Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 2015 / Proposed Rules 47441 

and their members as well as certain 

individual states during the months of 

June–September, 2014. Records of these 

meetings and copies of written 

comments and questions submitted by 

states and state associations are 

included in the docket for this rule. 

Some participants expressed 

concerns, which included: Whether the 

proposal would affect the geographic 

scope of TAS under the CWA; whether 

there is adequate evidence of 

congressional intent; how the proposal 

would affect a state’s ability to dispute 

a TAS application; and how the 

proposal would affect the status of 

existing TAS applications. Some states 

also had questions about issues unique 

to their situations. EPA considered this 

input in developing the proposed rule, 

particularly in developing sections IV. 

and V. 

EPA specifically solicits additional 

comment on this proposed action from 

state officials. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action has tribal implications 

because it would directly affect tribes 

seeking to administer CWA regulatory 

programs. However, it would neither 

impose substantial direct compliance 

costs on federally recognized tribal 

governments, nor preempt tribal law. 

EPA consulted and coordinated with 

tribal officials under the EPA Policy on 

Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribes early in the process of 

developing this regulation to permit 

them to have meaningful and timely 

input into its development. A summary 

of that consultation and coordination 

follows. 

EPA initiated a tribal consultation and 

coordination process for this action by 

sending a ‘‘Notification of Consultation 

and Coordination’’ letter on April 18, 

2014, to all 566 federally recognized 

tribes. EPA contacted all federally 

recognized tribes, even though only 

tribes with reservations can apply for 

TAS under the CWA, because it is 

possible that additional tribes could 

acquire reservation lands in the future. 

The letter invited tribal leaders and 

designated consultation representatives 

to participate in the tribal consultation 

and coordination process. EPA held two 

identical webinars concerning this 

matter for tribal representatives on May 

22 and May 28, 2014. A total of 70 tribal 

representatives participated in the two 

webinars, and tribes and tribal 

organizations sent 23 comment letters to 

EPA. 

All tribal comments generally 

supported EPA’s potential 

reinterpretation of section 518. Some 

comments expressed concerns about 

whether there would be adequate 

funding to help tribes administer CWA 

regulatory programs after they have 

TAS. EPA considered the tribal 

comments in developing this proposal, 

and will continue to consider tribal 

resource issues in its budgeting and 

planning process. However, EPA cannot 

assure tribes that additional funding 

will be available for a tribe to develop 

or implement the CWA regulatory 

program it seeks. A tribe choosing to 

administer such programs will need to 

carefully weigh its priorities and any 

available EPA assistance. 

EPA specifically solicits additional 

comment on this proposed action from 

tribal officials. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

as applying only to those regulatory 

actions that concern environmental 

health or safety risks that EPA has 

reason to believe could 

disproportionately affect children, per 

the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory 

action’’ in section 2–202 of the 

Executive Order. This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it does not concern an 

environmental health or safety risk. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211 because it is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

This rulemaking does not involve 

technical standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

This proposed interpretive rule would 

not have potential disproportionately 

high and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on minority, lowincome, or indigenous populations. This 

action would affect the procedures 

tribes must follow in order to seek TAS 

for CWA regulatory purposes and would 

not directly affect the level of 

environmental protection. 

Dated: July 31, 2015. 

Gina McCarthy, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2015–19351 Filed 8–6–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 721 

[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2014–0697; FRL–9930–33] 

RIN 2070–AK50 

Trichloroethylene (TCE); Significant 

New Use Rule; TCE in Certain 

Consumer Products 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: Under the Toxic Substance 

Control Act (TSCA), EPA is proposing a 

significant new use rule (SNUR) for 

trichloroethylene (TCE). The proposed 

significant new use is manufacture or 

processing for use in a consumer 

product, with a proposed exception for 

use of TCE in cleaners and solvent 

degreasers, film cleaners, hoof polishes, 

lubricants, mirror edge sealants, and 

pepper spray. Persons subject to the 

SNUR would be required to notify EPA 

at least 90 days before commencing any 

manufacturing or processing of TCE for 

a significant new use. The required 

notification would provide EPA with 

the opportunity to evaluate the intended 

use and, if necessary based on the 

information available at that time, an 

opportunity to protect against potential 

unreasonable risks, if any, from that 

activity before it occurs. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 6, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2014–0697, by 

one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. 

• Mail: Document Control Office 

(7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention 

and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: To make special 

arrangements for hand delivery or 

delivery of boxed information, please 

follow the instructions at http://

www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
47442 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

Additional instructions on commenting 

or visiting the docket, along with more 

information about dockets generally, is 

available at http://www.epa.gov/

dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical information contact: 

Katherine Sleasman, Chemical Control 

Division (7405M), Office of Pollution 

Prevention and Toxics, Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001; 

telephone number: (202) 564–7716; 

email address: sleasman.katherine@

epa.gov. 

For general information contact: The 

TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 

South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 

14620; telephone number: (202) 554– 

1404; email address: TSCA-Hotline@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Executive Summary 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you manufacture, process, 

or distribute in commerce chemical 

substances and mixtures. The following 

list of North American Industrial 

Classification System (NAICS) codes is 

not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 

provides a guide to help readers 

determine whether this document 

applies to them. Potentially affected 

entities may include: 

• Textile Product Mills (NAICS code 

314). 

• Wood Product Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 321). 

• Printing and Related Support 

Activities (NAICS code 323). 

• Chemical Manufacturing (NAICS 

code 325). 

• Plastics and Rubber Product 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 326). 

• Primary Metal Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 331). 

• Fabricated Metal Product 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 332). 

• Machinery Manufacturing (NAICS 

code 333). 

• Computer and Electronic Product 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 334). 

• Electrical Equipment, Appliance, 

and Component Manufacturing (NAICS 

code 335). 

• Transportation Equipment 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 336). 

• Furniture and Product Related 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 337). 

• Miscellaneous Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 339). 

• Clothing and Clothing Accessory 

Stores (NAICS code 488). 

• Warehousing and Storage (NAICS 

code 493). 

• Repair and Maintenance (NAICS 

code 811). 

• National Security and International 

Affairs (NAICS code 928). 

This action may also affect certain 

entities through pre-existing import 

certification and export notification 

rules under TSCA. Persons who import 

any chemical substance governed by a 

final SNUR are subject to the TSCA 

section 13 (15 U.S.C. 2612) import 

certification requirements and the 

corresponding regulations at 19 CFR 

12.118 through 12.127; see also 19 CFR 

127.28. Those persons must certify that 

the shipment of the chemical substance 

complies with all applicable rules and 

orders under TSCA, including any 

SNUR requirements. The EPA policy in 

support of import certification appears 

at 40 CFR part 707, subpart B. In 

addition, any persons who export or 

intend to export a chemical substance 

that is the subject of this proposed rule 

on or after September 8, 2015 are subject 

to the export notification provisions of 

TSCA section 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611(b)), 

(see 40 CFR 721.20), and must comply 

with the export notification 

requirements in 40 CFR part 707, 

subpart D. 

If you have any questions regarding 

the applicability of this action to a 

particular entity, consult the technical 

information contact listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

B. What is the agency’s authority for 

taking this action? 

Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 

2604(a)(2)) authorizes EPA to determine 

that a use of a chemical substance is a 

‘‘significant new use.’’ EPA must make 

this determination by rule after 

considering all relevant factors, 

including those listed in TSCA section 

5(a)(2). Once EPA determines that a use 

of a chemical substance is a significant 

new use, TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B) 

requires persons to submit a significant 

new use notice (SNUN) to EPA at least 

90 days before they manufacture 

(including import) or process the 

chemical substance for that use (15 

U.S.C. 2604(a)(1)(B)). As described in 

Unit V., the general SNUR provisions 

are found at 40 CFR part 721, subpart 

A. 

C. What action is the agency taking? 

EPA is proposing a SNUR for 

trichloroethylene (TCE). The proposed 

significant new use is: Manufacturing 

and processing for any use in a 

consumer product of TCE except for use 

in cleaners and solvent degreasers, film 

cleaners, hoof polishes, lubricants, 

mirror edge sealants, and pepper spray. 

The proposed significant use EPA has 

identified in this unit is a use that EPA 

believes is not ongoing at the time of 

this proposed rule. EPA is requesting 

public comment on this proposal, and 

specifically on the Agency’s 

understanding of ongoing uses for the 

chemical identified. EPA is particularly 

interested in whether there are any 

ongoing uses of this chemical in 

consumer products of which the Agency 

is currently unaware. EPA would 

welcome specific documentation of any 

such ongoing uses. A consumer product 

is defined at 40 CFR 721.3 as ‘‘a 

chemical substance that is directly, or as 

part of a mixture, sold or made available 

to consumers for their use in or around 

a permanent or temporary household or 

residence, in or around a school, or in 

recreation.’’ 

This proposed SNUR would require 

persons that manufacture (including 

import) or process any of the chemicals 

for a significant new use, consistent 

with the requirements at 40 CFR 721.25, 

to notify EPA at least 90 days before 

commencing such manufacture or 

process of the chemical substance for a 

significant new use. 

D. Why is the agency taking this action? 

This SNUR is necessary to ensure that 

EPA receives timely advance notice of 

any future manufacturing and 

processing of TCE for new uses that may 

produce changes in human and 

environmental exposures. The rationale 

and objectives for this SNUR are 

explained in Unit III. 

E. What are the estimated incremental 

impacts of this action? 

EPA has evaluated the potential costs 

of establishing SNUR reporting 

requirements for potential 

manufacturers and processors of the 

chemical substance included in this 

proposed rule. This analysis, which is 

available in the docket, is discussed in 

Unit IX., and is briefly summarized 

here. In the event that a SNUN is 

submitted, costs are estimated to be less 

than $8,900 per SNUN submission for 

large business submitters and $6,500 for 

small business submitters. These 

estimates include the cost to prepare 

and submit the SNUN and the payment 

of a user fee. The proposed SNUR 

would require first-time submitters of 

any TSCA section 5 notice to register 

their company and key users with the 

CDX reporting tool, deliver a CDX 

electronic signature to EPA, and 

establish and use a Pay.gov E-payment 

account before they may submit a 

SNUN, for a cost of $203 per firm. 

However, these activities are only 

required of first time submitters of 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 2015 / Proposed Rules 47443 

section 5 notices. In addition, for 

persons exporting a substance that is the 

subject of a SNUR, a one-time notice to 

EPA must be provided for the first 

export or intended export to a particular 

country, which is estimated to be $83 

per notification. 

II. Chemical Substance Subject to This 

Proposed Rule 

A. What chemical is included in the 

proposed SNUR? 

This proposed SNUR would apply to 

TCE (Chemical Abstract Services 

Registry Number (CASRN 79–01–6) 

manufactured or processed for use in a 

consumer product except for use in 

cleaners and solvent degreasers, film 

cleaners, hoof polishes, lubricants, 

mirror edge sealants, and pepper spray. 

TCE is a volatile organic compound 

(VOC) that is produced and imported 

into the United States, with use 

estimated to be around 250 million 

pounds per year. It is a clear, colorless 

liquid that has a sweet odor and 

evaporates quickly (Ref. 1). 

To ascertain if TCE is used in 

consumer products, EPA reviewed 

published literature, the National 

Institute of Health’s (NIH) Household 

Product Database (HPD), Safety Data 

Sheets (SDSs), data submitted under 

EPA’s Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) 

rule, and data submitted under EPA’s 

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) and 

communicated directly with domestic 

manufacturers and processors (Refs. 1 

and 2). From review of these resources 

it was confirmed that the following 

consumer products containing TCE are 

available in retail outlets and ecommerce sites: Cleaners and solvent 

degreasers, film cleaners, hoof polishes, 

lubricants, mirror edge sealants, and 

pepper spray. Cleaners and solvents can 

be used to clean automotive parts, 

fabrics, and carpets. EPA does not 

believe that there are any other types of 

consumer products containing TCE 

(Ref. 1). 

Following the release of the final risk 

assessment, EPA received a letter from 

PLZ Aeroscience Corporation on March 

5, 2015, indicating their intent to 

reformulate their spray fixative product 

for consumers. Their letter states that 

they will no longer manufacture or 

process spray fixatives with TCE by 

September 1, 2015 (Ref. 3). EPA’s 

review of the resources indicates this is 

the only TCE-containing spray fixative 

that is still used in a consumer product. 

B. What are the production volumes and 

uses of TCE? 

The majority (>80%) of TCE is used 

as an intermediate for manufacturing 

refrigerant chemicals. Much of the 

remainder, less than 14 percent, is used 

as a solvent for metals degreasing, 

leaving a relatively small percentage to 

account for all other uses, including its 

use in consumer products. In 2011, 

global consumption of TCE was 945 

million pounds (lbs) and U.S. 

consumption was 255 million lbs. Nine 

companies, including domestic 

manufacturers and importers, reported a 

total production of 224.7 million lbs of 

TCE in 2011 to the CDR database. Based 

on the TRI data for 2012, 38 companies 

use TCE as a formulation component, 33 

companies process TCE by repackaging 

the chemical, 28 companies use TCE as 

a manufacturing aid, and 1,113 

companies use TCE for ancillary uses, 

such as degreasing. Overall, most U.S. 

consumption is attributable to two 

specific uses: As an intermediate for 

manufacturing the refrigerant (closed 

system) HFC–134a (a major alternative 

to CFC–12), and as a solvent for metal 

degreasing (Ref. 1). 

C. What are the potential health effects 

of TCE? 

A broad set of relevant studies 

including epidemiologic studies, animal 

bioassays, metabolism studies and 

mechanistic studies show that TCE 

exposure is associated with a wide array 

of adverse health effects. TCE has the 

potential to induce neurotoxicity, 

immunotoxicity, developmental 

toxicity, liver toxicity, kidney toxicity, 

endocrine effects, and several forms of 

cancer (Ref. 1). 

TCE is fat soluble (lipophilic) and 

easily crosses biological membranes. It 

is readily absorbed into the body 

following oral, dermal, or inhalation 

exposure. Following oral ingestion TCE 

is rapidly absorbed from the 

gastrointestinal tract into the systemic 

circulation (i.e., blood), and its 

absorption rate is highly influenced by 

dose of the chemical, dosing vehicle, 

and stomach content. Absorption 

through the skin has been shown by 

both vapor and liquid TCE contact. 

Likewise, absorption following 

inhalation of TCE is also rapid and the 

inhaled absorbed dose is proportional to 

the exposure concentration, duration of 

exposure, and lung ventilation rate. 

Regardless of the route of exposure, TCE 

is widely distributed throughout the 

body. TCE levels can be found in many 

different tissues including: Brain, 

muscle, heart, kidney, lung, liver, and 

adipose tissues. Due to its lipophilicity, 

TCE has been found in human maternal 

and fetal blood and in the breast milk 

of lactating women (Ref. 1). 

The metabolism of TCE has been 

extensively studied in humans and 

experimental rodent models. Both 

humans and animals metabolize TCE to 

numerous toxicologically active 

metabolites to varying degrees. These 

metabolites are generated from and 

transported across multiple tissues and 

play a key role in causing 

TCE-associated toxic effects that target 

the liver and kidney (Ref. 1). 

TCE is characterized as carcinogenic 

to humans by all routes of exposure as 

documented in EPA’s TCE Integrated 

Risk Information System (IRIS) 

assessment (Ref. 4). This conclusion is 

based on strong cancer epidemiological 

data that reported an association 

between TCE exposure and the onset of 

various cancers, primarily in the kidney, 

liver and the immune system (i.e., 

non-Hodgkin lymphoma or NHL). 

Further support for TCE’s carcinogenic 

characterization comes from positive 

results in multiple rodent cancer 

bioassays in rats and mice of both sexes, 

similar toxicokinetics between rodents 

and humans, mechanistic data 

supporting a mutagenic mode of action 

for kidney tumors, and the lack of 

mechanistic data supporting the 

conclusion that any of the mode(s) of 

action for TCE-induced rodent tumors 

are irrelevant to humans. Additional 

support comes from the recent 

evaluation of TCE’s carcinogenic effects 

by the International Agency for 

Research on Cancer (IARC). IARC 

classifies TCE as carcinogenic to 

humans (Ref. 5). 

EPA’s IRIS assessment also concluded 

that TCE poses a potential human health 

hazard for non-cancer toxicity including 

neurotoxicity, liver and kidney effects, 

immunotoxicity, reproductive, and 

developmental effects. Also evaluated in 

the IRIS assessment were TCE’s and its 

metabolites genotoxic effects. As shown 

through the results of in vitro and in 

vivo tests, TCE has the potential to bind 

or induce damage to the structure of 

DNA or chromosomes (Ref. 4). 

Neurotoxicity has been demonstrated 

in animal and human studies under 

both acute and chronic exposure 

conditions. Evaluation of the human 

studies revealed TCE-induced 

neurotoxic effects including alterations 

in trigeminal nerve and vestibular 

function, auditory effects, changes in 

vision, alterations in cognitive function, 

changes in psychomotor effects, and 

neurodevelopmental outcomes. The 

strongest neurological evidence of 

human toxicological hazard is for 

changes in trigeminal nerve function or 

morphology and impairment of 

vestibular function. Multiple 

epidemiological studies in different 

populations have reported TCE-induced 

abnormalities in trigeminal nerve 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
47444 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

function in humans, and various human 

studies have consistently reported 

vestibular system-related symptoms 

such as headaches, dizziness, and 

nausea following TCE exposure (Ref. 1). 

Animals and humans exposed to TCE 

consistently experience liver toxicity. 

Specific effects include the following 

structural changes: Increased liver 

weight, increase in deoxyribonucleic 

acid (DNA) synthesis (transient), 

enlarged hepatocytes, enlarged nuclei, 

and peroxisome proliferation. Several 

human studies reported an association 

between TCE exposure and significant 

changes in serum liver function tests 

used in diagnosing liver disease, or 

changes in plasma or serum bile acids. 

There was also human evidence for 

hepatitis accompanying immune-related 

generalized skin diseases, jaundice, 

hepatomegaly, hepatosplenomegaly, and 

liver failure in TCE-exposed workers. 

For kidney effects, studies in both 

humans and animals have shown 

changes in the proximate tubules of the 

kidney following exposure to TCE. TCE 

metabolites also appear to be the 

causative agents that induce renal 

toxicity (Ref. 1). 

Immune-related effects following TCE 

exposures have been observed in both 

animal and human studies. In general, 

these effects were associated with 

inducing enhanced immune responses 

as opposed to immunosuppressive 

effects. Human studies have reported a 

relationship between systemic 

autoimmune diseases, such as 

scleroderma with occupational exposure 

to TCE. There have also been a large 

number of case reports in TCE-exposed 

workers developing a severe 

hypersensitivity skin disorder, often 

accompanied by systemic effects to the 

lymph nodes and other organs, such as 

hepatitis (Ref. 1). 

The toxicological literature provides 

support for male and female 

reproductive toxicity following TCE 

exposure. Both the epidemiological and 

animal studies provide evidence of 

adverse outcomes to female 

reproductive outcomes. However, much 

more extensive evidence exists in 

support of an association between TCE 

exposures and male reproductive 

toxicity. There is evidence that the 

metabolism of TCE in male reproductive 

tract tissues is associated with adverse 

effects on sperm measures in both 

humans and animals. Furthermore, 

human studies support an association 

between TCE exposure and alterations 

in sperm density and quality, as well as 

changes in sexual drive or function and 

altered serum endocrine levels (Ref. 1). 

An evaluation of the overall weight 

and strength of the evidence of the 

human and animal developmental 

toxicity data suggests an association 

between pre- and/or post-natal TCE 

exposures and potential adverse 

developmental outcomes. TCE-induced 

heart malformations in animals have 

been identified as the most sensitive 

developmental toxicity endpoint for 

TCE. Human studies examined the 

possible association of TCE with various 

prenatal effects. These adverse effects of 

developmental TCE exposure could 

include death (spontaneous abortion, 

perinatal death, pre- or postimplantation loss, resorptions), 

decreased growth (low birth weight, 

small for gestational age), and 

congenital malformations, in particular 

cardiac defects, and postnatal effects 

such as growth, survival, developmental 

neurotoxicity, developmental 

immunotoxicity, and childhood cancers. 

There have also been some 

epidemiological studies that have 

consistently reported an increased 

incidence of birth defects in 

TCE-exposed populations from 

exposure to contaminated water. As for 

human developmental neurotoxicity, 

studies collectively suggest that the 

developing brain is susceptible to TCE 

toxicity. These studies have reported an 

association with TCE exposure and 

central nervous system birth defects and 

postnatal effects such as delayed 

newborn reflexes, impaired learning or 

memory, aggressive behavior, hearing 

impairment, speech impairment, 

encephalopathy, impaired executive 

and motor function and attention deficit 

(Ref. 1). 

D. What are the potential routes and 

sources of exposure to TCE? 

The main route of exposure for TCE 

is inhalation due to its chemical 

properties and the nature of the 

consumer products. However, EPA 

recognizes that highly volatile 

compounds such as TCE may also be 

absorbed through the skin. (Ref. 1). 

In EPA’s final risk assessment for 

TCE, EPA examined acute risks for 

consumer exposures in residential 

settings. The assessment identified risks 

to consumers and residential bystanders 

from use of solvent degreasers and 

protective spray coatings, also referred 

to as spray fixatives, because of either 

their high TCE content or high potential 

for human exposure. TCE is also present 

in film cleaners, and mirror edge 

sealants, but these products were not 

evaluated because of either their low 

TCE content, less frequent use, or low 

exposure potential. The final risk 

assessment calculated indoor air 

concentrations using the Exposure and 

Fast Assessment Screening Tool Version 

2 (E–FAST2) Consumer Exposure Model 

(CEM) for the consumer exposure. EPA 

used E–FAST2 CEM because of the lack 

of available emissions and monitoring 

data for the TCE containing consumer 

products (Ref. 1). 

For the spray fixatives and solvent 

degreasers used by consumers who 

experience exposures, there is the 

potential for acute risks that could result 

from even one improper use of these 

products containing TCE. Most 

consumers would be unaware of the 

potential toxicity of consumer products 

containing TCE. Consequently, 

insufficient and inadequate hazard 

communication may lead to incorrect 

use and increased consumer and 

bystander exposures. Even if consumers 

are aware of such potential hazards, 

they may not take appropriate 

precautions or research the appropriate 

resources in which these precautions 

are addressed. Of particular concern is 

that TCE has harmful effects that occur 

below the odor threshold, meaning that 

smelling the chemical in the home 

environment is not a sufficient approach 

to avoid hazardous effects (Ref. 1). 

III. Rationale and Objectives 

A. Rationale 

EPA is concerned about the adverse 

health effects of TCE resulting from 

commercial and consumer uses of the 

chemical substance identified for a risk 

assessment as part of EPA’s Existing 

Chemicals Management Program. EPA 

identified a work plan of 83 chemicals 

including TCE for further assessment 

under the TSCA Work Plan for 

Chemical Assessments in March 2012, 

to help focus and direct the activities of 

its Existing Chemicals Management 

Program. EPA reviewed readily 

available information on TCE including 

uses, physical and chemical properties, 

fate, exposure potential, and associated 

hazards to humans and the 

environment. TCE was selected based 

on concerns for its human health hazard 

(e.g., human carcinogen) and its 

exposure profile (i.e., widely used in 

consumer products and detected in 

drinking water, indoor environments, 

surface water, ambient air, groundwater, 

and soil) using OPPT’s TSCA Work Plan 

screening methodology (Ref. 6). In 

EPA’s final risk assessment released on 

June 25, 2014, the Agency identified 

risks to workers using TCE and nonworkers for degreasers and a spotcleaner in dry cleaning uses, and EPA 

also identified health risks to consumers 

using spray aerosol degreasers and spray 

fixatives (Ref. 1). 

EPA believes that any additional use 

of this chemical substance in consumer 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 2015 / Proposed Rules 47445 

products could significantly increase 

human exposure, and that such 

exposures should not occur without an 

opportunity for EPA review and control 

as appropriate. However, as discussed 

in Unit II, based on review of SDSs and 

the NIH’s HPD, EPA believes that 

cleaners and solvent degreasers, film 

cleaners, hoof polishes, lubricants, 

mirror edge sealants, and pepper spray 

contain TCE. EPA believes that other 

consumer products do not presently 

contain TCE, other than spray fixative 

product use which will be discontinued 

by September 1, 2015 as described in 

Unit II.A. 

Consistent with EPA’s past practice 

for issuing SNURs under TSCA section 

5(a)(2), EPA’s decision to propose a 

SNUR for a particular chemical use 

need not be based on an extensive 

evaluation of the hazard, exposure, or 

potential risk associated with that use. 

Rather, the Agency action is based on 

EPA’s determination that if the use 

begins or resumes, it may present a risk 

that EPA should evaluate under TSCA 

before the manufacturing or processing 

for that use begins. Since the new use 

does not currently exist, deferring a 

detailed consideration of potential risks 

or hazards related to that use is an 

effective use of resources. If a person 

decides to begin manufacturing or 

processing the chemical for the use, the 

notice to EPA allows EPA to evaluate 

the use according to the specific 

parameters and circumstances 

surrounding that intended use. 

B. Objectives 

Based on the considerations in Unit 

III.A., EPA wants to achieve the 

following objectives with regard to the 

significant new use(s) that are 

designated in this proposed rule: 

1. EPA would receive notice of any 

person’s intent to manufacture or 

process TCE for the described 

significant new use before that activity 

begins. 

2. EPA would have an opportunity to 

review and evaluate data submitted in a 

SNUN before the notice submitter 

begins manufacturing or processing TCE 

for the described significant new use. 

3. EPA would be able to regulate 

prospective manufacturers or processors 

of TCE before the described significant 

new use of the chemical substance 

occurs, provided that regulation is 

warranted pursuant to TSCA section 

5(e), 5(f), 6 or 7. 

IV. Significant New Use Determination 

Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA states that 

EPA’s determination that a use of a 

chemical substance is a significant new 

use must be made after consideration of 

all relevant factors including: 

1. The projected volume of 

manufacturing and processing of a 

chemical substance. 

2. The extent to which a use changes 

the type or form of exposure of human 

beings or the environment to a chemical 

substance. 

3. The extent to which a use increases 

the magnitude and duration of exposure 

of human beings or the environment to 

a chemical substance. 

4. The reasonably anticipated manner 

and methods of manufacturing, 

processing, distribution in commerce, 

and disposal of a chemical substance. 

In addition to these factors 

enumerated in TSCA section 5(a)(2), the 

statute authorizes EPA to consider any 

other relevant factors. 

To determine what would constitute a 

significant new use of TCE compounds 

subject to this proposed rule, as 

discussed in this unit, EPA considered 

relevant information about the toxicity 

of the substance, likely human 

exposures and environmental releases 

associated with possible uses, and the 

four factors listed in section 5(a)(2) of 

TSCA. EPA has preliminarily 

determined as the significant new use: 

Manufacture or processing for any use 

in a consumer product except for use in 

cleaners and solvent degreasers, film 

cleaners, hoof polishes, lubricants, 

mirror edge sealants, and pepper spray. 

Because TCE is not used in consumer 

products (with the limited exceptions of 

use in cleaners and solvent degreasers, 

film cleaners, hoof polishes, lubricants, 

mirror edge sealants, pepper spray, and 

(before September 1, 2015) spray 

fixatives), EPA believes new use in 

consumer products could increase the 

magnitude and duration of human 

exposure to TCE. Exposure to TCE 

through inhalation may lead to a wide 

array of adverse health effects, such as 

neurotoxicity, immunotoxicity, 

developmental toxicity, liver toxicity, 

kidney toxicity, endocrine effects, and 

several forms of cancer, as further 

explained in Unit II.C., and because of 

these adverse effects EPA would like the 

opportunity to evaluate such potential 

uses in consumer products for any 

associated risks or hazards that might 

exist before those uses would begin. 

V. Applicability of General Provisions 

General provisions for SNURs appear 

under 40 CFR part 721, subpart A. 

These provisions describe persons 

subject to the rule, recordkeeping 

requirements, exemptions to reporting 

requirements, and applicability of the 

rule to uses occurring before the 

effective date of the final rule. 

Provisions relating to user fees appear 

at 40 CFR part 700. According to 40 CFR 

721.1(c), persons subject to SNURs must 

comply with the same notice 

requirements and EPA regulatory 

procedures as submitters of 

Premanufacture Notices (PMNs) under 

TSCA section 5(a)(1)(A). In particular, 

these requirements include the 

information submissions requirements 

of TSCA section 5(b) and 5(d)(1), the 

exemptions authorized by TSCA section 

5(h)(1), (h)(2), (h)(3), and (h)(5), and the 

regulations at 40 CFR part 720. Once 

EPA receives a SNUN, EPA may take 

regulatory action under TSCA section 

5(e), 5(f), 6 or 7 to control the activities 

on which it has received the SNUN. If 

EPA does not take action, EPA is 

required under TSCA section 5(g) to 

explain in the Federal Register its 

reasons for not taking action. 

Persons who export or intend to 

export a chemical substance identified 

in a proposed or final SNUR are subject 

to the export notification provisions of 

TSCA section 12(b). The regulations that 

interpret TSCA section 12(b) appear at 

40 CFR part 707, subpart D. In 

accordance with 40 CFR 707.60(b) this 

proposed SNUR does not trigger export 

notification for articles. Persons who 

import a chemical substance identified 

in a final SNUR are subject to the TSCA 

section 13 import certification 

requirements, codified at 19 CFR 12.118 

through 12.127; see also 19 CFR 127.28. 

Those persons must certify that the 

shipment of the chemical substance 

complies with all applicable rules and 

orders under TSCA, including any 

SNUR requirements. The EPA policy in 

support of import certification appears 

at 40 CFR part 707, subpart B. 

VI. Applicability of Rule to Uses 

Occurring Before Effective Date of the 

Final Rule 

As discussed in the Federal Register 

of April 24, 1990 (55 FR 17376; FRL– 

3658–5) (Ref. 7), EPA has decided that 

the intent of section 5(a)(1)(B) of TSCA 

is best served by designating a use as a 

significant new use as of the date of 

publication of the proposed rule rather 

than as of the effective date of the final 

rule. If uses begun after publication of 

the proposed rule were considered 

ongoing rather than new, it would be 

difficult for EPA to establish SNUR 

notice requirements, because a person 

could defeat the SNUR by initiating the 

proposed significant new use before the 

rule became final, and then argue that 

the use was ongoing as of the effective 

date of the final rule. Thus, persons who 

begin commercial manufacture or 

processing of the chemical substance(s) 

that would be regulated through this 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
47446 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

proposed rule, if finalized, would have 

to cease any such activity before the 

effective date of the rule if and when 

finalized. To resume their activities, 

these persons would have to comply 

with all applicable SNUR notice 

requirements and wait until the notice 

review period, including all extensions, 

expires. Uses arising after the 

publication of the proposed rule are 

distinguished from uses that exist at 

publication of the proposed rule. The 

former would be new uses, the latter 

ongoing uses, except that uses that are 

ongoing as of the publication of the 

proposed rule would not be considered 

ongoing uses if they have ceased by the 

date of issuance of a final rule. 

However, recognizing the use in a 

consumer product of TCE in spray 

fixatives will cease by September 1, 

2015 as described in Unit II.A., EPA 

considers September 1, 2015 as the date 

from which the significant new use with 

respect only to such spray fixatives 

would be designated. To the extent that 

additional ongoing uses are found in the 

course of rulemaking, EPA would 

exclude those specific uses from the 

final SNUR. EPA has promulgated 

provisions to allow persons to comply 

with the final SNUR before the effective 

date. If a person were to meet the 

conditions of advance compliance 

under 40 CFR 721.45(h), that person 

would be considered to have met the 

requirements of the final SNUR for 

those activities. 

VII. Test Data and Other Information 

EPA recognizes that TSCA section 5 

does not usually require developing any 

particular test data before submission of 

a SNUN. There are two exceptions: 

1. Development of test data is 

required where the chemical substance 

subject to the SNUR is also subject to a 

test rule under TSCA section 4 (see 

TSCA section 5(b)(1)); and 

2. Development of test data may be 

necessary where the chemical substance 

has been listed under TSCA section 

5(b)(4) (see TSCA section 5(b)(2)). 

In the absence of a section 4 test rule or 

a section 5(b)(4) listing covering the 

chemical substance, persons are 

required to submit only test data in their 

possession or control and to describe 

any other data known to or reasonably 

ascertainable by them (15 U.S.C. 

2604(d); 40 CFR 721.25, and 40 CFR 

720.50). However, as a general matter, 

EPA recommends that SNUN submitters 

include data that would permit a 

reasoned evaluation of risks posed by 

the chemical substance during its 

manufacture, processing, use, 

distribution in commerce, or disposal. 

EPA encourages persons to consult with 

the agency before submitting a SNUN. 

As part of this optional pre-notice 

consultation, EPA would discuss 

specific data it believes may be useful 

in evaluating a significant new use. 

SNUNs submitted for significant new 

uses without any test data may increase 

the likelihood that EPA will take action 

under TSCA section 5(e) to prohibit or 

limit activities associated with this 

chemical. 

SNUN submitters should be aware 

that EPA will be better able to evaluate 

SNUNs that provide detailed 

information on: 

• Human exposure and 

environmental releases that may result 

from the significant new uses of the 

chemical substance; 

• Potential benefits of the chemical 

substance; and 

• Information on risks posed by the 

chemical substances compared to risks 

posed by potential substitutes. 

VIII. SNUN Submissions 

EPA recommends that submitters 

consult with the Agency prior to 

submitting a SNUN to discuss what data 

may be useful in evaluating a significant 

new use. Discussions with the Agency 

prior to submission can afford ample 

time to conduct any tests that might be 

helpful in evaluating risks posed by the 

substance. According to 40 CFR 

721.1(c), persons submitting a SNUN 

must comply with the same notice 

requirements and EPA regulatory 

procedures as persons submitting a 

PMN, including submission of test data 

on health and environmental effects as 

described in 40 CFR 720.50. SNUNs 

must be submitted on EPA Form No. 

7710–25, generated using e-PMN 

software, and submitted to the Agency 

in accordance with the procedures set 

forth in 40 CFR 721.25 and 40 CFR 

720.40. E–PMN software is available 

electronically at http://www.epa.gov/

opptintr/newchems. 

IX. Economic Analysis 

A. SNUNs 

EPA has evaluated the potential costs 

of establishing SNUR reporting 

requirements for potential 

manufacturers and processors of the 

chemical substance included in this 

proposed rule (Ref. 2). In the event that 

a SNUN is submitted, costs are 

estimated at approximately $8,900 per 

SNUN submission for large business 

submitters and $6,500 for small 

business submitters. These estimates 

include the cost to prepare and submit 

the SNUN, and the payment of a user 

fee. Businesses that submit a SNUN 

would be subject to either a $2,500 user 

fee required by 40 CFR 700.45(b)(2)(iii), 

or, if they are a small business with 

annual sales of less than $40 million 

when combined with those of the parent 

company (if any), a reduced user fee of 

$100 (40 CFR 700.45(b)(1)). EPA’s 

complete economic analysis is available 

in the public docket for this proposed 

rule (Ref. 2). 

B. Export Notification 

Under section 12(b) of TSCA and the 

implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 

707, subpart D, exporters must notify 

EPA if they export or intend to export 

a chemical substance or mixture for 

which, among other things, a rule has 

been proposed or promulgated under 

TSCA section 5. For persons exporting 

a substance that is the subject of a 

SNUR, a one-time notice to EPA must be 

provided for the first export or intended 

export to a particular country. The total 

costs of export notification will vary by 

chemical, depending on the number of 

required notifications (i.e., the number 

of countries to which the chemical is 

exported). While EPA is unable to make 

any estimate of the likely number of 

export notifications for the chemical 

covered in this proposed SNUR, as 

stated in the accompanying economic 

analysis of this proposed SNUR, the 

estimated cost of the export notification 

requirement on a per unit basis is $83. 

X. Alternatives 

Before proposing this SNUR, EPA 

considered the following alternative 

regulatory action: Promulgate a TSCA 

Section 8(a) Reporting Rule. 

Under a TSCA section 8(a) rule, EPA 

could, among other things, generally 

require persons to report information to 

the agency when they intend to 

manufacture or process a listed 

chemical for a specific use or any use. 

However, for TCE, the use of TSCA 

section 8(a) rather than SNUR authority 

would have several limitations. First, if 

EPA were to require reporting under 

TSCA section 8(a) instead of TSCA 

section 5(a), EPA would not have the 

opportunity to review human and 

environmental hazards and exposures 

associated with the proposed significant 

new use and, if necessary, take 

immediate follow-up regulatory action 

under TSCA section 5(e) or 5(f) to 

prohibit or limit the activity before it 

begins. In addition, EPA may not 

receive important information from 

small businesses, because such firms 

generally are exempt from TSCA section 

8(a) reporting requirements (see TSCA 

sections 8(a)(1)(A) and 8(a)(1)(B)). In 

view of the level of health concerns 

about TCE if used for the proposed 

significant new use, EPA believes that a 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 2015 / Proposed Rules 47447 

TSCA section 8(a) rule for this 

substance would not meet EPA’s 

regulatory objectives. 

XI. Request for Comment 

A. Do you have comments or 

information about ongoing uses? 

EPA welcomes comment on all 

aspects of this proposed rule. EPA based 

its understanding of the use profile of 

these chemicals on the published 

literature, the 2012 CDR submissions, 

market research, discussions with 

manufacturers, and review of SDSs. To 

confirm EPA’s understanding, the 

Agency is requesting public comment 

on the EPA’s understanding that 

cleaners and solvent degreasers, film 

cleaners, hoof polishes, lubricants, 

mirror edge sealants, and pepper spray 

contain TCE. The Agency is also 

requesting public comment if any of the 

listed uses that contain TCE are no 

longer available to consumers. EPA 

believes that other consumer products 

do not contain TCE, however, EPA is 

interested in information indicating that 

there are other ongoing uses of TCE in 

consumer products. In providing 

comments on an ongoing use of TCE in 

a consumer product, it would be helpful 

if you provide sufficient information for 

EPA to substantiate any assertions of 

use. 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. It is EPA’s policy 

to include all comments received in the 

public docket without change or further 

notice to the commenter and to make 

the comments available on-line at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless a 

comment includes information claimed 

to be CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. Do 

not submit this information to EPA 

through regulations.gov or email. 

Clearly mark the part or all of the 

information that you claim to be CBI. 

For CBI information in a disk or CD 

ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the 

outside of the disk or CD ROM that you 

mail to EPA as CBI and then identify 

electronically within the disk or CD 

ROM the specific information that is 

claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2, subpart B. 

2. Tips for preparing your comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

i. Identify the document by docket ID 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date, and page number). 

ii. Follow directions. The agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

CFR part or section number. 

iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

iv. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

v. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

vi. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns and suggest 

alternatives. 

vii. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

viii. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

XII. References 

The following is a listing of the 

documents that are specifically 

referenced in this document. The docket 

includes these documents and other 

information considered by EPA, 

including documents that are referenced 

within the documents that are included 

in the docket, even if the referenced 

document is not physically located in 

the docket. For assistance in locating 

these other documents, please consult 

the technical person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

1. U.S. EPA. Final Risk Assessment on 

Trichloroethylene (TCE). June 25, 2014. 

2. U.S. EPA. Economic Analysis of the 

Significant New Use Rule for 

Trichloroethylene. February 19, 2015. 

3. Letter from PLZ Aeroscience Corporation. 

March 5, 2015. 

4. U.S. EPA. (2011). Toxicological Review of 

Trichloroethylene (CAS No. 79–01–6). 

EPA/635/R–09/011F. Integrated Risk 

Information System, Washington, DC. 

5. IARC (2014). International Agency for 

Research on Cancer. Monographs on the 

Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to 

Humans: Cadmium, Trichloroethylene, 

Tetrachloroethylene, and Some 

Chlorinated Agents, Volume 106. World 

Health Organization, Lyon, France. 

6. U.S. EPA. (2014). TSCA Work Plan for 

Chemical Assessments: 2014 Update. 

Washington. DC. 

7. U.S. EPA. Significant New Uses of Certain 

Chemical Substances. Federal Register 

of April 24, 1990, (55 FR 173776) (FRL– 

3658–5). 

XIII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This proposed SNUR is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

the terms of the Executive Order 12866 

(58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is 

therefore not subject to review under 

Executive Order 12866 and 13563, 

entitled ‘‘Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review’’ (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011). 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This action does not impose any new 

information collection burden under the 

PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is 

defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(b). The 

information collection activities 

associated with existing chemical 

SNURs are already approved by OMB 

under OMB control number 2070–0038 

(EPA ICR No. 1188); and the 

information collection activities 

associated with export notifications are 

already approved by OMB under OMB 

control number 2070–0030 (EPA ICR 

No. 0795). If an entity were to submit a 

SNUN to the Agency, the annual burden 

is estimated to be less than 100 hours 

per response, and the estimated burden 

for export notifications is less than 1.5 

hours per notification. In both cases, 

burden is estimated to be reduced for 

submitters who have already registered 

to use the electronic submission system. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to a collection of information 

that requires OMB approval under the 

PRA, unless it has been approved by 

OMB and displays a currently valid 

OMB control number. The OMB control 

numbers for EPA’s regulations in title 40 

of the CFR, after appearing in the 

Federal Register, are listed in 40 CFR 

part 9, and included on the related 

collection instrument, or form, if 

applicable. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

Pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA, 

5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., I hereby certify that 

promulgation of this SNUR would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

The rationale supporting this 

conclusion is as follows. 

A SNUR applies to any person 

(including small or large entities) who 

intends to engage in any activity 

described in the rule as a ‘‘significant 

new use.’’ By definition of the word 

‘‘new’’ and based on all information 

currently available to EPA, it appears 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
47448 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

that no small or large entities presently 

engage in such activities. Since this 

SNUR will require a person who intends 

to engage in such activity in the future 

to first notify EPA by submitting a 

SNUN, no economic impact will occur 

unless someone files a SNUN to pursue 

a significant new use in the future or 

forgoes profits by avoiding or delaying 

the significant new use. Although some 

small entities may decide to conduct 

such activities in the future, EPA cannot 

presently determine how many, if any, 

there may be. However, EPA’s 

experience to date is that, in response to 

the promulgation of SNURs covering 

over 1,000 chemical substances, the 

Agency receives only a handful of 

notices per year. During the six year 

period from 2005–2010, only three 

submitters self-identified as small in 

their SNUN submission (Ref. 2). EPA 

believes the cost of submitting a SNUN 

is relatively small compared to the cost 

of developing and marketing a chemical 

new to a firm or marketing a new use 

of the chemical and that the 

requirement to submit a SNUN 

generally does not have a significant 

economic impact. 

Therefore, EPA believes that the 

potential economic impact of complying 

with this proposed SNUR is not 

expected to be significant or adversely 

impact a substantial number of small 

entities. In a SNUR that published as a 

final rule on August 8, 1997 (62 FR 

42690) (FRL–5735–4), the Agency 

presented its general determination that 

proposed and final SNURs are not 

expected to have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities, which was provided to the 

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

Based on EPA’s experience with 

proposing and finalizing SNURs, State, 

local, and Tribal governments have not 

been impacted by these rulemakings, 

and EPA does not have any reason to 

believe that any State, local, or Tribal 

government would be impacted by this 

rulemaking. As such, the requirements 

of sections 202, 203, 204, or 205 of 

UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, do not 

apply to this action. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action will not have a substantial 

direct effect 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 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999). 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This proposed rule does not have 

Tribal implications because it is not 

expected to have any effect (i.e., there 

will be no increase or decrease in 

authority or jurisdiction) 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. Thus, Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000) does not 

apply to this action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 

1997), because this action is not 

intended to address environmental 

health or safety risks for children. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This proposed rule is not subject to 

Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, 

May 22, 2001), because this action is not 

expected to affect energy supply, 

distribution, or use. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

Since this action does not involve any 

technical standards, section 12(d) of 

NTTAA, 15 U.S.C. 272 note, does not 

apply to this action. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

This proposed rule does not invoke 

special consideration of environmental 

justice related issues as delineated by 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994), because EPA has 

determined that this action will not 

have disproportionately high and 

adverse human health or environmental 

effects on minority or low-income 

populations. This action does not affect 

the level of protection provided to 

human health or the environment. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 721 

Environmental protection, Chemicals, 

Hazardous substances, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: July 30, 2015. 

Wendy C. Hamnett, 

Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and 

Toxics. 

Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR 

chapter I be amended as follows: 

PART 721—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 721 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2604, 2607, and 

2625(c). 

■ 2. Add § 721.10851 to subpart E to 

read as follows: 

§ 721.10851 Trichloroethylene. 

(a) Chemical substance and 

significant new uses subject to reporting. 

(1) The chemical substance 

trichloroethylene (CAS 79–01–6) is 

subject to reporting under this section 

for the significant new use described in 

paragraph (a)(2) of this section. 

(2) Manufacture or processing for use 

in a consumer product except for use in 

cleaners and solvent degreasers, film 

cleaners, hoof polishes, lubricants, 

mirror edge sealants, and pepper spray. 

(b) [Reserved] 

[FR Doc. 2015–19348 Filed 8–6–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 54 

[WC Docket Nos. 10–90 and 14–259; Report 

3025] 

Petition for Reconsideration of Action 

in a Rulemaking Proceeding 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Petition for reconsideration. 

SUMMARY: A Petition for Reconsideration 

(Petition) has been filed in the 

Commission’s Rulemaking proceeding 

by Harold Mordkofsky, on behalf of 

Halstad Telephone Company. 

DATES: Oppositions to the Petition must 

be filed on or before August 24, 2015. 

Replies to an opposition must be filed 

on or before September 1, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications 

Commission, 445 12th Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Alexander Minard, Telecommunications 

Access Policy Division, Wireline 

Competition Bureau, (202) 418–7400, 

email: Alexander.Minard@fcc.gov, TTY 

(202) 418–0484. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of Commission’s document, 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS