*** EO12866/13563 Review Draft – Deliberative 

– Do Not Cite, Quote, or 

Release During the Review ***

Economic Analysis of the 

Significant New Use Rule for 

Long-Chain Perfluoroalkyl 

Carboxylate Chemical 

Substances and Perfluoroalkyl 

Sulfonate Chemical 

Substances 

(EPA DOCKET EPA-HQ-OPPT-2013-0225)

Contract # EP-W-08-010 

July 30, 2014 

-- Does not contain TSCA CBI -- 

Prepared for: 

 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch 

 Economics, Exposure and Technology Division 

Office of Pollution, Prevention, and Toxics 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

Washington, DC 20460 
This Page Intentionally Left Blank 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. i

Economic Analysis of the Significant New Use Rule Long-Chain Perfluoroalkyl 

Carboxylate Chemical Substances and Perfluoroalkyl Sulfonate Chemical 

Substances (EPA DOCKET EPA-HQ-OPPT-2013- 0225) 

Table of Contents 

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1-1

1.1 Statutory Authority ......................................................................................................... 1-2

1.2 Summary of Methodology .............................................................................................. 1-2

1.3 Organization of this Report ............................................................................................ 1-2

2. Chemical Uses and Manufacturers ....................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Chemicals Subject to the Proposed Rule ........................................................................ 2-1

2.1.1 ......................................................................................................................... 2-2

2.1.2 CDR Chemicals ................................................................................................ 2-3

2.1.3 PFAS Chemical Substances .............................................................................. 2-5

2.2 Significant New Uses under the Proposed SNUR .......................................................... 2-5

2.3 Chemical Uses ................................................................................................................ 2-6

2.4 Potentially Affected Companies ..................................................................................... 2-7

2.5 Article Importation ....................................................................................................... 2-11

2.5.1 Affected Entities ............................................................................................. 2-11

2.5.2 Activities which may Impact the Use of PFCs in the Supply Chain .............. 2-15

3. Industry Compliance Costs .................................................................................................... 3-1

3.1 Wage Rates ..................................................................................................................... 3-2

3.2 Unit Industry Compliance Costs ..................................................................................... 3-3

3.2.1 Rule Familiarization ......................................................................................... 3-3

3.2.2 CDX Registration, CDX Electronic Signature, and Pay.gov Account Setup ... 3-4

3.2.3 Form Completion and Submission Fee ............................................................. 3-5

3.2.4 Recordkeeping for Companies Choosing to Submit a SNUN .......................... 3-7

3.2.5 Recordkeeping for Companies that Do Not Submit a SNUN........................... 3-8

3.2.6 Customer Notification ...................................................................................... 3-8

3.2.7 Import Certification .......................................................................................... 3-9

3.2.8 Export Notification ......................................................................................... 3-10

3.2.9 Estimated Number of Annual Export Notifications per Exporter .................. 3-10

3.2.10 Exporter Costs ................................................................................................ 3-11

3.2.11 Article Importation ......................................................................................... 3-13

3.2.12 Potential Compliance Activities (Article Importers) ...................................... 3-14

3.3 Summary of per Submission Costs, by Option ............................................................... 3-0

3.4 Likelihood of SNUN Submission ................................................................................... 3-1

3.5 Potential for Subsequent Regulatory Actions ................................................................. 3-1

4. Agency Costs ............................................................................................................................ 4-1

4.1 Labor Rates for EPA Staff .............................................................................................. 4-1

4.2 SNUN Processing Costs ................................................................................................. 4-2

4.3 Export Notification Cost ................................................................................................. 4-6

5. Benefits ..................................................................................................................................... 5-1

6. Additional Analyses ................................................................................................................ 6-1
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. ii

6.1 Regulatory Flexibility Act .............................................................................................. 6-1

6.2 Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) .................................................................... 6-2

6.3 Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) ................................................................................... 6-2

6.4 Executive Order 13132, Federalism ............................................................................... 6-2

6.5 Executive Order 12898, Environmental Justice ............................................................. 6-3

6.6 Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children ............................................................. 6-3

6.7 Executive Order 13175, Tribal Governments ................................................................. 6-3

6.8 Executive Order 13211, Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use ....................................... 6-3

6.9 Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review ....................... 6-3

7. References ................................................................................................................................ 7-1

Appendix A – Wage Rate Calculations 

 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. iii

List of Exhibits

Exhibit 2-1: PFOA and Its Salts .......................................................................................................... 2-2

Exhibit 2-2: LCPFAC Chemical Substances and Aggregate National Production Volumes as 

Reported in the Non-Confidential 2012 CDR Database ................................................. 2-4

Exhibit 2-3: LPFAC Chemcial Substances and Company Level Production Volumes as Reported in 

the Non-Confidental 2012 CDR Database ..................................................................... 2-9

Exhibit 2-4: Examples of Industries that may Import Articles Containing LCPFACs .................... 2-12

Exhibit 3-1: Loaded Industry Wage Rates, December 2012 .............................................................. 3-3

Exhibit 3-2: Rule Familiarization Burden and Cost for SNUR Submitters ........................................ 3-4

Exhibit 3-3: CDX Registration, CDX Electronic Signature, and Pay.gov Account Setup Burden and 

Cost for First-Time Submitters ....................................................................................... 3-5

Exhibit 3-4: Industry Cost Estimate to Complete the SNUN Form .................................................... 3-7

Exhibit 3-5: Industry Cost Estimate to Complete and Submit the SNUN Form ................................ 3-7

Exhibit 3-6: Annual Per-Chemical Costs of Recordkeeping Requirement for Companies that Choose 

not to Submit a SNUN .................................................................................................... 3-8

Exhibit 3-7: Derivation of Total Mailing Cost for 12 Notices .......................................................... 3-11

Exhibit 3-8: TSCA 12(b) Export Notification Cost per Notification ............................................... 3-12

Exhibit 3-9: Range of costs associated with an importer’s identification of chemicals subject to 

SNURs in articles ......................................................................................................... 3-15

Exhibit 3-10: Compliance Options and Associated Costs Incurred by a Firm Due to the 

Proposed SNUR ............................................................................................................ 3-18

Exhibit 4-1: Derivation of Loaded Agency Wage Rates, 2012 .......................................................... 4-1

Exhibit 4-2: Derivation of Inflation Factors for Agency Extramural Costs ....................................... 4-3

Exhibit 4-3: Agency Costs for SNUN and Other Submission Review and Processing ...................... 4-4

Exhibit 4-4: TSCA 12(b) Export Notification Cost: Agency Burden per Activity (2012$) ............... 4-6

Exhibit 7-1: Derivation of Loaded Wage Rates ................................................................................. A-3

Exhibit 7-2: Derivation of Inflation Factors ...................................................................................... A-5

 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. iv

Contributors 

The EPA analyst responsible for this report was Timothy Lehman. Analytical and draft preparation 

support was provided by Abt Associates Inc. under EPA Contract No. EP-W-08-010. 

 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. v

Executive Summary 

Under section 5(a)(2) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to amend a significant new use rule (SNUR) at 40 CFR 

721.10536 for LCPFAC chemical substances by designating manufacturing (including import) or 

processing of LCPFAC chemical substances listed in Exhibit 2-2 for any use that will not be ongoing 

after December 31, 2015, as a significant new use; designating manufacturing (including importing) 

or processing of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) or its salts (listed in Exhibit 2-1) for any use as a 

significant new use; and designating manufacturing (including importing) or processing of all other 

LCPFAC chemicals substances for which there are currently no ongoing uses, as a significant new 

use. . For this SNUR, EPA is also proposing to make theexemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f) inapplicable 

for persons who import LCPFAC chemical substances listed in Exhibit 2-2 or PFOA or its salts as 

part of an article for a significant new use. However, EPA is also proposing that the exemption at 40 

CFR 721.45(f) remain in effect for persons who process chemical substances as part of an article 

because existing stocks of articles may still contain LCPFAC or PFOA chemical substances. In 

addition, EPA is also proposing to amend a SNUR at 721.9582 for perfluoroalkyl sulfonate (PFAS) 

chemical substances that would make the exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f) inapplicable for persons 

who import of PFAS chemical substances as part of carpets 

Persons subject to these SNURs would be required to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing 

any significant new use. The required notifications would provide EPA with the opportunity to 

evaluate the intended use and, if necessary, to prohibit or limit that activity before it occurs. A firm 

intending to engage in these activities would be required to submit a Significant New Use Notice 

(SNUN), incurring an estimated submission cost of $8,589 for large businesses per chemical1

, and 

potentially other minor costs. The required notification would provide EPA with the opportunity to 

evaluate the intended use and, if necessary, to prevent or limit potentially adverse effects from 

chemical use before it occurs. 

Firms importing articles that may use any of the LCPFAC chemicals listed in Exhibit 2-2, PFOA or 

its salts, or PFAS as part of carpets will need to determine whether the articles it imports uses any of 

these substances, and if so, either cease to import them or submit a SNUN. To determine if an article 

uses any of the LCPFAC chemicals listed in Exhibit 2-2, PFOA or its salts, or PFAS as part of 

carpets, a firm may either gather information from its suppliers to insure the article does not contain 

any of these chemicals and/or conduct testing samples of the article itself. However, EPA expects that 

no firms will be importing LCPFAC chemicals listed in Exhibit 2-2 as part of articles after 2015 as a 

result of the PFOA Stewardship Program, which plans on eliminating global emissions and product 

content of these chemicals by 2015. In addition, EPA also expects that no firms will be importing 

PFOA or its salts as part of articles or importing carpets PFAS chemical substances as part of carpets. 

In addition to any firms that may make a SNUN submission, the proposed SNUR may also affect 

firms that do not make a submission. By avoiding a significant new use, a firm can avoid submission 

and testing costs but may incur other compliance costs. The firm may also incur “hidden” costs; for 

 

1

 For small businesses, the estimated cost is $6,189 to complete and submit a SNUN. See section 3.2.3 for 

details. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. vi

example, it could forego profitable opportunities to use the chemical in an application that would be a 

significant new use, or limit production volume to avoid a significant new use. 

Costs in this report are estimated at the firm level and reflect the burden of a SNUR on the firms that 

make a submission. The potential hidden costs to the firms that do not make a submission are not 

quantified. EPA receives only a handful of SNUNs per year. The number of firms affected by not 

making submissions to EPA is not known; therefore, costs are not aggregated across the affected 

entities. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 1-1

1. Introduction 

This report presents the estimated costs of the proposed Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) for longchain perfluoroalkyl carboxylate (LCPFAC) chemical substances. Under section 5(a)(2) of the Toxic 

Substances Control Act (TSCA), EPA is proposing to amend a SNUR at 40 CFR 721.10536 for 

LCPFAC chemical substances by designating manufacturing (including import) or processing of 

LCPFAC chemical substances listed in Exhibit 2-2 for any use that will not be ongoing after 

December 31, 2015, as a significant new use; designating manufacturing (including importing) or 

processing of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) or its salts for any use as a significant new use; and 

designating manufacturing (including importing) or processing of all other LCPFAC chemicals 

substances for which there are currently no ongoing uses, as a significant new use. 

For this SNUR, EPA is also proposing to make the exemption at CFR 40 721.45(f) inapplicable for 

persons who import LCPFAC chemical substances listed in Exhibit 2-2 or PFOA or its salts as part of 

an article for a significant new use. However, EPA is also proposing that the exemption at CFR 40 

721.45(f) remain in effect for persons who process chemical substances as part of an article because 

existing stocks of articles may still contain LCPFAC or PFOA chemical substances. EPA is also 

proposing to amend a SNUR at 40 CFR 721.9582 for PFAS chemical substances to make the 

exemption at CFR 40 721.45(f) inapplicable for persons who import of PFAS chemical substances as 

part of carpets. The proposed SNUR requires manufacturers (including importers) or processors of 

chemicals subject to this SNUR to notify EPA at least 90 days prior to the occurrence of any 

significant new use. The required notifications will provide EPA with the opportunity to evaluate the 

intended use and, if necessary, to prohibit or limit that activity before it occurs. 

EPA will not designate ongoing uses as significant new uses. Persons who manufacture (including 

import) or process any of the chemical substances subject to this SNUR for an ongoing use would be 

free to continue without submitting a SNUN. Note, however, that uses not already ongoing as of 

publication date, 2014 would not be considered ongoing uses if they later arose between the date of 

publication and the effective date for the final rule. Furthermore, uses that are ongoing as of 

publication date, 2014 would not be considered ongoing uses if they have ceased by the date of 

issuance of a final rule. Persons who intend to begin (or resume) commercial manufacture (including 

import) or processing of the chemical substance(s) for a significant new use would have to comply 

with all applicable SNUN requirements. 

The term LCPFAC refers to the long-chain category of perfluorinated carboxylate chemical 

substances with perfluorinated carbon chain lengths equal to or greater than seven carbons and less 

than or equal to 20 carbons. The category of LCPFAC chemical substances also includes the salts and 

precursors of these perfluorinated carboxylates (See section 2.1 for further details). Note that PFOA 

and its salts covered by this rule are considered LCPFAC chemical substances. 

The term PFAS in this proposed rule refers to a general category of perfluorinated sulfonate chemical 

substances of any chain length. These chemical substances are referred collectively in this rule as 

perfluoroalkyl sulfonates, or PFAS chemical substances. The PFAS chemical substances for which 

EPA is modifying an existing SNUR are currently listed in 40 CFR 721.9582. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 1-2

1.1 Statutory Authority 

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 

SNUN to EPA at least 90 days before manufacturing, importing, or processing the chemical 

substance for that use (15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(1)(B)). 

The general SNUR provisions are found at 40 CFR Part 721, Subpart A. 

1.2 Summary of Methodology 

This analysis quantifies, to the extent possible, the costs of the proposed rule to society by identifying 

the costs to industry associated with performing the required reporting and recordkeeping activities, 

and the costs to EPA of administering the rule. Industry costs consist of rule familiarization; 

registration with the Central Data Exchange (CDX) electronic reporting tool; collection, compilation, 

and submission of required information for significant new uses of the subject chemicals; export 

notification; and recordkeeping. Agency costs include reviewing and processing the data received as a 

result of the rule. Data sources for this analysis include burden estimates derived from previous 

information collection requests and economic analyses for related rules, compensation data acquired 

from government publications, and supplementary market research. 

In addition to estimated costs, this report qualitatively discusses the benefits of the proposed rule 

based on the value of the information it would provide. 

1.3 Organization of this Report 

The remainder of this report presents EPA’s economic analysis in support of the proposed rule. A 

description of LCPFACs, including PFOA or its salts, and PFAS chemicals affected by this SNUR 

are provided in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 contains estimates of the industry costs to comply with the 

proposed rule, and Chapter 4 shows estimates of the government costs associated with the 

administration of the proposed rule. Chapter 5 addresses the benefits of the proposed rule. Several 

additional impact analyses are presented in Chapter 6, including: small entity impact analysis, as 

mandated by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA); a burden hour analysis that responds to the 

requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA); an analysis of unfunded mandates that pertains 

to the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA); an analysis of environmental justice implications 

that addresses the requirements of Executive Order 12898; and an analysis of children’s health 

pertinent to Executive Order 13045. 

Note that all dollar values in this analysis are reported in 2012 dollars, except for the U.S. Postal 

Service mailing rates, which reflect postal rates as of April 9, 2013. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 2-1

2. Chemical Uses and Manufacturers 

2.1 Chemicals Subject to the Proposed Rule 

EPA is proposing to amend a SNUR at 40 CFR 721.10536 for LCPFAC chemical substances by 

designating manufacturing (including import) or processing of LCPFAC chemical substances listed in 

Exhibit 2-2 for any use that will not be ongoing after December 31, 2015, as a significant new use; 

designating manufacturing (including importing) or processing of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) or 

its salts for any use as a significant new use; and designating manufacturing (including importing) or 

processing of all other LCPFAC chemicals substances for which there are currently no ongoing uses, 

as a significant new use. For this SNUR, EPA is also proposing to make the exemption at CFR 40 

721.45(f) inapplicable to persons who import LCPFAC chemical substances listed in Exhibit 2-2 or 

PFOA or its salts as part of an article for a significant new use. However, EPA is also proposing that 

the exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f) remain in effect for persons who process chemical substances as 

part of an article because existing stocks of articles may still contain LCPFAC or PFOA chemical 

substances. EPA is also proposing to amend a SNUR at 40 CFR 721.9582 for PFAS chemical 

substances to make the exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f) inapplicable to persons who import of PFAS 

chemical substances as part of carpets. 

Long-chain perfluorinated chemicals (LCPFCs) are found world-wide in the environment, wildlife, 

and humans. They are bioaccumulative in wildlife and humans, and are persistent in the environment 

(Danish Ministry of the Environment, 2008). To date, significant adverse effects have not been found 

in the general human population2

; however, LCPFCs have been linked to a number of health effects, 

including thyroid disease and reproductive function (Knox, et al., 2011; Melzer, et al., 2010). 

EPA believes that the commencement of manufacturing, import, or processing of these chemicals 

would significantly increase the magnitude and duration of exposure to humans and the environment. 

In this rule, the term LCPFAC refers to the long-chain category of perfluorinated carboxylate 

chemical substances with perfluorinated carbon chain lengths equal to or greater than seven carbons 

and less than or equal to twenty carbons. The category of LCPFAC chemical substances also includes 

the salts and precursors of these perfluorinated carboxylates. 

LCPFAC chemical substances are synthetic chemicals that do not occur naturally in the environment. 

The LCPFAC chemical substances are identified as follows, where where 5<n<21 or 6<m<21: 

a. CF3(CF2)n-COOM where M = H+

 or any other group where a formal dissociation can be 

made; 

b. CF3(CF2)n-CH=CH2; 

c. CF3(CF2)n-C(=O)-X where X is any chemical moiety; 

d. CF3(CF2)m-CH2-X where X is any chemical moiety; and 

 

2

 Based on review of a number of studies examining health effects of LCPFCs. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 2-2

e. CF3(CF2)m-Y-X where Y = non-S, non-N hetero atom and where X is any chemical moiety. 

This category definition of LCPFAC, based on the chemical structures above, refers to a large 

group of chemical substances containing perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and its higher homologues. 

The category also includes the salts and precursors of these chemical substances. The precursors may 

be simple derivatives of PFOA and higher homologues or polymers that contain or may degrade to 

PFOA or higher homologues. These precursors include certain long-chain fluorotelomers.

2.1.1 PFOA 

PFOA is an eight-carbon chain length chemical. PFOA is the most studied chemical of the LCPFAC 

chemical substances. PFOA is manufactured for use primarily as an aqueous dispersion agent, as the 

ammonium salt, in the manufacture of fluoropolymers, such as PTFE, which have thousands of 

important manufacturing and industrial applications (Prevedouros et al, 2006 ). PFOA can also be 

produced unintentionally by the degradation of some fluorotelomers, which are not manufactured 

using PFOA but could degrade to PFOA (Washington et al, 2009). Fluorotelomers are used to make 

polymers that impart soil, stain, grease, and water resistance to coated articles. Some fluorotelomer 

based products are also used as high performance surfactants in products where an even flow is 

essential, such as paints, coatings, cleaning products, and fire-fighting foams for use on liquid fuel 

fires (OECD PFC Steering Group, 2010). 

DuPont was the sole manufacturer of PFOA and its salts in the United States until it ceased 

manufacture at all its facilities worldwide in 2013. In addition, PFOA and its salts are not imported 

into the United States. APFO is the ammonium salt of PFOA which dissociates to PFOA in water 

(Burns et al, 2008). 

In this proposal, PFOA and its salts includes the chemical substances with the Chemical Abstract 

Service (CAS) Registry Numbers (CASRN) and chemical names shown in Exhibit 2-1. EPA is 

designing manufacturing (including importing) or processing of PFOA or its salts for any use as a 

significant new use. 

Exhibit 2-1: PFOA and Its Salts and Aggregate National Production Volumes as Reported in 

the Non-Confidential 2012 CDR Database 

CAS Registry 

Number (CAS 

RN) 

Chemical Name 

National 

Production 

Volume in 2011 

(lbs)2

335-67-1 Octanoic acid, pentadecafluoro- (PFOA) Withheld 

3825-26-1 Octanoic acid, pentadecafluoro-) ammonium salt 

(APFO) Withheld 

335-95-5 Octanoic acid, pentadecafluoro-) sodium salt No Reports 

2395-00-8 Octanoic acid, pentadecafluoro-) potassium salt No Reports 

335-93-3 Octanoic acid, pentadecafluoro-) silver salt No Reports 

335-66-0 Octanoyl fluoride, pentadecafluoro- Withheld 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 2-3

2.1.2 CDR Chemicals 

Exhibit 2-2 provides a list of LCPFAC of 20 non-confidential chemical substances, which are known 

to have current or recent ongoing uses on the basis of their inclusion in reports submitted to the 

Agency under the 2012 Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) rule. The manufacturing (including import) 

or processing of these chemical substances listed for any use that will not be ongoing after December 

31, 2015, will be considered a significant new use. This list is only a sample of the chemicals that 

may be regulated under the proposed rule, as only sites manufacturing more than 25,000 lbs. of a 

chemical in 2011 were required to report under CDR. EPA is also designating manufacturing 

(including importing) or processing of all other LCPFAC chemicals substances, which are not listed 

in Exhibit 2-2 and for which there are currently no ongoing uses, as a significant new use. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 2-4

Exhibit 2-2: LCPFAC Chemical Substances and Aggregate National Production Volumes as 

Reported in the Non-Confidential 2012 CDR Database 

Chemical 

Category of 

CAS Registry 

Number 

(CASRN)1

Accession 

Number Chemical Name 

National 

Production 

Volume in 

2011 (lbs)2

1 507-63-1 - Octane, 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8-heptadecafluoro-8-iodo- Withheld 

2 678-39-7 - 1-Decanol, 3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10,10-heptadecafluoro- Withheld 

3 865-86-1 - 1-Dodecanol, 3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10,11,11,12,12,12-heneicosafluoro- Withheld 

4 2043-53-0 - Decane, 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8-heptadecafluoro-10-iodo- Withheld

5 2043-54-1 - Dodecane, 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10 ,10-heneicosafluoro-12-iodo- Withheld 

6 17741-60-5 - 2-Propenoic acid, 3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10,11,11, 12,12,12-

heneicosafluorododecyl ester

Withheld 

7 27905-45-9 - 2-Propenoic acid, 3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10,10-heptadecafluorodecyl ester Withheld 

8 30046-31-2 - Tetradecane, 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10,11,11,12,12-

pentacosafluoro-14-iodoWithheld 

9 39239-77-5 - 1-Tetradecanol, 3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10,11,11,12,12,13,13,14,14,14-

pentacosafluoroWithheld 

10 60699-51-6 

- 1-Hexadecanol, 

3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10,11,11,12,12,13,13,14,14,15,15,16,16,16-

nonacosafluoroWithheld 

11 65510-55-6 - Hexadecane, 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10,11,11,12,12,13,13,14,14-

nonacosafluoro-16-iodoWithheld 

12 68187-47-3 - 1-Propanesulfonic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-[[1-oxo-3-[(.gamma.-.omega.-perfluoro- C4-

16-alkyl)thio]propyl]amino] derivs., sodium salts 128,784 

13 68391-08-2 - Alcohols, C8-14, .gamma.-.omega.-perfluoro Withheld

14 70969-47-0 - Thiols, C8-20, .gamma.-.omega.-perfluoro, telomers with acrylamide 127,592 

15 125476-71-3 

- Silicic acid (H4SiO4), sodium salt (1:2), reaction products with 

chlorotrimethylsilane and 3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10,10-heptadecafluoro-1-

decanol

33,455 

16 1078712-88-5 - Thiols, C4-20, .gamma.-.omega.-perfluoro, telomers with acrylamide and acrylic 

acid, sodium salts 34,374 

17 1078715-61-3 - 1-Propanaminium, 3-amino-N-(carboxymethyl)-N,N-dimethyl-, N-[2-[(.gamma.-

.omega.-perfluoro-C4-20-a lkyl)thio]acetyl] derivs., inner salts 95,372 

18 - 89419 Modified fluoroalkyl urethane Withheld

19 - 71217 Polyfluoroalkyl betaine Withheld

20 - 274147 Perfluorinated polyamine Withheld

Sources: 

2EPA, 2013a. US Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, “2012 Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) Data as 

provided by EPA’s Chemical Data Access Tool (CDAT)” Accessed February 2013
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 2-5

2.1.3 PFAS Chemical Substances 

In this SNUR, the term PFAS refers to a general category of perfluorinated sulfonate chemical 

substances of any chain length. These chemical substances are referred collectively in this rule as 

perfluoroalkyl sulfonates, or PFAS chemical substances EPA is amending a SNUR at 40 CFR 

721.9582 for PFAS chemical substances to make inapplicable the exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f) for 

persons who import PFAS chemicals as part of carpets. EPA believes that action on these PFAS 

chemicals is warranted because the commencement of import of these chemicals as part of carpets 

would significantly increase the magnitude and duration of exposure of humans and the environment 

to these chemicals. 

2.2 Significant New Uses under the Proposed SNUR 

EPA may promulgate a SNUR for a substance when potential use could result in significant changes 

in human exposure or environmental release levels and/or that concern exists about the substance’s 

health or environmental effects (40 CFR 721.170). According to TSCA Section 5(a)(2), the 

determination that a chemical use qualifies as a significant new use must consider all relevant factors, 

including: 

 The projected volume of manufacturing, importation, and processing of the chemical substance; 

 The extent to which a use changes the type or form of exposure of human beings or the 

environment to a chemical substance; 

 The extent to which a use increases the magnitude and duration of exposure of human beings or 

the environment to a chemical substance; and 

 The reasonably anticipated manner and methods of manufacturing, processing, distribution in 

commerce, and disposal of a chemical substance. 

EPA is proposing to define the significant new use as: 1) manufacturing (including import) or 

processing of LCPFAC chemical substances listed in Exhibit 2-2 for any use that will not be ongoing 

after December 31, 2015; 2) manufacturing (including importing) or processing of perfluorooctanoic 

acid (PFOA) or its salts for any use; and 3) manufacturing (including importing) or processing of all 

other LCPFAC chemicals substances for which there are currently no ongoing uses, as a significant 

new use. For this SNUR, EPA is also proposing to make the exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f) 

inapplicable for persons who import LCPFAC chemical substances listed in Exhibit 2-2 or PFOA or 

its salts as part of an article for a significant new use. However, EPA is also proposing that the 

exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f) remain in effect for persons who process chemical substances as part 

of an article because existing stocks of articles may still contain LCPFAC or PFOA chemical 

substances. In addition, EPA is also proposing to amend a SNUR at 40 CFR 721.9582 for 

perfluoroalkyl sulfonate (PFAS) chemical substances that would make the exemption at 40 CFR 

721.45(f) inapplicable for persons who import PFAS chemical substances as part of carpets. 

A company would be expected to submit a SNUN for any of the chemical substances used that are 

included in the proposed SNUR prior to initiating a new use. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 2-6

2.3 Chemical Uses 

PFACs are substances with special properties that have a variety of industrial applications. PFACs 

provide characteristics such as thermo-stability, ability to adapt to a variety of surface characteristics, 

high chemical stability, and other characteristics.3

 Fluoropolymers, in particular, have properties that 

include fire resistance and oil, stain, grease, and water repellency. Fluorotelomers can be used in 

surface treatment products in order to impart the following properties: soil, stain, grease, and water 

resistance. Fluorotelomers can also be used as surfactants to help products flow more evenly (EPA, 

2009d). 

PFACs are used in a wide variety of industries ranging from medical devices to wire and cable to 

textile products. The following list provides general categories of uses and applications for 

LCPFACs.4

 The proposed rule also applies to PFAS chemical substance used to treat carpets. 

 Aerospace 

o Wire insulation 

o Aircraft cabin interiors (films laminated to hardboard, paper, vinyl, polystyrene, 

polyurethane, and other substrates) 

o Heat-shrinkable tubing made from PVDF resin forms ‘‘solder sleeves’’ 

 Automotive 

o Engine oil seals (rotating and reciprocating types) 

o Tubing 

 Building/ Construction 

o Exterior siding on industrial and residential buildings (PVF films are laminated to 

sheets of metal to make the siding) 

 Coatings 

o Coating for window frames 

o Linings for hoses 

o Antireflective coatings 

o Paper coatings for food package 

o Wax (floor and ski) 

 Electrical/ Electronics 

o Insulated hookup wire 

o Molded electrical parts 

o Electrical tape 

 Lubricants 

o Lubricant additives 

o Magnetic recording surfaces using perfluoropolyether lubricants, partially fluorinated 

diesters, and amine polyesters 

 Mechanical 

 

3

 Armeduri, Bruno; Bouterin, Bernard. Well-Architectured Floropolymers: Synthesis, Properties, and 

Applications. “Applications of Flourinated Telomers,” (p. 71). 

4

 The list is not comprehensive. Also, an application or use could fall under several categories because the 

classifications are broad. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 2-7

o Piston rings 

o Mechanical tapes 

o Conveyor belts 

 Medical 

o Battery cases for heart pacemakers 

o Prosthetic devices 

o Waterproof packaging for pharmaceuticals (thin film) 

 Military 

o Binders for military flares 

 Semiconductor 

o Chemical handling equipment 

o Engineering coatings used semiconductor manufacture 

 Solar 

o Film for solar collector windows 

 Surfactant 

o Cleaning products 

o Paints 

 Textiles 

o Clothing 

o Carpets 

o Architectural fabric (dome construction) 

 Wire and Cable 

o Insulating heater cables and automotive wiring 

o Control and instrumentation wire for utilities 

o Jacketing signal, control, communications, and power wiring for mass transport 

systems 

2.4 Potentially Affected Companies 

The proposed SNUR requires manufacturers, importers, and processors to notify EPA at least 90 days 

before commencing the manufacture, import, or processing of any of the subject chemicals for any 

significant new use. The proposed SNUR may also affect firms that currently do not manufacture, 

import, or process any of the chemicals, but who may be interested in manufacturing, importing, or 

processing these chemicals in the future. 

In January 2006, EPA launched the 2010/2015 PFOA Stewardship Program (PFOA Stewardship 

Program) in partnership with eight companies (EPA, 2006): 

 Arkema 

 Asahi Glass Company 

 BASF Corporation (successor to Ciba Ciba Specialty Chemicals Corporation) 

 Clariant 

 Daikin 

 3M/Dyneon 

 DuPont 

 Solvay Solexis 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 2-8

These companies represent a large portion of global manufacture of LCPFAC. The program set a goal 

of reducing facility emissions and product content of LCPFAC chemical substances on a global basis 

by 95 percent, no later than 2010, and to work toward eliminating emissions and product content of 

these chemicals by 2015. The eight participating companies have informed EPA that they are on track 

to phase out LCPFC by the end of 2015 (EPA, 2012). 

Based on the 2012 CDR reporting, there are some additional manufacturers (including importers) of 

certain LCPFAC chemical substances who are not participants in the PFOA Stewardship Program. 

These companies manufacture (including import) a small volume, compared to the volume of 

LCPFAC chemical substances manufactured (including imported) by PFOA Stewardship Program 

companies. Importers identify the volume but not the source of the chemicals they report under the 

CDR. Because the PFOA Stewardship Program member companies represent a large portion of the 

global production of LCPFAC chemical substances, it is likely that a portion of the import volume 

reported by non-Stewardship Program companies may represent the importation of substances 

manufactured by member companies. Further, because of the nature of the market, companies 

reporting the domestic manufacture of specific LCPFAC chemicals may be obtaining the feedstocks 

for that manufacturing process from companies participating in the PFOA Stewardship Program. For 

these companies to continue manufacturing (importing) LCPFAC chemical substances, they would 

need the feedstock and finished LCPFAC chemical substances currently supplied by companies 

participating in the PFOA Stewardship Program. As the PFOA Stewardship Program member 

companies phase out their manufacture of those substances and customer demand continues to shift 

from LCPFAC to alternatives, EPA believes that the manufacture (including import) of LCPFAC by 

companies not participating in the PFOA Stewardship Programs are likely to cease by December 31, 

2015. 

Exhibit 2-2 contains 2012 CDR production information by company. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP

Exhibit 2-3: PFOA and LPFAC Chemcial Substances and Company Level Production Volumes as Reported in th

2012 CDR Database 

CASRN Chemical Name Parent Company 

1 335-66-0 Octanoyl fluoride, 2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,8-p entadecafluoro- E I Du Pont De Nemours & Co 2 335-67-1 Octanoic acid, 2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,8-p entadecafluoro- E I Du Pont De Nemours & Co 3 507-63-1 Octane, 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8-heptadecafluoro-8-iodo- E I Du Pont De Nemours & Co 4 678-39-7 1-Decanol, 3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10,10-heptadecafluoro- E I Du Pont De Nemours & Co 5 865-86-1 1-Dodecanol, 3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10,11,11,12,12,12-heneicosafluoro- E I Du Pont De Nemours & Co 6 2043-53-0 Decane, 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8-heptadecafluoro-10-iodo- E I Du Pont De Nemours & Co 

CBI 

7 2043-54-1 Dodecane, 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10-heneicosafluoro-12-iodo- E I Du Pont De Nemours & Co 

CBI 

8 3825-26-1 Octanoic acid, 2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,8-p entadecafluoro-, ammonium salt E I Du Pont De Nemours & Co 9 17741-60-5 2-Propenoic acid, 3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10,11,11, 12,12,12-

heneicosafluorododecyl ester 

Daikin America Inc 

E I Du Pont De Nemours & Co 

10 27905-45-9 2-Propenoic acid, 3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10,10-h eptadecafluorodecyl 

ester 

Daikin America Inc 

E I Du Pont De Nemours & Co 

11 30046-31-2 Tetradecane, 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10,11,11,12,12- E I Du Pont De Nemours & Co 12 39239-77-5 1-Tetradecanol, 3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10,11,11,12,12,13,13,14,14,14- E I Du Pont De Nemours & Co 13 60699-51-6 1-Hexadecanol, 

3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10,11,11,12,12,13,13,14,14,15,15,16,16,16-

E I Du Pont De Nemours & Co 

14 65510-55-6 Hexadecane, 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10,11,11,12,12,13,13,14,14-

nonacosafluoro-16-iodoE I Du Pont De Nemours & Co 

15 68187-47-3 1-Propanesulfonic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-[[1-oxo-3-[(.gamma.-.omega.-perfluoroC4-16-alkyl)thio]propyl]amino] derivs., sodium salts Tyco Fire Protection Products 16 68391-08-2 Alcohols, C8-14, .gamma.-.omega.-perfluoro CBI 17 70969-47-0 Thiols, C8-20, .gamma.-.omega.-perfluoro, telomers with acrylamide Tyco Fire Protection Products 18 125476-71-3 

Silicic acid (H4SiO4), sodium salt (1:2), reaction products with 

chlorotrimethylsilane and 3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10,10-h eptadecafluoro1-decanol Dow Corning Corp 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP

CASRN Chemical Name Parent Company 

19 1078712-88-5 Thiols, C4-20, .gamma.-.omega.-perfluoro, telomers with acrylamide and acrylic 

acid, sodium salts 

Tyco Fire Protection Products 

20 1078715-61-3 1-Propanaminium, 3-amino-N-(carboxymethyl)-N,N-dimethyl-, N-[2-[(.gamma.-

.omega.-perfluoro-C4-20-a lkyl)thio]acetyl] derivs., inner salts Tyco Fire Protection Products 

Sources: 1EPA, 2013b. US Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Downloadable of the Non-Confide

(CDR) Database, February 2013 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 2-11

2.5 Article Importation 

The proposed SNUR will also require importers to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing 

the import of LCPFAC chemical substances listed in Exhibit 2-2and PFOA or its salts as part of 

articles. In addition, the proposed SNUR will require importers to notify EPA at least 90 days before 

commencing the import of PFAS chemical substances as part of carpets. The proposed SNUR may 

also affect firms that do not currently import articles using the chemicals, but who may be interested 

in importing these articles in the future. 

2.5.1 Affected Entities 

As stated in Section 2.3 LCPFACs are used in a wide variety of industries and may be found in a 

wide variety of products, including textiles, electronics, and wires and cables, which may be imported 

into the United States as finished articles. While EPA believes that the manufacture (including 

import) of LCPFAC by both companies participating in the PFOA Stewardship Program and not 

participating in Stewardship Program are likely to cease by December 31, 2015, EPA is concerned 

about the importation of articles containing LCPFAC increasing human and environmental exposure 

to LCPFAC chemicals. For example, in Norway the main source of PFOAs in the environment is 

from imported articles, such as textiles, carpets, paints and lacquers, and coated paper, as there is no 

current production or use of PFOAs in the country (Vierke et al, 2012 and Norwegian Pollution 

Control Authority, 2007). Exhibit 2-3 contains examples of NAICS codes for firms that may import 

articles that contain PFACs. This is not meant to be an exhaustive list, but rather an example of the 

types of industries that may be impacted by the articles exemption. 

Given the PFAS chemicals subject to an existing SNUR and the stringent international regulations on 

PFAS, EPA believes it is unlikely that any carpet will be imported containing PFAS chemicals 

subject to the proposed rule. 

Furthermore, due to the Significant New Use Rules (SNURs) for PFAS chemicals published in 2002 

and 2007 under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the manufacture (including importation) 

of PFAS chemicals in the United States is strictly limited. The 2002 SNURs (67 FR 11008, March 11, 

2002, and 67 FR 72863, December 9, 2002, as codified at 40 CFR 721.9582 limited future 

manufacture or import of 88 PFAS chemicals; an amendment published in 2007 (72 FR 57229, 

October 9, 2007) identified an additional 183 PFAS chemicals no longer being manufactured, 

imported, or used in the United States. Given the PFAS chemicals subject to an existing SNUR and 

the stringent international regulations on PFAS, EPA believes it is unlikely that any carpet will be 

imported containing PFAS chemicals subject to the proposed rule.
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

Exhibit 2-4: Examples of Industries that may Import Articles Containing LCPFACs NAICS Code Section Description315 Apparel Manufacturing Industries in the Apparel Manufacturing subsector group establishments with two distinct manu

cut and sew (i.e., purchasing fabric and cutting and sewing to make a garment), and (2) the manestablishments that first knit fabric and then cut and sew the fabric into a garment. The Apparel includes a diverse range of establishments manufacturing full lines of ready-to-wear apparel and contractors, performing cutting or sewing operations on materials owned by others; jobbers perffunctions involved in apparel manufacture; and tailors, manufacturing custom garments for indiincluded. 

334 Computer and 

Electronic Product Manufacturing 

Industries in the Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing subsector group establishmencomputers, computer peripherals, communications equipment, and similar electronic products, amanufacture components for such products 

335 Electrical Equipment, 

Appliance, and Component Manufacturing 

Industries in the Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component Manufacturing subsector ma

generate, distribute and use electrical power. Electric Lighting Equipment Manufacturing establ

electric lamp bulbs, lighting fixtures, and parts. Household Appliance Manufacturing establishmand major electrical appliances and parts. Electrical Equipment Manufacturing establishments melectric motors, generators, transformers, and switchgear apparatus. Other Electrical Equipment Manufacturing establishments make devices for storing electrical power (e.g., batteries), for tran

insulated wire), and wiring devices (e.g., electrical outlets, fuse boxes, and light switches). 

423 Merchant Wholesalers, 

Durable Goods 

Industries in the Merchant Wholesalers, Durable Goods subsector sell capital or durable goods tMerchant wholesalers generally take title to the goods that they sell; in other words, they buy anown account. Durable goods are new or used items generally with a normal life expectancy of thDurable goods merchant wholesale trade establishments are engaged in wholesaling products, s

furniture, construction materials, machinery and equipment (including household-type applianc(except petroleum), sporting goods, toys and hobby goods, recyclable materials, and parts. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

NAICS Code Section Description424 Merchant Wholesalers, 

Nondurable Goods 

Industries in the Merchant Wholesalers, Nondurable Goods subsector sell nondurable goods to Nondurable goods are items generally with a normal life expectancy of less than three years. No

merchant wholesale trade establishments are engaged in wholesaling products, such as paper anchemicals and chemical products, drugs, textiles and textile products, apparel, footwear, groceri

petroleum and petroleum products, alcoholic beverages, books, magazines, newspapers, flowers 

tobacco products. 

442 Furniture and Home 

Furnishings Stores 

Industries in the Furniture and Home Furnishings Stores subsector retail new furniture and hompoint-of-sale locations. Establishments in this subsector usually operate from showrooms and hathe presentation of their products. 

443 Electronics and 

Appliance Stores 

Industries in the Electronics and Appliance Stores subsector retail new electronics and applianc

locations. Establishments in this subsector often operate from locations that have special provis

requiring special electrical capacity to accommodate the proper demonstration of the products. Tpersonnel knowledgeable in the characteristics and warranties of the line of goods retailed and m

repair persons to handle the maintenance and repair of the electronic equipment and appliances. within this subsector are made principally on the type of product and knowledge required to ope

444 Building Material and 

Garden Equipment and Supplies Dealers 

Industries in the Building Material and Garden Equipment and Supplies Dealers subsector retail 

and garden equipment and supplies from fixed point-of-sale locations. Establishments in this suequipment designed to handle lumber and related products and garden equipment and supplies tindoors or outdoors under covered areas. The staff is usually knowledgeable in the use of the spretailed in the construction, repair, and maintenance of the home and associated grounds. 

448 Clothing and Clothing 

Accessories Stores 

Industries in the Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores subsector retail new clothing and clomerchandise from fixed point-of-sale locations. Establishments in this subsector have similar di

staff that is knowledgeable regarding fashion trends and the proper match of styles, colors, and and accessories to the characteristics and tastes of the customer. 

449 Sporting Goods, 

Hobby, Musical Instrument, and Book Stores 

Industries in the Sporting Goods, Hobby, Musical Instrument, and Book Stores subsector are enproviding expertise on the use of sporting equipment or other specific leisure activities, such as 

instruments. Book stores are also included in this subsector. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

NAICS Code Section Description450 General Merchandise 

Stores 

Industries in the General Merchandise Stores subsector retail new general merchandise from fixlocations. Establishments in this subsector are unique in that they have the equipment and staff large variety of goods from a single location. This includes a variety of display equipment and s

information on many lines of products. 

451 Nonstore Retailers Industries in the Nonstore Retailers subsector retail merchandise using methods, such as the bro

infomercials, the broadcasting and publishing of direct-response advertising, the publishing of pcatalogs, door-to-door solicitation, in-home demonstration, selling from portable stalls and distrmachines. Establishments in this subsector include mail-order houses, vending machine operato

door-to-door sales, party plan sales, electronic shopping, and sales through portable stalls (e.g., food). Establishments engaged in the direct sale (i.e., nonstore) of products, such as home heatinnewspaper delivery service providers are included in this subsector. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 2-15

2.5.2 Activities which may Impact the Use of PFCs in the Supply Chain 

State level and international regulatory as well as voluntary actions by firms may impact the use of a 

chemical within an article. Because suppliers of articles are likely to export to multiple countries, they 

may find it more cost effective to comply with the more stringent regulations in one country than to 

have two separate supply chains. Similarly, if a significant downstream consumer refuses to purchase 

products containing a certain chemical, the supplier may find it more profitable to stop using that 

chemical for all of its customers. 

Currently, the PFAS chemical substance, perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) is subject to many 

international regulations and was added to Annex B of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent 

Organic Pollutants (POPs).The European Union’s toxics law Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation 

and Restriction of Chemical (REACH) currently prohibits PFOS in semi-finished products or articles, 

at levels greater than 0.1 percent by weight or, for textiles or other coated materials at levels greater 

than 1 μg/m2

. Furthermore, due to the Significant New Use Rules (SNURs) for PFAS chemicals 

published in 2002 and 2007 under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the manufacture 

(including importation) of PFAS chemicals in the United States is strictly limited. The 2002 SNURs 

(67 FR 11008, March 11, 2002, and 67 FR 72863, December 9, 2002, as codified at 40 CFR 

721.9582 limited future manufacture or import of 88 PFAS chemicals; an amendment published in 

2007 (72 FR 57229, October 9, 2007) identified an additional 183 PFAS chemicals no longer being 

manufactured, imported, or used in the United States. These SNURs were issued following the after 

the voluntary phase out of PFOS and its related chemicals between 2000 and 2002 by 3M, the only 

US manufacture of PFOS (EPA, 2000b and 3M, 2013). PFOS was used by 3M in Scotchgard TM a 

stain and water repellant used to treat carpets and other fabrics (EPA, 2000b). Given the PFAS 

chemicals are no longer manufactured, imported, or used in the United States and the stringent 

international regulations on PFOSEPA has no evidence of the international use of these chemicals in 

the treatment of carpets and it is believed that no carpets will be imported containing PFAS chemicals 

subject to the proposed rule. 

Regulatory and voluntary action regarding the use of PFOAs has been conducted at the national level. 

Canada currently has an agreement with five companies to work towards the elimination of residual 

PFOA, residual Long Chain PFACs and residual precursors in their perfluorochemical products sold 

in Canada and Germany has recommended maximum concentrations for drinking water (Environment 

Canada, 2010 and German Federal Environmental Agency, 2009).5

 While neither of these actions 

applies to the use of PFACs in articles, Norway has proposed regulate the content of PFOA in 

consumer products with a percentage by weight limit of 0.0001 percent and 1 μg/m2 for textiles, 

carpeting and other coated materials (Norwegian Pollution Control Authority, 2010 and European 

Commission, 2010). 

 

5

 Environment Canada defines a perfluorochemical product as a perfluorinated or polyfluorinated chemical 

product that may contain PFOA, Long Chain PFCAs, Precursors, or mixtures of these 

substances. Perfluorochemical Products are Fluoropolymers, Fluoropolymer Dispersions, and 

Fluorotelomer-Based Substances. Perfluorochemical Products do not include end products and formulated 

items (i.e., paints, cleaners and surface treatments), the articles to which they are applied (i.e., carpets, 

textiles and paper), and the articles that are manufactured from them. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 2-16

In addition to government regulatory approaches individual companies have also been taking 

voluntary approaches to banning PFCs in articles. The clothing company H&M has committed to 

banning PFCs in all its products by January 1st 2013 (H&M, 2012) and British department store 

Marks and Spencer’s has committed to phasing out PFCs by 2020 (Greenpeace, 2012). Several other 

clothing companies have indicated that they are currently in the process of substituting 8 chain 

PFOAs for 6 Chain PFOAs and non-fluorinated alternatives and have also indicated that they plan on 

eliminating the use of LCPFAC in 2015 as a result of EPA’s stewardship program (Patagonia, 2012, 

Adidas, 2012,Outsideonline, 2012, bluesign, 2012, and Jack-Wolfskin, 2012). 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 3-1

3. Industry Compliance Costs 

The proposed SNUR discussed in this report specifies that any manufacture (including import) or 

processing of LCPFACs for a designated significant new use would require reporting under section 

5(a)(1)(A) of TSCA. In addition, the proposed rule revokes the exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f) for 

importers of LCPFAC chemical substances listed in Exhibit 2-2 and PFOA or its salts as part of articles 

and for PFAS chemical substances as part of carpets. Therefore, a firm intending to manufacture 

(including import) and/or process any of these LCPFACs for a significant new use, import LCPFAC 

chemical substances listed in Exhibit 2-2 or PFOA or its salts as part of articles, or import PFAS chemicas 

as part of carpets must submit a SNUN. Alternatively, a firm can decide not to manufacture, import, 

and/or process these chemicals or articles in such a way that it is not considered a significant new use. 

The firm, therefore, has two options: 

 Option 1: Submit a SNUN. A SNUN indicates to EPA that the firm would like to manufacture, 

import, and/or process the chemical for a significant new use, which, in this case, means 1) 

manufacturing (including import) or processing of LCPFAC chemical substances listed in Exhibit 2-2 

for any use that will not be ongoing after December 31, 2015; 2) manufacturing (including importing) 

or processing of PFOA or its salts for any use; 3) manufacturing (including importing) or processing 

of all other LCPFAC chemicals substances for which there are currently no ongoing uses, as a 

significant new use; and 4) importing any of the twenty LCPFAC chemical substances listed in 

Exhibit 2-2 or PFOA or its salts as part of an article or PFAS chemical substances as part of carpet. A 

firm must submit the SNUN to EPA at least 90 days before it plans to commence the manufacture, 

import, and/or processing of the new use of the substance. The SNUN provides EPA with the 

opportunity to evaluate the intended use and, if necessary, to prohibit or limit that activity before it 

occurs. If EPA allows the manufacture, import, and/or processing of any of the chemical substances 

for a significant new use, then the costs associated with this option are the costs of submitting the 

SNUN (including a user fee) plus, if there is any export of these chemicals, the export notification 

costs that result from TSCA Section 12 (b) requirements that are automatically triggered for 

chemicals regulated under TSCA Section 5 (see Section 3.2.8 for details). 

 Option 2: Comply with SNUR limits (not manufacture, import, and/or process a new use of the 

chemical). A firm can avoid engaging in a Significant New Use and submitting a SNUN by not 

manufacturing, importing, and/or processing any of the chemical substances in a manner such that 

they would be considered new uses. That is, if the firm does not 1) manufacture (including import) or 

process LCPFAC chemical substances listed in Exhibit 2-2 for any use that will not be ongoing after 

December 31, 2015; 2) manufacturing (including importing) or processing of PFOA or its salts for 

any use; 3) manufacturing (including importing) or processing of all other LCPFAC chemicals 

substances for which there are currently no ongoing uses, as a significant new use; and 4) import any 

of the twenty LCPFAC chemical substances listed in Exhibit 2-2, PFOA or its salts as part of an 

article, or PFAS chemical substances as part of carpet, then it would meet all applicable SNUR 

requirements. While this option avoids the costs of submitting a SNUN, it may entail the “hidden” 

cost of the foregone profit as a result of not engaging in the commercial activity originally planned, 

and may involve substituting one of the subject chemicals for another, more costly substance. If the 

firm elects to produce the chemical for research and development (R&D) purposes only (an 

exemption for R&D purposes is provided in 40 CFR 721.47), it may have costs associated with R&D 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 3-2

recordkeeping. In addition, if the firm exports any existing stockpiles of the chemicals, it would incur 

the export notification costs. The firm may also pursue this option temporarily by complying with 

SNUR restrictions while also pursuing Option 1. Due to the uncertainty related to this option, and 

EPA’s expectation that affected entities would select Option 1, the costs of Option 2 are not fully 

quantified in this report. 

The remainder of this chapter estimates the quantified portion of costs associated with the proposed 

SNUR. Section 3.1 summarizes the wage rates used in this chapter. Section 3.2 provides the unit industry 

compliance costs, including the costs of rule familiarization, registration with the Central Data Exchange 

(CDX) electronic reporting tool, completing the SNUN form, submission fee, import certification, and 

export notification. Total costs under each option are presented in Section 3.3. 

3.1 Wage Rates 

The proposed rule involves activities that may require efforts by employees in three labor classifications: 

managerial, technical, and clerical. Costs for each activity are calculated by estimating the labor hours 

required in each labor category and multiplying those burden hours by the wage rate for the 

corresponding labor category. This section presents the estimated wage rate in each labor category. 

Loaded wage rates for managerial, technical, and clerical personnel are derived by combining data on 

wages and fringe benefits with estimates of overhead rates, following the methodology described in Wage 

Rates for Economic Analysis of the Toxics Release Inventory Program (EPA, 2002b). Wage data for each 

labor category for December 2012 are provided by the Employer Costs for Employee Compensation 

(ECEC) Supplemental Tables available on the BLS website (BLS, 2013a). The loaded wage rate is $72.87 

for managerial labor; $64.38 for technical labor; and $29.51 for clerical labor. Exhibit 3-1 presents the 

data used to calculate the loaded wage rates for the three labor categories. Appendix A: provides more 

information on the wage rates and inflation factors used in this analysis. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 3-3

Exhibit 3-1: Loaded Industry Wage Rates, December 2012 

Labor 

Category Data Source Date 

Wage Fringe 

Benefit 

Fringe 

as % 

Wage 

Overhead 

% 

Wage 

Fringe + 

Overhead 

Loaded 

Wages1

(a) (b) (c) 

=(b)/(a) (d) (e)=(c)+ 

(d)+1 

(f)=(a) 

x (e) 

Managerial 

BLS ECEC, Private 

Manufacturing 

industries, “Mgt, 

Business, and 

Financial”3

12/12 $43.95 $21.45 48.81% 17% 1.66 $72.87 

Professional/ 

Technical 

BLS ECEC, Private 

Manufacturing 

industries, 

“Professional and 

related“3

12/12 $38.53 $19.30 50.09% 17% 1.67 $64.38 

Clerical 

BLS ECEC, Private 

Manufacturing 

industries, “Office and 

Administrative 

Support”3

12/12 $17.64 $8.87 50.28% 17% 1.67 $29.51 

Notes: 

1 Wage rates are rounded to the closest pennies; however, unrounded values were used in calculations. 

2 An overhead rate of 17 percent was used based on assumptions in Wage Rates for Economic Analyses of the Toxics Release 

Inventory Program (EPA, 2002b), and the Revised Economic Analysis for the Amended Inventory Update Rule: Final Report 

(EPA, 2002a). 

3 Employer Costs for Employee Compensation Supplementary Tables December 2012, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 18, 

2013 (BLS, 2013a).

3.2 Unit Industry Compliance Costs 

3.2.1 Rule Familiarization 

The proposed rule requires manufactures, processors, and importers of the chemicals subject to the 

proposed rule, as well as any importer of articles containing LCPFACS and any importer of carpet 

containing PFAS to become familiar with the SNUR and its various requirements. Rule familiarization is 

estimated to require 0.55 hours of technical labor and 0.27 hours of managerial labor, as described in the 

Economic Analysis of the Premanufacture Notification Electronic Reporting Final Rule (EPA, 2009a), 

which measures the costs of mandatory electronic reporting of SNUNs and other TSCA Section 5 notices. 

As shown in Exhibit 3-2, the total labor cost associated with rule familiarization is estimated at $54.84. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 3-4

Exhibit 3-2: Rule Familiarization Burden and Cost for SNUR Submitters 

Reporting 

Activity 

Clerical Labor 

($29.51/hour) 

Technical Labor 

($64.38/hour) 

Managerial Labor 

($72.87/hour) 

Total Labor Cost 

(2012$) 

Burden Cost Burden Cost Burden Cost Burden Cost 

Rule 

Familiarization 0.00 $0.00 0.55 $35.41 0.27 $19.43 0.82 $54.84 

Note: 

Costs may not equal labor wage rate multiplied by burden hours as shown, due to rounding. Unrounded values were used in 

calculations. 

Sources: Wage rates: Exhibit 3-1; Burden estimates: EPA, 2009a. 

3.2.2 CDX Registration, CDX Electronic Signature, and Pay.gov Account Setup 

The proposed SNUR requires submission of a SNUN for any firm that chooses to manufacture, import, 

and/or process a chemical for a significant new use. First-time submitters of any TSCA section 5 notice 

(including Premanufacture Notices (PMNs), SNUNs, Test Market Exemption (TME) applications, Low 

Volume Exemption (LVE) notices, Low Exposure/Low Release (LoREX) exemption notices, 

Biotechnology Notices for genetically modified microorganisms, Notices of Commencement of 

Manufacture or Import (NOCs), and support documents to Section 5 notices) are required 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.6

 These activities are only required of first-time 

submitters of any Section 5 notice. These activities are estimated to require the following burden hours, 

based on the estimates presented in the Economic Analysis of the Premanufacture Notification Electronic 

Reporting Final Rule (EPA, 2009a): 

 CDX registration. EPA estimates that companies would spend approximately 0.18 hours per 

employee to register with CDX, and that an average of four technical staff members and one manager 

would need to register for each company, totaling approximately 0.92 hours of burden per company. 

 CDX electronic signature. EPA estimates that companies would spend 0.25 hours preparing, 

submitting, and filing an electronic signature agreement (Authentication of Identity) form to EPA per 

employee. This burden would apply to four technical staff members and one manager per company, 

totaling 1.25 hours of burden per company. In addition, EPA estimates that a manager would spend 

an additional 0.50 hours accessing, preparing, and submitting verification forms (Verification of 

Authorization) for all authorized submitters to EPA. The total burden incurred by companies 

submitting and then verifying electronic signature agreements is 1.75 hours. Note that this burden 

does not include any additional time required to contact EPA’s CDX help desk to notify a change of 

 

6

 Although the proposed rule does not require submitters to establish and use a Pay.gov account, the burden 

estimates in this analysis are conservative insofar as to include the use of Pay.gov as a required activity. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 3-5

submitter status, should one occur. Filing the electronic signature agreement requires an additional 

mailing cost of $2.60 per company (including five $0.46stamps7

 and five $0.06 business envelopes8). 

 Payment via Pay.gov account. EPA estimates that one manager per company would spend 

approximately 0.13 hours setting up a Pay.gov ID account, logging into the system, finding the 

appropriate form, and filling it out. This burden does not include the time required to click ‘submit’ 

on the form and wait for payment processing. 

As shown in Exhibit 3-3, the labor cost consists of CDX registration, CDX electronic signature, and 

Pay.gov account setup by a first-time submitter. As noted above, an additional $2.60 in mailing cost per 

company is attributable to these activities, for a total cost of approximately $192 per company. 

Exhibit 3-3: CDX Registration, CDX Electronic Signature, and Pay.gov Account Setup Burden 

and Cost for First-Time Submitters 

Reporting Activity 

Clerical Labor 

($29.51/hour) 

Technical Labor 

($64.38/hour) 

Managerial Labor 

($72.87/hour) 

Total Labor Cost 

(2012$) 

Burden Cost Burden Cost Burden Cost Burden Cost 

CDX Registration 0.00 $0.00 0.73 $47.21 0.18 $13.36 0.92 $60.57 

CDX Electronic 

Signature 0.00 $0.00 1 $64.38 0.75 $54.65 1.75 $119.03 

Mailing Cost $2.60 

E-Payment (Pay.gov ID) 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 0.13 $9.71 0.13 $9.71 

Total 0.00 $0.00 1.73 $112 1.07 $77.72 2.80 $192.1 

Note: 

Costs may not equal labor wage rate multiplied by burden hours as shown, due to rounding. Unrounded values were used in 

calculations. 

Sources: Wage rates: see Exhibit 3-1; Burden estimates: EPA, 2009a. 

3.2.3 Form Completion and Submission Fee 

Respondents who choose to submit a SNUN are required to gather and submit information regarding the 

data elements identified in the applicable SNUN reporting form. The methodology and calculations used 

in this analysis assume that the employee responsible for collecting, filling out, and submitting the 

requested information has a reasonable level of familiarity with the company and knowledge of 

operations at the site. It is assumed that for most entities these tasks are similar to other employee duties 

that require familiarity with EPA, State, and other Federal agency requests for chemical information and 

do not require additional familiarization or training beyond the basic rule familiarization described above. 

In addition, this analysis focuses on the marginal costs of submitting information for the proposed rule 

 

7

 Price for a stamp was taken from the U.S. Postal Service website on April 9, 2013. (See U.S. PS, 2013) 

8

 Price for an envelope was determined based on the per unit price of a regular business envelope. See “Staples® 

#10, Self-Sealing Envelopes, 500/Box." Available at: http://www.staples.com/ (Accessed 4/9/2013). 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 3-6

and not the total costs for the company to comply with a range of other Federal and State environmental, 

health, and safety regulations or accounting requirements that rely on this type of information. 

Estimates of the costs of completing a Significant New Use Notice (SNUN) form are based on the costs of 

completing a PMN submission, since the data requirements are the same and the same form is used for both. 

The PMN submission costs came from EPA's 1994 Regulatory Impact Analysis of Amendments to 

Regulations for TSCA Section 5 Premanufacture Notifications, which relied on industry estimates of the 

effort needed to collect and compile all data required for a PMN submission, prepare the form, submit the 

form and data to EPA, and maintain a file of the submission (EPA, 1994, Table III-2 and pages III-11, -

12, and -13). The 1994 estimates were based on a survey conducted by the Chemical Manufacturers 

Association, which became the American Chemistry Council. These burdens include “the time spent 

reading and becoming familiar with the form, gathering the required information and preparing the report, 

producing sanitized responses for items claimed as confidential business information, and maintaining a 

file of the submission” (EPA, 1994. p. III 11-13). The burden associated with SNUN submission and 

preparation has been adjusted to reflect burden reductions resulting from the 2009 final PMN Electronic 

Reporting (ePMN) Rule that requires the electronic submission of all TSCA section 5 notices. Electronic 

submission of SNUN forms is expected to remove all clerical burden and reduce the recordkeeping 

burden associated with preparing a SNUN (EPA, 2009a).9

 In addition, electronic submission is expected 

to generate and an additional 0.18 hours of technical burden, for the completion of the User Fee Payment 

Identification Number and email address data elements on the electronic SNUN form. 

SNUN form completion and electronic submission is estimated to require approximately 74 hours of 

technical labor and 18 hours of managerial labor (EPA, 2009a). Exhibit 3-4 combines the estimated 

reporting burden and loaded wage rates for all three labor categories to estimate the per-SNUN cost of 

form completion. The labor cost incurred by a SNUN submission for both large and small business 

submitters is estimated at $6,089. 

 

9

 The Economic Analysis of the Premanufacture Notification Electronic Reporting Final Rule (EPA, 2009a) 

reported a 0.5 hour clerical and a 0.5 hour technical burden associated with recordkeeping in addition to the 

burden estimates from the 1994 RIA (EPA, 1994, p. III-14). These burden estimates (the 0.5 for clerical burden 

and 0.5 for technical burden) are based on the recordkeeping burden for polymer exceptions and not the 

recordkeeping burden associated with PMN submissions. 

Therefore, for this analysis, the 0.5 hour for clerical labor and the 0.5 hour for technical labor were removed. It 

is important to note that for this analysis, clerical burden changes are not applicable because the entire clerical 

burden is assumed to be eliminated under the electronic reporting requirements. In summary, we do not include 

the one hour recordkeeping burden (0.5 hour for clerical, 0.5 for technical) reported in the ePMN EA. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 3-7

Exhibit 3-4: Industry Cost Estimate to Complete the SNUN Form 

Reporting 

Activity 

Clerical Labor 

($29.51/hour) 

Technical Labor 

($64.38/hour) 

Managerial Labor 

($72.87/hour) 

Total Labor Cost 

(2012$) 

Burden Cost Burden1 Cost Burden Cost Burden Cost 

Form 

Completion 0.00 $0.00 74.2 $4,777.00 18 $1,311.69 92.2 $6,089 

Note: 

1. Costs may not equal labor wage rate multiplied by burden hours as shown, due to rounding. 

2. Loaded wages include fringe benefits and overhead. See Exhibit 3-1 of this report for derivation. Wage rates presented in this 

table are rounded; however, unrounded values were used in calculations. For this reason, total labor costs may not equal the 

product of rounded values. 

3. The estimate of zero clerical burden is taken from the Economic Analysis of the Premanufacture Notice Electronic Reporting 

Final Rule (EPA, 2009a, page 7). 

4. Technical and managerial labor burden is from the PMN Amendments RIA (EPA, 1994, Table III-2). An additional eleven 

minutes (0.18 hours) of technical burden is estimated to complete the User Fee Payment Identification Number and Email Address 

data elements on the Electronic SNUN form (EPA, 2009a, page 15).

Sources: Burden estimated: EPA, 1994 and EPA, 2009a; Wage rates: see Exhibit 3-1.

In addition, each submitting large business must pay a $2,500 per-SNUN submission fee, and each 

submitting small business must pay a $100 per-SNUN submission fee. Exhibit 3-5 adds the labor cost and 

submission fee to estimate the total cost of a SNUN submission. The total cost of a SNUN submission is 

$8,589 for large business submitters and $6,189 for small business submitters. 

Exhibit 3-5: Industry Cost Estimate to Complete and Submit the SNUN Form 

Reporting Population Labor Cost Submission Fee Total Cost 

(2012$) 

Large Business Submitters $6,089 $2,500 $8,589 

Small Business Submitters $6,089 $100 $6,189 

Source: Labor cost: see Exhibit 3-4; Submission fees: EPA, 1994 

3.2.4 Recordkeeping for Companies Choosing to Submit a SNUN 

Companies submitting a SNUN must, under 40 CFR 721.40, keep records of the information contained in 

the SNUN. Some EPA reports have assumed that SNUN recordkeeping hours would be five percent of 

SNUN submission hours, or about five to six hours. For this report, the SNUN recordkeeping hours were 

included in the SNUN submission hours (see Section 3.2.3) and the SNUN recordkeeping costs under 40 

CFR 721.40 were not separately estimated.
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 3-8

3.2.5 Recordkeeping for Companies that Do Not Submit a SNUN 

If a firm that manufactures, imports, or processes a substance the proposed SNUR or imports articles 

containing a substance subject to the proposed SNUR chooses not to submit a SNUN, they must keep 

records that document compliance with SNUR conditions for avoiding a Significant New Use. Such 

recordkeeping requirements essentially involve copying and filing relevant records, including those 

related to category of use. Records must be maintained for five years from the date of their creation (40 

CFR 721.40). For firms that choose to not submit a SNUN, costs for compliance with the recordkeeping 

requirements are estimated to be five percent of the reporting burden for reporting information for a 

specific section of the SNUN form and are performed by clerical staff (EPA, 2005b, pages 10 and 14). 

EPA used the per-activity burden for reporting, human exposure, category of use and releases to the 

environment presented in the Information Collection Request (ICR) for TSCA Section 5(a)(2) Significant 

New Use Rules for Existing Chemicals (Renewal) (EPA, 2005b, page 12). Any clerical burden associated 

with these activities was removed to reflect the burden reduction associated with electronic submissions 

(EPA, 2009a). 

The recordkeeping burden for a company that does not submit a SNUN is estimated at 0.15 hours and $9.66 

and is derived in Exhibit 3-6. 

Exhibit 3-6: Annual Per-Chemical Costs of Recordkeeping Requirement for Companies that 

Choose not to Submit a SNUN 

Reporting Activity 

Per Activity 

Burden 

(Hours) 

% of Reporting 

Burden 

Attributed to 

Recordkeeping 

Total Labor Cost 

(2012$) 

Burden Cost 

Category of Use1 3 5% 0.15 $9.66 

Notes: For the category of use reporting activity, the burden is associated with technical labor. See Exhibit 3-1 for the technical 

wage rate. 

Source:

1 US EPA, 2005b Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics Information Collection Request (ICR) for TSCA Section 5(a)(2) 

Significant New Use Rules for Existing Chemicals (Renewal),page 13.

 

3.2.6 Customer Notification 

Manufacturers, processors, and importers of chemicals subject to SNURs must notify recipients of such 

chemicals of the SNUR or verify that knowledge of the SNUR has been otherwise acquired by recipients, 

or that the recipients are unable to engage in significant new uses. Since it is not expected that all such 

entities would have complete knowledge of all uses of any products subject to a SNUR, and because 

filing a SNUN could require significantly more burden, it is assumed that manufacturers, processors, and 

importers would most often choose to notify their customers of SNUR regulatory activities. As this 

notification may be accomplished by simply annotating an MSDS, EPA estimates the associated burden 

to be about one hour of a technical employee's time or $64.38 per manufacturer, processor, or importer 

per chemical. The proposed SNUR would cover LCPFACS and PFAS used for any significant new use. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 3-9

However, EPA believes LCPFACS (including PFOA and its salts) will not be manufactured, imported, or 

processed after 2015 as a result of the 2010/2015 PFOA Stewardship Program.. In addition, given the 

PFAS chemicals are no longer manufactured, imported, or used in the United States and the stringent 

international regulations on PFOS, EPA has no evidence of the international use of these chemicals in the 

treatment of carpets and it is believed that no carpets will be imported containing PFAS chemicals subject 

to the proposed rule. Therefore no manufacturers, processors, or importers would be affected and 

customer notifications would not be necessary. 

3.2.7 Import Certification 

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. 

Thus, any U.S. manufacturer, importer, or processor receiving an imported shipment of chemicals and/ or 

chemical substances subject to the SNUR would have certify that they are compliant with all applicable 

rules and orders under TSCA or that all chemical substances and/or chemical substances in the shipment 

are not subject to TSCA.10 The statement must be on or attached to a commercial invoice or entry 

document corresponding to the imported shipment. 

As stated in Sections 2.4 and 2.5, EPA believes that all manufacture of LCPFACs (including PFOA and 

its salts) will cease after 2015 as a result of the 2010/2015 PFOA Stewardship Program. Given the current 

commitments under the 2010/2015 PFOA Stewardship Program and stringent international regulations 

pertaining to these chemicals, EPA believes it is unlikely that these chemicals will be imported. 

Therefore, the likelihood of U.S. manufacturers, importers, or processors receiving an imported shipment 

of chemicals subject to the SNUR is minimal. 

If a firm wishes to import a chemical substance subject to the SNUR, this importation would be 

considered a new use and require them to first submit a SNUN. Reviewing and submitting the import 

certification is expected to take approximately fifteen minutes (0.25 hours) of clerical time and have a 

cost of $16.10 per transaction (OIRA, 2011). Any potential burden associated with a submitter’s 

familiarization with this requirement is assumed to be included in the more general SNUR familiarization 

burden discussed above. 

3.2.8 Export Notification 

Under Section 12(b) of TSCA, exporters must notify EPA if they export or intend to export a chemical 

subject to various TSCA sections (40 CFR 707.60 through 75). For TSCA 5(a)(2) (the section under 

 

10 The exact statements are as follows: For imports of chemical substances subject to TSCA, “I certify that all 

chemical substances in this shipment comply with all applicable rules or orders under TSCA and that I am not 

offering a chemical substance for entry in violation of TSCA or any applicable rule or order under TSCA.” For 

imports of chemical substances not subject to TSCA (e.g., pesticides), “I certify that all chemical substances in 

this shipment are not subject to TSCA.” (19 CFR 12.121(a)(1)) 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 3-10

which EPA promulgates significant new use rules) and certain other TSCA sections, this is a one-time 

notification requirement11 per destination country for each exporter of a chemical substance. After 

receiving a notification from a firm, EPA notifies the importing country and the United States State 

Department (40 CFR 707.70). To calculate the burden associated with making a single export 

notification, EPA first estimated the average annual number of export notifications made by an exporter. 

EPA then derived the annual and per notification burden associated with preparing and submitting an 

export notification. 

EPA estimated the average burden associated with making a single notification, but did not estimate 

either the total number of exporters of a SNUR chemical or the number of notifications per SNUR 

chemical. This is because the SNURs apply to a variety of different chemicals with a variety of unrelated 

uses, manufacturers, and processors, making it impractical within the resources available for this report to 

assess the potential number of exporters and importing countries per chemical. 

Most underlying data in this section come from the (2012 TSCA Section 12(b) ICR), ICR No.: 0795.14 

OMB Control Number 2070-0030 [Information Collection Request for] Notification of Chemical Exports 

- TSCA Section 12(b) Supporting Statement for Request for OMB Review under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (EPA, 2012c). 

3.2.9 Estimated Number of Annual Export Notifications per Exporter 

EPA’s 2012 TSCA Section 12(b) ICR estimated that the average exporter making notifications would 

make 13 notifications per year.

12 This includes notifications resulting from SNURs and notifications 

resulting from other TSCA activities. Therefore, it is likely that an exporter would make less than 13 

notifications per year as a result of this proposed SNUR. A notification is typically no more than one page 

per chemical/country combination, and one notification mailing often includes multiple chemicals and/or 

destination countries.13 

The percent of notifications resulting from SNURs in general is unknown, and it is also unknown how 

many notifications may result from this rulemaking, as not all manufacturers may choose to export a 

chemical, or they may make several notifications for a single chemical. 

3.2.10 Exporter Costs 

The 2012 TSCA Section 12(b) ICR (EPA, 2012c, page 11, Table 3), estimated the annual export 

notification cost for an exporter under the one-time export notification requirement. These costs include 

 

11 On November 14, 2006, EPA revised the export notification requirement for chemicals subject to TSCA 

§5(a)(2), 5(b), 5(e)(1) and 5(e)(2) from an annual to a one-time requirement per destination country for each 

exporter (November 14, 2006, 71 FR 66234). 

12 EPA calculated the average number of export notifications per exporter in the 2012 TSCA Section 12(b) ICR 

(EPA, 2012c) by dividing the estimated number of submitted notifications (3,090) by the estimated number of 

exporters (240). 

13 Based on review by an EPA economist of notifications received under TSCA Sections 4, 5 and 6 over 

approximately three weeks in early 2010. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 3-11

the cost to the exporter of compiling a list of their products that are subject to TSCA Section 12(b) 

requirements, writing or revising an export notification letter to EPA, checking the outgoing shipments, 

and sending the notification letters with the associated shipping costs. 

The per-notification cost was calculated based on the average burden per firm. Exporters who make a 

larger number of notifications per year may benefit from economies of scale and have lower costs per 

notification; conversely firms making fewer notifications may have a higher cost per notification. 

Estimated Submission (Mailing) Costs. Regulated companies would incur mailing costs for export 

notifications delivered to EPA. Notifications are assumed shipped via the U.S. Postal Service (U.S. PS) as 

first-class registered mail with a return receipt (U.S. PS, 2013). The estimated per-shipment and annual 

mailing costs incurred by individual submitters are detailed in Exhibit 3-7. 

Exhibit 3-7: Derivation of Total Mailing Cost for 13 Notices 

Postal Service Cost 

Registered mail, regular, with $0 declared value $10.95 

Return receipt, requested at time of mailing (receive by mail) $3.95 

Postage, regular First Class, up to 1 ounce $0.45 

Cost per export notice - Subtotal $15.35 

× 13 

Total Mailing Cost for 13 Notices $199.55 

Source: Mailing rates are from the U.S. Postal Service web site as of April 2013 (https://www.usps.com/ship/service-chart.htm). 

The assumption on the mailing method is based on the Economic Analysis of the Proposed Change to TSCA Section 12(b) Export 

Notification Requirements, November 2005 (EPA, 2005a), as clarified in a later SNUR economic analysis (EPA, 2007c, Table 8). 

Compile and Maintain the List of Products. Since TSCA §12(b) information collection activity has been 

in place for twenty years, most respondents would have already developed a list of their products subject 

to TSCA §12(b) export notification. Respondents need only check for new regulations promulgated and 

any new products exported by the company. Updating the list is estimated to take an average of one hour 

of technical time, which may also include some proportion of legal time (EPA, 2012c). The total burden 

can vary from two hours per year up to two hours per month, depending on the number of products 

exported by the company and the number of their products subject to TSCA §12(b) (EPA, 2012c). 

The number of submitters per year who report under TSCA §12(b) has varied over time, rising from 

around 160 in 1991 to over 460 in 2000, and declining since. In the most recent TSCA §12(b) ICR, EPA 

estimated that there would be approximately 240 submitters per year in near-future years (EPA, 2012c). 

Of these 240 submitters, EPA estimated that160 companies were near the lower burden estimate of two 

hours per year, and 80 companies were near the upper estimate of 24 hours per year. Compiling the list 

for all respondents was therefore estimated to take 2,240 hours (2 hours x 160 firms plus 24 hours x 80 

firms), or an average of about 9.3 hours of technical time per firm per year for 13 notifications per year 

(EPA, 2012c). 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 3-12

Write or Revise Export Notification. Companies that export chemicals subject to TSCA §12(b) reporting 

must prepare an export notification to send to EPA when export shipments are made. Time for initial 

preparation of the export notice may vary depending on whether the company has prior experience with 

this requirement. This step is estimated to take an average of one hour of technical time (which may also 

include some proportion of legal time) per firm per year for 13 notifications per year (EPA, 2012c). 

Check Orders and Send Notifications. Companies that export chemicals subject to TSCA §12(b) 

reporting must check outgoing shipments against the list of their products described above. A form letter 

notifying EPA and providing the required data must be printed and mailed within the required time 

period. This process is estimated to take an average one half hour of clerical time per export notification 

or 6.5 hours for 13 notifications (EPA, 2012c). 

The burdens and associated costs for each notification activity are provided in Exhibit 3-8. EPA estimates 

that the burden associated with making one notification is approximately 1.3 hours and $81. 

Exhibit 3-8: TSCA 12(b) Export Notification Cost per Notification 

Notification Activity 

Technical Labor Clerical Labor Total 

Wage 

Rate 

($/hr)

Burden Cost

Wage 

Rate 

($/hr) 

Burden Cost Burden Cost 

Compile list $64.38 9.3 $599 -- -- -- 9.3 $599 

Write letter $64.38 1 $64 -- -- -- 1 $64 

Check order and send 

notice -- -- -- $29.51 6.5 $191 6.5 $191 

Mailing cost1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- $199.55 

Total per average 

facility2 10.30 $663.12 6.5 $191.82 16.80 $1,054 

Total per Notification 0.79 $51.01 0.50 $14.76 1.29 $81.04 

Notes: 

Costs may not equal labor wage rate multiplied by burden hours as shown due to rounding. Unrounded values were used in 

calculations. 

1 Mailing costs reflect April 2013 U.S. PS rates and can be found in Exhibit 3-7.

2 An average facility submitting notifications is assumed to submit 13 export notifications per year. 

Source: Appendix A of this report derives technical and clerical hourly labor costs. Burden hour estimates are from ICR No.: 

0795.14 ICR for Notification of Chemical Exports - TSCA Section 12(b) Supporting Statement for Request for OMB Review 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act (EPA, 2012c, p.10). 

3.2.11 Article Importation 

The proposed SNUR contains a provision to eliminate the exemption for persons to the import of 

LCPFAC chemical substances listed in Exhibit 2-2 and PFOA or its salts as part of articles or PFAS as 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 3-13

part of carpets. However, EPA is also proposing that the articles exemption remain in effect for persons 

who process chemical substances as part of an article, because existing stocks may still contain LCPFAC 

or PFOA chemical substances. The elimination of the exemption will require importers of LCPFAC 

chemical substances listed in Exhibit 2-2 and PFOA or its salts as part of articles or PFAS as part of 

carpets to notify EPA at least 90 days before importing the articles. The proposed SNUR may also affect 

firms that do not currently import articles using the chemicals, but who may be interested in importing 

these articles in the future or who may be interested in ensuring that the articles they import s are in 

compliance with the requirements of the proposed SNUR. Although there are no specific requirements in 

the rule for these companies, they may choose to undertake some activities to assure themselves that they 

are not undertaking a new use. Importers have varying levels of knowledge about the chemical content of 

the articles they import, yet under TSCA the definition of “manufacture” means to “import..., produce or 

manufacture”14 and importers are responsible parties under the proposed SNUR. In order to understand 

and monitor their liability, companies might undertake a range of activities to ensure that the articles they 

import do not violate existing regulations. 

3.2.12 Potential Compliance Activities (Article Importers) 

The rule does not prescribe steps that an importer must take to identify a chemical subject to the SNUR in 

articles, therefore, there are a variety of potential actions that a company could take to identify specific 

substances in its articles, should they choose to do so. These activities range in cost; however, costs 

incurred are at the discretion of any individual importer. EPA expects that in all likelihood, importers 

would take actions that are commensurate with the level of risk each company perceives, and the 

resources it has available. 

There is currently no single widely accepted standard procedure to identify regulated chemicals in the 

supply chain. However, there are a number of organizations that help provide information on the content 

of articles, organize declarations from suppliers, or certify suppliers based on materials or processes used. 

Importers subject to SNURs may refer to these sources for assistance in their own strategy to identify a 

chemical subject to a SNUR in articles. 

ASTM International, formerly known as the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), has 

developed a Standard Guide for Assessment of Materials and Products for Declarable Substances

(“ASTM F2577”) which provides guidance for the decision process to assess materials and products for 

declarable substances. The following list includes activities that an importer might perform to identify any 

restricted chemicals in imported articles. Any rule familiarization burden associated with the proposed 

SNUR for importers of articles is discussed in Section 3.2.1 of this report. This list is intended to capture 

the general types of activities that might be performed. 

1) Understand applicable requirements (per-firm cost). All importers would read and understand 

the SNUR, within the context of the company’s products. This burden is derived in Section 3.2.1 

of this report 

2) Identify the type of imported articles that potentially Use the chemicals subject to this 

SNUR (per-firm cost). This determination may be done based on an understanding of the uses of 

the subject chemical substances (e.g., those described in Section 1.1 of this analysis) and the 

 

14 TSCA section 3(7). 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 3-14

application of any a priori knowledge of the material and its manufacture to assess the probability 

whether each regulated substance may be present. 

3) Identify all suppliers involved (per-firm cost). The importer may choose to identify all 

suppliers from whom the articles identified in the previous step are imported, and as appropriate, 

to make them aware of the importer’s potential notice obligations respecting the regulated 

chemical substances.

4) Collect data from suppliers (per-article cost). Importers may choose to obtain verification from 

suppliers identified in step 3 that the regulated chemical substance is or is not found in the article. 

This may be accomplished through, for example, agreements with suppliers, declarations through 

databases or surveys, or by using a third-party certification system. 

5) Chemical testing (per-article cost). Importers may choose to assess imported articles for 

chemical content. This could involve requiring suppliers to provide certificates of 

analysis/laboratory reports for a lot or batch of the material produced. Importers may perform 

their own laboratory testing of certain articles (or components of articles) to determine if they use 

the restricted substance. 

6) Recordkeeping (per-firm cost). The importer may choose to keep records confirming the 

activities completed.

Exhibit 3-9. contains the cost ranges associated with the above activities. The activities and cost 

derivations are discussed in more detail in Understanding the Costs Associated with Eliminating 

Exemptions for Articles in SNURs (EPA, 2013c). 

 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

▌pg. 3-15

Exhibit 3-9: Range of costs associated with an importer’s identification of chemicals subject to SNURs 

Activity Cost (2011$) Notes 

Per Rule Costs

Rule familiarization $55 Discussed in Section 3.2.1of this document Identify the type of imported articles that potentially use the restricted substances $130 to $1,550 Actual costs may vary based on number of articl

the complexity of the article itself (number of co

Identify all suppliers involved $950 Actual costs may vary depending on the number 

imported, number of suppliers, and frequency of changes 

Recordkeeping $104 Actual costs may vary depending on recordkeepi

already in place 

Per Article-Related Costs 

Collect data from suppliers

$5 to $515 per article 

reviewed.

$0 if no data collected.

Actual costs only apply to those companies that collect data from suppliers. They will vary depenspecific data collection method chosen. Total coconsiderations including the number of articles imnumber of suppliers, and frequency of supplier c

Chemical testing $130 per article tested. $0 if no testing.6

Actual costs only apply to those companies that collect data from suppliers. They will vary depenspecific chemical being tested for; the complexitand sample preparation required; and the exact flaboratory chosen for the analysis. Total costs pedepend on considerations including the number otested, which may be affected by the number of srisk associated with each, and frequency of supp

Source: EPA, 2013c 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 3-16 

Variation in costs associated with these activities would depend on a company’s level of activity to 

comply with other regulations on chemicals in articles, the complexity of the supply chains, and the 

size of the company. Total costs per article importer will further depend on the number of affected 

articles and the frequency of supplier change 

Total costs associated with these activities to any article importer are not quantified, but are believed 

to be minimal for this particular SNUR. As stated in Section 2.4, EPA believes that the global 

manufacture of LCPFACs (including PFOA and its salts) will cease by the end of 2015, as a result of 

the PFOA Stewardship Program. Therefore, EPA believes there will be no importation of articles 

using LCPFACs after 2015, because the chemical processors supplying importers with finished 

articles will be unable to purchase LCPFACs after 2015. In addition, given the PFAS chemicals are 

no longer manufactured, imported, or used in the United States and the stringent international 

regulations on PFOS, EPA has no evidence of the international use of these chemicals in the 

treatment of carpets and it is believed that no carpets will be imported containing PFAS chemicals 

subject to the proposed rule or PFOA and its salts will be imported as part of articles. 

Under step 1 above, importers who are aware of the PFOA Stewardship Program may apply this 

knowledge and determine that none of their imported articles manufactured after 2015 will contain a 

substance subject to the SNUR. Furthermore, firms that have previously selected suppliers that have 

agreed to uphold certain standards, or who have otherwise sufficiently demonstrated that they are not 

supplying LCPFACs ,PFOA and/or PFAS, would not likely incur any additional costs associated with 

these activities. Essentially, the product’s certification would allow importers of articles to learn 

whether an article does or does not contain LCPFACs ,PFOA and/or PFAS or whether suppliers have 

agreed to uphold certain production standards. There are labeling systems for products in which 

independent entities ensure that the production of products does not utilize specific chemicals. For 

example, the European Union has developed a voluntary labeling system, called the EU Ecolabel. 

Producers, importers and retailers can voluntarily apply for the EU Ecolabel (European Commission 

EC, 2013). Labeled products signal to consumers that the product in question has a reduced 

environmental impact throughout the product’s life cycle, such as at the manufacturing stage and/or 

during the final product disposal. The criteria are specifically designed to focus on the stage of the life 

cycle where a product has the most environmental impact (European Commission EC, 2013). Another 

international association, OEKO-TEX®15 set up an independent testing and certification system 

specifically for textiles, called the OEKO-TEX® Standard 100 (OEKO-TEX®, No Date b). The 

system looks at products at different stages of production, including, raw materials, intermediates, and 

end products. The label signals to customers that the textiles have been tested for (1) illegal 

substances, (2) legally regulated substances, (3) known harmful unregulated chemicals, and (4) 

parameters for healthcare The company also looks at the uses of the textile to see the intensity of 

contact between the product and skin, for their parameters. (OEKO-TEX®, No Date b). 

Similarly, firms that operate in places where LCPFACs ,PFOA and/or PFAS are already regulated 

would presumably have mechanisms in place to identify the content of any articles they import. Firms 

with less experience with other regulations that are planning to import articles that could potentially 

contain LCPFACs ,PFOA and/or PFAS may incur a larger burden should they choose to conduct 

 

15 The International Association for Research and Testing in the Field of Textile a union of 15 institutes for 

textile research and testing in Europe and Japan (OEKO-TEX®, No Date a). 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 3-17 

some or all of the activities listed above to ensure compliance. These firms may choose to reach out to 

a wide variety of upstream firms including subcontractors, accessory suppliers, and chemical 

suppliers to gather information on the chemical content of articles. Firms may also choose to conduct 

additional research on their suppliers to ensure that they are purchasing from reputable manufacturers 

and chemical suppliers who will provide necessary technical support and will use high quality articles 

that meet customer quality, as well as regulatory standards (AFIRM, 2011). Furthermore, a company 

could choose to have articles tested. If a company chooses to conduct testing they may also need to 

conduct additional research to ensure the laboratory is accredited, reliable and follows Good 

Laboratory Practices (GLP) (AFIRM, 2011). 

Given existing regulatory limitations both internationally and within the U.S., industry-wide 

processes, resources that support companies in understanding and managing their supply chains, and 

the evidence showing minimal worldwide availability of the LCPFACs regulated under the SNUR, 

EPA believes that article importers would incur costs at the lower end of the ranges presented in 

Table 8, as a result of this rule. However, firms with less knowledge about the chemical content of the 

articles they import may choose to undertake more extensive action to identify the chemicals 

substances located within the articles and may incur larger costs than firms with more understanding 

of their supply chains. For those companies choosing to undertake actions to assess the composition 

of the articles they import, EPA expects that in all likelihood, these importers would take actions that 

are commensurate with the level of risk (of a chemical to be a part of an article) each company 

perceives, and the resources it has available. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 3-18 

3.3 Summary of per Submission Costs, by Option 

The number of firms affected that do not make submissions to EPA (see Option 2 in Exhibit 3-10) is 

not known; therefore, costs are not aggregated across the affected entities. The following table 

summarizes the per-company per-chemical costs to comply with the proposed rule amendment, as 

described in more detail in section 3.2 above. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 3-19 

Exhibit 3-10: Compliance Options and Associated Costs Incurred by a Firm Due to the 

Proposed SNUR 

Option1 Costs Quantified Costs per Chemical (2012$)2

1. 

Electronic submission of 

a Significant New Use 

Notice (SNUN), 

indicating to EPA that 

the firm would like to 

manufacture, import, or 

process the chemical for 

a Significant New Use 

as defined in the SNUR. 

Costs of submitting a 

SNUN, including rule 

familiarization, CDX 

registration (for companies 

that are first-time 

submitters), form 

completion, user fee, export 

notification, and any test 

costs. 

$54.84 rule familiarization cost; $8,589 

submission cost (including SNUN 

recordkeeping under 40 CFR 721.40 and fee 

$2,500 for large businesses). EPA usually 

receives well under ten SNUNs per year. Import 

certification cost are approximately $16.10 per 

transaction. Export notifications costs are 

estimated at $81.04 per notification; total cost 

per company would vary. First time submitters 

would incur $191.91 for CDX registration and 

associated activities. Companies manufacturing, 

importing, or processing a chemical currently 

used in commerce in the United States would 

incur a cost $64.38 for notifying consumers of 

SNUR regulatory activities. 

2. 

Manufacture, import, or 

process in a way that 

avoids a Significant 

New Use. 

Cost of the profit foregone 

as a result of not engaging 

in the commercial activity 

originally planned 

(opportunity costs), 

recordkeeping, and export 

notification costs. 

Opportunity costs are not quantified. Other costs 

include rule familiarization ($54.84), 

recordkeeping ($9.66), import certification 

($16.10 per transaction), export notification 

($81.04 per notification), and customer 

notification ($64.38) may apply. Costs 

associated with article importation may include 

activities such as article identification ($130 to 

$1,550), supplier identification ($950) 

recordkeeping ($10), collecting data from 

suppliers ($5 to $515 per article), and testing 

($130 per article tested). 

Notes: 

1 Firms may be subject to both options at once since submission of a SNUN results in profits foregone as a result of not 

manufacturing, importing, or processing the chemical. 

2 Quantified costs are attributable to the SNUR only if a firm would not otherwise follow the specified practices. Costs are 

detailed in Section 3.2. 

3 EPA does not require the development of test data for submission of a SNUN, although a firm may submit test data already 

in its possession and/or describe any other available data. Because EPA does not require the development of test data, EPA 

assumes that no firms would incur testing costs as a result of the proposed SNUR. 

3.4 Likelihood of SNUN Submission 

This analysis assumes that no entities are expected to submit a SNUN. EPA has, over the years, 

promulgated SNURs that cover a total of more than 1,000 chemicals. In response, the Agency 

receives only a handful of SNUNs per year. For example, the number of SNUNs received was six in 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 3-20 

Federal fiscal year (FY) 2007, eight in FY2008, seven in FY2009, two in FY2010, and ten in 

FY2011.16 In addition, as discussed in sections 2.4, all of the chemicals subject to this proposed rule 

will not be manufactured, imported or processed after December 31, 2015. Therefore, this suggests 

there will be no ongoing uses of the chemicals after 2015 and that it is unlikely a firm would submit a 

SNUN. 

3.5 Potential for Subsequent Regulatory Actions 

The Agency recognizes that if submission of a SNUN does result from a SNUR, the Agency may take 

additional regulatory actions under TSCA. These additional regulatory actions might be necessary to 

further evaluate an intended new use and associated activities, or to prohibit or limit that activity 

before it occurs to prevent unreasonable risk of injury to human health or the environment. It is not 

known what specific subsequent regulatory actions, if any, the Agency may determine are necessary 

after reviewing a SNUN. Any such actions are highly dependent on the circumstances surrounding 

the individual SNUN (e.g., available information and scientific understanding about the chemical and 

its risks at the time the SNUN is being reviewed). 

Should the Agency’s review of the SNUN result in further regulatory actions, the Agency would 

initiate and follow the appropriate procedures for taking those actions. Included in those procedures 

would be an assessment of the costs and benefits of those actions. 

 

16 Values based on US EPA’s PMN Gold (V1.1) record keeping system as of September 1, 2011 (EPA, 

2011a). 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 4-1 

4. Agency Costs 

As described in the following sections, EPA’s costs to review and process SNUN submissions are 

assumed to be the same as EPA costs to review PMNs. 

4.1 Labor Rates for EPA Staff 

Agency labor costs are calculated based on annual Federal salaries for the Washington-Baltimore area 

published by the Office of Personnel Management effective January 2012 (OPM, 2012). EPA 

assumes that, on average, a federal GS-13, Step 5 full-time equivalent (FTE) would conduct its 

collection and administrative activities under the proposed rule.17 The average salary for a GS-13 Step 

5 employee was $100,904 in 2012 without fringe benefits and overhead costs. In order to derive the 

fully loaded salary, EPA multiplied the annual salary by an assumed loading factor of 1.6 to reflect 

federal fringe benefits and overhead (EPA, 2009c), which results in a fully loaded annual salary of 

$161,446 (see Exhibit 4-1). Dividing the fully loaded annual salary by 2,080 hours (i.e., the number 

of hours in a work year) yields an estimated hourly FTE wage rate of $77.62. 

Fully loaded costs for Agency labor are shown in Exhibit 4-1.

Exhibit 4-1: Derivation of Loaded Agency Wage Rates, 2012 

Labor 

Category Data Source Date Wage Fringe 

Benefit

Fringes 

as % 

wage 

Overhead 

as % 

wage

Fringe + 

overhead 

factor 

Loaded 

Wages 

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

EPA staff 

FTE 

Annual Federal staff cost: 

OPM WashingtonBaltimore-Northern 

Virginia, DC-MD-PA-VAWV, area, GS-13 Step 5 

pay rates, with 60% 

overhead1 

Jan 

2012

$100,904

(annual)

-- 

Included 

in 60% 

overhead

60%2

 1.60 

$161,446 

(annual) 

$48.51 

(hourly)

$77.62 

(hourly) 

Notes: 

1 The Agency salary is the unloaded federal GS-13 Step 5 salary ($100,904 for 2012), from the OPM salary table for the 

Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia Locality Pay Area (OPM, 2012). Hourly rates are based on annual salary divided 

by 2,080 hours. 

2 The 60% fringes-and-overhead rate is from an EPA guide, Instructions for Preparing Information Collection Requests 

(ICRs) (EPA, 2009c).

 

17 The GS-13 Step 5 is consistent with ICR No. 0574.14 (12/18/2007) (EPA, 2007a), which covers PMN 

SNURs. Use of this grade level follows the approach introduced in EPA, 2007b. That report represented a 

change from an earlier PMN SNUR economic analysis (EPA, 2003), which used an average of GS-12 Step 

1 and GS-12 Step 10 salaries. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 4-2 

4.2 SNUN Processing Costs 

The list of review steps, estimates of extramural costs, and the percent of chemicals requiring a 

particular review step are derived from the costs for processing PMN submissions in Table VII-1 of a 

1994 EPA report, Regulatory Impact Analysis of Amendments to Regulations for TSCA Section 5 

Premanufacture Notifications (EPA, 1994). The Agency burden associated with processing a PMN 

has been adjusted to reflect burden reductions resulting from the 2009 final PMN Electronic 

Reporting (ePMN) Rule that requires the electronic submission of all TSCA section 5 notices. 

Electronic submission of SNUN forms is expected to reduce Agency burden by 16.5 percent (EPA, 

2009b, p.28). 

For each review step, the “EPA staff” cost is calculated by multiplying the number of FTEs (in the 

first column) by the fully loaded hourly salary. This shows EPA staff cost for chemicals requiring the 

selected review step. 

The Extramural Cost column shows costs for contractor support and other outside purchases for 

chemicals requiring the selected review step, and is inflated from 1993 prices using the Bureau of 

Labor Statistics (BLS) Employment Cost Index (ECI) data (BLS, 2012). The ECI for total 

compensation (not seasonally adjusted) of private industry professional and related workers (Series 

ID CIU2010000120000I) is used because it is the only series with continuous data since 1985, and 

that includes professional and technical labor, which perform the majority of Agency extramural 

activities. Exhibit 4-2 contains the derivation of inflation factors for Agency extramural costs. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 4-3 

Exhibit 4-2: Derivation of Inflation Factors for Agency Extramural Costs 

Item Inflation Index Source1 Starting 

year 

Index 

for 

starting 

year 

(a) 

Index for 

December 

2012 

(b) 

Inflation 

factor 

(b)/(a) 2

Agency Extramural 

costs Professional 

and Related Private 

Industry 

BLS ECI, Total comp, Private 

industry, Professional and 

related, 4th Q [BLS, 2012]3

1993 67.0 118.2 1.76 

Notes: 

1 In 2006, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Employment Cost Index (ECI) series “were rebased to December 2005 = 100 

from June 1989 = 100.” The change is reflected in the indices in this table and explained on the BLS website, Employment 

Cost Index News Release Text: Employment Cost Index, March 2006 (BLS, 2006b). The Consumer Price Index (CPI) was 

not rebased. 

2 Inflation factors are rounded; unrounded values were used in calculations. 

3 Beginning with the report Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 25 Chemical Substances: EPA 

Docket OPPT-2009-0922 (EPA 2011b), we began to use the not-seasonally adjusted CIU2010000120000I for private 

industry Professional, and Related workers, instead of SA CIS2010000W00000I for private industry white collar workers 

because BLS retired the “white-collar” series. 

Source: (BLS 2012) Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employment Cost Index – Total Compensation: Professional and Related 

Private Industry, Not Seasonally Adjusted. (Series ID: CIU2010000120000I (B)), extracted March 22, 2012. 

http:/data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/srgate. (BLS 2012).

The Percent of Cases column in Exhibit 4-3 is a weighting factor applied to reflect the fact that not all 

chemicals require each review step. For example, in the PMN process, all chemicals require 

Administrative Prescreening, but not all chemicals require the intensive scrutiny of “Standard 

Review.” The three types of submissions resulting from a SNUR may have weighting factors that 

differ from each other and from the weighting factors for PMNs. Changes in weighting factors could 

cause actual review costs to be higher or lower than calculated here. For example, some SNUNs 

require little review because they are determined to be “invalid” – i.e. not required in the first place. 

However, often a SNUN may take more Agency time than a typical PMN because of factors such as 

the need to retrieve old PMN records from archives, and the likelihood that more data requiring EPA 

review are submitted with a SNUN than would be submitted on average with a PMN. Resources were 

not available to update the review hours to reflect the current review process or to tailor the cost 

estimates to SNUNs. Therefore, for this analysis, the review steps and weighting factors are assumed 

to be the same as those derived in 1994 for PMNs. 

Values in the Weighted Cost column is calculated by multiplying the un-weighted costs (EPA staff 

cost plus extramural costs) by the percentage of cases requiring this review step. Weighted costs are 

then multiplied by the burden reduction of 16.5 percent to account for burden savings generated 

electronic submission. This calculation yields total Agency costs of $5,086 per SNUN, for submission 

review and processing, as shown in Exhibit 4-3.
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract 

 

Exhibit 4-3: Agency Costs for SNUN and Other Submission Review and Processing 

Review Steps 

EPA Staff (FTE) Cost Extramural Cost2

Unweighted 

Cost 

% of 

Cases 

Weighted 

Cost3

Bur

Redu

FTE 

Fraction 

Cost per 

FTE1

FTE Total 

(2012$) 1993$ 2012$ 

(a) (b) (c)=(a)*(b) (d) (e) (f)=(c)+(e) (g) (h)=(f)*(g) (

Pre-notice consultation 0.0024 $161,446 $387.47 $4.00 $7.06 $395 41% $161.76 0.1Administrative prescreen/ notice receipt/user fee 

0.0024 $161,446 $387.47 $92.00 $162.30 $550 100% $549.78 0.1

CRSS (Chemical Review and Search Strategy) 

0.0025 $161,446 $403.62 $268.00 $472.80 $876 100% $876.42 0.1

SAT (Structure Activity Team) 0.0006 $161,446 $96.87 $14.00 $24.70 $122 100% $121.57 0.1Engineering/Exposure 0.0015 $161,446 $242.17 $56.00 $98.79 $341 100% $340.96 0.1Exposure/Fate 0.0008 $161,446 $129.16 $0.00 $0.00 $129 100% $129.16 0.1Focus 0.0009 $161,446 $145.30 $23.00 $40.58 $186 100% $185.88 0.1Standard Review Functions 0.0219 $161,446 $3,535.68 $511.00 $901.50 $4,437 29% $1,286.78 0.1Division Directors Meeting 0.0129 $161,446 $2,082.66 $113.00 $199.35 $2,282 15% $342.30 0.1Order Development/Negotiation Review 

0.0171 $161,446 $2,760.73 $22.00 $38.81 $2,800 3% $83.99 0.1

Post Order Data Review 0.0886 $161,446 $14,304.15 $0.00 $0.00 $14,304 3% $429.12 0.1Order Modification 0.2167 $161,446 $34,985.43 $0.00 $0.00 $34,985 3% $1,049.56 0.1New Chemical SNUR 0.0277 $161,446 $4,472.07 $85.00 $149.96 $4,622 7% $323.54 0.1
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract 

 

Review Steps 

EPA Staff (FTE) Cost Extramural Cost2

Unweighted 

Cost 

% of 

Cases 

Weighted 

Cost3

Bur

Redu

FTE 

Fraction 

Cost per 

FTE1

FTE Total 

(2012$) 1993$ 2012$ 

(a) (b) (c)=(a)*(b) (d) (e) (f)=(c)+(e) (g) (h)=(f)*(g) (

Development Notices of Commencement 0.0012 $161,446 $193.74 $40.00 $70.57 $264 31% $81.93 0.1FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) Requests 

0.0333 $161,446 $5,376.17 $287.00 $506.32 $5,882 1% $58.82 0.1

CBI (Confidential Business Information) Substantiation 

0.0004 $161,446 $64.58 $3.00 $5.29 $70 100% $69.87 0.1

TOTAL $6,091 0.1Notes: 1 GS-13 Step 5 salaries loaded with benefits and overhead. See Exhibit 4-1 for derivation.2 Extramural costs consist of contracting support and other purchases directly attributable to the PMN review process inflated from 1993 prices using E3 Weighted costs were calculated using unrounded unit cost estimates. 4 Electronic submission is expected to generate a cost savings of 16.5% to the Agency (EPA 2009a, p. 28). 

Sources: FTEs per review step, 1993 extramural costs, and percent of cases are from EPA, 1994 Table VII-1; GS-13 salaries are from OPM, 2012. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 4-6

4.3 Export Notification Cost 

Under TSCA Section 12(b), exporters must notify EPA if they intend to export chemicals subject to 

SNURs, as described in Section 3.2.8. The Agency burden and cost due to TSCA §12(b) export 

notification result from three tasks. In the first task, EPA receives export notifications from 

companies that intend to export one of the chemicals subject to TSCA §12(b) (EPA, 20012c). In the 

second task, EPA staff prepares separate notification letters that are subsequently reviewed and 

delivered to importing countries, their embassies, or representatives, and to the importing country’s 

U.S. embassies (EPA, 2012c). (See Exhibit 3-7 for the cost of mailing one notification). The third 

task is comprised of EPA staff responses to public inquiries and other TSCA 12(b) activities. The 

work of responding to non-routine requests for information and clarification from industry and 

importing countries, and of handling other tasks associated with the TSCA §12(b) program, was 

estimated to require roughly 400 hours per year (EPA, 2012c). Since the current rulemaking covers 

only a very small percent of the chemicals subject to TSCA 12(b) reporting, a very small percent of 

such activity would be attributable to the current rulemaking. 

Because it is unknown how many, if any, notifications EPA would receive or send as a result of the 

current rulemaking, the costs to the Agency are presented per activity. The estimated burden for the 

first two Agency activities is provided in Exhibit 4-4. To estimate the Agency cost, hourly burdens 

are multiplied by the loaded wage rate of a GS-13, Step 5, which is derived in Exhibit 4-1. 

Exhibit 4-4: TSCA 12(b) Export Notification Cost: Agency Burden per Activity (2012$) 

Agency Activity 

Hours per 

Activity 

FTE per 

Activity1

Loaded Wages Mailing 

Cost 

Total Agency 

Cost per 

Activity GS-13, Step 5 FTE 

(a) (b) = (a)/2,080 (c) (d) (e) = 

((b)*(c))+(d) 

Process an incoming 

notification from an 

exporting company 

0.1 0.00005 $161,446 $0.00 $7.76 

Prepare and mail a 

notification to an 

importing country 

0.5 0.00024 $161,446 $14.21 $53.02 

Notes: 

1 The burden associated with an Agency activity is the burden for the Agency to process one incoming notification, or to 

prepare and mail an outgoing notification. 

Source: Appendix A of this report derives Agency labor costs. Mailing costs are from Exhibit 3-7 of this report. Other 

burden estimates are from ICR No.: 0795.14 [Information Collection Request for] Notification of Chemical Exports - 

TSCA Section 12(b) Supporting Statement for Request for OMB Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act (EPA 

2012c), adjusted for inflation.
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 5-1

5. Benefits 

A SNUN submission provides EPA with the opportunity to evaluate the intended use and, if 

necessary, to prohibit or limit that activity before it occurs. It allows the Agency to take immediate 

action to mitigate an activity that the Agency deems harmful to the environment or human health. The 

proposed SNUR allows EPA to evaluate the use of, or exposure to these chemicals and allow the 

Agency to take preventive action to limit or prohibit any Significant New Use. 

Long-chain perfluorinated chemicals (LCPFCs) are found world-wide in the environment, wildlife, 

and humans. They are bioaccumulative in wildlife and humans, are persistent in the environment, and 

toxic to mammalian species (Danish Ministry of the Environment, 2008 and OECD, 2002). Based on 

currently available information, EPA believes that while all PFAS chemical substances are expected 

to persist, the length of the perfluorinated chain may also have an effect on bioaccumulation and 

toxicity, and that chemical substances with longer carbon chain lengths may be of greater concern 

than those with shorter chain lengths (3M Company, 1999b, 3M Company, 1999c, and Kudo et.al, 

2001). LCPFAC chemical substances have been detected in human blood samples throughout the 

United States and the world. These compounds have also been detected in human breast milk, liver, 

umbilical cord blood, and seminal plasma. Individual samples collected on perfluorinated chemical 

substances in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999-2009 are 

similar across teens and adults; however, pooled data from NHANES 2001-2002 indicate that most of 

the levels of perfluorinated compounds are higher in children ages 3-11 years compared to adults 

(EPA, 2009d). To date, significant adverse effects have not been found in the general human 

population18; however, LCPFCs have been linked to a number of health effects, including thyroid 

disease and reproductive function (Knox, et al., 2011; Melzer, et al., 2010). 

The proposed SNUR allows EPA to evaluate the use of, or exposure to these chemicals and allow the 

Agency to take preventive action to limit or prohibit any Significant New Use. EPA also expects that 

the proposed rule may restrict future uses or exposure to the chemicals, as a company may choose to 

modify planned uses in such a way that does not trigger a SNUR, as opposed to submitting a SNUN. 

Therefore, the proposed SNUR may limit future exposure to the chemicals. 

 

18 Based on review of a number of studies examining health effects of LCPFACs. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 6-1

6. Additional Analyses 

6.1 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 SNUR would not have a significant adverse economic 

impact on a substantial number of small entities. The rationale supporting this conclusion is as 

follows. The requirement to submit a SNUN 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. Where a use is 

new, by definition no small or large entities presently engage in such activities. Although some small 

entities may decide to manufacture or process a substance for the new use after the SNUR is 

promulgated, EPA receives very few SNUNs, and few of those are submitted by small entities. In 

response to the promulgation of SNURs covering over 1,000 chemical substances, the Agency 

receives only a handful of SNUNs per year. For example, the number of SNUNs was four in Federal 

fiscal year 2005, eight in FY2006, six in FY2007, eight in FY2008, seven in FY2009, two in 2010, 

and ten in 2011 (EPA, 2012a), for an average of 6 per year from all SNURs. EPA has no reason to 

believe that this SNUR would alter the pattern of SNUN submissions that EPA has historically seen. 

In addition, the estimated reporting cost for submission of a SNUN is minimal regardless of the size 

of the firm, averaging about $8,600 including SNUN recordkeeping and reporting costs. The Agency 

currently offers some relief to certain small businesses with sales (including those of 

subsidiary/parent companies) of less than $40 million per year by reducing the SNUN submission fee 

from $2,500 to $100. This lower fee reduces the cost of submitting a SNUN to about $6,200 for 

smaller firms. During the six year period from 2005-2010, only three submitters self-identified as 

small in their SNUN submission19 (EPA, 2012a). EPA believes the cost of submitting a SNUN is 

relatively small compared the cost of developing and marketing a chemical new to a firm and that the 

requirement to submit a SNUN generally does not have a significant economic impact. 

As stated in Section 2.4, EPA believes that the global manufacture of LCPFAC will cease by the end 

of 2015, as a result of the PFOA Stewardship Program. Therefore, EPA believes there will be no 

importation of articles containing LCPFACs after 2015, because the chemical processors supplying 

importers with finished articles will be unable to purchase LCPFACs after 2015. In addition, given 

the PFAS chemicals are no longer manufactured, imported, or used in the United States and the 

stringent international regulations on PFOS, EPA believes that no carpets will be imported containing 

PFAS chemicals subject to the proposed rule or PFOA and its salts will be imported as part of 

articles. 

EPA believes that there will be minimal impact to importers of the chemical substance subject to the 

proposed SNUR as part of an article. The SNUR does not require importers of articles that contain the 

chemicals subject to the proposed SNUR to conduct specific activities to ascertain if they are 

importing or processing an article that uses a chemical subject to the rule. Therefore importers are 

expected to take actions that are commensurate with the level of risk each company perceives, and the 

resources it has available. EPA has no reason to believe that a firm would voluntarily incur substantial 

 

19 The three “small” submitters were identified by review of actual SNUN submissions from the years 2005-

2010. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 6-2

costs to comply with the SNUR, but rather EPA believes each firm will choose the most efficient 

route to identify whether it is importing the subject chemical substances in articles. 

EPA believes that the potential economic impact of complying with a SNUR is not expected to be 

significant or adversely affect a substantial number of small entities. 

6.2 Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 

The proposed rule does not impose any enforceable duty, contain any unfunded mandate, or 

otherwise have any effect on small governments because none of the current producers of the subject 

chemicals are governments. Additionally, it is not expected that any governments would initiate 

production of these chemicals. 

6.3 Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., 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. The information collection requirements related to this action have 

already been approved by OMB pursuant to the PRA under OMB control numbers 2070-0038 (EPA 

ICR No. 1188) and 2070-0030 (EPA ICR No. 0795). 

If an entity were to submit a SNUN to the Agency, the annual burden is estimated to average 98.2 

hours per response: 0.82 hours for rule familiarization (Section 3.2.1), 2.80 hours for CDX 

registration, CDX electronic signature, and pay.gov account setup (Section 3.2.2), 92.2 hours for form 

completion, submission and recordkeeping under 40 CFR 721.40 (Sections 3.2.3), 1 hour for 

consumer notifications (Section 3.2.6) and 1.36 hours for export notification (Section 3.2.8). The 

burdens for rule familiarization, CDX registration, CDX electronic signature, pay.gov account setup 

form completion, submission, and recordkeeping consumer notifications are approved under EPA 

ICR No. 1188 (OMB control number 2070-0038). The burden for export notification is approved 

under EPA ICR No. 0795 (OMB control number 2070-0030). 

6.4 Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), requires EPA to 

develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in 

the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.” Policies that have 

federalism implications are defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have 

“substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the 

States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government” 

(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). 

The proposed rule establishes reporting and recordkeeping requirements that apply to manufacturers 

(including importers) and processors of certain chemicals. EPA has no information to indicate that 

any state or local government manufactures or processes the chemical substances covered by this 

action. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 6-3

6.5 Executive Order 12898, Environmental Justice 

Executive Order 12898, “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations 

and Low Income Populations” (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994), establishes federal executive policy 

on environmental justice. Its main provision directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable 

and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and 

addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 

effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations 

in the United States. 

The information collected under this proposed rule, if finalized, would assist EPA and others in 

determining the potential hazards and risks associated with various chemicals manufactured and used 

at high production volumes. Although not directly impacting environmental justice-related concerns, 

this information would enable the Agency to better protect human health and the environment, 

including in low-income and minority communities. 

6.6 Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children 

Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 

FR 19885, April 23, 1997), requires EPA to identify and assess environmental health and safety risks 

that may disproportionately affect children. This type of analysis is required for rules that would have 

an impact of $100 million or more only. The impact of this SNUR would be less than $100 million 

and therefore no analysis of such impacts on children is required. 

6.7 Executive Order 13175, Tribal Governments 

Executive Order 13175 is Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (59 FR 

22951, November 6, 2000). This rule does not have Tribal implications because EPA has no 

information to indicate that any tribal government manufactures or processes the chemical substances 

covered by this action. 

6.8 Executive Order 13211, Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

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. 

6.9 Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review 

Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review (76 FR 3821, January 21, 

2011), requires EPA to base regulations on the best available science, allow for public participation 

and the open exchange of ideas, promote predictability and reduce uncertainty , identify and use the 

best, most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends, consider both the 

costs and benefits qualitatively and quantitatively and ensure regulations are accessible, consistent, 

written in plain language, and easy to understand. 

The proposed rule establishes reporting and recordkeeping requirements that apply to manufacturers 

(including importers) and processors of certain chemicals. Consistent with EO 13563, this document 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 6-4

qualitatively and quantitatively describes both the costs and benefits of the proposed rule as well as 

the underlying data used in the analyses. EPA chose the best available data to analyze the costs and 

benefits described in this document and the best analytic approaches given the available data and 

other constraints. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 7-1

7. References 

3M, 2013. 3M “3M’s Phase Out and New Technologies” 2013. Avaliable at: 

http://solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/3M/en_US/PFOS/PFOA/Information/phase-out-technologies/ 

40 CFR 721 Toxic Substances Control Act, Significant New Uses for Chemical Substances Code of 

Federal Regulations. Part 721 Title 40, July 27, 1988, as amended, June 23, 1993. 

Adidas, 2012. Adidas Group. Adidas Group Responds to Greenpeace Report on the use of Chemical 

by the Outdoor Industry. November, 2012. 

AFIRM , 2011. Apparel and Footwear International RSL Management. AFIRM Supplier Toolkit. 

Retrieved from: http://www.afirm-group.com/AFIRMSupplierToolkitFinalJune6.pdf. 

Armeduri, Bruno; Bouterin, Bernard. Well-Architectured Floropolymers: Synthesis, Properties, and 

Applications. “Applications of Flourinated Telomers,” (p. 71). 

ASTM-F2577. ASTM International, ASTM’s Standard Guide for Assessment of Materials and 

Products for Declarable Substances

bluesign, 2012. bluesign. Management of per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) according to 

bluesign® criteria. November 2012. 

BLS, 2006a. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employer Costs for Employee Compensation: Changes 

to NAICS and SOC, Table 2. ECEC Occupational Comparability between SOC and OCS. 

Downloaded February 2006 from http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ect/sp/ecsm0003.htm. 

BLS, 2006b. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment Cost Index News Release Text: 

Employment Cost Index, March 2006 (April 28, 2006), at http://www.bls.gov. 

BLS, 2006c. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Change has Come to the ECI (June 14, 2006) at 

http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ect/sp/ecsm0001.htm. 

BLS, 2012. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employment Cost Index – Total Compensation: Professional 

and Related Private Industry, Not Seasonally Adjusted. (Series ID: CIU2010000120000I (B)), 

extracted March 22, 2012. Available at: http:/data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/srgate. 

BLS, 2013a. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Employer Costs for Employee Compensation 

Supplementary Tables December 2012.” Accessed March 18, 2012. Available at: 

http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ect/sp/ecsuptc25.pdf (Note: The BLS report title and content are updated 

periodically to include more recent data, on the same website.) 

BLS, 2013b. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer Price Index- All Urban Consumers, U.S. 

City Average (Series ID: CUUR0000SA0), extracted March 18, 2013. Available through 

http:/data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/srgate

Branch, 2006. Raphael E. Branch and Lowell Mason. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Seasonal 

adjustment in the ECI and the conversion to NAICS and SOC.” Monthly Labor Review. Vol. 

129, No. 4, April 2006. Available at www.bls.gov. 

Burns DC, Ellis DA, Li H, McMurdo CJ, Webster E: Experimental pKa determination for 

perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and the potential impact of pKa concentration 

dependence on laboratory-measured partitioning phenomena and environmental 

modeling. Environ Sci Technol 2008, 42:9283–9288. 

Caroll, 2006. Richard E. Caroll. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Changes affecting the Employment 

Cost Index: an overview.” Monthly Labor Review. Vol. 129, No. 4, April 2006. Available at 

www.bls.gov. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 7-2

Danish Ministry of the Environment. 2008. Survey and Environmental/Health Assessment of 

Fluorinated Substances in Impregnated Consumer Products and Impregnating Agents: Survey of 

Chemical Substances in Consumer Products, No. 99. 

Environment Canada, 2010. Environment Canada. Environmental Performance Agreement 

(“Agreement”) Respecting Perfluorinated Carboxylic Acids (PFCAs) and their Precursors in 

Perfluorochemical Products Sold in Canada. 2010. Available at http://www.ec.gc.ca/epeepa/default.asp?lang=En&n=81AE80CE-1#X-2010073015020613. Accessed February 2013. 

EPA, 1992. U.S. EPA, Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation. Instructions for Preparing 

Information Collection Requests (ICRs). Washington, DC, June 1, 1992. 

EPA, 1994. U. S. EPA, Office of Toxic Substances, Regulatory Impacts Branch. Regulatory Impact 

Analysis of Amendments to Regulations for TSCA Section 5 Premanufacture Notifications. 

Washington, DC, September 9, 1994. (OTS/RIB later became OPPT/EPAB.) 

EPA, 2000a. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, ICR No. 1139.06. OMB Control 

No.: 2070-0033 [Information Collection Request for] TSCA Existing Chemical Test Rules, 

Consent Orders, Test Rule Exemptions, and Voluntary Test Data Submissions: Supporting 

Statement for Request for OMB Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Attachment 5, Wage 

Rates Estimation, August 29, 2000. 

EPA, 2000b. U.S. EPA, “EPA and 3M announce Phase out of PFOs” May 16, 200. Avaliable at 

http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/d0cf6618525a9efb85257359003fb69d/33aa946e6cb11f3

5852568e1005246b4!OpenDocument&Highlight=2,risk 

EPA, 2002a. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis 

Branch. Revised Economic Analysis for the Amended Inventory Update Rule: Final Report. 

Washington, DC. August 2002. 

EPA, 2002b. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis 

Branch, Wage Rates for Economic Analysis of the Toxics Release Inventory Program. Washington, 

DC: June 10, 2002. 

EPA, 2003. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis 

Branch. Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 65 Chemical Substances. 

Washington, DC, 2003. Available from the Federal Docket Management System as EPA-HQOPPTS-2002-0078 at http://www.regulations.gov. 

EPA, 2005a. Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis Branch. 

Economic Analysis of the Proposed Change to TSCA Section 12(b) Export Notification 

Requirements, November 2005, available from the Federal Docket Management System as EPAHQ-OPPT-2005-005 8-0017 at http://www.regulations.gov. 

EPA, 2005b. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics ICR No. 118.08. OMB Control No.: 

2070-0038 [Information Collection Request for] TSCA Section 5(a)(2) Significant New Use Rules 

for Existing Chemicals (Renewal). Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB Review under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, October 11, 2005. 

EPA, 2006. 2010/2015 PFOA Stewardship Program. 2006. Available at 

http://www.epa.gov/oppt/pfoa/pubs/stewardship/index.html. 

EPA, 2007a. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, EPA ICR No. 0574.14. OMB 

Control No.: 2070-0014 [Information Collection Request for] Pre-Manufacture Review 

Reporting and Exemption Requirements for New Chemical Substances and Significant New Use 

Reporting Requirements for Chemical Substances: Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB 

Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act, December 6, 2007. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 7-3

EPA, 2007b. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis 

Branch. Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 65 Chemical Substances 

(EPA Docket OPPT-2003-0063), December 4, 2006 (Revised March 12, 2007). 

EPA, 2007c. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis 

Branch. Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 38 Chemical Substances 

(EPA Docket OPPT-2006-0898), August 17, 2007. 

EPA, 2009a. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis 

Branch. Economic Analysis of the Premanufacture Notification Electronic Reporting Final Rule. 

(EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0296). July 13, 2009. 

EPA, 2009c. U.S. EPA, Office of Environmental Information, Collection Strategies Division, ICR 

Handbook EPA’s Guide to Writing Information Collection Requests under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 199. Revised 10/2009. 

EPA, 2009d. "Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Fluorinated Telomers: Basic Information." 

Available at: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/pfoa/pubs/pfoainfo.html (Accessed August 24, 2009). 

EPA, 2011a. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. 

PMN Gold Database (Confidential Business Information) accessed September 1, 2011. 

EPA, 2011b. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. 

Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 25 Chemical Substances, (EPA 

Docket OPPT-2009-0922) August 2011. 

EPA, 2012a. Count of SNUN Submissions as tracked in EPA’s Confidential Business Information 

Tracking System (CBITS). February, 2012. 

EPA, 2012b. “Industry Progressing in Voluntary Effort to Reduce Toxic Chemicals.” February 10, 

2012. 

EPA, 2012c. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. EPA ICR No.: 0795.14 OMB 

Control Number 2070-0030 [Information Collection Request for] Notification of Chemical 

Exports - TSCA Section 12(b) Supporting Statement for Request for OMB Review under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act. December 18, 2012 at http://www.regulations.gov. 

EPA, 2013a. US Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, “2012 

Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) Data as provided by EPA’s Chemical Data Access Tool 

(CDAT)” Accessed February 2011. 

EPA, 2013b. US Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. 

Downloadable of the Non-Confidential Chemical Reporting Data (CDR) Database, February 

2013 

EPA, 2013c. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Understanding the Costs 

Associated with Eliminating Exemptions for Articles in SNURs

European Commission, 2010. European Commission: Enterprise and Industry –TRIS. Prohibition on 

Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) in consumer products. December 2010. 

European Commission EC, 2013. “More about the EU Ecolabel.” Available at: 

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecolabel/the-ecolabel-scheme.html (Accessed June 5, 2013). 

Last updated March 25, 2013. 

Germany Federal Environmental Agency, 2009, Germany Federal Environmental Agency. 

Perfluorinated compounds: Avoid inputs – protect the environment Available at 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 7-4

http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/uba-info-presse-e/2009/pe09-

046_perfluorinated_compounds_avoid_inputs_protect_the_environment.htm. 2009. Accessed 

February 2013. 

Greenpeace, 2012. Greenpeace. Marks & Spencer Pledges to Eliminate Toxic Chemicals from 

Clothing. October, 2012. 

H&M, 2012. H&M. H&M Puts Ban on Perflourinated Compounds (PFCs).September 2012. 

Jacks-Wolfskin, 2012. Jacks-Wolfskin. FAQ on PFOA and PFCs in outdoor apparel (as of: 

13/11/12). November 2012. 

Knox, S. S., T. Jackson, B. Javins, Stephanie J. Frisbee, A. Shankar and A. M. Ducatman. 2011. 

Implications of Early Menopause in Women Exposed to Perfluorocarbons. J Clin Endocrinol 

Metab 96(6): 1-7. 

Melzer, D., N. Rice, M. H. Depledge, W. E. Henley and T. S. Galloway. 2010. Association between 

Serum Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Thyroid Disease in the U.S. National Health and 

Nutrition Examination Survey. Environmental Health Perspectives. 118(5): 686-692. 

Norwegian Pollution Control Authority 2007. Norwegian Pollution Control Agency. Survey of 

National Sources 2007: PFOA in Norway. December 2007. 

Norwegian Pollution Control Authority 2010. Norwegian Pollution Control Authority. Impact 

assessment of regulating perfluorooctanoic acid and individual PFOA salts and esters in 

consumer products (PFOA) 2010. 

OECD PFC Steering Group. 2010. Survey on the production, use and release of PFOS, PFAS,PFOA, 

PFCA, their related substances and products/mixtures containing these substances(2009 survey). 

Available at 

http://www.oecd.org/document/58/0,3343,en_2649_34375_2384378_1_1_1_1,00.html. 

OEKO-TEX® Association. No Date a. “OEKO-TEX® Association” Available at https://www.oekotex.com/en/manufacturers/philosophy/oeko_tex_association/oeko_tex_association.xhtml 

(Accessed June 6, 2013) 

OEKO-TEX® Association. No Date b. “OEKO-TEX® Standard 100” Available at 

https://www.oekotex.com/en/manufacturers/concept/oeko_tex_standard_100/oeko_tex_standard_100.xhtml

(Accessed June 5, 2013) 

OPM, 2012. Office of Personnel Management, Salary Table 2012-DCB, Washington Baltimore 

Northern Virginia, DC-MD-PA-VA-WV. Accessed from 

http://www.opm.gov/oca/12tables/pdf/DCB.pdf. 

OIRA, 2011. U.S. Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.. Historic Information Collection 

Data for the Information Collection Request (ICR) for the Importation of Chemicals Subject to 

the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) OMB Control Number: 1515-0173 Accessed. June 

2011. 

Outsideonline, 2012. Outside Magazine. “Greenpeace Scolds Outdoor Apparel Makers for Chemical 

Use”. November, 2012. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 ▌pg. 7-5

Patagonia, 2012. Patagonia Apparel. PFOS, PFOA and Other Fluorochemical. 2012. 

Prevedouros K, Cousins IT, Buck RC, Korzeniowski SH: Sources, fate and transport of 

perfluorocarboxylates. Environ Sci Technol 2006, 40:32–44. 

Sleemi, 2006. Fehimida Sleemi. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Employment Cost Index 

Publication Plans”. Monthly Labor Review. Vol. 129, No. 4, April 2006. Available at 

www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2006/04/art2full.pdf. 

U.S. Postal Service (U.S. PS). 2013. “Compare Services & Prices.” Available at 

https://www.usps.com/ship/service-chart.htm. Accessed April 2013. 

Vierke et al, 2012. Lena Vierke, Claudia Staude, Annegret Biegel-Engler, Wiebke Drost and 

Christoph Schulte. 2012. Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) — main concerns and regulatory 

developments in Europe from an environmental point of view. Environmental Sciences Europe. 

24(16) 

Washington JW, Ellington JJ, Thomas MJ, Evans JJ, Hoon Yoo, Hafner SC. 2009. Degradability of 

an acrylate-linked, fluorotelomer polymer in soil Environmental Science and Technology, 43(17), 

6617-6623. 

Weinstein, 2004. Harriet G. Weinstein and Mark A. Loewenstein, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

Comparing Current and Former Industry and Occupation ECEC Series. Originally posted August 

25, 2004 at http://www.bls.gov/opub/cwc/cm20040823ar01p1.htm. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 Appendix A ▌pg. A-1

Appendix A: – Inflators and Wage Rates 

This appendix describes the derivation of the fully loaded labor rates and inflation factors used in 

calculating costs of labor, materials, and other inputs. Costs presented in this report are in 2012 

dollars. 

A.1 Derivation of Loaded Wage Rates 

Unit labor costs are calculated by adding fringe benefits and overhead to the wage or salary to derive 

a fully loaded labor cost. The basic method is described in Wage Rates for Economic Analysis of the 

Toxics Release Inventory Program (EPA, 2002b). The resulting loaded labor rates are given in 

Exhibit 7-1. Costs are calculated for several labor categories: Managerial, Professional/Technical, 

Clerical, and EPA staff. 

In March 2004, BLS began using the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes 

instead of the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) System, and the Standard Occupational 

Classification (SOC) system instead of the Occupational Classification System (OCS). The following 

table shows the crosswalk between old and new occupational titles. 

Exhibit A- 1: Labor Category Crosswalk 

EPAB Reports Labor Category BLS Old Title (OCS) BLS New Title (SOC) 

Managerial Executive, administrative, and 

managerial 

Management, business, and 

financial 

Professional/Technical Professional specialty and technical Professional and related 

Clerical Administrative support, including 

clerical Office and administrative support 

Source: Employer Costs for Employee Compensation: Changes to NAICS and SOC, Table 2. ECEC Occupational 

Comparability between SOC and OCS (BLS, 2006a and Weinstein, 2004). 

A.1.1 Derivation of Labor Rates for Managerial, Professional/Technical, and Clerical 

Labor 

Wages and fringe benefits for managerial, professional/technical, and clerical labor were taken from 

the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Employer Costs for Employee Compensation (ECEC) data,20 for 

December 2012, for manufacturing industries.21

The cost of fringe benefits such as paid leave and insurance, specific to each labor category, are taken 

from the same ECEC series. Fringe benefits as a percent of wages are calculated separately for each 

 

20 This follows the approach introduced in Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 65 Chemical 

Substances: EPA Docket OPPT-2003-0063 (EPAB, 2007b). 

21 Employer Costs for Employee Compensation Supplementary Tables December 2012. (BLS, 2013a). This follows the 

approach introduced in EPAB, 2007a. Earlier PMN SNUR economic analyses, such as EPA, 2003, used ECEC data for 

“All Goods Producing” sectors (manufacturing, mining, and construction). However, the manufacturing sector data seem 

more relevant since the SNURs mainly affect the chemicals industry. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 Appendix A ▌pg. A-2

labor category. For example, for December 2012, the average wage rate for professional/technical22

labor was $38.53; the average fringe benefit was $19.30. Fringe benefits as a percent of wages were 

$19.30/$38.53, or approximately 50.09 percent. 

An additional loading factor of 17 percent is applied to wages to account for overhead. This approach 

is used for consistency with Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics economic analyses for two 

major rulemakings: Wage Rates for Economic Analyses of the Toxics Release Inventory Program 

(EPA, 2002b), and the Revised Economic Analysis for the Amended Inventory Update Rule: Final 

Report (EPA, 2002a). This overhead loading factor is added to the benefits loading factor, and the 

total is then applied to the base wage to derive the fully loaded wage. For example, the December 

2012 fully loaded wage for professional/technical labor is $38.53 × (1+0.5009 + 0.17) = $64.38. 

Fully loaded costs for managerial and clerical labor are calculated in a similar manner, as shown in 

Exhibit 7-1. 

A.1.2 Derivation of Labor Rates for EPA Staff 

Agency labor costs are calculated based on annual Federal salaries for the Washington-Baltimore area 

published by the Office of Personnel Management effective January 2012 (OPM, 2012). The average 

salary for one FTE staff member is estimated as the salary for a GS-13 Step 5 employee.23 

Multiplying the annual pay by an assumed loading factor of 1.6 to reflect Federal fringe benefits and 

overhead, the loaded annual salary of EPA staff was calculated to be $161,446. 

The Agency loading factor is from an EPA guide, Instructions for Preparing Information Collection 

Requests (ICRs) (EPA, 1992, page 30, footnote 9). The 60 percent assumption was labeled “the 

benefits multiplication factor” in the EPA Guide, but has been used in many EPA Office of Pollution 

Prevention and Toxics ICRs to reflect both fringe benefits and overhead for Federal staff. For 

example, it was used in an August 2000 document supporting ICR No. 1139.06 (EPA, 2000a), with 

the following explanation: 

The annual costs per FTE are derived by multiplying the annual pay rate by 1.6 (the benefits 

multiplication factor). The multiplication factor used is recommended in EPA’s Office of Policy, 

Planning, and Evaluation’s Instructions for Preparing Information Collection Requests (ICRs) (June 1, 

1992). An EPA internal phone call between Carol Rawie (OPPT/EETD/RIB) and Carl Koch 

(OPPE/RMD/IMB) on May 3, 1994, indicated that the 1.6 factor included not only benefits but also 

overhead. (ICR No.1139.06) 

 

22 This follows terminology introduced in EPAB, 2007b. Earlier SNUR economic analyses used the term “technical” labor. 

Here the category is called “professional/technical” labor, to make clear how it relates to BLS categories. In 2004, BLS 

changed from the Occupational Classification System, OCS, to the Standard Occupational Classification system, SOC. 

In the process, the “Professional specialty and technical” category became the “Professional and related” category. 

However, the coverage of the old and new occupational groups is approximately the same. See the BLS article, Comparing 

Current and Former Industry and Occupation ECEC Series (Weinstein, 2004).

23 The GS-13 Step 5 is consistent with ICR No. 0574.14 (12/18/2007), which covers PMN SNURs. Use of this grade level 

follows the approach introduced in EPAB, 2007a. That report represented a change from the earlier PMN SNUR 

economic analysis (EPA, 2003), which used an average of GS-12 Step 1 and GS-12 Step 10 salaries.
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs 

 

Exhibit 7-1: Derivation of Loaded Wage Rates 

EPAB Labor 

Category Data Source Date Wage Fringe Benefit Fringes as % Wage Overhead % Wage2 Fr

Ove

F

(a) (b) (c) =(b)/(a) (d) (e)=(

Managerial 

BLS ECEC, Private Manufacturing industries, “Mgt, Business, and Financial”3

Dec-12 $43.95 $21.45 48.81% 17% 

Professional/ Technical 

BLS ECEC, Private Manufacturing industries, “Professional and related“3 Dec-12 $38.53 $19.30 50.09% 17% 

Clerical 

BLS ECEC, Private Manufacturing industries, “Office and Administrative Support”3

Dec-12 $17.64 $8.87 50.28% 17% 

EPA staff FTE 

Annual Federal staff cost: OPM Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia, DC-MD-PA-VA-WV, area, GS-13 Step 5 pay rates, with 60% overhead4 

Jan-12 $48.51 -- [Included in 60% overhead] 60% 

Notes: 1Wage data are rounded to the closest penny; however, unrounded values were used in calculations. 2An overhead rate of 17 percent was used based on assumptions in Wage Rates for Economic Analyses of the Toxics Release Inventory Program (EPA

Economic Analysis for the Amended Inventory Update Rule: Final Report (EPA, 2002a). 

3Employer Costs for Employee Compensation Supplementary Tables December 2012, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 18, 2013 (BLS, 2013a).4The Federal salary is the unloaded Federal GS-13 Step 5 salary ($100,904 divided by 2,080 hours to get the hourly wage rate in the table) for 2012, fr

Management salary table for Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia (OPM, 2012). The 60% fringes-and-overhead rate is from an EPA guide, InstruInformation Collection Requests (ICRs) (EPA, 1992, page 30, footnote 9). 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 Agency Costs ▌pg. A-4

A.2 Derivation of Inflation Factors 

Detailed information on the derivation of the inflation factors used is presented in Exhibit 7-2. In 

2006, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) made several changes to the Employment Cost Index. The 

changes are described on a BLS web page, “Change has come to the ECI,” (BLS, 2006c) and in 

several April 2006 Monthly Labor Review articles posted on the BLS web site: “Changes affecting the 

Employment Cost Index: an overview” (Caroll, 2006); “Employment Cost Index Publication Plans” 

(Sleemi, 2006); and “Seasonal adjustment in the ECI and the conversion to NAICS and SOC” 

(Branch, 2006). 

Under a mandate from OMB, BLS changed its classification of industries and occupations from the 

Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) and Occupational Classification System (OCS) to the North 

American Industry Classification System (NAICS) and Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) 

system. In 2006, BLS adjusted all ECI series to reflect this change. 

In addition to changing the industry and occupational classification systems, in 2006, BLS rebased 

the ECI from June 1989 = 100 to December 2005 = 100 for all current and historical non-seasonally 

adjusted series, including the NAICS and SIC based series. (Seasonally adjusted indices, including 

those in Exhibit 7-2 of this report, may not exactly equal 100 for December 2005 as a result of the 

seasonal adjustment. Seasonal adjustments are explained in Branch, 2006.) 

According to BLS, the official ECI for the years 1975-2005 is the SIC-OCS based series, and for 

subsequent years, the official ECI is the NAICS-SOC based series (Sleemi, 2006, p.8).24 

“Starting year” indices in Exhibit 7-2 continue to be SIC-OCS based. Current year indices are 

NAICS-SOC based. We use indices from both the NAICS-SOC and the SIC-OCS based ECI series 

because neither series spans the entire period over which testing and other costs need to be inflated. 

 

24 BLS has been publishing the NAICS-SOC based ECI series since March 2001 and it became official in March 2006. The 

SIC-OCS based series and NAICS-SOC series have different series ID numbers, even when they describe essentially the 

same population. For example the series ID for seasonally adjusted total compensation for all private industry workers is 

ECS10002I for the SIC-OCS series and CIS2010000000000I for the NAICS-SOC series. 
SNUR EA for Long Chain PFACs Contract # EP-W-08-010 

 Agency Costs ▌pg. A-5

Exhibit 7-2: Derivation of Inflation Factors 

Item Inflation Index Source1 Starting 

Year 

Index for 

Starting Year 

(a) 

Index for 

2012 

(b) 

Inflation 

Factor 

(b)/(a)2

Agency Extramural costs 

Professional and Related 

Private Industry 

BLS ECI, Total comp, Private 

industry, Professional and 

related, 4th Q [BLS, 2012b] 3

1993 67 118.2 1.764 

Labels, placards etc. BLS CPI, All urban 

consumers, not SA. 

CUUR0000SA0, Annual 

[BLS, 2012c] 

1997 160.5 229.594 1.430 

File cabinet 

Photocopies BLS CPI, All urban 

consumers, not SA. 

CUUR0000SA0, Annual 

[BLS, 2012c] 

1988 118.3 229.594 1.941 

Record keeping materials 

Key: BLS = Bureau of Labor Statistics. CPI = Consumer Price Index. ECI = Employment Cost Index. SA = Seasonally 

Adjusted. Total Comp = Total Compensation (wages/salaries and benefits). 4th Q = Fourth Quarter. 

Notes: 

1 In 2006, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Employment Cost Index (ECI) series “were rebased to December 2005 = 100 

from June 1989 = 100.” The change is reflected in the indices in this table and explained on the BLS website, Employment 

Cost Index News Release Text: Employment Cost Index, March 2006 (BLS, 2006b). The Consumer Price Index (CPI) was not 

rebased. 

“Starting year” ECI indices are SIC-OCS based: Seasonally Adjusted (SA) ECS10002I for private industry All Workers, and 

not SA ECU11122I for private industry Professional and Related Workers. 

After 2006, ECI indices are NAICS-SOC based: Seasonally Adjusted (SA) CIS2010000000000I for private industry All 

Workers, and not SA CIU2010000120000I (B) for private industry Professional, and Related workers. 

2Inflation factors are rounded; however, unrounded values were used in calculations. 

3 Beginning with the report Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 25 Chemical Substances: EPA 

Docket OPPT-2009-0922 (EPA, 2011b) we began to use the not-seasonally adjusted CIU2010000120000I for private industry 

Professional, and Related workers, instead of SA CIS2010000W00000I for private industry white collar workers because 

BLS retired the “white-collar” series.