Inorganic Chemicals: Sources of Information Suggested by Commenters to the Proposed Inventory Update Rule Amendments Economic and Policy Analysis Branch Economics, Exposure, and Technology Division Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics U. S. Environmental Protection Agency June 2000  1 1. Sources of Information for Inorganic Chemicals Several of the commenters suggested specific sources of information for inorganic chemicals. Table 1 summarizes the sources of information suggested, the frequency and type of collected information, and the reporting entity or source of information. The following sources of information are collected on a regular, ongoing basis:

EPA Toxics Release Inventory ( TRI)

EPCRA Tier II  Hazardous Chemical Inventory Report

Bureau of Labor Statistics

USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries

USGS Mineral Industry Surveys

Census of Manufacturers ° U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission Form 10 K Of these, TRI, EPCRA Tier II, USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries, and the USGS Mineral Industry Surveys contain information related to chemical use and/ or exposure. The Bureau of Labor Statistics conducts many surveys, but they are related to employment and productivity and do not contain chemical exposure information. The U. S. Census conducts periodic surveys on manufacturer's shipments, inventories, and orders, but these surveys do not appear to contain information useful for the TSCA Inventory Update Rule. The Form 10 K reports submitted by all public companies to the U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission contain financial data and are not useful for screening risks to public health and the environment.

The TRI reports on the annual, site specific amounts of toxic chemicals released to air, water, and land, and that are transferred off site for disposal, treatment, etc. The focus of this reporting is on chemicals in waste, not on chemicals in products. Therefore, the TRI information is different than that requested for the TSCA Inventory Update Rule which consists of the average and maximum concentration, measured by weight, of the reportable chemical substance as it leaves the site in a commercial product.

The EPCRA Tier II data consists of the Hazardous Chemical Inventory Report required under section 312 of EPCRA. ( See http:// es. epa. gov/ program/ exec/ qa tri2. html for further information on EPRCA requirements). These data are submitted annually to three different groups: local fire departments, local emergency planning committees, and State emergency response commissions. The data are not submitted to the Federal government and therefore, there is no comprehensive listing or database of the reported information on the Internet. This law applies to hazardous chemicals as defined by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration ( OSHA) as chemicals that are a physical or health hazard. These hazards are defined in 29 CFR Part 1910.1200( c). Although many chemical substances can meet the OSHA definition of a physical or health hazard, there is no comprehensive list of all OSHA hazardous chemicals. Tier II reporting facilities should submit forms for most chemicals for which they are required by OSHA to maintain a Material Safety Data Sheet ( MSDS) and for Extremely Hazardous  2 Substances ( EHSs) that are defined and listed in Appendices A and B of Title 40 CFR Part 355 ( rules promulgated under EPCRA). There are currently 362 listed EHSs ( www. afcee. brooks. af. mil/ pro_ act/ fact/ Oct98d. htm). The completed Tier II inventory form contains the following information ( 42 U. S. C. 11022( d)( 2)):

1. The chemical name or the common name of the chemical as provided on the material safety data sheet and the CAS number. 2. An estimate, in ranges, of the maximum amount of the hazardous chemical present at the facility at any time during the preceding year. 3. An estimate, in ranges, of the average daily amount of the hazardous chemical present at the facility during the preceding year. 4. A brief description of the manner of storage of the hazardous chemical. 5. The location of the hazardous chemical at the facility. 6. An indication of whether the owner elects to withhold location information or other information about a specific hazardous chemical from disclosure to the public as a trade secret.

The USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries provide annual information on the total production of a chemical, in thousands of metric tons, in the United States . This information is presented in aggregate and it is not broken down by facility; in contrast, the TSCA Inventory Update Rule gathers this information for each facility required to report under the Rule. Similarly, the USGS Mineral Industry Surveys provide data on total production, imports, and consumption of each chemical. However, this information is also presented as an aggregate and would not be of use for facility specific information, does not contain specific location information, does not indicate a tie in to any parent company, and does not contain a certification of accuracy of the information. An example of the type of information that is included in the USGS reports for aluminum and can be seen at http:// minerals. usgs. gov/ minerals/ pubs/ commodity/ aluminum/ index. html. Information on all of the chemicals listed on Attachment 1 would also be available at this site. Attachment 2 provides additional information on the USGS survey.

In summary, the commenters have presented many excellent data sources on inorganic chemicals. However, many of these data sources are documents which consist of literature reviews and are not updated regularly. Other sources of data do not contain information in a format that would be readily useable for the IUR and do not contain the information that will be collected through the IURA.  3 Table 1. Sources of Information From Comments Sources of Information Frequency of collected information Type of information collected Reporting entity or source of information Toxics Release Inventory ( TRI)

( http:// www. epa. gov/ tri /) Annual The amounts of toxic chemicals released to air, water, land, and injected underground and amount transferred off site for recycling, energy recovery, treatment, and disposal. Facilities with 10 or more employees, which manufacture or process more than 25,000 lbs or otherwise use more than 10,000 lbs of any listed chemical during the calender yr.

EPCRA Tier II  Hazardous Chemical Inventory Report ( http:// es. epa. gov/ p rogram/ exec/ qa tri2 . html) Annual The maximum and average daily amount of hazardous chemicals and extremely hazardous substances present at a facility. Facility using 10,000 lbs or more of hazardous chemical or facilities that exceed either the threshold planning quantity or 500 lbs, ( whichever is lower) for extremely hazardous substances.

Material Safety Data Sheets ( MSDS) Once One sheet per chemical  contains: chemical identity, hazardous ingredients, physical data, fire and explosion hazard data, health hazard data, reactivity data, spill or leak procedures, special protection information, & special precautions. Employers must have a MSDS for each chemical substance used in the workplace.

Bureau of Mines ( http:// www. cdc. gov/ ni osh/ mining/) Unclear what commenter was referring to here. The Bureau of Mines closed in 1996. A few parts survived, such as the Office for Mine Safety and Health Research in NIOSH, and the Mine Safety and Health Admin Dept. of Labor. Perhaps some older publications from the Bureau of Mines contained exposure information but it would be out of date. NA  4 Bureau of Labor Statistics ( http:// stats. bls. gov/ bls home. htm) Surveys ( some monthly, some annual) Employment and unemployment, prices and living conditions, compensation and working conditions, productivity and technology, employment projections, international programs. Survey data USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries ( http:// minerals. usgs. g ov/ minerals/ pubs/ mcs/ # A) Annual not facility specific Information on the domestic industry structure, govt. programs, tariffs, and 5 year statistics including production ( thousands of metric tons), imports, exports, consumption, price, employment, for more than 90 minerals and materials.* Survey data USGS Mineral Industry Surveys ( http:// minerals. usgs. g ov/ minerals/ pubs/ com modity/ mis. html) Monthly, quarterly, or at other regular interval   not facility specific Production ( thousands of metric tons), distribution, stocks, and consumption of approx. 90 minerals.* Survey data Census of Manufacturers ( http:// www. census. gov / econ/ www/ ma0100. ht ml) Periodic Reports on manufacturers shipments, inventories, and orders in dollars Survey data ATSDR Toxicological Profiles ( http:// www. atsdr. cdc. g ov/) One per chemical, updated as needed, approx. every 4 years   not facility specific Information on production, import/ export, use, potential for human exposure including levels measured in air, water, and soil and general population and occupational exposure ( majority of document toxicology data) Literature and databases NTP reports ( http:// ntp server. niehs. nih. gov/) One per chemical   not facility specific Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of specific chemicals. Small section on chemical properties, production, and exposure. Literature and databases IARC monographs ( http:// <IP_ADDRESS>/ d efault. html) Each volume contains approx. 15 individual chemical monographs   not facility specific Information on chemical and physical data, production, use, occurrence, and analysis ( rest of monograph contains carcinogenicity data) Literature and databases  5 Federal OSHA ( http:// www. osha. gov/) periodic Information on worker exposure, accidents, injuries and deaths. Facilities EPA 1986 Health Assessment Document on Nickel Once Information on chemical/ physical properties, environmental cycling, and levels of Ni in air, water, food, and soils ( majority of document toxicology data) Literature and databases ATSDR Toxicological Profile on Nickel Updated in 1997 Information on Ni production, import/ export, use, potential for human exposure including levels measured in air, water , and soil and general population and occupational exposure ( majority of document toxicology data) Literature and databases TERA's 1999 Toxicological Review of Soluble Nickel Salts Once Chemical and physical properties, exposure, occupational exposure, Ni speciation ( majority of document toxicology data) Literature and databases.

U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission Form 10 K ( http:// www. sec. gov/ in dex. html) Annually   by company, not individual facility Information on business operations similar to what is included in a company's annual report to its shareholders Company records Occupational Exposure Limits Criteria Document for Nickel  European Commission Once Chemical and physical properties, occurrence, production, use, analytical methods, exposure data, health effects Literature and databases NiDI  Trade Association  data on intermediate and end uses of Nickel ( http:// www. nidi. org) Once End use distribution into products NA * See Attachment 1 for a list of chemicals and materials which have mineral commodity summaries and mineral industry surveys.  6 2. Summary of Comments Comment: Several commenters stated that data on inorganic chemicals that EPA needs to conduct screening level risk assessments is already available from the following sources: Toxics Release Inventory, EPCRA Tier II, Material Safety Data Sheets, Bureau of Mines, Bureau of Labor Statistics, U. S. Geological Survey's annual reports on mineral production and uses, the Census of Manufacturers, U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission, ATSDR data, the NTP reports, OSHA and the International Agency for Research on Cancer monographs. In particular, lime production volume information is already available from USGS' annual lime industry survey. ( Commenters 44, 54)

Comment: A commenter stated that the hazard potential of aluminum is well established and sufficient information is available from other sources on this compound. ( Commenter 13)

Comment: A commenter stated that there are several lengthy toxicological reviews of nickel, there is sufficient data available for EPA to conduct a screening level risk assessment and, therefore, this chemical should not be included in the rule. ( Commenter 22)

Comment: Two commenters felt that many chemicals moving through commerce, such as iron oxides, zinc, aluminas, naturally occurring clays, zeolites, and complex inorganic color pigments, do not present risks to human health or the environment. Because the hazards are so low for these compounds, EPA should not be focusing its risk screening efforts on such low priority chemicals. In addition, requiring reporting for these chemicals would result in large burdens to industry and large quantities of unnecassary data. ( Commenters 38, 54)

3. Chemical Specific Data Many of the sources identified in Table 1 contain data on the specific chemicals that were mentioned by the commenters ( lime, aluminum, nickle, iron oxide, zinc, naturally occurring clays, zeolites, and inorganic color pigments). For example all of theses chemicals ( with the exception of inorganic color pigments) are included on Attachment 1 chemicals in the USGS surveys. In the text above, I provided the specific Internet links for the USGS information for aluminum. Additional Internet links are provided in Table 1 for the other information sources. Most of these sources are extensive and contain information on the chemicals in question. However, the information provided by these websites does not appear to duplicate the information that would be provided by the IUR.

Attachment 1 Chemicals and Materials in both the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries and Mineral Industry Surveys  7

Abrasives

Aluminum

Antimony

Arsenic

Asbestos

Barite

Bauxite and Alumina

Beryllium

Bismuth

Boron

Bromine

Cadmium

Cement

Cesium

Chromium

Clays

Cobalt

Columbium ( Niobium)

Copper

Diamond, Industrial

Diatomite

Feldspar

Fluorspar

Gallium

Garnet

Gemstones

Germanium

Gold

Graphite

Gypsum

Helium

Indium

Iodine

Iron and Steel

Iron and Steel Scrap

Iron and Steel Slag

Iron ore

Kyanite

Lead

Lime

Lithium

Magnesium

Manganese

Manufactured Abrasives

Mercury

Mica

Molybdenum

Nickel

Nitrogen

Peat

Perlite

Phosphate Rock

Platinum

Potash

Rare earths

Rhenium

Salt

Sand and Gravel

Selenium

Silicon

Silver

Soda Ash

Stone

Sulfur

Talc

Thorium

Tin

Titanium

Tungsten

Vanadium

Vermiculite

Zinc

Zirconium Chemicals and Materials in the Mineral Commodity Summaries Only

Ilmenite

Pumice

Quartz Crystal, Industrial

Rubidium

Rutile

Scandium  8

Sodium Sulfate

Strontium

Tantalum

Tellerium

Thallium

Yttrium Chemicals and Materials in the Mineral Industry Surveys Only

Coal Combustion Byproducts

Crushed Stone and Sand and Gravel

Construction sand and Gravel

Dimension stone

Explosives

Ferroalloys

Iron oxide pigments

Precious Metals

Recycling materials

Silica

Wollastonite

Zeolites  9 Attachment 2 U. S. Geological Survey The following are the responses to the questions asked by EPA. I obtained this information from the USGS Internet site and from a discussion with one USGS employee. The address for the Internet site is included in the response to question # 1. I believe that all of the information that you need is contained on the Internet but I cut and pasted the answers to your specific questions below. I have put the information that has come directly from the USGS site in quotes.

Through this process, I have learned that the USGS Mineral Industry Surveys and the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries are both based on the survey form that is located on the Internet. The main differences between these two documents are that the industry survey data comes out on a monthly basis and is mineral specific while the commodity summaries are annual reports with summary information on the entire list of chemicals and minerals that was included in Attached 1 of Supplemental Analysis # 3.

2. What does the USGS minerals survey form look like?

Go to http:// minerals. usgs. gov/ minerals/ pubs/ commodity/ survey_ methods/ , click on the link to the survey methods for 1998. See page four of the attached file. It is an example form for rolled zinc. I expect that other forms are similar.

3. How are facilities that will receive the survey identified?

" After the survey form has been designed, a list of the appropriate establishments to be canvassed is developed. Many sources are used to determine which companies, mines, plants, and other operations should be included on the survey mailing list. State geologists, Federal organizations ( e. g., Mine Safety and Health Administration), trade associations, industry representatives, and trade publications and directories are some of the sources that are used to develop and update survey listings. With few exceptions, a complete canvass of the list of establishments is used rather than a sample survey. The iron and steel scrap industry is one of the exceptions where a sample survey is conducted."

" The USGS surveys approximately 18,000 establishments. Each year, the USGS mails about 40,000 forms for 141 different surveys."

4. Are facilities required to complete the survey? What happens if they don't?

As stated in the fine print at the top of the sample survey form, " the USGS relies on your voluntary and timely response...." Therefore it appears that response by a specific date is not required. Procedures that the USGS uses to get data are as follows  10 " To produce reliable aggregated data, the USGS uses efficient procedures for handling instances of nonresponse. Failure to return the initial survey form results in a second mailing of the form. If the second form is not returned, then telephone calls are made to the nonrespondents. The follow up calls provide the necessary data to complete the survey forms and/ or to verify questionable data entries. Periodic visits to minerals establishments also are made by USGS mineral commodity specialists to gather missing data and to explain the importance of the establishment's reporting. By describing the use of the published statistics and showing the impact of nonresponse, the USGS strives to encourage respondents to give a complete and accurate reply."

" The OMB publication " Guidelines for Reducing Reporting Burden" stipulates that the minimum acceptable response rate shall be 75% of the panel surveyed. In addition, the USGS strives for a minimum reporting level of 75% of the quantity produced or consumed ( depending on the survey) for certain key statistics. Response rates are periodically reviewed. For those surveys not meeting the minimum reporting level, procedures are developed and implemented to improve response rates."

5. Does the form require a certifying signature to ensure accuracy of the data?

The form has a line at the bottom for the signature of a contact person at the facility. There is no wording next to this block that implies that a signature indicates that the information is accurate. In the fine print at the top of the form it states that " the USGS relies on your response to assure that its information is complete and accurate." The USGS conducts extensive QA on the data as described in the following paragraphs.

" Each completed survey form returned to the USGS undergoes extensive analysis to ensure the highest possible accuracy of the mineral data. The statistical staff monitors all surveys to ensure that errors are not created by reporting in physical units different from the units requested on the form. Relations between related measures, such as produced crude ore and marketable crude ore, are analyzed for consistency. Engineering relations, such as recovery factors from ores and concentrates, also are used. The totals for each form are verified, and currently reported data are checked against prior reports to detect possible errors or omissions."

" For the majority of the surveys, which are automated, the forms are reviewed to ensure that data are complete and correct before entering into the computer. The computer is programmed to conduct a series of automated checks to verify mathematical consistency and to identify discrepancies between the data reported and logically acceptable responses."

6. Is the reported data considered CBI and therefore not available to the public or other government agencies?  11 The data submitted by the forms is treated as confidential unless the reporting facility gives permission for it to be disclosed. The USGS was contacted to discuss this issue and to see if arrangements could be made to share the data with other firms or government agencies. I spoke with Gail James ( 703 648 4915). She stated that she thought that arrangements had been made in the past for information sharing. Her supervisor is Kenneth Mlynarski ( 703 648 4919) and should be the one contacted for more information.

" The USGS relies on the cooperation of the U. S. minerals industry to provide the mineral data that are presented in this and other USGS publications. Without a strong response to survey requests, the USGS would not be able to present reliable statistics. The USGS, in turn, respects the proprietary nature of the data received from the individual companies and establishments. To ensure that proprietary rights will not be violated, the USGS analyzes each of the aggregated statistics to determine if the data reported by an individual establishment can be deduced from the aggregated statistics. If, for example, only two significant producers of a commodity are in a given State, then the USGS will not publish the State total because either producer could readily estimate the production of the other. It is this obligation to protect proprietary information that results in the withheld, or W, entries in the published tables. If a company gives permission in writing, however, then the USGS will publish the data as long as the data from other respondents are protected from disclosure."


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 70 (Friday, April 11, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20098-20099]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07731]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2008-0117; FRL-9908-51-Region 1]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Connecticut; Reasonable Further Progress Plan and 2002 Base Year
Emission Inventory

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Correcting amendments.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a final
rule regarding reasonable further progress plans and 2002 base year
emission inventories for Connecticut in the Federal Register on August
22, 2012. A duplicate paragraph letter was

identified and is corrected in this action.

DATES: This rule is effective on May 12, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob McConnell, Air Quality Planning
Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional
Office, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100 (mail code: OEP05-2), Boston,
MA 02109-3912, telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax number (617) 918-
0046, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a final rule dated August 22, 2012 (77 FR
50600), Sec.  52.377 was amended by adding paragraph (k). However, a
different action published shortly before had already used letter (k).
This action corrects that error by inserting the next available
paragraph letter (o).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: April 2, 2014.
H. Curtis Spalding,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.

    Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

0
2. Section 52.377 is amended by adding paragraph (o) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.377  Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (o) Revisions to the State Implementation Plan submitted by the
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection on February 1, 2008.
These revisions are for the purpose of satisfying the rate of progress
requirement of section 182(b)(1) from 2002 through 2008, and the
contingency measure requirement of sections 172(c)(9) and of the Clean
Air Act, for the Greater Connecticut moderate 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area, and the Connecticut portion of the New York-New
Jersey-Long Island moderate 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. These
revisions establish motor vehicle emission budgets for 2008 of 29.7
tons per day of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and 60.5 tons per day
of nitrogen oxides (NOx) to be used in transportation conformity in the
Connecticut portion of the New York-New Jersey-Long Island moderate 8-
hour ozone nonattainment area. These revisions also establish motor
vehicle emission budgets for 2008 for the Greater Connecticut moderate
8-hour ozone nonattainment area of 28.5 tons per day for VOCs, and 54.3
tons per day for NOx.
[FR Doc. 2014-07731 Filed 4-10-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P