7A-9284	3M Paint Spray Prefilter, p119	$2.37

7A-9292	3M Retainer Caps, p119	$3.90

7A-33446	Pro-Tech Full-Face Respirator, p122	$106.45

7A-955-4	Pro-Tech Organic Vapors Cartridge, p123	$9.27

7A-9605	Pro-Tech Paint Spray Prefilter, p123	$1.95

7A-3195	Willson 1600/1700 Series Full-Face Respirators, p124	$215.10

7A-3197	Willson Organic Vapors Cartridge, p125	$11.22

7A-3203	Willson Pesticides/Paint Spray Prefilter, p125	$3.36

7A-3858	Willson Retainer Caps, p125	$4.27

7A-23959	AO7Star Full-Face Respirator (Silicone), p126	$203.25

7A-9935	AO7Star Organic Vapors Cartridge, p127	$8.76

7A-10043	AO7Star Dusts/Mists/Paint Spray Prefilter, p127	$3.07

	 	7A-10044	AO7Star Retainer Clips, p 127	$3.20

(ix) 	23C PAPR with tight-fitting facepiece and combination cartridges approved PLE	$627	$36

7A-13599	3M Face-Mounted PAPR System, p142	$720.00

---	Paint, Lacquer, Enamel Cartridge3	$36.50

7A-32505	RACAL Powerflow PAPR, p142	$534.90

	 	---	Paint, Lacquer, Enamel Cartridge3	$34.50

(x) 	23C PAPR with loose-fitting hood or helmet and combination cartridges for PLE	$525	$27

7A-32506	RACAL Air-Mate PAPR 12, p143	$411.05

---	Paint, Lacquer, Enamel Cartridge3	$24.65

7A-32477	RACAL Breathe-Easy HEPA Cartridges and Turbo Unit, p141	$548.50

7A-12840	RACAL Breathe-Easy 10 Tyvek Hood, p140	$91.30

	 	---	Paint, Lacquer, Enamel Cartridge3	$29.10

	(xi) 	23C Air-purifying with combination cartridges for PLE, including disposable respirators	$14	$9

7A-12711	Willson Freedom 2000 Series Organic Vapors Respirator, p136 $17.85

7A-7531	Willson Dusts/Mists/Paint Spray/Pesticides Prefilter, p136	$2.52

7A-13509	Willson Retainer Caps, p136	$2.03

7A-33826	Moldex 8000 Series Half-Mask Respirator, p139	$10.75

7A-22751	Moldex Organic Vapors Cartridge, p139	$8.03

7A-22753	Moldex Paint Spray/Pesticides Prefilter, p139	$2.56

	 	7A-22754	Moldex Retainer Caps, p139	$2.65

(xii) 	23C Air-purifying with full-facepiece and organic gas/vapor cartridges	$192	$10

7A-9838	North Full-Face Respirator, p114	$210.10

7A-7117	North Organic Vapors Cartridge, p115	$10.50

7A-12338	Willson Full-Face Silicone Respirator, p116	$215.10

7A-7527	Willson Organic Vapors Cartridge, p117	$10.25

7A-10516	3M 7800 Full-Facepiece Respirator, p118	$202.10

7A-9279	3M Organic Vapors Cartridge, p119	$8.91

7A-9292	3M Retainer Caps, p119	$3.90

7A-33446	Pro-Tech Full-Face Respirator, p122	$106.45

7A-955-4	Pro-Tech Organic Vapors Cartridge, p123	$9.27

7A-3195	Willson 1600/1700 Series Full-Face Respirators, p124	$215.10

7A-3197	Willson Organic Vapors Cartridge, p125	$11.22

7A-23959	AO7Star Full-Face Respirator (Silicone), p126	$203.25

	 	7A-9935	AO7Star Organic Vapors Cartridge, p127	$8.76

(xiii) 	23C PAPR with tight-fitting facepiece and organic gas/vapor cartridges	$826	$41

7A-32473	RACAL Breathe-Easy Organic Vapors and Turbo Unit, p141	$548.50

7A-12844	RACAL Breathe-Easy 7 Full Face, p140	$277.90

	 	7A-12830	RACAL Organic Vapors Replacement Cartridges, p141	$41.15

(xiv) 	23C PAPR with a loose-fitting hood or helmet and organic gas/vapor cartridges	$640	$41

7A-32473	RACAL Breathe-Easy Organic Vapors and Turbo Unit, p141	$548.50

7A-12840	RACAL Breathe-Easy 10 Tyvek Hood, p140	$91.30

	 	7A-12830	RACAL Organic Vapors Replacement Cartridges, p141	$41.15

(xv) 	23C Air-purifying with organic gas/vapor cartridges, including disposable cartridges	$11	$9

7A-15255	3M 6000 Series Low-Maintenance Respirator, p135	$10.90

7A-15256	3M Organic Vapors Cartridge, p135	$9.85

7A-33826	Moldex 8000 Series Half-Mask Respirator, p139	$10.75

	 	7A-22751	Moldex Organic Vapors Cartridge, p139	$8.03

Notes:

1See Table C-10 for the cross-walk between respirator types in the SNUR and in this table.

2Average costs presented in this table are rounded to the nearest dollar figure, so results may differ from calculations using the rounded values shown in this table.

3Paint, lacquer and enamel (PLE) cartridges for PAPRs were not listed in the catalog.  The costs for PLE cartridges are assumed to be the same as HEPA cartridges.

Source: LSS, 1997; EPAB, 1999C.2.7	Annual Costs of Protection in the Workplace Requirements

Based on the equipment purchase costs shown above in Tables C-7, C-8, C-9, and C-11, and the assumptions made regarding replacement intervals for the equipment, Table C-13 below shows the annual costs of providing the various types of personal protective equipment in the workplace, per chemical, at one manufacturing site, with 25 exposed workers.

Table C-13 Annual Per-Chemical Costs of Personal Protective Equipment

Personal Protective Equipment and Requirement Citation at 40 CFR	Unit Cost ($2005)	Quantity Required	Total Annual Cost ($2005)1

Dermal Protection Selection §721.63(a)(1)

	     10 hours industrial hygienist (IH) time	$44.61	10	$446

Impermeability Testing §721.63(a)(3)

	     Impermeability Test	$1,161	1	$1,161

     Evaluation of Manufacturer's Specifications	$178	1	$178

Gloves §721.63(a)(2)(i)

	     Standard (disposable)	$0.52	6,250	$3,270

     Heavy-duty butyl	$41	250	$10,343

Protective clothing §721.63(a)(2)

	     [ii] - Full-body (coverall with hood)	$74	75	$5,585

     [iv] - Coverall (no hood)	$44	75	$3,308

Eyewear §721.63(a)(2)(iii)

	     Standard goggles	$5	75	$370

     Heavy-duty goggles	$7	75	$552

Respirators used in the SNUR [§721.63(a)(4)]

Unit cost is per worker, and includes one respirator unit and 50 Cartridge sets per year.

Supplied-air respirator operated in pressure demand or continuous flow mode and equipped with a tight-fitting full facepiece. [ii in Table C-11] 	$978	25	$24,459

Supplied-air respirator operated in pressure demand or continuous flow mode and equipped with a hood or helmet or tight-fitting facepiece (either half- or full-face). [iii in Table C-11]	$1,134	25	$28,357

Air-purifying respirator equipped with a tight-fitting full facepiece and High Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) filters. [iv]

Air-purifying, tight-fitting respirator (either half- or full-face) equipped with N100 (if aerosols absent), R100, or P100 filters. [iv in Table C-11]	$814	25	$20,341

Powered air-purifying, tight-fitting full-face respirator equipped with N100 (if oil aerosols absent), R100, or P100 filters. [v]

Powered air-purifying respirator equipped with a tight-fitting facepiece (either half- or full-face) and HEPA filters. [v in Table C-11]	$2,923 25	$73,084

Powered air-purifying respirator equipped with a loose-fitting hood or helmet and High Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) filters. [vi in Table C-11]	$2,275	25	$56,884

Notes:

1Total annual costs assume: 1) 25 workers exposed 250 days per year; 2) standard gloves replaced daily and heavy-duty gloves replaced every 25 days; 3) respirators replaced annually and cartridge sets replaced every five days (50 cartridges sets per year); 4) goggles and protective clothing replaced three times yearly.  See Table C-10 for the crosswalk between respirator types in the SNUR and in this table.  Total annual costs were calculated using unrounded unit cost estimates, and may not equal the product of the rounded estimates shown in this table.

Source: Tables C-5, C-6, C-7, C-8, C-9, and C-11.

C.3	Recordkeeping

	There are two main types of recordkeeping requirements for the substances listed in the current SNUR: those for companies submitting a SNUN, and those for all companies that that manufacture, import or process SNUR-regulated substances.

	Companies submitting a SNUN must keep records under 40 CFR §721.40.  Some EPAB reports have assumed that SNUN recordkeeping hours would be 5 percent of SNUN submission hours, or about 5 to 6 hours.  For this report, the SNUN recordkeeping hours were included in the SNUN submission hours (see Appendix E) and the SNUN recordkeeping cost was not separately estimated.

	Whether or not they submit a SNUN, firms that manufacture, import, or process the SNUR substance must keep records based on 40 CFR §721.125(a) through (k), to document compliance with SNUR conditions for avoiding a Significant New Use. (For firms producing under the R&D exemption, R&D recordkeeping would be needed.  R&D recordkeeping costs were not estimated for this report.)

	Recordkeeping requirements vary between PMN chemicals, reflecting differences in SNUR restrictions.  For all chemicals in the current SNURs, manufacturers, importers, and processors must keep records on quantities supplied or purchased under 40 CFR §721.125(a), (b), and (c).  For chemicals with water discharge restrictions, companies must keep records concerning water discharge compliance, under §721.125(k).  For chemicals with other use restrictions, or for those few chemicals with workplace protection or hazard communication restrictions, companies must keep records to document compliance.

All recordkeeping requirements essentially involve copying and filing relevant records, including those related to: manufacturing, importing, or processing volumes; shipment amounts and customer information; clothing impermeability determinations; the hazard communication program including labels and MSDS copies; compliance with other use restrictions; and/or compliance with disposal and water discharge limitations.  Records must be maintained for five years from the date of their creation.

	Costs for compliance with the recordkeeping requirements for substances subject to a SNUR are based on the approach in Economic Analysis of Final Significant New Use Rules: General Provisions for New Chemical Followup (RIB, 1989) which in turn was based on Recordkeeping Costs for a Generic SNUR, prepared for EPA in 1988 by Kearney/Centaur (Kearney, 1988a).  These reports drew on recordkeeping costs estimated for the Comprehensive Assessment Information Rule, CAIR.  Industry recordkeeping costs for CAIR compliance were estimated in reports Kearney prepared for EPA, including Estimated Cost of the Final Comprehensive Assessment Information Rule, June 1, 1988 (Kearney, 1988b, pages 63 to 65).

This report uses the basic Kearney (1988a and 1988b) estimates and assumptions to estimate recordkeeping costs for SNUR requirements.  Unlike Kearney (1988a) and previous PMN SNUR economic reports, this report presents costs for each  §721.125 recordkeeping requirement separately.  This report also avoids minor rounding errors by calculating from unrounded data.  However, the underlying methodology is identical to the Kearney 1988a/RIB 1989 reports, resulting in identical costs per chemical except for differences due to inflation and rounding.  The paragraphs that follow describe estimates and assumptions used from Kearney (1988a and 1988b).

	Kearney (1988a) assumes that the ratios of labor hours to page count for each labor category, file drawer space to page count, and cost of miscellaneous supplies such as folders and labels to page count, are the same as those estimated for EPA’s Comprehensive Assessment and Reporting Rule.  The CAIR estimates are given in the 1988 report, Estimated Cost of the Final Comprehensive Assessment Information Rule, June 1, 1988, page 65 (Kearney, 1988b).  Table C-14 summarizes estimates from Kearney 1988a and the CAIR report (Kearney, 1988b), and the derivation of $2005 costs from these estimates, as follows:

Technical labor was estimated at 1 hour for 750 pages in the CAIR report (Kearney, 1988b, page 65), or .00133 hours per page.  The analysis estimates a cost per hour and per page using fully loaded labor rates as estimated in Table B-1.

Clerical labor was estimated at 10 hours for 750 pages in the CAIR report (Kearney, 1988b, page 65), or .01333 hours per page.  The analysis estimates a cost per hour and per page using fully loaded labor rates as estimated in Table B-1.

The photocopying cost from Kearney 1988a ($0.05 per page) was inflated using an inflation factor estimated in Table B-3.

File space for CAIR was estimated at ¼ of a four-drawer file cabinet for 750 pages (Kearney, 1988b, page 65) or 0.000333 of a cabinet per page.  A standard, four-drawer, full-suspension file cabinet was priced from a national office products supplier at $195 in 1997 (BT Office Products, 1997; Item #LGM-202401; EPAB, 1998).  This results in $0.065 per page cost for file space, before inflation ($195 × 0.25 file cabinet/750 pages). The cost per page was inflated using an inflation factor estimated in Table B-3.

Miscellaneous materials costs were estimated at $10.00 for 750 pages in the CAIR report (Kearney, 1988b, page 65), or $0.0133/page before inflation.  This cost per page was inflated using an inflation factor estimated in Table B-3.

Table C-14  Recordkeeping Estimates from Kearney 1988a and 1988b

Labor Costs	Kearney Estimates (1988b)	Estimates in $2005

	Hours	Pages	Hours Per Page	Cost Per Hour ($2005)	Cost Per Page ($2005)

Technical	1	750	0.0013	$53.02	$0.07

Clerical	10	750	0.0133	$26.37	$0.35

Materials Costs	Kearney Estimates (1988a)	Estimates in $2005

	Estimate	Pages	Cost Per Page ($1998)	Inflation Factor2	Cost Per Page ($2005)

Photocopying	$0.05	1	$0.050	1.651	$0.083

File Cabinet	1/4 of cabinet priced at $195	750	$0.065	1.217	$0.079

Misc. Materials	$10 total	750	$0.013	1.651	$0.022

Source: Labor costs, Table B-1; inflation factors, Table B-3.

In order to estimate recordkeeping costs, the analysis multiplies the costs per page for each recordkeeping element estimated in Table C-14 by the number of pages required for each SNUR recordkeeping requirement at 40 CFR §721.125 as estimated by Kearney (1998a).  The Kearney data was used by EPA in RIB, 1989. For example, maintaining MSDS copies as required at §721.125(h) would require 5 pages.  The following estimates from Kearney (1988a) are also used:

Manufacture and import volume, and sales and transfer data require 485 pages of records per year.  This reflects 40 invoices per month (see haz-comm Section C.1 above), 480 for sales/transfer and 5 for manufacturer/import  (Kearney, 1988a, p.11).

Disposal compliance records, if required, cover items such as waste production, shipping manifests, permits, and transfer receipts.  The 600 disposal compliance pages assume 50 pages per month (Kearney, 1988a, p.11).

This report uses slightly different terminology from RIB, 1989: “Protective clothing” instead of “protective gloves,” “haz-comm” instead of “employee information and training.” Also, recordkeeping for “impermeability determination” was not separately costed out in RIB, 1989. This report assumes it is included under “protective clothing” recordkeeping.

	Total estimated annual costs for recordkeeping are summarized in Table C-15 for a chemical that has numerous SNUR restrictions.  Recordkeeping costs would be lower for chemicals with relatively few SNUR restrictions because fewer pages would be needed to document SNUR compliance. Table C-15 does not include costs of recordkeeping resulting from a SNUN submission; those costs were included in the SNUN submission cost.

	As shown in Table C-15, annual recordkeeping activities at one site for one SNUR chemical is estimated to require a maximum of 2.3 hours technical time, 23 hours clerical time, 1,715 photocopies, approximately one-half of a 4-drawer file cabinet, and other miscellaneous materials such as folders.   Table C-15  Annual Per-Chemical Costs of Recordkeeping Requirements [40 CFR 721.125]1

40CFR §721.1252	Cost Element	Estimated Number of Pages3	Estimated Labor Cost	Estimated Materials Cost	Total Estimated Cost Per Chemical ($2005)

	Technical Labor	Clerical Labor	Photocopying Cost

($2005)	File Cabinet Cost ($2005)4	Misc. Materials Cost ($2005)

Number of Hours	Cost ($2005)	Number of Hours	Cost ($2005)

(a)(b)(c)	Volumes & sales/transfer data	485	0.65	$34 	6.47	$171	$40 	$38 $11	$294

(d)(e)	Protective clothing [§721.63] and impermeability [§721.63(a)(3)]	20	0.03	$1	0.27	$7	$2	$2	$0.44	$12

(f)	Haz com program [§721.72]	250	0.33	$18 	3.33	$88	$21 	$20	$6	$152

(g)	Label copies [§721.72(b)]	5	0.01	$0.35 	0.07	$2	$0.41 	$0.40	$0.11 $3

(h)	MSDS copies [§721.72(c)]	5	0.01	$0.35 	0.07	$2	$0.41 	$0.40	$0.11 $3

(i)	Use limitations compliance [§721.80]	250	0.33	$18 	3.33	$88	$21  $20	$6	$152

(j)	Disposal compliance [§721.80]	600	0.80	$42 	8.00	$211	$50 	$47	$13 $364

(k)	Water discharge compliance [§721.90]	100	0.13	$7 	1.33	$35	$8 	$8 $2	$61

TOTAL

1,715	2.29	$121	22.87	$603	$142 	$136	$38	$1,039

Notes:

1This table multiplies per page estimates from Table C-14 by the estimated number of pages presented here for each recordkeeping cost element.  The table does not include recordkeeping for SNUN submissions required by 40 CFR §721.  Total costs are calculated from unrounded values and may not equal the sum and/or product of rounded values.

240 CFR 721.125(a) through (k) list recordkeeping that may be specified in the SNUR. The recordkeeping specified depends on which 40 CFR §721 provisions [in brackets] were used by the SNUR to define reportable New Uses (§721.63, §721.72, §721.80).

3Pages estimates are from Kearney, 1988a and are specific to SNURs.

4The file space per chemical was rounded in Kearney 1988 to ½ of a file cabinet, but Table C-15 calculations use unrounded values, so that the file cabinet cost here is slightly higher than it would have been using the Kearney rounding.  The per-SNUN file space is 0.57cabinet (0.25 cabinet for CAIR / 750 CAIR pages) × 1,715 SNUN pages).

APPENDIX D

COSTS OF TESTING

APPENDIX D	COSTS OF TESTING

	This appendix presents a detailed description of the methodology used to estimate costs for health and environmental effects testing recommended for chemicals subject to the current Significant New Use Rules.

D.1	Testing Guidelines

	In the SNURs, EPA identifies a set of tests for each PMN chemical that can be used by firms making Significant New Use Notice or other submissions to EPA to characterize risks of the chemical.  The tests are recommended in the SNUR, not mandatory. They are identified by guideline numbers which can be used to look up published test protocols.  Table D-1 lists all test guidelines cited in the SNUR and their associated costs, Table D-2 presents certain assumptions used in the analysis, and Table D-3 aggregates costs for testing guidelines associated with each PMN chemical.  The types of guidelines are described below.

OPPTS Harmonized.  Most SNUR tests are identified by their OPPTS number from the series of OPPTS Harmonized Test Guidelines and OPPTS harmonized public drafts not yet promulgated as OPPTS guidelines.  These guidelines blended testing guidance from OPPT (published in the Code of Federal Regulations), EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and other sources.  The harmonized guidelines fall into several categories, including the following:

	Series 835--Fate, Transport and Transformation Test Guidelines

	Series 850--Ecological Effects Test Guidelines

	Series 860--Residue Chemistry Test Guidelines

	Series 870--Health Effects Test Guidelines

They are available electronically on EPA’s website (OPPT, 2006). Cross-references for health effects guidelines are listed at 63 FR 41847, August 5, 1998.

CFR.  SNUR tests may also come from the Code of Federal Regulations, identified for example as “40 CFR 799.9370” or just “799.9370.” In addition, in costing out test guidelines, this report sometimes uses costs for a CFR guideline when costs have not been developed for the equivalent OPPTS harmonized guideline.  40 CFR parts 795 through 798 include pre-harmonization test guidelines, typically updated before 1990. 40 CFR part 799 includes more recent TSCA test guidelines, based on harmonized test guidelines. (63 FR 41845, August 5, 1998).

OECD.  A few SNUR tests are identified by their OECD number.  The OECD guidelines may have OPPTS equivalents.  For example, OECD 407 28-Day Oral Toxicity in Rats is essentially equivalent to OPPTS 870.3050.

PBT Category.  For some chemicals, the SNUR cites tiered testing according to a testing strategy published in the Federal Register (FR), Category for Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic New Chemical Substances, November 4, 1999 (64 FR 60194), which in turn refers to a number of tests by OPPTS or OECD guideline number.

ASTM, NTIS, and other sources.  Test guidelines may also come from the American Society of Testing and Materials (for example, ASTM D2035-80 Modified Coagulation-flocculation Jar Test of Water) (www.astm.org) or other sources The guideline for a neurotoxicity functional observational battery, NTIS PB 91-154617, is available from the National Technical Information Service (www.ntis.gov).

Table D-1 Cost Estimates for Test Guidelines Cited in SNUR

Guideline 4	Test	Species	Route/Method	Cost	Hours

799.9370	Prenatal Developmental Neurotoxicity Study	Rats	gavage	$109,700 1079

830.7200 / (OECD 102)	Melting Point / Melting Range	NA	Average of eight tests	$1,498	13

830.7550 / (OECD 107)	Partition Coefficient (n-Octanol/Water)	NA	Shake Flask Method	$7,297	50

830.7560 / (796.1720)	Log Kow (generator column) 	NA	Generator column $3,698	39

830.7570 / (796.1570)	Log Kow (liquid chromatography)	NA	Liquid Chromatography	$2,690	28

830.7560 / (796.1720) and 830.7570 / (796.1570) (avg) 1	Log Kow (liquid chromatography or generator column)	NA	Average of 2 tests	$3,194	34

835.1110	Activated Sludge Sorption Isotherm	NA	NA	$11,036	82

835.2110 1	Hydrolysis as a Function of pH	NA	NA	$52,966	130

835.3100 / (796.3100)	Aerobic Aquatic Biodegradation	NA	NA	$14,560	174

835.3110 1	Ready Biodegradation	NA	Average of six methods	$11,379	112

835.3170 2	Shake Flask Die-Away Test	NA	NA	$46,402	88

835.3180 3	Sediment/Water Microcosm Biodegradation	NA	flow-through $121,303	1496

835.3210	Modified SCAS Test	NA	NA	$27,173	316

835.3220	Porous Pot Test	NA	NA	$45,507	539

850.1010 / (797.1300)	Daphnid Acute Toxicity	Daphnid	flow-through $13,524	54

850.1075 / (797.1400)	Fish Acute Toxicity	Fathead Minnow	flow-through $18,681	65

850.1085	Fish Acute Toxicity Test mitigated by humic acid	Fathead Minnow static	$15,737	74

850.1300 3	Daphnid Chronic Toxicity Test	Daphnid	flow-through	$38,882 173

850.1400	Fish Early Life Stage Toxicity	Fathead Minnow	flow-through $41,951	291

850.1400 3	Fish Early Life Stage Toxicity	Rainbow Trout	Flow-through $62,109	432

850.1730 2	Fish BCF	Fathead Minnow	flow-through	$68,923	775

850.5400	Algal Toxicity, Tiers I and II	Average of four species	NA $15,739	60

850.5400	Algal Toxicity, Tiers I and II	Selenastrum capricornutum	NA $15,742	58

870.2600	Skin Sensitization	Guinea Pigs	Average of two methods	$11,072 56

870.3050 / (OECD 407) 	Repeated Dose Oral Toxicity in Rodents (28-Day) Rats	gavage (28 day)	$52,285	328

870.3100	90-Day Oral Toxicity	Rats	gavage	$138,464	834

870.3465	Subchronic Inhalation Toxicity	Rats	inhalation	$382,952	2458

870.3465 (mod)	Subchronic Inhalation Toxicity (w/ 60 day recovery group) Rats	inhalation	$222,180	2882

870.3700	Prenatal Developmental Toxicity {2 species}	Mice	aerosol $124,400	1385

870.3700	Prenatal Developmental Toxicity {2 species}	Rats	gavage $113,357	1157

870.3800	Reproduction/Fertility Effects (2-Generation Reproduction)	Rats gavage	$598,724	5024

870.4200	Carcinogenicity {2 species}	Rats	gavage	$900,159	8275

870.4200	Carcinogenicity {2 species}	Rats	inhalation	$1,136,014	11683

870.5100	Bacteria Reverse Mutation Assay	NA	Direct plate	$12,301	48

870.5265	Salmonella typhimurium Reverse Mutation Assay (Ames Test)	NA Average of Direct plate and Azo reduction	$11,687	48

870.5395	In Vivo Mammalian Bone Marrow Cytogenetics Tests: Erythrocyte Micronucleus Assay (Average of 1 and 3 day dosings)	Mice	gavage (average of 1 and 3 day)	$19,878	114

870.5550	Unscheduled DNA Synthesis in Mammalian Cells in Culture	Rat hepatocytes	NA	$20,552	124

870.6200	Neurotoxicity Screening Battery (Subchronic)	Rats	dietary (subchronic)	$172,791	1387

D2034-80 (ASTM D 2035-80)	Standard Practice for Coagulation-Flocculation Jar Test of Water	NA	NA	$3,862	25

NTIS:PB 91-154617 / (798.6050)	Functional Observation Battery (Subchronic)	Rats	gavage (subchronic)	$81,664	537

OECD 218 / (795.1350)	Chironomid Sediment Toxicity	Midge	flow-through $94,863	949

OECD 422 3	Combined Repeated Dose Study with Reproductive/Developmental Toxicity Screen	Rats	gavage	$125,462	1146

Notes:

1Guideline in tiered testing as described in the New Chemicals Program’s PBT Category Tier 1 (64 FR 60194).

2Guideline in tiered testing as described in the New Chemicals Program’s PBT Category Tier 2 (64 FR 60194).

3Guideline in tiered testing as described in the New Chemicals Program’s PBT Category Tier 3 (64 FR 60194).

4Some guidelines list two numbers. In this instance, cost for the second guideline is used as an approximate cost when the first does not have a test cost.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 D.2	Test Costs by Guideline

	Table D-1 gives dollar cost and hours for each test, based on assumptions and adjustments discussed below.  This section describes the development of individual test costs.

	EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Analysis Branch, regularly develops cost estimates of test guidelines to support TSCA rule development. Estimates are based on assumptions about species, route of administration, study duration, and other aspects of methodology.   Costs are calculated based on costs of labor, materials, and equipment needed to perform testing, with overhead and fee.  Many of the test costs were developed in the 1990s.  Test costs have been inflated using Employment Cost Index inflators from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (see Appendix B). However, generally they have not been updated  to reflect subsequent changes in laboratory technologies.

	Testing laboratories perform analytical method validation to ensure that proper dose concentrations are used in toxicity studies (EPAB 2005, p. 3-9).  This analysis assumes that for health effects tests (e.g. 870 series guidelines), tests of up to 90 days in duration have method validation costs of $3,500, and longer term tests have validation costs of $8,500.  For simplicity, the method validation cost  for ecological effects tests (e.g. 850 series guidelines) was assumed to be $3,500 for each test. 9

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 In cases where costs have not been estimated for the specified guideline, EPA uses the cost from an approximately equivalent guideline (listed in Tables D-1 and D-3 in parentheses).  Many of these equivalents are listed in the Federal Register at 63 FR 41847, August 5, 1998, but sometimes judgment was needed to select the closest equivalent(s).

	In some cases, EPA has not costed out the test for the species, route, duration, and/or other method  listed in the SNUR, or the SNUR specifies a guideline but does not specify these details.  In such cases, EPA has made the adjustments described below. The adjustments were selected based on discussions with EPA scientists and on SNUR language, published test guidelines, assumptions underlying the cost estimates in EPAB's test cost database, EPA review and Consent Order history for specific PMNs, or other sources (Rawie 2004).

	Default Parameters

	Costs for many of the guidelines have been estimated for different combinations of species, route, length of study and other aspects of methodology, but in some cases the SNUR may not specify all of these variables.  Where this occurs, EPA has used certain default parameters, listed in Table D-2.

Table D-2  Default Parameters for Species, Route, and Study Type

	Variable	Default

Species	Mammals

Fish

Invertebrates

Algae	Rats

Fathead minnow1

Daphnids

[Four species -- see text]

Route/Method	Mammalian

Fish

Invertebrates	Gavage

Flow-through

Flow-through

Notes:

1For guideline 850.1400 tests duplicated in PBT tier tests, rainbow trout is the default. (See PBT test discussion below.)

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxic (PBT) tiered testing

	For some chemicals, the SNUR cites tiered testing for Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxic chemical substances (PBTs) according to the testing strategy in EPA’s New Chemicals Program PBT Category document, published in the Federal Register notice, Category for Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic New Chemical Substances, November 4, 1999, at 64 FR 60194.

	In 64 FR 60194, there are three tiers of testing.  The results of Tier 1 determine whether Tier 2 testing is needed and the results of Tier 2 testing determine whether Tier 3 testing is needed.  To obtain a cost estimate for SNURs that cite PBT Category testing (64 FR 60194), individual tests from 64 FR 60194 were listed in Table D-3 as appropriate, depending on the specific SNUR language.  The test list was adjusted to avoid double counting tests listed in both the PBT Category tiers and in the SNUR.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Other assumptions related to PBT testing are described below:

The PBT category tests at 64 FR 60194 specify rainbow trout as the species for the chronic fish toxicity test, 850.1400.  For SNURs that recommend PBT Category testing, 850.1400 costs are based on using rainbow trout.  If 850.1400 is recommended without PBT testing, costs are based on using fathead minnows.

For PBT Tier 1 ready biodegradability tests, firms may either choose among six methods in test guideline 835.3110 or follow test guideline 835.3120. The costs estimates assume 835.3110 was used, and calculate the average cost of its six methods.

Tiers and other Adjustments

	The SNURs identify certain chemicals for tiered testing.  In Table D-3, the “low” costs assume only the first-tier tests are performed, while “high” costs assume all tests listed for the chemical are performed.  For this cost analysis, testing is treated as “tiered” if later tests are contingent on the results of earlier tests, and/or if some tests are contingent on the firm reaching a certain chemical volume or time limit.  Some tiers result because the SNUR references the tiered PBT Category testing described at 64 FR 60194.

	Other adjustments are as follows:

A SNUR may recommend algal acute toxicity testing following OPPTS Guideline 850.5400.  This guideline has been previously costed by EPA for four separate algal species (Navicula pelliculosa, Skeletonema costatum, Anabaena flos-aquae, and Selenastrum capricornutum).  If a SNUR does not specify the algal species to be used, the average costs of the four algal species tests are used.

For OPPTS test guideline 835.3100, a SNUR may call for an additional analytical methodology to identify the isononyl phenol degradation product, which may be a substantial add-on to the basic cost.  No cost information was available for the extended test.  As a result, the stated cost for this testing requirement may understate the true cost.

A SNUR may recommend a “modified” version of ASTM test guideline D2035-80.  No cost information was available for the additional analytical methodology.  As a result, the cost information used for this test may understate the actual cost.

For OECD test guideline 422, a SNUR may recommend extended histopathology.  Although the OECD 422 protocol does include histopathology, it is possible that extending the histopathology would increase the cost.  In such a case, the cost information used may underestimate the actual cost of performing this test.

A SNUR may recommend two variations of OECD test guideline 218 (Chironomid Sediment Toxicity), one using the acute portion of the sediment and the other using the chronic portion.  Cost information was not available for these two variants.  The cost of the test performed on midge under flow through conditions was used for both.

A SNUR may recommend “a fish acute toxicity test, freshwater and marine (OPPTS 850.1075 test guideline)”.  “Freshwater and marine” refers to the name of the test, not the number of species required by EPA.  The cost estimates assume only one species is used.

D.3	Testing Costs by Chemical

	Testing costs for each PMN chemical are calculated by adding up costs of individual tests listed in the SNUR for that substance.

	Table D-3 presents recommended test guidelines, the costs associated with each guideline, and the total testing cost estimates for each chemical.  An asterisk denotes that the SNUR did not specify which species or route/method to use and where suitable test costs were available, the default assumptions mentioned above were used.

Table D-3 Testing Requirements and Costs for all SNUR Chemicals1

SNUR Sequence Number	PMN Number	PBT Tier	SNUR Guideline	 	Species	  Route/ Method	Cost ($2005)	Hours	Low Cost	High Cost

$2005	Hours	$2005	Hours

1	P97-0415	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$300,576	2,401	$300,576	2,401

	850.1010   (797.1300)

Daphnid

flow-through	$13,524	54

	850.1075   (797.1400)

Fathead Minnow

flow-through	$18,681	65

	850.54

Average of four species

NA	$15,739	60

	NTIS:PB 91-154617   (798.6050)

Rats

gavage (subchronic)	$81,664	537

	OECD 422

Rats

gavage	$125,462	1,146

 	 	 	835.322	 	NA	 	NA	$45,507	539

2	P00-0614	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$138,464	834	$138,464	834

 	 	 	870.3100	*	Rats	*	gavage	$138,464	834

3	P00-0617	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$138,464	834	$138,464	834

 	 	 	870.3100	*	Rats	*	gavage	$138,464	834

4	P98-0625	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$138,464	834	$138,464	834

 	 	 	870.3100	*	Rats	*	gavage	$138,464	834

5	P98-0626	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$138,464	834	$138,464	834

 	 	 	870.3100	*	Rats	*	gavage	$138,464	834

6	P98-0627	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$138,464	834	$138,464	834

 	 	 	870.3100	*	Rats	*	gavage	$138,464	834

7	P98-0628	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$138,464	834	$138,464	834

 	 	 	870.3100	*	Rats	*	gavage	$138,464	834

8	P98-0629	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$138,464	834	$138,464	834

 	 	 	870.3100	*	Rats	*	gavage	$138,464	834

9	P98-1181	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$311,255	2,221	$311,255	2,221

	870.6200	*	Rats	*	dietary (subchronic)	$172,791	1,387

 	 	 	870.3100	*	Rats	*	gavage	$138,464	834

10	P98-1182	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$311,255	2,221	$311,255	2,221

	870.6200	*	Rats	*	dietary (subchronic)	$172,791	1,387

 	 	 	870.3100	*	Rats	*	gavage	$138,464	834

11	P99-0511	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$32,178	162	$932,338	8437

Tier 1	870.5395

Mice	*	gavage (average of 1 and 3 day) (a)	$19,878	114

Tier 1	870.5100

NA	*	Direct plate	$12,301	48

 	 	Tier 2	870.4200	*	Rats	*	gavage	$900,159	8,275

12	P00-0011	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$47,943	179	$47,943	179

	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681	65

	850.5400	*	Average of four species

NA	$15,739	60

 	 	 	850.1010   (797.1300)	 	Daphnid	*	flow-through	$13,524	54

13	P00-1121	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$222,180	2,882	$1,358,194	14,565

 	 	Tier 1	870.3465 (mod)   	 	Rats	 	inhalation	$222,180	2,882

 	 	Tier 2	870.4200	*	Rats	 	inhalation	$1,136,014	11,683

14	P00-1122	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$291,103	3,657	$1,427,117	15,340

 	 	Tier 1	850.1730	 	Fathead Minnow	 	flow-through	$68,923	775

 	 	Tier 1	870.3465 (mod)   	 	Rats	 	inhalation	$222,180	2,882

 	 	Tier 2	870.4200	*	Rats	 	inhalation	$1,136,014	11,683

15	P00-1123	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$222,180	2,882	$1,358,194	14,565

 	 	Tier 1	870.3465 (mod)   	 	Rats	 	inhalation	$222,180	2,882

 	 	Tier 2	870.4200	*	Rats	 	inhalation	$1,136,014	11,683

16	P00-1124	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$222,180	2,882	$1,358,194	14,565

 	 	Tier 1	870.3465 (mod)   	 	Rats	 	inhalation	$222,180	2,882

 	 	Tier 2	870.4200	*	Rats	 	inhalation	$1,136,014	11,683

17	P00-1125	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$222,180	2,882	$1,358,194	14,565

 	 	Tier 1	870.3465 (mod)   	 	Rats	 	inhalation	$222,180	2,882

 	 	Tier 2	870.4200	*	Rats	 	inhalation	$1,136,014	11,683

18	P00-1126	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$291,103	3,657	$1,427,117	15,340

 	 	Tier 1	850.1730	 	Fathead Minnow	 	flow-through	$68,923	775

 	 	Tier 1	870.3465 (mod)   	 	Rats	 	inhalation	$222,180	2,882

 	 	Tier 2	870.4200	*	Rats	 	inhalation	$1,136,014	11,683

	19	P01-0109	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$47,943	179	$47,943	179

	850.1010   (797.1300)

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$13,524	54

	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681	65

 	 	 	850.5400	*	Average of four species	 	NA	$15,739	60

20	P01-0110	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$8,796	63	$588,028	4,619

Tier 1	830.7200   (OECD 102)

NA	*	Average of eight tests	$1,498	13

Tier 1	830.7550   (OECD 107)

NA	*	Shake Flask Method	$7,297	50

Tier 2	D2034-80   (ASTM D 2035-80)

NA

NA	$3,862	25

Tier 3	850.5400

Average of four species

NA	$15,739	60

Tier 3	850.1010   (797.1300)

Daphnid

flow-through	$13,524	54

Tier 3	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow

flow-through	$18,681	65

Tier 4	850.1730

Fathead Minnow

flow-through	$68,923	775

Tier 4	850.1400

Rainbow Trout

flow-through	$62,109	432

Tier 4	850.1300

Daphnid

flow-through	$38,882	173

Tier 4	835.3180

NA

Flow-through	$121,303	1,496

Tier 4	835.3170

NA

NA	$46,402	88

Tier 4	835.2110

NA

NA	$52,966	130

Tier 4	OECD 422

Rats

gavage	$125,462	1,146

 	 	Tier 4	835.3110	 	NA	 	Average of six methods	$11,379	112

21	P01-0111	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$3,862	25	$132,640	668

Tier 1	D2034-80  (ASTM D 2035-80)

NA

NA	$3,862	25

Tier 2	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681	65

Tier 2	850.5400

Average of four species

NA	$15,739	60

Tier 2	850.1010   (797.1300)

Daphnid

flow-through	$13,524	54

Tier 3	850.1300

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$38,882	173

 	 	Tier 3	850.1400	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$41,951	291

	22	P01-0257

	$63,680	253	$63,680	253

	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681	65

	850.1085	*	Fathead Minnow	*	static	$15,737	74

	850.1010   (797.1300)

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$13,524	54

 	 	 	850.5400	*	Average of four species	 	NA	$15,739	60

23	P01-0258	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$63,680	253	$63,680	253

	850.1010   (797.1300)

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$13,524	54

	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681	65

	850.1085	*	Fathead Minnow	*	static	$15,737	74

 	 	 	850.5400	*	Average of four species	 	NA	$15,739	60

24	P01-0259	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$63,680	253	$63,680	253

	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681	65

	850.1085	*	Fathead Minnow	*	static	$15,737	74

	850.1010   (797.1300)

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$13,524	54

 	 	 	850.5400	*	Average of four species	 	NA	$15,739	60

25	P01-0261	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$63,680	253	$63,680	253

	850.1010   (797.1300)

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$13,524	54

	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681	65

	850.1085	*	Fathead Minnow	*	static	$15,737	74

 	 	 	850.5400	*	Average of four species	 	NA	$15,739	60

26	P01-0442	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$382,952	2,458	$382,952	2,458

 	 	 	870.3465	 	Rats	 	inhalation	$382,952	2,458

27	P01-0563	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$62,504	353	$62,504	353

	835.3100   (796.3100)

NA

NA	$14,560	174

	850.1010   (797.1300)

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$13,524	54

	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681	65

 	 	 	850.5400	*	Average of four species	 	NA	$15,739	60

28	P01-0564	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$62,504	353	$62,504	353

	835.3100   (796.3100)

NA

NA	$14,560	174

	850.1010   (797.1300)

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$13,524	54

	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681	65

 	 	 	850.5400	*	Average of four species	 	NA	$15,739	60

	29	P01-0764	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$222,180	2,882	$1,122,339	11,157

Tier 1	870.3465 (mod)

Rats

inhalation	$222,180	2,882

 	 	Tier 2	870.4200	*	Rats	*	gavage	$900,159	8,275

30	P01-0769	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$115,325	863	$463,081	4,110

Tier 1	835.3170

NA

NA	$46,402	88

Tier 1	850.1730

Fathead Minnow

flow-through	$68,923	775

Tier 2	835.3180

NA

Flow-through	$121,303	1,496

Tier 2	850.1300

Daphnid

flow-through	$38,882	173

Tier 2	850.1400

Rainbow Trout

flow-through	$62,109	432

 	 	Tier 2	OECD 422   	 	Rats	 	gavage	$125,462	1,146

31	P01-0770	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$115,325	863	$463,081	4,110

Tier 1	850.1730

Fathead Minnow

flow-through	$68,923	775

Tier 1	835.3170

NA

NA	$46,402	88

Tier 2	835.3180

NA

Flow-through	$121,303	1,496

Tier 2	850.1400

Rainbow Trout

flow-through	$62,109	432

Tier 2	OECD 422

Rats

gavage	$125,462	1,146

 	 	Tier 2	850.1300	 	Daphnid	 	flow-through	$38,882	173

	32	P01-0771	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$115,325	863	$463,081	4,110

Tier 1	835.3170

NA

NA	$46,402	88

Tier 1	850.1730

Fathead Minnow

flow-through	$68,923	775

Tier 2	850.1300

Daphnid

flow-through	$38,882	173

Tier 2	850.1400

Rainbow Trout

flow-through	$62,109	432

Tier 2	835.3180

NA

Flow-through	$121,303	1,496

 	 	Tier 2	OECD 422   	 	Rats	 	gavage	$125,462	1,146

33	P01-0772	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$115,325	863	$463,081	4,110

Tier 1	835.3170

NA

NA	$46,402	88

Tier 1	850.1730

Fathead Minnow

flow-through	$68,923	775

Tier 2	OECD 422

Rats

gavage	$125,462	1,146

Tier 2	835.3180

NA

Flow-through	$121,303	1,496

Tier 2	850.1300

Daphnid

flow-through	$38,882	173

 	 	Tier 2	850.1400	 	Rainbow Trout	 	flow-through	$62,109	432

34	P01-0856	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$47,943	179	$47,943	179

	850.5400	*	Average of four species

NA	$15,739	60

	850.1010   (797.1300)	*	Daphnid	*	flow-through	$13,524	54

 	 	 	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681 65

35	P01-0862	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$92,213	576	$119,386	892

Tier 1	835.3110

NA	*	Average of six methods	$11,379	112

Tier 1	850.1300

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$38,882	173

Tier 1	850.1400	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$41,951	291

 	 	Tier 2	835.3210	 	NA	 	NA	$27,173	316

36	P01-0901	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$270,126	3,059	$270,126	3,059

	850.1010   (797.1300)

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$13,524	54

	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681	65

	850.5400

Selenastrum capricornutum

NA	$15,742	58

 	 	 	870.3465 (mod)   	 	Rats	 	inhalation	$222,180	2,882

37	P01-0902	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$270,126	3,059	$270,126	3,059

	850.1010   (797.1300)

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$13,524	54

	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681	65

	850.5400

Selenastrum capricornutum

NA	$15,742	58

 	 	 	870.3465 (mod)   	 	Rats	 	inhalation	$222,180	2,882

38	P01-0918	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$532,489	3,348	$532,489	3,348

	870.2600

Guinea Pigs	*	Average of two methods	$11,072	56

	870.3465

Rats

inhalation	$382,952	2,458

 	 	 	870.3100	*	Rats	*	gavage	$138,464	834

39	P01-0919	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$206,296	1,610	$206,296	1,610

	850.1300

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$38,882	173

	850.1400	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$41,951	291

 	 	 	OECD 422   	 	Rats	 	gavage	$125,462	1,146

40	P02-0214	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$222,180	2,882	$1,122,339	11,157

Tier 1	870.3465 (mod)   	*	Rats

inhalation	$222,180	2,882

 	 	Tier 2	870.4200	*	Rats	*	gavage	$900,159	8,275

41	P02-0269	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$1,283,112	10,733	$1,283,112	10,733

	870.3465

Rats

inhalation	$382,952	2,458

 	 	 	870.4200	*	Rats	*	gavage	$900,159	8,275

42	P02-0322	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$96,573	524	$96,573	524

	850.1300

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$38,882	173

	850.1400

Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$41,951	291

 	 	 	850.5400	*	Average of four species	 	NA	$15,739	60

43	P02-0359	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$96,573	524	$96,573	524

	850.1400	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$41,951	291

	850.5400	*	Average of four species

NA	$15,739	60

 	 	 	850.1300	 	Daphnid	*	flow-through	$38,882	173

44	P02-0382	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$47,943	179	$47,943	179

	850.1010   (797.1300)

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$13,524	54

	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681	65

 	 	 	850.5400	*	Average of four species	 	NA	$15,739	60

45	P02-0406	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$67,540	276	$530,621	4,386

Tier 1	830.7560 and 830.7570 (avg) / 796.1720 and 796.1570 (avg)

NA

Average of 2 tests	$3,194	34

Tier 1	835.2110

NA

NA	$52,966	130

Tier 1	835.3110

NA

Average of six methods	$11,379	112

Tier 2	835.3170

NA

NA	$46,402	88

Tier 2	850.1730

Fathead Minnow

flow-through	$68,923	775

Tier 3	850.1300

Daphnid

Flow-through	$38,882	173

Tier 3	850.1400

Rainbow Trout

Flow-through	$62,109	432

Tier 3	OECD 422

Rats

gavage	$125,462	1,146

 	 	Tier 3	835.3180	 	NA	 	Flow-through	$121,303	1,496

46	P02-0423	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$791,588	6,522	$1,691,748	14,797

Tier 1	870.3800	*	Rats	*	gavage	$598,724	5,024

Tier 1	850.1010   (797.1300)

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$13,524	54

Tier 1	870.5265

NA	*	Average of Direct plate and Azo reduction	$11,687	48

Tier 1	870.5395

Mice	*	gavage (average of 1 and 3 day) (a)	$19,878	114

Tier 1	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681	65

Tier 1	850.5400	*	Average of four species

NA	$15,739	60

Tier 1	870.3700	*	Rats

gavage	$113,357	1,157

 	 	Tier 2	870.4200	*	Rats	*	gavage	$900,159	8,275

47	P02-0434	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$14,560	174	$14,560	174

 	 	 	835.3100   (796.3100)	 	NA	 	NA	$14,560	174

	48	P02-0514	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$504,954	3,585	$504,954	3,585

	799.9370	*	Rats (a)

gavage	$109,700	1,079

	870.3465

Rats

inhalation	$382,952	2,458

 	 	 	870.5100	 	NA	 	Direct plate	$12,301	48

49	P02-0522	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$96,573	524	$96,573	524

 	850.1300

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$38,882	173

 	850.1400	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$41,951	291

 	850.5400	*	Average of four species

NA	$15,739	60

50	P02-0530	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$47,943	179	$47,943	179

	850.5400	*	Average of four species

NA	$15,739	60

	850.1010   (797.1300)

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$13,524	54

 	 	 	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681 65

51	P02-0585	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$113,357	1,157	$113,357	1,157

 	 	 	870.3700	 	Rats	 	gavage	$113,357	1,157

52	P02-0697	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$67,540	276	$530,621	4,386

Tier 1	835.2110

NA

NA	$52,966	130

Tier 1	835.3110

NA

Average of six methods	$11,379	112

Tier 1	830.7560 and 830.7570 (avg) / 796.1720 and 796.1570 (avg)

NA

Average of 2 tests	$3,194	34

Tier 2	835.3170

NA

NA	$46,402	88

Tier 2	850.1730

Fathead Minnow

flow-through	$68,923	775

Tier 3	850.1400

Rainbow Trout

Flow-through	$62,109	432

Tier 3	OECD 422

Rats

gavage	$125,462	1,146

Tier 3	835.3180

NA

Flow-through	$121,303	1,496

 	 	Tier 3	850.1300	 	Daphnid	 	Flow-through	$38,882	173

53	P02-0698	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$222,180	2,882	$222,180	2,882

 	 	 	870.3465 (mod)   	 	Rats	 	inhalation	$222,180	2,882

54	P02-0737	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$171,317	1,006	$1,071,477	9,281

 	 	Tier 1	870.5550	 	Rat hepatocytes	 	NA	$20,552	124

 	 	Tier 1	870.3100	 	Rats	 	gavage	$138,464	834

 	 	Tier 1	870.5100	*	NA	 	Direct plate	$12,301	48

 	 	Tier 2	870.4200	*	Rats	*	gavage	$900,159	8,275

55	P02-0747	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$47,943	179	$47,943	179

	850.1010   (797.1300)	*	Daphnid	*	flow-through	$13,524	54

	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681	65

 	 	 	850.5400	*	Average of four species	 	NA	$15,739	60

56	P02-0766	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$47,943	179	$47,943	179

	850.1010   (797.1300)

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$13,524	54

	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681	65

 	 	 	850.5400	*	Average of four species	 	NA	$15,739	60

57	P02-0869	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$96,573	524	$96,573	524

	850.1300

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$38,882	173

	850.1400	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$41,951	291

 	 	 	850.5400	*	Average of four species	 	NA	$15,739	60

58	P02-0912	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$80,834	464	$80,834	464

	850.1300

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$38,882	173

 	 	 	850.1400	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$41,951	291

59	P02-0929	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$138,464	834	$138,464	834

 	 	 	870.3100	*	Rats	 	gavage	$138,464	834

60	P02-0961	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$80,834	464	$80,834	464

	850.1300

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$38,882	173

 	 	 	850.1400	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$41,951	291

61	P02-1088	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$47,943	179	$47,943	179

	850.1010   (797.1300)

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$13,524	54

	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681	65

 	 	 	850.5400	*	Average of four species	 	NA	$15,739	60

62	P03-0041	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$47,943	179	$47,943	179

	850.1010   (797.1300)

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$13,524	54

	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681	65

 	 	 	850.5400	*	Average of four species	 	NA	$15,739	60

63	P03-0043	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$63,680	253	$63,680	253

	850.1010   (797.1300)

Daphnid	*	flow-through	$13,524	54

	850.1075   (797.1400)	*	Fathead Minnow	*	flow-through	$18,681	65

	850.1085	*	Fathead Minnow	*	static	$15,737	74

 	 	 	850.5400	*	Average of four species	 	NA	$15,739	60

64	P03-0046	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$165,642	1,485	$165,642	1,485

 	 	 	870.3050   (OECD 407)	 	Rats	 	gavage (28 day)	$52,285	328

 	 	 	870.3700	 	Rats	*	gavage	$113,357	1,157

65	P03-0047	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	$165,642	1,485	$165,642	1,485

 	 	 	870.3050   (OECD 407)	 	Rats	 	gavage (28 day)	$52,285	328

 	 	 	870.3700	 	Rats	*	gavage	$113,357	1,157

	Notes:

	1This table estimates low and high costs associated with testing guidelines for each PMN included in this SNUR.

	* Default assumptions used in cases where species and/or route/method are not specified in SNUR.

** Indicates these tests comprise the low cost estimate.

(a) The SNUR specifies “intraperitoneal” route, but assumed “gavage” for cost purposes.

(b) The SNUR specifies “two species,” but assumed rats-only for cost purposes.

APPENDIX E

COSTS FOR SNUN, MODIFICATION/REVOCATION,

OR EQUIVALENCY DETERMINATION

APPENDIX E 	COSTS FOR SNUN, MODIFICATION/REVOCATION, OR EQUIVALENCY DETERMINATION

Estimates of the costs of completing a Significant New Use Notice (SNUN) form are based on the costs of completing a PMN submission, since the data requirements are the same and the same form is used for both.  EPA's 1994 Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) for amendments to the PMN regulations relied on industry estimates of the effort needed to collect and compile all data required for a PMN submission, prepare the form, and submit the form and data to EPA (RIB, 1994).  These estimates were based on a survey conducted by the Chemical Manufacturers Association (CMA, 1991), which became the American Chemistry Council.

In the 1994 EPA report, the average effort required to prepare and submit a PMN was 95 to 114 hours.  This included recordkeeping for the submission, but the recordkeeping cost was not broken out.  For this analysis, the costs of a preparing a SNUN were derived using the averages of the hours for each type of labor from the 1994 report. The method of calculating hourly loaded labor costs is described in Appendix B.

As shown in Table E-1, the cost of submitting a request to modify or revoke a SNUR is the same as the cost for an equivalency determination.  The cost of submitting a SNUN is $2,500 higher due to EPA's notification user fee.

In addition to submission costs, there may be testing costs if the submitter believes performing the tests will help its submission, and/or costs of any testing or restrictions that might result from EPA review of the submission.  These other types of costs are discussed in Appendix C (worker protection, hazard communication) and Appendix D (testing).

 Table E-1  Industry Costs for SNUN, Request to Modify/Revoke SNUR, or Equivalency Determination

Labor Category	Hours Range1	Average Hours	Loaded Wage Rate2 ($2005) Total Labor Cost  (loaded wage x hours)

Request to Modify SNUR  (Option 2)	SNUN (Option 3)	Equivalency Determination (Option 4)

Clerical	12 - 14	13	$26.37	$343	$343	$343

Technical	67 - 80	73.5	$53.02	$3,897	$3,897	$3,897

Managerial	16 - 20	18	$63.61	$1,145	$1,145	$1,145

Subtotal	95 - 114	104.5

$5,385	$5,385	$5,385

User fees (SNUN only)	$0	$2,500	$0

TOTAL	$5,385	$7,885	$5,385

Notes:

1 Hours range for each labor category are from the PMN Amendments RIA (RIB. 1994)

2 Loaded wages include fringe benefits and overhead. See Appendix B for derivation. Wage rates presented in this table are rounded values; however, unrounded values are used to calculate total labor costs. For this reason, total labor costs may not equal the product of rounded values.

APPENDIX F

AGENCY COSTS

APPENDIX F	AGENCY COSTS

EPA submission review costs are presented in Table F-1.   Costs to review and process industry submissions -- SNUNs, requests to modify SNUR, and requests for equivalency determination -- are assumed to be similar to EPA costs to review PMNs.

The list of review steps, estimates of staff-year full-time equivalents (FTEs), and estimates of extramural costs are derived from the costs for processing PMN submissions in a 1994 EPA report, Regulatory Impact Analysis of Amendments to Regulations for TSCA Section 5 Premanufacture Notifications (RIB, 1994).  The percent of chemicals requiring a particular review step are from RIB, 1994.

The GS levels used for Agency staff reflect the judgment of Agency staff familiar with the PMN/SNUN review process.  The salary of a Full Time Equivalent EPA staff was calculated using GS-13 Step 5 salary data (OPM, 2006). The original PMN cost estimates were for GS 12 and were presented as low and high estimates, based on the most junior (Step 1) and the most senior (Step 10) GS-12 pay rates, respectively.  However, this analysis uses the higher GS-13 staff level and, for simplicity, a single intermediate pay rate (Step 5) within that GS level.  A loading factor of 1.6 was applied to the salary to reflect fringe benefits and overhead (OPPE, 1992).  The loaded salary calculations are described in Appendix B.

For each review step, the “EPA staff” cost is calculated by multiplying the number of FTEs (in the first column) by the fully loaded average salary.  This shows EPA staff cost for chemicals requiring the selected review step.

The Extramural Cost column shows costs for contractor support and other outside purchases for chemicals requiring the selected review step, inflated from 1993 prices, as explained in Appendix B.

The Percent of Cases is a weighting factor applied to reflect the fact that not all chemicals require each review step.  For example, in the PMN process, all chemicals require Administrative Prescreening, but not all chemicals require the intensive scrutiny of “Standard Review.”  The three types of submissions resulting from a SNUR may have weighting factors that differ from each other and from the weighting factors for PMNs.  Changes in weighting factors could cause actual review costs to be higher or lower than calculated here.  For example, some SNUNs require little review because they are determined to be “invalid” -- i.e. not required in the first place.  However, often a SNUN may take more Agency time than a typical PMN because of factors such as the need to retrieve old PMN records from archives, and the likelihood that more data requiring EPA review is submitted with a SNUN than would be submitted on average with a PMN.   Resources were not available to update the review hours to reflect the current review process or to tailor the cost estimates to SNUNs.  Therefore, for this analysis, the review steps and weighting factors are assumed to be the same as those derived in 1994 for PMNs.

The Weighted Cost column is calculated by multiplying the Unweighted Costs (EPA staff cost plus extramural costs) by the percentage of cases requiring this review step.  This calculation yields total Agency costs for submission review and processing shown in Table F-1.

Table F-1  Agency Costs for SNUN and Other Submission Review and Processing

        Review Steps	 EPA staff (FTE) Cost	Extramural Cost 2	Unweighted Cost	Pct. of Cases	Weighted Cost

	FTE fraction	Cost per FTE 1	FTE Total ($2005)	1993 dollars	2005 dollars

(1)	(2)	(3)=(1)*(2)	(4)	(5)	(6)=(3)+(5)	(7)	(8)=(6)*(7)

Prenotice consultation	0.0024	$140,262 	$337	$4	$6	$343	41%	$141

Administrative prescreen/ notice receipt/user fee	0.0024	$140,262	$337 $92	$141	$478	100%	$478

CRSS (Chemical Review and Search Strategy)	0.0025	$140,262	$351	$268 $410	$761	100%	$761

SAT (Structure Activity Team)	0.0006	$140,262	$84	$14	$21	$106	100%	$106

Engineering/Exposure	0.0015	$140,262	$210	$56	$86	$296	100%	$296

Exposure/Fate	0.0008	$140,262	$112	$0	$0	$112	100%	$112

Focus	0.0009	$140,262	$126	$23	$35	$161	100%	$161

Standard Review Functions	0.0219	$140,262	$3,072	$511	$782	$3,854	29% $1,118

Division Directors Meeting	0.0129	$140,262	$1,809	$113	$173	$1,982	15% $297

Order Development/ Negotiation Review	0.0171	$140,262	$2,398	$22	$34 $2,432	3%	$73

Post Order Data Review	0.0886	$140,262	$12,427	$0	$0	$12,427	3%	$373

Order Modification	0.2167	$140,262	$30,395	$0	$0	$30,395	3%	$912

New Chemical SNUR Development	0.0277	$140,262	$3,885	$85	$130	$4,015	7% $281

Notices of Commencement	0.0012	$140,262	$168	$40	$61	$230	31%	$71

FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) Requests	0.0333	$140,262	$4,671	$287 $439	$5,110	1%	$51

CBI (Confidential Business Information) Substantiation	0.0004	$140,262 $56	$3	$5	$61	100%	$61

TOTAL	$5,291

Notes:

1 GS-13 Step 5 salaries loaded with benefits and overhead.  See Appendix B derivation.

2 Extramural costs consist of contracting support and other purchases directly attributable to the PMN review process inflated from 1993 prices as described in Appendix B.

3Weighted costs were calculated using unrounded unit cost estimates, so results may differ from calculations using the rounded values shown in this table.

Sources: FTEs per review step and 1993 extramural costs are from RIB, 1994.  Percents of cases are from RIB, 1994.  GS-13 salaries are from OPM, 2006.

APPENDIX G

REFERENCES

APPENDIX G	REFERENCES

29 CFR 1910.  Occupational Safety and Health Standards.  Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1910, Title 29, November 25, 1983.

63 FR 41847. Test Guidelines; Notice of Availability, Federal Register, Volume 63, August 5, 1998.

64 FR 60914.  Category for Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic New Chemical Substances, Federal Register, Volume 64, November 8, 1999.  Available from the Federal Docket Management System as docket EPA-HQ-OPPTS-53171A at http://www.regulations.gov.

71 FR 6733.  Export Notification; Proposed Change to Reporting Requirements, Federal Register, Volume 71, February 9, 2006.  Available from the Federal Docket Management System as docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0058 at http://www.regulations.gov.

ASTM.  American Society for Standards and Materials.  http://www.astm.org.

Best, 1997.  Personal communication between Tom DeCoff of Eastern Research Group, Lexington, MA and Best Manufacturing Co. technical support services, Austin, TX, December 1997.

BLS, 2005.  U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment Statistics [OES].  May 2005 National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates Sectors 31, 32, and 33 – Manufacturing.   HYPERLINK "http://www.bls.gov/OES/current/naics2_31-33.htm"  http://www.bls.gov/OES/current/naics2_31-33.htm .

BLS, 2006a.  U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employer Costs for Employee Compensation: Changes to NAICS and SOC, Table 2. ECEC Occupational Comparability between SOC and OCS.  Downloaded February 2006 from   HYPERLINK "http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ect/sp/ecsm0003.htm"  http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ect/sp/ecsm0003.htm .

BLS, 2006b.  U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment Cost Index News Release Text: Employment Cost Index, March 2006 (April 28, 2006), at http://  HYPERLINK "http://www.bls.gov"  www.bls.gov .

BLS, 2006c.  Unpublished Employer Costs for Employee Compensation: Private Manufacturing Industry by Occupation, December 2005.  Data received May 10, 2006, by Carol Rawie, US EPA, from Raphael Branch, US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS 2006).  The data is not seasonally adjusted (email from Raphael Branch to Carol Rawie, November 17, 2005)

BLS, 2006d. Bureau of Labor Statistics.  Employment Cost Index, Historical Listing Current-Dollar 1975-2005 (May 10, 2006) at http://www.bls.gov/web/ecconst.pdf.

BLS, 2006e.  Bureau of Labor Statistics.  Consumer Price Index- All Urban Consumers, U.S. City Average (Series ID: CUUR0000SA0), extracted May 29, 2006.

BT Office Products, 1997.  BT Office Products International. Office Products Catalog, 1997.

CMA, 1991.  Chemical Manufacturers Association.  Responses to Questions on Burden Associated with PMN Submissions.  Distributed by the Chemical Manufacturers Association, Washington, DC.

EPA, 1997. Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.  Chemistry Assistance Manual for Premanufacture Notification Submitters, EPA 744-R-97-003, March 1997.    HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/oppt/newchems/pubs/chem-pmn/"  http://www.epa.gov/oppt/newchems/pubs/chem-pmn/

EPA, 2003.   U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Significant New Uses of Certain Chemical Substances, 68 FR 15061, March 28, 2003.  EPA Docket No. OPPT-2002-0060.

EPAB, 1998. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis Branch. Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 168 Chemical Substances and Background Support Document for Economic Analysis of Significant New Use Rules.   Washington, DC, January 1998.

EPAB, 1999. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis Branch. Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 41 Chemical Substances and  Background Support Document for Economic Analysis of Significant New Use Rules.  Washington, DC, July 20, 1999. Available from the Federal Docket Management System under EPA-HQ-OPPTS-50635 at http://www.regulations.gov.

EPAB, 2002.  U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis Branch. Revised Economic Analysis for the Amended Inventory Update Rule: Final Report.  Washington, DC.  August 2002.

EPAB, 2003.  U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis Branch. Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 65 Chemical Substances.  Washington, DC, 2003.  Available from the Federal Docket Management System as EPA-HQ-OPPTS-2002-0078 at http://www.regulations.gov.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 EPAB, 2005a.  Economic Analysis for the Final Section 4 Test Rule for High Production Volume Chemicals: Final Report, October 28, 2005, U.S. EPA.

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 EPAB, 2005b.  Economic Analysis of the Proposed Change to TSCA Section 12(b) Export Notification Requirements, November 2005, available from the Federal Docket Management System as EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0058-0017 at http://www.regulations.gov.

Kearney, 1988a.  Memorandum to Bill Massouda, Reporting and recordkeeping costs for a generic SNUR, February 3, 1988. [Memo submitted to U.S. EPA/Office of Toxic Substances (now OPPT) under contract 68-02-3980 with A.T.Kearney, Inc.].

Kearney, 1988b.  Estimated Cost of the Final Comprehensive Assessment Information Rule, June 1, 1988.  Prepared by Kearney/Centaur for US EPA.

ICR No. 118.08.  [Information Collection Request for] TSCA Section 5(a)(2) Significant New Use Rules for Existing Chemicals (Renewal).  Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act, October 11, 2005.

ICR No. 0574.12. [Information Collection Request for]Pre-Manufacture Review Reporting and Exemption Requirements for New Chemical Substances and Significant New Use Reporting Requirements for Chemical Substances: Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB Review under The Paperwork Reduction Act, Dec 22, 2004.

ICR No. 1139.06. [Information Collection Request for]  TSCA Existing Chemical Test Rules, Consent Orders, Test Rule Exemptions, and Voluntary Test Data Submissions: Supporting Statement for Request for OMB Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Attachment 5, Wage Rates Estimation, August 29, 2000.

LSS, 1997.  Lab Safety Supply.  1997 Product Catalog.

NTIS.  National Technical Information Service. http://www.ntis.gov.

OECD. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. http://www.oecd.org.

OPPE, 1992.  U.S. EPA, Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation.  Instructions for Preparing Information Collection Requests (ICRs). Washington, DC, June 1, 1992.

OPM, 2006.  Office of Personnel Management, Salary Table 2006-DCB, Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-PA-VA-WV. accessed from   HYPERLINK "http://www.opm.gov/oca/06tables/indexGS.asp" \t "_blank"  http://www.opm.gov/oca/06tables/indexGS.asp .

OPPT, 2006.  U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Harmonized Test Guidelines, available at     HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/home/guidelin.htm"  http://www.epa.gov/opptsfrs/home/guidelin.htm .

OSHA, 1983. US Dept of Labor, OSHA, Office of Regulatory Analysis, Final Regulatory Impact and Regulatory Flexibility Analyses of the Hazard Communication Standard. Washington DC, 8/9/83.

RIB, 1989.  U.S. EPA, Office of Toxic Substances, Regulatory Impacts Branch.  Economic Analysis of Final Significant New Rules: General Provisions for New Chemical Follow-Up.  Washington, DC, July 19, 1989.  (OTS/RIB later became OPPTS/EPAB.)

RIB, 1994.  Regulatory Impacts Branch.  Regulatory Impact Analysis of Amendments to Regulations for TSCA Section 5 Premanufacture Notifications.  Washington, DC: U.S. EPA/OPPT/EETD/RIB, September 9, 1994. (OTS/RIB later became OPPTS/EPAB.)

Rice, 2002.  Cody Rice. Wage Rates for Economic Analysis of the Toxics Release Inventory Program.  Washington, DC: U.S.EPA,Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis Branch, June 10, 2002.

Silagi, 1992.  William Silagi.  Economic Analysis in Support of the Final Rule Promulgated under TSCA Section 12(b).  Washington, DC:  U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis Branch, June 1992.

Weinstein, 2004.  Harriet G. Weinstein and Mark A. Loewenstein, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Comparing Current and Former Industry and Occupation ECEC Series. Originally posted August 25, 2004 at   HYPERLINK "http://www.bls.gov/opub/cwc/print/cm20040823ar01p1.htm"  http://www.bls.gov/opub/cwc/print/cm20040823ar01p1.htm .

 This report covers chemicals that went through PMN review and are part of an expedited rulemaking process.  The relevant Office of Management and Budget Information Collection Request number is ICR No. 0574.12.  EPA also promulgates SNURs through conventional rulemaking that are covered by ICR No. 188.08.

 For example, OPPT’s Information Collection Request (ICR) for TSCA Section 5(a)(2) Significant New Use Rules for Existing Chemicals (Renewal), October 11, 2005, estimates SNUN recordkeeping costs at 5.67 hours (ICR 118.08, page 12).

 In February of 2006, EPA proposed changes to the TSCA 12(b) export notification requirements (71 FR 6733).  The anticipated changes are expected to reduce per-chemical notification costs. However, the rule had not been finalized as of August, 2006, so costs here are for the requirements as they were before the regulatory changes.

 This supercedes an earlier EPA estimate that the one-time cost of preparing and submitting an export notification was $62.60 in 1992 (Silagi, 1992).

 Bona fides are submitted to EPA by manufacturers and importers to determine a chemical's TSCA Chemical Inventory and regulatory status.

 This is a change from the method used in a 2003 report, Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules For 65 Chemical Substances (EPAB, 2003; EPA docket number OPPT-2002-0078).  Previously, wage rates for production workers came from the BLS National Employment, Hours, and Earnings, Average Hourly Earnings of Production Workers, while fringe benefits were taken from the ECEC data.  Here, both wages and fringes for production workers come from ECEC data, for better consistency with the method of estimating labor costs for other labor categories.

 Employer Costs for Employee Compensation, Private Manufacturing Industry by Occupation, unpublished BLS data (BLS, 2006a).  Past SNUR economic analyses, such as EPAB, 2003, used ECEC data for “All Goods Producing” sectors (manufacturing, mining, and construction).  However, the manufacturing sector data seems more relevant since the SNUR mainly affects the chemicals industry.

	 Past SNUR economic analyses have used the term “technical” labor. Here the category is called “professional/technical” labor, to make clear how it relates to BLS categories.  In 2004, BLS changed from the Occupational Classification System, OCS, to the Standard Occupational Classification system, SOC.  In the process, the “Professional specialty and technical” category became the “Professional and related” category.  However, the coverage of the old and new occupational groups is approximately the same. See the BLS article, Comparing Current and Former Industry and Occupation ECEC Series (Weinstein, 2004).

 This represents a change in data sources for Industrial Hygienist wages as compared to the prior PMN SNUR economic analysis, which used data from a 1997 professional journal salary survey (EPAB, 2003).

 The GS-13 Step 5 is consistent with ICR No. 0574.12 (12/22/2004) which covers PMN SNURs.  This grade level represents a change from the earlier PMN SNUR economic analysis (EPAB, 2003), which used an average of GS-12 Step 1 and GS-12 Step 10 salaries.  The change is based on the judgment of EPA staff familiar with the SNUN process that a GS-13 (or higher) grade level is more typical for PMN and SNUN reviewers (Carol Rawie conversation with Karen Chu, EPA OPPT/Chemical Control Division, 5/1/06).

Figures presented here are rounded.

 Data on PMN notices suggest that some PMN submitters expected to produce less than 10,000 kilograms per year of the SNUR chemicals, but many expected to produce much more, often over 100,000 kg.   It is not known whether expected volumes were realized in practice.  Production volumes of secondary suppliers affected by the SNUR are also unknown.  Annual volumes significantly greater than 10,000 kg could lead to higher haz-comm costs than those estimated here.

 ADVANCE \d4 EPA’s website at http://www.epa.gov/oppt/newchems/pubs/ncelmain.htm explains that in Consent Orders and subsequent SNURs, EPA can require respirators unless workplace air measurements show that air-borne concentrations of the chemical are below a New Chemical Exposure Limit established by EPA to protect health.  NCEL provisions are modeled after Occupational Safety and Health Administration Permissible Exposure Limits (PELs), and also cover sampling and analytical methods, monitoring, respiratory protection, and recordkeeping.

 The cost was inflated as shown in Table C-11.

 The total cost is estimated using unrounded unit cost estimates and may not equal the product of the unrounded figures shown in this example.

 For example, OPPT’s Information Collection Request (ICR) for TSCA Section 5(a)(2) Significant New Use Rules for Existing Chemicals (Renewal), October 11, 2005, estimates SNUN recordkeeping costs at 5.67 hours (ICR 118.08, page 12).

 SNUN submission costs estimated in Appendix E of this report were based on PMN submission costs from a 1994 report, Regulatory Impact Analysis of Amendments to Regulations for TSC Section 5 Premanufacture Notifications (RIB, 1994).  Page III-14 of the 1994 report refers to “the normal records kept with a PMN submission which are included in the estimates for submission costs.”  Page III-12 identifies “maintaining a file of the submission” as part of the labor hours for the PMN reporting form. These statements imply that the 95 to 114 total hours for a PMN submission (page III-10 of RIB 1994) included recordkeeping hours.

 Table 6 in the main text estimates total recordkeeping costs for a chemical with multiple SNUR restrictions, including workplace protection, hazard communication, water discharge, disposal, and other limitations. Because few if any chemicals will have all of these restrictions, the total cost presented will be an overestimate of recordkeeping costs for most chemicals subject to the SNUR.

 For an overview of the PMN review process, see the Chemistry Assistance Manual for Premanufacture Notification Submitters, EPA, 1997.

 PAGE

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs			  PAGE  i 		  U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances					                          December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs						  PAGE  21 					U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances												     December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

  PAGE   26

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs					  U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						         December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

  PAGE   29

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs					  U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						        December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

  PAGE  1

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs			A-  PAGE  2 		  U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						         December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

 PAGE

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs			B-  PAGE  3 		  U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						        December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs						B-  PAGE  4 					U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						                                                                          December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs			B-  PAGE  6 		  U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						       December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

Economic Analysis Of Expedited SNURs		C-  PAGE  8 		  U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 75 Chemical Substances								                      August  9, 2006

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs			C-  PAGE  12 		    U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						        December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs						C-  PAGE  13 			                    U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						                                                                          December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs			C-  PAGE  23 		    U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						         December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs						C-  PAGE  24 				   U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						                                                                          December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

  PAGE  2

Economic Analysis Of Expedited SNURs		C-  PAGE  2 		    U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 75 Chemical Substances				 					       August  9, 2006

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs			D-  PAGE  2 		    U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						         December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs			D-  PAGE  1 		    U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						         December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs					D-  PAGE  4 					    U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						        					         December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs					D-  PAGE  3 					    U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances			 								         December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs			D-  PAGE  7 		   U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						         December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs			D-  PAGE  5 		    U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						         December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs					D-  PAGE  18 					    U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						           			        	 	          December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs			E-  PAGE  1 		    U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						         December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs			F-  PAGE  2 		    U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						         December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs			G-  PAGE  4 		    U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						         December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)

Economic Analysis of Expedited SNURs			G-  PAGE  1 		    U.S. EPA Economic and Policy Analysis Branch

for 65 Chemical Substances						         December 4, 2006 (revised March 12, 2007)


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 41 (Thursday, March 2, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13209-13210]
[FR Doc No: 2023-04214]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 34842]

Applications for Deregistration Under Section 8(f) of the
Investment Company Act of 1940

February 24, 2023.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'' or ``SEC'').

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The following is a notice of applications for deregistration under
section 8(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 for the month of
February 2023. A copy of each application may be obtained via the
Commission's website by searching for the applicable file number listed
below, or for an applicant

using the Company name search field, on the SEC's EDGAR system. The
SEC's EDGAR system may be searched at https://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/legacy/companysearch.html. You may also call the SEC's
Public Reference Room at<PHONE_NUMBER>. An order granting each
application will be issued unless the SEC orders a hearing. Interested
persons may request a hearing on any application by emailing the SEC's
Secretary at [email protected] and serving the relevant
applicant with a copy of the request by email, if an email address is
listed for the relevant applicant below, or personally or by mail, if a
physical address is listed for the relevant applicant below. Hearing
requests should be received by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. on March 21, 2023,
and should be accompanied by proof of service on applicants, in the
form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service.
Pursuant to Rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should state the
nature of the writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the
desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason for the request,
and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing
may request notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary at
[email protected].

ADDRESSES: The Commission: [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shawn Davis, Assistant Director, at
(202) 551-6413 or Chief Counsel's Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>; SEC,
Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office, 100 F Street
NE, Washington, DC 20549-8010.

Center Coast Brookfield Core MLP Fund I, LLC [File No. 811-22565]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On September
25, 2018, applicant made liquidating distributions to its shareholders
based on net asset value. Expenses of $8,362 incurred in connection
with the liquidation were paid by the applicant.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on February 2, 2023.
    Applicant's Address: Brookfield Public Securities Group LLC,
Brookfield Place, 250 Vesey Street, 15th Floor, New York, New York
10281-1023.

Forward Funds [File No. 811-06722]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. The applicant has transferred its assets to
Ultimus Managers Trust, and on November 18, 2022 made a final
distribution to its shareholders based on net asset value. Expenses of
$396,976 incurred in connection with the reorganization were paid by
the parent company of the applicant and the parent company of the
acquiring fund.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on December 9, 2022, and
amended on February 16, 2023.
    Applicant's Address: [email protected].

FPA Capital Fund, Inc. [File No. 811-01596]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. The applicant has transferred its assets to
FPA Queens road Small Cap Value Fund, a series of Bragg Capital Trust,
and on January 31, 2021 made a final distribution to its shareholders
based on net asset value. Expenses of $408,250 incurred in connection
with the reorganization were paid by the applicant and the applicant's
investment adviser.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on May 16, 2022, and
amended on January 30, 2023.
    Applicant's Address: 11601 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1200, Los
Angeles, California 90025.

FPA Paramount Fund, Inc. [File No. 811-00852]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. The applicant has transferred its assets to
Phaeacian Global Value Fund, a series of Datum One Series Trust, and on
October 16, 2020 made a final distribution to its shareholders based on
net asset value. Expenses of $202,042 incurred in connection with the
reorganization were paid by the applicant's investment adviser and the
acquiring fund's investment adviser.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on May 16, 2022, and
amended on January 30, 2023.
    Applicant's Address: 11601 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1200, Los
Angeles, California 90025.

Salient MF Trust [File No. 811-22678]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. The applicant has transferred its assets to
Ultimus Managers Trust, and on November 18, 2022 made a final
distribution to its shareholders based on net asset value. Expenses of
$770,747 incurred in connection with the reorganization were paid by
the parent company of the applicant and the parent company of the
acquiring fund.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on December 9, 2022, and
amended on February 16, 2023.
    Applicant's Address: [email protected].

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
pursuant to delegated authority.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-04214 Filed 3-1-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 110 (Wednesday, June 8, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34770-34772]
[FR Doc No: 2022-12183]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0381; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-01314-R;
Amendment 39-22068; AD 2022-11-18]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus Helicopters Model AS355E, AS355F, AS355F1, AS355F2, AS-365N2, AS
365 N3, SA-365N, SA-365N1, EC 155B, and EC155B1 helicopters. This AD
was prompted by investigation results from an engine compartment fire,
which determined some of the internal parts of the engine upper fixed
cowling (engine cowling) were painted with finish paint on top of the
primer layer. This AD requires a one-time inspection of certain part-
numbered engine cowlings, and corrective actions if necessary, as
specified in a European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which
is incorporated by reference. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective July 13, 2022.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of July 13,
2022.

ADDRESSES: For EASA material incorporated by reference (IBR) in this
final rule, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne,
Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email [email protected]; internet
www.easa.europa.eu. You may find the EASA material on the EASA website
at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. For Airbus Helicopters service
information identified in this final rule, contact Airbus Helicopters,
2701 N Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75052; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>
or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at https://www.airbus.com/helicopters/services/technical-support.html. You may view this material
at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101
Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on
the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Service information that is IBRed is also available in the AD docket at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2022-0381.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0381; 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 final rule, the
EASA AD, any comments received, and other information. The address for
Docket Operations is U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrea Jimenez, Aerospace Engineer,
COS Program Management Section, Operational Safety Branch, Compliance &
Airworthiness Division, FAA, 1600 Stewart Ave., Suite 410, Westbury, NY
11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2021-0265, dated November 23, 2021
(EASA AD 2021-0265), to correct an unsafe condition for Airbus
Helicopters (AH), formerly Eurocopter, Eurocopter France, Aerospatiale,
Sud Aviation, Model SA 365 N, SA 365 N1, AS 365 N2, AS 365 N3, EC 155
B, EC 155 B1, AS 355 E, AS 355 F, AS 355F 1 and AS 355 F2 helicopters,
all serial numbers.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Airbus Helicopters
Model AS355E, AS355F, AS355F1, AS355F2, AS-365N2, AS 365 N3, SA-365N,
SA-365N1, EC 155B, and EC155B1 helicopters. The NPRM published in the
Federal Register on March 29, 2022 (87 FR 17955). The NPRM was prompted
by investigation results from an engine compartment fire, which
determined some of the internal parts of the engine cowling were
painted with finish paint on top of the primer layer. The NPRM proposed
to require a one-time inspection of certain part-numbered engine
cowlings, and corrective actions if necessary, as specified in EASA AD
2021-0265.
    The FAA is issuing this AD to detect finish paint inside the duct
of the engine cowling. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could
result in fire

propagation in case of exposure to high temperature, damage to the
helicopter, and injury to the occupants. See EASA AD 2021-0265 for
additional background information.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of
the costs.

Conclusion

    These helicopters have been approved by EASA and are approved for
operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral
agreement with the European Union, EASA has notified the FAA about the
unsafe condition described in its AD. The FAA reviewed the relevant
data and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as
proposed, except for minor editorial changes. Accordingly, the FAA is
issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these helicopters.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2021-0265 requires a one-time inspection of certain part-
numbered engine cowlings (e.g., an affected part as defined in EASA AD
2021-0265) for finish paint and depending on the inspection results,
accomplishment of applicable corrective actions. EASA AD 2021-0265 also
allows an affected part to be installed on any helicopter, provided it
is a serviceable part as defined in EASA AD 2021-0265. Corrective
actions include repainting the affected part and replacing the affected
part.
    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.

Other Related Service Information

    The FAA reviewed Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin (ASB)
No. AS355-53.00.38, ASB No. AS365-53.00.65, and ASB No. EC155-53A040,
all Revision 0, and all dated October 27, 2021, which specify
procedures for inspecting the inside of the duct of the engine cowling
for finish paint and corrective actions.

Differences Between This AD and EASA AD 2021-0265

    Service information referenced in EASA AD 2021-0265 specifies
recording compliance with the applicable ASBs, whereas this AD does
not.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 93 helicopters of U.S.
Registry. Labor rates are estimated at $85 per work-hour. Based on
these numbers, the FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this AD.
    Inspecting each engine cowling takes about 1 work-hour for an
estimated cost of $85 per helicopter and $7,905 for the U.S. fleet.
    Repainting each engine cowling with primer takes about 8 work-hours
for an estimated cost of $680 per helicopter.
    Replacing an engine cowling with a ``serviceable part'' as defined
in EASA AD 2021-0265 takes about 4 work-hours and parts cost up to
$7,800 for an estimated cost of up to $8,140 per replacement.

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

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will 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 that this AD:
    (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 Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 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 adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

2022-11-18 Airbus Helicopters: Amendment 39-22068; Docket No. FAA-
2022-0381; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-01314-R.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective July 13, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus Helicopters Model AS355E, AS355F,
AS355F1, AS355F2, AS-365N2, AS 365 N3, SA-365N, SA-365N1, EC 155B,
and EC155B1 helicopters, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 7110, Engine
Cowling System.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by investigation results from an engine
compartment fire, which determined some of the internal parts of the
engine upper fixed cowling (engine cowling) were painted with finish
paint on top of the primer layer. The FAA is issuing this AD to
detect finish paint inside the duct of the engine cowling. The
unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in fire propagation
in case of exposure to high temperature, damage to the helicopter,
and injury to the occupants.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2021-0265, dated November 23, 2021 (EASA AD 2021-0265).

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2021-0265

    (1) Where EASA AD 2021-0265 requires compliance in terms of
flight hours (FH), this AD requires using hours time-in-service.
    (2) Where EASA AD 2021-0265 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (3) Where paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2021-0265 specifies ``in
accordance with the instructions of paragraph 3.B of the applicable
ASB,'' for this AD replace ``in accordance with the instructions of
paragraph 3.B of the applicable ASB'' with ``in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions, paragraphs 3.B.2.a. through 3.B.2.b. of
the applicable ASB.''
    (4) Where paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2021-0265 specifies to
repaint or replace the affected part, replace the text ``repaint
(with primer layer only) that affected part or replace it with a
serviceable part in accordance with the instructions of paragraph
3.B. of the applicable ASB,'' with ``repaint (with primer layer
only) that affected part in accordance with the instructions of
paragraph 3.B.2.b. of the applicable ASB, or replace the affected
part with a `serviceable part' as defined in EASA AD 2021-0265.''
    (5) Where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2021-
0265 specifies ``identify again the engine upper fixed cowling (a),
refer to paragraph 3.C.,'' this AD does require modifying your
helicopter by marking ``ASB No. 53.00.38,'' ``ASB No. 53A40,'' or
``ASB No. 53.00.65,'' as applicable to your helicopter, after the
old P/N on the engine cowling with indelible ink, but does not
require compliance with paragraph 3.C. of the ``applicable ASB'' as
defined in EASA AD 2021-0265.
    (6) Where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2021-
0265 specifies during the interpretation of results from the visual
check of the inside of the duct of the engine cowling, if there is
any finish paint inside the duct, obey with paragraph 3.B.2.b.
(i.e., perform corrective actions) not more than 6 months after you
complied with paragraph 3.B.2.a., for this AD, if there is any
finish paint inside the duct of the engine cowling, perform the
corrective actions not more than 6 months after you complied with
paragraph 3.B.2.a. Work Card 20-04-05-402 (MTC), referenced in the
Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph 3.B.2.b. of the ``applicable
ASB'' as defined in EASA AD 2021-0265 is for reference only and is
not required for the actions in this AD.
    (7) Where the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph 3.B.2.b of
Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. AS365-53.00.65,
and ASB EC155-53A040, both Revision 0, and both dated October 27,
2021, specify to refer to Work Card 53-50-00-402 (MET), or Task 53-
54-00-061(AMM), to remove and install the engine cowling, for this
AD those instructions are for reference only and are not required
for the actions in this AD.
    (8) This AD does not mandate compliance with the ``Remarks''
section of EASA AD 2021-0265.

(i) No Reporting Requirement

    Although the service information referenced in EASA AD 2021-0265
specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD
does not include that requirement.

(j) Special Flight Permit

    Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with 14 CFR
21.197 and 21.199, provided no passengers are onboard.

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, 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 manager of the International Validation Branch, send
it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (l) of
this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(l) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Andrea Jimenez,
Aerospace Engineer, COS Program Management Section, Operational
Safety Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, FAA, 1600
Stewart Ave., Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone (516) 228-
7330; email [email protected].

(m) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2021-0265,
dated November 23, 2021.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For EASA AD 2021-0265, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
[email protected]; internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find EASA
AD 2021-0265 on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Office of
the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room
6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. This material may be
found in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0381.
    (5) You may view this material that is incorporated by reference
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
[email protected], or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on May 24, 2022.
Ross Landes,
Deputy Director for Regulatory Operations, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-12183 Filed 6-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P