under this rule are
exclusively from article imports, EPA is
further extending the deadline for
reporting forms by an additional six
months. Thus, small article importers
have 24 months from the effective date
of this rule to submit the requested
information.
In response to commenters who refer
to TSCA section 8(a)(1) in their support
of an exemption for small
manufacturers, EPA respectfully points
out that this is a rule authorized under
TSCA section 8(a)(7), not under TSCA
section 8(a)(1). While Congress
explicitly carved out potential
exemptions for small manufacturers and
small processors for rules implemented
under TSCA section 8(a)(1) for
chemicals not subject to certain TSCA
actions, Congress chose not to do so in
the text of TSCA section 8(a)(7). EPA
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
considered the provisions at TSCA
section 8(a)(5) to limit reporting
requirements for small manufacturers
and determined that reporting from
small manufacturers would be
appropriate under TSCA section
8(a)(5)(A) through (C). The information
requested under this rule is not
unnecessary nor duplicative due, in
part, to exemptions in other TSCA
reporting rules. Additionally, a broad
exemption for all entities deemed a
‘‘small manufacturer’’ would not enable
EPA to fulfill the express requirements
of the NDAA to require ‘‘each person’’
to report their PFAS manufacturing
activities to the extent they know or can
reasonably ascertain. Regarding the
provision to minimize the cost of
compliance on small manufacturers,
EPA has identified regulatory
alternatives to the proposed rule that
reduce compliance costs without a
complete exemption. Finally, based on
public comments and input from the
SBAR Panel, EPA believes that small
manufacturers are likely to have
information regarding commercially
manufactured PFAS, which is relevant
to the effective implementation of
TSCA.
E. What is the concern regarding a lack
of common TSCA reporting exemptions
or reporting threshold?
1. Summary of Public Input
Many commenters opined on the
proposed rule’s lack of common TSCA
reporting exemptions and a reporting
threshold. Several commenters added
that incorporating exemptions and/or a
reporting threshold would make the
proposed rule consistent with other
TSCA rules such as CDR, Fees, PAIR,
and PMN reporting (Refs. 20, 26, and
27). Commenters cited potential
compliance challenges and reporting
burden as the rationale for such
exemptions, as they stated that the work
involved in identifying, tracing, and
reporting under the proposed rule is
significantly increased without
exemptions. Other commenters said that
the lack of exemptions would
significantly increase the number of
substances for which reporting must
occur as opposed to the 1,364 PFAS
estimated in the proposed rule, as those
only reflected those PFAS on the
Inventory or subject to an LVE, yet those
sources exempt several types of
substances (e.g., impurities, byproducts,
R&D substances). Another commenter
said that these types of substances are
not likely to result in exposure to
humans or the environment, and that
EPA has not articulated what the benefit
of the additional data would be.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70537
On the other hand, several
commenters supported implementation
of the proposed rule without any
exemptions. They said that Congress
intended for each person who
manufactures a PFAS to be subject to
the rule, without exemptions, and that
incorporating exemptions would not be
consistent with EPA’s past approach for
PFAS. Some commenters also pointed
out the differences between the
objectives of CDR and this PFAS
reporting rule, stating that CDR’s intent
is to obtain initial screening information
on a broad universe of chemicals, while
this rule’s aim is to collect information
specifically on PFAS.
2. EPA’s Response
EPA appreciates the input from
commenters on the impacts of not
incorporating certain reporting
exemptions or thresholds. EPA
appreciates the support from
commenters who supported
promulgating the final rule without
exemption and, after reviewing public
input, has decided to finalize that aspect
of the proposed rule.
EPA disagrees with commenters’
requests to include many of the
reporting exemptions found in other
TSCA rules such as in PMN reporting
and the Fees Rule (Refs. 20 and 26). EPA
points out that, unlike the Fees Rule, the
scope of this rule is information which
is known to or reasonably ascertainable
by the manufacturer (Ref. 26).
While this rule uses the same
reporting standard as CDR and other
TSCA section 8(a) rules, this rule is
focused on improving EPA’s knowledge
of commercially manufactured PFAS
and their uses, which includes
chemicals of concern to human health
and the environment. Therefore, EPA
does not believe many of the same
reporting exemptions used in other
TSCA rules are warranted. As directed
by the statute, EPA is requesting
information on PFAS manufactured for
a commercial purpose to the extent such
information is known or reasonably
ascertainable to the manufacturer. EPA
also points out that, whether types of
substances (such as non-isolated
intermediates, impurities, or articles)
are likely to result in human or
environmental exposures is not a
threshold that EPA needs to satisfy for
requiring reporting on those substances
under TSCA section 8(a)(7). EPA aims to
better understand the scope of existing
knowledge of the universe of
historically manufactured PFAS and
implementing certain exemptions may
inadvertently lead to the omission of
information known to or reasonably
ascertainable to some manufacturers.
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
70538
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
The information EPA receives through
this rule will refine the Agency’s
understanding of certain exposurerelated data of PFAS manufactured. If
certain substances have not resulted in
significant human and environmental
exposures, then that would be reflected
in the submitted information.
EPA appreciates the public input on
the proposed rule’s burden analysis,
including additional information
received during the proposed rule’s
comment period, the SBAR Panel, and
the IRFA comment period. EPA has
refined its economic analysis, including
the estimated scope of covered
substances and associated burden of
determining whether reporting is
required. Regarding commenters’ claims
that the estimated scope of covered
substances may be significantly greater
than estimated without certain
exemptions, EPA points out that the
exact challenge articulated by
commenters justifies the lack of
exemptions in this rule: the fact that
stakeholders have questions
surrounding the number of covered
substances under this rule, including as
impurities, intermediates, or R&D
substances, reveals the lack of existing
information of the universe of PFAS in
commerce. EPA aims to better
understand what manufacturers know
or may reasonably ascertain regarding
manufactured PFAS, and exempting
substances that were not previously
reported under other TSCA rules would
hinder that effort.
F. What is the application of the
reporting standard?
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
1. Summary of Public Input
EPA received many comments on the
reporting standard proposed for this
rule: information known to or
reasonably ascertainable by the
manufacturer. The majority of these
commenters suggested that EPA revise
their definition of ‘‘reasonably
ascertainable’’ to assist businesses with
compliance. Specifically, these
commenters voiced concerns over the
time spent to conduct compliance
determination activities to satisfy the
‘‘due diligence’’ requirement of the
reporting standard for many substances
and products, and for which they do not
anticipate information being readily
available even after an extensive search.
Commenters claimed that, for
substances which have been historically
exempt from other TSCA reporting
requirements (especially imported
articles), there is likely little if any
information available, yet entities would
still be required to perform due
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
diligence and demonstrated they have
examined each imported article.
However, other commenters largely
supported EPA’s proposed
requirements. One commenter suggested
that ‘‘known and reasonably
ascertainable’’ should be broadly
interpreted and that the proposed
definition of ‘‘known and reasonably
ascertainable’’ is consistent with
definitions in TSCA recordkeeping
regulations and should therefore be
included, as is, in the final rule. Other
commenters stated that the requirement
for manufacturers to assess whether
they know or can reasonably ascertain
PFAS’ presence in their articles is a
modest cost that is outweighed by the
benefits of the data to EPA and the
public.
In addition, there were several
comments requesting that EPA clarify or
provide additional guidance on the
reporting standard for this rule,
including guidance tailored to article
importers and what constitutes due
diligence under this standard. Some
suggestions included stipulating that the
scope of a manufacturer’s inquiry
within their supply chain is limited to
just immediate suppliers (i.e., no need
to inquire multiple levels of their
supply chain), and that if a supplier
refuses to share information with a
manufacturer, then the manufacturer
need not inquire further and would not
face EPA enforcement action. Some
commenters also requested further
clarification of the proposed
requirement to submit ‘‘reasonable
estimates’’ for certain data elements
where actual data are not available.
2. EPA’s Response
EPA appreciates the input from
commenters and the SBAR Panel related
to the scope of information that may be
known to or reasonably ascertainable by
(KRA) PFAS manufacturers, including
small article importers. EPA has
incorporated the feedback into both the
rule (e.g., providing an option of
streamlined reporting forms for article
importers and manufacturers of small
quantities of R&D substances who
would not know the downstream
processing, use, and disposal
information) and this rule’s
accompanying guidance and
instructions on applying the KRA
standard.
Regarding manufacturers who have
concerns over the due diligence
expected under this rule, including
those who believe they ultimately will
not obtain any reportable information,
EPA clarifies that there is no reporting
or recordkeeping requirement if an
entity has no relevant information. This
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
rule does not itself require any company
to maintain information upon which a
decision not to report is based.
Consistent with their own business
practices, companies may elect to retain
documentation of their conclusion that
they were not subject to reporting
requirements. While manufacturers and
importers are expected to exercise ‘‘due
diligence’’ in looking for reportable
PFAS and information, that effort will
look different for different entities.
EPA also acknowledges that it may
not be within the scope of ‘‘reasonably
ascertainable’’ to survey all articles and
products, especially for article
importers. In addition to the existing
guidance on this reporting standard,
EPA is providing guidance on this
reporting standard with respect to
article importers and other entities who
may be exempt under other TSCA
regulations (e.g., manufacturers of small
quantities of R&D substances).
Regarding the suggestions that the
rule should limit the scope of a
manufacturer’s inquiry of its supplier(s)
to only information which the supplier
does not claim as CBI or trade secret,
EPA is enabling a joint submission
option within the future reporting tool.
Similar to one of the joint submission
options in the CDR tool, a PFAS
manufacturer whose supplier does not
volunteer requested information,
including the specific chemical identity
of a PFAS imported from the supplier,
would have the option to complete the
PFAS reporting form to the extent
information is known or reasonably
ascertainable. The manufacturer would
then initiate an email to its supplier via
the CDX-based tool and request the
supplier provide the necessary
information to EPA, using a secondary
reporting form, without needing to
divulge to the reporting entity the
specific chemical identity of the PFAS
or the composition of the product. The
tool will create an electronic record of
the U.S.-based importer’s attempts to
contact the supplier and request
information. Further, if the immediate
supplier does not know the information,
they may continue to send an email via
the reporting tool to their own
suppliers, in an effort to secure the
requested information.
G. What are the concerns regarding
potential duplicative reporting?
1. Summary of Public Input
EPA received comments on potential
duplicative reporting under the
proposed rule and NODA public
comment periods. The majority of
commenters shared the sentiment that
the proposed reporting requirements
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
would result in duplicative reporting
that is contrary to TSCA section
8(a)(5)(A), which requires EPA to avoid,
to the extent feasible, reporting which is
unnecessary or duplicative. Most of
these commenters shared the opinion
that some information required to be
reported under the proposed rule is
extremely similar to, if not the same as,
information required under the CDR
rule. One commenter, however, shared
a contrasting opinion that EPA should
not exclude information previously
reported under CDR requirements on
the grounds that omitting that
information would compromise EPA’s
ability to collect and aggregate PFAS
data pursuant to TSCA section 8(a)(7).
The commenters who stated that the
requirements in the proposed rule
consist of duplicative reporting
primarily cited reporting requirements
under the CDR rule as justification for
their position. Multiple commenters
also cited studies submitted as
unpublished health and safety studies
under TSCA section 8(d) and the
substantial risk notification
requirements under TSCA section 8(e).
One commenter claimed that EPA is
likely already in possession of a
considerable amount of PFAS
information from studies submitted to
EPA under new chemicals reporting
(i.e., PMN and LVE applications) and
TSCA section 8(e) reporting. A few
commenters also suggested that
companies should not be required to
collect and repeat data for past nonprincipal reporting years. Other
commenters specified that EPA should
limit reporting of information
concerning environmental or health
effects by excluding information that is
publicly available, such as information
published in scientific journals, as
requiring reporting of this information
would be unnecessary and duplicative.
Multiple commenters claimed that
including articles in the required
reporting would substantially increase
duplicative reporting due to the number
of entities an article may pass through,
who would then all be required to
report information on that chemical.
Two commenters raised the issue of
articles which are exported from and
then reimported into the U.S. and
asserted that the reporting of reimported
articles would be considered
duplicative reporting. To remedy this
situation, a commenter suggested that
EPA require reporting at the level of
manufacturing the PFAS itself, and
possibly the first supplier that
incorporates a PFAS, but no further.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
2. EPA’s Response
EPA acknowledges that some of the
data elements may overlap with the data
required under the 2020 CDR cycle but
disagrees that the scope of such overlap
is significant. There are several
differences between the CDR rule and
this rule which limit the scope of any
potential overlaps between the datasets.
First, CDR includes several reporting
exemptions and a reporting threshold
based on production volume, which are
not included in this rule: imported
articles, certain byproducts, nonisolated intermediates, small quantities
of R&D chemicals, small manufacturers,
and a minimum production volume
reporting threshold of 25,000 lbs/year
(or 2,500 lbs/year for substances subject
to certain TSCA actions). Therefore,
PFAS reporters with activities that are
exempt in CDR or who manufacture
PFAS below the CDR threshold will not
have reported such information to CDR
before and would not be considered
‘‘duplicative’’ here. Further, CDR
reporters may have excluded quantities
that would be reportable under this rule,
based on certain CDR exemptions, and
therefore the information they
previously submitted to CDR would not
be considered duplicative and would
not be responsive to this rule. Secondly,
the PFAS that have been reported to
CDR are a subset of the scope of PFAS
for this rule. The scope of CDR chemical
substances is limited to those on the
Inventory and excludes polymers. The
scope of this reporting rule includes any
chemical substance meeting the rule’s
structural definition, which is not
limited to those on the Inventory (e.g.,
LVEs), and includes any fluoropolymers
that meet the structural definition.
Finally, the years for which certain
required data elements may have been
reported to CDR differ. Some of the
information described earlier in this
unit is reported differently for the
principal reporting year compared to the
other three years within the four-year
CDR period. For instance, the
production volumes for domestic
manufacture and import are combined
for any non-principal reporting year.
Further, prior CDR cycles had different
required information. Therefore, the
extent of potentially ‘‘duplicative’’
reporting between CDR and this rule is
limited, especially when considering
each year for which reporting is
required under this rule.
EPA is finalizing the proposal to not
require resubmission of information that
has been reported to CDR, unless that
information did not reflect all activities
or quantities for which reporting is
required under this rule. EPA disagrees
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70539
with the commenter who suggested that
EPA should not exclude information
previously reported under CDR. Such
information could be duplicative and
therefore EPA is limiting that reporting
under TSCA section 8(a)(5)(A).
EPA also appreciates the commenters’
input regarding information previously
submitted via TSCA section 8(e)
reporting. EPA agrees that substantial
risk notification requirements submitted
to EPA under TSCA section 8(e) could
be considered ‘‘information concerning
the environmental or health effects’’ of
a PFAS. To that end, EPA is finalizing
the rule to acknowledge that
manufacturers who have previously
submitted substantial risk notifications,
other unpublished health and safety
studies under TSCA section 8(d), or
other relevant information concerning
environmental or health effects need not
resubmit the information. However, to
enable EPA to easily collect those prior
submissions, the manufacturers must
indicate the rule or program to which
they submitted that prior information
concerning the environmental or health
effects of that PFAS and the year in
which it was submitted to EPA. EPA
also reiterates that manufacturers need
not submit health and environmental
effects information that is not in their
possession or control, but could be
found from a publicly available source.
Finally, regarding the comments
related to whether reporting certain
imported articles in complex products
may lead to duplicative reporting: EPA
disagrees that the information reported
will result in duplicative information,
especially given the reporting standard
applicable to this rule. EPA believes that
information known to or reasonably
ascertainable by an article manufacturer
at the first instance the PFAS is
imported into the United States is likely
different than the scope of information
known to an article importer farther
down the supply chain who may reimport that PFAS later, as the article is
incorporated into more complex articles
or products. EPA also believes that
applying the reporting requirements
each time a PFAS is imported into the
United States is consistent with TSCA’s
definition of manufacturing and
directive under TSCA section 8(a)(7). If
a PFAS is imported, exported, then reimported, then limiting the scope of
reporting to just one instance of
importation into the United States may
result in certain burdens on
manufacturers within the supply chain
who need to further communicate with
each other to determine whether a PFAS
within an article has already been
reported and who is responsible for
reporting.
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
70540
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
H. What are the concerns regarding the
lookback period?
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
1. Summary of Public Input
Several commenters stated that
attempting to obtain or develop the
required information over a ten-year
lookback period is not feasible and
would constitute a significant burden to
reporters, and they felt that EPA should
eliminate or shorten the lookback
period. These commenters suggested
either setting the lookback period to
either 3 years, or 5 years to be consistent
with the CDR recordkeeping
requirement. Commenters stated that it
would be difficult or impossible to
collect the information required due to
the complexities of their supply chains,
the turnover rate of foreign suppliers
especially for fad markets, the lack of
historical reporting requirements for
PFAS in products, and the concurrent
supply chain disruptions rendered by
the COVID–19 pandemic. Commenters
also suggested that creating or recreating
data from the lookback period will
result in imprecise data. In addition to
the suggestions to reduce the lookback
period, some commenters suggested that
EPA consider implementing a
‘‘principal reporting year’’ approach as
used in CDR, in which only production
volumes are reported for each year,
while the more detailed data elements
are reported for only the principal
reporting year. Other suggestions
included exempting articles or
exempting companies that have since
phased out PFAS by the reporting
deadline.
2. EPA’s Response
EPA disagrees with the commenters
who have suggested altering the
lookback period from 2011 to a more
recent year. The language in TSCA
section 8(a)(7) directs EPA to
promulgate a reporting rule for ‘‘each
person who has manufactured a
chemical substance that is a [PFAS] in
any year since January 1, 2011, to
submit to the Administrator a report
that includes, for each year since
January 1, 2011, the information
described in subparagraphs (A) through
(G) of paragraph (2).’’ Congress’s
direction to EPA is clear: the lookback
period for this reporting rule must begin
on January 1, 2011. EPA understands
the extent of information known to or
reasonably ascertainable by a
manufacturer may vary for several
reasons. However, EPA’s obligation
under TSCA section 8(a)(7) and interest
in identifying the scope of available and
existing data on historically
manufactured PFAS demand that PFAS
manufacturers conduct their due
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
diligence and submit requested
information to the extent it is known or
reasonably ascertainable.
I. What is the submission period
duration and reporting deadline?
1. Summary of Public Input
EPA received significant input on the
duration of the proposed submission
period. Many commenters and input
during the SBAR Panel claimed that the
proposed rule’s reporting deadline is
unrealistic, and EPA should allow more
time for reporting to accomplish the
required data collection. Commenters
provided a range of alternatives to
consider for the reporting deadline,
from 1.5 years from rule promulgation
to 5 years from rule promulgation for
article importers.
Several commenters provided
detailed descriptions of the types of
activities that would need to occur
during the submission period as
evidence of why they felt the proposed
submission period to be inadequate.
Some commenters raised EPA’s
experiences with the PIP (3:1) rule as
justification for a longer time frame for
extensive PFAS data reporting (Ref. 27).
Other reasons provided by commenters
regarding why additional time is needed
include: time to familiarize themselves
with the rule; unclear scope of
requirements in the proposed rule; lack
of systems in place with which to track
the data leading to manual collection;
and lack of ability to outsource the task
to contractors due to the confidentiality
concerns. In addition, one commenter
noted that other jurisdictions have
delayed the implementation of new
rules in light of overwhelming burden,
COVID, and supply chain disruptions.
EPA also received some comments
urging the Agency to finalize this aspect
of the proposed rule and not delay the
deadline by which PFAS data are
submitted. Commenters cited the
pressing need for such data and the
awareness within the regulated
community of this rule.
2. EPA’s Response
EPA appreciates the significant
feedback the Agency received from the
public, including through the SBAR
Panel, on the duration of the reporting
submission period. After considering
input from the commenters and other
stakeholders, EPA agrees that the
proposed reporting time frame may not
be sufficient for identifying, collecting,
and reporting the scope of information
requested by this rule. While EPA
disagrees that the extent of activities
necessarily requires investigations of the
supply chain that would take up to five
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
years to complete, it is modifying the
proposal by adding six more months to
the information collection period ahead
of the reporting tool opening (for a total
of one year from the effective date of
this rule). This one-year information
collection period will then be followed
by a six-month reporting submission
period. Thus, information will be due
18 months following the effective date
of this rule for all PFAS manufacturers
except certain small article importers.
EPA has provided an additional six
months for small manufacturers (as
defined at 40 CFR 704.3) who would
report exclusively article importers for
the purposes of this rule. Therefore,
small article importers have two years
from the effective date of this final rule
to report. Thus, information will be due
24 months following the effective date
of this rule for small manufacturers (per
40 CFR 704.3) who are reporting
exclusively as article importers. EPA
believes this timeframe will be
sufficient to allow reporters to
familiarize themselves with the rule,
identify PFAS they have produced or
imported, identify any suppliers or
other contacts, collect information, and
submit the information to EPA. The
additional time will enable reporters to
thoroughly review their known or
reasonably ascertainable information
and provide EPA with the extent of the
requested information under this
reporting standard.
Additionally, as this is a TSCA
section 8(a) reporting rule, EPA
disagrees with commenters who request
additional reporting time by comparing
this rule to the PIP (3:1) rule or other
non-section 8 reporting rules (Ref. 27).
The reporting standard under TSCA
section 8(a) does not apply to those
rules, which may require additional
compliance activities. However, EPA
agrees with commenters who pointed
out the distinctions between this rule
and CDR as a basis for extending the
reporting period: the CDR rule requires
only a four-year lookback period,
includes certain exemptions and
reporting thresholds, different data
elements, and is regularly occurring so
that companies can anticipate reporting.
Due, in part, to these differences with
CDR, EPA is extending the information
collection period ahead of the
submission period, thereby providing
reporters with 18 months to submit
information for this rule (or 24 months
for small article importers).
EPA disagrees with commenters who
have suggested the reporting deadline
should be sooner than what was
proposed. EPA appreciates the
commenters’ interest in reviewing the
submitted PFAS data as soon as
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
possible, but notes the scope of this rule
and differences between this rule and
CDR as factors in allowing the reporting
community extra time to sufficiently
review their known or reasonably
ascertainable information and to submit
the required data to EPA.
J. Can joint submissions be allowed?
1. Summary of Public Input
Some commenters requested that EPA
allow joint submissions. They suggested
it might ease the reporting burden and
simplify the reporting process while
still protecting CBI. However, other
commenters stated that joint
submissions can still be a substantial
burden for companies already trying to
complete their own reporting within a
prescribed timeframe. Commenters
urged EPA to carefully consider a
workable solution to protecting CBI and
reducing industry burden for
compliance. In response to the NODA,
one commenter asked EPA to eliminate
the requirement for joint submissions in
response to chemical identity CBI
concerns.
2. EPA’s Response
EPA agrees with the commenters’
requests for joint submissions and is
finalizing this requirement for reporters
(other than article importers) whose
suppliers do not wish to disclose
chemical identity. EPA agrees that such
an approach would help protect
suppliers’ CBI while not withholding
necessary information from EPA related
to PFAS identity. While this may
increase burden on upstream
companies, EPA believes this approach
will both help downstream
manufacturing and reporting entities, as
well as protect CBI if the suppliers do
not wish to disclose it to their
customers, including reporting entities.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
K. What are the economic analysis
considerations?
1. Summary of Public Input
Many commenters addressed the
impact of the proposed rule in general:
on industry, EPA, and the general
public. Several commenters provided
input on the industry burden estimates
provided in EPA’s draft Economic
Analysis for the proposed rule, with
many stating that EPA underestimated
the cost industry would incur to comply
with the proposed rule and failed to
include article importer costs.
Commenters provided specific feedback
on EPA’s burden and cost estimates for
certain activities including rule
familiarization, CBI substantiation,
article identification, determination of
chemical identity, identification of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
byproducts, outreach to suppliers, data
collection, CDX access and training,
form completion and recordkeeping.
Some of these commenters provided
additional data or factors to consider
when estimating burden or costs for
these compliance activities, including
providing results of their own industry
surveys. Commenters also provided
specific feedback on the proposed rule’s
burden on article importers and stated
that EPA’s draft burden assessment is
significantly underestimated. Some
commenters stated that article importers
may face substantially more costs than
domestic producers because they lack
the knowledge needed for compliance
yet would still incur costs under the
reporting standard. Additionally,
because article importers do not have
experience with CDR, commenters
believed their cost would be higher than
EPA’s draft estimates which used CDR
to extrapolate burden estimates for this
rule.
Some commenters also claimed that
EPA’s use of CDR burden to derive
burden estimates under this rule was
inappropriate due to the differences
between the two rules. Commenters also
provided feedback on the estimated
number of substances subject to
reporting in the draft Economic
Analysis and claimed that the draft
estimates were too low. Some
commenters pointed out that, because
the proposed rule does not have the
same exemptions as CDR nor is limited
to a discrete list of substances, the
number of substances subject to
reporting would be substantially higher
than the estimates provided in the draft
Economic Analysis.
EPA also received comments that the
proposed rule significantly
underestimated the universe of small
entities that would be subject to the
rule, both due to the lack of estimates
related to article importers and to the
extrapolation from CDR data. Some
commenters described the unique
difficulties or burdens small businesses
face when complying with the proposed
rule compared to larger businesses.
Commenters stated that EPA cannot
justify an RFA certification without
further analysis of the small business
impacts and requested that EPA
convene an SBAR Panel under the RFA
to obtain feedback from small
businesses potentially affected by the
rule.
Some commenters also stated that
EPA’s draft Economic Analysis
underestimated burden on the Agency
itself. Namely, the need to increase CDX
capacity to handle the number of
reporting forms and other
administrative costs of reviewing the
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70541
submitted data are not reflected in the
draft Economic Analysis.
Finally, other commenters claimed
that EPA had not accounted for the
social and health costs associated with
PFAS exposure in the burden analysis.
Commenters added that the public and
various government entities have
incurred significant health, social, and
financial costs due to inadequate
information related to PFAS, and that
even an underestimation of industry
compliance costs for this rule are
minimal compared to the externalized
costs that the public and governments
bear related to PFAS exposure and
remediation.
2. EPA’s Response
EPA appreciates the feedback on the
draft Economic Analysis and agrees
with commenters that an SBAR Panel
was appropriate given the limitations of
data related to the small entity universe
at the time of the proposed rule’s
publication. Accordingly, EPA
convened an SBAR Panel for this rule in
April 2022 and completed it in August
2022. Using feedback from commenters,
input during the SBAR Panel, and
additional data made available to EPA
since the proposed rule’s publication,
EPA has since accounted for the burden
that the rule would impose on article
importers and small entities. The
burden estimates include the number of
article importers who will be required to
report as well as the number of entities
that will have to assess their product
lines to determine whether they must
submit reports. EPA disagrees that the
article importer compliance
determination activities are too low.
EPA recognizes that a range of activities
may be involved depending on the level
of experience of the importer. Actual
costs may vary based on the number of
articles imported, the complexity of the
articles, the number of suppliers, and
the frequency of supplier changes. EPA
has increased the rule familiarization
costs as well as included the burden of
understanding the structural definition
of PFAS. Readers are referred to EPA’s
updated Economic Analysis for details
regarding the assumptions of calculating
burden and costs for article importers
and small entities.
With regards to the use of CDR data,
EPA acknowledges that CDR data are
subject to reporting thresholds and that
the CDR universe does not reflect a
perfect representation of the likely
reporting universe of this rule. EPA
recognizes the limitations of using CDR
data in estimating the burden, including
the number of PFAS for which
companies may ultimately report.
However, there is no comprehensive
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
70542
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
database of PFAS manufactured in the
U.S. that EPA could use to develop
more precise estimates. The reporting
requirements of this rule will serve to
fill this knowledge gap. After
considering input from the proposed
rule’s public comments, stakeholders in
the SBAR Panel, and comments
received on the IRFA, EPA is continuing
to rely on the CDR data to extrapolate
the estimated number of PFAS to be
reported per firm. EPA acknowledges
that the number may vary for some
manufacturers but believes that using
CDR for such estimates will help
provide an industry average.
EPA has updated the Agency costs to
account for the volume of reports that
will be submitted. EPA will incur costs
in administering the final rule
associated with processing submitted
reports, analyzing data from the reports,
maintaining the information technology
systems that support these activities,
reviewing CBI claim substantiations,
and information technology
infrastructure.
Finally, with regard to the comments
that EPA has not accounted for social
and health costs associated with PFAS,
EPA points out that this rule is a TSCA
section 8(a) reporting and recordkeeping
rule and does not impose any
restrictions or other chemical
management requirements. While the
benefits of this rule include additional
information related to potential PFAS
exposure, which will help inform future
regulatory and research activities, EPA
cannot quantify those benefits at this
time, though the Agency discusses them
qualitatively in the Economic Analysis.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
L. What are the CBI claim submission
requirements?
1. Summary of Public Input
Several commenters submitted
comments regarding reporting
requirements in the proposed rule and
EPA’s intended approach to reviewing
CBI claims as stated in the NODA. Their
comments generally fell into two
categories: (1) Urging EPA to protect CBI
and simplify electronic reporting to
allow joint submissions when needed,
in addition to making substantiation
procedures for CBI claims more
simplified, and not allowing reporters
without knowledge of a specific
chemical identity to waive a CBI claim
for that chemical identity; and (2)
Urging EPA to require valid and wellexplained rationale for any CBI
exemptions, and generally asking EPA
to disclose as much information to the
public as possible. Some commenters
also cited concerns with the proposed
rule’s CBI protections as being
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
inadequate for R&D activities, including
those in the defense or national security
industries. Some commenters requested
that the Agency allow a ‘‘blanket
substantiation’’ for all CBI claims so that
reporters would not be required to
substantiate each individual CBI claim.
On the other hand, commenters who
are supportive of limiting the amount of
information claimed as CBI (especially
regarding health and safety studies)
cited the urgent need for states to
address their own PFAS exposure and
contamination issues and the benefit
that this rule will confer on state
agencies struggling with inadequate
PFAS information. These commenters
encouraged EPA to review claims and
disclose as much information submitted
under this rule as possible.
Commenters during the NODA
comment period also addressed EPA’s
proposal to require that any PFAS
generic name include ‘‘fluor,’’ at
minimum, and EPA’s proposal to
determine that failure to stipulate that a
chemical for which the identity is being
claimed as CBI is fluorinated would be
an insufficient claim. Some commenters
were supportive of such requirements;
other commenters discouraged EPA
from implementing this requirement as
it may create confusion. Finally,
commenters diverged on EPA’s intent to
move any PFAS identity to the public
TSCA Inventory without prior notice if
it is not claimed as CBI. While some
commenters supported this approach,
others described potential
complications of confidential chemical
identity protection when multiple
entities submit reports for the same
substance, some of whom may not assert
CBI for the identity, and requested that
EPA notify all claimants of a potential
change in CBI status for a chemical
identity and allow appeal opportunities.
2. EPA’s Response
EPA does not believe that an option
for blanket CBI claims substantiation is
appropriate for an information
collection rule such as this one, in
which several types of information are
requested. TSCA section 14(c) requires
substantiation specific to each claim.
Because the type of information
requested under this rule varies, a
blanket substantiation is unlikely to
address the specific reasons for each
data element claimed as CBI. The more
generic a substantiation gets, the less
support it provides for any specific
claim. In terms of information
disclosure, EPA is committed to
reviewing CBI claims and
substantiations pursuant to TSCA
section 14 and implementing
regulations, and publicly disclosing data
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
that are not approved as CBI to the
extent possible.
As noted in the preamble of the
proposed rule, TSCA limits
confidentiality protections for health
and safety studies, and information from
health and safety studies (except to the
extent such studies or information
reveals ‘‘information that discloses
processes used in the manufacturing or
processing of a chemical substance or
mixture or, in the case of a mixture, the
portion of the mixture comprised by any
of the chemical substances in the
mixture’’). Submitters asserting a
confidentiality claim for such
information in health and safety studies
are also required to submit a sanitized
copy of the study, removing only that
information which is claimed as CBI
and that discloses the process or portion
of mixture information described in
TSCA section 14(b). However, certain
other information within study reports
may be claimed as CBI, such as the
names of lab personnel or the company,
or other information that is not related
to health or environmental effects.
In response to requests for EPA to
work directly with states on disclosing
CBI submitted under this rule, EPA
points out that TSCA section 14(d)(4)
permits states, tribes, and political subdivisions of states to request access to
CBI in writing. Under this authority, the
entity seeking CBI access must show
that it can continue to protect the
information as confidential. If a state or
tribe requests access and that is granted
per statutory conditions, EPA would
have an agreement in place laying out
how the requestor was going to protect
the information.
In response to comments on the CBI
procedures described in the NODA, EPA
is not requiring article importers to
assert CBI for the chemical identity and
will not make public any chemical
identity based on article importer
submissions alone (see discussion in
Unit III.G). Further, EPA acknowledges
some commenters’ concerns that
multiple manufacturers may report the
same PFAS, but not all submitters may
assert a CBI claim for the PFAS identity.
EPA will publish a list of Accession
numbers associated with chemical
identities that it plans to move to the
public portion of the Inventory because
either no chemical identity CBI claim
was asserted or the claim was denied.
Publication of these Accession numbers
will provide entities an opportunity to
contact EPA with questions or concerns
before specific chemical identities are
moved to the public Inventory (see Unit
III.G for more details on this process).
Finally, EPA believes that requiring
‘‘fluor’’ in generic name submissions is
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
consistent with PMN reporting
requirements which provide that a
generic name ‘‘should reveal the
chemical identity of the substance to the
maximum extent possible’’ (40 CFR
720.85(a)(3)(i)(B)), and is finalizing this
requirement as discussed in the NODA
(Ref. 1).
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
V. References
The following is a listing of the
documents that are specifically
referenced in this document. The docket
includes these documents and other
information considered by EPA,
including documents that are referenced
within the documents that are included
in the docket, even if the referenced
document is not physically located in
the docket. For assistance in locating
these other documents, please consult
the technical person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
1. EPA (2022). TSCA Section 8(a)(7)
Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements
for Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl
Substances; Notice of Data Availability and
Request for Comment (87 FR 72439,
November 25, 2022 (FRL–7902–04–OCSPP)).
2. EPA (2023). Economic Analysis for the
Final TSCA Section 8(a)(7) Reporting and
Recordkeeping Requirements for
Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl
Substances. September 2023.
3. EPA (2023). Research on Per- and
Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS). Available
at https://www.epa.gov/chemical-research/
research-and-polyfluoroalkyl-substancespfas.
4. Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry (ATSDR) (2021).
Toxicological Profile for Perfluoroalkyls.
Available at https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/
toxprofiles/tp200.pdf [accessed February 10,
2023].
5. EPA (2021). PFAS Strategic Roadmap:
EPA’s Commitments to Action 2021–2024.
October 2021. Available at https://
www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/202110/pfas-roadmap_final-508.pdf.
6. EPA. CompTox Chemicals Dashboard.
Available at https://comptox.epa.gov/
dashboard/.
7. EPA (2020) Long-Chain Perfluoroalkyl
Carboxylate and Perfluoroalkyl Sulfonate
Chemical Substances; Significant New Use
Rule (85 FR 45109, June 27, 2020 (FRL–
10010–44)).
8. OECD (2021). Reconciling Terminology
of the Universe of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl
Substances: Recommendations and Practical
Guidance. July 9, 2021. Series on Risk
Management. No.61. Environment
Directorate Chemicals and Biotechnology
Committee. Available at https://
www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/
publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=ENV/CBC/
MONO(2021)25&docLanguage=En.
9. Buck, Robert C., et al. (2021).
Identification and Classification of
Commercially Relevant Per- and PolyFluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS). May 14,
2021. Integrated Environmental Assessment
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
and Management, vol. 17, no. 5. Available at
https://setac.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/
full/10.1002/ieam.4450.
10. Gaines, Linda, et al. (2023). A Proposed
Approach to Defining Per- and
Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Based on
Molecular Structure and Formula. Integrated
Environmental Assessment and Management.
Accepted Author Manuscript. https://doi.org/
10.1002/ieam.4735.
11. United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP) (2022). Updated
indicative list of substances covered by the
listing of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), its
salts and PFOA-related compounds. March 4,
2022. Stockholm Convention on Persistent
Organic Pollutants. Available at https://
chm.pops.int/Portals/0/
download.aspx?d=UNEP-POPS-POPRC.17INF-14-Rev.1.English.PDF.
12. EPA (2020). Advancing Sustainable
Materials Management: 2018 Facts and
Figures Report. December 2020. https://
www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-01/
documents/2018_tables_and_figures_dec_
2020_fnl_508.pdf.
13. EPA (2023). International Agreements
on Transboundary Shipments of Hazardous
Waste. https://www.epa.gov/hwgenerators/
international-agreements-transboundaryshipments-hazardous-waste.
14. EPA (2023). Small Entity Compliance
Guidance for the TSCA PFAS Data Call.
September 2023.
15. EPA (2023). Data Elements included in
the TSCA Section 8(a)(7) Reporting and
Recordkeeping Requirements for
Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl
Substances, Final Rule. September 2023.
16. OECD. OECD Harmonised Templates.
Available at https://www.oecd.org/ehs/
templates/harmonised-templates.htm.
17. EPA (2023). Addition of Certain PFAS
to the TRI by the National Defense
Authorization Act. Available at https://
www.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventory-triprogram/addition-certain-pfas-tri-nationaldefense-authorization-act.
18. EPA (2023). Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Program (GHGRP). Available at https://
www.epa.gov/ghgreporting.
19. EPA (2018). Guidance for Creating
Generic Names for Confidential Chemical
Substance Identity Reporting under Toxic
Substances Control Act. EPA 743B18001.
June 2018.
20. EPA (2010) Premanufacture
Notification Exemption for Polymers;
Amendment of Polymer Exemption Rule to
exclude Certain Perfluorinated Polymers (75
FR 4295, January 27, 2010 (FRL–8805–5)).
21. EPA (2023). Response to Public
Comments: TSCA Section 8(a)(7) Reporting
and Recordkeeping Requirements for
Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl
Substances. September 2023.
22. EPA (2022). TSCA Section 8(a)(7) Small
Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) Panel
Report. August 2022.
23. EPA (2022). Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis and Updated Economic
Analysis for TSCA Section 8(a)(7) Reporting
and Recordkeeping Requirements for
Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl
Substances. November 2022.
24. EPA (2021). EPA Response to Petition
on Testing for Certain PFAS. December 2021.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70543
Available at https://www.epa.gov/system/
files/documents/2021-12/pfaspetition
response.pdf.
25. Frank, Harmut, et al. (2002).
Trifluoroacetate in ocean waters. 2002.
Environmental Science & Technology, 36(1),
12–15. Available at https://doi.org/10.1021/
es0101532.
26. EPA (2018). Fees for the
Administration of the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) (83 FR 52694, October
17, 2018 (FRL–9984–41)).
27. EPA (2022). Regulation of Persistent,
Bioaccumulative, and Toxic Chemicals
Under TSCA Section 6(h); Phenol,
Isopropylated Phosphate (3:1); Further
Compliance Date Extension (87 FR 12875,
March 8, 2022 (FRL–6015.6–02–OCSPP)).
28. EPA (2023). Information Collection
Request Supporting Statement entitled ‘‘Final
Rule ICR: Reporting and Recordkeeping
Requirements for PFAS (RIN 2070–AK67).’’
EPA Information Collection Request (ICR)
No. 2682.02. September 2023.
29. EPA (2023). Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis and Updated Economic
Analysis for TSCA Section 8(a)(7) Reporting
and Recordkeeping Requirements for
Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl
Substances. September 2023.
30. EPA. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Statement. PFAS; Reporting and
Recordkeeping Requirements under the
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); Final.
May 2023.
VI. Statutory and Executive Orders
Reviews
Additional information about these
statutes and Executive orders can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Orders 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and 14094:
Modernizing Regulatory Review
This action is a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ as defined under section 3(f)(1)
of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993), as amended by
Executive Order 14094 (88 FR 21879,
April 11, 2023). Accordingly, EPA
submitted this action to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
Executive Order 12866 review.
Documentation of any changes made in
response to the Executive Order 12866
review is available in the docket. EPA
prepared an analysis of the potential
costs and benefits associated with this
action. This analysis, entitled
‘‘Economic Analysis for the Final TSCA
Section 8(a)(7) Reporting and
Recordkeeping Requirements for
Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl
Substances’’ (Ref. 1), is also available in
the docket and is briefly summarized in
Unit 1.E.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
The information collection
requirements in this rule will be
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
70544
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
submitted for approval to OMB under
the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The
Information Collection Request (ICR)
document that EPA prepared has been
assigned the EPA ICR No. 2682.02 (Ref.
28) and the OMB Control number 2070–
0217. You can find a copy of the ICR in
the docket for this action, and it is
briefly summarized here. The
information collection requirements are
not enforceable until OMB approves
them.
The reporting requirements identified
in the rule will enable EPA to meet the
statutory obligations required by TSCA
section 8(a)(7) and collect data related to
the identities, manufacture, use,
exposure, and disposal of PFAS
manufactured in the United States since
2011. These one-time reporting
requirements will also help the Agency
to collect existing information on the
health and environmental effects of
PFAS. EPA intends to use information
collected under the rule to assist in
chemical assessments under TSCA, and
to inform any additional work necessary
under environmental protection
mandates beyond TSCA. Respondents
may claim some of the information
reported to EPA under the rule as CBI
under TSCA section 14. TSCA section
14(c) requires a supporting statement
and certification for confidentiality
claims asserted after June 22, 2016.
Respondents/affected entities: PFAS
manufacturers (including importers).
See Unit I.A.
Respondent obligation to respond:
Mandatory. TSCA section 8(a) and 40
CFR part 705.
Total estimated number of
respondents: 131,410.
Frequency of response: One time.
Total estimated burden: 3,878,744
hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5
CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: $281 million
(per year) and $266.7 million (per year)
using a 3 percent and 7 percent discount
rate, respectively, which includes no
annualized capital or operation and
maintenance costs.
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 for the EPA’s regulations in 40
CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When
OMB approves this ICR, the Agency will
announce that approval in the Federal
Register and publish a technical
amendment to 40 CFR part 9 to display
the OMB control number for the
approved information collection
activities contained in this final rule.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
Pursuant to the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq., EPA prepared an IRFA for the
proposed rule and convened an SBAR
Panel under RFA sections 603 and
609(b) to obtain advice and
recommendations from small entity
representatives that potentially would
be subject to the rule’s requirements.
Summaries of the IRFA and Panel
recommendations are presented in the
proposed rule’s NODA (Ref. 1).
As required by RFA section 604, EPA
prepared a final regulatory flexibility
analysis (FRFA) for this action. The
FRFA addresses the issues raised by
public comments on the IRFA for the
proposed rule. The complete FRFA is
available for review in the docket (Ref.
29) and is summarized here.
• Statement of need and rule
objectives. Section 7351 of the FY2020
NDAA amended TSCA by adding
section 8(a)(7), which obligates EPA to
promulgate a rule by January 1, 2023,
that requires each person who has
manufactured PFAS in any year since
2011 to report and maintain records, for
each year, information described in
TSCA section 8(a)(2)(A)–(G). This
includes a broad range of information,
such as information related to chemical
identity and structure, production, use,
exposure, disposal, and health and
environmental effects. In addition, EPA
believes that the collected data may
help provide more information about
PFAS manufacture, and to the extent
that new information indicates the
presence of negative externalities or
data gaps, inform future agency actions
and/or legislation governing the
manufacture, processing, use, and
disposal of PFAS.
EPA developed this final rule after
considering findings from information
provided in public comments on the
proposed rule, findings from and
comments on the SBAR Panel, and
public comments on the IRFA. The final
rule requires all manufacturers of PFAS
in any year since 2011 to report certain
information to EPA related to chemical
identity, categories of use, volume
manufactured, byproducts,
environmental and health effects,
worker exposure, and disposal (i.e., the
TSCA section 8(a)(2)(A)–(G)
requirements). This rule also requires a
five-year retention period for all
relevant records following the
submission period.
• Significant comments on the IRFA.
In response to the IRFA and notice of
data availability, EPA received 44
unique comments in the docket. EPA
has provided a comprehensive summary
of all comments received and EPA’s
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
responses in a supporting document
that is included in the docket for this
rulemaking (Ref. 21; see Part 2).
• SBA Office of Advocacy comments
and EPA response. EPA received
comments from SBA’s Office of
Advocacy on the proposed rule and the
IRFA. SBA’s comments and EPA’s
responses are in the Responses to
Comments document for this rule (Ref.
21) and in the FRFA (Ref. 29). SBA
comments that led to changes to the
proposed rule, and EPA’s responses to
those comments, are also summarized in
this unit.
Comments: EPA has improperly
certified the rule under the RFA. EPA
should convene a Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) Panel and consider burdenreducing compliance flexibilities for
small businesses. Additionally, EPA
underestimated the impact of
compliance costs associated with the
proposed reporting requirements.
Response: EPA initially certified the
proposed rule under the RFA based on
all information available to it at the time
of proposal. However, after receiving
additional information related to the
scope of small entities (including article
importers) potentially impacted by the
proposed rule, EPA updated its
estimated scope of the universe of small
entities potentially affected (including
article importers) and the small entity
compliance costs. Thus, EPA convened
an SBAR Panel in April 2022. The Panel
concluded in August 2022, and EPA
subsequently published the Panel
Report, updated Economic Analysis,
and IRFA for public comment in
November 2022. Input received through
the Panel and during the subsequent
comment period for the IRFA were
considered in the development of this
final rule, including comments related
to EPA’s small entity analysis. As a
result of public input, EPA identified
certain regulatory alternatives to the
proposed rule, which EPA is
implementing in the final rule:
streamlined reporting forms for article
importers and for manufacturers of low
quantities of R&D substances; extending
the reporting deadline; providing
additional guidance on the TSCA
section 8(a) reporting standard for
article importers. These modifications to
the proposed rule reduce compliance
costs without a complete exemption of
small entities. EPA has not made a
determination that a complete
exemption of small entities is not legally
viable in this rulemaking. EPA believes
such an exemption would result in
diminished collection of reasonably
known or ascertainable information
about PFAS manufacturing and import
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
since 2011 and therefore is exercising its
discretion to not implement this
alternative. EPA estimates that each
manufacturer would incur $2,240 in
costs to complete the streamlined R&D
form and $41,850 in costs to complete
the general reporting form. Thus,
incurring a total of $44,089 in costs per
firm for form completion, compared to
$52,739 without the streamlined form.
For the streamlined form for article
importers, EPA estimates that each
article importer will incur an average of
approximately 91.7 burden hours and
$7,531 in costs per firm. Without a
streamlined reporting form, EPA
estimates that each article importer
would incur an average of
approximately 168 burden hours and
$13,818 in costs for form completion.
Additionally, extending the reporting
deadline may reduce the opportunity
costs if firms are diverting resources
from other business activities to report
information under the rule. This may be
particularly true for small entities. See
Table 24 for more information on the
costs associated with the finalized
option and alternatives identified in the
IRFA (Ref. 23).
• Estimate of the number of small
entities to which the final rule applies.
This final rule will impact PFAS
manufacturers, including article
importers, across a broad number of
industries, including the following:
utilities; construction; manufacturing;
wholesale and retail trade; and some
waste management. Entities who solely
process, distribute, and/or use PFAS,
and do not manufacture (including
import) PFAS, are not covered. EPA
estimates that approximately 97% of all
firms potentially affected by this rule
would meet the SBA standard of ‘‘small
business,’’ for a total of 128,051 affected
small entities. It is expected that all
128,051 firms will undertake structural
definition familiarization, some rule
familiarization activity, and compliance
determination, including article
importers that do not report under this
rule. However, EPA does not assume
that all potentially affected firms will
ultimately have known or reasonably
ascertainable information to report, so
13,021 small entities are estimated to
report under this rule.
• Reporting, recordkeeping, and other
compliance requirements of the final
rule.
i. Compliance requirements. Pursuant
to TSCA section 8(a)(7), EPA is
finalizing this reporting and
recordkeeping rule for entities who have
manufactured a PFAS in any year since
January 1, 2011. For each year since
January 1, 2011, PFAS manufacturers
(including importers) are required to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
report the following types of
information for each PFAS to the extent
it is known or reasonably ascertainable:
chemical identity, production volume,
categories of use, byproducts, worker
exposure, disposal practices, and
existing information concerning
environmental or health effects. In
instances where reporters have already
submitted the requested information to
EPA under certain reporting programs,
they will not be required to re-report.
The reporters will simply indicate they
have already submitted such
information to EPA. The reporting
deadline is 18 months following the
effective date of this rule, except for
small manufacturers (defined at 40 CFR
704.3) whose reporting obligations
exclusively arise from article imports;
the latter’s reporting deadline is 24
months following the effective date of
this rule. The reporting deadline is then
followed by a five-year recordkeeping
period.
ii. Classes of small entities subject to
the compliance requirements. The small
entities that are potentially affected by
this rule are manufacturers (including
importers) who have manufactured
(including imported) PFAS in any year
since January 1, 2011. This includes
entities who have imported articles
containing PFAS in any year since
January 1, 2011.
iii. Professional skills needed to
comply. Understanding some of the
reporting requirements may involve
special skills or expertise, though hiring
or contracting such skills specifically for
this rule are not required to comply,
given the TSCA section 8(a) reporting
standard of ‘‘known or reasonably
ascertainable.’’ For example,
understanding the rule’s structural
definition of PFAS and other reporting
requirements may involve special
expertise of chemistry. EPA assumes
that chemical manufacturing and
importing firms and large article
importers will have staff with the
technical knowledge to understand a
structural definition more easily than
small article importers. Based on input
from the Small Entity Representatives,
EPA estimated the cost of small article
importer firms contracting outside help
to understand the chemical structural
definition, despite it not being a
necessary step for compliance. Small
article importers that contract outside
help (which is not required for this
rule’s compliance) would incur $1,212
in structural definition compliance
costs, while small article importers that
do not contract outside help would
incur approximately $831. Additionally,
environmental and health effects data
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70545
may require some technical knowledge
to report.
• Steps taken to reduce economic
impact to small entities.
i. Small Business Advocacy Review
Panel. As required by RFA section
609(b), EPA convened an SBAR Panel to
obtain advice and recommendations
from small entity representatives that
potentially would be subject to the
rule’s requirements. A copy of the full
SBAR Panel Report (Ref. 22) is available
in the docket. The comments received
on the proposed rule, the IRFA and
EPA’s responses to those comments are
summarized in Unit IV and in further
detail in the Response to Comments
document in the docket (Ref. 21).
ii. Alternatives considered. EPA
considered a wide variety of alternatives
to the proposed rule. EPA considered
the impact (both cost and in anticipated
reporting) of providing exemptions for
all small businesses, or a portion of
small businesses (e.g., small article
importers, small manufacturers using
the TSCA section 8 definition, or
entities below various sales thresholds).
EPA also evaluated the impact of
exemptions for certain substances,
including imported articles, byproducts,
impurities, non-isolated intermediates,
and R&D substances. EPA also evaluated
the impact of implementing a
production volume-based reporting
threshold in this rule. For each of these
alternatives, EPA found that it would
reduce the amount of PFAS reporting of
reasonably known or ascertainable
information from PFAS manufacturers
(including importers) under TSCA
section 8(a)(7). The amount of reporting
that certain alternatives would reduce
varied, ranging from exempting
approximately 91% of all potentially
covered firms from reporting under a
small manufacturer exemption for any
firm with under $12 million in sales
(which would have resulted in a final
rule costing small businesses
approximately $48.8 million under a 7
percent discount rate), to exempting
69% of firms (all article importers)
under an exemption for just article
importers with sales below $2 million
(which would have resulted in a final
rule costing small businesses
approximately $229.5 million under a 7
percent discount rate). EPA also
considered applying a production
volume reporting threshold of both
2,500 lbs per year and 25,000 lbs per
year, to align with CDR reporting
thresholds. Because the amount of
reporting and burden under a reporting
threshold was difficult to estimate with
existing data, EPA conducted sensitivity
analyses for this alternative, based on
the estimated number of PFAS article
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
70546
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
importers who would be able to
determine whether they are below the
reporting threshold. On the low-end
estimate for this alternative (i.e., 5% of
affected article importers import PFAScontaining articles above threshold),
EPA estimates that total number of
PFAS reports submitted would decrease
by 49 percent, and total small business
costs would be approximately $736.6
million under a 7 percent discount rate.
On the high-end (i.e., 9.5% of affected
article importers import PFAScontaining articles above threshold),
EPA estimates the total number of PFAS
reports submitted to decrease by 5%,
with total small business costs of $785.2
million under a 7 percent discount rate.
Given the reduced reporting expected
under alternatives including various
exemptions and reporting thresholds,
EPA determined that implementing
such alternatives contradicted EPA’s
mandate under section 8(a)(7) to collect
information from ‘‘each person’’ who
had manufactured a PFAS. Further,
while EPA recognizes there is a tradeoff
between rule compliance costs and
information collection, PFAS exposure
presents significant human health and
environmental concerns that it is critical
for EPA to collect as much existing
information on PFAS presence in
commerce (including through disposal)
as possible.
In addition to alternatives related to
reporting exemptions and reporting
thresholds, EPA considered limiting the
scope of PFAS subject to this rule to a
finite list, rather than a structural
definition. This alternative simplifies
rule familiarization for affected entities
and removes the cost and burden of
understanding the structural definition
of PFAS. Additionally, it reduces
compliance determination costs for
affected firms. However, this also
significantly limits the number of PFAS
subject to the rule and excludes many
PFAS that cannot be listed due to CBI
claims but are active in U.S. commerce.
If EPA limited the scope to a discrete
list of PFAS on the TSCA Inventory and
LVEs that could be specifically named
under the final definition, 602 PFAS
would be subject to the rule. This
alternative would result in an estimated
50% decrease in reporting forms
submitted, along with an estimated
small business cost of approximately
$626.4 million under a 7 percent
discount rate.
However, EPA also considered
alternatives to the proposed rule that the
Agency is finalizing to reduce burden
on small entities. EPA considered
providing streamlined reporting form
options for both imported articles and
R&D substances manufactured in low
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
quantities (i.e., no more than 10 kg/
year). Based on EPA’s knowledge of
manufacturers of those substances, and
public input from commenters and
small entity representatives, EPA
believes such manufacturers have less
information that is known or reasonably
ascertainable to them. Therefore, the
streamlined reporting form reduces the
burden of reporting on the standard
form while still enabling EPA to collect
all known or reasonably ascertainable
historical PFAS data. Additionally, EPA
considered and is finalizing a longer
compliance timeframe for all reporting
entities. Providing an additional six
months for a data collection period
ahead of the reporting period will
reduce the opportunity costs on affected
firms, particularly small entities,
without sacrificing any PFAS
manufacturing data. In addition, EPA is
granting small manufacturers (as
defined at 40 CFR 704.3) who would
report exclusively as article importers
an additional six months to collect data.
Therefore, those small entities would
have 24 months from the effective date
of this rule to submit information on
their imported articles. EPA is finalizing
such alternatives to meet the Agency’s
obligations under TSCA sections
8(a)(5)(A) through (C), as this rule is
requesting information that is neither
duplicative nor unnecessary and will
not exclude manufacturers who are
likely to have relevant information,
while minimizing costs on small
manufacturers to the extent feasible.
• Small entity compliance guide. EPA
prepared a Small Entity Compliance
Guide to help small entities comply
with the rule. This guide is available in
the docket for this rulemaking and will
be available on EPA’s website prior to
the effective date of this final rule (Ref.
14).
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This action contains a Federal
mandate under UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–
1538, that may result in expenditures of
$100 million or more for State, local,
and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or for private sector in any
one year. Accordingly, the EPA has
prepared a written statement (Ref. 30) as
required under UMRA section 202 that
is include in the docket for this action
and is briefly summarized here.
1. Authorizing legislation. This rule is
issued under the authority of TSCA
section 8(a)(7) (15 U.S.C. 2607(a)(7)).
2. Benefit-cost analysis. EPA has
prepared an Economic Analysis (Ref. 2)
and a Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (Ref. 29) to evaluate, among
other things, the benefits and costs of
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
this rule as well as various regulatory
options. The rule is calculated to result
in a total one-time cost to the private
sector of approximately $843 million
using a 3 percent discount rate and $800
million using a 7 percent discount rate.
When adjusted for inflation, the $100
million UMRA threshold is equivalent
to approximately $184 million. Thus,
the cost of the rule to the private sector
in the aggregate exceeds the inflationadjusted UMRA threshold.
Because this is an informationcollecting rule, EPA is not able to
quantitatively measure the associated
benefits. However, the rule may supply
information on PFAS to which Federal
agencies (and the public) do not
currently have access. By enhancing the
data supplied to risk-screening and riskmanagement programs, EPA expects to
more effectively and expeditiously
evaluate and manage any potential
unreasonable risk posed by PFAS. The
more EPA can base its decisions on
actual data rather than on assumptions,
the better EPA is able to tailor its risk
management decisions to the level of
actual risk, whether higher or lower
than it would be if based on
assumptions alone. Ultimately,
enhancing the risk evaluation process
will have positive consequences for
human health and the environment and
may enable a more efficient allocation of
EPA’s and society’s resources.
Additionally, this rule fulfills EPA’s
obligations under TSCA section 8(a)(7).
3. Impacts on State, local, and Tribal
governments. This rule does not contain
a significant Federal intergovernmental
mandate because it neither imposes
enforceable duties on State, local, or
Tribal governments nor reduces an
authorized amount of Federal financial
assistance provided to State, local, or
Tribal governments. This rule contains
no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The rule would require
reporting from certain persons who
manufactured (including imported)
PFAS for commercial purposes,
including in articles. Governments do
not typically engage in these activities,
so State, local, and Tribal government
entities are not expected to be subject to
the rule’s requirements. This action is
not subject to the requirements of
section 203 of UMRA because it
contains no regulatory requirements that
might significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The requirements of
this action would primarily affect
manufacturers (including importers) of
PFAS.
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999) because it will not have
substantial direct effects on States, on
the relationship between the National
Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have Tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000) because it will not have
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. It does not have substantial
direct effects on Tribal government
because EPA does not anticipate that
PFAS was manufactured (including
imported) for commercial purposes by
Tribes so this rulemaking is not
expected to impose substantial direct
compliance costs on Tribal
governments.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
G. 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 environmental
health or safety risks that EPA has
reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per
the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory
action’’ in section 2–202 of Executive
Order 13045. This action is not subject
to Executive Order 13045, because it
does not concern an environmental
health or safety risk. Since this action
does not concern human health, EPA’s
Policy on Children’s Health also does
not apply.
Although this action does not concern
an environmental health or safety risk,
this one-time data collection will aid in
collecting all existing and reasonably
ascertainable information related to the
manufacturing (including importing) of
PFAS since 2011. This rule will be of
use in identifying current data gaps
surrounding the knowledge of
commercially manufactured PFAS.
Understanding the extent of existing
data gaps related to manufactured PFAS
will also help inform and tailor future
EPA actions to address PFAS as needed.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
This regulatory action establishes onetime reporting requirements for PFAS
that will result in information on the
quantity of PFAS to which children may
be exposed. EPA believes that the
information obtained as a result of this
one-time data collection could also be
used by the public, government agencies
and others to identify potential
problems, set priorities, and take
appropriate steps to reduce any
potential human health or
environmental risks.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution in Commerce, 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 the supply,
distribution or use of energy. Further,
we have concluded that this action is
not likely to have any adverse effect on
the supply, distribution or use of
energy.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve
technical standards. As such, NTTAA
section 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations and Executive
Order 14096: Revitalizing Our Nation’s
Commitment to Environmental Justice
for All
The EPA believes that it is not
practicable to assess whether the human
health or environmental conditions that
exist prior to this action result in
disproportionate and adverse effects on
communities with environmental justice
concerns. The purpose of this action is
to require reporting activity. EPA was
unable to perform an environmental
justice analysis because it lacks data on
every exposure source.
However, this regulatory action makes
changes to the reporting requirements
for PFAS that will result in more
information being collected and
provided to better evaluate exposures
and the risks posed by such exposures
as explained in Unit II.A., certain PFAS
exposure may be a hazard to human
health. This action establishes one-time
reporting requirements for companies to
submit to EPA certain known or
reasonably ascertainable information on
manufactured PFAS by those entities as
discussed in detailed in Unit III.D. The
determination of potential risk to
human health and/or the environment
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70547
depends upon many factors, including
the toxicity of the chemical, the fate of
the chemical in the environment, and
the amount and duration of human or
other exposure to the chemical. This
action does not directly address human
health or environmental risks. However,
the action will increase the level of
information available to assess
environmental protection for all affected
populations without having any
disproportionate and adverse human
health or environmental effects on any
population, including any community
with environmental justice concerns.
The information obtained as a result of
this action may be used to collect all
existing and reasonably ascertainable
information related to PFAS-containing
articles will be of use in identifying
current data gaps surrounding the
knowledge of commercially
manufactured PFAS, and reporting of
PFAS within imported articles will
enable EPA to meet its obligations under
the FY 2020 NDAA. Understanding the
extent of existing data gaps related to
manufactured PFAS will also help
inform and tailor future EPA actions to
address PFAS as needed. EPA also
believes that the information obtained
as a result of this action potentially
could be used by the public (including
communities with environmental justice
concerns) with access to data which
they may use to seek lower exposures
and consequently reductions in
chemical risks for themselves and their
children. Technical assistance may be
provided to communities with
environmental justice concerns and
efforts will be made to ensure
meaningful access for individuals with
limited English proficiency and
individuals with disabilities. This
information can also be used by
government agencies and others to
identify potential problems, set
priorities, and take appropriate steps to
reduce any potential risks to human
health and the environment. Therefore,
informational benefits, of the action,
including behavioral changes such as
consumers avoiding specific products,
may have positive impact on the human
health and environmental impacts on all
communities, including communities
with environmental justice concerns.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., and EPA will submit
a rule report to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. This action is not
a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
70548
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 705
Chemicals, Environmental protection,
Hazardous materials, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: September 28, 2023.
Michal Freedhoff,
Assistant Administrator Office of Chemical
Safety and Pollution Prevention.
Therefore, for the reasons set forth in
the preamble, 40 CFR chapter I,
subchapter R, is amended by adding
part 705 to read as follows:
PART 705—REPORTING AND
RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS
FOR CERTAIN PER- AND
POLYFLUOROALKYL SUBSTANCES
Sec.
705.1 Scope, compliance, and enforcement.
705.3 Definitions.
705.5 Substances for which reports must be
submitted.
705.10 Persons who must report.
705.12 Activities for which reporting is not
required.
705.15 What information to report.
705.18 Article importer and R&D substance
reporting options.
705.20 When to report.
705.22 Duplicative reporting.
705.25 Recordkeeping requirements.
705.30 Confidentiality claims.
705.35 Electronic reporting.
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2607(a)(7).
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
§ 705.1 Scope, compliance, and
enforcement.
(a) This part specifies reporting and
recordkeeping procedures for
manufacturers (including importers) of
per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
(hereafter referred to as PFAS) under
section 8(a)(7) of the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA).
(b) TSCA section 15(3) makes it
unlawful for any person to fail or refuse
to submit information required under
this part. In addition, TSCA section
15(3) makes it unlawful for any person
to fail to keep, and permit access to,
records required by this part. TSCA
section 16 provides that any person who
violates a provision of TSCA section 15
is liable to the United States for a civil
penalty and may be criminally
prosecuted. Pursuant to TSCA section
17, the Federal Government may seek
judicial relief to compel submission of
TSCA section 8(a) information and to
otherwise restrain any violation of
TSCA section 15. TSCA section 11
allows for inspections to assure
compliance, and the Environmental
Protection Agency’s (EPA)
Administrator may by subpoena require
the attendance and testimony of
witnesses and the production of reports,
papers, documents, answers to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
questions, and other information that
the Administrator deems necessary.
(c) Each person who reports under
this part must maintain records that
document information reported under
this part and, in accordance with TSCA,
permit access to, and the copying of,
such records by EPA officials.
§ 705.3
Definitions.
The definitions in this section and the
definitions in TSCA section 3 apply to
this part. In addition, the definitions in
40 CFR 704.3 also apply to this part,
except the definition for small
quantities solely for research and
development.
Article means a manufactured item
which:
(1) Is formed to a specific shape or
design during manufacture;
(2) Has end use function(s) depending
in whole or in part upon its shape or
design during end use; and
(3) Has either no change of chemical
composition during its end use or only
those changes of composition which
have no commercial purpose separate
from that of the article, and that result
from a chemical reaction that occurs
upon end use of other chemical
substances, mixtures, or articles; except
that fluids and particles are not
considered articles regardless of shape
or design.
Central Data Exchange or CDX means
EPA’s centralized electronic submission
receiving system.
Chemical Information Submission
System or CISS means EPA’s electronic,
web-based reporting tool for the
completion and submission of data,
reports, and other information, or its
successors.
Commercial use means the use of a
chemical substance or a mixture
containing a chemical substance
(including as part of an article) in a
commercial enterprise providing
saleable goods or services.
Consumer use means the use of a
chemical substance or a mixture
containing a chemical substance
(including as part of an article) when
sold to or made available to consumers
for their use.
Environmental or health effects
information means any information of
any effect of a chemical substance or
mixture containing a chemical
substance on health or the environment
or on both. This includes all health and
safety studies.
(1) Not only is information that arises
as a result of a formal, disciplined study
included, but other information relating
to the effects of a chemical substance or
mixture containing a chemical
substance on health or the environment
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
is also included. Any information that
bears on the effects of a chemical
substance on health or the environment
would be included.
(2) Examples are:
(i) Long- and short-term tests of
mutagenicity, carcinogenicity, or
teratogenicity; data on behavioral
disorders; dermatoxicity;
pharmacological effects; mammalian
absorption, distribution, metabolism,
and excretion; cumulative, additive, and
synergistic effects; and acute,
subchronic, and chronic effects.
(ii) Tests for ecological or other
environmental effects on invertebrates,
fish, or other animals, and plants,
including acute toxicity tests, chronic
toxicity tests, critical life-stage tests,
behavioral tests, algal growth tests, seed
germination tests, plant growth or
damage tests, microbial function tests,
bioconcentration or bioaccumulation
tests, and model ecosystem (microcosm)
studies.
(iii) Assessments of human and
environmental exposure, including
workplace exposure, and impacts of a
particular chemical substance or
mixture containing a chemical
substance on the environment,
including surveys, tests, and studies of:
Biological, photochemical, and
chemical degradation; structure/activity
relationships; air, water, and soil
transport; biomagnification and
bioconcentration; and chemical and
physical properties, e.g., boiling point,
vapor pressure, evaporation rates from
soil and water, octanol/water partition
coefficient, and water solubility.
(iv) Monitoring data, including but
not limited to when they have been
aggregated and analyzed to measure the
exposure of humans or the environment
to a chemical substance or mixture
containing a chemical substance.
Health and safety studies means any
study of any effect of a chemical
substance or mixture on health or the
environment or on both, including
underlying information and
epidemiological studies, studies of
occupational exposure to a chemical
substance or mixture, toxicological,
clinical, and ecological studies of a
chemicals substance or mixture
containing a chemical substance, and
any test performed under TSCA. The
following information is not part of a
health and safety study:
(1) The name, address, or other
identifying information for the
submitting company, including
identification of the laboratory that
conducted the study in cases where the
laboratory is part of or closely affiliated
with the submitting company;
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
(2) Internal product codes (i.e., code
names for the test substance used
internally by the submitting company or
to identify the test substance to the test
laboratory);
(3) Names and contact details for
testing laboratory personnel and names
and other private information for health
and safety study participants or persons
involved in chemical incidents such as
would typically be withheld under 5
U.S.C. 552(b)(6) or under other privacy
laws; and
(4) Information pertaining to test
substance product development,
advertising, or marketing plans, or to
cost and other financial data.
Highest-level U.S. parent company
means the highest-level company of the
site’s ownership hierarchy as of the start
of the submission period during which
data are being reported according to the
following instructions. The highest-level
U.S. parent company is located within
the United States. The following rules
govern how to identify the highest-level
U.S. parent company:
(1) If the site is entirely owned by a
single U.S. company that is not owned
by another company, that single
company is the U.S. parent company.
(2) If the site is entirely owned by a
single U.S. company that is, itself,
owned by another U.S.-based company
(e.g., it is a division or subsidiary of a
higher-level company), the highest-level
domestic company in the ownership
hierarchy is the U.S. parent company.
(3) If the site is owned by more than
one company (e.g., company A owns 40
percent, company B owns 35 percent,
and company C owns 25 percent), the
company with the largest ownership
interest in the site is the U.S. parent
company. If a higher-level company in
the ownership hierarchy owns more
than one ownership company, then
determine the entity with the largest
ownership by considering the lowerlevel ownerships in combination (e.g.,
corporation X owns companies B and C,
for a total ownership of 60 percent for
the site).
(4) If the site is owned by a 50:50 joint
venture or a cooperative, the joint
venture or cooperative is its own parent
company. If the site is owned by a U.S.
joint venture or cooperative, the highest
level of the joint venture or cooperative
is the U.S. parent company.
(5) If the site is federally owned, the
highest-level Federal agency or
department is the U.S. parent company.
(6) If the site is owned by a nonFederal public entity, that entity (such
as a municipality, State, or tribe) is the
U.S. parent company.
Industrial function means the
intended physical or chemical
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
characteristic for which a chemical
substance or mixture is consumed as a
reactant; incorporated into a
formulation, mixture, reaction product
or article; repackaged; or used.
Industrial use means use at a site at
which one or more chemical substances
or mixtures are manufactured (including
imported) or processed.
Intended for use by children means
the chemical substance or mixture is
used in or on a product that is
specifically intended for use by children
aged 14 or younger. A chemical
substance or mixture containing a
chemical substance is intended for use
by children when the submitter answers
‘‘yes’’ to at least one of the following
questions for the product into which the
submitter’s chemical substance or
mixture containing a chemical
substance is incorporated:
(1) Is the product commonly
recognized (i.e., by a reasonable person)
as being intended for children aged 14
or younger?
(2) Does the manufacturer of the
product state through product labeling
or other written materials that the
product is intended for or will be used
by children aged 14 or younger?
(3) Is the advertising, promotion, or
marketing of the product aimed at
children aged 14 or younger?
Known to or reasonably ascertainable
by means all information in a person’s
possession or control, plus all
information that a reasonable person
similarly situated might be expected to
possess, control, or know.
Manufacture means to import into the
customs territory of the United States
(as defined in general note 2 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (19 U.S.C. 1202)),
produce, or manufacture for commercial
purposes.
Manufacture for commercial purposes
means:
(1) To import, produce, or
manufacture with the purpose of
obtaining an immediate or eventual
commercial advantage for the
manufacturer, and includes among other
things, such ‘‘manufacture’’ of any
amount of a chemical substance or
mixture containing a chemical
substance:
(i) For commercial distribution,
including for test marketing; and/or
(ii) For use by the manufacturer,
including use for product research and
development, or as an intermediate.
(2) Manufacture for commercial
purposes also applies to substances that
are produced coincidentally during the
manufacture, processing, use, or
disposal of another substance or mixture
containing a chemical substance,
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70549
including both byproducts that are
separated from that other substance or
mixture containing a chemical
substance and impurities that remain in
that substance or mixture containing a
chemical substance. Such byproducts
and impurities may, or may not, in
themselves have commercial value.
They are nonetheless produced for the
purpose of obtaining a commercial
advantage since they are part of the
manufacture of a chemical product for
a commercial purpose.
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances or
PFAS means, for the purpose of this
part, any chemical substance or mixture
containing a chemical substance that
structurally contains at least one of the
following three sub-structures:
(1) R-(CF2)-CF(R′)R″, where both the
CF2 and CF moieties are saturated
carbons.
(2) R-CF2OCF2-R′, where R and R′ can
either be F, O, or saturated carbons.
(3) CF3C(CF3)R′R″, where R′ and R″
can either be F or saturated carbons.
Possession or control means in
possession or control of the submitter,
or of any subsidiary, partnership in
which the submitter is a general partner,
parent company, or any company or
partnership which the parent company
owns or controls, if the subsidiary,
parent company, or other company or
partnership is associated with the
submitter in the research, development,
test marketing, or commercial marketing
of the chemical substance in question.
(A parent company owns or controls
another company if the parent owns or
controls 50 percent or more of the other
company’s voting stock. A parent
company owns or controls any
partnership in which it is a general
partner.) Information is included within
this definition if it is:
(1) In files maintained by submitter’s
employees who are:
(i) Associated with research,
development, test marketing, or
commercial marketing of the chemical
substance in question; and/or
(ii) Reasonably likely to have such
data.
(2) Maintained in the files of other
agents of the submitter who are
associated with research, development,
test marketing, or commercial marketing
of the chemical substance in question in
the course of their employment as such
agents.
Research and development (R&D)
means activities intended solely as
scientific experimentation, research, or
analysis. R&D focuses on the analysis of
the chemical or physical characteristics,
the performance, or the production
characteristics of a chemical substance,
a mixture containing the substance, or
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
70550
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
an article. R&D encompasses a wide
range of activities which may occur in
a laboratory, pilot plant, commercial
plant outside the research facility, or at
other sites appropriate for R&D. General
distribution of chemical substances to
consumers does not constitute R&D.
Site-limited means a chemical
substance is manufactured and
processed only within a site and is not
distributed as a chemical substance or
as part of a mixture or article containing
a chemical substance outside the site.
Imported chemical substances are never
site-limited.
Worker means someone at a site of
manufacture, import, or processing who
performs work activities near sources of
a chemical substance or mixture or
directly handles the chemical substance
or mixture during the performance of
work activities.
§ 705.5 Substances for which reports must
be submitted.
The requirements of this part apply to
all chemical substances and mixtures
containing a chemical substance
(including articles) that are a PFAS,
consistent with the definition of PFAS
at § 705.3.
§ 705.10
Persons who must report.
Persons who have manufactured for
commercial purposes a chemical
substance identified in § 705.5 at any
period from January 1, 2011, through
the end of the last calendar year prior
to November 13, 2023, except as
described in § 705.12, is subject to the
requirements of this part.
§ 705.12 Activities for which reporting is
not required.
Reporting under this part is not
required for the import of municipal
solid waste streams for the purpose of
disposal or destruction of the waste.
Additionally, reporting is not required
for a Federal agency which imports
PFAS when it is not for any immediate
or eventual commercial advantage.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
§ 705.15
What information to report.
For the one-time submission, persons
identified in § 705.10 must report to
EPA, for each site of each of the
chemical substances identified in
§ 705.5, the following information to the
extent known to or reasonably
ascertainable by them, except as
allowed under § 705.18. In the event
that actual data is not known to or
reasonably ascertainable by the
submitter, then reasonable estimates
may be submitted:
(a) Company and plant site
information. The following currently
correct company and plant site
information must be reported for each
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
site at which a reportable chemical
substance is manufactured (see 40 CFR
711.3 for the ‘‘site’’ for importers):
(1) The highest-level U.S. parent
company name, address, and Dun and
Bradstreet D–U–N–S® (D&B) number, if
one exists.
(2) The name of a person who will
serve as Authorized Official for the
submitter company, and who will be
able to sign the certification statement
as described in § 705.30(d), the
Authorized Official’s full mailing
address, telephone number, and email
address.
(3) The name of a person who will
serve as technical contact for the
submitter company, and who will be
able to answer questions about the
information submitted by the company
to EPA, the contact person’s full mailing
address, telephone number, and email
address.
(4) The name, full street address, and
six-digit North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) code(s) of
the site. A submitter under this part
must include the appropriate D&B
number for each plant site reported, and
the county or parish (or other
jurisdictional indicator) in which the
plant site is located. A submitter under
this part must obtain a D&B number for
the site reported if none exists. A
submitter under this part must also
provide other site identification
numbers, including the Facility Registry
Service (FRS) identification number, if
they exist.
(b) Chemical-specific information.
The following chemical-specific
information must be reported for each
chemical substance that is a PFAS
manufactured for each year since
January 1, 2011, except as allowed
under § 705.18. This includes each
chemical substance that is a PFAS and
incorporated into mixtures:
(1) The common or trade name, the
chemical identity, and, except for
chemical substances that are Class 1
substances on the TSCA Inventory, the
representative molecular structure of
each PFAS for which such a report is
required.
(i) The specific, currently correct
Chemical Abstracts (CA) Index name as
used to list the chemical substance on
the TSCA Inventory and the correct
corresponding Chemical Abstracts
Service Registry Number (CASRN) for
each reportable PFAS at each site.
Submitters who wish to report chemical
substances listed on the confidential
portion of the TSCA Inventory will need
to report the chemical substance using
a TSCA Accession Number. If a
submitter has a low-volume exemption
(LVE) case number for the chemical
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
substance, that number may also be
used if a CASRN is not known to or
reasonably ascertainable by the
submitter.
(ii) In addition to reporting the
number itself, submitters must specify
the type of number they are reporting by
selecting from among the codes in table
1 to this paragraph (b)(1)(ii).
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (b)(1)(ii)—
CODES TO SPECIFY TYPE OF CHEMICAL IDENTIFYING NUMBER
Code
Number type
A ........
C .......
TSCA Accession Number.
Chemical Abstracts Service Registry
Number (CASRN).
Low-volume exemption (LVE) case
number.
L ........
(iii) If the CASRN or specific
identifier (i.e., Accession Number or
LVE number) of the PFAS is not known
to or reasonably ascertainable (NKRA) to
the submitter (e.g., if the chemical
identity is claimed as confidential
business information by the submitter’s
supplier, or if the submitter knows they
have a PFAS but are unable to ascertain
its specific identifier and/or specific
chemical identity), the submitter may
provide a generic name or description of
the PFAS and also initiate a joint
submission if the secondary submitter is
known. The submitter may only initiate
a joint submission if the CASRN or the
specific identifier (i.e., Accession
Number or LVE number) is not known
or reasonably ascertainable, and a
secondary submitter (who would
provide such information) is known.
The manufacturer (including importer)
must use the reporting tool described
under § 705.35 to ask the supplier or
other entity to provide the chemical
identity directly to EPA in a joint
submission. Such request must include
instructions for submitting chemical
identity information electronically,
using e-CDRweb and CDX (see 40 CFR
711.35), and for clearly referencing the
manufacturer’s (including importer)
submission. Contact information for the
supplier or other entity, a trade name or
other designation for the chemical
substance, and a copy of the request to
the supplier or other entity must be
included with the manufacturer’s
(including importer) submission. If,
after conducting due diligence and
reviewing known or reasonably
ascertainable information, a secondary
submitter to complete the joint
submission is not known, the reporter
may indicate that the secondary
submitter is NKRA. However, the PFAS
manufacturer would be required to
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
provide as much identifying detail as
they have regarding the PFAS identity,
and would be able to report to EPA
without initiating a joint submission
even if they do not know the underlying
identity of the chemical substance.
(2) The physical form(s) of the PFAS
as it is sent off-site from each site. If the
PFAS is site-limited, you must report
the physical form(s) of the PFAS at the
time it is reacted on-site to produce a
different chemical substance. For each
PFAS at each site, the submitter must
report as many physical forms as
applicable from among the physical
forms listed in this unit:
(i) Dry powder.
(ii) Pellets or large crystals.
(iii) Water- or solvent-wet solid.
(iv) Other solid.
(v) Gas or vapor.
(vi) Liquid.
(c) Categories of use. For each year
since January 1, 2011, report the
following information on categories of
use of each chemical substance that is
a PFAS manufactured for commercial
purposes.
(1) Industrial processing and use
information. A designation indicating
the type of industrial processing or use
operation(s) at each site that receives a
PFAS from the submitter site directly or
indirectly (whether the recipient site(s)
are controlled by the submitter site or
not). For each PFAS, report the letters
which correspond to the appropriate
processing or use operation(s) listed in
table 2 to this paragraph (c)(1). A
particular designation may need to be
reported more than once, to the extent
that a submitter reports more than one
sector that applies to a given
designation under this paragraph (c)(1).
TABLE 2 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(1)—
CODES FOR REPORTING TYPE OF INDUSTRIAL PROCESSING OR USE OP-
listed in table 3 to this paragraph (c)(2).
A particular sector code may need to be
reported more than once, to the extent
that a submitter reports more than one
function code that applies to a given
sector code under this paragraph (c)(2).
TABLE 3 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(2)—
CODES FOR REPORTING INDUSTRIAL
SECTORS
Code
Sector description
IS1 .....
Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and
hunting.
Oil and gas drilling, extraction, and
support activities.
Mining (except oil and gas) and support activities.
Utilities.
Construction.
Food, beverage, and tobacco product manufacturing.
Textiles, apparel, and leather manufacturing.
Wood product manufacturing.
Paper manufacturing.
Printing and related support activities.
Petroleum refineries.
Asphalt paving, roofing, and coating
materials manufacturing.
Petroleum lubricating oil and grease
manufacturing.
All other petroleum and coal products manufacturing.
Petrochemical manufacturing.
Industrial gas manufacturing.
Synthetic dye and pigment manufacturing.
Carbon black manufacturing.
All other basic inorganic chemical
manufacturing.
Cyclic crude and intermediate manufacturing.
All other basic organic chemical
manufacturing.
Plastics material and resin manufacturing.
Synthetic rubber manufacturing.
Organic fiber manufacturing.
Pesticide, fertilizer, and other agricultural chemical manufacturing.
Pharmaceutical and medicine manufacturing.
Paint and coating manufacturing.
Adhesive manufacturing.
Soap, cleaning compound, and toilet
preparation manufacturing.
Printing ink manufacturing.
Explosives manufacturing.
Custom compounding of purchased
resins.
Photographic film, paper, plate, and
chemical manufacturing.
All other chemical product and preparation manufacturing.
Plastics product manufacturing.
Rubber product manufacturing.
Non-metallic mineral product manufacturing (includes cement, clay,
concrete, glass, gypsum, lime, and
other non-metallic mineral product
manufacturing).
Primary metal manufacturing.
IS2 .....
IS3 .....
IS4 .....
IS5 .....
IS6 .....
IS7 .....
IS8 .....
IS9 .....
IS10 ...
IS11 ...
IS12 ...
IS13 ...
IS14 ...
IS15 ...
IS16 ...
IS17 ...
IS18 ...
IS19 ...
IS20 ...
IS21 ...
IS22 ...
IS23 ...
IS24 ...
IS25 ...
ERATION
IS26 ...
Designation
Operation
PC ................
PF .................
Processing as a reactant.
Processing—incorporation
into formulation, mixture, or
reaction product.
Processing—incorporation
into article.
Processing—repackaging.
Use—non-incorporative activities.
PA ................
PK ................
U ...................
IS27 ...
IS28 ...
IS29 ...
IS30 ...
IS31 ...
IS32 ...
IS33 ...
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
IS34 ...
(2) Corresponding sector code. A code
indicating the sector(s) that best
describes the industrial activities
associated with each industrial
processing or use operation reported
under this section. For each chemical
substance, report the code that
corresponds to the appropriate sector(s)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
IS35 ...
IS36 ...
IS37 ...
IS38 ...
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70551
TABLE 3 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(2)—
CODES FOR REPORTING INDUSTRIAL
SECTORS—Continued
Code
Sector description
IS39 ...
Fabricated metal product manufacturing.
Machinery manufacturing.
Computer and electronic product
manufacturing.
Electrical equipment, appliance, and
component manufacturing.
Transportation equipment manufacturing.
Furniture and related product manufacturing.
Miscellaneous manufacturing.
Wholesale and retail trade.
Services.
Other (requires additional information).
IS40 ...
IS41 ...
IS42 ...
IS43 ...
IS44 ...
IS45
IS46
IS47
IS48
...
...
...
...
(3) Corresponding function category.
For each sector reported under
paragraph (c)(2) of this section, the
applicable code(s) from table 4 to this
paragraph (c)(3) must be selected to
designate the function category(ies) that
best represents the specific manner in
which the PFAS is used.
TABLE 4 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(3)—
CODES FOR REPORTING FUNCTION
CATEGORIES
Code
F001
F002
F003
F004
F005
F006
F007
F008
F009
F010
F011
F012
F013
F014
F015
F016
F017
F018
F019
F020
F021
F022
F023
F024
F025
F026
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
F027
F028
F029
F030
F031
F032
F033
F034
F035
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
Category
Abrasives.
Etching agent.
Adhesion/cohesion promoter.
Binder.
Flux agent.
Sealant (barrier).
Absorbent.
Adsorbent.
Dehydrating agent (desiccant).
Drier.
Humectant.
Soil amendments (fertilizers).
Anti-adhesive/cohesive.
Dusting agent.
Bleaching agent.
Brightener.
Anti-scaling agent.
Corrosion inhibitor.
Dye.
Fixing agent (mordant).
Hardener.
Filler.
Anti-static agent.
Softener and conditioner.
Swelling agent.
Tanning agents not otherwise specified.
Waterproofing agent.
Wrinkle resisting agent.
Flame retardant.
Fuel agents.
Fuel.
Heat transferring agent.
Hydraulic fluids.
Insulators.
Refrigerants.
11OCR3
70552
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 4 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(3)—
CODES FOR REPORTING FUNCTION
CATEGORIES—Continued
Code
F036
F037
F038
F039
F040
F041
F042
F043
F044
F045
F046
F047
F048
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
F049
F050
F051
F052
F053
F054
F055
F056
F057
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
F058 ..
F059 ..
F060 ..
F061
F062
F063
F064
F065
..
..
..
..
..
F066 ..
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
F067 ..
F068 ..
F069
F070
F071
F072
..
..
..
..
F073
F074
F075
F076
F077
F078
F079
F080
F081
F082
F083
F084
F085
F086
F087
F088
F089
F090
F091
F092
F093
F094
F095
F096
F097
F098
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
Category
Code
Anti-freeze agent.
Intermediate.
Monomers.
Ion exchange agent.
Anti-slip agent.
Lubricating agent.
Deodorizer.
Fragrance.
Oxidizing agent.
Reducing agent.
Photosensitive agent.
Photosensitizers.
Semiconductor
and
photovoltaic
agent.
UV stabilizer.
Opacifer.
Pigment.
Plasticizer.
Plating agent.
Catalyst.
Chain transfer agent.
Chemical reaction regulator.
Crystal growth modifiers (nucleating
agents).
Polymerization promoter.
Terminator/Blocker.
Processing aids, specific to petroleum production.
Antioxidant.
Chelating agent.
Defoamer.
pH regulating agent.
Processing aids not otherwise specified.
Energy Releasers (explosives, motive propellant).
Foamant.
Propellants, non-motive (blowing
agents).
Cloud-point depressant.
Flocculating agent.
Flotation agent.
Solids
separation
(precipitating)
agent, not otherwise specified.
Cleaning agent.
Diluent.
Solvent.
Surfactant (surface active agent).
Emulsifier.
Thickening agent.
Viscosity modifiers.
Laboratory chemicals.
Dispersing agent.
Freeze-thaw additive.
Surface modifier.
Wetting agent (non-aqueous).
Aerating and deaerating agents.
Explosion inhibitor.
Fire extinguishing agent.
Flavoring and nutrient.
Anti-redeposition agent.
Anti-stain agent.
Anti-streaking agent.
Conductive agent.
Incandescent agent.
Magnetic element.
Anti-condensation agent.
Coalescing agent.
Film former.
Demulsifier.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
TABLE 4 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(3)—
CODES FOR REPORTING FUNCTION
CATEGORIES—Continued
Jkt 262001
F099
F100
F101
F102
F103
F104
F105
F106
F107
F108
F109
F110
F111
F112
F113
F114
F115
F116
F999
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
TABLE 5 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(4)—
CODES FOR REPORTING CONSUMER
AND COMMERCIAL PRODUCT CATEGORIES—Continued
Category
Stabilizing agent.
Alloys.
Density modifier.
Elasticizer.
Flow promoter.
Sizing agent.
Solubility enhancer.
Vapor pressure modifiers.
Embalming agent.
Heat stabilizer.
Preservative.
Anti-caking agent.
Deflocculant.
Dust suppressant.
Impregnation agent.
Leaching agent.
Tracer.
X-ray absorber.
Other.
Code
Category
CC105
Leather tanning, dye, finishing, impregnation and care products.
Textile (fabric) dyes.
Textile finishing and impregnating/
surface treatment products.
All-purpose foam spray cleaner.
All-purpose liquid cleaner/polish.
All-purpose liquid spray cleaner.
All-purpose waxes and polishes.
Appliance cleaners.
Drain and toilet cleaners (liquid).
Powder cleaners (floors).
Powder cleaners (porcelain).
Dishwashing detergent (liquid/gel).
Dishwashing detergent (unit dose/
granule).
Dishwashing detergent liquid (handwash).
Dry cleaning and associated products.
Fabric enhancers.
Laundry detergent (unit-dose/granule).
Laundry detergent (liquid).
Stain removers.
Ion exchangers.
Liquid water treatment products.
Solid/Powder water treatment products.
Liquid body soap.
Liquid hand soap.
Solid bar soap.
Air fresheners for motor vehicles.
Continuous action air fresheners.
Instant action air fresheners.
Anti-static spray.
Apparel finishing, and impregnating/
surface treatment products.
Insect repellent treatment.
Pre-market waxes, stains, and
polishes applied to footwear.
Post-market waxes, and polishes applied to footwear (shoe polish).
Waterproofing and water-resistant
sprays.
CC106
CC107
CC108
CC109
CC110
CC111
CC112
CC113
CC114
CC115
CC116
CC117
CC118
CC119
(4) Consumer and commercial use
information. Using the applicable codes
listed in table 5 to this paragraph (c)(4),
submitters must designate the consumer
and commercial product category(ies)
that best describe the consumer and
commercial products in which each
PFAS is used (whether the recipient
site(s) are controlled by the submitter
site or not). If more than 10 codes apply
to a PFAS, submitters need only report
the 10 codes for PFAS that cumulatively
represent the largest percentage of the
submitter’s production volume for that
chemical, measured by weight. If none
of the listed consumer and commercial
product categories accurately describes
the consumer and commercial products
in which each PFAS is used, the
category ‘‘Other’’ may be used, and must
include a description of the use.
CC120
CC121
CC122
CC123
CC124
CC125
CC126
CC127
CC128
CC129
CC130
CC131
CC132
CC133
CC134
CC135
CC136
CC137
CC138
TABLE 5 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(4)—
CODES FOR REPORTING CONSUMER
AND COMMERCIAL PRODUCT CAT-
Chemical Substances in Construction,
Paint, Electrical, and Metal Products
EGORIES
Code
Category
Chemical Substances in Furnishing,
Cleaning, Treatment Care Products
CC101
CC102
CC103
CC104
PO 00000
Construction and building materials
covering large surface areas including stone, plaster, cement,
glass and ceramic articles; fabrics,
textiles, and apparel.
Furniture & furnishings including
plastic articles (soft); leather articles.
Furniture & furnishings including
stone, plaster, cement, glass and
ceramic articles; metal articles; or
rubber articles.
Leather conditioner.
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
CC201
CC202
CC203
CC204
CC205
CC206
CC207
CC208
CC209
CC210
CC211
CC212
CC213
CC214
CC215
CC216
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
Fillers and putties.
Hot-melt adhesives.
One-component caulks.
Solder.
Single-component glues and adhesives.
Two-component caulks.
Two-component glues and adhesives.
Adhesive/Caulk removers.
Aerosol spray paints.
Lacquers, stains, varnishes and floor
finishes.
Paint strippers/removers.
Powder coatings.
Radiation curable coatings.
Solvent-based paint.
Thinners.
Water-based paint.
11OCR3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 5 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(4)—
CODES FOR REPORTING CONSUMER
AND COMMERCIAL PRODUCT CATEGORIES—Continued
Code
Category
Code
CC217
Construction and building materials
covering large surface areas, including wood articles.
Construction and building materials
covering large surface areas, including paper articles; metal articles; stone, plaster, cement, glass
and ceramic articles.
Machinery, mechanical appliances,
electrical/electronic articles.
Other machinery, mechanical appliances, electronic/electronic articles.
Construction and building materials
covering large surface areas, including metal articles.
Electrical batteries and accumulators.
CC409
CC410
CC411
CC412
CC413
CC414
CC415
CC416
CC417
CC418
CC218
CC219
CC220
CC221
CC222
Chemical Substances in Packaging, Paper,
Plastic, Toys, Hobby Products
CC990
CC301
CC302
CC303
CC304
CC305
CC306
CC307
CC308
CC309
CC310
CC311
CC312
CC313
CC314
CC315
CC316
CC317
Non-TSCA use.
Packaging (excluding food packaging), including paper articles.
Other articles with routine direct contact during normal use, including
paper articles.
Packaging (excluding food packaging), including rubber articles;
plastic articles (hard); plastic articles (soft).
Other articles with routine direct contact during normal use including
rubber articles; plastic articles
(hard).
Toys intended for children’s use (and
child dedicated articles), including
fabrics, textiles, and apparel; or
plastic articles (hard).
Adhesives applied at elevated temperatures.
Cement/concrete.
Crafting glue.
Crafting paint (applied to body).
Crafting paint (applied to craft).
Fixatives and finishing spray coatings.
Modelling clay.
Correction fluid/tape.
Inks in writing equipment (liquid).
Inks used for stamps.
Toner/Printer cartridge.
Liquid photographic processing solutions.
Chemical Substances in Automotive, Fuel,
Agriculture, Outdoor Use Products
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
TABLE 5 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(4)—
CODES FOR REPORTING CONSUMER
AND COMMERCIAL PRODUCT CATEGORIES—Continued
CC401
CC402
CC403
CC404
CC405
CC406
CC407
CC408
Exterior car washes and soaps.
Exterior car waxes, polishes, and
coatings.
Interior car care.
Touch up auto paint.
Degreasers.
Liquid lubricants and greases.
Paste lubricants and greases.
Spray lubricants and greases.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
Category
Anti-freeze liquids.
De-icing liquids.
De-icing solids.
Lock de-icers/releasers.
Cooking and heating fuels.
Fuel additives.
Vehicular or appliance fuels.
Explosive materials.
Agricultural non-pesticidal products.
Lawn and garden care products.
Chemical Substances in Products Not
Described by Other Codes
CC980
CC990
(5) Applicable codes for each
commercial and consumer products. For
each consumer and commercial product
category reported under paragraph (c)(4)
of this section, the applicable code(s)
described in table 4 to paragraph (c)(3)
of this section must be selected to
designate the function category(ies) that
best represents the specific manner in
which the PFAS is used.
(6) Commercial and consumer
products. Submitters must indicate, for
each consumer and commercial product
category reported under paragraph (c)(4)
of this section, whether the use is a
consumer or a commercial use, or both.
(7) Consumer product category.
Submitters must determine, within each
consumer and commercial product
category reported under paragraph (c)(4)
of this section, whether any amount of
each reportable chemical substance
manufactured (including imported) by
the submitter is present in (for example,
a plasticizer chemical substance used to
make pacifiers) or on (for example, as a
component in the paint on a toy) any
consumer products intended for use by
children age 14 or younger, regardless of
the concentration of the chemical
substance remaining in or on the
product. Submitters must select from
the following options: The chemical
substance is used in or on any consumer
products intended for use by children;
the chemical substance is not used in or
on any consumer products intended for
use by children; or information as to
whether the chemical substance is used
in or on any consumer products
intended for use by children is not
known to or reasonably ascertainable by
the submitter.
(8) Concentrations of PFAS. For each
year where the PFAS is used in
consumer or commercial products, the
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
estimated typical maximum
concentration, measured by weight, of
the chemical substance in each
consumer and commercial product
category reported under paragraph (c)(4)
of this section. For each PFAS in each
commercial and consumer product
category reported under paragraph (c)(4)
of this section, submitters must select
from among the ranges of concentrations
listed in table 6 to this paragraph (c)(8)
and report the corresponding code (i.e.,
M1 through M5):
TABLE 6 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(8)—
CODES FOR REPORTING MAXIMUM
CONCENTRATION OF CHEMICAL SUBSTANCE
Concentration range
(% weight)
Code
Other (specify).
Non-TSCA use.
70553
M1 .....
M2 .....
M3 .....
M4 .....
M5 .....
Less than 1% by weight.
At least 1 but less than 30% by
weight.
At least 30 but less than 60% by
weight.
At least 60 but less than 90% by
weight.
At least 90% by weight.
(d) Manufactured amounts. For each
year since January 1, 2011, the total
amounts manufactured of each PFAS,
including the amounts manufactured in
each calendar year for each category of
use as described in paragraph (c) of this
section.
(1) Total volume. For each year the
PFAS was manufactured, the total
annual volume (in pounds) of each
PFAS domestically manufactured or
imported at each site. The total annual
domestically manufactured volume (not
including imported volume) and the
total annual imported volume must be
separately reported. These amounts
must be reported to two significant
figures of accuracy.
(2) Site designation. A designation
indicating, for each PFAS at each site,
whether the imported PFAS is
physically present at the reporting site.
(3) Volume imported. The volume
directly exported of each PFAS
domestically manufactured or imported
at each site. These amounts must be
reported to two significant figures of
accuracy.
(4) Production volume. The estimated
percentage, rounded off to the closest 10
percent, of total production volume of
the reportable chemical substance
associated with each combination of
industrial processing or use operation,
sector, and function category as reported
in paragraph (c) of this section. Where
a particular combination of industrial
processing or use operation, sector, and
function category accounts for less than
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
70554
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
5 percent of the submitter’s site’s total
production volume of a reportable
chemical substance, the percentage
must not be rounded off to 0 percent.
Instead, in such a case, submitters must
report the percentage, rounded off to the
closest 1 percent, of the submitter’s
site’s total production volume of the
reportable chemical substance
associated with the particular
combination of industrial processing or
use operation, sector, and function
category.
(5) Site production volume. The
estimated percentage, rounded off to the
closest 10 percent, of the submitter’s
site’s total production volume of the
PFAS associated with each consumer
and commercial product category as
reported in paragraph (c)(4) of this
section. Where a particular consumer
and commercial product category
accounts for less than 5 percent of the
total production volume of a reportable
chemical substance, the percentage
must not be rounded off to 0 percent.
Instead, in such a case, submitters must
report the percentage, rounded off to the
closest 1 percent, of the submitter’s
site’s total production volume of the
reportable chemical substance
associated with the particular consumer
and commercial product category.
(6) Site-limited. An indication of
whether the PFAS was site-limited.
(7) Volume recycled. The total volume
(in pounds) of each PFAS recycled onsite.
(e) Byproduct reporting. A description
of the byproducts resulting from the
manufacture, processing, use, or
disposal of each PFAS.
(1) Byproduct identification. For each
byproduct produced from the
manufacture, processing, use, or
disposal of a PFAS, the submitter will
identify the byproduct by its specific,
currently correct CA Index name as
used to list the chemical substance on
the TSCA Inventory and the correct
corresponding CASRN. A submitter
under this part may use a known EPAdesignated TSCA Accession Number for
a chemical substance in lieu of a
CASRN when a CASRN is not known to
or reasonably ascertainable by the
submitter. Submitters who wish to
report chemical substances listed on the
confidential portion of the TSCA
Inventory will need to report the
chemical substance using a TSCA
Accession Number.
(i) In addition to reporting the number
itself, submitters must specify the type
of number they are reporting by
selecting from among the codes in table
1 to paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section.
(ii) If the specific chemical identity of
the byproduct is unknown to the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
submitter, the submitter may provide a
description of the chemical substance.
(iii) An indication of which specific
PFAS activity(ies) (i.e., manufacture,
process, use, or disposal) manufactured
the byproduct.
(2) Releases. An indication of whether
the byproduct is released to the
environment, and if so, the
environmental medium to which it is
released (i.e., air, water, land).
(3) Volume. For each year, the
byproduct volume (in pounds) released
to the environment.
(f) Environmental and health effects.
All existing information concerning the
environmental and health effects of
such substance or mixture containing a
chemical substance in the
manufacturer’s possession or control.
The scope of this information shall not
be limited to studies conducted or
published since 2011.
(1) Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD)
Harmonized Templates. For each
published study report, the submitter
shall complete an OECD Harmonized
Templates for Reporting Chemical Test
Summaries and submit the
accompanying study reports and
supporting information. This can be
accomplished by using the freely
available IUCLID software.
(2) Human health data—preliminary
studies. Submitters shall also provide
any additional human health data not in
study reports, including but not limited
to any preliminary studies, informal test
results in workers, or inhalation studies.
(3) Analytical tests. Submitters shall
also provide the names of any analytical
or test methods used to detect or
otherwise test for the PFAS.
(g) Worker exposure data. The
number of individuals exposed to PFAS
in their places of employment and the
duration of such exposure.
(1) Employment activities. A narrative
description of worker activities
involving the PFAS at the
manufacturing site, such as bag
dumping, sampling, cleaning, or
unloading drums.
(2) Number of workers. For each
worker activity in this paragraph,
indicate the number of workers
reasonably likely to be exposed. The
submitter must select from among the
worker ranges listed in table 7 to this
paragraph (g)(2) and report the
corresponding code (i.e., W1 though
W8).
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
TABLE 7 TO PARAGRAPH (g)(2)—
CODES FOR REPORTING NUMBER OF
WORKERS REASONABLY LIKELY TO
BE EXPOSED
Code
Range
W1 .....
W2 .....
Fewer than 10 workers.
At least 10 but fewer than 25 workers.
At least 25 but fewer than 50 workers.
At least 50 but fewer than 100 workers.
At least 100 but fewer than 500
workers.
At least 500 but fewer than 1,000
workers.
At least 1,000 but fewer than 10,000
workers.
At least 10,000 workers.
W3 .....
W4 .....
W5 .....
W6 .....
W7 .....
W8 .....
(3) Exposure scenarios. For each
worker activity in this paragraph (g), the
maximum duration of exposure for any
worker at the manufacturing site, for
each of the following scenarios:
(i) The daily exposure duration (in
hours per day) in the case of the worker
with greatest annual exposure frequency
(i.e., the worker exposed the most days
per year); and
(ii) The annual exposure frequency (in
days per year) in the case of the worker
with greatest daily exposure duration
(i.e., the worker exposed for the most
hours per day during the year).
(4) Exposure by category. For each
combination of industrial processing or
use operation, sector, and function
category identified in paragraph (c) of
this section, the submitter must estimate
the number of workers reasonably likely
to be exposed to each PFAS. For each
combination associated with each
chemical substance, the submitter must
select from among the worker ranges
listed in table 7 to paragraph (g)(2) of
this section and report the
corresponding code (i.e., W1 though
W8).
(5) Duration of exposure industrial
use. For each PFAS, the maximum
duration of exposure for any worker for
each combination of industrial
processing or use operation, sector, and
function category, for each of the
following scenarios:
(i) The daily exposure duration (in
hours per day) in the case of the worker
with the greatest annual exposure
frequency (i.e., the worker exposed the
most days per year); and
(ii) The annual exposure frequency (in
days per year) in the case of the worker
with the greatest daily exposure
duration (i.e., the worker exposed for
the most hours per day during the year).
(6) Commercial workers. Where the
PFAS is used in a commercial product,
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
the submitter must estimate the number
of commercial workers reasonably likely
to be exposed to each reportable
chemical substance. For each
commercial use associated with each
substance, the submitter must select
from among the worker ranges listed in
table 7 to paragraph (g)(2) of this section
and report the corresponding code (i.e.,
W1 though W8).
(7) Duration of exposure commercial
use. For each PFAS, the maximum
duration of exposure for any worker for
each commercial use, for each of the
following scenarios:
(i) The daily exposure duration (in
hours per day) in the case of the worker
with greatest annual exposure frequency
(i.e., the worker exposed the most days
per year); and
(ii) The annual exposure frequency (in
days per year) in the case of the worker
with greatest daily exposure duration
(i.e., the worker exposed for the most
hours per day during the year).
(h) Disposal data. During the years in
which the PFAS was manufactured, the
manners or methods of its disposal, and
any changes to the disposal methods or
processes.
(1) Categories of disposal methods.
Description of disposal processes or
methods, using the appropriate codes in
table 8 to this paragraph (h)(1), and
additional descriptions as needed.
(4) Incineration volume. Indicate total
volume of the PFAS that was
incinerated on-site in each year since
2011. If incineration occurred, indicate
the temperature (in degrees Celsius) at
which the PFAS was incinerated. If
incineration occurred at multiple
temperatures, indicate the minimum
temperature (in degrees Celsius) at
which the PFAS was incinerated.
§ 705.18 Article importer and R&D
substance reporting options.
For the one-time submission, certain
manufacturers have the option to use a
streamlined reporting form if they do
not know nor can reasonably ascertain
information requested under § 705.15,
beyond what is listed in this part.
Paragraph (a) of this section lists the
information which a manufacturer who
has imported a PFAS within an article
must report to the extent they know or
can reasonably ascertain. Paragraph (b)
of this section lists the information that
manufacturers of PFAS that are solely
R&D substances manufactured in
volumes no greater than 10 kilograms
per year must report to the extent they
know or can reasonably ascertain.
(a) Article reporting. Any importer of
an article which contains a chemical
substance that is a PFAS and who meets
the reporting requirements described in
§ 705.10 has the option to submit
information to EPA using a streamlined
reporting form for that PFAS in the
TABLE 8 TO PARAGRAPH (h)(1)—
CODES FOR REPORTING DISPOSAL imported article, for each year since
January 1, 2011, in which the PFAS was
METHODS
imported in an article. Information must
be submitted to the extent the submitter
Code
Disposal method
knows or can reasonably ascertain. In
D1 ..... On-site land disposal: Resource
the event that actual data is not known
Conservation and Recovery Act
to or reasonably ascertainable by the
(RCRA) Class C landfill (hazsubmitter, then reasonable estimates
ardous).
may be submitted. The information
D2 ..... On-site land disposal: other landfill.
requested on the streamlined reporting
D3 ..... Other on-site land disposal.
form for article importers includes:
D4 ..... On-site underground injection (UIC).
(1) Company and plant site
D5 ..... Off-site land disposal: RCRA Class
information. All company and plant site
C landfill (hazardous).
information requested under § 705.15(a)
D6 ..... Off-site land disposal: other landfill.
D7 ..... On-site incineration.
shall be reported.
D8 ..... Off-site incineration.
(2) Chemical-specific information.
D9 ..... Publicly owned treatment works
The following chemical-specific
(POTW).
information must be reported for each
D10 ... Other off-site waste transfer.
chemical substance that is a PFAS
D11 ... Release to surface water.
imported in an article, for each year
D12 ... Release to air (stack emissions).
since January 1, 2011, in which that
D13 ... Release to air (fugitive emissions).
PFAS was imported within an article.
D99 ... Other.
(i) The common or trade name, the
chemical identity, and, except for
(2) Disposal processes. Describe any
chemical substances that are Class 1
changes to the disposal process(es) or
substances on the TSCA Inventory
method(s) indicated in paragraph (h)(1)
(Inventory), the representative
of this section for any PFAS
molecular structure of each PFAS for
manufactured since 2011.
(3) Disposal volume. Indicate total
which such a report is required.
volume of the PFAS that was released
Submitters who wish to report chemical
to each environmental medium in each
substances listed on the confidential
year since 2011: land, water, and air.
portion of the Inventory will need to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70555
report the chemical substance using a
TSCA Accession Number. If a submitter
has a low-volume exemption (LVE) case
number for the chemical substance, that
number may also be used if a CASRN
is not known to or reasonably
ascertainable by the submitter. In
addition to reporting the number itself,
submitters must specify the type of
number they are reporting by selecting
from among the codes in table 1 to
§ 705.15(b)(1)(ii).
(ii) If the specific chemical identity of
the PFAS imported in an article is not
known to or reasonably ascertainable to
the submitter (e.g., if the chemical
identity is claimed as confidential
business information by the submitter’s
supplier, or if the submitter knows they
have a PFAS but is unable to ascertain
its specific chemical identity), the
submitter may provide a generic name
or description of the PFAS.
(3) Categories of use. For each year
since January 1, 2011, report the
following information on categories of
use of each PFAS imported in an article.
(i) Industrial processing and use
information. A designation indicating
the type of industrial processing or use
operation(s) at each site that receives a
PFAS from the submitter site directly or
indirectly (whether the recipient site(s)
are controlled by the submitter site or
not). For each PFAS that was imported
in an article, report the letters which
correspond to the appropriate
processing or use operation(s) listed in
table 2 to § 705.15(c)(1). A particular
designation may need to be reported
more than once, to the extent that a
submitter reports more than one sector
that applies to a given designation
under this paragraph (a)(3)(i).
(ii) Industrial activities sector. A code
indicating the sector(s) that best
describe the industrial activities
associated with each industrial
processing or use operation reported
under this section. For each PFAS that
was imported in an article, report the
code that corresponds to the appropriate
sector(s) listed in table 3 to
§ 705.15(c)(2). A particular sector code
may need to be reported more than
once, to the extent that a submitter
reports more than one function code
that applies to a given sector code under
this paragraph (a)(3)(ii).
(iii) Sector specific function
categories. For each sector reported
under paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section,
the applicable code(s) from table 4 to
§ 705.15(c)(3) must be selected to
designate the function category(ies) that
best represents the specific manner in
which the PFAS in the imported article
is used.
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
70556
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
(iv) Consumer and commercial use
information. Using the applicable codes
listed in table 5 to § 705.15(c)(4),
submitters must designate the consumer
and commercial product category(ies)
that best describe the consumer and
commercial products in which each
PFAS that is in an imported article is
used (whether the recipient site(s) are
controlled by the submitter site or not).
If more than 10 codes apply to a PFAS
in an imported article, submitters need
only report the 10 codes for PFAS that
cumulatively represent the largest
percentage of the submitter’s production
volume for that chemical, measured by
weight. If none of the listed consumer
and commercial product categories
accurately describe the consumer and
commercial products in which each
PFAS is used, the category ‘‘Other’’ may
be used, and must include a description
of the use.
(v) Product specific function
categories. For each consumer and
commercial product category reported
under paragraph (a)(3)(iv) of this
section, the applicable code(s) described
in table 4 to § 705.15(c)(3) must be
selected to designate the function
category(ies) that best represents the
specific manner in which the PFAS in
an imported article is used.
(vi) Consumer or commercial use
designation. Submitters must indicate,
for each consumer and commercial
product category reported under
paragraph (a)(3)(v) of this section,
whether the use is a consumer or a
commercial use, or both.
(vii) In or on consumer products
intended for children. Submitters must
determine, within each consumer and
commercial product category reported
under paragraph (a)(3)(v) of this section,
whether any amount of each reportable
chemical substance manufactured
(including imported) by the submitter is
present in (for example, a plasticizer
chemical substance used to make
pacifiers) or on (for example, as a
component in the paint on a toy) any
consumer products intended for use by
children age 14 or younger, regardless of
the concentration of the chemical
substance remaining in or on the
product. Submitters must select from
the following options: The chemical
substance is used in or on any consumer
products intended for use by children;
the chemical substance is not used in or
on any consumer products intended for
use by children; or information as to
whether the chemical substance is used
in or on any consumer products
intended for use by children is not
known to or reasonably ascertainable by
the submitter.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
(viii) Estimated maximum
concentration. For each year where the
PFAS in an imported article is used in
consumer or commercial products, the
submitter must report the estimated
typical maximum concentration,
measured by weight, of the chemical
substance in each consumer and
commercial product category reported
under paragraph (a)(3)(v) of this section.
For each PFAS in an imported article in
each commercial and consumer product
category reported under paragraph
(a)(3)(v) of this section, submitters must
select from among the ranges of
concentrations listed in table 1 to this
paragraph (a)(3)(viii) and report the
corresponding code (i.e., AM1 through
AM5):
imported in an article, including
supplemental attachments.
(b) Research and development (R&D).
Any manufacturer of a PFAS R&D
substance that was manufactured in
volumes no greater than 10 kilograms
per year and who meets the reporting
requirements described in § 705.10 has
the option to submit information to EPA
using a streamlined reporting form for
each such PFAS, for each year since
January 1, 2011, in which the PFAS was
manufactured for R&D purposes in
volumes no greater than 10 kilograms
per year. Information must be submitted
to the extent the submitter knows or can
reasonably ascertain. In the event that
actual data is not known to or
reasonably ascertainable by the
submitter, then reasonable estimates
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(3)(viii)— may be submitted. The information
CODES FOR REPORTING MAXIMUM requested on the streamlined reporting
for R&D manufacturers includes:
CONCENTRATION OF PFAS IN AN IM- form
(1) Company and plant site
PORTED ARTICLE
information. All company and plant site
information requested under § 705.15(a)
Concentration range
Code
shall be reported.
(% weight)
(2) Chemical-specific information.
The following chemical-specific
AM1 ... Less than 0.1% by weight.
information must be reported for each
AM2 ... At least 0.1% but less than 1% by
weight.
R&D chemical substance that is a PFAS
AM3 ... At least 1% but less than 10% by
and each mixture containing a chemical
weight.
substance that is a PFAS and meets the
AM4 ... At least 10% but less than 30% by
requirements for the reporting option
weight.
under this paragraph (b)(2). The
AM5 ... At least 30% by weight.
information must be reported for each
year since January 1, 2011, in which
(4) Imported article production
that PFAS was manufactured for R&D
volume. For each calendar year since
January 1, 2011, in which the PFAS was purposes in quantities no greater than
10 kilograms per year.
imported in an article, the production
(i) The common or trade name, the
volume of the imported article. The
chemical identity, and, except for
imported production volume must be
chemical substances that are Class 1
reported to two significant figures of
substances on the TSCA Inventory, the
accuracy. The submitter must also
representative molecular structure of
provide the unit of measurement of the
each PFAS for which such a report is
imported production volume by
required. Submitters who wish to report
selecting among the table 2 to this
chemical substances listed on the
paragraph (a)(4). The submitter must
confidential portion of the TSCA
also designate, for each PFAS imported
Inventory will need to report the
in an article, whether the imported
chemical substance using a TSCA
PFAS was ever physically present at the
Accession Number. If a submitter has a
reporting site.
low-volume exemption (LVE) case
number for the chemical substance, that
TABLE 2 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(4)—
number may also be used if a CASRN
CODES TO SPECIFY UNIT OF MEAS- is not known to or reasonably
UREMENT FOR THE IMPORTED ARTI- ascertainable by the submitter. In
CLE PRODUCTION VOLUME
addition to reporting the number itself,
submitters must specify the type of
Code
Unit of measurement
number they are reporting by selecting
from among the codes in table 1 to
LB ...... Pounds.
§ 705.15(b)(1)(ii).
TN ..... Tons.
(ii) If the specific chemical identity of
QT ..... Quantity of imported article.
the PFAS is not known to or reasonably
O ....... Other (must specify).
ascertainable to the submitter (e.g., if the
(5) Additional article data. The
chemical identity is claimed as
submitter has the option to provide any
confidential business information by the
additional information to EPA that is
submitter’s supplier, or if the submitter
requested under § 705.15 on the PFAS
knows they have a PFAS but are unable
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
to ascertain its specific chemical
identity), the submitter may provide a
generic name or description of the
PFAS.
(3) Production volume. The submitter
must report for each year since January
1, 2011, in which the PFAS was
manufactured, the total annual volume
(in pounds) of each PFAS domestically
manufactured or imported at each site.
The total annual domestically
manufactured volume (not including
imported volume) and the total annual
imported volume must be separately
reported. These amounts must be
reported to two significant figures of
accuracy.
(i) A designation indicating, for each
PFAS at each site, whether any
imported PFAS is ever physically
present at the reporting site.
(ii) [Reserved]
(4) Additional R&D data. The
submitter has the option to provide any
additional information to EPA that is
requested under § 705.15 on the PFAS,
including supplemental attachments.
§ 705.20
When to report.
All information reported to EPA in
response to the requirements of this part
must be submitted during the applicable
submission period. For all reporters
submitting information pursuant to
§§ 705.15 and 705.18(b) (research and
development), the submission period
shall begin one year following
November 13, 2023, and last for six
months: November 12, 2024, through
May 8, 2025. For any reporter who is
reporting under this part exclusively
pursuant to § 705.18(a) (article
importers), and is also considered a
small manufacturer under the definition
at 40 CFR 704.3, the submission period
shall begin one year following
November 13, 2023, and last for 12
months: November 12, 2024, through
November 10, 2025.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
§ 705.22
Duplicative reporting.
Any person covered in this part may
notify EPA through the electronic
reporting system in § 705.35 that certain
information has already been submitted
to EPA, and any such person does not
need to re-submit the information. The
notification must include the statutory
and regulatory provision under which
the information was submitted and in
which year it was submitted. This
ability is limited to the type of
information listed in this section. If the
previous submission did not account for
all information required to be submitted
pursuant to this part (e.g., due to
exemptions inapplicable to this part),
then the person may not rely on that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
prior submission to satisfy the reporting
requirements of this part.
(a) Chemical Data Reporting rule. If a
person identified in § 705.10 has already
reported certain information in § 705.15
to EPA pursuant to the Chemical Data
Reporting rule at 40 CFR part 711, then
duplicative reporting of that information
is not required of the years for which
the information has already been
reported. Such information that may
potentially be duplicative under this
part is limited to:
(1) Chemical description. Physical
state of the chemical or mixture
containing a chemical substance,
pursuant to 40 CFR 711.15(b)(3)(C)(ix).
(2) Sector description. Industrial
processing and use type, sector(s),
functional category(ies), and percent of
production volume for each use,
pursuant to 40 CFR 711.15(b)(4)(i)(A)
through (D).
(3) Product category. Consumer and/
or commercial indicator, product
category(ies), functional category(ies),
percent of production volume for each
use, indicator for use in products
intended for children, and maximum
concentration in the product, pursuant
to 40 CFR 711.15(b)(4)(ii)(A) through
(F).
(4) Workers. Number of workers
reasonably likely to be exposed for each
combination of industrial processing or
use operation, sector, and function,
pursuant to 40 CFR 711.15(b)(4)(i)(F),
and the number of commercial workers
reasonably likely to be exposed when
the substance is used in a commercial
product, pursuant to 40 CFR
711.15(b)(4)(ii)(G).
(5) Volume. Production volume, both
domestically manufactured and
imported, an indicator for the imported
chemical never physically at site, and
the volume directly exported, pursuant
to 40 CFR 711.15(b)(3)(iii) through (v).
(b) Greenhouse Gas Reporting rule. If
a person identified in § 705.10 has
already reported certain information in
§ 705.15 to EPA pursuant to the
Greenhouse Gas Reporting rule at 40
CFR part 98, then duplicative reporting
of that information is not required of the
years for which the information has
already been reported. Such information
that may potentially be duplicative
under this part is limited to:
(1) Imported. Production volume
(imported), pursuant to 40 CFR
98.416(c)(1) and (2).
(2) Exported. Volume directly
exported, pursuant to 40 CFR
98.416(d)(1).
(3) Incinerated. Total volume
incinerated on-site, pursuant to 40 CFR
part 98.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70557
(c) Toxics Release Inventory reporting
rule. If a person identified in § 705.10
has already reported certain information
in § 705.15 to EPA pursuant to the
Toxics Release Inventory reporting rule
at 40 CFR part 372, then duplicative
reporting of that information is not
required of the years for which the
information has already been reported.
Such information that may potentially
be duplicative under this part is limited
to:
(1) Recycled. Total volume recycled
on-site, pursuant to 40 CFR
372.85(b)(16).
(2) Disposal. Description of disposal
process(es), pursuant to 40 CFR
372.85(b)(14) and (15).
(3) Release to land. Total volume
released to land, pursuant to 40 CFR
372.85(b)(14)(i)(D) and (E).
(4) Release to water. Total volume
released to water, pursuant to 40 CFR
372.85(b)(14)(i)(C).
(5) Release to air. Total volume
released to air, pursuant to 40 CFR
372.85(b)(14)(i)(A) and (B).
(6) Incinerated. Total volume
incinerated on-site, pursuant to 40 CFR
372.85(b)(16).
(d) TSCA sections 8(d) and 8(e)
reporting. If a person identified in
§ 705.10 has already reported certain
information in § 705.15(f) to EPA, then
duplicative reporting of that information
is not required of the years for which
the information has already been
reported. Such information that may
potentially be duplicative under this
part is limited to health and safety
studies submitted pursuant to TSCA
section 8(d), notification of substantial
risks pursuant to TSCA section 8(e), or
other information concerning
environmental and health effects of the
PFAS.
(e) Byproduct reporting. If a person
identified in § 705.10 must report
byproducts information pursuant to
§ 705.15(e), and those byproducts are
also PFAS that are reported
independently pursuant to this part,
then duplicative reporting of the
environmental releases as byproducts is
not required. Such information that may
potentially be duplicative is limited to:
(1) Incineration. An indication of
whether the byproduct is released to the
environment, and if so, the
environmental medium to which it is
released (i.e., air, water, land), pursuant
to § 705.15(e)(2).
(2) Byproduct volume. For each year,
the byproduct volume (in pounds)
released to the environment, pursuant to
§ 705.15(e)(3).
(f) Environmental and health effects
information. If a person identified in
§ 705.10 has already reported the
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
70558
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
information in § 705.15(f) to EPA, then
duplicative reporting of that information
is not required, except to the extent
required by to § 705.30. The notification
required by this paragraph (f) must also
include the EPA office (e.g., EPA region
or Headquarters Office) and case
number or other identifier for the prior
submission.
(g) Reporting timeframe. Any person
covered in this part must report all
information to EPA in § 705.15 for each
year since January 1, 2011, in which
that person manufactured a chemical
substance that is a PFAS or a mixture
containing a PFAS. If a person has
already reported any of the data
elements identified in paragraph (a) of
this section, but not for all years since
2011, then that person must submit the
required information for the intervening
years. If a person has already reported
any of the data elements identified in
paragraph (a), (b), or (c) of this section,
and the previous submissions did not
account for all activities that are
reportable under this part due to
exemptions or thresholds that do not
apply to this part, then that information
is not considered duplicative reporting,
and the person must submit information
for that data element responsive to this
part.
§ 705.25
Recordkeeping requirements.
Each person who is subject to the
reporting requirements of this part must
retain records that document any
information reported to EPA. Relevant
records must be retained for a period of
5 years beginning on the last day of the
submission period.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
§ 705.30
Confidentiality claims.
(a) Making confidentiality claims—(1)
Generally. Any person submitting
information under this part may assert
a confidentiality claim for that
information, except for information
described in paragraph (a)(2) of this
section. All such confidentiality claims
must be asserted at the time the
information is submitted. Instructions
for asserting confidentiality claims are
provided in the document identified in
§ 705.35. Information claimed as
confidential business information in
accordance with this section will be
treated and disclosed in accordance
with the procedures in 40 CFR part 703
and TSCA section 14.
(2) Exceptions. Confidentiality claims
cannot be asserted for the following:
(i) Specific chemical identity if the
chemical is on the public (nonconfidential) TSCA Inventory or
reported as non-confidential in an LVE;
(ii) For processing and use data
elements required by §§ 705.15(c)(1)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
through (7) and 705.18(a)(3)(i) through
(vii);
(iii) When a response is left blank or
designated as ‘‘not known or reasonably
ascertainable;’’
(iv) For specific chemical identity by
submitters of article importer forms
described in § 705.18(a);
(v) For all generic chemical names;
(vi) For any PFAS that are on the
public (non-confidential) TSCA
Inventory, the chemical’s CASRN;
(vii) For the Inventory Accession
Numbers for PFAS that are on the
confidential TSCA Inventory; or,
(viii) For LVE numbers.
(3) All existing information
concerning environmental and health
effects. (i) Any person submitting a
health and safety study, or information
from a healthy and safety study, under
this part may only assert a
confidentiality claim for information
that discloses processes used in the
manufacturing or processing of a
chemical substance or mixture or, in the
case of a mixture, the release of data
disclosing the portion of the mixture
comprised by any of the chemical
substances in the mixture.
(ii) If any information submitted
under § 705.15(f) is claimed as
confidential business information, a
person who submits the information
must provide EPA, at the time of
submission, a sanitized copy for public
release, removing only that information
that is claimed as confidential business
information.
(iii) Any person who has previously
submitted information under § 705.15(f)
and claimed it as confidential business
information is required to reassert and
re-substantiate the confidential business
information claim if they seek to
maintain the claim of confidential
business information. Such persons are
required to submit s a revised sanitized
copy.
(b) Substantiation of confidentiality
claims. (1) Unless exempted, all
confidentiality claims require
substantiation at the time of submission
and must be signed and dated by an
authorized official.
(2) Confidentiality claims for the
following data elements are exempt
from the substantiation requirement in
paragraph (b)(1) of this section:
(i) Volume. Production volume
information required pursuant to
§§ 705.15(d)(1), (5), and (6) and
705.18(a)(4) and (b)(3)(i).
(ii) Primary submitter. Joint
submission information from the
primary submitter, consisting of trade
name and supplier identification
required pursuant to § 705.15(b)(1)(i)
and (ii).
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(iii) Secondary submitter. Joint
submission information from the
secondary submitter, consisting of the
percentage of formulation required
pursuant to § 705.15(b)(1)(i) and (ii).
(c) Marking information claimed as
confidential business information in
confidentiality substantiation
documentation. If any of the
information contained in the answers to
the questions listed in paragraph (e) of
this section is asserted to contain
information that itself is considered to
be confidential, you must clearly
identify the information that is claimed
confidential.
(d) Certification statement for claims.
An authorized official representing a
person asserting a claim of
confidentiality must certify that the
submission complies with the
requirements of this part by signing and
dating the following certification
statement:
‘‘I certify that all claims for confidentiality
asserted 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: (1) I have taken reasonable
measures to protect the confidentiality of the
information; (2) I have determined that the
information is not required to be disclosed or
otherwise made available to the public under
any other Federal law; (3) 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 (4) I have a reasonable basis
to believe that the information is not readily
discoverable through reverse engineering.’’
(e) Substantiation requirements for all
types of confidentiality claims. For each
data element that is claimed as
confidential business information, you
must submit with your report detailed
written answers to the following
questions:
(1) Substantial harm due to release.
Please specifically explain what harm to
the competitive position of your
business would be likely to result from
the release of the information claimed as
confidential business information. How
would that harm be substantial? Why is
the substantial harm to your competitive
position likely (i.e., probable) to be
caused by release of the information
rather than just possible? If you claimed
multiple types of information to be
confidential (e.g., site information,
exposure information, environmental
release information, etc.), explain how
disclosure of each type of information
would be likely to cause substantial
harm to the competitive position of your
business. (40 CFR 703.5(b)(3))
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
(2) Precautions to protect
confidentiality. Has your business taken
precautions to protect the
confidentiality of the disclosed
information? If yes, please explain and
identify the specific measures,
including but not limited to internal
controls, that your business has taken to
protect the information claimed as
confidential business information. If the
same or similar information was
previously reported to EPA as nonconfidential (such as in an earlier
version of this submission), please
explain the circumstances of that prior
submission and reasons for believing
the information is nonetheless still
confidential.
(3) Disclosure under Federal law or
publicly available information. (i) Is any
of the information claimed as
confidential business information
required to be publicly disclosed under
any other Federal law? If yes, please
explain.
(ii) Does any of the information
claimed as confidential business
information otherwise appear in any
public documents, including (but not
limited to) safety data sheets;
advertising or promotional material;
professional or trade publications; state,
local, or Federal agency files; or any
other media or publications available to
the general public? If yes, please explain
why the information should be treated
as confidential. If this chemical is
patented and the patent reveals the
information you are claiming to be
confidential business information,
please explain your reasons for
believing the information is nonetheless
still confidential.
(4) Duration of claims. Is the claim of
confidentiality intended to last less than
10 years (see TSCA section 14(e)(1)(B))?
If yes, please indicate the number of
years (between 1–10 years) or the
specific date after which the claim is
withdrawn.
(5) Previously disclosed information.
Has EPA, another Federal agency, or
court made any confidentiality
determination regarding information
associated with this chemical
substance? If yes, please provide the
circumstances associated with the prior
determination, whether the information
was found to be entitled to confidential
treatment, the entity that made the
decision, and the date of the
determination.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:36 Oct 10, 2023
Jkt 262001
(f) Additional requirements for
specific chemical identity. A person
may assert a claim of confidentiality for
the specific chemical identity of a
chemical substance as described in
§§ 705.15(b)(1)(i) and 705.18(b)(2)(i)
only if the identity of that chemical
substance is treated as confidential in
the Master Inventory File (or as a
confidential LVE) as of the time the
report is submitted for that chemical
substance, if that substance is currently
on the Inventory or is an LVE. Any
person who asserts a claim of
confidentiality for the specific chemical
identity under this paragraph must
provide a generic chemical name. To
assert a claim of confidentiality for the
identity of a reportable chemical
substance, you must submit with the
report detailed written answers to the
questions from paragraph (b) of this
section and to the following questions.
(1) Chemical substance in U.S.
commerce. Is this chemical substance
publicly known (including by your
competitors) to be in U.S. commerce? If
yes, please explain why the specific
chemical identity should still be
afforded confidential status (e.g., the
chemical substance is publicly known
only as being distributed in commerce
for research and development purposes,
but no other information about the
current commercial distribution of the
chemical substance in the United States
is publicly available) (40 CFR
703.5(b)(4)). If no, please complete the
certification statement:
‘‘I certify that on the date referenced, I
searched the internet for the chemical
substance identity (i.e., by both chemical
substance name and CASRN). I did not find
a reference to this chemical substance and
have no knowledge of public information
that would indicate that the chemical is
being manufactured or imported by anyone
for a commercial purpose in the United
States. [provide date].’’
(2) Leave manufacturing site. Does
this particular chemical substance leave
the site of manufacture (including
import) in any form, e.g., as a product,
effluent, emission? If yes, please explain
what measures have been taken to guard
against the discovery of its identity.
(3) Chemical identity. If the chemical
substance leaves the site in a form that
is available to the public or your
competitors, can the chemical identity
be readily discovered by analysis of the
substance (e.g., product, effluent,
emission), in light of existing
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
70559
technologies and any costs, difficulties,
or limitations associated with such
technologies? Please explain why or
why not.
(4) Chemical name. Would disclosure
of the specific chemical name release
confidential process information? If yes,
please explain.
(g) Joint submissions. If a primary
submitter asks a secondary submitter to
provide information directly to EPA in
a joint submission under
§§ 705.15(b)(1)(i) and 705.18(b)(2)(i),
only the primary submitter may assert a
confidentiality claim for the data
elements that it directly submits to EPA.
The primary submitter must
substantiate those claims that are not
exempt under paragraph (b)(2) of this
section. The secondary submitter is
responsible for asserting all
confidentiality claims for the data
elements that it submits directly to EPA
and for substantiating those claims that
are not exempt under paragraph (b)(3) of
this section.
(h) No claim of confidentiality. Except
for the chemical identity on article
importer forms submitted under
§ 705.18(a), information not claimed as
confidential business information in
accordance with the requirements of
this section may be made public (e.g., by
publication of specific chemical name
and CASRN on the public portion of the
TSCA Inventory). EPA will provide
advance public notice of specific
chemical identities to be added to the
public portion of the TSCA Inventory.
§ 705.35
Electronic reporting.
You must use CDX to complete and
submit the reporting form required
under this part. Submissions may only
be made as set forth in this section.
Submissions must be sent electronically
to EPA via CDX. The information
submitted and all attachments (unless
the attachment appears in scientific
literature) must be in English. All
information must be true and correct.
Access the PFAS 8(a)(7) reporting tool
and instructions, as follows:
(a) By website. Access the PFAS
8(a)(7) reporting tool via the CDX
homepage at https://cdx.epa.gov/ and
follow the appropriate links.
(b) By phone or email. Contact the
EPA TSCA Hotline at (202) 554–1404 or
TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov.
[FR Doc. 2023–22094 Filed 10–10–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\11OCR3.SGM
11OCR3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 195 (Wednesday, October 11, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70516-70559]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22094]
[[Page 70515]]
Vol. 88
Wednesday,
No. 195
October 11, 2023
Part III
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 705
Toxic Substances Control Act Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements
for Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 11, 2023 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 70516]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 705
[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2020-0549; FRL-7902-02-OCSPP]
RIN 2070-AK67
Toxic Substances Control Act Reporting and Recordkeeping
Requirements for Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing
reporting and recordkeeping requirements for per- and polyfluoroalkyl
substances (PFAS) under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). In
accordance with obligations under TSCA, as amended by the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, EPA is requiring
persons that manufacture (including import) or have manufactured these
chemical substances in any year since January 1, 2011, to submit
information to EPA regarding PFAS uses, production volumes, byproducts,
disposal, exposures, and existing information on environmental or
health effects. In addition to fulfilling statutory obligations under
TSCA, this rule will enable EPA to better characterize the sources and
quantities of manufactured PFAS in the United States.
DATES: This final rule is effective on November 13, 2023.
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2020-0549, is available online
at https://www.regulations.gov. Additional instructions for 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:
Alie Muneer, Data Gathering and Analysis Division (7406M), Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(202) 564-6369; email address: [email protected].
For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill,
422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202)
554-1404; email address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Executive Summary
A. Does this action apply to me?
This action may apply to you if you have manufactured (defined by
statute at 15 U.S.C. 2602(9) to include import) PFAS for a commercial
purpose at any time since January 1, 2011. The following list of North
American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes is not intended
to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help readers determine
whether this document applies to them. Potentially affected entities
may include:
Construction (NAICS code 23);
Manufacturing (NAICS code 31 through 33);
Wholesale trade (NAICS code 42);
Retail trade (NAICS code 44 through 45); and
Waste management and remediation services (NAICS code
562).
This list details the types of entities that EPA is aware could
potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities not
listed could also be regulated. To determine whether your entity is
regulated by this action, you should carefully examine the
applicability criteria found in 40 CFR 705.10 and 705.12. If you have
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
B. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?
EPA is promulgating this rule pursuant to its authority in TSCA
section 8(a)(7) (15 U.S.C. 2607(a)(7)). The National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (FY 2020 NDAA) (Pub. L. 116-92,
section 7351) amended TSCA section 8(a) in December 2019, adding
section 8(a)(7), titled ``PFAS Data.'' TSCA section 8(a)(7) requires
EPA to promulgate a rule ``requiring each person who has manufactured a
chemical substance that is a [PFAS] in any year since January 1, 2011''
to report information described in TSCA section 8(a)(2)(A) through (G).
This includes a broad range of information, such as information related
to chemical identity and structure, production, use, byproducts,
exposure, disposal, and health and environmental effects.
TSCA section 14 imposes requirements for the assertion,
substantiation, and review of information that is claimed as
confidential business information (CBI).
C. What action is the Agency taking?
In this action, EPA is promulgating reporting and recordkeeping
requirements for entities who have manufactured (including imported) a
PFAS for commercial purposes at any point since January 1, 2011. This
rule takes into consideration comments received on the proposed rule
(86 FR 33926, June 28, 2021 (FRL-10017-78)) input from the Small
Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) Panel that was convened following
publication of the proposed rule, and comments received on the SBAR
Panel Report and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), which
EPA published with a Notice of Data Availability (NODA) (Ref. 1).
Details on the final rule requirements, including modifications from
the proposal, are explained in Unit III.
EPA is finalizing this rule both to fulfill its obligations under
TSCA section 8(a)(7), as amended by the FY 2020 NDAA, and to create a
more comprehensive database of previously manufactured PFAS to improve
the Agency's understanding of PFAS in commerce and to support actions
to address PFAS exposure and contamination.
D. Why is the Agency taking this action?
TSCA section 8(a)(7) requires EPA to promulgate a rule requiring
each person who has manufactured a PFAS in any year since January 1,
2011, to report certain information for each year since January 1,
2011.
E. What are the incremental economic impacts?
EPA has evaluated the costs and benefits of this rulemaking and
provided an Economic Analysis of the potential impacts associated with
this rule (Ref. 2). The primary benefit of this rule is providing EPA
with data on PFAS which have been manufactured, including imported, for
commercial purposes since 2011; the Agency is not currently aware of
any similar source of information for these substances of interest.
Subsequently, EPA will use these data to support activities addressing
PFAS under TSCA, as well as activities and programs under other
environmental statutes. The additional data on the production, use,
exposure, and environmental and health effects of PFAS in the United
States may allow EPA to more effectively determine whether additional
risk assessment and management measures are needed. This information
may lead to reduced costs of risk-based decision making and improved
decisions concerning PFAS.
EPA has evaluated the potential costs of this reporting and
recordkeeping requirement for manufacturers and article importers.
Since the notice of proposed rulemaking for this action
[[Page 70517]]
published on June 28, 2021 (86 FR 33926 (FRL-10017-78)), EPA found
additional data and received feedback via public comments to update its
economic analysis, including estimating the number of PFAS article
importers. EPA revised cost estimates from $10.8 million in industry
costs detailed in the draft Economic Analysis for the proposed rule to
$876 million detailed in the IRFA and NODA (Ref. 1), to $843 million
using a 3 percent discount rate and $800 million using a 7 percent
discount rate at the final rule stage. The final Economic Analysis
(Ref. 2), which is available in the docket, is briefly summarized here.
The regulated community is expected to incur one-time burdens and costs
associated with rule familiarization, compliance determination, form
completion, CBI claim substantiation, recordkeeping, and electronic
reporting activities. Industry is estimated to incur a burden of
approximately 11.6 million hours, with a cost of approximately $843
million and $800 million under a 3 percent and 7 percent discount rate,
respectively. The Agency is expected to incur a cost of $1.6 million.
The total social cost is therefore estimated to be approximately $844.8
million and $801.7 million under a 3 percent and 7 percent discount
rate, respectively.
II. Background
A. What are PFAS?
PFAS are a group of synthetic chemicals that have been in use since
the 1940s and can be found in a wide array of industrial and consumer
products (Refs. 2 and 3). PFAS are synthesized for many different uses,
ranging from firefighting foams to coatings for clothes and furniture,
to food contact substances, to the manufacture of other chemicals and
products. They are used in a wide variety of products, including
textiles, electronics, wires and cables, pipes, cooking and bakeware,
sport articles, automotive products, toys, transportation equipment,
and musical instruments, which may be imported into the United States
as finished articles (Ref. 2). PFAS can be released to the environment
throughout the lifecycle of manufacturing, processing, distribution,
use, and disposal (Refs. 3 and 4). There is evidence that exposure to
some PFAS in the environment may be linked to harmful health effects in
humans and animals, and that continued exposure above specific levels
to certain PFAS may lead to adverse health effects (Refs. 2, 3, and 4).
B. What is TSCA section 8(a)(7)?
On December 20, 2019, the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2020 (NDAA) was signed into law (Pub. L. 116-92). Among
other provisions, section 7321 of NDAA added TSCA section 8(a)(7) which
states that the Administrator shall promulgate a rule in accordance
with this subsection requiring each person who has manufactured a
chemical substance that is a perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl
substance (PFAS) in any year since January 1, 2011, to submit to the
Administrator a report that includes, for each year since January 1,
2011, the information described in subparagraphs (A) through (G) of
paragraph (2). The categories of information described in sections
8(a)(2)(A) through (G) are:
The common or trade name, chemical identity and molecular
structure of each chemical substance or mixture for which a report is
required;
Categories or proposed categories of use for each
substance or mixture;
Total amount of each substance or mixture manufactured or
processed, the amounts manufactured or processed for each category of
use, and reasonable estimates of the respective proposed amounts;
Descriptions of byproducts resulting from the manufacture,
processing, use, or disposal of each substance or mixture;
All existing information concerning the environmental and
health effects of each substance or mixture;
The number of individuals exposed, and reasonable
estimates on the number of individuals who will be exposed, to each
substance or mixture in their places of work and the duration of their
exposure; and
The manner or method of disposal of each substance or
mixture, and any change in such manner or method.
Finally, in carrying out TSCA section 8, section 8(a)(5) requires
EPA, to the extent feasible, to (A) not require unnecessary or
duplicative reporting, (B) minimize compliance costs on small
manufacturers and processors, and (C) apply any reporting obligations
to those persons likely to have information relevant to effective
implementation of TSCA.
C. What did EPA propose?
In the proposed rule, EPA published for the reporting and
recordkeeping requirements for PFAS manufacturers under TSCA section
8(a)(7). EPA proposed to require any entity who had commercially
manufactured a PFAS that is a TSCA chemical substance at any time since
January 1, 2011, to electronically report certain information to EPA
regarding PFAS identity, production volumes, industrial uses,
commercial and consumer uses, byproducts, worker exposure, disposal,
and any existing information related to environmental and health
effects. Such information would be reported for each year since 2011 in
which a covered PFAS was manufactured, to the extent such information
were known to or reasonably ascertainable by the reporter. EPA also
proposed a five-year recordkeeping period following the submission
date.
EPA also proposed the following structural definition of PFAS: per-
and polyfluorinated substances that structurally contain the unit R-
(CF2)-C(F)(R')R''. Both the CF2 and CF moieties
are saturated carbons and none of the R groups (R, R', or R'') can be
hydrogen. Under the proposal, reporting would have been required for
any TSCA chemical substance (including any mixture with a chemical
substance) which met the proposed structural definition and had been
manufactured for a commercial purpose at any time since January 1,
2011.
EPA did not propose any reporting exemptions or production volume
thresholds. The scope of covered chemical substances under the proposed
rule included any amounts of PFAS which were known to or reasonably
ascertainable by the manufacturer, including PFAS-containing articles,
byproducts, and impurities. EPA also did not propose any exemptions or
flexibilities for small manufacturers.
EPA proposed a six-month information collection period following
the effective date of the final rule, after which the reporting tool
would open for a six-month reporting period. Thus, the proposed rule
stipulated a reporting deadline one year from the effective date of the
final rule.
III. Final PFAS Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements
In this unit, EPA discusses in detail the final reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, including changes from the proposed rule in
response to public input.
A. What substances are covered by this rule?
1. The Scope of PFAS for the Purpose of This Rule
Under TSCA section 8(a)(7), EPA must collect information on
chemical substances manufactured (including imported) for commercial
purposes, including chemical substances present in a mixture, that are
``perfluoroalkyl or
[[Page 70518]]
polyfluoroalkyl substances,'' or PFAS. TSCA section 8(a)(7) does not
define or characterize ``PFAS.'' EPA has determined that any TSCA
chemical substance (as that term is defined by TSCA section 3(2); see
Unit IV.A.2.) that falls within the structural definition at 40 CFR
705.3 is subject to reporting under TSCA section 8(a)(7), if it has
been manufactured for commercial purposes in any year since January 1,
2011. The proposed definition defined PFAS as a substance that includes
the following structure: R-(CF2)-C(F)(R')R'', in which both
the CF2 and CF moieties are saturated carbons and none of
the R groups (R, R' or R'') can be hydrogen. EPA found that at least
1,364 substances from both the TSCA Inventory (Inventory) and Low-
Volume Exemption (LVE) claims would meet the proposed structural
definition. Separately, a count of chemicals meeting the proposed
definition on EPA's CompTox Chemicals Dashboard (Ref. 6) found
approximately 9,400 structures, though many of those structures are not
known TSCA chemical substances and would be out of scope of reporting
for this rule, as explained in section III.A.2 of this rule.
EPA determined that a structural definition was more appropriate
for this rule than a discrete list of specifically identified
substances. Other TSCA requirements have relied on a structural
definition when appropriate (e.g., the long-chain perfluoroalkyl
carboxylate (LCPFAC) significant new use rule (SNUR) defines covered
substances using a structural definition (40 CFR 721.10536) (Ref. 7),
and the polymer exemption rule for new chemical pre-manufacture notices
(PMNs) defines covered PFAS polymers using structural definitions (40
CFR 723.250)). Additionally, other scientific and regulatory bodies,
such as the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
(Refs. 8 and 9), have defined PFAS using various structural
definitions. Thus, there is clear precedent for using a structural
definition both for TSCA rules and for actions addressing PFAS, and a
structural definition is consistent with the text of TSCA section
8(a)(7). EPA also determined that limiting the scope of reporting to a
discrete list of chemicals would eliminate reporting on substances of
interest to the Agency. Given various reporting exemptions for both
existing chemicals (e.g., certain byproducts and research and
development (R&D) substances are exempt from reporting in the Chemical
Data Reporting (CDR) rule) and new chemicals (e.g., byproducts and
impurities that are not listed on the Inventory), and with minimum
reporting thresholds under other rules, EPA may be unaware of some TSCA
chemical substances which meet this structural definition of PFAS.
Providing a discrete list based on substances currently on the
Inventory and in LVEs likely limits EPA's ability to capture all
substances that meet the structural definition, and which may present
properties similar to perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid (PFOS), and hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid (HFPO-
DA) and its ammonium salt (popularly known as ``GenX''). Therefore, EPA
is defining PFAS for this TSCA section 8(a)(7) rule using a structural
definition to avoid inadvertently limiting the scope of reporting to
substances on a discrete list.
After reviewing public comments, EPA determined that the proposed
definition may not include all substances for which EPA believes
reporting of information is necessary (see additional discussion of
relevant public comment in Unit IV.A). Therefore, EPA is modifying the
definition of PFAS from the proposal. For the purpose of this TSCA
section 8(a)(7) reporting rule, EPA is defining ``PFAS'' using a
structural definition. PFAS is defined as including at least one of
these three structures:
R-(CF2)-CF(R')R'', where both the
CF2 and CF moieties are saturated carbons;
R-CF2OCF2-R', where R and R' can
either be F, O, or saturated carbons; and
CF3C(CF3)R'R'', where R' and R'' can
either be F or saturated carbons.
Manufacturers of substances that do not meet this structural
definition are not required to report under this rule. EPA is providing
a list of substances that meet this definition, gathered from the
Inventory, LVEs, and the CompTox Chemicals Dashboard; this list will be
available in the CompTox Chemicals Dashboard at https://comptox.epa.gov/dashboard. A substance that is not on this list but
still falls under the definition of a ``chemical substance'' under TSCA
(see Unit III.A.2) is subject to this rule if the substance has been
manufactured for a commercial purpose since 2011.
EPA is modifying the proposed definition first to remove the R
group requirements, resulting in the first sub-structure of this rule's
definition of PFAS (i.e., R-(CF2)-CF(R')R'', where both the
CF2 and CF moieties are saturated carbons). The removal of
the R group requirements from the proposed definition will expand the
universe of PFAS to include additional substances of potential concern
because they are likely to be persistent. While the proposed definition
was developed to focus on substances most likely to be persistent in
the environment while excluding those substances that are ``lightly''
fluorinated (i.e., the molecule only contains unconnected
CF2 or CF3 moieties), EPA acknowledges that
substances that are not fully fluorinated may still be persistent in
the environment. This is because the persistence of organofluoro
compounds is more related to the density of C-F bonds within the
molecule than simply the existence of fully fluorinated carbons (Ref.
10). The final definition, which does not include the proposed
definition's R group requirements focuses the definition on those
substances most likely to persist in the environment. The final
definition does not include substances that only have a single
fluorinated carbon, or unsaturated fluorinated moieties (e.g.,
fluorinated aromatic rings and olefins). The latter set of substances
are more susceptible to chemical transformation than their saturated
counterparts, and therefore, are less likely to persist in the
environment (Ref. 10). EPA has determined that, for the purpose of this
rule, it is unnecessary to extend reporting requirements to substances
that only have a single fluorinated carbon or unsaturated fluorinated
moieties and are therefore less likely to persist in the environment,
unlike substances like PFOA, PFOS, and GenX.
In addition to modifying the proposed definition by removing the R
group requirements, EPA determined that the definition should be
further expanded by adding two sub-structures that will include certain
substances of interest to the Agency and to public commenters.
Furthermore, the additional two sub-structures will encompass other
chemical substances that are persistent in the environment but were not
covered by the proposed definition. The second sub-structure (R-
CF2OCF2-R', where R and R' can either be F, O, or
saturated carbons) aims to capture certain fluorinated ethers. EPA
believes that these ethers are likely to be found in water; for
example, perfluoro-2-methoxyacetic acid (PFMOAA) (Chemical Abstracts
Service Registry Number (CASRN) 674-13-5) and other chemicals with
structures similar to GenX found in the Cape Fear River. However, they
may not have been reported to the Inventory or as an LVE, and therefore
would not have been considered when developing the proposed definition,
which focused on substances in the known TSCA universe
[[Page 70519]]
(i.e., the Inventory and LVEs). Additionally, it is possible that such
substances are not on the Inventory due to TSCA reporting exemptions
(e.g., byproducts, or certain R&D substances). Based on these ethers'
properties and the lack of prior TSCA reporting, EPA believes that data
related to the manufacturing of these PFAS is necessary to carry out
TSCA section 8(a)(7) and would not be duplicative of other reporting.
Thus, EPA is interested in known or reasonably ascertainable
information on substances meeting this sub-structure definition, as it
meets EPA's threshold of focusing on chemicals more likely to exhibit
properties similar to GenX (along with PFOA and PFOS), including their
likely presence in the environment.
Finally, the third sub-structure
(CF3C(CF3)R'R'', where R' and R'' can either be F
or saturated carbons) aims to capture a different type of branching for
highly fluorinated substances that would not meet the proposed
definition due to their non-adjacent fluorinated carbons. These
substances are likely to be persistent, and EPA believes that reporting
for these more branched substances is necessary to collect the
information described in TSCA section 8(a)(2)(A)-(G) for substances
with similar persistence properties as PFOA, PFOS, or GenX. For
instance, 4,4,4-Trifluoro-2,2,3,3-tetra)kis(trifluoromethyl)butanoic
acid (CASRN 1882109-62-7) would not have met the proposed definition
due to its non-adjacent fluorinated carbons, but it has the same number
of carbon, fluorine, and oxygen atoms as PFOA, and has been identified
as an isomer of PFOA under the Stockholm Convention (Ref. 11). Further,
this substance, like other substances meeting this sub-structure, has
many highly fluorinated moieties such that EPA believes it is likely to
be persistent in the environment. EPA is interested in known or
reasonably ascertainable information on substances meeting this sub-
structure definition, as these chemicals are likely to persist in
environments to which they are released.
Under this rule's definition of PFAS, EPA identified additional
substances that may be subject to the rule from the Inventory and LVEs,
i.e., ``known TSCA chemical substances.'' Specifically, EPA identified
an additional 22 chemical substances on the Inventory and 19 LVEs, all
of which are now covered under the first sub-structure of this rule's
definition. To date, EPA has not identified any additional substances
on the Inventory or as an LVE under the second and third sub-
structures. This relatively modest increase of 41 known TSCA chemical
substances would bring the known universe of TSCA chemical substances
meeting this rule's definition of PFAS to 1,462, from 1,364 known TSCA
PFAS identified by the proposed definition. However, as discussed
previously, a substance's absence on the Inventory or LVEs may be due,
at least in part, to several exemptions for Inventory and new chemicals
reporting (e.g., byproducts, impurities, certain R&D substances). In
the absence of those exemptions, a PFAS meeting the definition under
TSCA section 3(2) may be subject to reporting under this rule.
EPA is also affirming that fluoropolymers which meet this rule's
definition of PFAS are reportable under this rule; this includes higher
molecular weight fluoropolymers. EPA does not believe the requested
data on fluoropolymers would be considered duplicative or unnecessary:
this information is not reported to EPA otherwise, and any
manufacturers' existing information on such fluoropolymers will inform
EPA's understanding of such types of PFAS within U.S. commerce,
including their downstream uses and their disposal methods.
EPA notes that this definition may not be identical to other
definitions of PFAS used within EPA and/or by other organizations. The
term ``PFAS'' has been used broadly by many organizations for their
individual research and/or regulatory needs. Various programs or
organizations have distinct needs or purposes apart from this TSCA
section 8(a)(7) reporting rule, and therefore, different definitions of
the term ``PFAS'' may be appropriate for other purposes. The Agency
notes that this perspective, that different users may have very
different needs and no single PFAS characterization or definition meets
all needs, is shared by many other organizations, including OECD (see
page 29, Ref. 8). EPA has determined the final definition of ``PFAS''
is the most appropriate definition for this TSCA section 8(a)(7) rule
and acknowledges that there may be other rules or programs who apply
different definitions to meet their own needs.
2. Definition of ``Chemical Substance'' Under TSCA and PFAS in Mixtures
This rule is limited to manufacturers (including importers) of PFAS
that are considered a ``chemical substance.'' Under TSCA section 3(2),
``chemical substance'' means any organic or inorganic substance of a
particular molecular identity, including: (1) Any combination of such
substances occurring in whole or in part as a result of a chemical
reaction or occurring in nature, and (2) Any element or uncombined
radical. This rule does not require reporting on activities that are
excluded from the definition of ``chemical substance'' in TSCA section
3(2)(B).
Even though the definition of chemical substance excludes mixtures,
PFAS as a chemical substance may be present in a mixture. Therefore,
this rule requires reporting on each chemical substance that is a PFAS,
including as a component of a mixture. This rule does not require
reporting on components of a mixture that do not fall under the
structural definition of PFAS, as explained in Unit III.A.1.
B. Which entities are covered by this rule?
1. Scope of Covered Entities
Anyone who has manufactured (including imported) a PFAS for a
commercial purpose in any year since January 1, 2011, is covered by
this rule. As noted in Unit III.B.2, ``manufacture for a commercial
purpose'' includes the coincidental manufacture of PFAS as byproducts
or impurities. EPA believes at least portions of the NAICS codes listed
in Unit I.A. may be covered by this rule. This rule extends to
manufacturers (including importers) only. Importers of PFAS in articles
are considered PFAS manufacturers.
Persons who have only processed, distributed in commerce, used,
and/or disposed of PFAS are not required to report under this rule,
unless they also have manufactured PFAS for a commercial purpose. If an
entity (such as a wastewater treatment plant) is simply processing PFAS
they received domestically, and not also manufacturing PFAS, including
as a byproduct, then the entity is not covered by this rule. Although
EPA received several public comments about extending the rule to cover
processors (see Unit IV.), TSCA section 8(a)(7) only refers to
manufacturers and expanding the rule to processors would be pursuant to
EPA's separate rulemaking authority at TSCA section 8(a)(1), which the
Agency is not pursuing at this time.
2. Scope of ``Manufacture for Commercial Purposes''
Pursuant to TSCA section 8(f), the scope of ``manufacturing'' for
the purposes of this rule is limited to entities manufacturing for a
commercial purpose. EPA is defining ``manufacture for commercial
purposes'' to align with definitions used in other rules. Specifically,
``manufacture for
[[Page 70520]]
commercial purposes'' includes the import, production, or manufacturing
of a chemical substance or mixture containing a chemical substance with
the purpose of obtaining an immediate or eventual commercial advantage
for the manufacturer. This includes, but is not limited to, the
manufacture of chemical substances or mixtures for commercial
distribution, including test marketing, or for use by the manufacturer
itself as an intermediate or for product research and development.
``Manufacture for commercial purposes'' also includes the coincidental
manufacture of byproducts and impurities that are produced during the
manufacture, processing, use, or disposal of another chemical substance
or mixture. As described in Unit III.B.1, simply receiving PFAS from
domestic suppliers or other domestic sources is not, in itself,
considered manufacturing PFAS for commercial purposes. Entities that
process and/or use PFAS only need to report on PFAS they have
manufactured (including imported), if any.
However, certain activities are not considered ``manufacture for
commercial purposes'' under TSCA section 8(f) (e.g., non-commercial R&D
activities such as scientific experimentation, research, or analysis
conducted by academic, government, or independent not-for-profit
research organizations, unless the activity is for eventual commercial
purposes) and are not subject to the reporting requirements in this
rule. For example, reporting would not be required for a Federal agency
which manufactures or imports PFAS when it is not for any immediate or
eventual commercial advantage.
3. Non-Reportable Activities
As discussed in Unit III.B.2, entities who have manufactured PFAS
for a commercial purpose include those who have imported PFAS
(including in wastes), or those who have coincidentally produced PFAS
during the manufacture, processing, use, or disposal of another
chemical substance or mixture. EPA noted in the proposed rule that this
may include certain waste management companies, if they have imported
PFAS in a waste or produced PFAS at their site during the disposal of
another chemical substance or mixture. Through public comments and
input during the SBAR Panel, EPA understands that entities engaged in
certain waste management activities are in the unique position of not
having knowledge of PFAS they may have manufactured for commercial
purposes. Entities that import municipal solid wastes (MSW) for the
purpose of disposal or destruction cannot know or reasonably ascertain
that they imported PFAS in the MSW streams. MSW streams are
heterogeneous and generally difficult to characterize, in the absence
of notification or labeling requirements related to the content of the
waste. There were no Federal labeling or notification requirements for
PFAS in wastes concurrent with this reporting period, nor are there
general labeling practices for PFAS in MSW streams that are sent for
disposal or destruction. Additionally, standard analytical methods for
PFAS in MSW streams were not available during this reporting period.
Because no PFAS was listed as a hazardous waste and subject to
notification requirements under the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) or other Federal laws during this rule's lookback period
(i.e., since January 1, 2011), and due to general industry practices,
EPA understands that importers of MSW streams for disposal or
destruction would not have any records or data that they had imported
PFAS or any other information relevant to TSCA section 8(a)(7).
Therefore, EPA has determined that waste management activities
involving importing municipal solid waste streams for the purpose of
disposal or destruction are not within scope of this rule's reporting
requirements, per EPA's obligations under TSCA section 8(a)(5)(C).
However, EPA is not broadly exempting all waste management
facilities from this rule. Facilities that have imported waste
containing PFAS, other than in MSW streams for destruction or disposal,
are likely to have information relevant to this rule. Other waste
management sites may have relevant information regarding PFAS contents
in waste they have imported outside of MSW, or for the purpose of
recycle or reuse; thus, EPA is required to apply reporting requirements
to such entities who may have relevant information, pursuant to TSCA
section 8(a)(5)(C). This would include waste management sites who
import PFAS-containing waste (including in MSW) for the purpose of
recycling or reuse for PFAS-containing products, as well as waste
management sites who import PFAS in wastes that are not municipal solid
waste streams. In the former activity, entities who import wastes that
may contain PFAS, such as some carpets and rugs, for the purpose of
recycling or reusing the PFAS-containing material, may be aware of the
general nature of those materials and the downstream processing and use
information that is responsive to this rule (see Table 14, Ref. 12). In
the latter activity, importers of PFAS-containing wastes that are not
MSW (such as industrial wastes) may also have knowledge of the contents
of the waste they have imported due to labeling or notification
practices, including under international agreements affecting
transboundary movement of wastes (Ref. 13). Because certain importers
of waste (besides MSW that is imported for the purpose of disposal or
destruction) are anticipated to know or reasonably ascertain that they
have manufactured PFAS, EPA is extending reporting requirements to
manufacturers (including importers) of PFAS in wastes, unless they have
imported PFAS in municipal solid waste streams for the purpose of
disposal or destruction.
C. What is the reporting standard of this rule?
For the purpose of this rule, the reporting standard is information
known to or reasonably ascertainable by the manufacturer, which is the
standard used in other TSCA section 8 rules, including CDR since 2011
(see TSCA section 8(a)(2)). ``Known to or reasonably ascertainable by''
is defined to include ``all information in a person's possession or
control, plus all information that a reasonable person similarly
situated might be expected to possess, control, or know'' (40 CFR
704.3). This reporting standard requires reporting entities to evaluate
their current level of knowledge of their manufactured products
(including imports), as well as evaluate whether there is additional
information that a reasonable person, similarly situated, would be
expected to know, possess, or control. This standard carries with it an
exercise of due diligence, and the information-gathering activities
that may be necessary for manufacturers to achieve this reporting
standard may vary from case-to-case.
This standard would require that submitters conduct a reasonable
inquiry within the full scope of their organization (not just the
information known to managerial or supervisory employees). This
standard may also entail inquiries outside the organization to fill
gaps in the submitter's knowledge. Such activities may, though not
necessarily, include phone calls or email inquiries to upstream
suppliers or downstream users or employees or other agents of the
manufacturer, including persons involved in the research and
development, import or production, or marketing of the PFAS. Examples
of types of information that are considered to be in a manufacturer's
possession or
[[Page 70521]]
control, or that a reasonable person similarly situated might be
expected to possess, control, or know include: files maintained by the
manufacturer such as marketing studies, sales reports, or customer
surveys; information contained in standard references showing use
information or concentrations of chemical substances in mixtures, such
as a Safety Data Sheet (SDS) or a supplier notification; and
information from the CAS or from Dun & Bradstreet (D-U-N-S). However,
if particular information cannot be derived or reasonably estimated
without conducting further customer surveys (i.e., without sending a
comprehensive set of identical questions to multiple customers), it
would not be ``reasonably ascertainable'' to the submitter. Thus, there
is not a need to conduct new surveys for purposes of this rule. As
described previously, however, existing survey data may nevertheless be
``known to'' the organization. This information may also include
documented knowledge gained through discussions, conferences, and
technical publications. In addition, this is the same reporting
standard employed in the TSCA section 8(a) CDR rule (40 CFR 711.15). In
response to public comments and input received through the SBAR Panel,
EPA has also created additional compliance guidance related to this
reporting standard, including for small entities and for article
importers (Ref. 14). Therefore, EPA anticipates many reporters under
this rule are familiar with this reporting standard, and resources are
available to support those reporters who may not be familiar with the
standard.
In the event that a manufacturer (including importer) does not have
actual data (e.g., measurements or monitoring data) to report to EPA,
the manufacturer (including importer) should consider whether
``reasonable estimates'' of such information are ascertainable.
``Reasonable estimates'' may rely, for example, on approaches such as
mass balance calculations, emissions factors, or best engineering
judgment. EPA notes that many of the data elements requested under this
rule, including production volumes or environmental release volumes,
incorporate a level of estimation by requiring only two significant
figures. Other data elements, including worker exposure, are reported
as ranges, as with CDR. For instance, a manufacturer may be able to
estimate the range of number of workers reasonably likely to be exposed
for each commercial use based on the manufacturer's knowledge of the
commercial sites' sizes, without specific workplace monitoring data;
the manufacturer, would report the estimated range, rather than
reporting that the information is not known. In general, EPA believes
that industry possesses a greater knowledge than EPA about its own
supply chain and operations related to the chemical substances it
manufactures and the downstream uses, even if they do not control their
customers' sites. However, if manufacturers do not know nor can
reasonably make estimates for certain data elements, except for
production volumes, they may indicate such information is ``Not Known
or Reasonably Ascertainable'' (NKRA) to them in lieu of the requested
estimate or range. For instance, if a manufacturer does not know and
cannot reasonably ascertain (including, having no basis for a
reasonable estimate or assumption based on past experiences for the
same or similar substances) how a PFAS is disposed of as a waste in a
given year, the manufacturer may submit ``NKRA'' for that information.
Reporters are also advised that ``NKRA'' designations cannot be claimed
as CBI under TSCA section 14. Reporting NKRA should only happen when
data are truly not reasonably ascertainable or are unattainable (e.g.,
when the appropriate recordkeeping period has lapsed and a past record
is no longer available).
EPA has published reporting instructions and a Small Entity
Compliance Guide, which include information related to this reporting
standard and the activities that small entities, including article
importers, may take to meet the due diligence requirement (Ref. 14).
If, after conducting due diligence and reviewing known or
reasonably ascertainable existing information, a manufacturer,
particularly an importer of articles containing PFAS, may not have
knowledge that they have manufactured or imported PFAS and thus need
not report under this rule. EPA encourages such an entity to document
its activities to provide evidence of due diligence. Additionally,
consistent with their own business practices, companies may elect to
retain documentation of their conclusion that they were not subject to
reporting requirements.
D. What information must be reported under this rule?
1. General Reporting Form
EPA is requiring that PFAS manufacturers submit the following
information for each PFAS, for each year in which that substance was
manufactured since January 1, 2011, to the extent the information is
known or reasonably ascertainable. For the purposes of this rule, EPA
is requiring this information to be submitted for each chemical
substance that is a PFAS. For mixtures that contain at least one
chemical substance that is a PFAS, manufacturers must submit
information for each chemical substance in the mixture that is a PFAS.
For example, a mixture comprised of PFAS A and PFAS B would result in
the submission of two forms containing the information described later
in this unit for each PFAS. For chemical substances of unknown or
variable compositions, complex reaction products, and biological
materials (UVCBs), including polymers, a single form may be submitted
for that UVCB. EPA encourages submitters of mixtures and UVCBs that
contain PFAS to provide additional information in the optional free
text box related to the composition of that mixture or UVCB at the time
of manufacture, if known.
EPA is largely finalizing the proposed reporting requirements, with
a few modifications based on public comments. Changes to the proposed
requirements include: removing the requirements for reporting maximum
production volume in the first 12 months and maximum yearly production
volume in any 3 years; removing the requirement for reporting the
maximum quantity on-site at any time (including storage); modifying the
requirement to submit the molecular structure for each substance by
making the submission optional for any Class 1 chemical substance on
the Inventory (but required for all others); requiring submitters to
provide a generic name or description (which indicates, at least, that
the substance is fluorinated) in lieu of the specific chemical identity
or trade name when neither are known; reporting analytical methods, if
any; adding optional comment boxes to provide any additional
information or clarification to EPA.
A spreadsheet containing the reporting requirements is also
available in the docket (Ref. 15).
2. Streamlined Reporting Form Option for Article Importers
Article importers are not exempt from this rule. Given the
reporting exemptions in other TSCA reporting rules, exempting imported
articles from the scope of this TSCA section 8(a)(7) reporting rule
would perpetuate data gaps in EPA's level of knowledge related to PFAS
manufactured for a commercial purpose since 2011. EPA cannot know what
requested information is ``reasonably ascertainable'' to all article
[[Page 70522]]
importers without knowing the full range of potentially available
information to be reported. Thus, EPA does not otherwise have the
information outlined in TSCA section 8(a)(7) on PFAS within imported
articles, and the Agency cannot justify a broad exemption of imported
articles under TSCA section 8(a)(5)(A), which requires EPA, to the
extent feasible, to not require unnecessary or duplicative reporting.
However, after considering public input on the information that may be
known to or reasonably ascertainable by some PFAS article importers,
EPA is finalizing a reporting option for article importers to provide
data to EPA on a streamlined form, if they do not know or cannot
reasonably ascertain information requested on the longer standard form
described in Unit III.D.1.
If an article importer determines they have imported a covered
substance in an article, they would have the option to provide
information to EPA through the streamlined form. The information
requested through this streamlined form would still include chemical
identity, processing and use information, and production volume, as
well as the option to provide any additional information to EPA that
the entity may have (e.g., SDS, disposal information).
The production volume requested is the volume of the imported
article, rather than the PFAS. EPA believes it is more likely that an
article importer is able to determine the total imported production
volume of articles rather than the volume related to just the PFAS
contained within the article. For instance, an article importer may
submit as the production volume the total weight of the PFAS-containing
imported articles (e.g., in tons or pounds). Alternatively, the article
importer could report the production volume in terms of quantity of the
article imported (e.g., number of vehicles). The reporter would also be
required to specify the unit of measurement reflected in the imported
production volume. Based on information provided from article importers
during the public comment period and the SBAR Panel, EPA believes that
many article importers would have more difficulty providing precise
production volumes of just the PFAS within an article. Industry input
indicated that the historical documentation provided to article
importers would not always or reliably include the weight or
concentration of a PFAS contained in the article, making it more
difficult for article importers to precisely calculate the production
volume of just the PFAS contained within the article. Based on public
input on the historical reporting practices and knowledge of PFAS in
imported articles, and the fact that this rule is not a product testing
requirement, EPA believes that article importers are more easily able
to determine the imported production volume of the article itself. EPA
acknowledges that it would be preferable to have the production volume
of the chemical itself, though having the production volume of the
imported article would still confer meaningful information to EPA for
the purpose of chemical assessments under TSCA and other programs.
Because EPA would rather have data on the production volume of the
imported article, rather than many ``NKRA'' responses related to the
production volume of the PFAS itself, EPA is requiring article
importers to submit the production volume information on the whole
article rather than the PFAS contained within the article.
The streamlined article importer form would require the following
information to the extent it is known or reasonably ascertainable:
1. Chemical identity:
a. Specific chemical name, or
b. Generic name(s) or description(s) if the specific chemical
name(s) is claimed as CBI and/or when a manufacturer knows they have a
PFAS but is unaware of its specific chemical identity. A generic name
must meet the naming requirements for this rule and indicate the
substance is a fluorinated substance (i.e., contain ``fluor'').
2. Chemical identification number:
a. CASRN, or
b. Accession or LVE case number, if applicable, and if the specific
CASRN is unknown. EPA notes that this rule does not require
manufacturers to obtain a CASRN or other identifier for a substance
without such a number for the purpose of complying with this rule.
3. Trade name or common name, if applicable.
4. Representative molecular structure, for any PFAS that is not a
Class 1 substance on the Inventory. And optional free text for further
clarification on the chemical identity or molecular structure (such as
for Class 2 substances, or where the molecular structure is of unknown
or variable composition).
5. Import production volume of the imported article and the unit of
measurement for that production volume (e.g., quantity of the imported
article, pounds, tons).
6. Industrial processing and use:
a. Type of process or use;
b. Sector(s);
c. Functional use category(ies); and
d. Percent of production volume for each use.
7. Consumer and commercial use:
a. indicator for whether this is a consumer and/or commercial
product;
b. Product category;
c. Functional use category(ies);
d. Percent production volume for each use;
e. Maximum concentration in any product;
f. Indicator for use in products intended for children;
g. Indicator for imported but never physically at site; and
h. Any optional information the article importer wishes to provide.
Under TSCA section 8(a)(5)(C), EPA must, to the extent feasible,
``apply any reporting obligations to those persons likely to have
information relevant to the effective implementation of [TSCA].'' EPA
believes that this streamlined reporting form option for any article
importer would still provide necessary information to EPA under TSCA
section 8(a)(7), while reducing the reporting burden for the data
elements that EPA understands may not be known to or reasonably
ascertainable by article importers. However, to the extent any
additional information requested on the longer forms is known to or
reasonably ascertainable by the article importer (e.g., information on
disposal of that PFAS, or an SDS or other existing information
regarding environmental or health effects), the reporter would have the
option and ability to submit that information to EPA through the
``optional'' field. EPA also notes that it is possible that a
manufacturer both imports a PFAS within an article, and otherwise
manufactures (including imports) the same PFAS beyond an article. In
such scenarios, the reporter would still have to provide information on
the longer standard form for the non-imported article and would have
the option to report on the PFAS within the imported article either on
the streamlined form or within the longer standard form. The reporting
tool for this rule will enable multiple form options for the same PFAS
if appropriate.
3. Streamlined Reporting Form Option for R&D Substances Manufactured
Below 10 Kilograms
EPA is also including R&D substances that were manufactured,
including imported, for a commercial purpose within the scope of this
rule. EPA notes that the scope of ``manufacture for commercial
purposes'' encompasses any importing, production, or other
manufacturing activities with the purpose of obtaining an immediate or
eventual commercial advantage and includes chemicals ``for use by the
[[Page 70523]]
manufacturer, including use for product research and development'' (40
CFR 704.3). R&D substances which meet the scope of ``manufacture for
commercial purposes'' must be reported under this rule, even if the
PFAS itself was not later commercialized. However, R&D substances which
have not been manufactured for commercial purposes (such as for
scientific experimentation, research, or analysis conducted by
academic, government, or independent not-for-profit research
institutions, unless the activity is for eventual commercial purposes)
would not be within scope of this rule (40 CFR 720.30(i)).
EPA believes that the submission of information related to the
commercial manufacture of PFAS as R&D substances is necessary to
understand the scope of PFAS manufactured in the United States. With
existing R&D reporting exemptions under other TSCA rules (including CDR
and PMN submissions), EPA does not have a dataset of PFAS manufactured
as R&D substances. Therefore, reporting on such substances is necessary
to the effective implementation of TSCA. Further, EPA understands that
manufacturers of R&D substances that have been exempt under other
reporting rules should have certain documentation available to support
those exemption claims, in accordance with their recordkeeping
requirements.
However, EPA understands through input from public commenters and
the SBAR Panel that much of the information requested for this rule is
unknown and not reasonably ascertainable to manufacturers of R&D
substances, particularly small entities who may manufacture R&D
substances in small quantities. EPA believes that manufacturers of R&D
substances in such low quantities are likely to have manufactured those
substances purely for laboratory analytical purposes, which may be at
their own site or their customers' sites. As such, these manufacturers
are aware of the R&D chemical identity and production volume but are
unlikely to have any other information requested. However, EPA believes
that manufacturers of R&D chemicals manufactured in larger quantities
(i.e., greater than 10 kilograms per year) are more likely to have the
other information requested, including worker exposure information,
disposal information, and health or environmental effects information
(such as monitoring or toxicity data). Given EPA's understanding of
typical recordkeeping practices of R&D activities, it is likely that a
manufacturer with greater quantities of R&D substances would know the
requested information on those substances beyond their identities and
production volumes. Under TSCA section 8(a)(5)(C), EPA shall, to the
extent feasible, apply reporting requirements to those persons likely
to have relevant information. Therefore, EPA is providing another
streamlined reporting option to manufacturers of R&D substances that
were manufactured in volumes under 10 kilograms per year, if they do
not know or cannot reasonably ascertain information requested on the
longer standard form described in Unit III.D.1.
Information requested on this form, for each R&D PFAS manufactured
below 10 kilograms per year, will include the following to the extent
it is known or reasonably ascertainable:
1. Chemical identity:
a. Specific chemical name, or
b. Generic name(s) or description(s) if the chemical name(s) is
claimed as CBI and/or when a manufacturer knows they have a PFAS but is
unaware of its specific chemical identity. A generic name must meet the
naming requirements for this rule and indicate the substance is a
fluorinated substance (i.e., contain ``fluor'').
2. Chemical identification number:
a. CASRN, or
b. TSCA Accession Number or LVE case number, if applicable, and if
the specific CASRN is unknown. EPA notes that this rule does not
require manufacturers to obtain a CASRN or other identifier for a
substance without such a number for the purpose of complying with this
rule.
3. Trade name or common name, if applicable.
4. Representative molecular structure, for any PFAS that is not a
Class 1 substance on the Inventory. With optional free text for further
clarification on the chemical identity or molecular structure (such as
for Class 2 substances, or where the molecular structure is of unknown
or variable composition).
5. Production volume:
a. Domestically manufactured.
b. Imported.
6. Indicator for imported but never physically at site.
7. Any optional information the manufacturer wishes to provide.
EPA believes that this streamlined reporting form option for any
manufacturer of R&D substances in low volumes (i.e., below 10 kilograms
per year) would still provide necessary information to EPA under TSCA
section 8(a)(7), while minimizing the cost of compliance for certain
small manufacturers, consistent with TSCA section 8(a)(5), for the data
elements that EPA understands may not be known to or reasonably
ascertainable by such manufacturers. However, to the extent any
additional information requested on the longer forms is known to or
reasonably ascertainable by the manufacturer (e.g., information on
disposal of that PFAS, or existing information regarding environmental
or health effects), the manufacturer would be required to submit that
information to EPA through the ``optional'' field on the streamlined
reporting form.
E. What must be submitted as ``all existing information concerning the
environmental and health effects'' of a chemical substance?
Pursuant to TSCA section 8(a)(2)(E), EPA is requiring the
submission of ``all existing information concerning the environmental
and health effects'' of the chemical substances covered by this rule.
``All existing information concerning environmental and health
effects'' is defined as ``any information of any effect of a chemical
substance or mixture on health or the environment or both'' (to be
codified at 40 CFR 705.3) and is intended to be interpreted broadly.
The scope of ``all existing information concerning environmental and
health effects'' includes all health and safety studies but is not
limited to formal studies. Chemical identity is always part of a health
and safety study, and TSCA section 14(b) limits the extent to which
health and safety studies and information from studies may be withheld
from the public as confidential business information (CBI). Any
information that bears on the effects of a PFAS on human health or the
environment would be included, including information on the chemical
substance developed or generated prior to the year 2011. The codified
definition of ``all existing information concerning environmental and
health effects'' at 40 CFR 705.3 provides non-exhaustive examples, such
as:
Toxicity information (e.g., long- and short-term tests of
mutagenicity, carcinogenicity, teratogenicity; pharmacological effects;
acute, subchronic, and chronic effects);
Ecological or other environmental effects on fish,
invertebrates, or other animals and plants, such as bioconcentration or
bioaccumulation tests;
Human and environmental exposure assessments, including
workplace exposure, and the impacts of a chemical substance or mixture
on the environment; and
Other data relevant to environmental and health effects
including monitoring data to measure the exposure of humans or the
[[Page 70524]]
environment or a chemical substance, range-finding studies, preliminary
studies, adverse effects reports, and any information, including
medical screening or surveillance, such as under the American
Conference of Government Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH).
Following public comments, EPA is also clarifying that the scope of
``all existing information concerning environmental and health
effects'' is information in the submitter's possession or control. For
the purpose of requiring existing information related to health or
environmental effects, EPA is adopting the same definition of
``possession or control'' as in the TSCA Pre-Manufacture Notice (PMN)
regulations (40 CFR 720.3(y)). Thus, a PFAS manufacturer would not
necessarily be searching all information in the public realm but would
be submitting information in their possession or control, or other
information for which they are responsible. This includes any data or
other information in files maintained by the submitter's employees, or
the employees of a submitter's subsidiary or partnership which is
associated with research and development, test marketing or commercial
marketing of the PFAS, regardless of the publication status. EPA is not
requiring manufacturers to search open scientific literature to find
relevant information on a PFAS that was previously not in their
possession or control for the purpose of this rule. EPA believes that
implementing such a requirement may result in duplicative information,
if multiple PFAS manufacturers are submitting the same studies or other
information that are available publicly (including in EPA's scientific
literature databases).
EPA considered ways to avoid requiring the submission of
potentially duplicative information concerning health and environmental
effects (see TSCA section 8(a)(5)(A)), while still fulfilling EPA's
obligation under TSCA section 8(a)(7) to require reporting of such
information. Such information concerning environmental or health
effects may have been submitted to EPA previously under either TSCA
section 8(d) rules (as unpublished health and safety information) or
TSCA section 8(e) (as a substantial risk notice). If a reporter has
already submitted information concerning environmental or health
effects to EPA under specific TSCA submissions, they need not re-submit
that information if they provide the details of to which program (or
under which rule) that information was submitted and in which year
(e.g., TSCA section 8(e), in 2010). In the event of a reporter having
previously submitted relevant environmental and health effects
information, the reporter must ensure that the previous submission
included all existing underlying information, including test data. Note
that a previous submission of information concerning environmental or
health effects does not relieve a manufacturer of providing all
existing information concerning environmental or health effects that
has not previously been submitted to EPA. See Unit III.F for more
discussion on how EPA is mitigating potentially duplicative reporting
for this rule.
For environmental and health effects information that was
previously submitted to EPA as CBI, the reporter would need to resubmit
if that information predated the 2016 Lautenberg Act amending TSCA and
its CBI submission requirements and reassert the CBI claim (see
Sec. Sec. 705.22(f) and 705.30). If a reporter has submitted
environmental and health effects information as CBI since the 2016
Lautenberg Amendments to TSCA were implemented, then the manufacturer
must provide EPA with details regarding when, how, and under which
title and/or statutory authority the CBI claim was submitted, and the
TSCA section 14 certification. In order for a reporter to earn an
exemption from resubmitting that environmental and health effects
information and re-asserting a CBI claim, the reporter must be able to
point to a previous claim that adequately covers the current claim. In
any event of a reporter having previously submitted environmental or
health effects information as CBI, whether pre- or post-Lautenberg
Amendments, they must adequately substantiate their CBI claim. EPA
encourages all reporters who have previously submitted environmental or
health effects information as CBI to carefully review their previous
submissions and determine whether the previous claims satisfy current
CBI substantiation requirements, and to assert a new claim and
substantiate if appropriate. More discussion on submitting CBI under
this rule is in Unit III.G.
Additionally, EPA is finalizing the requirement to submit all
existing information concerning health and environmental effects in the
format of OECD-harmonized templates, where such templates exist for the
type of data (to be codified at 40 CFR 705.15(f)). OECD templates are
accessible to the public online at https://oecd.org/ehs/templates/harmonised-templates.htm (Ref. 16). This can be accomplished by using
the freely available IUCLID6 software by exporting the dossier in the
OECD Harmonized Template working context. At the time of this rule
publication, EPA can accept any dossiers generated using any version of
IUCLID6. Users should refer to EPA web pages (to be identified) for
updates on which version of IUCLID files will be accepted.
A standardized format such as the OECD templates will improve the
efficiency of review and organization of the submitted data. EPA
believes that some of the data will already be available as an OECD
template if the company had already submitted the studies under the
European Union's Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and
Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) regulation (Ref. 16). In addition to
the required template format, those subject to this rulemaking must
submit any associated full study reports or underlying data as support
documents. The full study reports and support documents are necessary
for EPA to understand the full context and evaluate the quality of the
data, which is necessary for the Agency to review to determine whether
such data may be used for any future Agency actions.
If an OECD-harmonized template is not available for a particular
endpoint for which the manufacturer has relevant information, then the
manufacturer must still submit the data. Such information may include,
but is not limited to, raw monitoring data (regardless of having been
aggregated or analyzed) of human or environmental exposure assessments
and toxicity tests for either human health effects or ecological other
environmental effects.
F. What steps is the Agency taking to reduce potentially
``duplicative'' reporting? Does information need to be reported on the
basis that it has already been reported to the Agency?
TSCA section 8(a)(5)(A) requires EPA, to the extent feasible when
carrying out TSCA section 8, to avoid requiring unnecessary or
duplicative reporting. The Agency seeks to avoid collecting data on
PFAS that would duplicate information already reported to the Agency,
while ensuring EPA obtains all data required to be collected under TSCA
section 8(a)(7) and that such data are submitted in a format that is
conducive to the collection and review of a manufactured PFAS dataset.
While developing this rule, EPA reviewed the data elements submitted
under the CDR Rule to evaluate whether there may be some overlap with
the information requested under this rule. Through internal review, and
from input received
[[Page 70525]]
during the public comment periods and the SBAR Panel, the Agency has
identified the following data elements that may have some overlap with
CDR requirements:
Physical state of the chemical or mixture;
Production volume (domestically manufactured);
Production volume (imported);
Volume directly exported;
Indicator for imported but never physically at site;
Industrial processing and use type, sector(s), functional
category(ies), and percent of production volume for each use;
Consumer and/or commercial indicator, product
category(ies), functional category(ies), percent of production volume
for each use, indicator for use in products intended for children, and
maximum concentration in the product; and
Number of workers reasonably likely to be exposed for each
combination of industrial processing or use operation, sector, and
function, and the number of commercial workers reasonably likely to be
exposed if the PFAS is contained in a commercial product.
However, EPA notes that even though there are some potentially
overlapping data elements between this rule and CDR, any duplication of
reporting requirements is likely to be narrower in scope. For instance,
CDR is limited to chemical substances on the Inventory. In contrast,
the reporting requirements in this rule extend beyond chemicals on the
Inventory and may cover chemicals subject to LVEs, byproducts, and
other chemicals that may not have been reported on or added to the
Inventory. In addition, CDR has a reporting threshold of 25,000 pounds
(or 2,500 pounds for chemicals subject to certain TSCA actions), along
with several reporting exemptions, including for imported articles,
certain byproducts, non-isolated intermediates, and small quantities of
R&D substances, while this reporting rule does not incorporate any such
thresholds or exemptions. Finally, while this rule requests the same
data to be submitted for each year in which a PFAS has been
manufactured since 2011, CDR requires different information to be
submitted in different years: for instance, reporters submit the total
annual domestically manufactured production volume and the total annual
imported volume separately only for the principal reporting year (e.g.,
2019 for the 2020 reporting cycle), but only the combined total annual
production volume is required reporting for the intervening years.
Additionally, the CDR rule has been amended over the course of this
reporting period, meaning certain data elements were not requested or
submitted for all CDR cycles overlapping this rule's lookback period.
Specifically, the CDR industrial processing and use codes and consumer/
commercial processing and use codes did not align with the OECD-
harmonized use codes until the 2020 reporting cycle. While CDR
submitters may have provided certain processing and use information
related to PFAS they manufactured during previous CDR cycles, any CDR
responses that do not sufficiently respond to this data call by
providing the required OECD codes would not be duplicative of the
information being reported under this rule. Therefore, while some data
elements of this rule may be considered duplicative of CDR
requirements, differences between CDR and this rule's requirements
(including reporting thresholds and reporting exemptions) may limit the
scope of what is duplicative and duplicative information does not need
to be re-reported for this rule. If the previous submission for the
same data element under a different reporting rule was not accurate for
purposes of this rule (e.g., by not reporting volumes related to an
activity exemption that does not apply to this rule, or by reporting
industrial processing and use information that does not align with the
OECD-harmonized use codes required under this rule), then the submitter
must report the accurate information and cannot rely on their prior
submission to satisfy this rule's requirements.
Beyond the CDR rule, some commenters and participants in the SBAR
Panel suggested that other information requested under this rule may
have been reported to EPA through a TSCA section 8(d) rule. Under TSCA
section 8(d), EPA has the authority to request unpublished health and
safety data studies, or lists of such studies, known to or reasonably
ascertainable by manufacturers, processors, and distributors of certain
chemical substances or mixtures. Commenters suggested that some
``existing environmental and health effects information'' on PFAS may
have already been submitted to EPA through a TSCA section 8(d) rule and
would be duplicative of information requested under this rule.
While EPA agrees that any previous submissions of unpublished
studies under TSCA section 8(d) need not be resubmitted under this TSCA
section 8(a)(7) rule, EPA does not anticipate that there will be much
overlap between information requested under this rule and information
that may have already been submitted through the reporting requirements
related to the TSCA section 8(d) rule codified in 40 CFR part 716.
First, only a few substances already listed in a section 8(d) rule
would meet this rule's definition of PFAS; out of the many examples of
PFAS, only oxirane, 2-(2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,7-tridecafluoroheptyl)-
(CASRN 38565-52-5), hexane, 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,6-
tetradecafluoro- (CASRN 355-42-0), and 1-butanamine, 1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,4-
nonafluoro-N,N-bis(1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,4-nonafluorobutyl)- (CASRN 311-89-7)
are listed as PFAS, which can be found in 40 CFR 716. Secondly, the
substances which are listed in 40 CFR part 716 have sunset dates, or
reporting deadlines. The PFAS that have previously been listed in a
section 8(d) rule have sunset dates between 1988 and 1995; therefore,
potentially duplicative section 8(d) reporting stops decades short of
the scope of reporting for this rule (40 CFR 716) (53 FR 38645,
September 30, 1988 (FRL-3439-9)). Finally, the scope of ``unpublished
health and safety studies'' requested under a TSCA section 8(d) rule
may not be as inclusive as the scope of ``all existing information
concerning the environmental and health effects'' requested for the
substances under this TSCA section 8(a)(7) rule. This rule's scope of
all existing information concerning environmental and health effects is
intended to be broadly interpreted and is inclusive of any health and
safety study, regardless of the date the information was collected or
generated; see the discussion in Unit III.E.
Similarly, ``all existing information concerning the environmental
and health effects'' of a PFAS may include previous submissions to EPA
pursuant to TSCA section 8(e). TSCA section 8(e) requires
manufacturers, processors, and distributors of chemicals to notify EPA
immediately of information that reasonably supports the conclusion that
their substances or mixtures present a substantial risk of injury to
health or the environment. To the extent that a substantial risk
notification under TSCA section 8(e) may be duplicative with this
rule's requirements, the reporter need not resubmit such information,
but will be required to indicate when they had previously provided that
notification under TSCA section 8(e) so that EPA is able to locate that
previous submission and satisfy the requirements of TSCA section
8(a)(7). Manufacturers who have previously submitted information to EPA
under TSCA section 8(d) or TSCA section 8(e) that may be
[[Page 70526]]
considered ``existing information concerning the environmental and
health effects'' of a PFAS for which they are reporting under this TSCA
section 8(a)(7) rule need not resubmit the duplicative information.
However, the manufacturer must indicate in the reporting form the year
in which they had previously provided that information and under which
rule (e.g., TSCA section 8(d), section 8(e)). If EPA has previously
collected information relevant to the implementation of TSCA section
8(a)(7) and is able to locate that information based on the reporter's
submission, then EPA would be able to meet the information collection
obligations under TSCA section 8(a)(7) without requiring potentially
duplicative reporting.
EPA also considered other, non-TSCA reporting rules' potential
overlap with this rule. These include the Toxics Release Inventory
(TRI) and the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP). Under the TRI,
certain industrial and Federal facilities are required to report their
annual releases and other waste management quantities and activities
for TRI-listed toxic chemicals that are manufactured, processed, or
otherwise used above the respective threshold. Information reported to
TRI that is also requested under this rule includes:
Total volume recycled on-site;
Description of disposal process(es);
Total volume released to land;
Total volume released to water;
Total volume released to air; and
Total volume incinerated on-site.
However, in the same vein as the limitations on potentially
duplicative reporting with CDR and TSCA section 8(d) rules, EPA does
not anticipate much, if any, overlap in reporting between this rule and
TRI. First, PFAS were not on the TRI chemical list until the FY 2020
NDAA automatically added 172 PFAS effective calendar year 2020, with
additional PFAS added annually since 2020 (Ref. 17). Therefore, the
only potentially overlapping reporting of PFAS releases and other waste
management quantities would be since 2020, instead of the entire
lookback period of this rule. Additional limitations in the potential
overlap between this rule and TRI include the PFAS reporting threshold
for TRI of 100 pounds manufactured, processed, or otherwise used and
certain TRI reporting exemptions for quantities below de minimis
concentrations and in articles. Without a reporting threshold or
similar reporting exemptions applicable for this rule, there may be
more PFAS releases and other waste management activities reportable for
this rule than for TRI.
EPA also considered potential overlaps with GHGRP. The GHGRP
requires annual reporting of greenhouse gas (GHG) data and other
information from large GHG emissions sources (i.e., those that emit at
least 25,000 tons of CO2-equivalent, any electricity
generation site, aluminum, ammonia or cement production facility, and
some municipal solid waste landfills), fuel and industrial gas
suppliers, and carbon dioxide injection sites (Ref. 18) (40 CFR part
98). 111 compounds covered as GHGs and heat transfer fluids (HTF) would
also be considered PFAS under this rule. Between this rule and the
GHGRP, the following data elements may be duplicative for at least some
GHGRP reporters:
Production volume (imported);
Volume directly exported; and
Total volume incinerated on-site.
Besides the limited number of PFAS covered by GHGRP, other
limitations on the potential overlap between this rule and GHGRP
include the exemption of GHGRP reporting for quantities imported or
exported below 25 kilograms. Additionally, not all coincidentally
manufactured chemicals (such as byproducts) are covered by GHGRP,
though they fall under the definition of ``manufacture for a commercial
purpose'' under this rule (40 CFR 705.3). Overall, there is a
significant difference between the reporting requirements in the GHGRP
and this rule, though EPA is allowing reporters to abstain from re-
reporting any of the information listed previously in this unit for a
PFAS that was previously reported to GHGRP, unless the GHGRP submission
did not account for all quantities that are covered by this rule.
EPA also notes the potential for duplicative reporting of
environmental releases of certain byproducts within this rule. Pursuant
to TSCA section 8(a)(2)(D), EPA is requiring PFAS manufacturers to
provide a ``description of the byproducts resulting from the
manufacture, processing, use, or disposal of each [PFAS].'' However,
EPA notes there may be occasions where a byproduct that resulted from
the manufacture, processing, use, or disposal of a reported PFAS also
meets this rule's definition of PFAS. Because ``manufacture for
commercial purposes'' includes the coincidental manufacture of
byproducts, that byproduct would also need to be reported under this
rule to the extent data are known or reasonably ascertainable. As a
reportable PFAS, information on that byproduct's environmental releases
would be requested twice, both as a byproduct of the originally
manufactured PFAS and as a commercially manufactured PFAS itself. To
mitigate potentially duplicative reporting concerns in such situations,
manufacturers of byproducts that are also reportable PFAS under this
rule need not re-report the environmental release information of that
byproduct on the original PFAS's form.
To address potentially duplicative reporting, EPA is identifying
specific types of information that need not be reported if the
reporting entity indicates in the reporting tool that they have
previously provided such information to EPA and provides information
sufficient to allow the agency to locate that information. Pursuant to
TSCA section 8(a)(5)(A), EPA is limiting the requirement for reporting
``duplicative'' information if a PFAS manufacturer has previously
submitted the requested information to EPA for that same PFAS in that
same year through CDR, TRI, GHGRP, or TSCA sections 8(d) and 8(e), or
is also reporting a PFAS byproduct on its own reporting form. Only the
aforementioned data elements from CDR, TRI, and GHGRP; studies
submitted under TSCA section 8(d) or 8(e); and certain byproduct
release information may be exempt from re-reporting under this rule as
potentially duplicative information. In these cases, the manufacturer
would be required to indicate to which program (and in which year) that
information was submitted (e.g., CDR, in 2016). Additionally, EPA notes
that a manufacturer's previous submission for the same data element
under a different reporting rule (e.g., a manufacturer previously
reported the production volume to CDR for a particular year) does not
necessarily mean that the same quantity or information would be
accurate for this rule's purposes. Because this rule does not provide
for the same exemptions as the rules discussed in Unit III.F., the
manufacturer must ensure that all quantities and other requested
information for that PFAS are reported under this rule to the extent
such information is known or reasonably ascertainable. In the previous
example of a CDR reporter who had previously reported a PFAS's
production volume, the reporter must ensure that all manufactured
quantities covered under this rule (including those that are exempt
from CDR, such as impurities or imported articles) are accounted for.
If a previous submission for a data element does not account for all
covered volumes or activities, then the submitter
[[Page 70527]]
may not rely on that prior submission to satisfy the reporting
requirements of this rule.
EPA considered other previous information collection requests
related to PFAS but did not determine those to be ``duplicative'' such
that reporting may be exempt under TSCA section 8(a)(5)(A). For
instance, EPA received many public comments asserting that information
submitted through a PMN is duplicative of the information that would be
collected through this rule. EPA disagrees. Information collected
through a PMN (or an LVE) reflects information before manufacture of a
substance commences.
EPA notes that the Agency has also required the submission of
information on PFAS using a variety of enforcement authorities under
different environmental statutes. However, most, if not all, of the
information collected in the course of investigating potential non-
compliance with, or liability under, TSCA or other statutes is
different in numerous respects from information requested pursuant to
this rule. EPA does not anticipate there to be duplicative reporting as
the enforcement requests are generally narrower in scope. The
enforcement requests generally focus on fewer years than this rule's
reporting period, and those requests tend to focus on far fewer
substances. Additionally, the requested data for enforcement
authorities is both aggregated and reported in formats differently than
this rule's requirements. While this rule requires data to be reported
for each year over the reporting period in which the PFAS was
manufactured, some enforcement requests have focused on just single
years, or have requested quantities to be reported to reflect
cumulative totals over multiple years. In that latter example, such a
submission would not satisfy EPA's obligations under TSCA section
8(a)(7) requesting certain information ``for each year since January 1,
2011.'' In terms of information reporting formats, EPA notes that
enforcement requests may often ask for responses in a narrative format,
distinct from this rule's requests for information in quantities or
within specific ranges. For these discrepancies, EPA does not believe
that most information requested through previous enforcement request
letters is duplicative of information requested under this rule.
The only information that may have been submitted in response to
past enforcement letters that may be potentially duplicative of this
rule relates to ``all existing information concerning environmental and
health effects.'' Such information includes but is not limited to
environmental monitoring, sampling, or worker exposure data. Thus, if a
manufacturer has previously submitted certain information concerning
environmental or health effects of a PFAS to EPA under an enforcement
authority, that manufacturer does not need to resubmit that
environmental or health effects information to EPA under this rule,
provided that the manufacturer indicates to which program or office and
in which year such information was submitted to EPA.
While the use of those enforcement authorities may be duplicative
in some cases, the information is needed to ensure protection of public
health and the environment in instances where the Agency feels it needs
information from an entity to make that judgment call and determine if
action is needed. Therefore, information duplication between previous
enforcement requests and this rule is unlikely for many reasons,
including various limitations on information gathered under the
enforcement authorities and the fundamental differences in the type of
information sought under this rule as compared with the information
gathered under the other authorities. While information from PFAS
manufacturers requested by EPA is, in all cases, needed to ensure the
protection of public health and the environment, the information
requested under the different authorities serves different purposes.
EPA has determined that the information submitted in response to an
enforcement letter is not duplicative of the information requested
under this rule, except for certain information concerning
environmental and health effects.
Finally, some reporters may also have submitted certain information
concerning environmental or health effects of a PFAS pursuant to either
a TSCA section 4 action or voluntarily, in conjunction with EPA's
National PFAS Testing Strategy. To the extent a reporting entity has
already provided information concerning environmental or health effects
(such as chemical and physical properties, hazard testing, or exposure
testing), that entity need not resubmit the information to this
reporting rule. Instead, the reporter should indicate that they have
already submitted such information to EPA and provide the program, the
specific chemical identity, the date, and an associated case number, if
available, of that submission.
G. What are the requirements for submitting CBI claims?
The 2016 amendments to TSCA included new procedural requirements
for the submission and Agency management of CBI claims, including new
substantiation requirements, generic name requirements, a certification
requirement, and a requirement for Agency review of specified CBI
claims within 90 days after receipt of the claim (15 U.S.C. 2613). In
accordance with the 2016 TSCA amendments, the Agency recently proposed
a rule addressing the procedures for submitting CBI claims to EPA under
TSCA and the procedures for EPA's review of such claims (87 FR 29078,
May 6, 2022 (FRL-8223-01-OCSPP)). PFAS manufacturers reporting under
this rule may claim certain portions of the reporting form are CBI
confidential business information, consistent with TSCA section 14,
such as specific chemical identities that are not on the public
Inventory, company identifier, and production volumes. Only
confidentiality claims made through this rule's PFAS reporting tool
will be considered properly asserted; any additional TSCA CBI claims
made elsewhere will be considered improperly presented and will not be
treated as having asserted a CBI claim under TSCA, and the information
may be disclosed to the public without further notice. In addition to
the requirement that CBI claims be submitted through the PFAS reporting
tool, TSCA requires the reporter to certify that it has: (1) Taken
reasonable measures to protect the confidentiality of the information;
(2) Determined the information is not required to be disclosed or made
public under Federal law; (3) A reasonable basis to believe that
disclosure of the information is likely to cause substantial
competitive harm; and (4) A reasonable basis to believe that the
information is not readily discoverable through reverse engineering;
and, (5) To certify that these statements and any information provided
are true and correct. Consistent with the format of other TSCA
reporting forms, the statements and certification would be combined
into a single certification statement.
Information under this rule that may not be asserted as CBI
includes:
Specific chemical identity if the chemical is on the
public (non-confidential) Inventory or reported as non-confidential in
an LVE;
All generic chemical names;
For any PFAS that are on the public (non-confidential)
Inventory, the chemical's CASRN;
[[Page 70528]]
For PFAS that are on the confidential Inventory, the
Inventory Accession Number cannot be claimed as CBI (but the underlying
chemical identity can be claimed as CBI);
LVE numbers;
The following categories of use information: industrial
processing and use type, sector, and functional categories, whether a
chemical is in a consumer and/or commercial product, the consumer/
commercial product categories and functional categories, and its
presence in products for children; or
Any blank or NKRA designation or response.
Any entity that claims a specific chemical identity as CBI must
also submit a generic name pursuant to TSCA section 14(c)(1)(C). This
includes reporting a PFAS by either an Accession number or LVE number
(assuming that the specific chemical identity is not on the public
Inventory), or reporting by a CAS name on a PFAS for which the CASRN,
Accession number, and LVE number are not known to be assigned (i.e.,
the CASRN and specific identifiers have not been created or generated).
Entities must ensure that that any such generic name is consistent with
EPA's Generic Name Guidance (Ref. 19). The generic name must also
``describe the chemical structure of the chemical substance as
specifically as practicable while protecting those features of the
chemical structure that are claimed as confidential; and the disclosure
of which would be likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive
position of the person.'' 15 U.S.C. 2613(c)(1)(C)(ii). Generic names
must be sufficiently detailed to identify the reported chemical as a
PFAS. Specifically, any generic name reported for a PFAS that does not
contain ``fluor'' in the name would be rejected by EPA as insufficient
under TSCA section 14(c)(1)(C). As the Agency described in the NODA
published for this rule (Ref. 1), any generic name for a PFAS
(including previously existing generic names from earlier TSCA section
5 submissions) that does not contain ``fluor'' in the name is
inconsistent with this provision and will be rejected. Ultimately, if a
generic name reported under the TSCA section 8(a)(7) rule lacks the
structural unit ``fluor,'' the Agency will publicly identify the
chemical substance as a PFAS.
TSCA section 14 further requires that substantiation be provided
for each data element claimed as CBI. The substantiation must be
provided at the time of submission. However, TSCA section 14(c)(2)
exempts certain information from the substantiation requirements (e.g.,
specific production volume). Under this rule, CBI claims for specific
production or import volumes of the manufacturer need not be
substantiated. Additionally, the specific chemical identity and
molecular structure need not be substantiated when the substance has
not been introduced into commerce (e.g., an R&D substance manufactured
in small quantities meeting the new chemical reporting exemption under
section 5(h)(3)). No other TSCA section 14(c)(2) exemptions apply to
information requested under this rule, so CBI claims must be
substantiated for all other such information. Any information which is
claimed as CBI will be disclosed by EPA only in accordance with the
procedures and requirements of TSCA section 14 and 40 CFR parts 2 and
703. TSCA limits CBI protections for information in health and safety
studies.
Generally, information from health and safety studies is not
protected from disclosure, except to the extent such studies or
information reveal information ``that discloses processes used in the
manufacturing or processing of a chemical substance or mixture or, in
the case of a mixture, the portion of the mixture comprised by any of
the chemical substances in the mixture,'' 15 U.S.C. 2613(2)(B).
Additional information, listed in the rule's definition of health and
safety study, are not part of a health and safety study (e.g., names of
laboratory personnel). Submitters asserting a CBI claim for information
under Sec. 705.15(f) are required to submit a sanitized copy, removing
only the information that is claimed as CBI.
EPA expects that article importers generally do not know the
Accession number or other specific identifiers (e.g., PMN or LVE
number) for a confidential Inventory chemical that may be included in
the article they are importing. As a result, article importers must
report chemical identities to the extent that they are known to or
reasonably ascertainable (generic name, trade name, or CASRN if it is a
publicly known chemical substance) and use the article importer
streamlined form. Public identifiers like generic names and public
Inventory CASRNs may not be claimed as CBI and it is unnecessary for
article importers to assert CBI claims for the specific identities of
substances that are not reported by a specific identifier (i.e.,
Accession number or LVE number). EPA would not be able to determine an
underlying confidential chemical identity from this generic identifying
information, so could not disclose that specific chemical identity,
regardless of whether the submitter asserted a CBI claim. It would be
purposeless for the submitter to assert a CBI claim for this
information or for EPA to review such claims. In this TSCA section
8(a)(7) rule, and for these reasons, EPA believes that it is
appropriate to differentiate article importers from other reporters
with respect to chemical identity CBI claims.
However, all other entities (i.e., other than article importers)
who report a CAS name, CASRN, or specific identifier (i.e., Accession
number, LVE number) must assert and substantiate a CBI claim for the
specific chemical identity if the reporter wants the chemical identity
to receive confidential treatment. A person or entity (other than an
article importer) who does not have knowledge of such an identifier
(CAS name, CASRN, Accession number, or LVE number) must initiate a
joint submission with its supplier or other entity who can provide this
identifying information, if such an entity is known to or reasonably
ascertainable by the manufacturer. In these cases, the secondary
submitter would be responsible for providing the CAS name, CASRN,
Accession number, or LVE number and for asserting and substantiating
any CBI claims concerning the chemical identity (see e.g., 40 CFR
711.15(b)(3); 711.30(c)). In light of the extended timeframe (11 years)
covered by this reporting rule, it is possible that the submitter's
supplier is unknown or no longer exists (e.g., supplier has gone out of
business without a successor entity). As applied to this reporting rule
only, a submitter who lacks knowledge of the CAS name, CASRN or a
specific identifier (i.e., Accession number or LVE number) and who--
after conducting due diligence and reviewing known or reasonably
ascertainable existing information--cannot identify a supplier or any
other entity who could provide this information in a joint submission,
the submitter would indicate that secondary submitter information is
not known or reasonably ascertainable and therefore does not need to
initiate a joint submission.
Generally, reporting entities will not have an opportunity to add
or modify substantiations once the reporting period concludes.
Therefore, reporting entities should communicate with suppliers, or any
other entities with CBI concerns (e.g., non-disclosure agreements) and
carefully consider the CBI implications of this rule. However,
reporting entities may amend their submission to withdraw CBI claims at
any time during the reporting period.
In response to comments received on CBI claims concerning the
specific chemical identity, following the
[[Page 70529]]
conclusion of the reporting period for this rule, EPA will compile a
list of reported substances it plans to move to the public Inventory
because either no chemical identity CBI claim was asserted, or the
claim was denied. Similar to past compilations, EPA will publish a list
of Accession numbers associated with these substances on the EPA
website for several months in advance of any update to the Inventory.
Interested parties will have an opportunity to review the list for
possible errors and contact EPA with any questions or concerns about
specific candidates. In some cases, there may be assertions by a
company that a mistake has been made (e.g., the wrong chemical identity
was reported by a third party) or that a waiver of a CBI claim was made
by a company that may not know the specific chemical identity, in which
case EPA will undertake appropriate factual investigations as necessary
to confirm whether EPA should reconsider whether the chemical is no
longer entitled to confidential Inventory protection. Where EPA
determines that a chemical identity was identified as a candidate for
disclosure because there was an error or because the sole basis for the
proposed move to the public portion of the Inventory was a waiver of a
CBI claim by an entity that did not know the specific chemical
identity, it will not move the chemical identity to the public portion
of the Inventory. This investigation would take place prior to the
point that the specific chemical identity would be disclosed on the
public Inventory.
H. What are the electronic reporting requirements?
EPA is requiring all information to be submitted electronically,
similar to the requirements established in 2013 for submitting other
information under TSCA (see 40 CFR 704.20(e)). Reporters must use EPA's
Central Data Exchange (CDX), the Agency's electronic reporting portal,
to submit all information under this rule. EPA developed the Chemical
Information Submission System (CISS) for use in submitting data
electronically to the Agency for TSCA sections 4, 5, 6, 8(a), 8(b),
8(d), and 8(e) and Title VI. CISS, a web-based reporting tool housed
within the CDX environment, provides submitters with user-friendly
applications to build and submit data packages to EPA within a secure,
encrypted environment. CISS applications provide for the capture of
both fielded data as well as the attachment of additional information
using a wide variety of file types. Within CDX, CISS is available under
the ``Submission for Chemical Safety and Pesticide Program (CSPP)'' CDX
flow. Users who have previously submitted under TSCA through CDX,
including submitting information under sections 4 and 5, or CDR, will
already have the CSPP flow linked to their account. Users reporting to
EPA using other CDX housed applications, including the Toxics Release
Inventory TRI-MEweb, would be able to add the CSPP flow to their
existing CDX accounts.
EPA is developing a rule-specific reporting tool within CISS, which
reporters must use to submit the required information. This tool will
be available in CISS prior to the start of the reporting period (see
the discussion in Unit III.I on reporting deadlines). EPA believes that
electronic reporting reduces the reporting burden for submitters by
reducing the cost and time required to review, edit, and transmit data
to the Agency. It also allows submitters to share a draft submission
within their organization and more easily save a copy for their records
or future use. Additionally, EPA believes that many of the anticipated
reporters under this rule have experience with reporting electronically
to EPA through CDX. For those reporters who do not have experience
submitting information to EPA via CDX, EPA has provided guidance
documents and support via a help desk to assist users with technical
questions related to CDX. The resource and time requirements to review
and process data by the Agency will also be reduced, and document
storage and retrieval will require fewer resources.
I. What if an entity who knows the specific chemical identity will not
disclose it to the PFAS manufacturer (including importer)?
In response to public comment, EPA is also enabling joint
submissions for PFAS manufacturers (including importers) other than
article importers who do not know the CASRN, Accession Number, and/or
LVE number and whose suppliers will not disclose the identity to the
PFAS reporter. Similar to the 2020 CDR cycle, this joint submission
tool would allow manufacturers (including importers) to submit all
importing, processing, use, and other information to the extent it is
known or reasonably ascertainable and to send a request to the
appropriate supplier or other entity to create a submission to supply
the PFAS identity to EPA through the reporting tool. The joint
submission process does not require the supplier or other entity to
disclose the specific chemical identity to their customer, thus
maintaining confidentiality between the two entities.
The joint submission tool would be relevant when a manufacturer
(including importer) cannot provide the CAS name, CASRN, Accession
number, or LVE number of a chemical substance it manufactures,
generally because it is unknown to the manufacturer (including
importer) and claimed in part or in its entirety as CBI by the supplier
of the chemical substance or mixture.
In a joint submission, the primary submitter (i.e., the PFAS
manufacturer) may assert CBI claims over some of their supplier
information, including the supplier identity and the chemical substance
or mixture trade name (or other designation). Substantiation of the CBI
claims for this information will not be required at the time of the
primary submitter's submission. The secondary submitter of the joint
submission must register with CDX if they have not previously and
provide its company name and location, a technical contact, trade name,
chemical identity, function, and, for PFAS in mixtures, the percentage
of each PFAS in the mixture represented by the trade name. The
secondary submitter is responsible for asserting all confidentiality
claims for the data elements that it submits directly to EPA and for
substantiating those claims not exempt under 40 CFR 705.30(a)(2). The
specific chemical identity may be claimed as CBI by the secondary
submitter following the provisions in 40 CFR 705.30. If the secondary
submitter does not assert and substantiate a CBI claim for the identity
of the chemical substance in its response to the Agency, then the
chemical is not entitled to confidential treatment. Except for the
percentage composition information, which is generally exempt from
substantiation pursuant to TSCA section 14(c)(2)(D), all other reported
data elements are subject to substantiation at the time the information
is submitted.
Similar to the CDR joint submissions, any secondary submitter in
this rule will be able to request the chemical information from their
own suppliers as needed, should the importer's direct supplier not have
the information. There may be instances where a foreign supplier
purchases a mixture, under a trade name, from another company (tertiary
company) and does not know the chemical components of the mixture. The
foreign supplier can ask the tertiary company manufacturing the trade
secret mixture or PFAS within the mixture to directly provide EPA with
the correct chemical identity in the reporting tool. In this case, the
tertiary company would register with CDX and use the Unique Identifier
for Joint Submissions, sent to the tertiary
[[Page 70530]]
company by the secondary company (i.e., the foreign supplier), to
complete the reporting form.
Under this scenario, the foreign supplier does not have access to
any of the information submitted to EPA by the tertiary company.
Likewise, the tertiary company cannot see the information the foreign
supplier or the primary company (i.e., the U.S. manufacturer (including
importer)) reports to EPA. This way, the confidentiality of information
for all parties is protected. EPA believes this functionality addresses
some concerns that have been voiced from stakeholders, including an
importer's direct (or immediate) supplier may not have knowledge of the
PFAS identity. By allowing a foreign supplier (secondary submitter) to
request the required information from their own supplier (a tertiary
submitter) as needed, EPA believes this will capture more information
related to specific PFAS identities that may not be known to the
importer due to confidentiality or trade secret claims, while not
requiring suppliers to share any information they wish to protect from
their customers.
Joint submissions are to be used only in cases when the PFAS
reporter does not know the CAS name, CASRN, Accession number, or LVE
number for the PFAS, but another entity (e.g., a supplier or other
manufacturer) does and will not disclose it to the reporter. If a
reporter (including importer) or joint reporter (secondary or tertiary
submitter) actually knows or can reasonably ascertain the CAS name,
CASRN, Accession number, or LVE number of a PFAS, the reporter
(including importer) must provide that information irrespective of
others' confidentiality claims. If the reporter wishes to claim the
specific chemical identity as confidential, the chemical substance must
not be listed on the public portion of the Inventory, the submitter
must check the CBI box in the reporting tool and provide the
appropriate substantiation. Such a CBI claim only relates to the
specific chemical identity as listed on the confidential portion of the
Inventory (i.e., CAS name and/or CASRN) and does not apply to the
Accession number and generic name listed on the public portion of the
Inventory.
Because article importers are not required to assert or
substantiate CBI claims for the chemical identity for this rule, EPA is
not requiring or enabling joint submissions for article importers when
they do not know the CAS name, CASRN, Accession number, or LVE number
of the PFAS. Additionally, in scenarios where a secondary submitter is
not known or existent (e.g., a supplier has gone out of business and
does not have a successor entity), the primary submitter would indicate
in the reporting tool that the secondary submitter is ``not known or
reasonably ascertainable.'' In this case, however, the PFAS
manufacturer would be required to provide as much identifying detail as
they have regarding the PFAS identity (e.g., trade name), but would be
able to report to EPA without initiating a joint submission.
J. When are reports due?
EPA proposed a six-month information collection period following
the effective date of the final rule, then a six-month reporting
period. Thus, the proposed rule stipulated a reporting deadline one
year following the effective date of the final rule. EPA received many
public comments on the reporting timeframe, which are detailed in Unit
IV.K.
In response to public comment, EPA has decided to finalize a one-
year information collection period following the effective date of this
rule, which will then be followed by a six-month reporting period.
Further, EPA is granting an additional six months for reporting to
small manufacturers (as defined at 40 CFR 704.3) whose reporting
obligations under this rule are exclusively from article import.
``Small manufacturers'' as defined at 40 CFR 704.3 include
manufacturers who meet one of two standards: (1) a manufacturer
(including importer) whose total annual sales, when combined with those
of its parent company, are less than $120 million, and the annual
production volume of a chemical substance is less than 100,000 lbs; or
(2) a manufacturer (including importer) whose total annual sales, when
combined with those of its parent company, are less than $12 million.
EPA acknowledges that the scope of reporting for this rule is broader
than for CDR, and that there may be some reporting entities who have
not submitted information to EPA under a TSCA section 8(a) reporting
rule before (e.g., some small manufacturers). Therefore, EPA agrees
that additional time is warranted for PFAS manufacturers to familiarize
themselves with the scope of the reporting rule and reporting standard,
as well as begin to collect the required information and create a CDX
account if necessary. The extended time period for information
collection also benefits both EPA and the reporting community by
providing the Agency with additional time to develop and test the CDX
reporting application for this rule. Thus, reporting forms will be due
18 months following the effective date of this rule, except for small
article importers (as defined at 40 CFR 704.3), whose reporting forms
are due 24 months following the effective date of this rule.
K. What are the recordkeeping requirements?
EPA is finalizing the proposed recordkeeping requirements. Each
person who is subject to the reporting requirements must retain records
that document any information reported to EPA for five years, beginning
on the last date of the information submission period. The five-year
retention requirement is consistent with the CDR rule and corresponds
with the statute of limitations for violations and is necessary to
preserve records to support future regulatory activities that will be
informed by this information collection. Further, EPA believes the
burden of retaining these records, which are likely electronic, is
minimal.
L. Which proposed requirements are not being finalized as proposed?
EPA is modifying the following items from the proposed rule: the
definition of ``PFAS''; the reporting deadline; some of the data
elements requested; enabling streamlined reporting options for article
importers and manufacturers of R&D substances below 10 kilograms;
enabling joint submissions; and [certain waste management/disposal
facility exemptions].
As noted in Unit III.A.1, this rule defines ``PFAS'' as including
at least one of these three structures:
R-(CF2)-CF(R')R'', where both the
CF2 and CF moieties are saturated carbons;
R-CF2OCF2-R', where R and R' can
either be F, O, or saturated carbons; and
CF3C(CF3)R'R'', where R' and R'' can
either be F or saturated carbons.
This definition is an expansion of the proposed definition of
``PFAS'', which was defined as R-(CF2)-CF(R')R'', where both
the CF2 and CF moieties are saturated carbons, and none of
the R groups can be hydrogen. The proposed definition defined PFAS as a
substance that includes the following structure: R-(CF2)-
C(F)(R')R'', in which both the CF2 and CF moieties are
saturated carbons and none of the R groups (R, R' or R'') can be
hydrogen. The proposed definition, which existed previously in EPA's
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), was developed to
focus on chemical substances in the Inventory with properties similar
to PFOA, PFOS, and GenX. EPA notes that the proposed definition of
``PFAS'' had previously been used by OPPT, although this definition has
changed
[[Page 70531]]
over time. For instance, the polymer exemption for PMNs provided a
different definition of ``perfluoroalkyl'' in its PFAS exception rule
in 2010 (40 CFR 723.250) (Ref. 20). Over many years of research and
data collection, EPA continues to learn more about these substances and
may consider whether modifications to the definition are appropriate.
See Unit IV.A.1 for a more detailed discussion of EPA's reasons for
modifying this definition for this rule.
EPA is also modifying the reporting deadline from the proposed
rule. As noted in Unit III. J, EPA believes additional time for rule
familiarization and data collection is warranted given the lookback
period of this rule and that there are entities that are potentially
covered by this rule which have not been previously required to respond
to other TSCA section 8 reporting rules, such as CDR. Given public
comments and input during the SBAR Panel, EPA is providing a one-year
period following the effective date of this rule for data collection,
followed by a six-month reporting period during which the reporting
application will be open. EPA is further granting an additional six
months for reporting to small manufacturers (as defined at 40 CFR
704.3) who would report exclusively as article importers for the
purpose of this rule. Thus, reporting forms are due 18 months following
the effective date of this rule, except for small article importers,
which are due 24 months from the effective date of this rule.
EPA is slightly modifying the data elements requested by PFAS
manufacturers. Based on public comments, EPA is not including the
following proposed data elements within this rule: the maximum quantity
on-site at any time, including storage; the maximum first 12 months
production volume, and the maximum yearly production volume in any 3
years. EPA received public comment that it is unlikely that
manufacturers have information related to the storage quantities, and
other comments stated that requesting the maximum production quantities
in either the first 12 months or in any three years may be duplicative
of other production volume data requested. Therefore, EPA is removing
these three items from the scope of the final rule. For more discussion
on the comments received on the scope of data elements, see the
Response to Comments document (Ref. 21).
Pursuant to public comments, EPA is also modifying the request for
the molecular structure of the PFAS in all reports: submitting
molecular structure of the reported PFAS is optional for any Class 1
PFAS on the Inventory. Class 1 chemical substances are those chemical
substances composed of molecules with particular atoms arranged in a
definite, known structure. If a Class 1 substance is also on the
Inventory, EPA knows its particular molecular structure. However, many
commercially-manufactured chemicals are not Class 1 substances (i.e.,
they are Class 2 substances comprised of specific molecular formula
representations in variable structures, or they have unknown or
indefinite molecular formulas and/or incomplete structural diagrams).
Additionally, not all commercially-manufactured substances that are
subject to TSCA may be on the Inventory due to various reporting
exemptions. While EPA has the authority and obligation to request the
molecular structure of any reported PFAS pursuant to TSCA section
8(a)(2)(A), EPA does already know the structure of Class 1 substances
on the Inventory; thus, pursuant to TSCA section 8(a)(5)(A), EPA is
limiting the scope of this reporting requirement in cases where the
information would be duplicative of information EPA has obtained
through TSCA reporting. Therefore, EPA is modifying the proposed rule
by limiting the reporting requirement of molecular structures to those
PFAS that are not Class 1 substances on the Inventory.
Finally, EPA is also modifying the proposed data elements for
worker exposure duration. EPA proposed to request information on worker
exposure for the manufacturing site, each industrial process and use,
and each commercial use. For all three categories, EPA proposed to
request ``maximum duration of exposure for any worker'' in both hours
per day and days per year. However, following the publication of the
proposed rule, EPA understands that the worker exposure duration
information, as proposed, could lead to a manufacturer reporting
unassociated variables; that is, the worker with the maximum duration
of exposure in hours per day is not the same as the worker with the
maximum duration of exposure in days per year. Without additional
clarifying information on which worker(s) the reported durations
reflect, such a request may not yield data useful for EPA's
assessments. EPA is therefore modifying the proposed request for the
worker exposure duration data by clarifying the workers for whom the
maximum exposure durations or frequency must be reported. EPA is
requesting worker exposure duration information (in hours per day and
days per year) both for the worker with the greatest daily exposure
duration (i.e., the worker with the greatest exposure in hours per day)
and for the worker with the greatest annual exposure frequency (i.e.,
the worker exposed during the most days per year).
Additionally, EPA is modifying the scope of data elements requested
for some article importers and manufacturers of R&D substances in
quantities below 10 kilograms annually. Based on feedback through
public comments and the SBAR Panel, EPA understands that some article
importers and some manufacturers of R&D substances may not know or be
able to ascertain all information being requested. Therefore, EPA is
offering two streamlined reporting options for those manufacturers.
(For more information on these reporting options, see additional
discussions in Units III.D.2 and III.D.3.)
EPA is also modifying the proposed rule by enabling joint
submissions. In the proposed rule, EPA did not propose joint
submissions, but did specifically request comment on whether to enable
them for this rule in cases where a supplier may not disclose the
chemical identity to an importer who is covered by this reporting rule.
Following public comments, EPA is finalizing this rule to include joint
submissions for situations in which an importer does not know the CASRN
or specific identifier (i.e., Accession number or LVE number) (see Unit
III.I.). EPA further discussed requiring submitters who lack knowledge
of a chemical's specific chemical identity to initiate a joint
submission in the NODA.
Finally, EPA is modifying the scope of reportable activities under
this rule to clarify that importing municipal solid waste streams for
the purpose of disposal or destruction is not a reportable activity
under this rule. As explained in Unit III.B.3., EPA learned through
public comments and the SBAR Panel that entities engaged in certain
municipal solid waste management activities are in the unique position
of not having any knowledge of the contents of the municipal solid
waste they have imported. Therefore, extending reporting requirements
to such sites would not result in any responsive information under TSCA
section 8(a)(7), and EPA does not consider the import of municipal
solid waste for the purpose of disposal or destruction to be a
reportable activity.
IV. Summary of Comments and Other Public Input and EPA's Response
EPA received 109 unique public comments during the proposed rule's
public comment period. Following
[[Page 70532]]
publication of the proposed rule, EPA received more data related to the
proposed rule's burden and cost estimates. At the time of the proposed
rule's publication, EPA did not have sufficient and reliable data to
inform an estimate of the scope of article importers that may be
affected by the proposed rule's requirements. However, after receiving
comments through the docket related to the scope of article importers
(including estimates provided by companies and industry trade
associations), and through the discovery of additional information and
data sources related to the scope of potentially affected article
importers, EPA determined the proposed rule could no longer support a
certification under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq., that there would be no significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Specifically, the number of small
businesses who may be considered importers of PFAS-containing articles
and therefore potentially affected by the proposed rule was estimated
to be approximately 130,000. Thus, EPA convened an SBAR Panel under the
RFA to hear directly from small entities on the anticipated impact of
the proposed rule on their organizations, and to hear feedback
regarding recommended paths forward to finalize a rulemaking that would
minimize the burden of compliance on small entities while still
achieving the objectives of TSCA section 8(a)(7). This Panel convened
in April 2022, with a Panel Outreach meeting conducted on April 20,
2022. The Panel (which included EPA, Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), and Small Business Administration (SBA) representatives) used
feedback from the small entity representatives submitted during and
after the Outreach meeting to develop its Panel Report (Ref. 22), which
included recommendations for EPA to consider in its final rule.
Along with public comments on the overall cost estimates of the
2021 proposed rule, EPA received many public comments both in support
of and against EPA's position to not exempt entities or activities that
are often exempt under CDR, including small manufacturers and article
importers, and the use of a structural definition for PFAS rather than
a discrete list of substances.
Following this Panel, EPA published a NODA (Ref. 1) to solicit
public comment on the rule's IRFA and other aspects of the proposed
rule that may have been impacted by EPA actions or proposed actions
since the public comment period had closed for the proposed rule in
September 2021. EPA also published the SBAR Panel Report (Ref. 22) for
public comment. The notice was published on November 25, 2022 (Ref.1),
for a 33-day public comment period ending on December 27, 2022. EPA
received 44 unique public comments during the public comment period
following the publication of the NODA (Ref. 1). Comments largely
focused on different regulatory alternatives presented in the Panel
Report (including certain exemptions, or using a discrete list of
covered PFAS) and on EPA's discussion of its approach to CBI claims of
the chemical identity.
EPA considered all comments and other stakeholder input, including
from the SBAR Panel, in the development of this final rule. This unit
discusses many of the comments on the proposed rule received through
both avenues and the Agency's responses; however, the more
comprehensive response to comments related to this rule can be found in
the Response to Comments document, which is available in the docket for
this rulemaking (Ref. 21).
A. What is the proposed definition of covered substances?
1. Summary of Public Input
Many commenters provided feedback on the specific definition of
PFAS in the proposed rule. These commenters either were unsupportive of
EPA's definition and requested that the Agency narrow the proposed
definition of PFAS or requested that EPA broaden their definition of
PFAS, while generally supporting EPA's proposed structural definition.
Commenters who were generally unsupportive of EPA's proposed
definition of PFAS noted that ``the proposed rule contains a definition
of `PFAS' not recognized by any other federal agency or international
organization, and which EPA itself does not use consistently.'' One
commenter mentioned that treating PFAS as a single group or class of
chemicals is ``not scientifically sound or appropriate'' due to it
being ``over- and under-inclusive.'' Another commenter stated that
EPA's proposed definition of PFAS is overly expansive ``because it
includes molecules that are not obviously PFAS'' such as ``highly
fluorinated molecules that are not PFAS by any common understanding of
PFAS.'' This commenter suggested that the definition of PFAS in the
final rule ``hew much more closely to the types of PFAS molecules that
motivated Section 7351 of the NDAA 2020.'' Commenters who suggested
that EPA's proposed PFAS definition is overly broad, also suggested
that an overly broad PFAS definition will ``almost certainly'' result
in unnecessary reporting of ``PFAS molecules' that are ``likely
unrelated to the underlying problems.''
Some commenters suggested that EPA use the OECD definition of PFAS,
with a few commenters recommending that EPA define PFAS ``at least as
broadly as the recent OECD definition.'' Supporters of adopting the
OECD definition claimed that the OECD definition incorporates sound
science based on input from the ``world's leading developed countries,
including scientists from EPA'' and mentioned that it might make
reporting compliance easier for PFAS manufacturers who have a global
presence. Another commenter who supported use of the OECD definition
mentioned that EPA's proposed definition excludes ``many PFAS of known
concern, undercutting the benefits of the Agency's actions.''
A few commenters who claimed that EPA's proposed PFAS definition is
overly narrow, mentioned that other regulatory agencies in some states
have taken a ``class-based approach'' to PFAS by regulating them as a
chemical class. Commenters specifically cited Vermont, Massachusetts,
and California as examples of States that are regulating PFAS in this
way, ``given that all PFAS, or their degradation, reaction, or
metabolism products, display commonly hazardous traits.'' Some
commenters pointed to additional States (Colorado, Maine, Washington)
that have adopted or are considering adopting a broader definition of
PFAS similar to the OECD definition.
2. EPA's Response
EPA appreciates that there are differences between the definition
of PFAS used for this rule, for other actions in the Agency, and by
non-EPA entities. While EPA's rule is not dictated by the definitions
used by other regulatory bodies or international organizations, the
Agency did consider adopting the different definitions suggested by the
commenters, but ultimately determined those definitions would not
satisfy EPA's obligations under TSCA section 8(a)(7). In the
development of this proposed definition, EPA intended to include
substances with a strong electron withdrawing nature as this greatly
effects the chemistry of the substituted, adjacent and nearby atoms,
meaning they would have a minimum of two fluorine atoms on at least one
carbon (e.g., -CF2-). Additionally, EPA wanted the covered
substances to be unlikely to degrade or metabolize, so an adjacent CF
group was added to the requirement/
[[Page 70533]]
definition, with the stipulations that the substitutions could not be H
and both carbons must be saturated (e.g., -CF2-CFR-). EPA
also thought that branching might make a chemical less susceptible to
degradation and metabolism, so EPA also removed the option for -
CF2-CF2- when developing the proposed definition.
After reviewing public comments, EPA is modifying the proposed
definition of PFAS. For the purposes of this section 8(a)(7) reporting
rule, EPA is defining ``PFAS'' using a structural definition. PFAS is
defined as including at least one of these three structures:
R-(CF2)-CF(R')R'', where both the
CF2 and CF moieties are saturated carbons;
R-CF2OCF2-R', where R and R' can
either be F, O, or saturated carbons; and
CF3C(CF3)R'R'', where R' and R'' can
either be F or saturated carbons.
For the purposes of this rule, EPA has defined PFAS to include
chemical substances whose structures or sub-structures resemble, at
least in part, chemicals widely known to be of concern to human health
and/or the environment, i.e., PFOA, PFOS, and GenX. The definition also
captures substances that may metabolize or degrade to PFAS which may
present similar properties to PFOA, PFOS, or GenX. This definition is
focused on substances likely to be present in the environment, thereby
focusing on substances with greater potential for exposures to people
and/or the environment and by extension more potential to present
risks.
EPA considered adopting OECD's definition for the purpose of this
rule, but for the reasons provided in this unit, determined it is not
appropriate to do so. First, EPA notes that ``alkyl'' means an alkane
missing one hydrogen, and acyclic alkyl has the general formula of
CnH2(n+1), while a cycloalkyl has the general
formula CnH2(n-1). Rather than limiting the
definition of PFAS to alkyl chains, the OECD definition covers, with
certain exceptions, any chemical with one or more fluorinated alkyl
groups (i.e., -CF2-, -CF3). Many chemical
substances covered by the OECD definition are unlike the structures of
the PFAS of concern (i.e., PFOA, PFOS, GenX), which have more
fluorinated carbons and are more likely to be present in the
environment. The substances with only single fluorinated alkyl groups
and no additional fluorinated moieties do not share the same
environmental and/or human health impacts (including bioaccumulation,
persistence, or toxicity) as substances such as PFOA, PFOS, or GenX.
Further, many substances with one terminal -CF3 (e.g.,
trifluoroacetic acid (TFA)) are well-studied. Using structures in the
CompTox Chemicals Dashboard, EPA estimates that approximately 23,000
additional substances would be captured by the OECD definition, though
approximately 17,000 of those would be covered only due to having one
terminal -CF3 and no additional fluorine. Thus, adopting the
OECD definition of PFAS in this rule would mainly serve to
significantly add reporting burden on many substances whose only
fluorine atom is in a terminal -CF3 and that do not share a
fluorinated substructure that is likely to result in their persistence
in the environment, nor to degrade to a substance that shares
toxicological or physiochemical properties with PFOA, PFOS, or GenX.
Therefore, EPA is using its authority under TSCA section 8(a)(5)(A) to
focus reporting on structures that contain at least one fluorinated
alkyl chain rather than isolated fluorinated alkyl groups. Information
on structures that would meet the OECD definition due to an isolated
fluorinated alkyl group is considered ``unnecessary'' for the purpose
of this rule and is out of scope of reporting requirements under EPA's
authority under TSCA section 8(a)(5)(A).
Further, OECD's general definition is ``based on molecular
structure alone'' (Ref. 8). In its 2021 terminology document, OECD
notes that the current definition ``serves as a starting and reference
point to guide individual users to have a comprehensive understanding
of the PFAS universe and to keep the big picture of the PFAS universe
in mind. At the same time, individual users may define their own
working scope of PFASs for specific activities according to their
specific needs by combining the general definition of PFASs with
additional considerations (e.g., specific properties, use areas)''
(Ref. 8). Accordingly, EPA determined it is appropriate to define
``PFAS'' differently for this rule and to establish a definition which
characterizes PFAS based on pre-defined traits. Substances which meet
the OECD's definition of PFAS but that would not be considered PFAS
under this rule do not share properties with substances of concern to
EPA (i.e., PFOA, PFOS, and GenX). As noted previously, EPA is defining
PFAS for this rule to focus on reporting that is necessary under TSCA
section 8(a)(7), while reducing unnecessary or duplicative reporting
pursuant to EPA's obligations under TSCA section 8(a)(5)(A).
Additionally, while the OECD definition of PFAS is broader than
other entities' definitions of PFAS, EPA is aware of some TSCA chemical
substances which would meet this rule's definition of PFAS but not
OECD's. In comparing the universe of PFAS that would be subject to
EPA's proposed definition and those substances captured by OECD's
definition, EPA determined that some substances with halogens (e.g.,
iodine, chlorine, bromine) on the same carbon as the CF or
CF2 moiety would be in scope of EPA's proposed definition
but not OECD's. Examples of substances which are considered PFAS under
this rule's definition but not OECD's definition include 1-chloro-
1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane (CASRN 354-25-6) or 1,2-dichloro-1,1,2,2-
tetrafluoroethane (CASRN 76-14-2). Because all substances which were
captured by the proposed definition are still captured in this final
rule, EPA points out that adopting the OECD definition would still have
excluded some substances that are captured by this rule's definition.
Many commenters also suggested that trifluoroacetyl fluoride (TFA;
CASRN 354-34-7) should be included within the scope of this rule. Under
this rule's definition of PFAS, TFA is not within scope. EPA believes
TFA does not meet the threshold for reporting under TSCA section
8(a)(7), as it is a short-chain molecule (C2) with only one
terminal -CF3, and no other fluorine atom, unlike substances
such as PFOA, PFOS, and GenX. TFA is naturally occurring in some
instances or is produced as an environmental degradant of many other
substances, especially those with only one terminal carbon (-
CF3) (Refs. 23, 24, and 25). EPA understands that the
manufacture of TFA would not always be considered ``manufactured for
commercial purposes'' under TSCA, such as its production as an
environmental degradant or its presence as a naturally-occurring
substance, and therefore EPA would not receive any TSCA section 8(a)(7)
reporting on those quantities. Additionally, as EPA has noted in
responding to a request for testing on PFAS, TFA is ``a well-studied
substance'' with ``relatively robust toxicity information available''
(Ref. 25). Therefore, EPA believes that reporting on TFA under a TSCA
section 8(a) rule (i.e., one in which the scope is limited to those
substances manufactured for commercial purposes and does not include
environmental degradants) is not warranted as such requirements would
be ``unnecessary'' and
[[Page 70534]]
``duplicative'' under TSCA section 8(a)(5)(A).
EPA also disagrees with commenters who expressed that the scope of
substances reportable under this rule should be a discrete list and not
a structural definition. EPA points out that other TSCA requirements
have relied on a structural definition when appropriate (e.g., the
LCPFAC SNUR defines covered substances using a structural definition
(40 CFR 721.10536) (Ref. 7), and the polymer exemption rule for new
chemical pre-manufacture notices (PMNs) defines covered PFAS polymers
using structural definitions (40 CFR 723.250). As some commenters
pointed out, reporting exemptions for both existing chemicals (e.g.,
certain byproduct exemptions in the CDR rule) and new chemicals (e.g.,
byproducts and impurities not listed on the Inventory) mean that EPA
may be unaware of some substances which meet this definition of PFAS,
and which would also meet the TSCA definition of ``chemical
substance.'' Therefore, EPA has chosen to define the scope of covered
substances for the purpose of this rule using a structural definition
and not inadvertently limit the scope of reporting to a discrete list.
B. What is the inclusion for articles?
1. Summary of Public Input
Several commenters provided feedback on the inclusion of articles
(whether imported or domestically produced) in the proposed reporting
requirements.
Commenters who expressed support for the inclusion of articles in
the proposed reporting requirements provided the following rationales:
It is necessary that EPA include articles in the scope of
reporting requirements to better understand where PFAS are used in
products and the extent of human exposure. Additionally, EPA has
recognized that PFAS in articles can be released during use and
disposal, and therefore it is necessary for EPA to gather this
information.
Information on PFAS-containing articles is critical to
states that are beginning to regulate PFAS-containing items.
Even if there are data gaps related to the presence of
PFAS in articles, EPA would benefit from knowing the existence of these
gaps, and therefore, EPA should move forward with requiring reporting
on articles.
Congress has authorized inclusion of articles in the
reporting requirements; reporting of ``known or reasonably
ascertainable information'' is not an excessive burden. Commenters
argued that excluding articles from the scope of the final rule would
be inconsistent with Congressional intent.
The definition of ``chemical substance'' under TSCA is not
incompatible with the inclusion of articles. Further, in other sections
of TSCA, Congress specified distinct requirements for chemical
substances depending on their presence in articles, though it did not
do so in TSCA section 8(a)(7).
Commenters who suggested that EPA exempt articles from the proposed
reporting requirements provided the following rationales:
The proposed requirements are at odds with regulatory
practices; historically, EPA has not included articles in reporting
requirements. Additionally, CDR does not include reporting on imported
articles, and some commenters stated that EPA should be consistent with
those requirements. Some commenters suggested that the reasons EPA has
provided in the past for certain CDR exemptions, including imported
articles, are relevant here (i.e., the potential for exposure to
chemicals contained in articles is ``limited'') and encouraged EPA to
incorporate an imported article exemption under this rule. Several of
these comments also mentioned previous EPA actions, such as the TSCA
Fees Rule and the phenol, isopropylated phosphate (3:1) (PIP (3:1))
rule, in which EPA initially aimed to include articles but eventually
changed course due to ``workability'' issues of including articles
(Refs. 26 and 27).
EPA did not provide sufficient justification in the
proposed rule for requiring article reporting, and there is no mandate
in the FY 2020 NDAA for inclusion of articles. Commenters claimed that
EPA underestimated or failed to account for the burden this reporting
will have on article importers, and EPA is unable to accurately
estimate how many importers this proposed rule would affect.
Under TSCA, the definition of ``chemical substance'' has
not been interpreted to include articles which contain the chemical
substance. Commenters argue that TSCA section 8 implementing
regulations also distinguish ``articles'' from ``chemical substances.''
Requiring reporting on articles would place undue burden
on industry and for manufacturers or importers to obtain the
information EPA seeks is very difficult given the absence of historical
PFAS reporting requirements. Commenters claimed that there will be
significant data gaps if EPA requires article information, and that EPA
will not be able to obtain the information it seeks. Additionally,
reporting on articles going back ten years is impractical.
EPA has acknowledged that article manufacturers and
importers likely will not have the information EPA seeks, and
therefore, manufacturers and importers should be exempt. These
commenters also cite their foreign suppliers' confidentiality or trade
secret claims over their products and indicate that it is unlikely
their suppliers will divulge the information necessary to comply with
this rule.
Supply chains are too broad and requiring articles
reporting will result in duplicative information, especially for more
complex articles or finished products.
Neutral comments suggested that if EPA is going to require
reporting on articles, they should require reporting for domestic
article manufacturers only and not article importers, and that even
beyond this rule, EPA should fully consider the complexities associated
with collecting data on articles under TSCA. One commenter stated that
EPA should consider focusing its reporting requirements on articles
with the greatest potential for human exposure. The commenter offered
as an example the differences between articles containing PFAS on its
surface due to the properties that PFAS would impart on the product
(such as carpets or cookware) and articles containing PFAS within
resins of multi-component parts. The commenter suggested that EPA
exclude articles containing PFAS unless the PFAS was intentionally
added to the article due to properties imparted on the article.
2. EPA's Response
EPA appreciates the broad interest in the general topic of
requiring reporting on PFAS within articles (either imported articles
or articles that are domestically produced). This topic was also
discussed at length during the SBAR Panel, and EPA considered all
public input on the proposed inclusion of PFAS-containing articles in
this rule. EPA is finalizing the requirement to include PFAS-containing
articles within the scope of this rule, to the extent that the
manufacturer (including importer) of PFAS within articles knows or can
reasonably ascertain the requested information. EPA disagrees with
commenters who stated that the Agency does not have the authority to
collect information on PFAS-containing articles given the language in
the FY 2020 NDAA. While the FY 2020 NDAA did not explicitly direct EPA
to collect data
[[Page 70535]]
on articles containing PFAS, the FY 2020 NDAA also did not explicitly
prevent EPA from collecting information on PFAS-containing articles.
Further, EPA notes that it is within the Agency's authority to collect
information on chemical substances which are manufactured or imported
through articles. Thus, the FY 2020 NDAA's direction to EPA to require
data from PFAS manufacturers necessarily includes those PFAS
manufactured (including imported) within articles. Although EPA has not
typically included articles in some other TSCA section 8 reporting
rules, the Agency both has the authority and has previously done so.
Other TSCA rules, including other TSCA section 8 reporting rules (such
as the Preliminary Assessment Information Reporting rule under TSCA
section 8(a) (40 CFR part 712) and the TSCA section 8(d) Health and
Safety Data Reporting rule (40 CFR part 716) include reporting on
articles as needed for EPA to fulfill its responsibilities under TSCA.
Additionally, EPA points out that the TSCA Fees and PIP 3:1 rules
(Refs. 26 and 27) are authorized under separate sections of TSCA. This
PFAS reporting rule was proposed and required under TSCA section 8(a),
which authorizes EPA to require reporting and recordkeeping
requirements of manufacturers and/or processors, to the extent such
information is known to or reasonably ascertainable by the reporter.
The requirements and compliance standards of the PIP 3:1 (use in
article prohibition) (Ref. 27) and Fees (self-identification of
manufacture) rules were different (Ref. 26).
EPA disagrees with the commenters that under TSCA, the definition
of `chemical substance' ``cannot be and has never been interpreted to
include articles that contain the regulated chemical substance.'' TSCA
section 3(2) does not define ``chemical substance'' to exclude
articles. Generally speaking, articles are manufactured goods or
finished products--and the chemicals in them are subject to TSCA. The
law is clear that when a chemical substance is manufactured (including
imported into the United States) or is distributed or processed in the
United States--whether in bulk form or in an article--it can be subject
to regulation under TSCA. As such, EPA can and has imposed regulatory
requirements on chemical substances in articles under TSCA. Further, no
TSCA section 8 regulations exclude articles from the definition of
``chemical substances.'' While implementing regulations for other TSCA
section 8 rules may exempt reporting for activities related to a
covered chemical substance in an article (e.g., general reporting and
recordkeeping provisions for TSCA section 8(a) information-gathering
rules (40 CFR part 704) or the Chemical Data Reporting rule (40 CFR
part 711)), there is no definitional distinction for a chemical
substance depending on whether it is incorporated into an article;
nothing says that an ``article'' is exclusive or distinct from a
``chemical substance.'' While the CDR rule has exempted the import of
articles from reporting, the domestic manufacture of a chemical
substance within an article is still subject to CDR. Further, EPA
points out that the introductory paragraph of 40 CFR 704.5 for
exemptions states this section is superseded by any TSCA section 8(a)
rule that adds to, removes, or revises the exemptions described in this
section. Thus, the commenters' reliance on precedent under 40 CFR part
704 fails to acknowledge that EPA has long allowed for different
exemptions (or lack thereof) to apply under different TSCA section 8(a)
rules as appropriate.
EPA also disagrees with commenters' statements that reporting on
articles would place undue burden on industry. EPA points out that the
reporting standard of TSCA section 8(a) rules is limited to information
which is known to or reasonably ascertainable by the manufacturer.
Thus, if requested information is beyond that scope of known or
reasonably ascertainable, the reporting entity would not be required to
submit anything beyond indicating that such information is not known or
reasonably ascertainable to them. In other words, this reporting
standard is not a testing requirement; rather it asks reporters to
share with EPA the information they already have (or can reasonably
determine) on their manufactured and imported PFAS.
Regarding comments on the lookback period for article importers,
EPA points out that the lookback period proposed is consistent with
Congress's direction to EPA in TSCA section 8(a)(7). EPA is not
changing the proposed requirement to provide any known or reasonably
ascertainable information for the period beginning in 2011.
Regarding comments stating that requiring reporting on articles may
result in duplicative information for complex articles or products that
are re-imported, EPA disagrees that the information reported will
result in duplicative information, especially given the reporting
standard applicable to this rule. EPA acknowledges that some supply
chains of manufacturers reporting under this rule are complex. However,
EPA believes that information known to or reasonably ascertainable by
an article manufacturer at the first instance the PFAS is imported into
the United States is likely different than the scope of information
known to an article importer farther down the supply chain who may re-
import that PFAS later, as the article is incorporated into more
complex articles or products. For instance, the person who imports a
PFAS within an article in the first instance may have different worker
exposure information to report than a person who may later re-import
that PFAS-containing article as part of a more complex product. In
another example, information related to the known industrial or
consumer uses of a PFAS within an article may be clearer to the person
who re-imports a PFAS within a larger complex product than it is to the
person who first manufactured the PFAS within the article. Thus, EPA
does not believe that the information requested of PFAS article
manufacturers would be duplicative, given the different steps of a
supply chain and manufacturing processes, and is requiring all PFAS-
containing article manufacturers to report the requested data to EPA to
the extent it is known or reasonably ascertainable. EPA also believes
that applying the reporting requirements each time a PFAS is imported
into the United States is consistent with TSCA's definition of
manufacturing under TSCA section 3(9) (which means ``to import into the
customs territory of the United States (as defined in general note 2 of
the Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the United States), produce, or
manufacture'') and the directive under TSCA section 8(a)(7). EPA also
believes that if a PFAS is imported, exported, then re-imported,
limiting the scope of reporting to just one instance of importation
into the United States may result in certain burden on manufacturers
within the supply chain who need to further communicate with each other
to determine whether a PFAS within an article has already been reported
and who is responsible for reporting. Further, with respect to comments
claiming that the inclusion of articles will necessarily result in
significant data gaps, EPA respectfully points out that there is no
current database with comparable information on PFAS in commerce,
including within articles, over the reporting timeframe. EPA cannot
make an assessment of potential PFAS data gaps without considering all
reasonably available information. Additionally, as noted by other
commenters, EPA would benefit
[[Page 70536]]
from better characterizing any data gaps after receipt of all
reasonably known information.
EPA disagrees with commenters' suggestions to limit the scope of
reporting on PFAS in articles by extending reporting requirements to
only those articles ``with the greatest exposure potential.'' For the
purpose of a TSCA section 8 information reporting rule, there is no
requirement for EPA to determine which substances or types of articles
may pose greater exposure potential, unlike some other sections of TSCA
(e.g., TSCA section 6 Significant New Use Rules). This TSCA section
8(a)(7) rule in particular aims to provide EPA with a greater
understanding of the scope of existing information of PFAS within the
supply chain and the quantities and uses of commercially manufactured
PFAS, which may include PFAS manufactured or imported within a variety
of articles or products.
Finally, EPA took appropriate and necessary steps to consult with
the public and consider stakeholder input on the proposed rule,
including reporting on PFAS-containing articles. These steps included
convening an SBAR Panel and meeting with stakeholders to discuss the
proposed rule and potential reporting obligations. EPA has considered
all input for this rule, including the complexity of different supply
chains with respect to collecting data on articles. While EPA was not
able to estimate the burden on article importers given the data
limitations at the time of the proposed rule's publication, the Agency
has since been able to provide such estimates, including input from
public commenters, peer-reviewed journals, other government datasets,
and input from the SBAR Panel. EPA has now remedied this omission in
the Economic Analysis.
C. What are the exclusion of processors from rule?
1. Summary of Public Input
EPA received comments both in support of and in opposition to the
addition of processors to the proposed rule. Ten commenters stated that
EPA should expand the rule beyond manufacturers (including importers)
to cover all facilities processing PFAS. Two of these commenters
expressed that processors are often in the best position to provide the
information required under TSCA section 8(a). Several commenters
emphasized the importance of collecting information on the full life
cycle of PFAS, including from processing operations. Some commenters
were concerned with a potential data gap of PFAS exposures if
processors are omitted from the final rule. Another commenter
highlighted the importance of tracking the PFAS solid waste stream to
enhance understanding of health risks associated with PFAS and to
inform other actions under environmental regulations such as the Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). Many commenters in support of
adding processors also stated that EPA has the authority to require
reporting from processors, citing both the FY 2020 NDAA and TSCA
section 8(a)(1).
Four commenters indicated that the Congress did not intend for the
proposed rule to include processors and that EPA should not require
them to report. Two of these commenters referred to the FY 2020 NDAA
section 7351 language stating that the Act does not identify
manufacturers that process PFAS substances as entities that would be
subject to the rule. Commenters in opposition to adding processors also
claimed that EPA would be creating confusion and the potential for
duplicative reporting. One commenter urged EPA to clarify in the final
rule that reporting is limited to only the initial importers of PFAS-
containing products and not any downstream processors or users.
Commenters also said that such reporting would create unnecessary
burden for both EPA and processors.
2. EPA's Response
EPA appreciates commenters' perspectives on extending reporting
requirements to processors for this rule under TSCA section 8(a)(7).
However, the Agency's reading of the text in TSCA section 8(a)(7) and
the FY 2020 NDAA's legislative history conclude that the intended scope
of this rule is to only require reporting from manufacturers (including
importers), distinct from processors. EPA is clarifying that entities
who solely process, distribute, and/or use PFAS, and do not manufacture
(including import) PFAS for a commercial purpose, are not required to
report under this rule.
As some commenters noted, the Agency would have the authority to
promulgate such a rule for processors under TSCA section 8(a)(1).
However, this rule is being promulgated under TSCA section 8(a)(7). EPA
also notes that the exclusion of processors from the scope of this rule
does not preclude any potential future rulemaking under TSCA section
8(a)(1), should the Agency determine such data are needed. EPA will
review the data submitted by manufacturers under this rule and reserves
the right to promulgate a rule under TSCA section 8(a)(1) to capture
information from PFAS processors if appropriate. EPA disagrees with
commenters who noted that including processors in the scope of this
rule would lead to confusion and duplicative reporting. EPA points out
that other TSCA section 8(a) rules have included processors, such as
the nanoscale materials reporting rule (40 CFR 740.20).
D. What were the small business considerations?
1. Summary of Public Input
Many commenters opined on the inclusion of small businesses,
including small manufacturers, under the proposed rule. Several
commenters stated that EPA should exempt small businesses from
reporting under the proposed rule. Some of these commenters said that
small businesses are not likely to provide useful information and will
be disproportionately affected by the rule (including potentially being
forced out of business) because fewer resources are available to them.
Others expressed that they thought EPA had not evaluated whether small
businesses would actually contribute meaningful data to EPA as a result
of the rule.
Four commenters disagreed with EPA's position that the FY 2020 NDAA
authorizes data collection from all manufacturers, including small
manufacturers. Two of these commenters felt that, by not providing
relief for small manufacturers, EPA did not appropriately apply TSCA
section 8(a)(5) requirements. Some commenters referred to TSCA section
8(a)(1), which they state excludes small manufacturers from reporting
rules. Another commenter stated that EPA needs to consider the
historical lack of TSCA section 8 reporting requirements on small
manufacturers or article importers, including from CDR.
Other commenters said that EPA should collect the information
required under the proposed rule from all businesses regardless of
size. While one commenter acknowledged that the rule could be
burdensome for small entities, they also said that the health risks
associated with PFAS are significant and warrant the data collection
from small businesses. Another commenter described EPA's definition of
small manufacturer under TSCA section 8 as ``expansive'' and noted that
the existing ``small manufacturer'' definition would
[[Page 70537]]
result in omitting reporting from significant PFAS manufacturing and
importing activities such that it would undermine this data collection
effort.
One commenter stated that EPA could help small businesses comply
with the proposed rule in lieu of a small manufacturer exemption by
extending other reporting exemptions to them, including R&D substances,
non-isolated intermediates, impurities, byproducts, and articles, as
well as a minimum reporting threshold.
2. EPA's Response
EPA disagrees with commenters' positions that a broad small
business or a small manufacturer exemption is appropriate for this
rule. EPA appreciates that small businesses, especially those which
have not previously reported under CDR or other TSCA section 8(a)
rules, may not have the same resources that are available to large
companies. This feedback was also voiced through the rule's SBAR Panel,
and EPA is greatly appreciative of the input related to small
businesses' resources and ability to respond to the rule. To that end,
EPA has modified the proposed rule to include options that provide some
relief to all manufacturers, including small entities. Specifically,
article importers and manufacturers of R&D substances in quantities
below 10 kilograms per year will have the option to submit more
streamlined reporting forms than the longer, standard form for all
other PFAS manufacturers. Additionally, EPA is extending the deadline
for reporting forms by at least six months from what was proposed, so
that all entities, including small entities, have 18 months from the
effective date of this rule to submit the requested information. For
small manufacturers (as defined at 40 CFR 704.3) whose reporting
obligations under this rule are exclusively from article imports, EPA
is further extending the deadline for reporting forms by an additional
six months. Thus, small article importers have 24 months from the
effective date of this rule to submit the requested information.
In response to commenters who refer to TSCA section 8(a)(1) in
their support of an exemption for small manufacturers, EPA respectfully
points out that this is a rule authorized under TSCA section 8(a)(7),
not under TSCA section 8(a)(1). While Congress explicitly carved out
potential exemptions for small manufacturers and small processors for
rules implemented under TSCA section 8(a)(1) for chemicals not subject
to certain TSCA actions, Congress chose not to do so in the text of
TSCA section 8(a)(7). EPA considered the provisions at TSCA section
8(a)(5) to limit reporting requirements for small manufacturers and
determined that reporting from small manufacturers would be appropriate
under TSCA section 8(a)(5)(A) through (C). The information requested
under this rule is not unnecessary nor duplicative due, in part, to
exemptions in other TSCA reporting rules. Additionally, a broad
exemption for all entities deemed a ``small manufacturer'' would not
enable EPA to fulfill the express requirements of the NDAA to require
``each person'' to report their PFAS manufacturing activities to the
extent they know or can reasonably ascertain. Regarding the provision
to minimize the cost of compliance on small manufacturers, EPA has
identified regulatory alternatives to the proposed rule that reduce
compliance costs without a complete exemption. Finally, based on public
comments and input from the SBAR Panel, EPA believes that small
manufacturers are likely to have information regarding commercially
manufactured PFAS, which is relevant to the effective implementation of
TSCA.
E. What is the concern regarding a lack of common TSCA reporting
exemptions or reporting threshold?
1. Summary of Public Input
Many commenters opined on the proposed rule's lack of common TSCA
reporting exemptions and a reporting threshold. Several commenters
added that incorporating exemptions and/or a reporting threshold would
make the proposed rule consistent with other TSCA rules such as CDR,
Fees, PAIR, and PMN reporting (Refs. 20, 26, and 27). Commenters cited
potential compliance challenges and reporting burden as the rationale
for such exemptions, as they stated that the work involved in
identifying, tracing, and reporting under the proposed rule is
significantly increased without exemptions. Other commenters said that
the lack of exemptions would significantly increase the number of
substances for which reporting must occur as opposed to the 1,364 PFAS
estimated in the proposed rule, as those only reflected those PFAS on
the Inventory or subject to an LVE, yet those sources exempt several
types of substances (e.g., impurities, byproducts, R&D substances).
Another commenter said that these types of substances are not likely to
result in exposure to humans or the environment, and that EPA has not
articulated what the benefit of the additional data would be.
On the other hand, several commenters supported implementation of
the proposed rule without any exemptions. They said that Congress
intended for each person who manufactures a PFAS to be subject to the
rule, without exemptions, and that incorporating exemptions would not
be consistent with EPA's past approach for PFAS. Some commenters also
pointed out the differences between the objectives of CDR and this PFAS
reporting rule, stating that CDR's intent is to obtain initial
screening information on a broad universe of chemicals, while this
rule's aim is to collect information specifically on PFAS.
2. EPA's Response
EPA appreciates the input from commenters on the impacts of not
incorporating certain reporting exemptions or thresholds. EPA
appreciates the support from commenters who supported promulgating the
final rule without exemption and, after reviewing public input, has
decided to finalize that aspect of the proposed rule.
EPA disagrees with commenters' requests to include many of the
reporting exemptions found in other TSCA rules such as in PMN reporting
and the Fees Rule (Refs. 20 and 26). EPA points out that, unlike the
Fees Rule, the scope of this rule is information which is known to or
reasonably ascertainable by the manufacturer (Ref. 26).
While this rule uses the same reporting standard as CDR and other
TSCA section 8(a) rules, this rule is focused on improving EPA's
knowledge of commercially manufactured PFAS and their uses, which
includes chemicals of concern to human health and the environment.
Therefore, EPA does not believe many of the same reporting exemptions
used in other TSCA rules are warranted. As directed by the statute, EPA
is requesting information on PFAS manufactured for a commercial purpose
to the extent such information is known or reasonably ascertainable to
the manufacturer. EPA also points out that, whether types of substances
(such as non-isolated intermediates, impurities, or articles) are
likely to result in human or environmental exposures is not a threshold
that EPA needs to satisfy for requiring reporting on those substances
under TSCA section 8(a)(7). EPA aims to better understand the scope of
existing knowledge of the universe of historically manufactured PFAS
and implementing certain exemptions may inadvertently lead to the
omission of information known to or reasonably ascertainable to some
manufacturers.
[[Page 70538]]
The information EPA receives through this rule will refine the Agency's
understanding of certain exposure-related data of PFAS manufactured. If
certain substances have not resulted in significant human and
environmental exposures, then that would be reflected in the submitted
information.
EPA appreciates the public input on the proposed rule's burden
analysis, including additional information received during the proposed
rule's comment period, the SBAR Panel, and the IRFA comment period. EPA
has refined its economic analysis, including the estimated scope of
covered substances and associated burden of determining whether
reporting is required. Regarding commenters' claims that the estimated
scope of covered substances may be significantly greater than estimated
without certain exemptions, EPA points out that the exact challenge
articulated by commenters justifies the lack of exemptions in this
rule: the fact that stakeholders have questions surrounding the number
of covered substances under this rule, including as impurities,
intermediates, or R&D substances, reveals the lack of existing
information of the universe of PFAS in commerce. EPA aims to better
understand what manufacturers know or may reasonably ascertain
regarding manufactured PFAS, and exempting substances that were not
previously reported under other TSCA rules would hinder that effort.
F. What is the application of the reporting standard?
1. Summary of Public Input
EPA received many comments on the reporting standard proposed for
this rule: information known to or reasonably ascertainable by the
manufacturer. The majority of these commenters suggested that EPA
revise their definition of ``reasonably ascertainable'' to assist
businesses with compliance. Specifically, these commenters voiced
concerns over the time spent to conduct compliance determination
activities to satisfy the ``due diligence'' requirement of the
reporting standard for many substances and products, and for which they
do not anticipate information being readily available even after an
extensive search. Commenters claimed that, for substances which have
been historically exempt from other TSCA reporting requirements
(especially imported articles), there is likely little if any
information available, yet entities would still be required to perform
due diligence and demonstrated they have examined each imported
article.
However, other commenters largely supported EPA's proposed
requirements. One commenter suggested that ``known and reasonably
ascertainable'' should be broadly interpreted and that the proposed
definition of ``known and reasonably ascertainable'' is consistent with
definitions in TSCA recordkeeping regulations and should therefore be
included, as is, in the final rule. Other commenters stated that the
requirement for manufacturers to assess whether they know or can
reasonably ascertain PFAS' presence in their articles is a modest cost
that is outweighed by the benefits of the data to EPA and the public.
In addition, there were several comments requesting that EPA
clarify or provide additional guidance on the reporting standard for
this rule, including guidance tailored to article importers and what
constitutes due diligence under this standard. Some suggestions
included stipulating that the scope of a manufacturer's inquiry within
their supply chain is limited to just immediate suppliers (i.e., no
need to inquire multiple levels of their supply chain), and that if a
supplier refuses to share information with a manufacturer, then the
manufacturer need not inquire further and would not face EPA
enforcement action. Some commenters also requested further
clarification of the proposed requirement to submit ``reasonable
estimates'' for certain data elements where actual data are not
available.
2. EPA's Response
EPA appreciates the input from commenters and the SBAR Panel
related to the scope of information that may be known to or reasonably
ascertainable by (KRA) PFAS manufacturers, including small article
importers. EPA has incorporated the feedback into both the rule (e.g.,
providing an option of streamlined reporting forms for article
importers and manufacturers of small quantities of R&D substances who
would not know the downstream processing, use, and disposal
information) and this rule's accompanying guidance and instructions on
applying the KRA standard.
Regarding manufacturers who have concerns over the due diligence
expected under this rule, including those who believe they ultimately
will not obtain any reportable information, EPA clarifies that there is
no reporting or recordkeeping requirement if an entity has no relevant
information. This rule does not itself require any company to maintain
information upon which a decision not to report is based. Consistent
with their own business practices, companies may elect to retain
documentation of their conclusion that they were not subject to
reporting requirements. While manufacturers and importers are expected
to exercise ``due diligence'' in looking for reportable PFAS and
information, that effort will look different for different entities.
EPA also acknowledges that it may not be within the scope of
``reasonably ascertainable'' to survey all articles and products,
especially for article importers. In addition to the existing guidance
on this reporting standard, EPA is providing guidance on this reporting
standard with respect to article importers and other entities who may
be exempt under other TSCA regulations (e.g., manufacturers of small
quantities of R&D substances).
Regarding the suggestions that the rule should limit the scope of a
manufacturer's inquiry of its supplier(s) to only information which the
supplier does not claim as CBI or trade secret, EPA is enabling a joint
submission option within the future reporting tool. Similar to one of
the joint submission options in the CDR tool, a PFAS manufacturer whose
supplier does not volunteer requested information, including the
specific chemical identity of a PFAS imported from the supplier, would
have the option to complete the PFAS reporting form to the extent
information is known or reasonably ascertainable. The manufacturer
would then initiate an email to its supplier via the CDX-based tool and
request the supplier provide the necessary information to EPA, using a
secondary reporting form, without needing to divulge to the reporting
entity the specific chemical identity of the PFAS or the composition of
the product. The tool will create an electronic record of the U.S.-
based importer's attempts to contact the supplier and request
information. Further, if the immediate supplier does not know the
information, they may continue to send an email via the reporting tool
to their own suppliers, in an effort to secure the requested
information.
G. What are the concerns regarding potential duplicative reporting?
1. Summary of Public Input
EPA received comments on potential duplicative reporting under the
proposed rule and NODA public comment periods. The majority of
commenters shared the sentiment that the proposed reporting
requirements
[[Page 70539]]
would result in duplicative reporting that is contrary to TSCA section
8(a)(5)(A), which requires EPA to avoid, to the extent feasible,
reporting which is unnecessary or duplicative. Most of these commenters
shared the opinion that some information required to be reported under
the proposed rule is extremely similar to, if not the same as,
information required under the CDR rule. One commenter, however, shared
a contrasting opinion that EPA should not exclude information
previously reported under CDR requirements on the grounds that omitting
that information would compromise EPA's ability to collect and
aggregate PFAS data pursuant to TSCA section 8(a)(7).
The commenters who stated that the requirements in the proposed
rule consist of duplicative reporting primarily cited reporting
requirements under the CDR rule as justification for their position.
Multiple commenters also cited studies submitted as unpublished health
and safety studies under TSCA section 8(d) and the substantial risk
notification requirements under TSCA section 8(e). One commenter
claimed that EPA is likely already in possession of a considerable
amount of PFAS information from studies submitted to EPA under new
chemicals reporting (i.e., PMN and LVE applications) and TSCA section
8(e) reporting. A few commenters also suggested that companies should
not be required to collect and repeat data for past non-principal
reporting years. Other commenters specified that EPA should limit
reporting of information concerning environmental or health effects by
excluding information that is publicly available, such as information
published in scientific journals, as requiring reporting of this
information would be unnecessary and duplicative.
Multiple commenters claimed that including articles in the required
reporting would substantially increase duplicative reporting due to the
number of entities an article may pass through, who would then all be
required to report information on that chemical. Two commenters raised
the issue of articles which are exported from and then reimported into
the U.S. and asserted that the reporting of reimported articles would
be considered duplicative reporting. To remedy this situation, a
commenter suggested that EPA require reporting at the level of
manufacturing the PFAS itself, and possibly the first supplier that
incorporates a PFAS, but no further.
2. EPA's Response
EPA acknowledges that some of the data elements may overlap with
the data required under the 2020 CDR cycle but disagrees that the scope
of such overlap is significant. There are several differences between
the CDR rule and this rule which limit the scope of any potential
overlaps between the datasets. First, CDR includes several reporting
exemptions and a reporting threshold based on production volume, which
are not included in this rule: imported articles, certain byproducts,
non-isolated intermediates, small quantities of R&D chemicals, small
manufacturers, and a minimum production volume reporting threshold of
25,000 lbs/year (or 2,500 lbs/year for substances subject to certain
TSCA actions). Therefore, PFAS reporters with activities that are
exempt in CDR or who manufacture PFAS below the CDR threshold will not
have reported such information to CDR before and would not be
considered ``duplicative'' here. Further, CDR reporters may have
excluded quantities that would be reportable under this rule, based on
certain CDR exemptions, and therefore the information they previously
submitted to CDR would not be considered duplicative and would not be
responsive to this rule. Secondly, the PFAS that have been reported to
CDR are a subset of the scope of PFAS for this rule. The scope of CDR
chemical substances is limited to those on the Inventory and excludes
polymers. The scope of this reporting rule includes any chemical
substance meeting the rule's structural definition, which is not
limited to those on the Inventory (e.g., LVEs), and includes any
fluoropolymers that meet the structural definition. Finally, the years
for which certain required data elements may have been reported to CDR
differ. Some of the information described earlier in this unit is
reported differently for the principal reporting year compared to the
other three years within the four-year CDR period. For instance, the
production volumes for domestic manufacture and import are combined for
any non-principal reporting year. Further, prior CDR cycles had
different required information. Therefore, the extent of potentially
``duplicative'' reporting between CDR and this rule is limited,
especially when considering each year for which reporting is required
under this rule.
EPA is finalizing the proposal to not require resubmission of
information that has been reported to CDR, unless that information did
not reflect all activities or quantities for which reporting is
required under this rule. EPA disagrees with the commenter who
suggested that EPA should not exclude information previously reported
under CDR. Such information could be duplicative and therefore EPA is
limiting that reporting under TSCA section 8(a)(5)(A).
EPA also appreciates the commenters' input regarding information
previously submitted via TSCA section 8(e) reporting. EPA agrees that
substantial risk notification requirements submitted to EPA under TSCA
section 8(e) could be considered ``information concerning the
environmental or health effects'' of a PFAS. To that end, EPA is
finalizing the rule to acknowledge that manufacturers who have
previously submitted substantial risk notifications, other unpublished
health and safety studies under TSCA section 8(d), or other relevant
information concerning environmental or health effects need not
resubmit the information. However, to enable EPA to easily collect
those prior submissions, the manufacturers must indicate the rule or
program to which they submitted that prior information concerning the
environmental or health effects of that PFAS and the year in which it
was submitted to EPA. EPA also reiterates that manufacturers need not
submit health and environmental effects information that is not in
their possession or control, but could be found from a publicly
available source.
Finally, regarding the comments related to whether reporting
certain imported articles in complex products may lead to duplicative
reporting: EPA disagrees that the information reported will result in
duplicative information, especially given the reporting standard
applicable to this rule. EPA believes that information known to or
reasonably ascertainable by an article manufacturer at the first
instance the PFAS is imported into the United States is likely
different than the scope of information known to an article importer
farther down the supply chain who may re-import that PFAS later, as the
article is incorporated into more complex articles or products. EPA
also believes that applying the reporting requirements each time a PFAS
is imported into the United States is consistent with TSCA's definition
of manufacturing and directive under TSCA section 8(a)(7). If a PFAS is
imported, exported, then re-imported, then limiting the scope of
reporting to just one instance of importation into the United States
may result in certain burdens on manufacturers within the supply chain
who need to further communicate with each other to determine whether a
PFAS within an article has already been reported and who is responsible
for reporting.
[[Page 70540]]
H. What are the concerns regarding the lookback period?
1. Summary of Public Input
Several commenters stated that attempting to obtain or develop the
required information over a ten-year lookback period is not feasible
and would constitute a significant burden to reporters, and they felt
that EPA should eliminate or shorten the lookback period. These
commenters suggested either setting the lookback period to either 3
years, or 5 years to be consistent with the CDR recordkeeping
requirement. Commenters stated that it would be difficult or impossible
to collect the information required due to the complexities of their
supply chains, the turnover rate of foreign suppliers especially for
fad markets, the lack of historical reporting requirements for PFAS in
products, and the concurrent supply chain disruptions rendered by the
COVID-19 pandemic. Commenters also suggested that creating or
recreating data from the lookback period will result in imprecise data.
In addition to the suggestions to reduce the lookback period, some
commenters suggested that EPA consider implementing a ``principal
reporting year'' approach as used in CDR, in which only production
volumes are reported for each year, while the more detailed data
elements are reported for only the principal reporting year. Other
suggestions included exempting articles or exempting companies that
have since phased out PFAS by the reporting deadline.
2. EPA's Response
EPA disagrees with the commenters who have suggested altering the
lookback period from 2011 to a more recent year. The language in TSCA
section 8(a)(7) directs EPA to promulgate a reporting rule for ``each
person who has manufactured a chemical substance that is a [PFAS] in
any year since January 1, 2011, to submit to the Administrator a report
that includes, for each year since January 1, 2011, the information
described in subparagraphs (A) through (G) of paragraph (2).''
Congress's direction to EPA is clear: the lookback period for this
reporting rule must begin on January 1, 2011. EPA understands the
extent of information known to or reasonably ascertainable by a
manufacturer may vary for several reasons. However, EPA's obligation
under TSCA section 8(a)(7) and interest in identifying the scope of
available and existing data on historically manufactured PFAS demand
that PFAS manufacturers conduct their due diligence and submit
requested information to the extent it is known or reasonably
ascertainable.
I. What is the submission period duration and reporting deadline?
1. Summary of Public Input
EPA received significant input on the duration of the proposed
submission period. Many commenters and input during the SBAR Panel
claimed that the proposed rule's reporting deadline is unrealistic, and
EPA should allow more time for reporting to accomplish the required
data collection. Commenters provided a range of alternatives to
consider for the reporting deadline, from 1.5 years from rule
promulgation to 5 years from rule promulgation for article importers.
Several commenters provided detailed descriptions of the types of
activities that would need to occur during the submission period as
evidence of why they felt the proposed submission period to be
inadequate. Some commenters raised EPA's experiences with the PIP (3:1)
rule as justification for a longer time frame for extensive PFAS data
reporting (Ref. 27). Other reasons provided by commenters regarding why
additional time is needed include: time to familiarize themselves with
the rule; unclear scope of requirements in the proposed rule; lack of
systems in place with which to track the data leading to manual
collection; and lack of ability to outsource the task to contractors
due to the confidentiality concerns. In addition, one commenter noted
that other jurisdictions have delayed the implementation of new rules
in light of overwhelming burden, COVID, and supply chain disruptions.
EPA also received some comments urging the Agency to finalize this
aspect of the proposed rule and not delay the deadline by which PFAS
data are submitted. Commenters cited the pressing need for such data
and the awareness within the regulated community of this rule.
2. EPA's Response
EPA appreciates the significant feedback the Agency received from
the public, including through the SBAR Panel, on the duration of the
reporting submission period. After considering input from the
commenters and other stakeholders, EPA agrees that the proposed
reporting time frame may not be sufficient for identifying, collecting,
and reporting the scope of information requested by this rule. While
EPA disagrees that the extent of activities necessarily requires
investigations of the supply chain that would take up to five years to
complete, it is modifying the proposal by adding six more months to the
information collection period ahead of the reporting tool opening (for
a total of one year from the effective date of this rule). This one-
year information collection period will then be followed by a six-month
reporting submission period. Thus, information will be due 18 months
following the effective date of this rule for all PFAS manufacturers
except certain small article importers. EPA has provided an additional
six months for small manufacturers (as defined at 40 CFR 704.3) who
would report exclusively article importers for the purposes of this
rule. Therefore, small article importers have two years from the
effective date of this final rule to report. Thus, information will be
due 24 months following the effective date of this rule for small
manufacturers (per 40 CFR 704.3) who are reporting exclusively as
article importers. EPA believes this timeframe will be sufficient to
allow reporters to familiarize themselves with the rule, identify PFAS
they have produced or imported, identify any suppliers or other
contacts, collect information, and submit the information to EPA. The
additional time will enable reporters to thoroughly review their known
or reasonably ascertainable information and provide EPA with the extent
of the requested information under this reporting standard.
Additionally, as this is a TSCA section 8(a) reporting rule, EPA
disagrees with commenters who request additional reporting time by
comparing this rule to the PIP (3:1) rule or other non-section 8
reporting rules (Ref. 27). The reporting standard under TSCA section
8(a) does not apply to those rules, which may require additional
compliance activities. However, EPA agrees with commenters who pointed
out the distinctions between this rule and CDR as a basis for extending
the reporting period: the CDR rule requires only a four-year lookback
period, includes certain exemptions and reporting thresholds, different
data elements, and is regularly occurring so that companies can
anticipate reporting. Due, in part, to these differences with CDR, EPA
is extending the information collection period ahead of the submission
period, thereby providing reporters with 18 months to submit
information for this rule (or 24 months for small article importers).
EPA disagrees with commenters who have suggested the reporting
deadline should be sooner than what was proposed. EPA appreciates the
commenters' interest in reviewing the submitted PFAS data as soon as
[[Page 70541]]
possible, but notes the scope of this rule and differences between this
rule and CDR as factors in allowing the reporting community extra time
to sufficiently review their known or reasonably ascertainable
information and to submit the required data to EPA.
J. Can joint submissions be allowed?
1. Summary of Public Input
Some commenters requested that EPA allow joint submissions. They
suggested it might ease the reporting burden and simplify the reporting
process while still protecting CBI. However, other commenters stated
that joint submissions can still be a substantial burden for companies
already trying to complete their own reporting within a prescribed
timeframe. Commenters urged EPA to carefully consider a workable
solution to protecting CBI and reducing industry burden for compliance.
In response to the NODA, one commenter asked EPA to eliminate the
requirement for joint submissions in response to chemical identity CBI
concerns.
2. EPA's Response
EPA agrees with the commenters' requests for joint submissions and
is finalizing this requirement for reporters (other than article
importers) whose suppliers do not wish to disclose chemical identity.
EPA agrees that such an approach would help protect suppliers' CBI
while not withholding necessary information from EPA related to PFAS
identity. While this may increase burden on upstream companies, EPA
believes this approach will both help downstream manufacturing and
reporting entities, as well as protect CBI if the suppliers do not wish
to disclose it to their customers, including reporting entities.
K. What are the economic analysis considerations?
1. Summary of Public Input
Many commenters addressed the impact of the proposed rule in
general: on industry, EPA, and the general public. Several commenters
provided input on the industry burden estimates provided in EPA's draft
Economic Analysis for the proposed rule, with many stating that EPA
underestimated the cost industry would incur to comply with the
proposed rule and failed to include article importer costs. Commenters
provided specific feedback on EPA's burden and cost estimates for
certain activities including rule familiarization, CBI substantiation,
article identification, determination of chemical identity,
identification of byproducts, outreach to suppliers, data collection,
CDX access and training, form completion and recordkeeping. Some of
these commenters provided additional data or factors to consider when
estimating burden or costs for these compliance activities, including
providing results of their own industry surveys. Commenters also
provided specific feedback on the proposed rule's burden on article
importers and stated that EPA's draft burden assessment is
significantly underestimated. Some commenters stated that article
importers may face substantially more costs than domestic producers
because they lack the knowledge needed for compliance yet would still
incur costs under the reporting standard. Additionally, because article
importers do not have experience with CDR, commenters believed their
cost would be higher than EPA's draft estimates which used CDR to
extrapolate burden estimates for this rule.
Some commenters also claimed that EPA's use of CDR burden to derive
burden estimates under this rule was inappropriate due to the
differences between the two rules. Commenters also provided feedback on
the estimated number of substances subject to reporting in the draft
Economic Analysis and claimed that the draft estimates were too low.
Some commenters pointed out that, because the proposed rule does not
have the same exemptions as CDR nor is limited to a discrete list of
substances, the number of substances subject to reporting would be
substantially higher than the estimates provided in the draft Economic
Analysis.
EPA also received comments that the proposed rule significantly
underestimated the universe of small entities that would be subject to
the rule, both due to the lack of estimates related to article
importers and to the extrapolation from CDR data. Some commenters
described the unique difficulties or burdens small businesses face when
complying with the proposed rule compared to larger businesses.
Commenters stated that EPA cannot justify an RFA certification without
further analysis of the small business impacts and requested that EPA
convene an SBAR Panel under the RFA to obtain feedback from small
businesses potentially affected by the rule.
Some commenters also stated that EPA's draft Economic Analysis
underestimated burden on the Agency itself. Namely, the need to
increase CDX capacity to handle the number of reporting forms and other
administrative costs of reviewing the submitted data are not reflected
in the draft Economic Analysis.
Finally, other commenters claimed that EPA had not accounted for
the social and health costs associated with PFAS exposure in the burden
analysis. Commenters added that the public and various government
entities have incurred significant health, social, and financial costs
due to inadequate information related to PFAS, and that even an
underestimation of industry compliance costs for this rule are minimal
compared to the externalized costs that the public and governments bear
related to PFAS exposure and remediation.
2. EPA's Response
EPA appreciates the feedback on the draft Economic Analysis and
agrees with commenters that an SBAR Panel was appropriate given the
limitations of data related to the small entity universe at the time of
the proposed rule's publication. Accordingly, EPA convened an SBAR
Panel for this rule in April 2022 and completed it in August 2022.
Using feedback from commenters, input during the SBAR Panel, and
additional data made available to EPA since the proposed rule's
publication, EPA has since accounted for the burden that the rule would
impose on article importers and small entities. The burden estimates
include the number of article importers who will be required to report
as well as the number of entities that will have to assess their
product lines to determine whether they must submit reports. EPA
disagrees that the article importer compliance determination activities
are too low. EPA recognizes that a range of activities may be involved
depending on the level of experience of the importer. Actual costs may
vary based on the number of articles imported, the complexity of the
articles, the number of suppliers, and the frequency of supplier
changes. EPA has increased the rule familiarization costs as well as
included the burden of understanding the structural definition of PFAS.
Readers are referred to EPA's updated Economic Analysis for details
regarding the assumptions of calculating burden and costs for article
importers and small entities.
With regards to the use of CDR data, EPA acknowledges that CDR data
are subject to reporting thresholds and that the CDR universe does not
reflect a perfect representation of the likely reporting universe of
this rule. EPA recognizes the limitations of using CDR data in
estimating the burden, including the number of PFAS for which companies
may ultimately report. However, there is no comprehensive
[[Page 70542]]
database of PFAS manufactured in the U.S. that EPA could use to develop
more precise estimates. The reporting requirements of this rule will
serve to fill this knowledge gap. After considering input from the
proposed rule's public comments, stakeholders in the SBAR Panel, and
comments received on the IRFA, EPA is continuing to rely on the CDR
data to extrapolate the estimated number of PFAS to be reported per
firm. EPA acknowledges that the number may vary for some manufacturers
but believes that using CDR for such estimates will help provide an
industry average.
EPA has updated the Agency costs to account for the volume of
reports that will be submitted. EPA will incur costs in administering
the final rule associated with processing submitted reports, analyzing
data from the reports, maintaining the information technology systems
that support these activities, reviewing CBI claim substantiations, and
information technology infrastructure.
Finally, with regard to the comments that EPA has not accounted for
social and health costs associated with PFAS, EPA points out that this
rule is a TSCA section 8(a) reporting and recordkeeping rule and does
not impose any restrictions or other chemical management requirements.
While the benefits of this rule include additional information related
to potential PFAS exposure, which will help inform future regulatory
and research activities, EPA cannot quantify those benefits at this
time, though the Agency discusses them qualitatively in the Economic
Analysis.
L. What are the CBI claim submission requirements?
1. Summary of Public Input
Several commenters submitted comments regarding reporting
requirements in the proposed rule and EPA's intended approach to
reviewing CBI claims as stated in the NODA. Their comments generally
fell into two categories: (1) Urging EPA to protect CBI and simplify
electronic reporting to allow joint submissions when needed, in
addition to making substantiation procedures for CBI claims more
simplified, and not allowing reporters without knowledge of a specific
chemical identity to waive a CBI claim for that chemical identity; and
(2) Urging EPA to require valid and well-explained rationale for any
CBI exemptions, and generally asking EPA to disclose as much
information to the public as possible. Some commenters also cited
concerns with the proposed rule's CBI protections as being inadequate
for R&D activities, including those in the defense or national security
industries. Some commenters requested that the Agency allow a ``blanket
substantiation'' for all CBI claims so that reporters would not be
required to substantiate each individual CBI claim.
On the other hand, commenters who are supportive of limiting the
amount of information claimed as CBI (especially regarding health and
safety studies) cited the urgent need for states to address their own
PFAS exposure and contamination issues and the benefit that this rule
will confer on state agencies struggling with inadequate PFAS
information. These commenters encouraged EPA to review claims and
disclose as much information submitted under this rule as possible.
Commenters during the NODA comment period also addressed EPA's
proposal to require that any PFAS generic name include ``fluor,'' at
minimum, and EPA's proposal to determine that failure to stipulate that
a chemical for which the identity is being claimed as CBI is
fluorinated would be an insufficient claim. Some commenters were
supportive of such requirements; other commenters discouraged EPA from
implementing this requirement as it may create confusion. Finally,
commenters diverged on EPA's intent to move any PFAS identity to the
public TSCA Inventory without prior notice if it is not claimed as CBI.
While some commenters supported this approach, others described
potential complications of confidential chemical identity protection
when multiple entities submit reports for the same substance, some of
whom may not assert CBI for the identity, and requested that EPA notify
all claimants of a potential change in CBI status for a chemical
identity and allow appeal opportunities.
2. EPA's Response
EPA does not believe that an option for blanket CBI claims
substantiation is appropriate for an information collection rule such
as this one, in which several types of information are requested. TSCA
section 14(c) requires substantiation specific to each claim. Because
the type of information requested under this rule varies, a blanket
substantiation is unlikely to address the specific reasons for each
data element claimed as CBI. The more generic a substantiation gets,
the less support it provides for any specific claim. In terms of
information disclosure, EPA is committed to reviewing CBI claims and
substantiations pursuant to TSCA section 14 and implementing
regulations, and publicly disclosing data that are not approved as CBI
to the extent possible.
As noted in the preamble of the proposed rule, TSCA limits
confidentiality protections for health and safety studies, and
information from health and safety studies (except to the extent such
studies or information reveals ``information that discloses processes
used in the manufacturing or processing of a chemical substance or
mixture or, in the case of a mixture, the portion of the mixture
comprised by any of the chemical substances in the mixture'').
Submitters asserting a confidentiality claim for such information in
health and safety studies are also required to submit a sanitized copy
of the study, removing only that information which is claimed as CBI
and that discloses the process or portion of mixture information
described in TSCA section 14(b). However, certain other information
within study reports may be claimed as CBI, such as the names of lab
personnel or the company, or other information that is not related to
health or environmental effects.
In response to requests for EPA to work directly with states on
disclosing CBI submitted under this rule, EPA points out that TSCA
section 14(d)(4) permits states, tribes, and political sub-divisions of
states to request access to CBI in writing. Under this authority, the
entity seeking CBI access must show that it can continue to protect the
information as confidential. If a state or tribe requests access and
that is granted per statutory conditions, EPA would have an agreement
in place laying out how the requestor was going to protect the
information.
In response to comments on the CBI procedures described in the
NODA, EPA is not requiring article importers to assert CBI for the
chemical identity and will not make public any chemical identity based
on article importer submissions alone (see discussion in Unit III.G).
Further, EPA acknowledges some commenters' concerns that multiple
manufacturers may report the same PFAS, but not all submitters may
assert a CBI claim for the PFAS identity. EPA will publish a list of
Accession numbers associated with chemical identities that it plans to
move to the public portion of the Inventory because either no chemical
identity CBI claim was asserted or the claim was denied. Publication of
these Accession numbers will provide entities an opportunity to contact
EPA with questions or concerns before specific chemical identities are
moved to the public Inventory (see Unit III.G for more details on this
process). Finally, EPA believes that requiring ``fluor'' in generic
name submissions is
[[Page 70543]]
consistent with PMN reporting requirements which provide that a generic
name ``should reveal the chemical identity of the substance to the
maximum extent possible'' (40 CFR 720.85(a)(3)(i)(B)), and is
finalizing this requirement as discussed in the NODA (Ref. 1).
V. References
The following is a listing of the documents that are specifically
referenced in this document. The docket includes these documents and
other information considered by EPA, including documents that are
referenced within the documents that are included in the docket, even
if the referenced document is not physically located in the docket. For
assistance in locating these other documents, please consult the
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
1. EPA (2022). TSCA Section 8(a)(7) Reporting and Recordkeeping
Requirements for Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances;
Notice of Data Availability and Request for Comment (87 FR 72439,
November 25, 2022 (FRL-7902-04-OCSPP)).
2. EPA (2023). Economic Analysis for the Final TSCA Section
8(a)(7) Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements for Perfluoroalkyl
and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances. September 2023.
3. EPA (2023). Research on Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances
(PFAS). Available at https://www.epa.gov/chemical-research/research-and-polyfluoroalkyl-substances-pfas.
4. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR)
(2021). Toxicological Profile for Perfluoroalkyls. Available at
https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp200.pdf [accessed February
10, 2023].
5. EPA (2021). PFAS Strategic Roadmap: EPA's Commitments to
Action 2021-2024. October 2021. Available at https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2021-10/pfas-roadmap_final-508.pdf.
6. EPA. CompTox Chemicals Dashboard. Available at https://comptox.epa.gov/dashboard/.
7. EPA (2020) Long-Chain Perfluoroalkyl Carboxylate and
Perfluoroalkyl Sulfonate Chemical Substances; Significant New Use
Rule (85 FR 45109, June 27, 2020 (FRL-10010-44)).
8. OECD (2021). Reconciling Terminology of the Universe of Per-
and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances: Recommendations and Practical
Guidance. July 9, 2021. Series on Risk Management. No.61.
Environment Directorate Chemicals and Biotechnology Committee.
Available at https://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=ENV/CBC/MONO(2021)25&docLanguage=En.
9. Buck, Robert C., et al. (2021). Identification and
Classification of Commercially Relevant Per- and Poly-Fluoroalkyl
Substances (PFAS). May 14, 2021. Integrated Environmental Assessment
and Management, vol. 17, no. 5. Available at https://setac.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ieam.4450.
10. Gaines, Linda, et al. (2023). A Proposed Approach to
Defining Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Based on
Molecular Structure and Formula. Integrated Environmental Assessment
and Management. Accepted Author Manuscript. https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.4735.
11. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (2022). Updated
indicative list of substances covered by the listing of
perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), its salts and PFOA-related compounds.
March 4, 2022. Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic
Pollutants. Available at https://chm.pops.int/Portals/0/download.aspx?d=UNEP-POPS-POPRC.17-INF-14-Rev.1.English.PDF.
12. EPA (2020). Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: 2018
Facts and Figures Report. December 2020. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-01/documents/2018_tables_and_figures_dec_2020_fnl_508.pdf.
13. EPA (2023). International Agreements on Transboundary
Shipments of Hazardous Waste. https://www.epa.gov/hwgenerators/international-agreements-transboundary-shipments-hazardous-waste.
14. EPA (2023). Small Entity Compliance Guidance for the TSCA
PFAS Data Call. September 2023.
15. EPA (2023). Data Elements included in the TSCA Section
8(a)(7) Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements for Perfluoroalkyl
and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances, Final Rule. September 2023.
16. OECD. OECD Harmonised Templates. Available at https://www.oecd.org/ehs/templates/harmonised-templates.htm.
17. EPA (2023). Addition of Certain PFAS to the TRI by the
National Defense Authorization Act. Available at https://www.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventory-tri-program/addition-certain-pfas-tri-national-defense-authorization-act.
18. EPA (2023). Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP).
Available at https://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting.
19. EPA (2018). Guidance for Creating Generic Names for
Confidential Chemical Substance Identity Reporting under Toxic
Substances Control Act. EPA 743B18001. June 2018.
20. EPA (2010) Premanufacture Notification Exemption for
Polymers; Amendment of Polymer Exemption Rule to exclude Certain
Perfluorinated Polymers (75 FR 4295, January 27, 2010 (FRL-8805-5)).
21. EPA (2023). Response to Public Comments: TSCA Section
8(a)(7) Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements for Perfluoroalkyl
and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances. September 2023.
22. EPA (2022). TSCA Section 8(a)(7) Small Business Advocacy
Review (SBAR) Panel Report. August 2022.
23. EPA (2022). Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and
Updated Economic Analysis for TSCA Section 8(a)(7) Reporting and
Recordkeeping Requirements for Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl
Substances. November 2022.
24. EPA (2021). EPA Response to Petition on Testing for Certain
PFAS. December 2021. Available at https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2021-12/pfaspetitionresponse.pdf.
25. Frank, Harmut, et al. (2002). Trifluoroacetate in ocean
waters. 2002. Environmental Science & Technology, 36(1), 12-15.
Available at https://doi.org/10.1021/es0101532.
26. EPA (2018). Fees for the Administration of the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA) (83 FR 52694, October 17, 2018 (FRL-
9984-41)).
27. EPA (2022). Regulation of Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and
Toxic Chemicals Under TSCA Section 6(h); Phenol, Isopropylated
Phosphate (3:1); Further Compliance Date Extension (87 FR 12875,
March 8, 2022 (FRL-6015.6-02-OCSPP)).
28. EPA (2023). Information Collection Request Supporting
Statement entitled ``Final Rule ICR: Reporting and Recordkeeping
Requirements for PFAS (RIN 2070-AK67).'' EPA Information Collection
Request (ICR) No. 2682.02. September 2023.
29. EPA (2023). Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and
Updated Economic Analysis for TSCA Section 8(a)(7) Reporting and
Recordkeeping Requirements for Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl
Substances. September 2023.
30. EPA. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Statement. PFAS; Reporting
and Recordkeeping Requirements under the Toxic Substances Control
Act (TSCA); Final. May 2023.
VI. Statutory and Executive Orders 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 Orders 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and 14094:
Modernizing Regulatory Review
This action is a ``significant regulatory action'' as defined under
section 3(f)(1) of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4,
1993), as amended by Executive Order 14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11,
2023). Accordingly, EPA submitted this action to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for Executive Order 12866 review.
Documentation of any changes made in response to the Executive Order
12866 review is available in the docket. EPA prepared an analysis of
the potential costs and benefits associated with this action. This
analysis, entitled ``Economic Analysis for the Final TSCA Section
8(a)(7) Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements for Perfluoroalkyl and
Polyfluoroalkyl Substances'' (Ref. 1), is also available in the docket
and is briefly summarized in Unit 1.E.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
The information collection requirements in this rule will be
[[Page 70544]]
submitted for approval to OMB under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The
Information Collection Request (ICR) document that EPA prepared has
been assigned the EPA ICR No. 2682.02 (Ref. 28) and the OMB Control
number 2070-0217. You can find a copy of the ICR in the docket for this
action, and it is briefly summarized here. The information collection
requirements are not enforceable until OMB approves them.
The reporting requirements identified in the rule will enable EPA
to meet the statutory obligations required by TSCA section 8(a)(7) and
collect data related to the identities, manufacture, use, exposure, and
disposal of PFAS manufactured in the United States since 2011. These
one-time reporting requirements will also help the Agency to collect
existing information on the health and environmental effects of PFAS.
EPA intends to use information collected under the rule to assist in
chemical assessments under TSCA, and to inform any additional work
necessary under environmental protection mandates beyond TSCA.
Respondents may claim some of the information reported to EPA under the
rule as CBI under TSCA section 14. TSCA section 14(c) requires a
supporting statement and certification for confidentiality claims
asserted after June 22, 2016.
Respondents/affected entities: PFAS manufacturers (including
importers). See Unit I.A.
Respondent obligation to respond: Mandatory. TSCA section 8(a) and
40 CFR part 705.
Total estimated number of respondents: 131,410.
Frequency of response: One time.
Total estimated burden: 3,878,744 hours (per year). Burden is
defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: $281 million (per year) and $266.7 million
(per year) using a 3 percent and 7 percent discount rate, respectively,
which includes no annualized capital or operation and maintenance
costs.
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 for the
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When OMB
approves this ICR, the Agency will announce that approval in the
Federal Register and publish a technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 to
display the OMB control number for the approved information collection
activities contained in this final rule.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
Pursuant to the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., EPA prepared an IRFA for
the proposed rule and convened an SBAR Panel under RFA sections 603 and
609(b) to obtain advice and recommendations from small entity
representatives that potentially would be subject to the rule's
requirements. Summaries of the IRFA and Panel recommendations are
presented in the proposed rule's NODA (Ref. 1).
As required by RFA section 604, EPA prepared a final regulatory
flexibility analysis (FRFA) for this action. The FRFA addresses the
issues raised by public comments on the IRFA for the proposed rule. The
complete FRFA is available for review in the docket (Ref. 29) and is
summarized here.
Statement of need and rule objectives. Section 7351 of the
FY2020 NDAA amended TSCA by adding section 8(a)(7), which obligates EPA
to promulgate a rule by January 1, 2023, that requires each person who
has manufactured PFAS in any year since 2011 to report and maintain
records, for each year, information described in TSCA section
8(a)(2)(A)-(G). This includes a broad range of information, such as
information related to chemical identity and structure, production,
use, exposure, disposal, and health and environmental effects. In
addition, EPA believes that the collected data may help provide more
information about PFAS manufacture, and to the extent that new
information indicates the presence of negative externalities or data
gaps, inform future agency actions and/or legislation governing the
manufacture, processing, use, and disposal of PFAS.
EPA developed this final rule after considering findings from
information provided in public comments on the proposed rule, findings
from and comments on the SBAR Panel, and public comments on the IRFA.
The final rule requires all manufacturers of PFAS in any year since
2011 to report certain information to EPA related to chemical identity,
categories of use, volume manufactured, byproducts, environmental and
health effects, worker exposure, and disposal (i.e., the TSCA section
8(a)(2)(A)-(G) requirements). This rule also requires a five-year
retention period for all relevant records following the submission
period.
Significant comments on the IRFA. In response to the IRFA
and notice of data availability, EPA received 44 unique comments in the
docket. EPA has provided a comprehensive summary of all comments
received and EPA's responses in a supporting document that is included
in the docket for this rulemaking (Ref. 21; see Part 2).
SBA Office of Advocacy comments and EPA response. EPA
received comments from SBA's Office of Advocacy on the proposed rule
and the IRFA. SBA's comments and EPA's responses are in the Responses
to Comments document for this rule (Ref. 21) and in the FRFA (Ref. 29).
SBA comments that led to changes to the proposed rule, and EPA's
responses to those comments, are also summarized in this unit.
Comments: EPA has improperly certified the rule under the RFA. EPA
should convene a Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) Panel and consider burden-reducing compliance flexibilities
for small businesses. Additionally, EPA underestimated the impact of
compliance costs associated with the proposed reporting requirements.
Response: EPA initially certified the proposed rule under the RFA
based on all information available to it at the time of proposal.
However, after receiving additional information related to the scope of
small entities (including article importers) potentially impacted by
the proposed rule, EPA updated its estimated scope of the universe of
small entities potentially affected (including article importers) and
the small entity compliance costs. Thus, EPA convened an SBAR Panel in
April 2022. The Panel concluded in August 2022, and EPA subsequently
published the Panel Report, updated Economic Analysis, and IRFA for
public comment in November 2022. Input received through the Panel and
during the subsequent comment period for the IRFA were considered in
the development of this final rule, including comments related to EPA's
small entity analysis. As a result of public input, EPA identified
certain regulatory alternatives to the proposed rule, which EPA is
implementing in the final rule: streamlined reporting forms for article
importers and for manufacturers of low quantities of R&D substances;
extending the reporting deadline; providing additional guidance on the
TSCA section 8(a) reporting standard for article importers. These
modifications to the proposed rule reduce compliance costs without a
complete exemption of small entities. EPA has not made a determination
that a complete exemption of small entities is not legally viable in
this rulemaking. EPA believes such an exemption would result in
diminished collection of reasonably known or ascertainable information
about PFAS manufacturing and import
[[Page 70545]]
since 2011 and therefore is exercising its discretion to not implement
this alternative. EPA estimates that each manufacturer would incur
$2,240 in costs to complete the streamlined R&D form and $41,850 in
costs to complete the general reporting form. Thus, incurring a total
of $44,089 in costs per firm for form completion, compared to $52,739
without the streamlined form. For the streamlined form for article
importers, EPA estimates that each article importer will incur an
average of approximately 91.7 burden hours and $7,531 in costs per
firm. Without a streamlined reporting form, EPA estimates that each
article importer would incur an average of approximately 168 burden
hours and $13,818 in costs for form completion. Additionally, extending
the reporting deadline may reduce the opportunity costs if firms are
diverting resources from other business activities to report
information under the rule. This may be particularly true for small
entities. See Table 24 for more information on the costs associated
with the finalized option and alternatives identified in the IRFA (Ref.
23).
Estimate of the number of small entities to which the
final rule applies. This final rule will impact PFAS manufacturers,
including article importers, across a broad number of industries,
including the following: utilities; construction; manufacturing;
wholesale and retail trade; and some waste management. Entities who
solely process, distribute, and/or use PFAS, and do not manufacture
(including import) PFAS, are not covered. EPA estimates that
approximately 97% of all firms potentially affected by this rule would
meet the SBA standard of ``small business,'' for a total of 128,051
affected small entities. It is expected that all 128,051 firms will
undertake structural definition familiarization, some rule
familiarization activity, and compliance determination, including
article importers that do not report under this rule. However, EPA does
not assume that all potentially affected firms will ultimately have
known or reasonably ascertainable information to report, so 13,021
small entities are estimated to report under this rule.
Reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance
requirements of the final rule.
i. Compliance requirements. Pursuant to TSCA section 8(a)(7), EPA
is finalizing this reporting and recordkeeping rule for entities who
have manufactured a PFAS in any year since January 1, 2011. For each
year since January 1, 2011, PFAS manufacturers (including importers)
are required to report the following types of information for each PFAS
to the extent it is known or reasonably ascertainable: chemical
identity, production volume, categories of use, byproducts, worker
exposure, disposal practices, and existing information concerning
environmental or health effects. In instances where reporters have
already submitted the requested information to EPA under certain
reporting programs, they will not be required to re-report. The
reporters will simply indicate they have already submitted such
information to EPA. The reporting deadline is 18 months following the
effective date of this rule, except for small manufacturers (defined at
40 CFR 704.3) whose reporting obligations exclusively arise from
article imports; the latter's reporting deadline is 24 months following
the effective date of this rule. The reporting deadline is then
followed by a five-year recordkeeping period.
ii. Classes of small entities subject to the compliance
requirements. The small entities that are potentially affected by this
rule are manufacturers (including importers) who have manufactured
(including imported) PFAS in any year since January 1, 2011. This
includes entities who have imported articles containing PFAS in any
year since January 1, 2011.
iii. Professional skills needed to comply. Understanding some of
the reporting requirements may involve special skills or expertise,
though hiring or contracting such skills specifically for this rule are
not required to comply, given the TSCA section 8(a) reporting standard
of ``known or reasonably ascertainable.'' For example, understanding
the rule's structural definition of PFAS and other reporting
requirements may involve special expertise of chemistry. EPA assumes
that chemical manufacturing and importing firms and large article
importers will have staff with the technical knowledge to understand a
structural definition more easily than small article importers. Based
on input from the Small Entity Representatives, EPA estimated the cost
of small article importer firms contracting outside help to understand
the chemical structural definition, despite it not being a necessary
step for compliance. Small article importers that contract outside help
(which is not required for this rule's compliance) would incur $1,212
in structural definition compliance costs, while small article
importers that do not contract outside help would incur approximately
$831. Additionally, environmental and health effects data may require
some technical knowledge to report.
Steps taken to reduce economic impact to small entities.
i. Small Business Advocacy Review Panel. As required by RFA section
609(b), EPA convened an SBAR Panel to obtain advice and recommendations
from small entity representatives that potentially would be subject to
the rule's requirements. A copy of the full SBAR Panel Report (Ref. 22)
is available in the docket. The comments received on the proposed rule,
the IRFA and EPA's responses to those comments are summarized in Unit
IV and in further detail in the Response to Comments document in the
docket (Ref. 21).
ii. Alternatives considered. EPA considered a wide variety of
alternatives to the proposed rule. EPA considered the impact (both cost
and in anticipated reporting) of providing exemptions for all small
businesses, or a portion of small businesses (e.g., small article
importers, small manufacturers using the TSCA section 8 definition, or
entities below various sales thresholds). EPA also evaluated the impact
of exemptions for certain substances, including imported articles,
byproducts, impurities, non-isolated intermediates, and R&D substances.
EPA also evaluated the impact of implementing a production volume-based
reporting threshold in this rule. For each of these alternatives, EPA
found that it would reduce the amount of PFAS reporting of reasonably
known or ascertainable information from PFAS manufacturers (including
importers) under TSCA section 8(a)(7). The amount of reporting that
certain alternatives would reduce varied, ranging from exempting
approximately 91% of all potentially covered firms from reporting under
a small manufacturer exemption for any firm with under $12 million in
sales (which would have resulted in a final rule costing small
businesses approximately $48.8 million under a 7 percent discount
rate), to exempting 69% of firms (all article importers) under an
exemption for just article importers with sales below $2 million (which
would have resulted in a final rule costing small businesses
approximately $229.5 million under a 7 percent discount rate). EPA also
considered applying a production volume reporting threshold of both
2,500 lbs per year and 25,000 lbs per year, to align with CDR reporting
thresholds. Because the amount of reporting and burden under a
reporting threshold was difficult to estimate with existing data, EPA
conducted sensitivity analyses for this alternative, based on the
estimated number of PFAS article
[[Page 70546]]
importers who would be able to determine whether they are below the
reporting threshold. On the low-end estimate for this alternative
(i.e., 5% of affected article importers import PFAS-containing articles
above threshold), EPA estimates that total number of PFAS reports
submitted would decrease by 49 percent, and total small business costs
would be approximately $736.6 million under a 7 percent discount rate.
On the high-end (i.e., 9.5% of affected article importers import PFAS-
containing articles above threshold), EPA estimates the total number of
PFAS reports submitted to decrease by 5%, with total small business
costs of $785.2 million under a 7 percent discount rate. Given the
reduced reporting expected under alternatives including various
exemptions and reporting thresholds, EPA determined that implementing
such alternatives contradicted EPA's mandate under section 8(a)(7) to
collect information from ``each person'' who had manufactured a PFAS.
Further, while EPA recognizes there is a tradeoff between rule
compliance costs and information collection, PFAS exposure presents
significant human health and environmental concerns that it is critical
for EPA to collect as much existing information on PFAS presence in
commerce (including through disposal) as possible.
In addition to alternatives related to reporting exemptions and
reporting thresholds, EPA considered limiting the scope of PFAS subject
to this rule to a finite list, rather than a structural definition.
This alternative simplifies rule familiarization for affected entities
and removes the cost and burden of understanding the structural
definition of PFAS. Additionally, it reduces compliance determination
costs for affected firms. However, this also significantly limits the
number of PFAS subject to the rule and excludes many PFAS that cannot
be listed due to CBI claims but are active in U.S. commerce. If EPA
limited the scope to a discrete list of PFAS on the TSCA Inventory and
LVEs that could be specifically named under the final definition, 602
PFAS would be subject to the rule. This alternative would result in an
estimated 50% decrease in reporting forms submitted, along with an
estimated small business cost of approximately $626.4 million under a 7
percent discount rate.
However, EPA also considered alternatives to the proposed rule that
the Agency is finalizing to reduce burden on small entities. EPA
considered providing streamlined reporting form options for both
imported articles and R&D substances manufactured in low quantities
(i.e., no more than 10 kg/year). Based on EPA's knowledge of
manufacturers of those substances, and public input from commenters and
small entity representatives, EPA believes such manufacturers have less
information that is known or reasonably ascertainable to them.
Therefore, the streamlined reporting form reduces the burden of
reporting on the standard form while still enabling EPA to collect all
known or reasonably ascertainable historical PFAS data. Additionally,
EPA considered and is finalizing a longer compliance timeframe for all
reporting entities. Providing an additional six months for a data
collection period ahead of the reporting period will reduce the
opportunity costs on affected firms, particularly small entities,
without sacrificing any PFAS manufacturing data. In addition, EPA is
granting small manufacturers (as defined at 40 CFR 704.3) who would
report exclusively as article importers an additional six months to
collect data. Therefore, those small entities would have 24 months from
the effective date of this rule to submit information on their imported
articles. EPA is finalizing such alternatives to meet the Agency's
obligations under TSCA sections 8(a)(5)(A) through (C), as this rule is
requesting information that is neither duplicative nor unnecessary and
will not exclude manufacturers who are likely to have relevant
information, while minimizing costs on small manufacturers to the
extent feasible.
Small entity compliance guide. EPA prepared a Small Entity
Compliance Guide to help small entities comply with the rule. This
guide is available in the docket for this rulemaking and will be
available on EPA's website prior to the effective date of this final
rule (Ref. 14).
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action contains a Federal mandate under UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-
1538, that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or for private
sector in any one year. Accordingly, the EPA has prepared a written
statement (Ref. 30) as required under UMRA section 202 that is include
in the docket for this action and is briefly summarized here.
1. Authorizing legislation. This rule is issued under the authority
of TSCA section 8(a)(7) (15 U.S.C. 2607(a)(7)).
2. Benefit-cost analysis. EPA has prepared an Economic Analysis
(Ref. 2) and a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (Ref. 29) to
evaluate, among other things, the benefits and costs of this rule as
well as various regulatory options. The rule is calculated to result in
a total one-time cost to the private sector of approximately $843
million using a 3 percent discount rate and $800 million using a 7
percent discount rate. When adjusted for inflation, the $100 million
UMRA threshold is equivalent to approximately $184 million. Thus, the
cost of the rule to the private sector in the aggregate exceeds the
inflation-adjusted UMRA threshold.
Because this is an information-collecting rule, EPA is not able to
quantitatively measure the associated benefits. However, the rule may
supply information on PFAS to which Federal agencies (and the public)
do not currently have access. By enhancing the data supplied to risk-
screening and risk-management programs, EPA expects to more effectively
and expeditiously evaluate and manage any potential unreasonable risk
posed by PFAS. The more EPA can base its decisions on actual data
rather than on assumptions, the better EPA is able to tailor its risk
management decisions to the level of actual risk, whether higher or
lower than it would be if based on assumptions alone. Ultimately,
enhancing the risk evaluation process will have positive consequences
for human health and the environment and may enable a more efficient
allocation of EPA's and society's resources. Additionally, this rule
fulfills EPA's obligations under TSCA section 8(a)(7).
3. Impacts on State, local, and Tribal governments. This rule does
not contain a significant Federal intergovernmental mandate because it
neither imposes enforceable duties on State, local, or Tribal
governments nor reduces an authorized amount of Federal financial
assistance provided to State, local, or Tribal governments. This rule
contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. The rule would require reporting
from certain persons who manufactured (including imported) PFAS for
commercial purposes, including in articles. Governments do not
typically engage in these activities, so State, local, and Tribal
government entities are not expected to be subject to the rule's
requirements. This action is not subject to the requirements of section
203 of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The requirements of
this action would primarily affect manufacturers (including importers)
of PFAS.
[[Page 70547]]
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) because it will
not have substantial direct effects on States, on the relationship
between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have Tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) because it will
not have 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. It does not have substantial direct
effects on Tribal government because EPA does not anticipate that PFAS
was manufactured (including imported) for commercial purposes by Tribes
so this rulemaking is not expected to impose substantial direct
compliance costs on Tribal governments.
G. 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 environmental
health or safety risks that EPA has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per the definition of ``covered
regulatory action'' in section 2-202 of Executive Order 13045. This
action is not subject to Executive Order 13045, because it does not
concern an environmental health or safety risk. Since this action does
not concern human health, EPA's Policy on Children's Health also does
not apply.
Although this action does not concern an environmental health or
safety risk, this one-time data collection will aid in collecting all
existing and reasonably ascertainable information related to the
manufacturing (including importing) of PFAS since 2011. This rule will
be of use in identifying current data gaps surrounding the knowledge of
commercially manufactured PFAS. Understanding the extent of existing
data gaps related to manufactured PFAS will also help inform and tailor
future EPA actions to address PFAS as needed. This regulatory action
establishes one-time reporting requirements for PFAS that will result
in information on the quantity of PFAS to which children may be
exposed. EPA believes that the information obtained as a result of this
one-time data collection could also be used by the public, government
agencies and others to identify potential problems, set priorities, and
take appropriate steps to reduce any potential human health or
environmental risks.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution in Commerce, 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 the supply, distribution
or use of energy. Further, we have concluded that this action is not
likely to have any adverse effect on the supply, distribution or use of
energy.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards. As such,
NTTAA section 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations and
Executive Order 14096: Revitalizing Our Nation's Commitment to
Environmental Justice for All
The EPA believes that it is not practicable to assess whether the
human health or environmental conditions that exist prior to this
action result in disproportionate and adverse effects on communities
with environmental justice concerns. The purpose of this action is to
require reporting activity. EPA was unable to perform an environmental
justice analysis because it lacks data on every exposure source.
However, this regulatory action makes changes to the reporting
requirements for PFAS that will result in more information being
collected and provided to better evaluate exposures and the risks posed
by such exposures as explained in Unit II.A., certain PFAS exposure may
be a hazard to human health. This action establishes one-time reporting
requirements for companies to submit to EPA certain known or reasonably
ascertainable information on manufactured PFAS by those entities as
discussed in detailed in Unit III.D. The determination of potential
risk to human health and/or the environment depends upon many factors,
including the toxicity of the chemical, the fate of the chemical in the
environment, and the amount and duration of human or other exposure to
the chemical. This action does not directly address human health or
environmental risks. However, the action will increase the level of
information available to assess environmental protection for all
affected populations without having any disproportionate and adverse
human health or environmental effects on any population, including any
community with environmental justice concerns. The information obtained
as a result of this action may be used to collect all existing and
reasonably ascertainable information related to PFAS-containing
articles will be of use in identifying current data gaps surrounding
the knowledge of commercially manufactured PFAS, and reporting of PFAS
within imported articles will enable EPA to meet its obligations under
the FY 2020 NDAA. Understanding the extent of existing data gaps
related to manufactured PFAS will also help inform and tailor future
EPA actions to address PFAS as needed. EPA also believes that the
information obtained as a result of this action potentially could be
used by the public (including communities with environmental justice
concerns) with access to data which they may use to seek lower
exposures and consequently reductions in chemical risks for themselves
and their children. Technical assistance may be provided to communities
with environmental justice concerns and efforts will be made to ensure
meaningful access for individuals with limited English proficiency and
individuals with disabilities. This information can also be used by
government agencies and others to identify potential problems, set
priorities, and take appropriate steps to reduce any potential risks to
human health and the environment. Therefore, informational benefits, of
the action, including behavioral changes such as consumers avoiding
specific products, may have positive impact on the human health and
environmental impacts on all communities, including communities with
environmental justice concerns.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., and EPA
will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a ``major
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
[[Page 70548]]
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 705
Chemicals, Environmental protection, Hazardous materials, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: September 28, 2023.
Michal Freedhoff,
Assistant Administrator Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention.
Therefore, for the reasons set forth in the preamble, 40 CFR
chapter I, subchapter R, is amended by adding part 705 to read as
follows:
PART 705--REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN PER-
AND POLYFLUOROALKYL SUBSTANCES
Sec.
705.1 Scope, compliance, and enforcement.
705.3 Definitions.
705.5 Substances for which reports must be submitted.
705.10 Persons who must report.
705.12 Activities for which reporting is not required.
705.15 What information to report.
705.18 Article importer and R&D substance reporting options.
705.20 When to report.
705.22 Duplicative reporting.
705.25 Recordkeeping requirements.
705.30 Confidentiality claims.
705.35 Electronic reporting.
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2607(a)(7).
Sec. 705.1 Scope, compliance, and enforcement.
(a) This part specifies reporting and recordkeeping procedures for
manufacturers (including importers) of per- and polyfluoroalkyl
substances (hereafter referred to as PFAS) under section 8(a)(7) of the
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
(b) TSCA section 15(3) makes it unlawful for any person to fail or
refuse to submit information required under this part. In addition,
TSCA section 15(3) makes it unlawful for any person to fail to keep,
and permit access to, records required by this part. TSCA section 16
provides that any person who violates a provision of TSCA section 15 is
liable to the United States for a civil penalty and may be criminally
prosecuted. Pursuant to TSCA section 17, the Federal Government may
seek judicial relief to compel submission of TSCA section 8(a)
information and to otherwise restrain any violation of TSCA section 15.
TSCA section 11 allows for inspections to assure compliance, and the
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Administrator may by subpoena
require the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of
reports, papers, documents, answers to questions, and other information
that the Administrator deems necessary.
(c) Each person who reports under this part must maintain records
that document information reported under this part and, in accordance
with TSCA, permit access to, and the copying of, such records by EPA
officials.
Sec. 705.3 Definitions.
The definitions in this section and the definitions in TSCA section
3 apply to this part. In addition, the definitions in 40 CFR 704.3 also
apply to this part, except the definition for small quantities solely
for research and development.
Article means a manufactured item which:
(1) Is formed to a specific shape or design during manufacture;
(2) Has end use function(s) depending in whole or in part upon its
shape or design during end use; and
(3) Has either no change of chemical composition during its end use
or only those changes of composition which have no commercial purpose
separate from that of the article, and that result from a chemical
reaction that occurs upon end use of other chemical substances,
mixtures, or articles; except that fluids and particles are not
considered articles regardless of shape or design.
Central Data Exchange or CDX means EPA's centralized electronic
submission receiving system.
Chemical Information Submission System or CISS means EPA's
electronic, web-based reporting tool for the completion and submission
of data, reports, and other information, or its successors.
Commercial use means the use of a chemical substance or a mixture
containing a chemical substance (including as part of an article) in a
commercial enterprise providing saleable goods or services.
Consumer use means the use of a chemical substance or a mixture
containing a chemical substance (including as part of an article) when
sold to or made available to consumers for their use.
Environmental or health effects information means any information
of any effect of a chemical substance or mixture containing a chemical
substance on health or the environment or on both. This includes all
health and safety studies.
(1) Not only is information that arises as a result of a formal,
disciplined study included, but other information relating to the
effects of a chemical substance or mixture containing a chemical
substance on health or the environment is also included. Any
information that bears on the effects of a chemical substance on health
or the environment would be included.
(2) Examples are:
(i) Long- and short-term tests of mutagenicity, carcinogenicity, or
teratogenicity; data on behavioral disorders; dermatoxicity;
pharmacological effects; mammalian absorption, distribution,
metabolism, and excretion; cumulative, additive, and synergistic
effects; and acute, subchronic, and chronic effects.
(ii) Tests for ecological or other environmental effects on
invertebrates, fish, or other animals, and plants, including acute
toxicity tests, chronic toxicity tests, critical life-stage tests,
behavioral tests, algal growth tests, seed germination tests, plant
growth or damage tests, microbial function tests, bioconcentration or
bioaccumulation tests, and model ecosystem (microcosm) studies.
(iii) Assessments of human and environmental exposure, including
workplace exposure, and impacts of a particular chemical substance or
mixture containing a chemical substance on the environment, including
surveys, tests, and studies of: Biological, photochemical, and chemical
degradation; structure/activity relationships; air, water, and soil
transport; biomagnification and bioconcentration; and chemical and
physical properties, e.g., boiling point, vapor pressure, evaporation
rates from soil and water, octanol/water partition coefficient, and
water solubility.
(iv) Monitoring data, including but not limited to when they have
been aggregated and analyzed to measure the exposure of humans or the
environment to a chemical substance or mixture containing a chemical
substance.
Health and safety studies means any study of any effect of a
chemical substance or mixture on health or the environment or on both,
including underlying information and epidemiological studies, studies
of occupational exposure to a chemical substance or mixture,
toxicological, clinical, and ecological studies of a chemicals
substance or mixture containing a chemical substance, and any test
performed under TSCA. The following information is not part of a health
and safety study:
(1) The name, address, or other identifying information for the
submitting company, including identification of the laboratory that
conducted the study in cases where the laboratory is part of or closely
affiliated with the submitting company;
[[Page 70549]]
(2) Internal product codes (i.e., code names for the test substance
used internally by the submitting company or to identify the test
substance to the test laboratory);
(3) Names and contact details for testing laboratory personnel and
names and other private information for health and safety study
participants or persons involved in chemical incidents such as would
typically be withheld under 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(6) or under other privacy
laws; and
(4) Information pertaining to test substance product development,
advertising, or marketing plans, or to cost and other financial data.
Highest-level U.S. parent company means the highest-level company
of the site's ownership hierarchy as of the start of the submission
period during which data are being reported according to the following
instructions. The highest-level U.S. parent company is located within
the United States. The following rules govern how to identify the
highest-level U.S. parent company:
(1) If the site is entirely owned by a single U.S. company that is
not owned by another company, that single company is the U.S. parent
company.
(2) If the site is entirely owned by a single U.S. company that is,
itself, owned by another U.S.-based company (e.g., it is a division or
subsidiary of a higher-level company), the highest-level domestic
company in the ownership hierarchy is the U.S. parent company.
(3) If the site is owned by more than one company (e.g., company A
owns 40 percent, company B owns 35 percent, and company C owns 25
percent), the company with the largest ownership interest in the site
is the U.S. parent company. If a higher-level company in the ownership
hierarchy owns more than one ownership company, then determine the
entity with the largest ownership by considering the lower-level
ownerships in combination (e.g., corporation X owns companies B and C,
for a total ownership of 60 percent for the site).
(4) If the site is owned by a 50:50 joint venture or a cooperative,
the joint venture or cooperative is its own parent company. If the site
is owned by a U.S. joint venture or cooperative, the highest level of
the joint venture or cooperative is the U.S. parent company.
(5) If the site is federally owned, the highest-level Federal
agency or department is the U.S. parent company.
(6) If the site is owned by a non-Federal public entity, that
entity (such as a municipality, State, or tribe) is the U.S. parent
company.
Industrial function means the intended physical or chemical
characteristic for which a chemical substance or mixture is consumed as
a reactant; incorporated into a formulation, mixture, reaction product
or article; repackaged; or used.
Industrial use means use at a site at which one or more chemical
substances or mixtures are manufactured (including imported) or
processed.
Intended for use by children means the chemical substance or
mixture is used in or on a product that is specifically intended for
use by children aged 14 or younger. A chemical substance or mixture
containing a chemical substance is intended for use by children when
the submitter answers ``yes'' to at least one of the following
questions for the product into which the submitter's chemical substance
or mixture containing a chemical substance is incorporated:
(1) Is the product commonly recognized (i.e., by a reasonable
person) as being intended for children aged 14 or younger?
(2) Does the manufacturer of the product state through product
labeling or other written materials that the product is intended for or
will be used by children aged 14 or younger?
(3) Is the advertising, promotion, or marketing of the product
aimed at children aged 14 or younger?
Known to or reasonably ascertainable by means all information in a
person's possession or control, plus all information that a reasonable
person similarly situated might be expected to possess, control, or
know.
Manufacture means to import into the customs territory of the
United States (as defined in general note 2 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (19 U.S.C. 1202)), produce, or
manufacture for commercial purposes.
Manufacture for commercial purposes means:
(1) To import, produce, or manufacture with the purpose of
obtaining an immediate or eventual commercial advantage for the
manufacturer, and includes among other things, such ``manufacture'' of
any amount of a chemical substance or mixture containing a chemical
substance:
(i) For commercial distribution, including for test marketing; and/
or
(ii) For use by the manufacturer, including use for product
research and development, or as an intermediate.
(2) Manufacture for commercial purposes also applies to substances
that are produced coincidentally during the manufacture, processing,
use, or disposal of another substance or mixture containing a chemical
substance, including both byproducts that are separated from that other
substance or mixture containing a chemical substance and impurities
that remain in that substance or mixture containing a chemical
substance. Such byproducts and impurities may, or may not, in
themselves have commercial value. They are nonetheless produced for the
purpose of obtaining a commercial advantage since they are part of the
manufacture of a chemical product for a commercial purpose.
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances or PFAS means, for the purpose
of this part, any chemical substance or mixture containing a chemical
substance that structurally contains at least one of the following
three sub-structures:
(1) R-(CF2)-CF(R')R'', where both the CF2 and
CF moieties are saturated carbons.
(2) R-CF2OCF2-R', where R and R' can either
be F, O, or saturated carbons.
(3) CF3C(CF3)R'R'', where R' and R'' can
either be F or saturated carbons.
Possession or control means in possession or control of the
submitter, or of any subsidiary, partnership in which the submitter is
a general partner, parent company, or any company or partnership which
the parent company owns or controls, if the subsidiary, parent company,
or other company or partnership is associated with the submitter in the
research, development, test marketing, or commercial marketing of the
chemical substance in question. (A parent company owns or controls
another company if the parent owns or controls 50 percent or more of
the other company's voting stock. A parent company owns or controls any
partnership in which it is a general partner.) Information is included
within this definition if it is:
(1) In files maintained by submitter's employees who are:
(i) Associated with research, development, test marketing, or
commercial marketing of the chemical substance in question; and/or
(ii) Reasonably likely to have such data.
(2) Maintained in the files of other agents of the submitter who
are associated with research, development, test marketing, or
commercial marketing of the chemical substance in question in the
course of their employment as such agents.
Research and development (R&D) means activities intended solely as
scientific experimentation, research, or analysis. R&D focuses on the
analysis of the chemical or physical characteristics, the performance,
or the production characteristics of a chemical substance, a mixture
containing the substance, or
[[Page 70550]]
an article. R&D encompasses a wide range of activities which may occur
in a laboratory, pilot plant, commercial plant outside the research
facility, or at other sites appropriate for R&D. General distribution
of chemical substances to consumers does not constitute R&D.
Site-limited means a chemical substance is manufactured and
processed only within a site and is not distributed as a chemical
substance or as part of a mixture or article containing a chemical
substance outside the site. Imported chemical substances are never
site-limited.
Worker means someone at a site of manufacture, import, or
processing who performs work activities near sources of a chemical
substance or mixture or directly handles the chemical substance or
mixture during the performance of work activities.
Sec. 705.5 Substances for which reports must be submitted.
The requirements of this part apply to all chemical substances and
mixtures containing a chemical substance (including articles) that are
a PFAS, consistent with the definition of PFAS at Sec. 705.3.
Sec. 705.10 Persons who must report.
Persons who have manufactured for commercial purposes a chemical
substance identified in Sec. 705.5 at any period from January 1, 2011,
through the end of the last calendar year prior to November 13, 2023,
except as described in Sec. 705.12, is subject to the requirements of
this part.
Sec. 705.12 Activities for which reporting is not required.
Reporting under this part is not required for the import of
municipal solid waste streams for the purpose of disposal or
destruction of the waste. Additionally, reporting is not required for a
Federal agency which imports PFAS when it is not for any immediate or
eventual commercial advantage.
Sec. 705.15 What information to report.
For the one-time submission, persons identified in Sec. 705.10
must report to EPA, for each site of each of the chemical substances
identified in Sec. 705.5, the following information to the extent
known to or reasonably ascertainable by them, except as allowed under
Sec. 705.18. In the event that actual data is not known to or
reasonably ascertainable by the submitter, then reasonable estimates
may be submitted:
(a) Company and plant site information. The following currently
correct company and plant site information must be reported for each
site at which a reportable chemical substance is manufactured (see 40
CFR 711.3 for the ``site'' for importers):
(1) The highest-level U.S. parent company name, address, and Dun
and Bradstreet D-U-N-S[supreg] (D&B) number, if one exists.
(2) The name of a person who will serve as Authorized Official for
the submitter company, and who will be able to sign the certification
statement as described in Sec. 705.30(d), the Authorized Official's
full mailing address, telephone number, and email address.
(3) The name of a person who will serve as technical contact for
the submitter company, and who will be able to answer questions about
the information submitted by the company to EPA, the contact person's
full mailing address, telephone number, and email address.
(4) The name, full street address, and six-digit North American
Industry Classification System (NAICS) code(s) of the site. A submitter
under this part must include the appropriate D&B number for each plant
site reported, and the county or parish (or other jurisdictional
indicator) in which the plant site is located. A submitter under this
part must obtain a D&B number for the site reported if none exists. A
submitter under this part must also provide other site identification
numbers, including the Facility Registry Service (FRS) identification
number, if they exist.
(b) Chemical-specific information. The following chemical-specific
information must be reported for each chemical substance that is a PFAS
manufactured for each year since January 1, 2011, except as allowed
under Sec. 705.18. This includes each chemical substance that is a
PFAS and incorporated into mixtures:
(1) The common or trade name, the chemical identity, and, except
for chemical substances that are Class 1 substances on the TSCA
Inventory, the representative molecular structure of each PFAS for
which such a report is required.
(i) The specific, currently correct Chemical Abstracts (CA) Index
name as used to list the chemical substance on the TSCA Inventory and
the correct corresponding Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number
(CASRN) for each reportable PFAS at each site. Submitters who wish to
report chemical substances listed on the confidential portion of the
TSCA Inventory will need to report the chemical substance using a TSCA
Accession Number. If a submitter has a low-volume exemption (LVE) case
number for the chemical substance, that number may also be used if a
CASRN is not known to or reasonably ascertainable by the submitter.
(ii) In addition to reporting the number itself, submitters must
specify the type of number they are reporting by selecting from among
the codes in table 1 to this paragraph (b)(1)(ii).
Table 1 to Paragraph (b)(1)(ii)--Codes To Specify Type of Chemical
Identifying Number
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Code Number type
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A............................... TSCA Accession Number.
C............................... Chemical Abstracts Service Registry
Number (CASRN).
L............................... Low-volume exemption (LVE) case
number.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) If the CASRN or specific identifier (i.e., Accession Number
or LVE number) of the PFAS is not known to or reasonably ascertainable
(NKRA) to the submitter (e.g., if the chemical identity is claimed as
confidential business information by the submitter's supplier, or if
the submitter knows they have a PFAS but are unable to ascertain its
specific identifier and/or specific chemical identity), the submitter
may provide a generic name or description of the PFAS and also initiate
a joint submission if the secondary submitter is known. The submitter
may only initiate a joint submission if the CASRN or the specific
identifier (i.e., Accession Number or LVE number) is not known or
reasonably ascertainable, and a secondary submitter (who would provide
such information) is known. The manufacturer (including importer) must
use the reporting tool described under Sec. 705.35 to ask the supplier
or other entity to provide the chemical identity directly to EPA in a
joint submission. Such request must include instructions for submitting
chemical identity information electronically, using e-CDRweb and CDX
(see 40 CFR 711.35), and for clearly referencing the manufacturer's
(including importer) submission. Contact information for the supplier
or other entity, a trade name or other designation for the chemical
substance, and a copy of the request to the supplier or other entity
must be included with the manufacturer's (including importer)
submission. If, after conducting due diligence and reviewing known or
reasonably ascertainable information, a secondary submitter to complete
the joint submission is not known, the reporter may indicate that the
secondary submitter is NKRA. However, the PFAS manufacturer would be
required to
[[Page 70551]]
provide as much identifying detail as they have regarding the PFAS
identity, and would be able to report to EPA without initiating a joint
submission even if they do not know the underlying identity of the
chemical substance.
(2) The physical form(s) of the PFAS as it is sent off-site from
each site. If the PFAS is site-limited, you must report the physical
form(s) of the PFAS at the time it is reacted on-site to produce a
different chemical substance. For each PFAS at each site, the submitter
must report as many physical forms as applicable from among the
physical forms listed in this unit:
(i) Dry powder.
(ii) Pellets or large crystals.
(iii) Water- or solvent-wet solid.
(iv) Other solid.
(v) Gas or vapor.
(vi) Liquid.
(c) Categories of use. For each year since January 1, 2011, report
the following information on categories of use of each chemical
substance that is a PFAS manufactured for commercial purposes.
(1) Industrial processing and use information. A designation
indicating the type of industrial processing or use operation(s) at
each site that receives a PFAS from the submitter site directly or
indirectly (whether the recipient site(s) are controlled by the
submitter site or not). For each PFAS, report the letters which
correspond to the appropriate processing or use operation(s) listed in
table 2 to this paragraph (c)(1). A particular designation may need to
be reported more than once, to the extent that a submitter reports more
than one sector that applies to a given designation under this
paragraph (c)(1).
Table 2 to Paragraph (c)(1)--Codes for Reporting Type of Industrial
Processing or Use Operation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation Operation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PC.................................. Processing as a reactant.
PF.................................. Processing--incorporation into
formulation, mixture, or reaction
product.
PA.................................. Processing--incorporation into
article.
PK.................................. Processing--repackaging.
U................................... Use--non-incorporative activities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Corresponding sector code. A code indicating the sector(s) that
best describes the industrial activities associated with each
industrial processing or use operation reported under this section. For
each chemical substance, report the code that corresponds to the
appropriate sector(s) listed in table 3 to this paragraph (c)(2). A
particular sector code may need to be reported more than once, to the
extent that a submitter reports more than one function code that
applies to a given sector code under this paragraph (c)(2).
Table 3 to Paragraph (c)(2)--Codes for Reporting Industrial Sectors
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Code Sector description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IS1............................. Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and
hunting.
IS2............................. Oil and gas drilling, extraction, and
support activities.
IS3............................. Mining (except oil and gas) and
support activities.
IS4............................. Utilities.
IS5............................. Construction.
IS6............................. Food, beverage, and tobacco product
manufacturing.
IS7............................. Textiles, apparel, and leather
manufacturing.
IS8............................. Wood product manufacturing.
IS9............................. Paper manufacturing.
IS10............................ Printing and related support
activities.
IS11............................ Petroleum refineries.
IS12............................ Asphalt paving, roofing, and coating
materials manufacturing.
IS13............................ Petroleum lubricating oil and grease
manufacturing.
IS14............................ All other petroleum and coal products
manufacturing.
IS15............................ Petrochemical manufacturing.
IS16............................ Industrial gas manufacturing.
IS17............................ Synthetic dye and pigment
manufacturing.
IS18............................ Carbon black manufacturing.
IS19............................ All other basic inorganic chemical
manufacturing.
IS20............................ Cyclic crude and intermediate
manufacturing.
IS21............................ All other basic organic chemical
manufacturing.
IS22............................ Plastics material and resin
manufacturing.
IS23............................ Synthetic rubber manufacturing.
IS24............................ Organic fiber manufacturing.
IS25............................ Pesticide, fertilizer, and other
agricultural chemical manufacturing.
IS26............................ Pharmaceutical and medicine
manufacturing.
IS27............................ Paint and coating manufacturing.
IS28............................ Adhesive manufacturing.
IS29............................ Soap, cleaning compound, and toilet
preparation manufacturing.
IS30............................ Printing ink manufacturing.
IS31............................ Explosives manufacturing.
IS32............................ Custom compounding of purchased
resins.
IS33............................ Photographic film, paper, plate, and
chemical manufacturing.
IS34............................ All other chemical product and
preparation manufacturing.
IS35............................ Plastics product manufacturing.
IS36............................ Rubber product manufacturing.
IS37............................ Non-metallic mineral product
manufacturing (includes cement, clay,
concrete, glass, gypsum, lime, and
other non-metallic mineral product
manufacturing).
IS38............................ Primary metal manufacturing.
IS39............................ Fabricated metal product
manufacturing.
IS40............................ Machinery manufacturing.
IS41............................ Computer and electronic product
manufacturing.
IS42............................ Electrical equipment, appliance, and
component manufacturing.
IS43............................ Transportation equipment
manufacturing.
IS44............................ Furniture and related product
manufacturing.
IS45............................ Miscellaneous manufacturing.
IS46............................ Wholesale and retail trade.
IS47............................ Services.
IS48............................ Other (requires additional
information).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Corresponding function category. For each sector reported under
paragraph (c)(2) of this section, the applicable code(s) from table 4
to this paragraph (c)(3) must be selected to designate the function
category(ies) that best represents the specific manner in which the
PFAS is used.
Table 4 to Paragraph (c)(3)--Codes for Reporting Function Categories
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Code Category
------------------------------------------------------------------------
F001............................ Abrasives.
F002............................ Etching agent.
F003............................ Adhesion/cohesion promoter.
F004............................ Binder.
F005............................ Flux agent.
F006............................ Sealant (barrier).
F007............................ Absorbent.
F008............................ Adsorbent.
F009............................ Dehydrating agent (desiccant).
F010............................ Drier.
F011............................ Humectant.
F012............................ Soil amendments (fertilizers).
F013............................ Anti-adhesive/cohesive.
F014............................ Dusting agent.
F015............................ Bleaching agent.
F016............................ Brightener.
F017............................ Anti-scaling agent.
F018............................ Corrosion inhibitor.
F019............................ Dye.
F020............................ Fixing agent (mordant).
F021............................ Hardener.
F022............................ Filler.
F023............................ Anti-static agent.
F024............................ Softener and conditioner.
F025............................ Swelling agent.
F026............................ Tanning agents not otherwise
specified.
F027............................ Waterproofing agent.
F028............................ Wrinkle resisting agent.
F029............................ Flame retardant.
F030............................ Fuel agents.
F031............................ Fuel.
F032............................ Heat transferring agent.
F033............................ Hydraulic fluids.
F034............................ Insulators.
F035............................ Refrigerants.
[[Page 70552]]
F036............................ Anti-freeze agent.
F037............................ Intermediate.
F038............................ Monomers.
F039............................ Ion exchange agent.
F040............................ Anti-slip agent.
F041............................ Lubricating agent.
F042............................ Deodorizer.
F043............................ Fragrance.
F044............................ Oxidizing agent.
F045............................ Reducing agent.
F046............................ Photosensitive agent.
F047............................ Photosensitizers.
F048............................ Semiconductor and photovoltaic agent.
F049............................ UV stabilizer.
F050............................ Opacifer.
F051............................ Pigment.
F052............................ Plasticizer.
F053............................ Plating agent.
F054............................ Catalyst.
F055............................ Chain transfer agent.
F056............................ Chemical reaction regulator.
F057............................ Crystal growth modifiers (nucleating
agents).
F058............................ Polymerization promoter.
F059............................ Terminator/Blocker.
F060............................ Processing aids, specific to petroleum
production.
F061............................ Antioxidant.
F062............................ Chelating agent.
F063............................ Defoamer.
F064............................ pH regulating agent.
F065............................ Processing aids not otherwise
specified.
F066............................ Energy Releasers (explosives, motive
propellant).
F067............................ Foamant.
F068............................ Propellants, non-motive (blowing
agents).
F069............................ Cloud-point depressant.
F070............................ Flocculating agent.
F071............................ Flotation agent.
F072............................ Solids separation (precipitating)
agent, not otherwise specified.
F073............................ Cleaning agent.
F074............................ Diluent.
F075............................ Solvent.
F076............................ Surfactant (surface active agent).
F077............................ Emulsifier.
F078............................ Thickening agent.
F079............................ Viscosity modifiers.
F080............................ Laboratory chemicals.
F081............................ Dispersing agent.
F082............................ Freeze-thaw additive.
F083............................ Surface modifier.
F084............................ Wetting agent (non-aqueous).
F085............................ Aerating and deaerating agents.
F086............................ Explosion inhibitor.
F087............................ Fire extinguishing agent.
F088............................ Flavoring and nutrient.
F089............................ Anti-redeposition agent.
F090............................ Anti-stain agent.
F091............................ Anti-streaking agent.
F092............................ Conductive agent.
F093............................ Incandescent agent.
F094............................ Magnetic element.
F095............................ Anti-condensation agent.
F096............................ Coalescing agent.
F097............................ Film former.
F098............................ Demulsifier.
F099............................ Stabilizing agent.
F100............................ Alloys.
F101............................ Density modifier.
F102............................ Elasticizer.
F103............................ Flow promoter.
F104............................ Sizing agent.
F105............................ Solubility enhancer.
F106............................ Vapor pressure modifiers.
F107............................ Embalming agent.
F108............................ Heat stabilizer.
F109............................ Preservative.
F110............................ Anti-caking agent.
F111............................ Deflocculant.
F112............................ Dust suppressant.
F113............................ Impregnation agent.
F114............................ Leaching agent.
F115............................ Tracer.
F116............................ X-ray absorber.
F999............................ Other.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(4) Consumer and commercial use information. Using the applicable
codes listed in table 5 to this paragraph (c)(4), submitters must
designate the consumer and commercial product category(ies) that best
describe the consumer and commercial products in which each PFAS is
used (whether the recipient site(s) are controlled by the submitter
site or not). If more than 10 codes apply to a PFAS, submitters need
only report the 10 codes for PFAS that cumulatively represent the
largest percentage of the submitter's production volume for that
chemical, measured by weight. If none of the listed consumer and
commercial product categories accurately describes the consumer and
commercial products in which each PFAS is used, the category ``Other''
may be used, and must include a description of the use.
Table 5 to Paragraph (c)(4)--Codes for Reporting Consumer and Commercial
Product Categories
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Code Category
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chemical Substances in Furnishing, Cleaning, Treatment Care Products
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC101........................... Construction and building materials
covering large surface areas
including stone, plaster, cement,
glass and ceramic articles; fabrics,
textiles, and apparel.
CC102........................... Furniture & furnishings including
plastic articles (soft); leather
articles.
CC103........................... Furniture & furnishings including
stone, plaster, cement, glass and
ceramic articles; metal articles; or
rubber articles.
CC104........................... Leather conditioner.
CC105........................... Leather tanning, dye, finishing,
impregnation and care products.
CC106........................... Textile (fabric) dyes.
CC107........................... Textile finishing and impregnating/
surface treatment products.
CC108........................... All-purpose foam spray cleaner.
CC109........................... All-purpose liquid cleaner/polish.
CC110........................... All-purpose liquid spray cleaner.
CC111........................... All-purpose waxes and polishes.
CC112........................... Appliance cleaners.
CC113........................... Drain and toilet cleaners (liquid).
CC114........................... Powder cleaners (floors).
CC115........................... Powder cleaners (porcelain).
CC116........................... Dishwashing detergent (liquid/gel).
CC117........................... Dishwashing detergent (unit dose/
granule).
CC118........................... Dishwashing detergent liquid (hand-
wash).
CC119........................... Dry cleaning and associated products.
CC120........................... Fabric enhancers.
CC121........................... Laundry detergent (unit-dose/granule).
CC122........................... Laundry detergent (liquid).
CC123........................... Stain removers.
CC124........................... Ion exchangers.
CC125........................... Liquid water treatment products.
CC126........................... Solid/Powder water treatment products.
CC127........................... Liquid body soap.
CC128........................... Liquid hand soap.
CC129........................... Solid bar soap.
CC130........................... Air fresheners for motor vehicles.
CC131........................... Continuous action air fresheners.
CC132........................... Instant action air fresheners.
CC133........................... Anti-static spray.
CC134........................... Apparel finishing, and impregnating/
surface treatment products.
CC135........................... Insect repellent treatment.
CC136........................... Pre-market waxes, stains, and polishes
applied to footwear.
CC137........................... Post-market waxes, and polishes
applied to footwear (shoe polish).
CC138........................... Waterproofing and water-resistant
sprays.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chemical Substances in Construction, Paint, Electrical, and Metal
Products
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC201........................... Fillers and putties.
CC202........................... Hot-melt adhesives.
CC203........................... One-component caulks.
CC204........................... Solder.
CC205........................... Single-component glues and adhesives.
CC206........................... Two-component caulks.
CC207........................... Two-component glues and adhesives.
CC208........................... Adhesive/Caulk removers.
CC209........................... Aerosol spray paints.
CC210........................... Lacquers, stains, varnishes and floor
finishes.
CC211........................... Paint strippers/removers.
CC212........................... Powder coatings.
CC213........................... Radiation curable coatings.
CC214........................... Solvent-based paint.
CC215........................... Thinners.
CC216........................... Water-based paint.
[[Page 70553]]
CC217........................... Construction and building materials
covering large surface areas,
including wood articles.
CC218........................... Construction and building materials
covering large surface areas,
including paper articles; metal
articles; stone, plaster, cement,
glass and ceramic articles.
CC219........................... Machinery, mechanical appliances,
electrical/electronic articles.
CC220........................... Other machinery, mechanical
appliances, electronic/electronic
articles.
CC221........................... Construction and building materials
covering large surface areas,
including metal articles.
CC222........................... Electrical batteries and accumulators.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chemical Substances in Packaging, Paper, Plastic, Toys, Hobby Products
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC990........................... Non-TSCA use.
CC301........................... Packaging (excluding food packaging),
including paper articles.
CC302........................... Other articles with routine direct
contact during normal use, including
paper articles.
CC303........................... Packaging (excluding food packaging),
including rubber articles; plastic
articles (hard); plastic articles
(soft).
CC304........................... Other articles with routine direct
contact during normal use including
rubber articles; plastic articles
(hard).
CC305........................... Toys intended for children's use (and
child dedicated articles), including
fabrics, textiles, and apparel; or
plastic articles (hard).
CC306........................... Adhesives applied at elevated
temperatures.
CC307........................... Cement/concrete.
CC308........................... Crafting glue.
CC309........................... Crafting paint (applied to body).
CC310........................... Crafting paint (applied to craft).
CC311........................... Fixatives and finishing spray
coatings.
CC312........................... Modelling clay.
CC313........................... Correction fluid/tape.
CC314........................... Inks in writing equipment (liquid).
CC315........................... Inks used for stamps.
CC316........................... Toner/Printer cartridge.
CC317........................... Liquid photographic processing
solutions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chemical Substances in Automotive, Fuel, Agriculture, Outdoor Use
Products
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC401........................... Exterior car washes and soaps.
CC402........................... Exterior car waxes, polishes, and
coatings.
CC403........................... Interior car care.
CC404........................... Touch up auto paint.
CC405........................... Degreasers.
CC406........................... Liquid lubricants and greases.
CC407........................... Paste lubricants and greases.
CC408........................... Spray lubricants and greases.
CC409........................... Anti-freeze liquids.
CC410........................... De-icing liquids.
CC411........................... De-icing solids.
CC412........................... Lock de-icers/releasers.
CC413........................... Cooking and heating fuels.
CC414........................... Fuel additives.
CC415........................... Vehicular or appliance fuels.
CC416........................... Explosive materials.
CC417........................... Agricultural non-pesticidal products.
CC418........................... Lawn and garden care products.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chemical Substances in Products Not Described by Other Codes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC980........................... Other (specify).
CC990........................... Non-TSCA use.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5) Applicable codes for each commercial and consumer products. For
each consumer and commercial product category reported under paragraph
(c)(4) of this section, the applicable code(s) described in table 4 to
paragraph (c)(3) of this section must be selected to designate the
function category(ies) that best represents the specific manner in
which the PFAS is used.
(6) Commercial and consumer products. Submitters must indicate, for
each consumer and commercial product category reported under paragraph
(c)(4) of this section, whether the use is a consumer or a commercial
use, or both.
(7) Consumer product category. Submitters must determine, within
each consumer and commercial product category reported under paragraph
(c)(4) of this section, whether any amount of each reportable chemical
substance manufactured (including imported) by the submitter is present
in (for example, a plasticizer chemical substance used to make
pacifiers) or on (for example, as a component in the paint on a toy)
any consumer products intended for use by children age 14 or younger,
regardless of the concentration of the chemical substance remaining in
or on the product. Submitters must select from the following options:
The chemical substance is used in or on any consumer products intended
for use by children; the chemical substance is not used in or on any
consumer products intended for use by children; or information as to
whether the chemical substance is used in or on any consumer products
intended for use by children is not known to or reasonably
ascertainable by the submitter.
(8) Concentrations of PFAS. For each year where the PFAS is used in
consumer or commercial products, the estimated typical maximum
concentration, measured by weight, of the chemical substance in each
consumer and commercial product category reported under paragraph
(c)(4) of this section. For each PFAS in each commercial and consumer
product category reported under paragraph (c)(4) of this section,
submitters must select from among the ranges of concentrations listed
in table 6 to this paragraph (c)(8) and report the corresponding code
(i.e., M1 through M5):
Table 6 to Paragraph (c)(8)--Codes for Reporting Maximum Concentration
of Chemical Substance
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Code Concentration range (% weight)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
M1.............................. Less than 1% by weight.
M2.............................. At least 1 but less than 30% by
weight.
M3.............................. At least 30 but less than 60% by
weight.
M4.............................. At least 60 but less than 90% by
weight.
M5.............................. At least 90% by weight.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(d) Manufactured amounts. For each year since January 1, 2011, the
total amounts manufactured of each PFAS, including the amounts
manufactured in each calendar year for each category of use as
described in paragraph (c) of this section.
(1) Total volume. For each year the PFAS was manufactured, the
total annual volume (in pounds) of each PFAS domestically manufactured
or imported at each site. The total annual domestically manufactured
volume (not including imported volume) and the total annual imported
volume must be separately reported. These amounts must be reported to
two significant figures of accuracy.
(2) Site designation. A designation indicating, for each PFAS at
each site, whether the imported PFAS is physically present at the
reporting site.
(3) Volume imported. The volume directly exported of each PFAS
domestically manufactured or imported at each site. These amounts must
be reported to two significant figures of accuracy.
(4) Production volume. The estimated percentage, rounded off to the
closest 10 percent, of total production volume of the reportable
chemical substance associated with each combination of industrial
processing or use operation, sector, and function category as reported
in paragraph (c) of this section. Where a particular combination of
industrial processing or use operation, sector, and function category
accounts for less than
[[Page 70554]]
5 percent of the submitter's site's total production volume of a
reportable chemical substance, the percentage must not be rounded off
to 0 percent. Instead, in such a case, submitters must report the
percentage, rounded off to the closest 1 percent, of the submitter's
site's total production volume of the reportable chemical substance
associated with the particular combination of industrial processing or
use operation, sector, and function category.
(5) Site production volume. The estimated percentage, rounded off
to the closest 10 percent, of the submitter's site's total production
volume of the PFAS associated with each consumer and commercial product
category as reported in paragraph (c)(4) of this section. Where a
particular consumer and commercial product category accounts for less
than 5 percent of the total production volume of a reportable chemical
substance, the percentage must not be rounded off to 0 percent.
Instead, in such a case, submitters must report the percentage, rounded
off to the closest 1 percent, of the submitter's site's total
production volume of the reportable chemical substance associated with
the particular consumer and commercial product category.
(6) Site-limited. An indication of whether the PFAS was site-
limited.
(7) Volume recycled. The total volume (in pounds) of each PFAS
recycled on-site.
(e) Byproduct reporting. A description of the byproducts resulting
from the manufacture, processing, use, or disposal of each PFAS.
(1) Byproduct identification. For each byproduct produced from the
manufacture, processing, use, or disposal of a PFAS, the submitter will
identify the byproduct by its specific, currently correct CA Index name
as used to list the chemical substance on the TSCA Inventory and the
correct corresponding CASRN. A submitter under this part may use a
known EPA-designated TSCA Accession Number for a chemical substance in
lieu of a CASRN when a CASRN is not known to or reasonably
ascertainable by the submitter. Submitters who wish to report chemical
substances listed on the confidential portion of the TSCA Inventory
will need to report the chemical substance using a TSCA Accession
Number.
(i) In addition to reporting the number itself, submitters must
specify the type of number they are reporting by selecting from among
the codes in table 1 to paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section.
(ii) If the specific chemical identity of the byproduct is unknown
to the submitter, the submitter may provide a description of the
chemical substance.
(iii) An indication of which specific PFAS activity(ies) (i.e.,
manufacture, process, use, or disposal) manufactured the byproduct.
(2) Releases. An indication of whether the byproduct is released to
the environment, and if so, the environmental medium to which it is
released (i.e., air, water, land).
(3) Volume. For each year, the byproduct volume (in pounds)
released to the environment.
(f) Environmental and health effects. All existing information
concerning the environmental and health effects of such substance or
mixture containing a chemical substance in the manufacturer's
possession or control. The scope of this information shall not be
limited to studies conducted or published since 2011.
(1) Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
Harmonized Templates. For each published study report, the submitter
shall complete an OECD Harmonized Templates for Reporting Chemical Test
Summaries and submit the accompanying study reports and supporting
information. This can be accomplished by using the freely available
IUCLID software.
(2) Human health data--preliminary studies. Submitters shall also
provide any additional human health data not in study reports,
including but not limited to any preliminary studies, informal test
results in workers, or inhalation studies.
(3) Analytical tests. Submitters shall also provide the names of
any analytical or test methods used to detect or otherwise test for the
PFAS.
(g) Worker exposure data. The number of individuals exposed to PFAS
in their places of employment and the duration of such exposure.
(1) Employment activities. A narrative description of worker
activities involving the PFAS at the manufacturing site, such as bag
dumping, sampling, cleaning, or unloading drums.
(2) Number of workers. For each worker activity in this paragraph,
indicate the number of workers reasonably likely to be exposed. The
submitter must select from among the worker ranges listed in table 7 to
this paragraph (g)(2) and report the corresponding code (i.e., W1
though W8).
Table 7 to Paragraph (g)(2)--Codes for Reporting Number of Workers
Reasonably Likely To Be Exposed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Code Range
------------------------------------------------------------------------
W1.............................. Fewer than 10 workers.
W2.............................. At least 10 but fewer than 25 workers.
W3.............................. At least 25 but fewer than 50 workers.
W4.............................. At least 50 but fewer than 100
workers.
W5.............................. At least 100 but fewer than 500
workers.
W6.............................. At least 500 but fewer than 1,000
workers.
W7.............................. At least 1,000 but fewer than 10,000
workers.
W8.............................. At least 10,000 workers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Exposure scenarios. For each worker activity in this paragraph
(g), the maximum duration of exposure for any worker at the
manufacturing site, for each of the following scenarios:
(i) The daily exposure duration (in hours per day) in the case of
the worker with greatest annual exposure frequency (i.e., the worker
exposed the most days per year); and
(ii) The annual exposure frequency (in days per year) in the case
of the worker with greatest daily exposure duration (i.e., the worker
exposed for the most hours per day during the year).
(4) Exposure by category. For each combination of industrial
processing or use operation, sector, and function category identified
in paragraph (c) of this section, the submitter must estimate the
number of workers reasonably likely to be exposed to each PFAS. For
each combination associated with each chemical substance, the submitter
must select from among the worker ranges listed in table 7 to paragraph
(g)(2) of this section and report the corresponding code (i.e., W1
though W8).
(5) Duration of exposure industrial use. For each PFAS, the maximum
duration of exposure for any worker for each combination of industrial
processing or use operation, sector, and function category, for each of
the following scenarios:
(i) The daily exposure duration (in hours per day) in the case of
the worker with the greatest annual exposure frequency (i.e., the
worker exposed the most days per year); and
(ii) The annual exposure frequency (in days per year) in the case
of the worker with the greatest daily exposure duration (i.e., the
worker exposed for the most hours per day during the year).
(6) Commercial workers. Where the PFAS is used in a commercial
product,
[[Page 70555]]
the submitter must estimate the number of commercial workers reasonably
likely to be exposed to each reportable chemical substance. For each
commercial use associated with each substance, the submitter must
select from among the worker ranges listed in table 7 to paragraph
(g)(2) of this section and report the corresponding code (i.e., W1
though W8).
(7) Duration of exposure commercial use. For each PFAS, the maximum
duration of exposure for any worker for each commercial use, for each
of the following scenarios:
(i) The daily exposure duration (in hours per day) in the case of
the worker with greatest annual exposure frequency (i.e., the worker
exposed the most days per year); and
(ii) The annual exposure frequency (in days per year) in the case
of the worker with greatest daily exposure duration (i.e., the worker
exposed for the most hours per day during the year).
(h) Disposal data. During the years in which the PFAS was
manufactured, the manners or methods of its disposal, and any changes
to the disposal methods or processes.
(1) Categories of disposal methods. Description of disposal
processes or methods, using the appropriate codes in table 8 to this
paragraph (h)(1), and additional descriptions as needed.
Table 8 to Paragraph (h)(1)--Codes for Reporting Disposal Methods
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Code Disposal method
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D1.............................. On-site land disposal: Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Class C landfill (hazardous).
D2.............................. On-site land disposal: other landfill.
D3.............................. Other on-site land disposal.
D4.............................. On-site underground injection (UIC).
D5.............................. Off-site land disposal: RCRA Class C
landfill (hazardous).
D6.............................. Off-site land disposal: other
landfill.
D7.............................. On-site incineration.
D8.............................. Off-site incineration.
D9.............................. Publicly owned treatment works (POTW).
D10............................. Other off-site waste transfer.
D11............................. Release to surface water.
D12............................. Release to air (stack emissions).
D13............................. Release to air (fugitive emissions).
D99............................. Other.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Disposal processes. Describe any changes to the disposal
process(es) or method(s) indicated in paragraph (h)(1) of this section
for any PFAS manufactured since 2011.
(3) Disposal volume. Indicate total volume of the PFAS that was
released to each environmental medium in each year since 2011: land,
water, and air.
(4) Incineration volume. Indicate total volume of the PFAS that was
incinerated on-site in each year since 2011. If incineration occurred,
indicate the temperature (in degrees Celsius) at which the PFAS was
incinerated. If incineration occurred at multiple temperatures,
indicate the minimum temperature (in degrees Celsius) at which the PFAS
was incinerated.
Sec. 705.18 Article importer and R&D substance reporting options.
For the one-time submission, certain manufacturers have the option
to use a streamlined reporting form if they do not know nor can
reasonably ascertain information requested under Sec. 705.15, beyond
what is listed in this part. Paragraph (a) of this section lists the
information which a manufacturer who has imported a PFAS within an
article must report to the extent they know or can reasonably
ascertain. Paragraph (b) of this section lists the information that
manufacturers of PFAS that are solely R&D substances manufactured in
volumes no greater than 10 kilograms per year must report to the extent
they know or can reasonably ascertain.
(a) Article reporting. Any importer of an article which contains a
chemical substance that is a PFAS and who meets the reporting
requirements described in Sec. 705.10 has the option to submit
information to EPA using a streamlined reporting form for that PFAS in
the imported article, for each year since January 1, 2011, in which the
PFAS was imported in an article. Information must be submitted to the
extent the submitter knows or can reasonably ascertain. In the event
that actual data is not known to or reasonably ascertainable by the
submitter, then reasonable estimates may be submitted. The information
requested on the streamlined reporting form for article importers
includes:
(1) Company and plant site information. All company and plant site
information requested under Sec. 705.15(a) shall be reported.
(2) Chemical-specific information. The following chemical-specific
information must be reported for each chemical substance that is a PFAS
imported in an article, for each year since January 1, 2011, in which
that PFAS was imported within an article.
(i) The common or trade name, the chemical identity, and, except
for chemical substances that are Class 1 substances on the TSCA
Inventory (Inventory), the representative molecular structure of each
PFAS for which such a report is required. Submitters who wish to report
chemical substances listed on the confidential portion of the Inventory
will need to report the chemical substance using a TSCA Accession
Number. If a submitter has a low-volume exemption (LVE) case number for
the chemical substance, that number may also be used if a CASRN is not
known to or reasonably ascertainable by the submitter. In addition to
reporting the number itself, submitters must specify the type of number
they are reporting by selecting from among the codes in table 1 to
Sec. 705.15(b)(1)(ii).
(ii) If the specific chemical identity of the PFAS imported in an
article is not known to or reasonably ascertainable to the submitter
(e.g., if the chemical identity is claimed as confidential business
information by the submitter's supplier, or if the submitter knows they
have a PFAS but is unable to ascertain its specific chemical identity),
the submitter may provide a generic name or description of the PFAS.
(3) Categories of use. For each year since January 1, 2011, report
the following information on categories of use of each PFAS imported in
an article.
(i) Industrial processing and use information. A designation
indicating the type of industrial processing or use operation(s) at
each site that receives a PFAS from the submitter site directly or
indirectly (whether the recipient site(s) are controlled by the
submitter site or not). For each PFAS that was imported in an article,
report the letters which correspond to the appropriate processing or
use operation(s) listed in table 2 to Sec. 705.15(c)(1). A particular
designation may need to be reported more than once, to the extent that
a submitter reports more than one sector that applies to a given
designation under this paragraph (a)(3)(i).
(ii) Industrial activities sector. A code indicating the sector(s)
that best describe the industrial activities associated with each
industrial processing or use operation reported under this section. For
each PFAS that was imported in an article, report the code that
corresponds to the appropriate sector(s) listed in table 3 to Sec.
705.15(c)(2). A particular sector code may need to be reported more
than once, to the extent that a submitter reports more than one
function code that applies to a given sector code under this paragraph
(a)(3)(ii).
(iii) Sector specific function categories. For each sector reported
under paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section, the applicable code(s) from
table 4 to Sec. 705.15(c)(3) must be selected to designate the
function category(ies) that best represents the specific manner in
which the PFAS in the imported article is used.
[[Page 70556]]
(iv) Consumer and commercial use information. Using the applicable
codes listed in table 5 to Sec. 705.15(c)(4), submitters must
designate the consumer and commercial product category(ies) that best
describe the consumer and commercial products in which each PFAS that
is in an imported article is used (whether the recipient site(s) are
controlled by the submitter site or not). If more than 10 codes apply
to a PFAS in an imported article, submitters need only report the 10
codes for PFAS that cumulatively represent the largest percentage of
the submitter's production volume for that chemical, measured by
weight. If none of the listed consumer and commercial product
categories accurately describe the consumer and commercial products in
which each PFAS is used, the category ``Other'' may be used, and must
include a description of the use.
(v) Product specific function categories. For each consumer and
commercial product category reported under paragraph (a)(3)(iv) of this
section, the applicable code(s) described in table 4 to Sec.
705.15(c)(3) must be selected to designate the function category(ies)
that best represents the specific manner in which the PFAS in an
imported article is used.
(vi) Consumer or commercial use designation. Submitters must
indicate, for each consumer and commercial product category reported
under paragraph (a)(3)(v) of this section, whether the use is a
consumer or a commercial use, or both.
(vii) In or on consumer products intended for children. Submitters
must determine, within each consumer and commercial product category
reported under paragraph (a)(3)(v) of this section, whether any amount
of each reportable chemical substance manufactured (including imported)
by the submitter is present in (for example, a plasticizer chemical
substance used to make pacifiers) or on (for example, as a component in
the paint on a toy) any consumer products intended for use by children
age 14 or younger, regardless of the concentration of the chemical
substance remaining in or on the product. Submitters must select from
the following options: The chemical substance is used in or on any
consumer products intended for use by children; the chemical substance
is not used in or on any consumer products intended for use by
children; or information as to whether the chemical substance is used
in or on any consumer products intended for use by children is not
known to or reasonably ascertainable by the submitter.
(viii) Estimated maximum concentration. For each year where the
PFAS in an imported article is used in consumer or commercial products,
the submitter must report the estimated typical maximum concentration,
measured by weight, of the chemical substance in each consumer and
commercial product category reported under paragraph (a)(3)(v) of this
section. For each PFAS in an imported article in each commercial and
consumer product category reported under paragraph (a)(3)(v) of this
section, submitters must select from among the ranges of concentrations
listed in table 1 to this paragraph (a)(3)(viii) and report the
corresponding code (i.e., AM1 through AM5):
Table 1 to Paragraph (a)(3)(viii)--Codes for Reporting Maximum
Concentration of PFAS in an Imported Article
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Code Concentration range (% weight)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AM1............................. Less than 0.1% by weight.
AM2............................. At least 0.1% but less than 1% by
weight.
AM3............................. At least 1% but less than 10% by
weight.
AM4............................. At least 10% but less than 30% by
weight.
AM5............................. At least 30% by weight.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(4) Imported article production volume. For each calendar year
since January 1, 2011, in which the PFAS was imported in an article,
the production volume of the imported article. The imported production
volume must be reported to two significant figures of accuracy. The
submitter must also provide the unit of measurement of the imported
production volume by selecting among the table 2 to this paragraph
(a)(4). The submitter must also designate, for each PFAS imported in an
article, whether the imported PFAS was ever physically present at the
reporting site.
Table 2 to Paragraph (a)(4)--Codes To Specify Unit of Measurement for
the Imported Article Production Volume
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Code Unit of measurement
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LB.............................. Pounds.
TN.............................. Tons.
QT.............................. Quantity of imported article.
O............................... Other (must specify).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5) Additional article data. The submitter has the option to
provide any additional information to EPA that is requested under Sec.
705.15 on the PFAS imported in an article, including supplemental
attachments.
(b) Research and development (R&D). Any manufacturer of a PFAS R&D
substance that was manufactured in volumes no greater than 10 kilograms
per year and who meets the reporting requirements described in Sec.
705.10 has the option to submit information to EPA using a streamlined
reporting form for each such PFAS, for each year since January 1, 2011,
in which the PFAS was manufactured for R&D purposes in volumes no
greater than 10 kilograms per year. Information must be submitted to
the extent the submitter knows or can reasonably ascertain. In the
event that actual data is not known to or reasonably ascertainable by
the submitter, then reasonable estimates may be submitted. The
information requested on the streamlined reporting form for R&D
manufacturers includes:
(1) Company and plant site information. All company and plant site
information requested under Sec. 705.15(a) shall be reported.
(2) Chemical-specific information. The following chemical-specific
information must be reported for each R&D chemical substance that is a
PFAS and each mixture containing a chemical substance that is a PFAS
and meets the requirements for the reporting option under this
paragraph (b)(2). The information must be reported for each year since
January 1, 2011, in which that PFAS was manufactured for R&D purposes
in quantities no greater than 10 kilograms per year.
(i) The common or trade name, the chemical identity, and, except
for chemical substances that are Class 1 substances on the TSCA
Inventory, the representative molecular structure of each PFAS for
which such a report is required. Submitters who wish to report chemical
substances listed on the confidential portion of the TSCA Inventory
will need to report the chemical substance using a TSCA Accession
Number. If a submitter has a low-volume exemption (LVE) case number for
the chemical substance, that number may also be used if a CASRN is not
known to or reasonably ascertainable by the submitter. In addition to
reporting the number itself, submitters must specify the type of number
they are reporting by selecting from among the codes in table 1 to
Sec. 705.15(b)(1)(ii).
(ii) If the specific chemical identity of the PFAS is not known to
or reasonably ascertainable to the submitter (e.g., if the chemical
identity is claimed as confidential business information by the
submitter's supplier, or if the submitter knows they have a PFAS but
are unable
[[Page 70557]]
to ascertain its specific chemical identity), the submitter may provide
a generic name or description of the PFAS.
(3) Production volume. The submitter must report for each year
since January 1, 2011, in which the PFAS was manufactured, the total
annual volume (in pounds) of each PFAS domestically manufactured or
imported at each site. The total annual domestically manufactured
volume (not including imported volume) and the total annual imported
volume must be separately reported. These amounts must be reported to
two significant figures of accuracy.
(i) A designation indicating, for each PFAS at each site, whether
any imported PFAS is ever physically present at the reporting site.
(ii) [Reserved]
(4) Additional R&D data. The submitter has the option to provide
any additional information to EPA that is requested under Sec. 705.15
on the PFAS, including supplemental attachments.
Sec. 705.20 When to report.
All information reported to EPA in response to the requirements of
this part must be submitted during the applicable submission period.
For all reporters submitting information pursuant to Sec. Sec. 705.15
and 705.18(b) (research and development), the submission period shall
begin one year following November 13, 2023, and last for six months:
November 12, 2024, through May 8, 2025. For any reporter who is
reporting under this part exclusively pursuant to Sec. 705.18(a)
(article importers), and is also considered a small manufacturer under
the definition at 40 CFR 704.3, the submission period shall begin one
year following November 13, 2023, and last for 12 months: November 12,
2024, through November 10, 2025.
Sec. 705.22 Duplicative reporting.
Any person covered in this part may notify EPA through the
electronic reporting system in Sec. 705.35 that certain information
has already been submitted to EPA, and any such person does not need to
re-submit the information. The notification must include the statutory
and regulatory provision under which the information was submitted and
in which year it was submitted. This ability is limited to the type of
information listed in this section. If the previous submission did not
account for all information required to be submitted pursuant to this
part (e.g., due to exemptions inapplicable to this part), then the
person may not rely on that prior submission to satisfy the reporting
requirements of this part.
(a) Chemical Data Reporting rule. If a person identified in Sec.
705.10 has already reported certain information in Sec. 705.15 to EPA
pursuant to the Chemical Data Reporting rule at 40 CFR part 711, then
duplicative reporting of that information is not required of the years
for which the information has already been reported. Such information
that may potentially be duplicative under this part is limited to:
(1) Chemical description. Physical state of the chemical or mixture
containing a chemical substance, pursuant to 40 CFR
711.15(b)(3)(C)(ix).
(2) Sector description. Industrial processing and use type,
sector(s), functional category(ies), and percent of production volume
for each use, pursuant to 40 CFR 711.15(b)(4)(i)(A) through (D).
(3) Product category. Consumer and/or commercial indicator, product
category(ies), functional category(ies), percent of production volume
for each use, indicator for use in products intended for children, and
maximum concentration in the product, pursuant to 40 CFR
711.15(b)(4)(ii)(A) through (F).
(4) Workers. Number of workers reasonably likely to be exposed for
each combination of industrial processing or use operation, sector, and
function, pursuant to 40 CFR 711.15(b)(4)(i)(F), and the number of
commercial workers reasonably likely to be exposed when the substance
is used in a commercial product, pursuant to 40 CFR
711.15(b)(4)(ii)(G).
(5) Volume. Production volume, both domestically manufactured and
imported, an indicator for the imported chemical never physically at
site, and the volume directly exported, pursuant to 40 CFR
711.15(b)(3)(iii) through (v).
(b) Greenhouse Gas Reporting rule. If a person identified in Sec.
705.10 has already reported certain information in Sec. 705.15 to EPA
pursuant to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting rule at 40 CFR part 98, then
duplicative reporting of that information is not required of the years
for which the information has already been reported. Such information
that may potentially be duplicative under this part is limited to:
(1) Imported. Production volume (imported), pursuant to 40 CFR
98.416(c)(1) and (2).
(2) Exported. Volume directly exported, pursuant to 40 CFR
98.416(d)(1).
(3) Incinerated. Total volume incinerated on-site, pursuant to 40
CFR part 98.
(c) Toxics Release Inventory reporting rule. If a person identified
in Sec. 705.10 has already reported certain information in Sec.
705.15 to EPA pursuant to the Toxics Release Inventory reporting rule
at 40 CFR part 372, then duplicative reporting of that information is
not required of the years for which the information has already been
reported. Such information that may potentially be duplicative under
this part is limited to:
(1) Recycled. Total volume recycled on-site, pursuant to 40 CFR
372.85(b)(16).
(2) Disposal. Description of disposal process(es), pursuant to 40
CFR 372.85(b)(14) and (15).
(3) Release to land. Total volume released to land, pursuant to 40
CFR 372.85(b)(14)(i)(D) and (E).
(4) Release to water. Total volume released to water, pursuant to
40 CFR 372.85(b)(14)(i)(C).
(5) Release to air. Total volume released to air, pursuant to 40
CFR 372.85(b)(14)(i)(A) and (B).
(6) Incinerated. Total volume incinerated on-site, pursuant to 40
CFR 372.85(b)(16).
(d) TSCA sections 8(d) and 8(e) reporting. If a person identified
in Sec. 705.10 has already reported certain information in Sec.
705.15(f) to EPA, then duplicative reporting of that information is not
required of the years for which the information has already been
reported. Such information that may potentially be duplicative under
this part is limited to health and safety studies submitted pursuant to
TSCA section 8(d), notification of substantial risks pursuant to TSCA
section 8(e), or other information concerning environmental and health
effects of the PFAS.
(e) Byproduct reporting. If a person identified in Sec. 705.10
must report byproducts information pursuant to Sec. 705.15(e), and
those byproducts are also PFAS that are reported independently pursuant
to this part, then duplicative reporting of the environmental releases
as byproducts is not required. Such information that may potentially be
duplicative is limited to:
(1) Incineration. An indication of whether the byproduct is
released to the environment, and if so, the environmental medium to
which it is released (i.e., air, water, land), pursuant to Sec.
705.15(e)(2).
(2) Byproduct volume. For each year, the byproduct volume (in
pounds) released to the environment, pursuant to Sec. 705.15(e)(3).
(f) Environmental and health effects information. If a person
identified in Sec. 705.10 has already reported the
[[Page 70558]]
information in Sec. 705.15(f) to EPA, then duplicative reporting of
that information is not required, except to the extent required by to
Sec. 705.30. The notification required by this paragraph (f) must also
include the EPA office (e.g., EPA region or Headquarters Office) and
case number or other identifier for the prior submission.
(g) Reporting timeframe. Any person covered in this part must
report all information to EPA in Sec. 705.15 for each year since
January 1, 2011, in which that person manufactured a chemical substance
that is a PFAS or a mixture containing a PFAS. If a person has already
reported any of the data elements identified in paragraph (a) of this
section, but not for all years since 2011, then that person must submit
the required information for the intervening years. If a person has
already reported any of the data elements identified in paragraph (a),
(b), or (c) of this section, and the previous submissions did not
account for all activities that are reportable under this part due to
exemptions or thresholds that do not apply to this part, then that
information is not considered duplicative reporting, and the person
must submit information for that data element responsive to this part.
Sec. 705.25 Recordkeeping requirements.
Each person who is subject to the reporting requirements of this
part must retain records that document any information reported to EPA.
Relevant records must be retained for a period of 5 years beginning on
the last day of the submission period.
Sec. 705.30 Confidentiality claims.
(a) Making confidentiality claims--(1) Generally. Any person
submitting information under this part may assert a confidentiality
claim for that information, except for information described in
paragraph (a)(2) of this section. All such confidentiality claims must
be asserted at the time the information is submitted. Instructions for
asserting confidentiality claims are provided in the document
identified in Sec. 705.35. Information claimed as confidential
business information in accordance with this section will be treated
and disclosed in accordance with the procedures in 40 CFR part 703 and
TSCA section 14.
(2) Exceptions. Confidentiality claims cannot be asserted for the
following:
(i) Specific chemical identity if the chemical is on the public
(non-confidential) TSCA Inventory or reported as non-confidential in an
LVE;
(ii) For processing and use data elements required by Sec. Sec.
705.15(c)(1) through (7) and 705.18(a)(3)(i) through (vii);
(iii) When a response is left blank or designated as ``not known or
reasonably ascertainable;''
(iv) For specific chemical identity by submitters of article
importer forms described in Sec. 705.18(a);
(v) For all generic chemical names;
(vi) For any PFAS that are on the public (non-confidential) TSCA
Inventory, the chemical's CASRN;
(vii) For the Inventory Accession Numbers for PFAS that are on the
confidential TSCA Inventory; or,
(viii) For LVE numbers.
(3) All existing information concerning environmental and health
effects. (i) Any person submitting a health and safety study, or
information from a healthy and safety study, under this part may only
assert a confidentiality claim for information that discloses processes
used in the manufacturing or processing of a chemical substance or
mixture or, in the case of a mixture, the release of data disclosing
the portion of the mixture comprised by any of the chemical substances
in the mixture.
(ii) If any information submitted under Sec. 705.15(f) is claimed
as confidential business information, a person who submits the
information must provide EPA, at the time of submission, a sanitized
copy for public release, removing only that information that is claimed
as confidential business information.
(iii) Any person who has previously submitted information under
Sec. 705.15(f) and claimed it as confidential business information is
required to reassert and re-substantiate the confidential business
information claim if they seek to maintain the claim of confidential
business information. Such persons are required to submit s a revised
sanitized copy.
(b) Substantiation of confidentiality claims. (1) Unless exempted,
all confidentiality claims require substantiation at the time of
submission and must be signed and dated by an authorized official.
(2) Confidentiality claims for the following data elements are
exempt from the substantiation requirement in paragraph (b)(1) of this
section:
(i) Volume. Production volume information required pursuant to
Sec. Sec. 705.15(d)(1), (5), and (6) and 705.18(a)(4) and (b)(3)(i).
(ii) Primary submitter. Joint submission information from the
primary submitter, consisting of trade name and supplier identification
required pursuant to Sec. 705.15(b)(1)(i) and (ii).
(iii) Secondary submitter. Joint submission information from the
secondary submitter, consisting of the percentage of formulation
required pursuant to Sec. 705.15(b)(1)(i) and (ii).
(c) Marking information claimed as confidential business
information in confidentiality substantiation documentation. If any of
the information contained in the answers to the questions listed in
paragraph (e) of this section is asserted to contain information that
itself is considered to be confidential, you must clearly identify the
information that is claimed confidential.
(d) Certification statement for claims. An authorized official
representing a person asserting a claim of confidentiality must certify
that the submission complies with the requirements of this part by
signing and dating the following certification statement:
``I certify that all claims for confidentiality asserted 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: (1) I have taken
reasonable measures to protect the confidentiality of the
information; (2) I have determined that the information is not
required to be disclosed or otherwise made available to the public
under any other Federal law; (3) 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 (4)
I have a reasonable basis to believe that the information is not
readily discoverable through reverse engineering.''
(e) Substantiation requirements for all types of confidentiality
claims. For each data element that is claimed as confidential business
information, you must submit with your report detailed written answers
to the following questions:
(1) Substantial harm due to release. Please specifically explain
what harm to the competitive position of your business would be likely
to result from the release of the information claimed as confidential
business information. How would that harm be substantial? Why is the
substantial harm to your competitive position likely (i.e., probable)
to be caused by release of the information rather than just possible?
If you claimed multiple types of information to be confidential (e.g.,
site information, exposure information, environmental release
information, etc.), explain how disclosure of each type of information
would be likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position
of your business. (40 CFR 703.5(b)(3))
[[Page 70559]]
(2) Precautions to protect confidentiality. Has your business taken
precautions to protect the confidentiality of the disclosed
information? If yes, please explain and identify the specific measures,
including but not limited to internal controls, that your business has
taken to protect the information claimed as confidential business
information. If the same or similar information was previously reported
to EPA as non-confidential (such as in an earlier version of this
submission), please explain the circumstances of that prior submission
and reasons for believing the information is nonetheless still
confidential.
(3) Disclosure under Federal law or publicly available information.
(i) Is any of the information claimed as confidential business
information required to be publicly disclosed under any other Federal
law? If yes, please explain.
(ii) Does any of the information claimed as confidential business
information otherwise appear in any public documents, including (but
not limited to) safety data sheets; advertising or promotional
material; professional or trade publications; state, local, or Federal
agency files; or any other media or publications available to the
general public? If yes, please explain why the information should be
treated as confidential. If this chemical is patented and the patent
reveals the information you are claiming to be confidential business
information, please explain your reasons for believing the information
is nonetheless still confidential.
(4) Duration of claims. Is the claim of confidentiality intended to
last less than 10 years (see TSCA section 14(e)(1)(B))? If yes, please
indicate the number of years (between 1-10 years) or the specific date
after which the claim is withdrawn.
(5) Previously disclosed information. Has EPA, another Federal
agency, or court made any confidentiality determination regarding
information associated with this chemical substance? If yes, please
provide the circumstances associated with the prior determination,
whether the information was found to be entitled to confidential
treatment, the entity that made the decision, and the date of the
determination.
(f) Additional requirements for specific chemical identity. A
person may assert a claim of confidentiality for the specific chemical
identity of a chemical substance as described in Sec. Sec.
705.15(b)(1)(i) and 705.18(b)(2)(i) only if the identity of that
chemical substance is treated as confidential in the Master Inventory
File (or as a confidential LVE) as of the time the report is submitted
for that chemical substance, if that substance is currently on the
Inventory or is an LVE. Any person who asserts a claim of
confidentiality for the specific chemical identity under this paragraph
must provide a generic chemical name. To assert a claim of
confidentiality for the identity of a reportable chemical substance,
you must submit with the report detailed written answers to the
questions from paragraph (b) of this section and to the following
questions.
(1) Chemical substance in U.S. commerce. Is this chemical substance
publicly known (including by your competitors) to be in U.S. commerce?
If yes, please explain why the specific chemical identity should still
be afforded confidential status (e.g., the chemical substance is
publicly known only as being distributed in commerce for research and
development purposes, but no other information about the current
commercial distribution of the chemical substance in the United States
is publicly available) (40 CFR 703.5(b)(4)). If no, please complete the
certification statement:
``I certify that on the date referenced, I searched the internet
for the chemical substance identity (i.e., by both chemical
substance name and CASRN). I did not find a reference to this
chemical substance and have no knowledge of public information that
would indicate that the chemical is being manufactured or imported
by anyone for a commercial purpose in the United States. [provide
date].''
(2) Leave manufacturing site. Does this particular chemical
substance leave the site of manufacture (including import) in any form,
e.g., as a product, effluent, emission? If yes, please explain what
measures have been taken to guard against the discovery of its
identity.
(3) Chemical identity. If the chemical substance leaves the site in
a form that is available to the public or your competitors, can the
chemical identity be readily discovered by analysis of the substance
(e.g., product, effluent, emission), in light of existing technologies
and any costs, difficulties, or limitations associated with such
technologies? Please explain why or why not.
(4) Chemical name. Would disclosure of the specific chemical name
release confidential process information? If yes, please explain.
(g) Joint submissions. If a primary submitter asks a secondary
submitter to provide information directly to EPA in a joint submission
under Sec. Sec. 705.15(b)(1)(i) and 705.18(b)(2)(i), only the primary
submitter may assert a confidentiality claim for the data elements that
it directly submits to EPA. The primary submitter must substantiate
those claims that are not exempt under paragraph (b)(2) of this
section. The secondary submitter is responsible for asserting all
confidentiality claims for the data elements that it submits directly
to EPA and for substantiating those claims that are not exempt under
paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
(h) No claim of confidentiality. Except for the chemical identity
on article importer forms submitted under Sec. 705.18(a), information
not claimed as confidential business information in accordance with the
requirements of this section may be made public (e.g., by publication
of specific chemical name and CASRN on the public portion of the TSCA
Inventory). EPA will provide advance public notice of specific chemical
identities to be added to the public portion of the TSCA Inventory.
Sec. 705.35 Electronic reporting.
You must use CDX to complete and submit the reporting form required
under this part. Submissions may only be made as set forth in this
section. Submissions must be sent electronically to EPA via CDX. The
information submitted and all attachments (unless the attachment
appears in scientific literature) must be in English. All information
must be true and correct. Access the PFAS 8(a)(7) reporting tool and
instructions, as follows:
(a) By website. Access the PFAS 8(a)(7) reporting tool via the CDX
homepage at https://cdx.epa.gov/ and follow the appropriate links.
(b) By phone or email. Contact the EPA TSCA Hotline at (202) 554-
1404 or [email protected].
[FR Doc. 2023-22094 Filed 10-10-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P