[Federal Register: November 14, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 219)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 66234-66245]
[DOCID:fr14no06-4]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

 40 CFR Parts 707 and 799

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0058; FRL-8101-3]
RIN 2070-AJ01

Export Notification; Change to Reporting Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is promulgating amendments to the Toxic Substances Control
Act (TSCA) section 12(b) export notification regulations at subpart D
of 40 CFR part 707. One amendment changes the current annual
notification requirement to a one-time requirement for exporters of
chemical substances or mixtures (hereinafter referred to as
``chemicals'') for which certain actions have been taken under TSCA.
Relatedly, for the same TSCA actions, EPA is changing the current
requirement that the Agency notify foreign governments annually after
the Agency's receipt of export notifications from exporters to a
requirement that the Agency notify foreign governments once after it
receives the first export notification from an exporter. EPA is also
promulgating de minimis concentration levels below which notification
will not be required for the export of any chemical for which export
notification under TSCA section 12(b) is otherwise required,
promulgating other minor amendments (to update the EPA addresses to
which export notifications must be sent, to indicate that a single
export notification may refer to more than one section of TSCA where
the exported chemical is the subject of multiple TSCA actions, and to
correct an error in 40 CFR 799.19 that currently omits mentioning
multi-chemical test rules as being among those final TSCA section 4
actions that trigger export notification), and clarifying exporters'
and EPA's obligations where an export notification-triggering action is
taken with respect to a chemical previously or currently subject to
export notification due to the existence of a previous triggering
action.

DATES:  This rule is effective January 16, 2007. In accordance with 40
CFR 23.5, this rule shall be promulgated for purposes of judicial
review at 1 p.m. eastern daylight/standard time on November 28, 2006.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0058. All documents in the
docket are listed on the regulations.gov web site. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. The EPA Docket Center (EPA/
DC) suffered structural damage due to flooding in June 2006. Although
the EPA/DC is continuing operations, there will be temporary changes to
the EPA/DC during the clean-up. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room, which
was temporarily closed due to flooding, has been relocated in the EPA
Headquarters Library, Infoterra Room (Room Number 3334) in EPA West,
located at 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the EPA/DC
Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the
OPPT Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. EPA visitors are required to show

photographic identification and sign the EPA visitor log. Visitors to
the EPA/DC Public Reading Room will be provided with an EPA/DC badge
that must be visible at all times while in the EPA Building and
returned to the guard upon departure. In addition, security personnel
will escort visitors to and from the new EPA/DC Public Reading Room
location. Up-to-date information about the EPA/DC is on the EPA website
at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information contact: Colby
Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, Environmental Assistance Division
(7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    For technical information contact: Kenneth Moss, Chemical Control
Division (7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you export or
intend to export any chemical substance or mixture for which any of the
following actions have been taken under TSCA with respect to that
chemical substance or mixture: Data are required under TSCA section 4
or 5(b), an order has been issued under TSCA section 5, a rule has been
proposed or promulgated under TSCA section 5 or 6, or an action is
pending, or relief has been granted under section 5 or 7. Potentially
affected entities, identified using the North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes, may include, but are not limited
to:
     Exporters of chemical substances or mixtures (NAICS codes
325 and 324110; e.g. chemical manufacturing and processing, and
petroleum refineries).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The NAICS codes have been provided to assist you and others
in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. To
determine whether you or your business may be affected by this action,
you should carefully examine the applicability provisions at 40 CFR
707.60 for TSCA section 12(b)-related obligations. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT. You may obtain a copy of both the U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services National Toxicology Program (NTP) Report
on Carcinogens (latest edition) (Ref. 1) and the World Health
Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)
Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans and their
Supplements (latest editions) (Ref. 2) on-line.

II. Background

A. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

    EPA is promulgating these amendments pursuant to TSCA section
12(b), 15 U.S.C. 2611(b). Section 12(b) of TSCA requires that any
person who exports or intends to export to a foreign country a chemical
for which the submission of data is required under TSCA section 4 or
5(b), an order has been issued under TSCA section 5, a rule has been
proposed or promulgated under TSCA section 5 or 6, or with respect to
which an action is pending or relief has been granted under TSCA
section 5 or 7 must notify the Administrator of EPA of such exportation
or intent to export. Upon receipt of such notification, EPA must
furnish the government of the importing country with:
    1. Notice of the availability of data received pursuant to an
action under TSCA section 4 or 5(b), or
    2. Notice of such rule, order, action, or relief under TSCA section
5, 6, or 7.

B. Currently Existing Regulations

    Currently, the TSCA section 12(b) regulations require exporters of
chemicals to notify EPA of the first export or intended export to a
particular country in a calendar year when data are required under TSCA
section 5(b), an order has been issued under TSCA section 5, a rule has
been proposed or promulgated under TSCA section 5 or 6, or an action is
pending, or relief has been granted under TSCA section 5 or 7. For
chemicals subject to a final TSCA section 4 action, exporters are
currently required to submit an export notification only for the first
export or intended export to a particular country.
    In the Federal Register of December 16, 1980, EPA promulgated rules
at 40 CFR part 707, subpart D, implementing TSCA section 12(b) (Ref.
3). Under these rules, exporters were required to submit a written
notification to EPA for the first export or intended export to a
particular country in a calendar year for any chemical that was the
subject of a TSCA section 12(b)-triggering TSCA action. Upon receipt of
such notification from an exporter, the implementing rules required
(and still require) that EPA provide the importing country with, among
other things, a summary of the action taken or an indication of the
availability of data received pursuant to action under TSCA section 4
or 5(b) (see 40 CFR 707.70(b)).
    To facilitate foreign governments' consideration of export notices
for chemicals exported from the United States and to reduce the burden
on EPA and exporters, EPA published a rule in the Federal Register of
July 27, 1993, that amended the regulations in 40 CFR part 707, subpart
D (Ref. 4). The amendment limited the notification requirement for each
exporter of chemicals subject to a final TSCA section 4 action to a
one-time notification to EPA for the export of each such chemical to
each particular country, instead of requiring annual notification to
EPA for shipments of the chemical to that country. The amended rule
also limited EPA's notice to foreign governments to one time for the
export of each chemical subject to a final TSCA section 4 action. The
1993 amendment did not change the export notification requirements for
chemicals that are the subject of an action under TSCA section 5, 6, or
7. The 1993 amendment also did not change the frequency of EPA's notice
to foreign governments for chemicals subject to TSCA section 5, 6, or
7; EPA notice is provided upon receipt of the first annual export
notification for each such chemical to each country.

C. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    EPA is amending TSCA section 12(b) export notification regulations
at subpart D of 40 CFR part 707. The first amendment changes the
current annual notification requirement for exporters of chemicals for
which certain actions have been taken under TSCA. Currently, the TSCA
section 12(b) regulations require exporters of chemicals to notify EPA
of the first export or intended export to a particular country in a
calendar year when data are required under TSCA section 5(b), an order
has been issued under TSCA section 5, a rule has been proposed or
promulgated under TSCA section 5 or 6, or an action is pending, or
relief has been granted under TSCA section 5 or 7. For chemicals
subject to a final TSCA section 4 action, exporters are currently
required to submit an export

notification only for the first export or intended export to a
particular country.
    This final rule changes the current annual export notification
requirement to a one-time requirement for each of the following TSCA
section 12(b)-triggering actions per each destination country for each
exporter of a chemical:
     An order issued, an action pending, or an action granting
relief under TSCA section 5(e),
     A proposed or promulgated rule under TSCA section 5(a)(2),
or
     An action requiring the submission of data under TSCA
section 5(b).
For exports of chemicals that are the subjects of TSCA 12(b)-triggering
actions under TSCA section 5(f), 6, or 7, however, each exporter will
continue to be required to submit annual export notifications to EPA.
    EPA is also changing the frequency with which the Agency must
notify foreign governments after the Agency's receipt of export
notifications from exporters. Consistent with the current requirement
that EPA notify foreign governments one time regarding the export of
chemicals subject to final TSCA section 4 actions, EPA is requiring
that the Agency provide a one-time (rather than the current annual)
notice to each foreign government to which exported chemicals that are
the subjects of any of the following actions are sent: An order issued,
an action pending, or an action granting relief under TSCA section
5(e), a rule proposed or promulgated under TSCA section 5(a)(2), or an
action requiring the submission of data under TSCA section 5(b). EPA
will continue to notify each foreign government on an annual basis
regarding the export of chemicals that are the subject of TSCA section
5(f), 6, or 7 actions, for which EPA has proposed to make or has made a
finding under TSCA that a chemical substance or mixture ``presents or
will present'' an unreasonable risk.
    EPA believes this rule will further focus importing governments'
resources and attention on chemicals for which EPA has proposed to make
or has made a finding under TSCA that a chemical substance or mixture
``presents or will present'' an unreasonable risk, and to reduce
overall burden on exporters and the Agency.
    In addition, EPA is setting de minimis concentration levels below
which notification would not be required for the export of any chemical
substance or mixture for which export notification under TSCA section
12(b) is otherwise required. Specifically, EPA is finalizing the
requirement that export notification will not be required for such
chemical substances or mixtures if the chemical is being exported at a
concentration of less than 1% (by weight or volume), unless that
chemical substance or mixture is a known or potential human carcinogen.
A chemical is considered to be a known or potential human carcinogen,
for purposes of TSCA section 12(b) export notification, if that
chemical is:
    1. Listed as a ``known to be human carcinogen'' or ``reasonably
anticipated to be human carcinogen'' in the Report on Carcinogens
issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services National
Toxicology Program (NTP) (latest edition) (Ref. 1),
    2. Classified as a Group 1, Group 2A, or Group 2B carcinogen by the
World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer
(IARC) in the IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks
to Humans and their Supplements (latest editions) (Ref. 2), or
    3. Characterized as a carcinogen or potential carcinogen in the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA's) regulations
related to toxic and hazardous substances (29 CFR part 1910, subpart
Z).
For such chemicals in paragraph 1., 2., or 3. of this unit, a de
minimis concentration level of less than 0.1% (by weight or volume)
will apply.
    4. A polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB), for which notification will
not be required if such PCBs are being exported at a concentration of
less than or equal to 50 parts per million (ppm) (by weight or volume).
    In this final rule, EPA is also updating the instructions for the
submission of export notifications to the Agency (40 CFR 707.65(c)),
clarifying exporters' and EPA's obligations when subsequent TSCA
section 12(b)-triggering actions are taken with respect to a chemical
previously or currently subject to export notification due to a
separate triggering action, indicating in 40 CFR 707.67 that a single
export notification may refer to more than one section of TSCA where
the exported chemical is the subject of multiple TSCA actions, and
correcting 40 CFR 799.19 to make it clear that final multi-chemical
TSCA section 4 rules also trigger export notification.

D. Rotterdam Convention

    EPA notes as further background the Rotterdam Convention on the
Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and
Pesticides in International Trade (Rotterdam Convention) (Ref. 5), a
multi-lateral environmental agreement that the United States signed in
September of 1998 but has not yet ratified (and thus is not a Party
to). This Rotterdam Convention, which went into force in February of
2004, includes the following major obligations:
    1. Notification of control action and imposition of export
notification requirement on exporters. The Rotterdam Convention
requires exporting parties to: Determine whether a pesticide or
industrial chemical is ``banned'' or ``severely restricted'' (BSR);
notify the Secretariat of that determination; and notify importing
parties of the export of those chemicals from their country prior to
their export after making the BSR determination and thereafter for the
first export of every calendar year.
    2. Impose export restrictions consistent with importing parties
response. Once a BSR chemical (and its use category, i.e., use as a
pesticide or industrial chemical) is, by consensus of the Parties,
added to Annex III of the Rotterdam Convention, the Rotterdam
Convention requires importing parties to identify any conditions/
restrictions on the import of these substances and exporting parties to
make sure exports occur consistent with conditions/restrictions
identified by importing countries. Annex III of the Rotterdam
Convention contains a list of chemicals that are subject to the Prior
Informed Consent Procedures described by the Rotterdam Convention (Ref.
5).
    3. Label exported products. For countries' domestic BSR chemicals
and the Rotterdam Convention's Annex III chemicals, the Rotterdam
Convention requires labeling to ``ensure adequate availability of
information with regard to risks and/or hazards to human health or the
environment.'' For the Rotterdam Convention's Annex III chemicals,
labels must also include a Harmonized System Code if available (Ref.
6). The Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System, generally
referred to as ``Harmonized System'' or simply ``HS,'' is a multi-
purpose international product nomenclature developed by the World
Customs Organization. For an exporting country's BSR chemicals and the
Rotterdam Convention's Annex III chemicals that are to be used in an
occupational setting, the Rotterdam Convention requires that a safety
data sheet setting out the most up-to-date information available be
sent to each importer.
    EPA believes the export notification mechanism in the Rotterdam
Convention broadly reflects importing governments' interests and that
this proposal to amend the TSCA section 12(b) export notification rule
is not inconsistent with the export notification provisions of the
Rotterdam Convention.

    EPA wishes to note that the Administration is committed to the
United States becoming a Party to the Rotterdam Convention, as well as
two other chemicals-related multi-lateral environmental agreements: the
Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) (Stockholm
Convention) (Ref. 7) and the POPs Protocol to the United Nations
Economic Commission for Europe Convention on Long Range Transboundary
Air Pollution (LRTAP) (Ref. 8). The Administration has been and intends
to continue working with Congress to facilitate the development of
legislation that would provide the authority needed for the United
States to fully implement and become a Party to those agreements. If
and when such legislation is enacted, and depending on the nature of
the legislation, it may be appropriate or necessary to further amend
the TSCA section 12(b) regulations.

III. Rationale for This Rule

    EPA believes this rule is a reasonable supplement to the export
notification regulations at 40 CFR parts 707 and 799 because it further
reduces overall burden on exporters and the Agency and helps to further
focus importing governments' resources and attention on chemicals for
which EPA has proposed to make or has made a finding that a chemical
``presents or will present'' an unreasonable risk to human health or
the environment.

A. This Rule

    This rule treats actions under TSCA sections 5(a)(2) and 5(e)
similarly to final actions under TSCA section 4 for purposes of export
notification, such that a one time notice will be required. In the 1993
amendments, it was EPA's view that TSCA section 5(a)(2) and 5(e)
actions, which are based on exposure or risk concerns for identified
use scenarios, ``restrict'' in a limited sense, regulated uses. The
amendments further stated that the Agency has authority to take follow-
up action under TSCA section 5(a)(2) via TSCA section 5(e) and because
there is no similar provision under TSCA section 4 (with the exception
of a separate proceeding under TSCA section 6 or 7), there was a
reasonable basis for treating the export notification requirement for
chemicals regulated under TSCA sections 4 and 5 differently (Ref. 4, p.
40240).
    Although TSCA sections 5(a)(2) and 5(e) restrict use in some sense,
the statutory finding for such actions is based on consideration of
``factors'' relating to a ``significant new use'' determination under
TSCA section 5(a)(2) or, for TSCA section 5(e), the same ``may present
an unreasonable risk'' or ``substantial production/significant/
substantial exposure'' findings required under TSCA section 4
rulemakings. EPA believes foreign governments will want to focus
greater attention on chemicals for which the Agency has made a finding
that a chemical ``presents or will present'' an unreasonable risk to
human health or the environment (TSCA sections 5(f), 6, and 7). This
finding represents a definitive determination and thus is different
from a finding that a chemical ``may present'' an unreasonable risk
(TSCA sections 4(a)(1)(A)(i) and 5(e)(1)(A)(ii)(I)), substantial
production and substantial or significant exposure/release findings
(``exposure-based'' findings; TSCA sections 4(a)(1)(B)(i),
5(b)(4)(A)(i), and 5(e)(1)(A)(ii)(II)), or factors determining a
significant new use (TSCA section 5(a)(2)). Because ``presents or will
present'' an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment is a
definitive risk determination, EPA believes that it is reasonable to
require more frequent notification for those chemicals that are the
subject of each export notification-triggering action under TSCA
sections 5(f), 6, and 7. Therefore, EPA is continuing to require annual
export notification by exporters of chemicals that are the subject of
each action under TSCA section 5(f), 6, or 7, and EPA is similarly
amending the regulatory provision regarding EPA's notice to foreign
governments to limit annual notices to these chemicals.

B. De Minimis Exemption

    EPA is also promulgating de minimis concentration levels below
which notification will not be required for the export of any chemical
that is the subject of an action under TSCA section 4, 5, 6, or 7. This
rule provides background on the use of de minimis concentration levels
under an international chemical classification and labeling scheme as a
basis for incorporation of a de minimis concentration level under TSCA
section 12(b).
    The 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
(Ref. 9) provided the international mandate for development of the
Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals
(Ref. 10). The GHS was adopted by the United Nations Economic and
Social Council in July 2003 and is an internationally agreed upon tool
for chemical hazard communication that incorporates a harmonized
approach to hazard classification and provisions for standardized
labels and safety data sheets. The GHS labeling is intended to provide
a foundation for national programs to promote safer use, transport and
disposal of chemicals, and to facilitate international trade in
chemicals whose hazards have been properly assessed and identified
based on internationally agreed upon criteria. As with TSCA section
12(b), one of the primary purposes of the GHS labeling scheme is to
communicate information on chemicals to foreign governments.
Accordingly, EPA believes it is appropriate to look to GHS for guidance
on establishing a de minimis concentration exemption under TSCA section
12(b).
    Classification of chemical mixtures under the GHS for several
health and environmental hazard classes is triggered when generic cut-
off values or concentration limits are exceeded, for example, >1.0% for
target organ systemic toxicity, >0.1% for known or presumed human
carcinogens, etc. (See Ref. 10, chapter 1.5, table 1.5.1; the cut-off
levels for each hazard class are provided in chapters 3.1-3.10 (health
hazards) and chapter 4.1 (environmental hazards) of Ref. 10.) When a
chemical is present below these cut-off levels, the GHS does not
require that the chemical appear on labeling or other information
sources. The GHS reflects international consensus on appropriate de
minimis concentrations below which governments do not find information
useful for hazard communication on chemicals in international (or
domestic) commerce. TSCA section 12(b) is primarily intended to alert
and inform foreign governments, in a general manner, of hazards that
may be associated with a chemical substance or mixture. As a result,
EPA believes it is logical to refer to GHS as a guide to implementation
of TSCA section 12(b). EPA believes the inclusion of de minimis
concentration thresholds in GHS is indicative of foreign governments'
likely preference not to be notified by the United States about its
export of chemicals present in low concentrations.
    In order to implement an exemption from export notification
requirements for chemicals exported in de minimis concentrations, EPA
is establishing de minimis concentration levels below which
notification would not be required for the export of any chemical for
which export notification under TSCA section 12(b) is otherwise
required. Specifically, export notification will not be required for
such chemicals if the chemical is being exported at a concentration of
less than 1% (by weight or volume), with two

exceptions. The first exception would be made for chemicals treated for
export notification purposes as known or potential human carcinogens.
These chemicals are identified in the regulation based on the three
sources referred to in OSHA's regulations related to hazard
communication (29 CFR 1910.1200(d)(4)), i.e.:
    1. Listed as a ``known to be human carcinogen'' or ``reasonably
anticipated to be human carcinogen'' in the Report on Carcinogens
issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services National
Toxicology Program (NTP) (latest edition) (Ref. 1),
    2. Classified as a Group 1, Group 2A, or Group 2B carcinogen by the
World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer
(IARC) in the IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks
to Humans and their Supplements (latest editions) (Ref. 2), or
    3. Characterized as a carcinogen or potential carcinogen in OSHA's
regulations related to toxic and hazardous substances (29 CFR part
1910, subpart Z).
For paragraphs III.B.1., 2. and 3., a de minimis concentration level of
less than 0.1% (by weight or volume) will apply, except for PCBs
regarding which a de minimis concentration level of 50 ppm or less will
apply, as in this unit. For purposes of monitoring compliance with
notice requirements for chemical substances or mixtures subject to this
rule as covered in 40 CFR 707.60(c)(2)(i) and (ii) of the regulatory
text, EPA will consider the lists maintained by the World Health
Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and
the US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service,
National Toxicology Program (NTP) as the definitive sources.
    The NTP Report on Carcinogens is mandated by section 301(b)(4) of
the Public Health Service Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 201 et seq.),
which stipulates that the Secretary of the Department of Health and
Human Services shall publish an annual report which contains a list of
all substances:
     Which either are known to be carcinogens in humans or may
reasonably be anticipated to be human carcinogens
      To which a significant number of persons residing in the
United States are exposed.
 In 1993, the Public Health Service Act was amended by Public Law 95-
622 to change the frequency of publication of the Report on Carcinogens
from an annual to a biennial report.
    The IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to
Humans are independent assessments prepared by international working
groups of experts of the evidence on the carcinogenicity of a wide
range of agents, mixtures and exposures. The evaluations of IARC
Working Groups are scientific, qualitative judgments on the evidence
for or against carcinogenicity provided by the available data. The
Monographs are used by national and international authorities to make
risk assessments, formulate decisions concerning preventive measures,
provide effective cancer control programs and decide among alternative
options for public health decisions.
    The third source of carcinogens or potential carcinogens which is
referred to in OSHA's regulations related to hazard communication (29
CFR 1910.1200(d)(4)) is the group of carcinogens or potential
carcinogens in OSHA's toxic and hazardous substances regulations (29
CFR part 1910, subpart Z). In lieu of referencing OSHA's regulations
directly in the regulatory text, this rule incorporates at 40 CFR
707.60(c)(2)(iii) the two chemicals characterized by OSHA as
carcinogens or potential carcinogens that are not already included on
either the NTP or IARC lists referenced. The rest of the chemicals
characterized by OSHA as carcinogens or potential carcinogens are
included on either or both the NTP Report on Carcinogens (latest
edition) (Ref. 1) and/or IARC Monographs and their Supplements (latest
editions) (Ref. 2).
    Concentration threshold levels like those used in the GHS context
are also generally accepted or recognized in other United States
Federal regulatory contexts. The OSHA has established 1.0% and 0.1%
concentration thresholds as a basis for requiring the development of
Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs) and workplace labeling under the
OSHA's Hazard Communication (HAZCOM) Standard (29 CFR 1910.1200) (Ref.
11). The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, section
313 (Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)) regulations use the OSHA HAZCOM
Standard for purposes of establishing a chemical's de minimis
concentration as either 0.1% or 1.0% for chemical substances when
present in a mixture (40 CFR 372.38(a)). EPA's TSCA New Chemicals
Program also uses concentration limits of 1.0% and 0.1% in TSCA section
5(e) consent orders as thresholds for hazard communication and personal
protective equipment requirements (Ref. 12).
    EPA believes that in the context of TSCA section 12(b) export
notification, foreign governments will have little interest in notices
regarding exports of chemicals present in de minimis concentrations,
and that notices for such exports may divert attention from notices for
exports of chemicals in higher concentrations that potentially may
warrant more serious consideration. Thus, EPA believes that de minimis
concentration thresholds are justified in the context of its TSCA
section 12(b) regulations and is promulgating that the export of
chemicals present at a concentration below the specified de minimis
concentration levels be exempt from notification requirements.
    As EPA has noted in the past, some chemicals retain their toxic
properties at levels less than the general thresholds in this rule, so
the de minimis concentration thresholds established in this TSCA
section 12(b) context are not an indication that EPA has determined
that chemicals are generally not toxic at lesser concentrations. The de
minimis concentration exemption in this rule is only a reflection of
the circumstances under which EPA believes foreign governments want to
receive information regarding chemicals imported into their countries.
    In addition to paragraphs III.B.1., 2, and 3., the second exception
to the generally applicable de minimis concentration level of 1% is
made for PCBs, which, when exported in a concentration of greater than
50 ppm, require the submission of an export notification. EPA believes
it is appropriate to include a different de minimis concentration level
for PCBs in its TSCA section 12(b) regulations (i.e., levels less than
or equal to 50 ppm versus the general 1% and 0.1% for carcinogens
levels) after considering the coverage of PCBs under certain
international treaties and/or guidance materials developed thereunder,
including the Stockholm Convention and the Basel Convention on the
Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their
Disposal (Basel Convention) (Ref. 13). Note that the manufacture and
distribution in commerce of PCBs for use within the United States or
for export from the United States are generally prohibited, with
certain exceptions (see, for example, 40 CFR 761.20(b) and (c)).
    The Stockholm Convention, which entered into force on May 17, 2004,
and for which there were 128 Parties and 151 Signatories as of August
2006 (the United States is a Signatory but not yet a Party), includes,
among other things, provisions that require Parties to reduce and/or
eliminate the production and use of listed intentionally produced
chemicals or pesticides (Ref. 7). Annex A of the Stockholm Convention
lists

chemicals subject to elimination, including PCBs which are listed with
a specific exemption for ``articles in use in accordance with the
provisions of Part II of this Annex.'' Part II of Annex A of the
Stockholm Convention states, in part:

``Each Party shall: (a) With regard to the elimination of the use of
polychlorinated biphenyls in equipment (e.g. transformers,
capacitors or other receptacles containing liquid stocks) by 2025,
subject to review by the Conference of the Parties, take action in
accordance with the following priorities . . .
(iii) Endeavour to identify and remove from use equipment containing
greater than 0.005 percent [50 ppm] polychlorinated biphenyls and
volumes greater than 0.05 litres . . .
(d) Except for maintenance and servicing operations, not allow
recovery for the purpose of reuse in other equipment of liquids with
polychlorinated biphenyls content above 0.005 per cent;
(e) Make determined efforts designed to lead to environmentally
sound waste management of liquids containing polychlorinated
biphenyls and equipment contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls
having a polychlorinated biphenyls content above 0.005 per cent, in
accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 6, as soon as possible but no
later than 2028, subject to review by the Conference of the Parties;
(f) In lieu of note (ii) in Part I of this Annex, endeavour to
identify other articles containing more than 0.005 per cent
polychlorinated biphenyls (e.g., cable-sheaths, cured caulk and
painted objects) and manage them in accordance with paragraph 1 of
Article 6;''

    Annex A of the Stockholm Convention thus focuses attention on PCBs
in equipment or articles where the PCBs are at a concentration of more
than 50 ppm.
    In addition, the Basel Convention, which entered into force on May
5, 1992, and for which there were 166 governments that were Parties as
of November 2005 (the United States is a Signatory but not yet a
Party), stipulates that any transboundary movement of wastes (export,
import, or transit) is permitted only when the movement itself and the
disposal of the concerned hazardous or other wastes are environmentally
sound. The Stockholm Convention directs close cooperation with the
Basel Convention to define a ``low POPs content'' for purposes of safe
disposal of wastes contaminated with POPs. Under the Basel Convention,
``General Technical Guidelines for the Environmentally Sound Management
of Wastes Consisting of, Containing or Contaminated with Persistent
Organic Pollutants'' (Basel POPs Guidelines) have been developed that
provisionally identify the level of 50 milligrams/kilogram (mg/kg) (50
ppm) as ``low POPs content'' for PCBs. (Ref. 14).
    Because the 50 ppm level is used in the Stockholm Convention as a
cutoff level for purposes of obligations associated with PCB-containing
equipment and has been further supported by the Basel POPs Guidelines
as a low level not warranting the attention and control required for
higher PCB levels, EPA believes it reasonable to use it as the basis of
a de minimis concentration level for PCBs under TSCA section 12(b).
Thus, at this time, EPA believes importing governments will not desire
export notices from the United States for PCBs at levels of 50 ppm or
less.
    EPA believes that the most practical means of maintaining the
quality of notification, of improving the scrutiny importing countries
give to notices, and of reducing burden on both exporters and EPA, is
to amend the TSCA section 12(b) regulations under 40 CFR part 707 to
reduce the frequency of certain export notifications submitted by
exporters to EPA as well as EPA notices sent to foreign governments.
EPA's responsibility is both to alert and to make information and data
available to the importing government. EPA believes that although the
frequency of EPA's notices to foreign governments may be reduced by
this rule, the quality of the information provided to them will not be
substantially affected.

C. Additional Amendments and Clarifications

    In addition to the amendments to the TSCA section 12(b) regulations
regarding the scope of exporters' and EPA's responsibilities, the
Agency is promulgating minor amendments to update the EPA addresses to
which export notifications must be sent (40 CFR 707.65(c)), to indicate
that a single export notification may refer to more than one section of
TSCA where the exported chemical is the subject of multiple TSCA
actions, and to correct an error in 40 CFR 799.19 that currently omits
mentioning multi-chemical test rules as being among those final TSCA
section 4 actions that trigger export notification.
    EPA is also clarifying exporters' and EPA's obligations where a
TSCA section 12(b)-triggering action is taken with respect to a
chemical previously or currently subject to export notification due to
the existence of a previous triggering action. EPA's intention is that
exporters notify EPA with respect to each TSCA section 12(b)-triggering
action to which the chemical becomes subject (as long as the exporter
in fact still exports or intends to export the chemical to that
country) even if they have previously notified EPA about the export of
that chemical to that country as a result of an earlier TSCA section
12(b)-triggering action. Note that an export notification may indicate
more than one triggering action, i.e., separate export notifications
need not be submitted where the need for export notification as a
result of more than one triggering action at the same time exists with
respect to a given chemical. Similarly, EPA would notify a foreign
government with respect to each TSCA section 12(b)-triggering action to
which the chemical becomes subject (as long as the Agency continues to
receive an export notification from any exporter for the export of the
chemical to that country) even if it has previously notified that
government about the export of the chemical as a result of an earlier
TSCA section 12(b)-triggering action. In this rule, EPA is amending 40
CFR 707.65 and 707.70 in order to make these obligations clear.

IV. Response to Public Comments

    The Agency received 48 comments on the proposed rule that was
issued in the Federal Register of February 9, 2006 (71 FR 6733) (FRL-
7752-2). Copies of all comments received are available in the public
docket for this action. A discussion of the comments germane to the
rulemaking and the Agency's response follows:
    1. Comment--Response to Four Questions Listed in Unit VI of the
Proposed Rule. Unit VI. of the proposed rule provided four issues on
which the Agency was specifically requested public comment. These
issues were:
     Whether the proposed reporting thresholds (1.0%, 0.1%, and
50 ppm) are set at a reasonable level for the purposes of TSCA section
12(b), and if not, what other, if any, level(s) may be appropriate and
why?
     Whether it is appropriate to look to GHS for guidance on
establishing a de minimis concentration exemption under TSCA section
12(b).
     Whether the Stockholm Convention is an appropriate basis
for selecting a 50 ppm threshold for PCBs.
     EPA estimated that the de minimis concentration exemption
would reduce the burden of TSCA section 12(b) reporting by 5%. EPA
sought information that might further inform the Agency's burden
estimate.
    Response. Public comments received overwhelmingly supported the
proposed de minimis reporting thresholds, the use of GHS as guidance
for these thresholds, and the use of the Stockholm Convention as a
basis for selecting a 50 ppm threshold for PCBs. All commenters agreed
that there would be burden reduction, although

quantifying this was difficult and there were suggestions for other
amendments that could result in further or ``more meaningful'' burden
reduction. Estimates ranged from at least the 5% Agency estimate in the
proposed rule to much greater than 50%. EPA is adjusting its burden
reduction estimates in response to comments received. Following are
more specific burden-related comments.
    2. Comment. The concept of establishing three separate thresholds
is cumbersome and likely more resource intensive than what is in place
today. A more accurate estimate of cost or burden is needed. Commenters
questioned the Agency's choice of 5% for its estimate of burden
reduction or decrease in TSCA 12(b) reporting for an individual company
resulting from the proposed rule, and EPA received a number of
estimates, ranging from greater than the Agency's estimate of 5% up to
one commenter stating that its TSCA section 12(b) reporting will
decrease by 100% if the de minimis exemption is adopted. Some
commenters noted that costs incurred in reprogramming computerized
systems that ensure compliance with TSCA reporting may be such that
several years will be required before a net burden reduction will be
achieved for some business entities, and noted that these do not seem
to have been recognized in the economic analysis. The point was also
made that if industry does what is needed in order to not `over-report'
without the use of a consolidated EPA master list of chemicals subject
to reporting requirements, then companies will likely add burden to
their current operations, while EPA will see a reduction in
notifications received.
    Response. While the public responses to EPA's request to quantify
the potential burden reduction as a result of the de minimis exemption
varied greatly, the responses appear to assert that the reduction may
be larger than the Agency's previously estimated 5%. Taking into
account the range of comments, including seven firms that estimated a
reduction of at least 50%, EPA is now estimating that the overall
reduction will be 20%. EPA disagrees with the implication, by one
commenter, that the addition of the new de minimis reporting thresholds
will not achieve meaningful burden reduction, and points to the
overwhelming support of the public comments received on the proposed
rule, including support for the thresholds themselves as technically
appropriate. With regards to potential computer reprogramming costs,
EPA does not at this time have enough information, and the commenter
did not provide specific estimates, to gauge such costs. Such costs are
not part of the Agency's burden estimates because they are not imposed
by EPA; they are activities that companies may engage in on their own.
    3. Comment-- No expected burden reduction. While supporting the
expansion of one-time notification in this rule, one commenter did not
think that the associated burden reduction will be significant. The
commenter stated that the change may somewhat reduce the number of
notification letters submitted, but it does not fundamentally affect
the steps necessary for compliance and the burden associated with it.
    Response. EPA agrees with this commenter that the fundamental steps
necessary to comply with the regulations are not changed by the
amendments to the rule. However, the reduction in the frequency and
number of notification letters will lead to a reduction in the burden
and costs associated with submitting those letters.
    4. Comment. The proposed rule is silent as to the management costs
that are incurred for compliance with TSCA section 12(b) reporting
obligations. The coordination required to identify known and trace
ingredients in various chemical products and mixtures, along with
supervision of the complex processes required to communicate this
information to the export administration and regulatory compliance
personnel is not adequately presented in the proposed rule. The costs
of compliance with TSCA section 12(b) reporting requirements for small
and medium sized facilities are not sufficiently considered by the
proposed rule. For substances such as pigments that are manufactured
from complex intermediate ingredient products that may in turn be
manufactured from many more ingredients, the proposed rule does not
consider the cost of analyzing all of these sources for the possible
substances present or known to be potentially present in finished
products. As a result, the costs of compliance with the existing TSCA
section 12(b) reporting rule is underestimated significantly by EPA.
Therefore compliance with TSCA section 12(b) is not a simple exercise
in collecting a list of products which might be exported, as the
proposed rule indicates. Nor is the task complete when such a list of
products is identified for TSCA section 12(b) compliance. Additionally,
industry has been required to prepare clarification letters for EPA to
provide to foreign governments when shipments subject to notification
are received and the notification covers only trace contaminants in the
product. Many foreign governments have, and continue to, request
clarification, since the notice provided by EPA does not indicate that
only trace de minimis amounts of regulated substances are present. In
summary, the cost of compliance with the current regulatory scheme is
extensive and underestimated by EPA in its proposed rule.
    Response. EPA has presented the costs and burdens more fully in the
Economic Analysis for the rule, including costs and burdens associated
with anticipated activities involved in compliance determination. As
the TSCA section 12(b) regulations apply identically regardless of
company size, EPA assumes that small and medium-sized companies would
go through the same process that larger companies would to comply with
the TSCA section 12(b) regulations. Since the burden and cost figures
presented by EPA represent an average, EPA also recognizes that certain
companies, such as pigment manufacturers, may have higher-than-average
burdens, and thus exceed the estimates in the Economic Analysis, while
other companies may have lower than average burdens and thus experience
lower costs than the EPA estimates. EPA never intended the estimates to
represent a worst-case scenario as presented by the commenter. The
clarification letters mentioned by the commenter are not required by
the TSCA section 12(b) reporting regulations, and as such are not
included in the estimated costs of the TSCA section 12(b) regulations.
Further, because de minimis concentrations are not subject to export
notification, future notices would all pertain to exports exceeding the
de minimis concentrations, and it should also be noted that the
requirement for notice covers only substances known to be in the
exported material.
    5. Comment-- Timing of export notification: Seven days is not a
long enough time to develop and submit export notification to EPA.
Commenters noted that the ``within seven days of forming the intent to
export'' timing in 40 CFR 707.65(a)(3) for submitting export
notification to EPA does not originate in the TSCA section 12(b)
statutory language. One commenter stated ``Compliance with this
timeframe requires an ongoing system of identifying exports, checking
them for potential 12(b) components, and generating letters almost
immediately.'' One commenter requested that the phrase ``or on the date
of export, whichever is earlier'' be removed from 40 CFR 707.65(a)(3),
stating that many companies have automated systems

which track composition and distribution of products, integrated with
regulatory data systems that address international regulatory elements.
As to not interfere with systems running in multi-national
environments, companies typically briefly suspend sytem operations to
allow for data extracts and maintenance after normal business hours.
The commenter stated that phrase in 40 CFR 707.65(a)(3) has the effect
of requiring companies to implement separate processes, usually manual,
to ``catch'' those samples/products that trigger an export notification
where processing of an order after hours would not allow compliance
with the ``postmarked on the date of export'' requirement for
notification to EPA. This is especially relevant with overnight sample
shipments. Other commenters suggested changing 7 days to 30 days (as is
currently the case for TSCA section 8(e) reporting), quarterly,
annually or some other reasonable timeframe.
    Response. The proposed rule did not address timing of submission of
export notification and the Agency may investigate this issue further.
If EPA decides to initiate additional amendments to TSCA section 12(b)
export notification requirements, it may consider further adjusting
this timeframe.
    6. Comment-- Allow Electronic Reporting Under TSCA Section 12(b).
Commenters suggested adding ``either in written or electronic form'' at
40 CFR 707.65(a)(1), that such reporting would be easier, less time
consuming than by letter, especially for non-CBI.
    Response. EPA agrees with the commenter that there are technologies
and solutions that can streamline the export notification submission
process. In fact, EPA is putting in place such a process for the
upcoming Inventory Update Reporting (http://www.epa.gov/iur) and hopes

to use this type of technological solution for other TSCA data
submissions, including TSCA section 12(b), in the future.
    7. Comment-- EPA Should Maintain an Official List of Chemicals
Subject to TSCA 12(b) Reporting. Commenters requested that, to avoid
confusion and possible over-reporting, EPA should maintain an official
list of chemicals subject to TSCA section12(b) reporting, identifying
which ones qualify for the various new de minimis thresholds.
    Response. The Agency does make publicly available on the Internet
the ``Current List of Chemical Substances Subject to TSCA Section 12(b)
Export Notification Requirements,'' at http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/chemtest/pubs/main12b.htm.
 However, this listing is intended simply as

an information resource to facilitate compliance with TSCA section
12(b). It does identify which chemicals are subject to TSCA section 4,
section 5 generally, section 6, and section 7 actions. This list will
be revised to distinguish chemicals subject to TSCA section 5(f)
(annual export notification requirement) from the remainder of the
section 5 chemicals (subject to actions under TSCA section 5(e),
5(a)(2), or 5(b), for which there is now a one-time TSCA section 12(b)
export notification requirement). The list does not identify those
substances considered to be known or potential human carcinogens for
purposes of TSCA section 12(b) export notification (i.e., those
substances for which reporting would be required at concentrations of
0.1% or more (by weight or volume)). That information is available from
the IARC and NTP documents cited in the 40 CFR 707.60(c)(2)(i) and
(ii), and from 40 CFR 707.60(c)(2)(iii), which lists the two chemicals
characterized by OSHA as carcinogens or potential carcinogens and which
are currently not included in either the NTP or IARC documents.
    8. Comment-- Accept one-time reporting, per country, per chemical.
Comments requested that one notification for a particular chemical to a
country suffice for subsequent notifications on that same chemical to
the same country but from a different chemical exporter. This would
avoid duplicative reporting.
    Response. 40 CFR 707.60(a) and TSCA section 12(b) state that ``any
person'' who exports or intends to export a chemical subject to TSCA
section 12(b) triggering action must notify EPA. Thus, the statute
specifies that the notification requirement pertains to each exporter.
EPA believes the commenters' suggestion is not consistent with TSCA, or
the intended function of this required notification in terms of the
receiving countries.
    9. Comment-- The proposed exemption should also include Research
and Development samples, byproducts, and impurities. Commenter claimed
that domestic manufacturers, batch manufacturers of pigments in
particular, are at disadvantage under the current and proposed
reporting scheme. Exported samples for customer evaluation and testing
represent small quantities and are sent to foreign manufacturers with
expertise in evaluating products and as a result should not require
formal TSCA export notification.
    Response. EPA has not completely foreclosed the creation of some or
all of these additional exemptions. EPA will consider this suggestion
if it undertakes another, future amendment to the 12(b) regulations.
    10. Comment--Eligibility prior to effective date of final rule.
Allow TSCA section 5(e), 5(a)(2), or 5(b) notifications submitted prior
to the effective date of the final rule to also be eligible to qualify
for the new one-time notification.
    Response. The Agency believes this suggestion is consistent with
the Agency's goal of focusing foreign government attention on certain
TSCA actions. Therefore, any export notice for a chemical subject to a
TSCA section 5(e), 5(a)(2), or 5(b) action submitted prior to the
effective date of this final rule would satisfy the one-time reporting
requirement established in the new rule.
    11. Comment--Objection to a notification requirement for future,
multiple TSCA actions. Two commenters stated that companies should not
have to re-notify EPA when a chemical already subject to a TSCA section
12(b) triggering action becomes subject to a new action.
    Response. EPA's intention is to clarify that exporters need to
notify EPA with respect to each TSCA section 12(b)-triggering action
under TSCA to which the chemical becomes subject (as long as the
exporter in fact still exports or intends to export the chemical to
that country), even if they have previously notified EPA about the
export of that chemical to that country as a result of an earlier
12(b)-triggering action. EPA will re-notify the receiving country. EPA
has amended 40 CFR 707.65 and 707.70 in order to make these obligations
clear.
    12. Comment-- Notification on Class 2 substances. One commenter
requested that EPA state that export notifications are not required for
Class 2 substances that contain TSCA section 12(b)-subject chemicals.
    Response. It is EPA's position that the export of a Class 2
substance that contains a component that is subject to a TSCA section
12(b)-triggering action triggers export notification. Neither the
statutory nor the regulatory language restricts the export notification
requirement to exporters of chemical substances and mixtures in
particular forms, but instead generally extends export notification
requirements to exporters of chemical substances and mixtures without
regard to the form in which the chemical substances and mixtures are
being or will be exported. Accordingly, any person who exports, or who
intends to export, one of the chemical substances contained in a TSCA
12(b)-triggering action in any form is subject to the export
notification

requirements. This is consistent with the Agency's view regarding the
scope of TSCA section 12(b) since the export notification regulations
were initially published in the Federal Register of December 16, 1980
(Ref. 3).
    13. Comment-- Exempt chemicals that are only subject to
``information collection rules.'' One commenter suggested an exemption
for chemicals subject to ``information collection rules,'' such as TSCA
section 4 actions or section 5 SNURs pending information collection--
anything but established risk chemicals--TSCA section 5(f), 6, and 7
actions.
    Response. The commenter's suggestion is inconsistent with TSCA
section 12(b).

V. Economic Impact

    EPA has evaluated the potential costs of these amendments. The
Agency anticipates that these amendments will reduce the number of
export notifications sent to EPA by exporters of chemicals that are the
subject of actions under TSCA section 5(e), 5(a)(2), or 5(b), and also
eliminate the submission of export notifications from exporters of
chemicals otherwise subject to TSCA section 12(b) where they are
present at a concentration below the relevant de minimis concentration
threshold. The amendments will also reduce the number of export notices
sent by EPA to foreign governments. These reductions will save both
exporter and EPA resources.
    For the period 1996-2004, EPA received an average of approximately
8,600 export notifications from exporters annually. On average, each
year nearly 60% of those export notifications were for chemicals
subject to final TSCA section 4 actions, 25% for chemicals that were
the subject of actions under TSCA section 5, and the remainder were
primarily for chemicals that were the subject of actions under TSCA
section 6 and a very few for chemicals subject to actions under TSCA
section 7. At this time, EPA is unable to predict with certainty the
reduction in export notifications received by EPA from exporters due to
the de minimis concentration exemption of this rule, but based on
comments received on the proposed rule, EPA is estimating a 20% across-
the-board reduction in TSCA section 12(b) notification burden to
exporters due to the de minimis concentration exemption. Based on
historical reporting, EPA is able to estimate, after the first year, a
50% reduction in export notifications triggered by TSCA section 5(e),
5(a)(2), or 5(b) actions as a result of the one-time-only provision.
Thus, EPA expects to receive approximately 6,000 export notifications
annually. These reductions are expected to save the regulated community
over $75,000 per year, or over 20% of industry costs. Over 20 years,
these amendments should save the regulated community approximately
$800,000 at a 7% discount rate, and over $1.1 million at a 3% discount
rate. See the Final Economic Analysis of the Amendments to TSCA Section
12(b) Export Notification Requirements (Ref. 15) for details on all
cost and burden calculations. The costs to EPA should also be reduced
based on these amendments, as EPA incurs costs for processing export
notifications received, and for sending export notices to foreign
governments. While EPA has been sending roughly 1,600 notices to
foreign governments annually, that number is expected to drop as a
result of these amendments to an estimated 824 yearly. These reductions
are expected to save the Federal Government over $60,000 annually (34%
of current costs). Over 20 years, these amendments should save the
Federal Government approximately $650,000 at a 7% discount rate, and
roughly $900,000 at a 3% discount rate. Over 20 years these amendments
should yield a total cost savings to both EPA and industry of $1.46
million at a 7% discount rate and $2.05 million at 3% (Ref. 15).

VI. References

    The official record for this rule has been established under docket
ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0058, and the public version of the official
record is available for inspection as specified under ADDRESSES. The
following is a listing of the documents referenced in this preamble
that have been placed in the official docket for this rule (see http://www.regulations.gov
, docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0058):

    1. United States Department of Health and Human Services, Public
Health Service. National Toxicology Program. Report on Carcinogens
(latest edition). Available on-line at http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/index.cfm?objectid=32BA9724-F1F6-975E-7FCE50709CB4C932
.

    2. International Agency for Research on Cancer Monographs on the
Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans and their Supplements. Lists
of All Agents Evaluated as Being in Group 1 (carcinogenic to humans),
Group 2A (probably carcinogenic to humans), and Group 2B (possibly
carcinogenic to humans) (latest editions). Available on-line at http://www-cie.iarc.fr/monoeval/allmonos.html
.

    3. EPA. Chemical Imports and Exports; Notification of Export. Final
Rule. Federal Register (45 FR 82844, December 16, 1980). Available on-
line at http://www.regulations.gov, docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-

0058.
    4. EPA. Export Notification Requirement; Change to Reporting
Requirements. Final Rule. Federal Register (58 FR 40238, July 27, 1993)
(FRL-4067-2). Available on-line at http://www.regulations.gov, docket

ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0058.
    5. Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for
Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade.
September, 1998 (amended September, 2004). Available on-line at http://www.pic.int/en/viewpage.asp?id_cat=0.
 Annex III: Chemicals Subject to

the Prior Informed Consent Procedure. Available on-line at http://www.pic.int/en/ViewPage.asp?id=104#III%20Annex
.

    6. Harmonized System Convention, World Customs Organization (WCO).
Available on-line at http://www.wcoomd.org/ie/En/Topics_Issues/topics_issues.html.
 June 14, 1983.

    7. Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs).
May 22, 2001. Available on-line at http://www.pops.int.

    8. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Convention on Long
Range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP) Protocol on Persistent
Organic Pollutants (POPs), June 24, 1998. Available on-line at http://www.unece.org/env/lrtap/pops_h1.htm
.

    9. United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (Earth
Summit) Agenda 21; Chapter 19: Environmentally Sound Management of
Toxic Chemicals, Including Prevention of Illegal International Traffic
in Toxic and Dangerous Products. Rio de Janeiro, June 1992. Available
on-line at http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/english/agenda21chapter19.htm
.

    10. GHS. Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling
of Chemicals (GHS). United Nations. 2003. Available on-line at http://www.unece.org/trans/danger/publi/ghs/ghs_rev00/00files_e.html
.

    11. OSHA. Hazard Communication. Final Rule. Federal Register (48 FR
53280-53348, November 25, 1983). For discussion of 1% and 0.1% cut-off,
see pp. 53290-53293.
    12. EPA. New Chemicals Program Boilerplate TSCA Section 5(e)
Consent Orders. Available on-line at http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/newchems/boilerpl.htm
.

    13. Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of
Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal. Adopted by the Conference of the
Plenipotentiaries March 22, 1989. Entry into force May 1992. Available
on-line at http://www.basel.int/about.html.

    14. Basel Convention General Technical Guidelines for
Environmentally Sound Management of wastes consisting of, containing or
contaminated with Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs). April 2005.
Available on-line at http://www.basel.int/techmatters/techguid/frsetmain.php
.

    15. Economic and Policy Analysis Branch, Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics, EPA. August 2006. Final Economic Analysis of the
Amendments to TSCA Section 12(b) Export Notification Requirements.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866

    Under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has determined that this final rule is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' subject to review by OMB, because it does not meet
the criteria in section 3(f) of the Executive Order.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection activities associated with export
notification under TSCA section 12(b) are already approved by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. That Information Collection Request (ICR)
document has been assigned EPA ICR number 0795, and OMB control number
2070-0030. This final rule does not impose any new information
collection burdens that would require additional approval by OMB under
PRA, and is expected to reduce existing burden estimates.
    The currently approved annual public burden for the collection of
information covered by OMB Control No. 2070-0030 is estimated to be
0.878 hours per response. Under PRA, ``burden'' means the total time,
effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate,
maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a
Federal Agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions;
develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the
purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information,
processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing
information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously
applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to
respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete
and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise
disclose the information.
    Under PRA, an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is
not required to respond to a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers
for EPA's regulations codified in chapter 40 of the CFR, after
appearing in the preamble of the final rule, are listed in 40 CFR part
9, are displayed either by publication in the Federal Register or by
other appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument
or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain
EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9. For the ICR activity
contained in this final rule, in addition to displaying the applicable
OMB control number in this Unit, the Agency has also included it on the
list in 40 CFR 9.1.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Agency hereby certifies that promulgation
of this rule will not have a significant adverse economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. The factual basis for the
Agency's determination is presented in the economic analysis prepared
for this rule (Ref. 15), a copy of which is available in the docket for
this rulemaking. The following is a brief summary of the factual basis
for this certification.
    Under RFA, small entities include small businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. For purposes of
assessing the impacts of this rule on small entities, small entity is
defined as:
     1. A small business as defined by the Small Business
Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR 121.201, which for the
pesticide industry consists of businesses with fewer than 500 to 1,000
employees (range is based on NAICS sector variations).
    2. A small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a
city, county, town, school district or special district with a
population of less than 50,000.
    3. A small organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which
is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.
Available information indicates that small governmental jurisdictions
and small not-for-profit organizations would not generally engage in
the activities regulated by this rule, i.e., the export of chemical
substances or mixtures. As such, the Agency's expects that only small
businesses will benefit from the burden reduction in this rule.
    This final rule amends an existing requirement and result in a
reduction of burden and costs for all chemical exporters, regardless of
the size of the business. As such, these amendments will not have a
significant adverse economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Pursuant to Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA), Public Law 104-4, EPA has determined that this rule does not
contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100
million or more for State, local, and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or the private sector in any 1 year.
    Based on EPA's experience with the TSCA 12(b) reporting, State,
local, and tribal governments have not been affected by this reporting
requirement, and EPA does not have any reason to believe that any
State, local, or tribal government will be affected by these
amendments. As such, EPA has determined that this regulatory action
does not impose any enforceable duty, contain any unfunded mandate, or
otherwise have any affect on such governments, nor will it have these
impacts on the private sector. EPA has determined that this rule does
not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Accordingly,
this rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202, 203, 204,
or 205 of UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132

    This rule does not have a federalism implications because it is not
expected to have substantial direct effects on States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).

F. Executive Order 13175

    This rule does not have tribal implications because it is not
expected to have substantial direct any affect on tribal governments,
on the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal government and Indian tribes, as specified in the Order.
Thus, Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination
with

Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000), do not apply
to this rule.

G. Executive Order 13045

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045, entitled
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because this is not an economically
significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866, and
this action does not address environmental health or safety risks
disproportionately affecting children.

H. Executive Order 13211

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because this action
is not expected to affect energy supply, distribution, or use.

I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    Since this action does not involve any technical standards, section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note), does
not apply to this action.

J. Executive Order 12898

    This rule does not have an adverse impact on the environmental and
health conditions in low-income and minority communities. Therefore,
the Agency does not need to consider environmental justice-related
issues as delineated by Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions
to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

VIII. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the Agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and the Comptroller General of the United
States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 707 and 799

     Environmental protection, Chemicals, Exports, Hazardous
substances, Imports, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: November 2, 2006.
James B. Gulliford,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic
Substances.

0
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 707--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 707 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2611(b) and 2612.

0
2. In Sec. 707.60, redesignate paragraphs (c) through (e) as paragraphs
(d) through (f), add a new paragraph (c), and revise newly redesignated
paragraphs (d), (e), and (f) to read as follows:

Sec. 707.60  Applicability and compliance.

* * * * *
    (c)(1) Except as provided in paragraphs (c)(2) and (3) of this
section no notice of export is required for the export of a chemical
substance or mixture for which export notification is otherwise
required, where such chemical substance or mixture is present in a
concentration of less than 1% (by weight or volume).
    (2) No notice of export is required for the export of a chemical
substance or mixture that is a known or potential human carcinogen. A
chemical is considered to be a known or potential human carcinogen, for
purposes of TSCA section 12(b) export notification, if that chemical
is:
    (i) A chemical substance or mixture listed as a ``known to be human
carcinogen'' or ``reasonably anticipated to be human carcinogen'' in
the Report on Carcinogens (latest edition) issued by the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Public Heath Service, National
Toxicology Program,
    (ii) A chemical substance or mixture is classified as
``carcinogenic to humans'' (Group 1), ``probably carcinogenic to
humans'' (Group 2A), or ``probably carcinogenic to humans'' (Group 2B)
in the Monographs and Supplements on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic
Risks to Humans issued by the World Health Organization International
Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), Lyons, France (latest editions),
or
    (iii) Alpha-naphthylamine (Chemical Abstract Service Registry
Number (CAS No.) 134-32-7) or 4-nitrobiphenyl (CAS No. 92-93-3).
    (3) No notice of export is required for the export of
polychlorinated biphenyl chemicals (PCBs) (see definition in 40 CFR
761.3), where such chemical substances are present in a concentration
of less than or equal to 50 ppm (by weight or volume).
    (d) Any person who exports or intends to export PCBs or PCB
articles (see definition in 40 CFR 761.3), for any purpose other than
disposal, shall notify EPA of such intent or exportation under TSCA
section 12(b), except as specified in Sec. 707.60(c)(3). PCBs and PCB
articles have the definitions published in 40 CFR 761.3.
    (e) Any person who would be prohibited by a TSCA section 5 or 6
regulation from exporting a chemical substance or mixture, but who is
granted an exemption by EPA to export that chemical substance or
mixture, shall notify EPA under TSCA section 12(b) of such intent to
export or exportation.
    (f) Failure to comply with TSCA section 12(b) as set forth in this
part will be considered a violation of TSCA section 15(3), and will
subject the exporter to the penalty, enforcement, and seizure
provisions of TSCA sections 16 and 17.

0
3. In Sec. 707.65, revise paragraph (a) introductory text, (a)(2), and
(c) to read as follows:

Sec. 707.65  Submission to agency.

    (a) For each action under TSCA triggering export notification,
exporters must notify EPA of their export or intended export of each
subject chemical substance or mixture for which export notice is
required under Sec. 707.60 in accordance with the following:
* * * * *
    (2) (i) The notice must be for the first export or intended export
by an exporter to a particular country in a calendar year when the
chemical substance or mixture is the subject of an order issued, an
action that is pending, or relief that has been granted under TSCA
section 5(f), a rule that has been proposed or promulgated under TSCA
section 6, or an action that is pending or relief that has been granted
under TSCA section 7.
    (ii) The notice must only be for the first export or intended
export by an exporter to a particular country when the chemical
substance or mixture is the subject of an order issued, an action that
is pending, or relief that has been granted under TSCA section 5(e), a
rule that has been proposed or promulgated under TSCA section 5(a)(2),
or when the submission of data is required under

TSCA section 4 or 5(b). Under this paragraph, notice of export to a
particular country is not required if an exporter previously submitted
to EPA a notice of export to that country prior to January 16, 2007.
* * * * *
    (c) Notices shall be marked ``TSCA Section 12(b) Notice'' and sent
to EPA by mail or delivered by hand or courier. Send notices by mail
to: Document Control Office (7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001 (Attention: TSCA Section 12(b) Notice).
Hand delivery of TSCA section 12(b) notices should be made to: OPPT
Document Control Office (DCO), EPA East., Rm. 6428, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1201 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC
(Attention: TSCA Section 12(b) Notice). The DCO is open from 8 a.m. to
4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the DCO is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Such deliveries are only accepted
during the DCO's normal hours of operation.

Sec. 707.67  [Amended]

0
4. In Sec. 707.67, add ``and/'' before ``or'' in the first sentence of
paragraph (a) after ``6,'' and in the parenthetical in paragraph (e)
after ``6,''.

0
5. In Sec. 707.70, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec. 707.70  EPA notice to foreign governments.

    (a)(1) Notice by EPA to the importing country shall be sent no
later than 5 working days after receipt by the TSCA Document Processing
Center of the first annual notification from any exporter for each
chemical substance or mixture that is the subject of an order issued,
an action that is pending, or relief that has been granted under TSCA
section 5(f), a rule that has been proposed or promulgated under TSCA
section 6, or an action that is pending or relief that has been granted
under TSCA section 7.
    (2) Notice by EPA to the importing country shall be sent no later
than 5 working days after receipt by the TSCA Document Processing
Center of the first notification from any exporter for each chemical
substance or mixture that is the subject of an order issued, an action
that is pending, or relief that has been granted under TSCA section
5(e), a rule that has been proposed or promulgated under TSCA section
5(a)(2), or for which the submission of data is required under TSCA
section 4 or 5(b).
* * * * *

PART 799--[AMENDED]

0
6. The authority citation for part 799 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2603, 2611, 2625.

0
7. By revising Sec. 799.19 to read as follows:

Sec. 799.19  Chemical imports and exports.

    Persons who export or who intend to export chemical substances or
mixtures listed in subpart B, subpart C, or subpart D of this part are
subject to the requirements of 40 CFR part 707.
[FR Doc. E6-19182 Filed 11-13-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register: June 6, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 108)]
[Notices]
[Page 31315-31316]
[DOCID:fr06jn07-80]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12710-002]

Passamaquoddy Tribe at Pleasant Point Reservation; Notice of
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Motions To Intervene,
Protests, and Comments

May 30, 2007.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: Preliminary Permit.
    b. Project No.: 12710-002.
    c. Date Filed: May 9, 2007.
    d. Applicant: Passamaquoddy Tribe at Pleasant Point Reservation.
    e. Name of Project: Passamaquoddy Tribe Hydrokinetic Energy
Project.
    f. Location: The project will be located in the Western Passage off
of Pleasant Point and Kendall Head, in Washington County, Maine.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)--825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Steve Crawford, Environmental Director,
Pleasant Point Passamaquoddy Tribe, Salkom Road, Route 190, P.O. Box
343, Perry, ME 04667, phone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Chris Yeakel,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    j. Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to
intervene: 60 days from the issuance date of this notice.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person in the official service list for the
project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an

issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource
agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource
agency.
    k. Description of Project: The proposed project would consist of:
(1) 55 Underwater Electric Kite (UEK) units 10 feet-tall, 18 feet-wide,
and 16 feet-long consisting of, (2) two counter-rotating runners, (3) a
fish/bird/mammal protection screen and deterrent system, and (4) a
proposed transmission line. The Passamaquoddy Tribe's project would
have an average annual generation of 29.25 gigawatt-hours and would be
sold to a local utility.
    l. Locations of Applications: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission in the
Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A,
Washington, DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may
also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov

using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last
three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is

also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h
above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Competing Preliminary Permit: Anyone desiring to file a
competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project
must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to
file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36).
Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to
file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days
after the specified comment date for the particular application. A
competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR
4.30(b) and 4.36.
    o. Competing Development Application: Any qualified development
applicant desiring to file a competing development application must
submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the
particular application, either a competing development application or a
notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely
notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested
person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after
the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing
license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36.
    p. Notice of Intent: A notice of intent must specify the exact
name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective
applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to
submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary
permit application or a development application (specify which type of
application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s)
named in this public notice.
    q. Proposed Scope of Studies Under Permit: A preliminary permit, if
issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed
preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the
preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of
preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts.
Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide
whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to
construct and operate the project.
    r. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically
via the Internet in lieu of paper; See 18 CFR 385.2001 (a)(1)(iii) and
the instructions on the Commission's web site under ``e-filing'' link.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing.
    s. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filings must
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR TERMS AND CONDITIONS'', ``PROTEST'', ``COMPETING APPLICATION'' or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', as applicable, and the Project Number of the
particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-
named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number
of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be
served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the
particular application.
    t. Agency Comments: Federal, State, and local agencies are invited
to file comments on the described application. A copy of the
application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If
an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing
comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an
agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-10804 Filed 6-5-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 220 (Thursday, November 16, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53537-53538]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24751]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-173, OMB Control No. 3235-0178]

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549-2736

Extension:
    Rule 31a-1

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collections
of information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit these
existing collections of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension.
    Rule 31a-1 (17 CFR 270.31a-1) under the Investment Company Act of
1940 (the ``Act'') (15 U.S.C. 80a) is entitled ``Records to be
maintained by registered investment companies, certain majority-owned
subsidiaries thereof, and other persons having transactions with
registered investment companies.'' Rule 31a-1 requires registered
investment companies (``funds''), and every underwriter, broker,
dealer, or investment adviser that is a majority-owned subsidiary of a
fund, to maintain and keep current accounts, books, and other documents
which constitute the record forming the basis for financial statements
required to be filed pursuant to section 31 of the Act (15 U.S.C. 80a-
30) and of the auditor's certificates relating thereto. The rule lists
specific records to be maintained by funds. The rule also requires
certain underwriters, brokers, dealers, depositors, and investment
advisers to maintain the records that they are required to maintain
under federal securities laws.
    There are approximately 4,029 investment companies registered with
the Commission, all of which are required to comply with rule 31a-1.
For purposes of determining the burden imposed by rule 31a-1, the
Commission staff estimates that each fund is divided into approximately
four series, on average, and that each series is required to comply
with the recordkeeping requirements of rule 31a-1. Based on
conversations with fund representatives, it is estimated that rule 31a-
1 imposes an average burden of approximately 1,750 hours annually per
series for a total of 7,000 annual hours per fund.

The estimated total annual burden for all 4,029 funds subject to the
rule therefore is approximately 28,203,000 hours. Based on
conversations with fund representatives, however, the Commission staff
estimates that even absent the requirements of rule 31a-1, 90 percent
of the records created pursuant to the rule are the type that generally
would be created as a matter of normal business practice and to prepare
financial statements. Thus, the Commission staff estimates that the
total annual burden associated with rule 31a-1 is 2,820,300 hours.
    The estimate of average burden hours is made solely for the
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, and is not derived from a
comprehensive or even a representative survey or study. An agency may
not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.
    Written comments are requested on: (a) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information has practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the burden(s)
of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques or other
forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to
comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60 days of this
publication.
    Please direct your written comments to Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549; or send an email
to: [email protected].

    Dated: November 9, 2017.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-24751 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 51 (Tuesday, March 17, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13842-13843]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06080]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14514-001]

Community of Elfin Cove, dba Elfin Cove Utility Commission;
Notice of Intent To File License Application, Filing of Pre-Application
Document, and Approving Use of the Traditional Licensing Process

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application and
Request to Use the Traditional Licensing Process.
    b. Project No.: 14514-001.
    c. Date Filed: February 2, 2015.
    d. Submitted By: Community of Elfin Cove, dba Elfin Cove Utility
Commission.
    e. Name of Project: Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake Hydroelectric
Project.
    f. Location: On Crooked Creek and Jim's Lake, approximately 70
miles west of Juneau, Alaska. The project occupies 60 acres of land
within the Tongass National Forest, administered by the United States
Forest Service.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 5.3 of the Commission's regulations.
    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Joel Groves, PE, Polarconsult
Alaska, Inc., 1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310, Anchorage, Alaska
99503;<PHONE_NUMBER> x204.
    i. FERC Contact: Sean O'Neill at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Elfin Cove Utility Commission filed its request to use the
Traditional Licensing Process on February 2, 2015. Elfin Cove Utility
Commission provided public notice of its request on February 3, 2015.
In a letter dated March 11, 2015, the Director of the Division of
Hydropower Licensing approved Elfin Cove Utility Commission's request
to use the Traditional Licensing Process.
    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA Fisheries under section 7
of the Endangered Species Act and the joint agency regulations
thereunder at 50 CFR part 402; and NOAA Fisheries under section 305(b)
of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and
implementing regulations at 50 CFR 600.920. We are also initiating
consultation with the Alaska State Historic Preservation Officer, as
required by section 106, National Historic Preservation Act, and the
implementing regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
    l. Elfin Cove Utility Commission filed a Pre-Application Document
(PAD; including a proposed process plan and schedule) with the
Commission, pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.
    m. A copy of the PAD is available for review at the Commission in
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site
(http://www.ferc.gov), using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). A copy is also available for

inspection and reproduction at the address in paragraph h.
    n. Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filing and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.

    Dated: March 11, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-06080 Filed 3-16-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: September 30, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 189)]
[Notices]
[Page 57307]
[DOCID:fr30se05-111]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB
Review; Comment Request

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Emergency Preparedness and
Response Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency has submitted the
following proposed information collection to the Office of Management
and Budget for review and clearance in accordance with the requirements
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507). This
submission adds complete details on a mail survey to be administered in
the Newport, IN site.
    Title: Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program (CSEPP)
Evaluation and Customer Satisfaction Survey.
    Type of Information Collection: Revision of a currently approved
collection.
    OMB Number: OMB 1660-0057.
    Abstract: Consistent with performance measurement requirements set
forth by the Government Performance Results Act, the Chemical Stockpile
Preparedness Program (CSEPP) will continue collecting data from state,
local and tribal governments, individuals, and businesses residing in
immediate or surrounding areas of eight chemical stockpile sites. The
study will: assess outreach program effectiveness, measure/monitor
customer satisfaction, and identify weaknesses and strengths of
individual sites.
    Affected Public: Individuals (residents), Businesses, State, local,
and Tribal Governments.
    Number of Respondents: 7,757 residents, businesses and government
officials.
    Estimated Time per Respondent: 15 minutes.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 1,910.
    Frequency of Response: Once annually.
    Comments: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments
on the proposed information collection to: Desk Officer for the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Emergency Preparedness & Response
Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, facsimile number
(202) 395-7285 within 30 days of the date of this notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or
copies of the information collection should be made to the Chief,
Records Management Section, Information Resources Management Branch,
Information Technology Services Division, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, Department of
Homeland Security 500 C Street, SW., Room 316, Washington, DC 20472.
Facsimile number<PHONE_NUMBER>, or e-mail address
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

    Dated: September 21, 2005.
Darcy Bingham,
Division Director, Information Resources Management Division,
Information Technology Services Directorate.
[FR Doc. 05-19639 Filed 9-29-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-13-P


IDA Format 2010 Utility Emissions for the Minnesota PM2.5 Sensitivity Modeling This document describes a CD containing the file: egu2010CAIRsupport2_ Sep26_ 2005. zip which includes utility emissions for the 2010 Base Case ( pre CAIR), as projected by EPA using the Integrated Planning Model ( IPM) using updated information for units in Minnesota, based on comments from Minnesota Power.

This file is also available for download from the following ftp site: ftp:// www. airmodelingftp. com/ under the directory: CAIR_ Petition_ Reconsideration_ Minnesota/ 2010af_ 2/ EGU_ IDA_ file Please contact Peter Eckhoff: eckhoff. peter@ epa. gov for access to this ftp site.

Data files on this CD include Inventory Data Analyzer ( IDA) format files that can be processed with the Sparse Matrix Operator Kernal ( SMOKE) emissions processor to create emissions inputs for air quality modeling.

EPA used these data, along with other emissions inputs, in air quality modeling of the contribution of SO2 and NOx emissions in Minnesota to PM2.5 nonattainment in other States as part of the CAIR Reconsideration process.

To use these files and directory structures with SMOKE scripts for modeling purposes, we recommend using the SMOKE platform provided with the CAIR docket item EPA HQ OAR 2003 0053 1688.

The " parsed" output file for this IPM run, which were used in creating the IDA files, can be found under docket item EPA HQ OAR 2003 0053 2243: IPM Parsed File for 2010_ Base Case 2004_ MN Sensitivity.