[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 149 (Monday, August 3, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46560-46563]
[FR Doc No: 2020-16629]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 149 / Monday, August 3, 2020 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0677; Product Identifier 2020-NM-099-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2019-23-03, which applies to certain Dassault Aviation Model FALCON
900EX airplanes. AD 2019-23-03 requires revising the existing
maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or
more restrictive maintenance requirements and/or airworthiness
limitations. Since the FAA issued AD 2019-23-03, the FAA has determined
that new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary.
This proposed AD would continue to require those maintenance or
inspection program revisions, and would also require revising the
existing maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to
incorporate additional new or more restrictive airworthiness
limitations, as specified in a European Union Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA) AD, which will be incorporated by reference. The FAA is
proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by September
17, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For EASA material identified in this proposed AD that will be
incorporated by reference (IBR), contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer
3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this IBR
material on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu.
    For Dassault service information identified in the proposed AD,
contact Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation, Teterboro Airport, P.O. Box
2000, South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet
https://www.dassaultfalcon.com.
    You may view this IBR material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products
Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in the AD docket on the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2020-0677.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0677; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this NPRM, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for Docket Operations is listed above. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. The most helpful comments reference a
specific portion of the proposal, explain the reason for any
recommended change, and include supporting data. To ensure the docket
does not contain duplicate comments, commenters should send only one
copy of written comments, or if comments are filed electronically,
commenters should submit only one time. Send your comments to an
address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-
2020-0677; Product Identifier 2020-NM-099-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, as well
as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this
proposal, the FAA will consider all comments received by the closing
date for comments. The FAA will consider comments filed after the
comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without incurring
expense or delay. The FAA may change this NPRM because of those
comments.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Any
commentary that the FAA receives which is not

specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for
this rulemaking.

Discussion

    The FAA issued AD 2019-23-03, Amendment 39-19796 (84 FR 67171,
December 9, 2019) (``AD 2019-23-03''), for certain Dassault Aviation
Model FALCON 900EX airplanes. AD 2019-23-03 requires revising the
existing maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to
incorporate new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations. The FAA
issued AD 2019-23-03 to address, among other things, fatigue cracking
and damage in principal structural elements; such fatigue cracking and
damage could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
    AD 2019-23-03 specifies that accomplishing the actions required by
paragraph (g) or (i) of that AD terminates the requirements of
paragraph (g)(1) of AD 2010-26-05, Amendment 39-16544 (75 FR 79952,
December 21, 2010) for Dassault Aviation Model 900EX airplanes, serial
number (S/N) 97 and S/Ns 120 and higher.

Actions Since AD 2019-23-03 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 2019-23-03, the FAA has determined that new
or more restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary.
    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2020-0117, dated May 20, 2020
(``EASA AD 2020-0117'') (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for certain Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 900EX airplanes.
EASA AD 2020-0117 superseded EASA AD 2019-0134 (which corresponds to
FAA AD 2019-23-03). Airplanes with an original airworthiness
certificate or original export certificate of airworthiness issued
after October 2, 2019 must comply with the airworthiness limitations
specified as part of the approved type design and referenced on the
type certificate data sheet; this AD therefore does not include those
airplanes in the applicability.
    This proposed AD was prompted by a determination that new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary. The FAA is
proposing this AD to address, among other things, fatigue cracking and
damage in principal structural elements; such fatigue cracking and
damage could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
See the MCAI for additional background information.

Related IBR Material Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2020-0117 describes procedures for maintenance tasks and
airworthiness limitations.
    This proposed AD would also require Chapter 5-40, Airworthiness
Limitations, Revision 11, dated September 2018, of the Dassault Falcon
900EX EASy, Falcon 900LX, and Falcon 900DX Maintenance Manual, which
the Director of the Federal Register approved for incorporation by
reference as of January 13, 2020 (84 FR 67171, December 9, 2019).
    This material is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to the FAA's bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority,
the FAA has been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
and service information referenced above. The FAA is proposing this AD
because the FAA has evaluated all pertinent information and determined
an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other
products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would retain the requirements of AD 2019-23-03.
This proposed AD would also require revising the existing maintenance
or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations, which are specified in EASA AD
2020-0117 described previously, as incorporated by reference. Any
differences with EASA AD 2020-0117 are identified as exceptions in the
regulatory text of this AD.
    This proposed AD would require revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to include new actions (e.g., inspections).
Compliance with these actions is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For
airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in
the areas addressed by this proposed AD, the operator may not be able
to accomplish the actions described in the revisions. In this
situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request
approval for an alternative method of compliance according to paragraph
(m)(1) of this proposed AD.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA initially worked with Airbus and EASA to develop a
process to use certain EASA ADs as the primary source of information
for compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has
since coordinated with other manufacturers and civil aviation
authorities (CAAs) to use this process. As a result, EASA AD 2020-0117
will be incorporated by reference in the FAA final rule. This proposed
AD would, therefore, require compliance with EASA AD 2020-0117 in its
entirety, through that incorporation, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.
Using common terms that are the same as the heading of a particular
section in the EASA AD does not mean that operators need comply only
with that section. For example, where the AD requirement refers to
``all required actions and compliance times,'' compliance with this AD
requirement is not limited to the section titled ``Required Action(s)
and Compliance Time(s)'' in the EASA AD.
    Service information specified in EASA AD 2020-0117 that is required
for compliance with EASA AD 2020-0117 will be available on the internet
at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2020-0677 after the FAA final rule is published.

Airworthiness Limitation ADs Using the New Process

    The FAA's process of incorporating by reference MCAI ADs as the
primary source of information for compliance with corresponding FAA ADs
has been limited to certain MCAI ADs (primarily those with service
bulletins as the primary source of information for accomplishing the
actions required by the FAA AD). However, the FAA is now expanding the
process to include MCAI ADs that require a change to airworthiness
limitation documents, such as airworthiness limitation sections.
    For these ADs that incorporate by reference an MCAI AD that changes
airworthiness limitations, the FAA requirements are unchanged.
Operators must revise the existing maintenance or inspection program,
as applicable, to incorporate the information specified in the new
airworthiness limitation document. The airworthiness

limitations must be followed according to 14 CFR 91.403(c) and
91.409(e).

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 97 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:
    The FAA estimates the total cost per operator for the retained
actions from AD 2019-23-03 to be $7,650 (90 work-hours x $85 per work-
hour).
    The FAA has determined that revising the maintenance or inspection
program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator, although the
FAA recognizes that this number may vary from operator to operator. In
the past, the FAA has estimated that this action takes 1 work-hour per
airplane. Since operators incorporate maintenance or inspection program
changes for their affected fleet(s), the FAA has determined that a per-
operator estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane estimate.
Therefore, the FAA estimates the total cost per operator for the new
proposed actions to be $7,650 (90 work-hours x $85 per work-hour).

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2019-23-03, Amendment 39-19796 (84 FR 67171, December 9, 2019), and
adding the following new AD:

Dassault Aviation: Docket No. FAA-2020-0677; Product Identifier
2020-NM-099-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments by September 17, 2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    (1) This AD replaces AD 2019-23-03, Amendment 39-19796 (84 FR
67171, December 9, 2019) (``AD 2019-23-03'').
    (2) This AD affects AD 2010-26-05, Amendment 39-16544 (75 FR
79952, December 21, 2010) (``AD 2010-26-05'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 900EX
airplanes, serial number (S/N) 97 and S/Ns 120 and higher,
certificated in any category, with an original airworthiness
certificate or original export certificate of airworthiness issued
on or before October 2, 2019.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Time Limits/
Maintenance Checks.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a determination that new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address, among other things, fatigue cracking and
damage in principal structural elements; such fatigue cracking and
damage could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Retained Maintenance or Inspection Program Revision, With No
Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (i) of AD
2019-23-03, with no changes. Within 90 days after January 13, 2020
(the effective date of AD 2019-23-03), revise the existing
maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate the
information specified in Chapter 5-40, Airworthiness Limitations,
Revision 11, dated September 2018, of the Dassault Falcon 900EX
EASy, Falcon 900LX, and Falcon 900DX Maintenance Manual. The initial
compliance times for accomplishing the actions are at the times
specified in Chapter 5-40, Airworthiness Limitations, Revision 11,
dated September 2018, of the Dassault Falcon 900EX EASy, Falcon
900LX, and Falcon 900DX Maintenance Manual, or 90 days after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, except as
provided by paragraphs (g)(1) through (4) of this AD. Accomplishing
the maintenance or inspection program revision required by paragraph
(i) of this AD terminates the requirements of this paragraph.
    (1) The term ``LDG'' in the ``First Inspection'' column of any
table in the service information means total airplane landings.
    (2) The term ``FH'' in the ``First Inspection'' column of any
table in the service information means total flight hours.
    (3) The term ``FC'' in the ``First Inspection'' column of any
table in the service information means total flight cycles.
    (4) The term ``M'' in the ``First Inspection'' column of any
table in the service information means months since the date of
issuance of the original airworthiness certificate or the date of
issuance of the original export certificate of airworthiness.

(h) Retained Restrictions on Alternative Actions and Intervals, With a
New Exception

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (j) of AD
2019-23-03, with a new exception. Except as required by paragraph
(i) of this AD, after the existing maintenance or inspection program
has been revised as required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no
alternative actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals may be used
unless the actions and intervals are approved as an AMOC in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (m)(1) of this
AD.

(i) New Maintenance or Inspection Program Revision

    Except as specified in paragraph (j) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2020-0117, dated May 20, 2020 (``EASA AD 2020-0117''). Accomplishing
the maintenance or inspection program revision required by this
paragraph terminates the requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD.

(j) Exceptions to EASA AD 2020-0117

    (1) The requirements specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) of EASA
AD 2020-0117 do not apply to this AD.
    (2) Paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2020-0117 specifies revising ``the
approved AMP'' within 12 months after its effective date, but this
AD requires revising the existing maintenance or inspection program,
as applicable, to incorporate the ``limitations, tasks and
associated thresholds and intervals'' specified in paragraph (3) of
EASA AD 2020-0117 within 90 days after the effective date of this
AD.
    (3) The initial compliance time for doing the tasks specified in
paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2020-0117 is at the applicable ``associated
thresholds'' specified in paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2020-0117, or
within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs
later.
    (4) The provisions specified in paragraphs (4) and (5) of EASA
AD 2020-0117 do not apply to this AD.
    (5) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2020-0117 does not apply
to this AD.

(k) New Provisions for Alternative Actions and Intervals

    After the maintenance or inspection program has been revised as
required by paragraph (i) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g.,
inspections) and intervals are allowed unless they are approved as
specified in the provisions of the ``Ref. Publications'' section of
EASA AD 2020-0117.

(l) Terminating Actions for Certain Actions in AD 2010-26-05

    Accomplishing the actions required by paragraph (g) or (i) of
this AD terminates the requirements of paragraph (g)(1) of AD 2010-
26-05, for Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 900EX airplanes, 900EX
airplanes, S/N 97 and S/Ns 120 and higher.

(m) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, has
the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the Large Aircraft Section, International Validation
Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified in
paragraph (n)(2) of this AD. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, Large Aircraft
Section, International Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Dassault
Aviation's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by
the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(n) Related Information

    (1) For information about EASA AD 2020-0117, contact the EASA,
Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221
8999 000; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You
may find this EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this material at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. This material may be
found in the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2020-0677.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Tom Rodriguez,
Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, International Validation
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Issued on July 27, 2020.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-16629 Filed 7-31-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


              Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB Review
                       under The Paperwork Reduction Act

1	IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

      1(a)	Title and Number of the Information Collection

      EPA's Safer Choice Product Recognition Program

      ICR Numbers:  EPA ICR No. 2302.03	OMB Control No. 2070-0178

      1(b)	Short Characterization / Abstract

      This renewal information collection request (ICR) addresses the submission of applications to EPA for recognition under the Safer Choice Product Recognition Program (Safer Choice program), formerly known as the Design for the Environment Program. The Safer Choice program recognizes products where all ingredients meet EPA's stringent requirements for human health and the environment as found in the Safer Choice Standard. Under the encouragement of the current program, leading companies have already made great progress in developing safer, highly effective chemical products. Since the program's inception in 1997, formulators have been using the program as a portal to OPPT's unique chemical expertise, information resources, and guidance on greener chemistry. Safer Choice partners enjoy Agency recognition, including the use of the Safer Choice label on qualifying products. This ICR would enable Safer Choice to accommodate participation by more than nine formulators each year, enhance program transparency, and further promote chemical safety.

      Safer Choice participates in the development of CleanGredients(TM), a database of safer cleaning product ingredients, which identifies safer formulations and makes forming partnerships easier. Organized by product functional use class (e.g., surfactants, solvents, etc.), CleanGredients(TM) facilitates a green marketplace where formulators can select functionally appropriate and safer ingredients.

      The redesign of chemical products offers opportunities to:

 Remove hazardous chemicals from formulations before they can enter the workplace, home, or environment.
 Advance energy and water efficiency, resource conservation, and innovative technologies.
 Qualify for environmentally preferred product status, increasingly sought by government, retailer and consumer purchasers.

Companies formulate products from a broad range of chemicals with a variety of applications. The Safer Choice program labels cleaning and other chemical-based products such as dish detergents, laundry detergents, hand soaps, and all-purpose cleaners for consumer and industrial use. Cleaning products make up the majority of partnership products, and cleaning product manufacturers have the greatest demand for program participation by potential partners. Third-party profilers review all product applications prior to Safer Choice submission.

      The review team carefully reviews each product component. A literature review, and when appropriate, structural activity relationships, are used to understand each chemical's health and environmental characteristics. The review includes all chemicals, including those in proprietary raw material blends, which ingredient suppliers share with Safer Choice and the third-party profilers in confidentiality. The review team then compares an ingredient's characteristics to other chemicals in the same use class, considers possible negative synergies between ingredients, and places the ingredient on a continuum of improvement relative to other similar chemicals. By means of its review team and methodology, Safer Choice provides information to formulators that helps them select from among the safest chemicals in an ingredient class. Only formulations containing exclusively safer ingredients are recognized by Safer Choice.

2.	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

	2(a)	Need/Authority for the Collection

      Authority for the Safer Choice program derives from Section 6604(b)(5) of the Pollution Prevention Act (PPA), 42 U.S.C. 13103(b)(5) (see Attachment A), which directs EPA to facilitate the adoption of source-reduction techniques by businesses, and the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.), which encourages safety in technological innovation in chemistry. In recognition of this statutory directive, and through consultation with a broad range of stakeholders, EPA developed the Safer Choice program.

      Safer Choice program information collection activities will assist the Agency in meeting the goals of the PPA by providing resources and recognition for businesses committed to promoting and using safer chemical products. In turn, the Safer Choice program will help businesses meet corporate sustainability goals by providing the means to, and an objective measure of, environmental stewardship. Investment analysts and advisers seek these types of measures in evaluating a corporation's sustainability profile and investment worthiness.  It is not surprising then that EPA has heard from many organizations that Safer Choice program partnership is an important impetus for prioritizing and completing the transition to safer chemical products. The Safer Choice program is also needed to promote greater use of safer chemical products by companies unaware of the benefits of such a change.

      Safer Choice has carefully tailored its request for information, and especially the Safer Choice program application forms, to ensure that it only asks for information essential to verifying applicants' eligibility for recognition.

	2(b)	Practical Utility/Users of the Data

      The information collected by the Safer Choice program is not designed or intended to support regulatory decision-making by EPA. EPA uses the information collected in the Safer Choice program application to: (1) review products and their components; (2) complete chemical profiles for each product component to determine its key health and environmental characteristics; and (3) establish a partnership agreement with the company outlining how the company and EPA/Safer Choice will work together to continually improve the health and environmental profile of the product(s).

3.     NON-DUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA

	3(a)	Non-Duplication

      Respondents will not be asked to provide information that has been or is currently being collected by EPA, other federal or state agencies, or proprietary sources. The information collected by the Safer Choice program is unique and is not duplicative of previous information collection requests.  As due diligence, EPA also checked with trade associations and potential partners to confirm that the information being collected by the Safer Choice program does not exist elsewhere.

	3(b)	Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

      Prior to submission to OMB, this ICR will be made available to the public for comment through a Federal Register notice. The public will have 60 days to provide comments. Any comments received will be given consideration when completing the supporting statement that is submitted to OMB.

	3(c)	Consultations

      Under 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1) OMB requires agencies to consult with potential ICR respondents and data users about specific aspects of ICRs before submitting an original or renewal ICR to OMB for review and approval. In accordance with this regulation, EPA will pursue additional consultations with interested parties during the development of the renewal of this collection.

	3(d)	Effects of Less Frequent Collection

      Safer Choice program applications will be received on an ongoing basis over the three years covered by this ICR. The applications are designed to be one-time information submissions for organizations that wish to participate in the Safer Choice program, with the opportunity to renew the partnership agreement at the end of the three-year partnership period. This means that once every three years, the organization will submit a renewal application to confirm that no changes have been made to ingredients; this step is done in response to correspondence from Safer Choice that reminds organizations of the terms of their partnership agreements. Without this information collection mechanism, Safer Choice will not have the ability to assist formulators in developing safer, highly effective chemical products or to formally recognize formulators who have successfully done so.

	3(e)	General Guidelines

      The information collection activities discussed in this renewal ICR comply with all regulatory guidelines under 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2).

	3(f)	Confidentiality

      Some information collected by EPA under the Safer Choice program involves confidential business (CBI) or trade secret information. The Safer Choice program handles all information claimed as confidential business information in accordance with Agency confidentiality procedures (see 40 CFR part 2, subpart B). The Safer Choice program uses information provided by formulators solely for purposes related to forming the partnership and discloses the information only to EPA employees and EPA contractors cleared for confidential information with a specific need to know.

	3(g)	Sensitive Questions

      The information collection activities does not involve any sensitive questions.

4.	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

	4(a)	Respondents and NAICS Codes

      The Safer Choice program seeks partners from establishments engaged in the formulation of end-use, for-sale chemical products.

      Below is a list of representative North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes and associated industries that may be affected by information collection requirements covered under this ICR. This list is intended to be illustrative; entities from other industries may elect to apply for recognition through the Safer Choice program. However, EPA expects that most applications will come from the following industries:

      NAICS Code	Affected Industry
      325510	Paint and Coating Manufacturing
      325611	Soap and Other Detergent Manufacturing
      325612	Polish and Other Sanitation Good Manufacturing
      325910	Printing Ink Manufacturing
      325992	Photographic Film, Paper, Plate, and Chemical Manufacturing
      325998	All Other Miscellaneous Chemical Product and Preparation Manufacturing

      4(b)	Information Requested

      Once a company with an interest in partnership with the Safer Choice program reviews the program materials and decides to apply, the next step for the organization is to submit the appropriate application.

 Data items:

      Applicants for this voluntary program submit information items that vary depending upon the class of product. The items include:

      Partnership Applications

      Product manufacturers will submit ingredient information, as described here, through a cloud-based Salesforce system, to a qualified third-party profiler before submittal to EPA (see Attachment B).

      Information submitted to third-party profilers:
 Company name and Web site URL;
 Number of employees;
 Company headquarters address and manufacturing address;
 Name, title, phone number, and e-mail address of the candidate's signatory contact person (e.g., CEO, or vice president for health and environment);
 Name, title, phone number, and e-mail address of candidate's technical contact person;
 Name, title, phone number, and e-mail address of candidate's marketing/outreach contact person;
 Product information (name(s), UPC, GSA number, sector, production volume, pH, flashpoint, product form, product use);
 Product characteristics on whether or not the product is:
 An EPA registered pesticide;
 A direct release product;
 A concentrate;
 Contains enzymes, fragrance, or VOCs;
 Requires hazard labeling;
 Ingredient disclosure and performance data submitted;
 Packaging information:
 Container size and shapes;
 Material;
 Supplier;
 Description of all chemical ingredients, including raw materials and alternative ingredients, in product:
 CAS number;
 Chemical name;
 Trade name;
 Percent composition;
 Ingredient class;
 Supplier name;
 An SDS for the product and each ingredient;
 Product performance testing (any method of demonstrating product performance is acceptable as long as it is a commonly used industry standard);
 Other product information specific to particular product classes, such as flushability / compostability for disposable cleaning wipes;
 If available, any supplemental product or ingredient environmental health and safety information, such as:
 Biodegradation tests on individual ingredients;
 Acute aquatic toxicity tests on product as a whole or individual ingredients;
 Human health and safety tests;
 Description of the type of training the company provides to customers on environmental and worker safety matters.

      Information submitted to EPA:
 Summary report, containing same data items as above.
      Adding Third-Party Partners and Products

      Cleaning product manufacturers will submit information about third-party additions to Safer Choice through their third-party profiler. The three types of third-party partners and products are private labels, licensees, and toll manufacturers. To be label-eligible, third-party products must contain ingredients identical to those in a Safer Choice-labeled product.

	Information submitted to EPA:
 Safer Choice Form for Adding Third-Party Partners and Products (Private Label Companies, Licensees, or Toll Manufacturers) (EPA Form XXXX-X) (See Attachment C)

      Note that this form will be incorporated into the Salesforce system in the coming months. The fields in the online form in Salesforce will be identical to the PDF form. Until this part of the system is fully incorporated, the Agency will continue to use the PDF application form in Attachment C.

 Respondent activities:

      Applicants for Cleaning and Non-Cleaning Product Formulation Partnerships
          Review program information, including instructions on submitting information to third-party profilers (note: third-party profilers are separate and distinct from third-party partners and products; a third-party profiler is an organization that has partnered with the Safer Choice Program to assist in the evaluation of product formulations against the Safer Choice Standard. To become a third-party profiler, the organization must meet stringent requirements as laid out in Section 7 of the Safer Choice Standard.)
 Submit information described in section 4(b)(i) of this supporting statement to third-party profiler;
 Establish agreement with third-party profiler;
 Submit summary report to Safer Choice;
 Negotiate / establish Partnership Agreement with Safer Choice;
 Renew partnership, with no changes needed;
 Site audit (See Attachment D).

      Adding Third-Party Partners and Products
 Review program information;
 Fill out and submit Safer Choice Program Form for Adding Third-Party Partners and Products (Private Label Companies, Licensees, or Toll Manufacturers).

5.      	THE INFORMATION COLLECTED  -  AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

	5(a)	Agency Activities

    Under the Safer Choice program, EPA engages in the following activities related to the Formulator application and decision process:

 Provide applications via Salesforce for potential participants;
 Answer questions posed by potential applicants regarding recognition under the program;
 Receive the completed applications, review for accuracy, and place any necessary follow-up calls;
 Apply EPA's chemical tools and expertise to understand toxicological characteristics of chemical ingredients and to ensure that they are the safest within their functional use class;
 Approve candidates for recognition and notify both successful and unsuccessful applicants of the decisions; and
 Make final decisions about which products may carry the Safer Choice label.

	5(b)	Collection Methodology and Management

      Product manufacturers may obtain applications for providing ingredient information by contacting a third-party profiler. The third-party profiler will then coordinate with EPA to direct the potential applicant to a link via Salesforce to complete the application online. If a product manufacturer would like to submit information that they believe is Confidential Business Information as defined under the Toxic Substances Control Act, the applicant should contact EPA by phone.

      In collecting and analyzing the information associated with this ICR, EPA will use a telephone system, personal computers, and applicable database software such as Salesforce. EPA will ensure the accuracy and completeness of collected information by reserving the right to request proof of the list of ingredients (e.g., bills of lading, invoices) or other relevant documentation at any time to confirm that candidates have the achieved the criteria for recognition. The cloud-based Salesforce system, which houses applications and other information related to the Safer Choice program, is designed to reduce the public and Agency burden related to the application and decision process. However, if a product manufacturer would like to submit information as a hard copy rather than using the Salesforce system, the applicant should contact EPA for the appropriate forms.

	5(c)	Small Entity Flexibility

      EPA expects that some of the participants in the Safer Choice program will be small entities. EPA has designed its application form to minimize respondent burden while obtaining sufficient and accurate information. In addition, given the voluntary nature of the collection, EPA expects that respondents will participate only if the benefits of participation outweigh the information collection burden.

	5(d)	Collection Schedule

      Organizations may submit an application for recognition at any time.

6.	ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION

	6(a)	Estimating Respondent Burden

      The average respondent burden is estimated to be 16 hours for new product formulators and 8 hours for product formulators wishing to add third-party partners and products (see Exhibit 6.2). EPA used professional judgment to arrive at a burden estimate and then consulted representatives from the participant categories to make sure the burden estimates were reasonable (see section 3(c)).

      EPA expects that for a typical product formulator, program and application review will take about 2 hours (1 managerial, 1 technical). Filling out and submitting third-party profiler information request forms will take about 6 hours (5 technical, 1 clerical), and then establishing an agreement with the third-party profiler will take about 3 hours (1 managerial, 1 technical, 1 clerical). Submitting a summary report to Safer Choice will take about 2 hours (1 managerial, 1 technical). Finally, establishing a Partnership Agreement with Safer Choice will take 3 hours (1 managerial, 2 technical).

      For a typical addition of a third-party partner and products, program and application review will take about 2 hours (1 managerial, 1 technical). Filling out and submitting one Safer Choice Program Form for Adding Third-Party Partners and Products (Private Label Companies, Licensees, or Toll Manufacturers) is estimated to take about 2 hours (1.5 technical, 0.5 clerical). On average, a partner will fill out 3 third-party partners and products forms annually. Therefore, it is estimated that it will take one respondent 6 hours (4.5 technical, 1.5 clerical) to add third-party partners and products.

      In addition to the burden associated with first-time submission of applications, each formulator has the opportunity to renew its Partnership Agreement at the end of the three-year partnership period. This means that once every three years, the formulator re-submits its application for each partnership product to confirm that no changes have been made to ingredients. EPA then evaluates the application. EPA estimates that the partnership renewal process will take 4 hours (3 technical, 1 clerical) for cleaning and non-cleaning product formulators.

      For purposes of this ICR, EPA expects that 108 (see Section 6(e) on estimating the respondent universe) product formulators will choose to renew their partnerships. Furthermore, EPA anticipates that one in ten product formulators (i.e., 12) over the three-year period of this ICR will need to make improvements to their formulations so that they contain the safest ingredients within each functional use class; in these cases, a new partnership approval process, as described above, will be triggered. The associated burden for completing the new partnership approval process is assumed to be the same as first-time submission.

      As part of the application process, the third-party profiler will also reserve the right to conduct site audits and desk audits. The purpose of site visits to facilities is to verify that each partnership product contains the same ingredients, in the same volumes, that are reported by the company as part of the Safer Choice recognition process. The site auditor will review batch tickets associated with each recognized product to ensure that ingredient claims are accurate. Additional audit procedures are listed in Attachment D of this document. For purposes of estimating annual cost and burden in Exhibit 6.2, it is assumed that about 33% of formulators will get audited on-site each year over the three-year period of this ICR. Each site audit is estimated to require two hours of a technical person's time and one hour of a clerical person's time. Desk audits will also be conducted by third-party profilers. Prior to the desk audit, formulators will be responsible for providing a list of all ingredients for each recognized product, product labels displaying the Safer Choice logo, private label information (where applicable), and various other materials. For the purposes of estimating annual cost and burden in Exhibit 6.2, it is assumed that 66% of formulators will be subject to a desk audit each year over the three-year period of this ICR. Each desk audit is estimated to require two hours of a technical person's time and two hours of a clerical person's time. As with the site audits, additional information on desk audits can be found in Attachment D of this document.

      6(b)	Estimating Respondent Costs

      EPA estimates an average loaded hourly labor rate (base hourly rate plus fringe and overhead) of $83 for managerial staff, $73 for technical staff, and $32 for clerical staff. These three labor rate estimates are based upon manufacturing industry wage data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Employer Costs for Employee Compensation, Supplementary Tables from September 2015.  The hourly labor rates include a 17% overhead; this overhead rate is used for consistency with OPPT economic analyses for two major rulemakings: Wage Rates for Economic Analyses of the Toxics Release Inventory Program and the Revised Economic Analysis for the Amended Inventory Update Rule: Final Report. In addition, the hourly labor rates have been rounded for the purposes of this ICR.  The type of staff needed to complete the Formulator's applications and their associated hourly labor rates were verified by contacting representatives from the participant categories.

      The derivation of labor rates for managerial, technical, and clerical staff appears in Exhibit 6.1.

Exhibit 6.1.  Derivation of Loaded Wage Rates in 2015$
                                Labor category
                                     Wage
                                Fringe Benefit
                               Fringes as % wage
                                Overhead % wage
                           Fringe + overhead factor
                                 Loaded Wages
                            Loaded Wages (rounded)

                                      (a)
                                      (b)
                                  (c)=(b)/(a)
                                      (d)
                                 (e)=(c)+(d)+1
                                (f)=(a)  (e)

                                  Managerial
                                    $49.78
                                    $24.70
                                    49.62%
                                      17%
                                     1.67
                                    $82.94
                                    $83.00
                                 Professional/
                                 Technical[2]
                                    $42.76
                                    $23.07
                                    53.95%
                                      17%
                                     1.71
                                    $73.10
                                    $73.00
                                  Clerical[2]
                                    $19.04
                                     $9.61
                                    50.47%
                                      17%
                                     1.67
                                    $31.89
                                    $32.00

      In exhibit 6.2 is the breakdown of burden costs, assuming 16 hours for completing the partnership agreement, 11 hours for renewals and associated audits, and 8 hours for cleaning product formulators wishing to add third-party partners and products. The third-party profiler verification process for cleaning products also adds an operating and management (O&M) cost of about $12,400 per company per application. This cost estimate is from NSF International, which has experience as a third-party profiler of ingredient characteristics. For this ICR, it is assumed that typical product manufacturers will submit four products in an application. Each product is assumed to contain 2 ingredients at $650 each, 1 proprietary ingredient at $1,300 each, and 3 CleanGredients(TM) ingredient at no charge, for a total of $2,600 per product. In addition, a $500 administrative fee per product is assumed. The total will be $12,400 per company per application. No additional capital or O&M costs are incurred by respondents under this ICR.

Exhibit 6.2.  Estimated Annual Burden and Costs to Respondents
Collection activity
                        Hours and Costs Per Respondent
                             Total Hours and Costs

                                     Mgr.
                                     Tech.
                                     Cler.
                               Response Hours/Yr
                                Labor Cost/Year
                                    Capital
                                O & M Cost*
                              Number of Respon.**
                                Total Hours/Yr
                                 Total Cost/Yr

                                    $83/Hr
                                    $73/Hr
                                    $32/Hr

                                     Cost

Partnership Agreements
Review program information
                                                                           1.0
                                                                           1.0
                                                                           -
                                                                           2.0
                                                                           $156
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                             44
                                                                            88
                                                                         $6,864
Fill out and submit third-party information request form
                                                                           -
                                                                           5.0
                                                                           1.0
                                                                           6.0
                                                                           $397
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                            44
                                                                           264
                                                                        $17,468
Establish agreement with third-party profiler
                                                                           1.0
                                                                           1.0
                                                                           1.0
                                                                           3.0
                                                                           $188
                                                                             $0
                                                                        $12,400
                                                                            44
                                                                           132
                                                                       $553,872
Submit summary report to Safer Choice
                                                                           1.0
                                                                           1.0
                                                                           -
                                                                           2.0
                                                                           $156
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                            44
                                                                            88
                                                                         $6,684
Negotiate / establish Partnership Agreement with Safer Choice
                                                                           1.0
                                                                           2.0
                                                                           -
                                                                           3.0
                                                                           $229
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                            44
                                                                           132
                                                                        $10,076
Subtotal
                                                                           4.0
                                                                          10.0
                                                                           2.0
                                                                          16.0
                                                                         $1,126
                                                                             $0
                                                                        $12,400
                                                                            44
                                                                            704
                                                                       $595,144
Renewals and Audits
Renew partnership, with no changes needed
                                                                           -
                                                                           3.0
                                                                           1.0
                                                                           4.0
                                                                           $251
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                             36
                                                                           144
                                                                         $9,036
Desk audit
                                                                              -
                                                                            2.0
                                                                            2.0
                                                                            4.0
                                                                           $210
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                             24
                                                                             96
                                                                         $5,040
Site audit
                                                                           -
                                                                           2.0
                                                                           1.0
                                                                           3.0
                                                                           $178
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                            12
                                                                            36
                                                                         $2,136
Subtotal
                                                                             -
                                                                           7.0
                                                                           4.0
                                                                          11.0
                                                                           $639
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                             36
                                                                            276
                                                                        $16,212
Adding Third-Party Partners and Products
Review program information
                                                                           1.0
                                                                           1.0
                                                                           -
                                                                           2.0
                                                                           $156
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                             77
                                                                           154
                                                                        $12,012
Fill out and submit form for adding third-party partners and products
                                                                           -
                                                                           4.5
                                                                           1.5
                                                                           6.0
                                                                           $377
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                            77
                                                                           462
                                                                        $28,991
Subtotal
                                                                           1.0
                                                                           5.5
                                                                           1.5
                                                                           8.0
                                                                           $533
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                            77
                                                                            616
                                                                        $41,003
TOTAL

                                                                            157
                                                                         1,596
                                                                       $652,359
* The cost for third-party profiler review and verification assumes that the typical application submitted by a cleaning product manufacturer will contain four products, each with 2 ingredients ($650 each), 1 proprietary ingredient ($1,300), and a $500 administrative fee. The total cost per product is $3,100. The total will be $12,400 per company per application.
**This column reports the number of annual respondents after accounting for the partnership renewal process.  Assumes that one in ten formulators over the three-year period will need to make changes to their formulations and go through a new partnership process which includes same collection steps.  On an annual basis, this translates to 4 product formulators (for a total of 44 partnership agreements).  Also assumes that about 33% of the remaining product formulators will be subject to site audits each year (i.e., 12) and that about 66% (i.e., 24) will be subject to desk audits each year. See Section 6(a) for additional explanation. Assumes that 77 partners will fill out third-party partners and products forms based on historical data. See Section 6(e) for additional explanation.

      6(c)	Estimating Agency Burden

      Exhibit 6.3 presents the estimated Agency burden hours and costs associated with the information collection activities under this ICR. EPA based its burden estimates on its experience managing other voluntary programs.

      EPA expects that review of the program application forms for a typical product formulator will take about 1 hour (1 technical). Reviewing the third-party profiler information summary report will take about 5 hours (5 technical). Establishing a Partnership Agreement with the formulator will take about 3 hours (1 managerial, 2 technical). Reviewing the partnership renewal and assuming that no changes are needed is estimated at 2 hours (1 managerial, 1 technical), and reviewing audit summaries is estimated at 1 hour (1 technical).

      The burden for reviewing the Safer Choice Form for adding third-party partners and products is estimated to take about 2 hours (2 technical).

      6(d)	Estimating Agency Costs

      Agency labor costs are calculated based on hourly basic rates for federal employees in the Washington-Baltimore area published by the Office of Personnel Management effective January 2016. The average hourly labor rate for managerial staff is estimated as the rate for a GS-13 Step 5 employee, for technical staff as a GS-10 Step 10 employee, and for clerical staff as GS-5 Step 1. These GS-level assumptions are consistent with those used in past EPA OPPT ICRs. The hourly rates were multiplied by an assumed loading factor of 1.6 to reflect Federal fringe benefits and overhead. This loading factor is from an EPA guide, Instructions for Preparing Information Collection Requests (ICRs) (OPPE, 1992, page 30, footnote 9).

      The resulting average hourly labor rates, rounded to the nearest dollar amount, are $80 for managerial staff, $59 for technical staff, and $27 for clerical staff. The Agency expects most activities related to this ICR to be performed by managerial staff (14 percent) and technical staff (86 percent).

Exhibit 6.3.  Annual Agency Burden/Cost
Collection activity
                        Hours and Costs Per Respondent
                             Total Hours and Costs

                                  Mgr. $80/Hr
                               Technical $59/Hr
                                Agency Hours/Yr
                                Labor Cost/Year
                             Capital/ Startup Cost
                                O & M Cost
                              Number of Respon.*
                                Total Hours/Yr
                                 Total Cost/Yr

Cleaning and Non-Cleaning Products
Review program application forms
                                                                           -
                                                                           1.0
                                                                           1.0
                                                                            $59
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                             44
                                                                            44
                                                                         $2,596
Review third-party profiler summary
                                                                           -
                                                                           5.0
                                                                           5.0
                                                                           $295
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                            44
                                                                           220
                                                                        $12,980
Negotiate / establish Partnership Agreement with formulator
                                                                           1.0
                                                                           2.0
                                                                           3.0
                                                                           $198
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                            44
                                                                           132
                                                                         $8,712
Review partnership renewal, with no changes needed
                                                                           1.0
                                                                           1.0
                                                                           2.0
                                                                           $139
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                            36
                                                                            72
                                                                         $5,004
Review audit summaries
                                                                              -
                                                                            1.0
                                                                            1.0
                                                                            $59
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                             36
                                                                             36
                                                                         $2,124
Subtotal
                                                                           2.0
                                                                          10.0
                                                                          12.0
                                                                           $750
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                            80
                                                                            504
                                                                        $31,416
Adding Third-Party Partners and Products
Review Safer Choice form for adding third-party partners and products
                                                                           -
                                                                           2.0
                                                                            2.0
                                                                           $118
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                            77
                                                                           154
                                                                         $9,086
Subtotal
                                                                           -
                                                                           2.0
                                                                            2.0
                                                                           $118
                                                                             $0
                                                                             $0
                                                                            77
                                                                           154
                                                                         $9,086
TOTAL

                                                                           157
                                                                           658
                                                                        $40,502
 *This column reports the number of respondents after accounting for the partnership renewal process.  Assumes that one in ten formulators will need to make changes to their formulations and go through a new partnership process which includes same collection steps, i.e. 4, for a total of 44 annually. Assumes that 77 partners will fill out third-party partners and products forms based on historical data.

      6(e)	Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

      EPA estimates that 120 formulators will submit applications over the three-year life of the clearance. EPA expects the participation will ramp up over the three year period but, for the purposes of estimating annual cost and burden in Exhibit 6.2, it is assumed that 40 product formulator applications will be submitted each year. This estimate is based on historical data and the assumption that participation will increase over the next three years in response to greater consumer demand for safer products and increased awareness of the Safer Choice label. EPA also expects 40 renewals per year, 10% of which will need to make changes to formulations and go through a new partnership process. Additionally, EPA estimates that 77 applications will be received annually to add third-party partners and products. This estimate is based on the average number of partners that submitted third-party partners and products applications over the past five years (62) and is expected to increase over the course of this ICR period due to the new label (25%). Therefore, it is estimated that a total of 157 respondents will submit applications under the Formulator program each year. The annual burden hours and cost associated with this information collection are 1,596 hours and $652,359 respectively.

	6(f)	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables

      a.	Respondent Tally

      Exhibit 6.4 below summarizes the total annual estimated respondent burden and cost. These estimates represent the average burden in any given year over the three years covered by this ICR.

Exhibit 6.4.  Total Annual Estimated Respondent Burden and Cost Summary
                            Total # of Respondents
                              Total Burden Hours
                                  Annual Cost
                                      157
                                     1,596
                                   $652,359

      b.	Agency Tally

      Exhibit 6.5 below summarizes the total annual estimated agency burden and cost. These estimates represent the average burden in any given year over the three years covered by this ICR.

Exhibit 6.5.  Total Annual Estimated Agency Burden and Cost Summary
                                 Burden Hours
                                  Annual Cost
                                      658
                                    $40,502

	6(g)	Reasons for Change in Burden

      This request reflects an increase in the estimated annual burden of 362 hours (from 1,234 hours to 1,596 hours) from that currently in the OMB inventory. EPA reduced per-response burden estimates compared to those in the previous ICR based on expected efficiencies created by using the Salesforce-based Safer Choice Community on the part of respondents. However, the number of respondents increased, compared to the prior ICR, due to historical experience and increases in the expected future number of responses due to greater consumer awareness and demand for products with the Safer Choice label. This change is an adjustment.

	6(h)	Burden Statement

      The annual public burden for this collection of information is estimated at 16 hours per response for formulators, 11 hours for formulators renewing a partnership that requires changes, and 8 hours for cleaning product formulators wishing to add third-party partners and products, including time for reviewing instructions, gathering information, and completing and reviewing the application. Burden is defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(b). 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 EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register, are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and included on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable.

      The Agency has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2015-0437, which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. You may submit comments regarding the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques.

      Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2015-0437 and OMB Control No. 2070-0178, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by mail to: Document Control Office (DCO), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code: 7407T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20460, and (2) OMB by mail to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503.

                    ATTACHMENTS TO THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT

      Attachments to the supporting statement are available in the public docket established for this ICR under docket identification number EPA - HQ - OPPT - 2008 - 0219.  These attachments are available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov or otherwise accessed as described in section 6(g) of the supporting statement.

Attachment A:	42 USC 13103 - Pollution Prevention Act Section 6604. Also available
			online at the US House of Representatives' Office of the Law Revision
			Counsel's US 	Code website

Attachment B:	Safer Choice Program: Product and Ingredient Submissions in
			Salesforce

Attachment C:	Safer Choice Program:  Form for Adding Third-Party Partners and
			Products (Private Label Companies, Licensees, or Toll
			Manufacturers)

Attachment D:	Safer Choice Program: Audit Process Guidance


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 48 (Wednesday, March 12, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 14023]
[FR Doc No: 2014-05308]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2467-000]

Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Authorization for
Continued Project Operation

    On February 8, 2012, the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, licensee
for the Merced Falls Hydroelectric Project, filed an Application for a
New License pursuant to the Federal Power Act (FPA) and the
Commission's regulations thereunder. The Merced Falls Hydroelectric
Project is located on the Merced River on the border of Merced and
Mariposa counties, California.
    The license for Project No. 2179 was issued for a period ending
February 28, 2014. Section 15(a)(1) of the FPA, 16 U.S.C. 808(a)(1),
requires the Commission, at the expiration of a license term, to issue
from year-to-year an annual license to the then licensee under the
terms and conditions of the prior license until a new license is
issued, or the project is otherwise disposed of as provided in section
15 or any other applicable section of the FPA. If the project's prior
license waived the applicability of section 15 of the FPA, then, based
on section 9(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 558(c),
and as set forth at 18 CFR 16.21(a), if the licensee of such project
has filed an application for a subsequent license, the licensee may
continue to operate the project in accordance with the terms and
conditions of the license after the minor or minor part license
expires, until the Commission acts on its application. If the licensee
of such a project has not filed an application for a subsequent
license, then it may be required, pursuant to 18 CFR 16.21(b), to
continue project operations until the Commission issues someone else a
license for the project or otherwise orders disposition of the project.
    If the project is subject to section 15 of the FPA, notice is
hereby given that an annual license for Project No. 2467 is issued to
the licensee for a period effective March 1, 2014 through February 28,
2015 or until the issuance of a new license for the project or other
disposition under the FPA, whichever comes first.
    If issuance of a new license (or other disposition) does not take
place on or before February 28, 2015, notice is hereby given that,
pursuant to 18 CFR 16.18(c), an annual license under section 15(a)(1)
of the FPA is renewed automatically without further order or notice by
the Commission, unless the Commission orders otherwise. If the project
is not subject to section 15 of the FPA, notice is hereby given that
the licensee, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, is authorized to
continue operation of the Merced Falls Hydroelectric Project, until
such time as the Commission acts on its application for a subsequent
license.

    Dated: March 5, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-05308 Filed 3-11-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 118 (Monday, June 20, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35876-35877]
[FR Doc No: 2011-15191]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER97-3359-018.
    Applicants: Florida Power & Light Company.
    Description: Florida Power & Light Company's Errata to the Notice
in Change in Status.
    Filed Date: 06/13/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110613-5131.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, July 05, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2700-004.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
submits tariff filing per 35: 06-13-11 CMMPA Compliance Filing to be
effective 3/21/2011.
    Filed Date: 06/13/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110613-5113.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, July 05, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2815-001.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits tariff filing per
35: Compliance filing per Order in ER11-2815-000 to correct Attachment
J to be effective 6/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 06/13/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110613-5066.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, July 05, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3787-000.
    Applicants: Exelon Generation Company, LLC.
    Description: Exelon Generation Company, LLC submits tariff filing
per 35: Electric Rate Schedule FERC No. 20 to be effective 6/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 06/13/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110613-5077.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, July 05, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3788-000.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc., Niagara
Mohawk Power Corporation.
    Description: New York Independent System Operator, Inc. submits
tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: SGIA Among NYISO, National Grid and
Chautauqua County to be effective 6/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 06/13/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110613-5093.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, July 05, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3789-000.
    Applicants: Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.
    Description: Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. submits
tariff filing per 35.13(a)(1): Amendment to PASNY and EDDS for Targeted
DSM Program June 2011 to be effective 6/14/2011 under ER11-3789 Filing
Type: 320.
    Filed Date: 06/13/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110613-5099.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, July 05, 2011.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
securities filings:

    Docket Numbers: ES11-37-000.
    Applicants: Duquesne Light Company.
    Description: Application of Duquesne Light Company Pursuant to
Section 204 of the Federal Power Act for an Order Authorizing the
Issuance of Short-Term Indebtedness.
    Filed Date: 06/13/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110613-5133.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, July 05, 2011.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
reliability filings:

    Docket Numbers: RR11-5-000.
    Applicants: North American Electric Reliability Corp.
    Description: Petition of the North American Electric Reliability
Corp. for Approval of Appendices 3B and 3D to NERC Rules of Procedure
Regarding the Election Procedure for Members of NERC Standards
Committee and Registered Ballot Body Criteria.
    Filed Date: 06/13/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110613-5163.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, July 5, 2011.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    As it relates to any qualifying facility filings, the notices of
self-certification [or self-recertification] listed above, do not
institute a proceeding regarding qualifying facility status. A notice
of self-certification [or self-recertification] simply provides
notification that the entity making the filing has determined the
facility named in the notice meets the applicable criteria to be a
qualifying facility. Intervention and/or protest do not lie in dockets
that are qualifying facility self-certifications or self-
recertifications. Any person seeking to challenge such qualifying
facility status may do so by filing a motion pursuant to 18 CFR
292.207(d)(iii). Intervention and protests may be filed in response to
notices of qualifying facility dockets other than self-certifications
and self-recertifications.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the

FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic
service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or
be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an
eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling
link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: June 14, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-15191 Filed 6-17-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P