*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release *** RIN : NA2070 Filename: FAR_TSCA 21petition_E&P Chems_FRN_2011

- 12

- 11.docx

Page 1 of 32 BILLING CODE 6560

- 50

- P 1

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 2

EPA

- HQ

- OPPT

- 2011

- 0683; FRL

- XXXX

- X 3
Chemical Substances and Mixtures Used in Oil and Gas Exploration or Production; 4

TSCA Section 21 Petition; Agency Response 5

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 6

ACTION: Notice. 7

SUMMARY: On August 4, 2011, Earthjustice and 114 other organizations petitioned 8

EPA under section 21 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to use: TSCA section 9

8( a) to require manufacturers and processors of oil and gas exploration and production 10
(E&P) chemical substances and mixtures to maintain certain records and submit reports 11
on those records; TSCA section 8(d) to require manufacturers, processors, and 12

distrib utors to submit to EPA existing health and safety studies related to E&P chemical 13
substances and mixtures; TSCA section 8(c) to request submission of copies of any 14
information related to significant adverse reactions to human health or the environment 15

alle ged to have been caused by E&P chemical substances and mixtures; and TSCA 16
section 4 to require manufacturers and processors of E&P chemical substances and 17
mixtures to conduct toxicity testing of E&P chemical substances and mixtures. For the 18

reasons set for th in this notice, EPA granted in part and denied in part the petitioners’ 19
requests. In addition, EPA has concluded that TSCA section 21 does not apply to request s 20

for a TSCA section 8(c) data call

- in. 21

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical inform ation contact : 22
Chenise Farquharson, Chemical Control Division (7405M), Office of Pollution 23*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 2 of 32 Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., 24
NW., Washington, DC 20460

- 0001; telephone number: (202) 564

- 7768; fax number: 25

(202) 5 64

- 4775; e

- mail address: Farquharson.chenise @epa.gov. 26
For general information contact : The TSCA

- Hotline, ABVI

- Goodwill, 422 South 27
Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202) 554

- 1404; e

- mail address: 28

TSCA

- Hotline@epa.gov

. 29

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 30

I. General Information 31
A. Does this Action Apply to Me? 32
This action is directed to the public in general. This action, however, may be of 33
interest to you if you manufacture (including import)
, process , or distribute chemical 34
substances or mixtures used in hydraulic fracturing to create fractures in geologic 35
formations, such as shale rock, allowing enhanced natural gas or oil recovery. Since other 36
entities also may be interested, the Agency has not attemp ted to describe all the specific 37
entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the 38
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the technical person listed under 39

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

. 40

B. H ow Can I Access Information About this Petition? 41
EPA has established a docket for this TSCA section 21 petition under docket 42

identification (ID) number EPA

- HQ

- OPPT

- 20 11

- 0683 . All documents in the docket are 43

listed in the docket index available at http://w ww.regulations.gov . Although listed in the 44
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information 45
(CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other 46*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 3 of 32 material, such as copyrighted material , will be publicly available only in hard copy. 47
Publicly available docket materials are available electronically at 48
http://www.regulations.gov , or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPPT Docket. The 49

OPPT Docket is located in the EPA Docket Center (EPA /DC) at Rm. 3334, EPA West 50
Bldg., 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading 51
Room hours of operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 52
legal holidays. The telephone number of the EPA/DC Public Reading Room is (202) 566

- 53
1744, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is (202) 566

- 0280. Docket visitors 54
are required to show photographic identification, pass through a metal detector, and sign 55
the EPA visitor log. All visitor bags are processed through an X

- ray machine and subject 56
to search. Visitors will be provided an EPA/DC badge that must be visible at all times in 57
the building and returned upon departure. 58

II. Background 59

A. What is a TSCA Section 21 Petition? 60

Under TSCA section 21 (15 U.S.C. 2620), an y person can petition EPA to initiate 61
a rulemaking proceeding for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule under TSCA 62

sections 4, 6, or 8 or an order under TSCA sections 5(e) or 6(b)(2). A TSCA section 21 63
petition must set forth the facts that are clai med to establish the necessity for the action 64
requested. EPA is required to grant or deny the petition within 90 days of its filing. If 65
EPA grants the petition, the Agency must promptly commence an appropriate 66
proceeding. If EPA denies the petition, the Ag ency must publish its reasons for the denial 67

in the Federal Register . A petitioner may commence a civil action in a U.S. district court 68
to compel initiation of the requested rulemaking proceeding within 60 days of the denial
, 69*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 4 of 32 if the denial occurs prior to the expiration of the 90

- day period, or within 60 days after 70
the expiration of the 90

- day period. 71
B. What Criteria Apply to a Decision on a TSCA Section 21 Petition? 72

1. Legal standard regarding TSCA section 21 petitions . Section 21(b)(1) of 73
TSCA requires that the petition “set forth the facts which it is claimed establish that it is 74
necessary” to issue the rule or order requested. 15 U.S.C. 2620(b)(1). Thus, TSCA 75
section 21 implicitly incorporates the statutory standards that apply to the requested 76

action s. In addition, TSCA section 21 establishes standards a court must use to decide 77
whether to order EPA to initiate rulemaking in the event of a lawsuit filed by the 78
petitioner. 15 U.S.C. 2620(b)(4)(B). Accordingly, EPA has relied on the standards in 79

TSCA se ction 21 and in the provisions under which actions have been requested to 80
evaluate this petition. 81

2. Legal standard regarding TSCA section 8(a) rules. Section 8(a) of TSCA 82
authorizes the EPA Administrator to promulgate rules under which manufacturers and 83
processors of chemical substances must maintain such records and submit such 84
information as the EPA Administrator may reasonably require. Regarding mixtures, 85

s ection 8(a) of TSCA authorizes the EPA Administrator to promulgate rules under which 86

manufacturer s and processors of mixtures must maintain such records and submit such 87

information to the extent the EPA Administrator determines the maintenance of records 88
or submission or reports, or both, is necessary for the effective enforcement of TSCA. 89
Section 8(a) of TSCA generally excludes small manufacturers and processors of chemical 90
substances or mixtures from the reporting requirements established in TSCA section 8(a). 91
However, EPA is authorized by TSCA section 8(a)(3)(A)(ii) to require TSCA sectio n 92*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 5 of 32 8(a) reporting from small manufacturers and processors with respect to any chemical 93
substance or mixture that is the subject of a rule proposed or promulgated under TSCA 94
section 4, 5(b)(4), or 6, or that is the subject of an order in effect under TSCA se ction 95
5(e), or that is the subject of relief granted pursuant to a civil action under TSCA section 96
5 or 7. The standard for determining whether an entity qualifies as a small manufacturer 97

is found at 40 CFR 704.3. 98
Section 21(b)(4)(B) of TSCA provides the standard for judicial review should 99
EPA deny a request for rulemaking under TSCA section 8(a): ‘‘If the petitioner 100
demonstrates to the satisfaction of the court by a preponderance of the evidence that 101

...there is a reasonable basis to conclude that the iss uance of such a rule ...is necessary to 102
protect health or the environment against an unreasonable risk of injury,’’ the court shall 103
order the Administrator to initiate the requested action. 15 U.S.C. 2620(b)(4)(B). 104

3. Legal standard regarding TSCA section 8(d) rules. Section 8(d) of TSCA 105
authorizes EPA to require the submission of unpublished health and safety studies 106
initiated or conducted by, or known to or reasonably ascertainable by, manufacturers, 107
processors, and distributors of chemical substances or mixtures. Studies may be excluded 108
‘‘if the Administrator finds that submission of lists of such studies are unnecessary to 109
carry out the purposes of [TSCA].’’ 15 U.S.C. 2607(d)(1). 110
Section 21(b)(4)(B) of TSCA provides the standard for judicial review sho uld 111
EPA deny a request for rulemaking under TSCA section 8(d): ‘‘If the petitioner 112
demonstrates to the satisfaction of the court by a preponderance of the evidence that 113

...there is a reasonable basis to conclude that the issuance of such a rule ...is neces sary to 114*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 6 of 32 protect health or the environment against an unreasonable risk of injury,’’ the court shall 115
order the Administrator to initiate the requested action. 15 U.S.C. 2620(b)(4)(B). 116

4 . Legal standard regarding TSCA section 8(c) call

- in. TSCA section 8(c) 117
requires manufacturers, processors, and distributors of chemical substances or mixtures 118
1) to keep records of significant adverse reactions to health or the environment, as 119
determined by the Administrator by rule, alleged to have been caused by the substan ce or 120
mixture and 2) to permit inspection and submit copies of such records upon request of 121
any duly designated representative of the Administrator. EPA’s implementing regulations 122
are at 40 CFR part 717. 123

TSCA section 21 does not list data call

- ins under TSCA section 8(c), and EPA 124
has therefore concluded that petitions for this activity are not covered by TSCA section 125

21. 126

5 . Legal standard regarding TSCA section 4 rules. To issue a TSCA section 4 test 127

rule, EPA must find that data and experience are insuf ficient to reasonably determine or 128
predict the effects of a chemical substance or mixture on health or the environment and 129
that testing of the chemical substance or mixture is necessary to develop the missing data. 130

15 U.S.C. 2603(a)(1). In addition, EPA mu st find either that the chemical substance or 131
mixture may present an unreasonable risk of injury or that the chemical substance or 132
mixture is produced in substantial quantities and may either result in significant or 133
substantial human exposure or result in substantial environmental release. 15 U.S.C. 134

2603(a)(1). 135

In the case of a mixture, EPA must also find that ‘‘the effects which the mixture’s 136
manufacture, distribution in commerce, processing, use, or disposal or any combination 137*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 7 of 32 of such activities may hav e on health or the environment may not be reasonably and more 138
efficiently determined or predicted by testing the chemical substances which comprise 139

the mixture.’’ 15 U.S.C. 2603(a)(2). 140
TSCA section 21 omits the finding that ‘‘testing is necessary to devel op the data’’ 141
from the findings that a petitioner must demonstrate in order for a court to require EPA to 142
initiate TSCA section 4 rulemaking. 15 U.S.C. 2620(b)(4)(B)(i). Nonetheless, EPA 143
believes TSCA section 21(b)(4) is best interpreted as incorporating t his finding. The 144
alternative would be to read the statute as empowering a court to require EPA to initiate a 145
rulemaking even where the Agency could not make proposed findings consistent with 146
TSCA section 4 or take final action on the rule. EPA’s interpreta tion is supported by 147
legislative history (Ref. 1). 148

TSCA section 21(b)(4) (B)(i) provide s for judicial review of a petition to 149
promulgate a TSCA section 4 rule for chemical substances

. In contrast, TSCA section 21 150
does not provide for judicial review of a p etition to promulgate a test rule for mixtures. 151
Section 3 of TSCA gives distinct definitions for “chemical substance” and “mixture”, and 152
section 21(b)(4)(B)(i) of TSCA specifies that the court’s review pertains to application of 153

the TSCA section 4 factors to chemical substances. Moreover, TSCA section 154
21(b)(4)(B)(i) does not contain the additional finding that TSCA section 4 requires for 155
issuing a test rule for mixtures (that the effect may not be reasonably and more efficiently 156
determined or predicted by testing the chemical components). Congress left the complex 157
issues associated with the testing of mixtures to the Administrator’s discretion. 158

159 C. What Action Was Requested? 160*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 8 of 32 On August 4, 2011, Earthjustice and several other organizations petitioned EPA 161

to: 162
1. Adopt a rule pursuant to TSCA section 4 to require manufacturers and 163
processors of E&P chemical substances and mixtures to develop test data sufficient to 164
evaluate the toxicity and potential for health and environmental impacts of all E&P 165

chemical su bstances and mixtures that they manufacture and process. The petitioners 166
request the rule include a requirement for the manufacturer or processor to identify any 167
E&P chemical substance and mixture for which testing is required (Ref. 2). 168
2. Adopt a rule pur suant to TSCA section 8(a) requiring manufacturers and 169
processors of E&P chemical substances and mixtures to maintain records and submit 170
reports to EPA disclosing the identities, categories, and quantities of E&P chemical 171
substances and mixtures, descript ions of byproducts of E&P chemical substances and 172
mixtures, all existing data on potential or demonstrated environmental and health effects 173
of E&P chemical substances and mixtures, and the number of individuals potentially 174
exposed to E&P chemical substanc es and mixtures (Ref. 2). 175

3. Request call in of all allegations of significant adverse reactions received and 176
maintained by manufacturers, processors, and distributors of E&P chemical substances 177
and mixtures pursuant to TSCA section 8(c) and 40 CFR part 71 7 (Ref. 2). 178
4. Adopt a rule pursuant to TSCA section 8(d) to require submittal of all existing, 179
not previously reported health and safety studies related to the health and/or 180

environmental effects of all E&P chemical substances and mixtures (Ref. 2). 181

D. Wh at Support Do the Petitioners Offer? 182

The petitioners believe that there are potential risks to human health, terrestrial 183*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 9 of 32 and aquatic life, and the environment from E&P chemical substances and mixtures, and 184
that there is currently insufficient information about these potential risks. The petitioners 185
believe rulemakings under TSCA section 4 and section 8 are necessary to fill information 186

gaps so that federal and state regulat ors can appropriately assess and regulate E&P 187

chemical substances and mixtures and provide information to the public about E&P 188

chemical substances and mixtures. To support their requests, the petitioners discussed the 189
following information sources and the limitations of these sources: 190

• EPA’s current study to examine the relationship betw een hydraulic fracturing and 191
drinking water resources (Ref. 3) ; 192

• FracFocus.org, a website ( operated jointly by the Ground Water Protection Council 193
(GWPC) and the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission (IOGCC)) that serves 194
as a voluntary chemical substance registry for companies to report all chemical 195
substances that would appear on Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs) (Ref. 4) ; 196

• Current federal and state regulations requiring the disclosure of E&P chemical 197

substances and mixtures ; 198

• Two reports publis hed by The Endocrine Disruption Exchange (TEDX) (Ref. 5) and 199
the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) (Ref. 6) 200
that analyze the health effects of chemical substances and mixtures for which TEDX 201

and NYSDEC could locate a C hemical A bstracts S ervice Re gistry N umber 202

(CASRN) ; and 203

• Reports of potential harm to human and environmental health from exposure to E&P 204

chemical substances and mixtures. 205*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 10 of 32 1. EPA’s study. In Fiscal Year 2010, the U.S. Congress’ Appropriation 206

Conference Committee d irected EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD) to 207
conduct research to examine the relationship between hydraulic fracturing and drinking 208
water resources (Ref. 3). Hydraulic fracturing is a well stimulation treatment that can be 209

used in reservoirs w ith low permeability to maximize natural gas or oil production. 210
Specially engineered fluids containing chemical additives and proppant are pumped 211
under high pressure into well s to induce and hold open fractures in geological formation s

. 212

Those fractures increase the exposed surface area of the rock in the formation and, in 213
turn, stimulate the flow of natural gas or oil to the well bore once the applied hydraulic 214
pressure is removed. The composition of hydraulic fracturing fluids varies by geologic 215

formati on, ranging from a simple mixture of water and sand to more complex mixtures 216
with a multitude of chemical additives. Companies may use these chemical additives to 217

thicken or thin the fluids, clean the formation, prevent corrosion of the well casing, 218
improv e the flow of the fluid, or kill bacteria that can reduce fracturing fluid performance 219

( Ref. 7 ). As the use of hydraulic fracturing has increased, so have concerns about its 220
potential impact on human health and the environment (Ref. 3 ). 221

The study is desig ned to assess the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on 222
drinking water resources and identify the driving factors that affect the severity and 223
frequency of impacts (Ref. 3)

. The scope of the research includes the hydraulic fracturing 224

water use lifec ycle, which is a subset of the greater hydrologic cycle. For purposes of the 225
study, the hydraulic fracturing water lifecycle begins with water acquisition from surface 226
or ground water and ends with discharge into surface waters or injection into deep wells

. 227
Specifically, the water lifecycle for hydraulic fracturing consists of wate r acquisition, 228*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 11 of 32 chemical mixing, well injection, flowback and produced wat er (collectively referred to as 229
“hydraulic fracturing wastewater”), and wastewater treatment and waste dis posal. (Ref. 230

3). 231
As part of its study, o n September 9, 2010, the Agency issued a voluntary 232
information request to nine hydraulic fracturing service providers (followed by a 233
subpoena to one company) (Ref. 8 ). The data requested include : 1) information on the 234
constituents of hydraulic fracturing fluids, including all chemical s ubstances , proppants, 235
and water, used in the last 5 years; 2) all data relating to the human health and 236
environmental impacts of all constituents listed in (1); 3) all standard operating 237
procedures and information on how the composition of hydraulic fracturing fluids may be 238
modified onsite, and 4) all sites where hydraulic fracturing has occurred within one year 239
prior to the request date and one year from the request date. The Agency rece ived 240
information on approximately 900 chemical substances from the nine service providers. 241
Additionally, on August 11, 2011, the Agency sent letters to nine oil and gas 242
companies requesting their voluntary participation in the study (Ref. 9 ). For example, the 243
Agency requested data on well construction, design, and well operation practices for 350 244
oil and gas wells that were hydraulically fractured from 2009

- 2010. These wells were 245
selected using a stratified random method and reflect the diversity in both g eography and 246

size of the well operator. This account of well performance, together with a literature 247

review, assessment of data and information from states and communities, case studies, 248
laboratory work, and computer modeling, will allow EPA to assess more thorough ly the 249
potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources. 250*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 12 of 32 As of December 1, 2011, EPA has received partial data from eight of the nine 251
companies on 277 well s. All nine of the companies have committed to submitting all 252
their responsive well data by December 31, 2011. By sharing information about specific 253
well construction design and operations, these companies will help EPA and the 254
public gain a better understand ing of well performance and technologies and practices 255
associated with hydraulic fracturing in order to help us understand the potential for health 256

and environmental effects . The final report is expected to be published in 2014. The 257
petitioners state that “EPA’s study falls short of TSCA rulemakings because it will not 258
require manufacturers and processors of E&P [chemical substances and mixtures] to take 259
proactive efforts to conduct testing or to develop health and safety data needed to 260

evaluate the health and environmental risks of their substances and mixtures” (Ref. 2). 261

2. FracFocus website. FracFocus is a website that is operated jointly by the 262
GWPC and the IOGCC to serve as a voluntary chemical registry for individual 263
companies to report all chemical subs tances and mixtures used in hydraulic fracturing. 264
The petitioners assert that “[b]ecause the registry is based upon voluntary disclosures, 265
operators may choose to disclose only those chemicals posing the least risk to health and 266
the environment, and the pu blic could receive misleading or selective information” (Ref. 267

2). 268

3. Federal and state regulations. The petitioners state that federal agencies have 269
extremely limited authority to regulate E& P chemical substances and mixtures. They 270
assert that were hydraulic fracturing not specifically excluded from the definition of 271
“underground injection” under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), the oil and gas 272
industry would be required to disclose in mand atory permit applications the source and 273*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 13 of 32 analysis of the physical and chemical characteristics o f all the chemical substances and 274
mixtures injected below ground to stimulate oil and gas production. According to the 275
petitioners, for the most part the oil an d gas industry is not regulated under the Resource 276
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the Emergency Planning and Community 277
Right to Know Act. Additionally, the petitioners believe there is limited information 278

about E&P chemical substances and mixture s on MSDSs. 279
Regarding state regulations, the petitioners stress that states do not routinely 280
disclose to the public information they receive about E&P chemical substances and 281
mixtures, even when the information is not claimed to be proprietary, and no st ate 282
requires toxicity testing or development of health and safety data. 283

4. TEDX and NYSDEC reports. According to the petitioners, in an 284
attempt to determine the identity of E&P chemical substances and mixtures and to 285

evaluate the health effects associated wi th them, TEDX gathered information from 286
multiple sources and matched the chemical substances that could be identified by 287

CASRN with available health data. TEDX concluded that health data were available for 288
“only a small percentage of the chemicals in use i n the gas industry” (Ref. 2). The 289
petitioners also cited a report that describes NYSDEC’s limited analysis of the health 290
effects of hydraulic fracturing chemical substances and mixtures likely to be used at well 291
sites in New York State. The petitioners ass ert that “NYSDEC’s review of the 292
identifiable chemical substances and mixtures demonstrated that compound

‐ specific 293
toxicity data are very limited for many chemical additives to fracturing fluids” (Ref. 2). 294
Based on these two reports, the petitioners conclu de that “the information currently 295
available is insufficient to identify the full spectrum of E&P [chemical substances and 296*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 14 of 32 mixtures] or to permit a reasoned evaluation of their health and environmental effects” 297

(Ref. 2). 298

5. Health risks and exposure. Accordin g to the petition, numerous incidents of 299

exposure to E&P chemical substances and mixtures demonstrate that these chemical 300

substances and mixtures may present an unreasonable risk of harm to health and the 301
environment at every stage of oil and gas developme nt, including storage, transportation, 302
treatment, and disposal. The petitioners cited reports of leaks and spills of E&P chemical 303
substances and mixtures in states such as Wyoming, Pennsylvania, Colorado, and Texas. 304
The petitioners assert that the incidenc es of harm linked to oil and gas exploration are 305
likely to increase, especially if EPA fails to promulgate regulations requiring disclosure 306
and testing of E&P chemical substances and mixtures and reporting of related health and 307

environmental effects. 308
E. Background on Oil and Gas E&P Industry 309 310 Oil and gas E&P encompasses all the steps involved in finding, producing, and 311
processing crude oil and natural gas prior to transportation, refining and marketing (Ref. 312

10 ). Many E&P activities include the use of chemical substances and mixtures that vary 313
to meet the specific needs of a geological formation. These chemical substances and 314
mixtures are used for different purposes, and many are not used solely in the oil and gas 315
industry (Ref. 11). E&P “ activities may include exploration for crude petroleum and 316
natural gas; drilling, completing, and equipping wells; operating separators, emulsion 317
breakers, desilting equipment, and field gathering lines for crude petroleum and natural 318
gas; and all other activities in the preparation of oil and gas up to the point of shipment 319
from the producing property ” (Ref

. 12). Exploration activities include “ excavating slush 320*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 15 of 32 pits and cellars, well surveying; running, cutting, and pulling casings, tubes, and rods; 321
cementing wells, shooting wells; perforating well casings; acidizing and chemically 322
treating wells; and cleaning out, bailing, and swabbing wells ” (Ref. 1 2 ). Steps in 323
exploration also may include “ spudding in, drilling in, redrilling, and directional drilling ” 324

( Ref. 1 2 ). Production activities to extract liquid hydrocarbons from hydrocarbon bearing 325

formations include the use of: separators, emulsion breakers, desilting equipment, 326
dehydrators and other processing equipment, and field gathering lines for crude oil and 327

natural gas; and all other activities in the preparation of oil and gas up to the point of 328
shipment from the producing property. “ This subsector includes the production of crude 329
petroleum, the mining and extraction of oil from oil shale and oil sands, and the 330

pro duction of natural gas, sulfur recovery from natural gas, and re covery of hydrocarbon 331
liquids ” ( Ref. 1 2 ) (e.g., NAICS codes 213112, 213111 and 21111). 332
There are more than “10,000 U.S. companies providing equipment, services, 333
supplies, and design and engineering support for exploration, drilling, refining and other 334
operations. Many are local firms, while others are global manufacturers selling products 335
for operations around the world” (Ref. 10 )

. 336
F. Background on TSCA and Fede ral Activities Regarding Hydraulic Fracturing 337 338 Under TSCA, EPA has authority to require reporting, record

- keeping and testing 339
requirements, and restrictions relating to chemical substances and/or mixtures 340
manufactured, processed, used, distributed in comme rce , or disposed of (Ref. 1 3 )

. In 341
addition, EPA has a number of other authorities that can be used to address aspects of 342
hydraulic fracturing. The following offices at EPA are working on hydraulic fracturing 343

efforts under other authorities : 344*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 16 of 32 • EPA’s ORD is u ndertaking a study to better understand any potential impacts of 345
hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources (Ref. 3). 346

• EPA’s Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) is evaluating 347
industry practices , alleged damage cases, and state requirements
, and considering 348
whether technical guidance on the design, operation, maintenance, and closure of pits 349
and impoundments is needed under RCRA in order to minimize potential impacts of 350
hydraulic fracturing waste

. 351

• EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation proposed a rule on August 23, 2011, to control air 352
emissions at oil and gas wells, including during completion of wells, that are 353
hydraulic ally fractur ed (Ref. 1 4 ). 354

• EPA has announced a schedule to develop standards for wastewater discharges 355
produced by natural gas extraction from underground coalbed and shale formations as 356
part of its effluent guidelines development process under sections 301 and 304 of the 357
Clean Water Act (CWA). Currently, wast e water associated with shale gas extraction 358

is prohibited from being directly discharged to waterways and other waters of the 359

United States. While some of the wastewater from shale gas extraction is reused or 360

re

- injected, a significant amount still requires disposal. As a result, some shale gas 361

wastew ater is transported to treatment plants, many of which are not properly 362
equipped to treat this type of wastewater. EPA will consider standards for shale gas 363
wastewater that must be met before going to a treatment facility. Wastewater 364

associated with coal bed methane extraction is not currently subject to national 365
standards when directly discharged into waterways or to pretreatment standards and 366
EPA will consider the development of standards for such discharges (Ref. 15 ). 367*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 17 of 32 • Under SDWA’s Underground Injectio n Control (UIC) P rogram, EPA is working to 368
provide EPA ’s UIC Program Directors guidance to ensure the SDWA programmatic 369
requirements related to hydraulic fracturing when using diesel fuels are implemented 370
appropriately (Ref. 15 ). 371
Section 9(b) of TSCA provi des that the Administrator of EPA “shall coordinate 372

actions taken under [TSCA] with actions taken under other Federal laws administered in 373
whole or in part by” EPA. 15 U.S.C. 2608(b). Therefore, in the development of actions 374
EPA proposes to initiate under TSCA described in this notice , EPA will c onsult and 375
cooperate with multiple offices within the Agency to address hydraulic fracturing in oil 376
and gas production to avoid unnecessary or duplicative reporting. 377
Other federal agencies have authorities to inv estigate and address hydraulic 378
fracturing. In fact, the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 379
and the Department of Energy are evaluating various aspects of hydraulic fracturing. 380

BLM currently is developing proposed regulations to re quire disclosure of well

- specific 381

information on chemical s ubstances used in hydraulic fracturing on public lands (Ref. 382

16 ). The Shale Gas Subcommittee of the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board (SEAB) 383
recently published a final report evaluating ways to reduce the environmental impacts 384
from shale gas production (Ref. 1 7 ). 385
TSCA section 8 provides EPA the authority to collect important information on 386
chemical substances and mixtures, including the amount manufactured, he alth and safety 387
information and exposure information, among other things. EPA’s p lanned use of TSCA 388
section 8, as described in this notice, would enable EPA and other federal agencies to 389
improve their risk screening capabilities, enabling them to better as sess and manage risk, 390*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 18 of 32 and improve public awareness of information about chemical substances and mixtures 391
used in hydraulic fracturing. 392
Although it is likely that some data submitted would be claimed confidential, 393
limiting public disclosure, EPA urges sub mitters of data under TSCA to limit the number 394
and scope of confidentiality claims to those necessary to protect proprietary data (Ref. 395

18 ). EPA also notes that health and safety studies that are submitted pursuant to TSCA 396

sections 8(a) and 8(d) rules, and data from such health and safety studies
, are generally 397

not considered confidential under TSCA and are therefore releasable. TSCA section 398

14(b). 399
III. Disposition of TSCA Section 21 Petition 400
For the purpose of making its decision, EPA evaluated the infor mation presented 401
or referenced in the petition and the Agency’s authority and requirements under TSCA 402

sections 4, 8, and 21. EPA has also evaluated the comments received from the American 403

Petroleum Institute (Ref. 11) , the American Chemistry Council (Ref. 19 ), and Halliburton 404
Energy Services (Ref. 20)

. After careful consideration, EPA has granted in part and 405
denied in part the petition. EPA has decided to partially grant the TSCA sections 8(a) and 406
8(d) requests and plans to initiate rulemaking to obtain data on chemical substances and 407
mixtures used in hydraulic fracturing. 408
EPA plans first to develop an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) 409
and initiate a stakeholder process to provide input on the design and scope of the TSCA 410
reporting r equirements that would be included in a proposed rule. EPA anticipates that 411
states, industry
, public interest groups and members of the public will be participants in 412
the stakeholder process. The stakeholder process will bring stakeholders together to 413*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 19 of 32 disc uss the information needs and help EPA to ensure reporting burdens and costs are 414
minimized, ensuring information already available is considered in order to avoid 415
duplication of efforts. Although EPA has partially granted the TSCA section 8(a) and 416

section 8(d) requests, the Agency is not committing to a specific rulemaking outcome. 417
The dialogue will also assist EPA in determining how information that is claimed CBI 418
can be aggregated and disclosed to maximize transparency and public understanding. 419

EPA intend s to release all reported information that is not claimed CBI. 420
EPA has concluded that the request for EPA to use its TSCA section 8(c) 421
authority is not subject to TSCA section 21. The Agency anticipates that the public 422
dialogue will include discussions of the need for section 8(c) reporting on allegations that 423
chemical substances or mixtures used in hydraulic fracturing cause significant adverse 424

reactions to health or the environmen t. 425
Regarding the TSCA section 4 request, EPA has concluded that the petition does 426
not set forth sufficient facts to support the petitioners’ assertion that it is necessary to 427
initiate the requested rulemaking under TSCA section 4. The discussion that foll ows 428
provides the reasons for EPA’s decisions to grant this petition in part and to deny it in 429

part. 430

A. Partial Grant With Respect to Hydraulic Fracturing Chemical Substances and 431

Mixtures 432
With regard to TSCA sections 8(a) and 8(d), EPA has decided to initia te 433
rulemaking to obtain data on chemical substances and mixtures used in hydraulic 434
fracturing. EPA is not granting the requests with respect to chemical substances and 435
mixtures used in oil and gas E&P more broadly. At this time, EPA believes a more 436*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 20 of 32 focused information collection regarding hydraulic fracturing would significantly 437
advance the government’s understanding of potential risks associated with this practice 438
and would help to determine if future actions are necessary. 439

TSCA sections 8(a) and 8(d) a ctions would be an important part of the federal 440
government’s efforts to better understand and characterize potential risks associated with 441
hydraulic fracturing. Given the specific authorities under TSCA to collect and make 442
public information on the manufa cture, processing, distribution in commerce, and use of 443

chemical substances and mixtures , and to collect and make public health and safety data 444
for chemical substances and mixtures, the data that would be collected would provide a 445

chemical

- specific and mixture

- specific national picture of the chemical substances and 446

mixture s used in hydraulic fracturing. This picture is currently not available
, and would 447
complement well

- by

- well disclosure programs of states. 448
The existing information sources provide only limited data on the chemical 449
substances and mixtures used in hydraulic fracturing. Individually, these sources often 450
provide information on only a subset of the chemical substances and mixtures used in 451
hydraulic fracturing and often require the user to go to multiple sources to synthesize the 452
information that the information source purports to provide. Even when taken together 453
the existing information is very limited. EPA is not aware of any other authority that can 454
provide as effectively as TSCA a national picture of the chemical substances and 455
mixtures used in hydraulic fracturing

. 456

These data collections and the disclosure of these data that EPA intends to pursue 457

would address some of the recommendations in both SEAB’s August 1 8 , 2011 (Ref. 21) 458

and Novembe r 1 8 , 2011 (Ref. 17) Ninety

- Day Report s . The August 1 8 , 2011 report 459*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 21 of 32 identifies measures that can be taken to reduce the environmental impact and improve the 460
safety of shale gas production. The SEAB recommends that federal agencies have 461
primary responsibili ty for ensuring disclosure of f racturing fluid composition and 462
“immediately develop rules to require disclosure of all chemicals used in hydraulic 463
fracturing fluids on both public and private lands

. ” (Ref. 21 ) In addition, SEAB 464

recommends that this informa tion be made publicly available “ with an exception for 465
genuinely proprietary information. ” In addition, the SEAB stressed the importance of 466
creating a national database to link as many sources of public information as possible 467
with respect to shale gas dev elopment and production (Ref. 21) . EPA believes the 468
information reported under TSCA authority would help to support the public disclosure 469

of chemical substances and mixtures used in hydraulic fracturing fluid and provid e 470
information to enable EPA and other agencies to assess and manage potential risks

. 471
Section 9(d) of TSCA provides that the Administrator of EPA shall consult and 472
cooperate with other federal agencies ‘‘for the purpose of achieving the maximum 473

enforcement of [TSCA] while imposing the least burdens of duplicative requirements.’’ 474
15 U.S.C. 2608(d). Consistent with TSCA section 9(d), in the development of these 475
actions, EPA will consult and cooperate with other agencies (e.g., BLM and the 476
Department of Energy ) to avoid unnecessary or duplicative reporting

. 477

B. Partial Grant of TSCA Section 8(a) Request 478
The petitioners requested that “EPA adopt a rule pursuant to TSCA section 8(a) to 479
require manufacturers and processors of E&P [chemical substances and mixtures] to 480
maintain certain records and submit to EPA reports on those records” (Ref. 2). After 481
careful consideration, EPA has decided to partially grant the TSCA section 8(a) request 482*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 22 of 32 to obtain data on chemical substances and mixtures used in hydraulic fracturing. T he 483
petitioners did not show that the requested TSCA section 8(a) rule, requiring maintenance 484
of records and reporting with respect to all of the TSCA section 8(a) data elements for all 485
E&P chemical substances and mixtures, is necessary. 486
EPA plans to init iate a stakeholder process to assist the Agency in identifying 487
reporting requirements for chemical substances and mixtures used in hydraulic fracturing
, 488

in order to allow the Agency and others to evaluate potential risks and to allow for public 489

disclosure of the information

. EPA’s current thinking with respect to TSCA section 8(a) is 490

to propose a rule that would request information, such as chemical identity, categories of use, 491
and volume and number of individuals exposed. Other TSCA section 8(a) elements a lso may 492
be incorporated. This type of information would provide the best basis for EPA and other 493
federal agencies to assess risks associated with hydraulic fracturing chemicals substances and 494

mixtures. Before developing the proposed rule and t o facilitate the stakeholder process, 495

EPA plans to first issue an ANPR to seek comment on the information that should be 496
included in the proposed section 8(a) rule

. Comments submitted on the ANPR and as part 497

of the stakeholder process will inform EPA's proposal, but gi ven efforts underway, our 498

expectation is that the TSCA proposal would focus on providing an aggregate picture of the 499
chemical substances and mixtures used in hydraulic fracturing. 500
Although EPA is granting the section 8(a) request in part, the petitioners’ request 501
is overly broad, and they have not demonstrated that the broad rule they requested is 502
necessary. The petitioners request that for all chemical substances and mixtures used 503
throughout all E&P operations, EPA require by rule submission o f essentially all of the 504
information identified in TSCA section 8(a) for rules under that section. (The petitioners 505
request all information for the chemical substances and mixtures generally , even beyond 506*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 23 of 32 their use in the E&P industry.) As explained in Unit II.E, the E&P industry is a large 507
industry involving a range of varied operations and classes of chemical substances and 508

mixtures. EPA
, other federal agencies, and states, have focused attention on hydraulic 509
fracturing due to specific concerns raised abou t this practice, and most of the incidents 510
and information sources referenced in the petition pertain to hydraulic fracturing. EPA 511

believes information collection under TSCA would significantly advance the 512
government’s understanding of potential risks asso ciated with this practice. EPA notes 513
that it already has broad regulations under TSCA section 8(a) requiring periodic reporting 514
of extensive information with respect to chemical substances (Ref. 2 2 ) including 515
chemical substances used in the E&P industry. B efore proposing a TSCA section 8(a) 516
rule specific to the E&P industry as a whole, EPA would want a better understanding of 517

the incremental value of individual information elements. 518
EPA also does not believe that petitioners have demonstrated all of the chemical 519
substances and mixtures used throughout the E&P industry (or any o f them) present an 520
unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. The petition provides an 521
inadequate basis for EPA to evaluate the risk presented by individual chemical s ubstances 522
or mixtures, or to evaluate the potential economic impact of the requested TSCA section 523

8(a) rule , which is a necessary element of an unreasonable risk analysis . EPA’s 524

assessment of information that may be submitted pursuant to TSCA section 8, along with 525

EPA’s continued evaluation of the data submitted and results achieved under the 526
Agency’s other actions and continued interaction with other federal agencies, may inform 527

the need for future additional TSCA sec tion 8(a) data collection. 528

C. Partial Gr ant of TSCA Section 8(d) Request 529*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 24 of 32 EPA is partially granting the TSCA section 8(d) request in this petition. EPA 530

intends first to issue an Advance Notice of P roposed R ulemaking for the submission of 531
unpublished health and safety studies in their possession and lists of ongoing and initiated 532
studies from companies manufacturing (including importing), processing, and 533
distributing certain chemical substances and mixtures, used in hydraulic fracturing. EPA 534
plans to seek stakeholder input on the range of chemical s that should be subject to the 535
section 8(d) rulemaking. For the reasons set out in the above discussion of the TSCA 536
section 8(a) request, EPA does not believe a broader TSCA section 8(d) rule is needed or 537
appropriate at this time. 538

D. TSCA Section 8(c) Request 539
The petitioners requested that EPA ‘‘exercise its authority under 40 C.F.R. section 540
717.17 and request submission of copies of any information related to significant adverse 541
reactions to human health or the environment alleged to have been caused b y E&P 542
[chemical substances and mixtures] manufactured, processed, or distributed” by nine 543
companies (Ref. 2). As explained below, EPA has concluded that TSCA section 21 does 544
not apply to the petitioners’ request for a TSCA section 8(c) data call

- in. EPA an ticipates 545
that the stakeholder process will involve discussion of the possible use of TSCA 8(c) to 546
request copies of records and reports of allegations from manufacturers (including 547
importers) and processors for chemical substances used in hydraulic fractu ring. 548
Among the actions potentially available under TSCA section 8, only rules are 549
proper objects of a TSCA section 21 petition. Pursuant to TSCA section 8(c) and EPA’s 550
implementing regulations at 40 CFR 717.17, allegations of adverse reactions are not 551
called in by rule. In contrast, other provisions of TSCA

— including part of TSCA section 552*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 25 of 32 8(c)

— require or authorize the Administrator to act by rule. Section 21 of TSCA allows 553
any person to petition ‘‘to initiate a proceeding for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of 554
a rule under section 2603, 2605, or 2607.” 15 U.S.C. 2620(a). EPA interprets TSCA 555
section 21 to apply only to the enumerated actions. 556
E. Denial of TSCA Section 4 Request 557
The petitioners requested a TSCA section 4 test rule covering all chemical 558
substances and mixtures used in oil and gas E&P . Specifically, the petitioners requested 559
that EPA promulgate a rule under TSCA section 4 requiring ‘‘manufacturers and 560
processors of E&P [chemical substances and mixtures] to develop test data to evaluate 561

th e toxicity and potential for health and environmental impacts of all substances and 562
mixtures they manufacture and process” and that the TSCA section 4 rule require the 563
manufacturers and processors to identify all chemical substances and mixtures tested 564

(Re f. 2). EPA is denying this request as the petitioners have not set forth sufficient facts 565
to support their assertion that it is necessary to issue a TSCA section 4 rule requiring 566
testing of all chemical s ubstances and mixtures used in all oil and gas E&P
, as required 567
by TSCA section 21(b)(1). Further, to the extent that the petition could be read to 568
articulate a somewhat narrower request (that only some chemical substances and 569
mixtures should be tested, as necessary to evaluate the potential impacts of thos e 570

chemical s ubstances and mixtures), this is not a request for a n identifiable rule under 571
TSCA section 4, as required by TSCA section 21 (e.g., the petition does not identify 572
specific chemical s ubstances or mixtures for which inadequate data exist, or the data gaps 573
or endpoints for which testing is necessary). 574
The petitioners have not set forth sufficient facts for EPA to find that information 575*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 26 of 32 available to the Administrator is insufficient to permit a reasoned evaluation of the health 576

and environmental eff ects of all E&P chemical substances and mixtures, or that testing is 577
necessary to develop such information. The petitioners identified two reports that discuss 578

health effects from some chemical substances and mixtures used during oil and gas 579
operations wit h some specific discussion on hydraulic fracturing. The reports are an 580
information source that EPA might review in developing a TSCA section 4 proposal to 581
determine whether data are lacking for specific health end points for specific chemical 582

substances . H owever, EPA believes the analysis conducted for the reports are not 583
comprehensive because not all E&P chemical substances and mixtures were reviewed in 584
either report ( Ref. 2). Therefore, the petitioners do not demonstrate that data are 585

insufficient for all E&P chemical substances and mixtures. 586
The petitioners also failed to show it is necessary to issue a TSCA section 4 rule 587
by failing to support the other findings under TSCA section 4. 15 USC 2603(a)(1)(A)(i) 588
& (B)(i). The petitioners made a minimal attem pt to show that any individual E&P 589
chemical substance is produced in “substantial quantities” and provided no production 590
volume information for any individual chemical substance. While the petitioners do make 591
general statements that E&P chemical substances and mixtures are used in large 592
quantities (Ref. 2), this does not provide a basis for EPA to conclude that all E&P 593

chemical s ubstances and mixtures are produced in substantial quantities. The term 594
“substantial quantities” has been interpreted by EPA to ge nerally be one million pounds 595

or more per year (Ref. 2 3 ). Nor have the petitioners shown that any specific chemical 596
substance or mixture enters or may reasonably be anticipated to enter the environment in 597
substantial quantities or that there is or may be significant or substantial human exposure 598*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 27 of 32 to any specifi c chemical substance or mixture. Individual chemical substances and 599
mixtures used in E&P operations may well be produced and released in small volumes. 600
Furthermore, the petitioners have not shown that all E&P chemical substances and 601
mixtures may present an unreasonable risk (Refs. 5 and 6). As discussed in Unit II.E, the 602
oil and gas E&P industry is broad and engages in a wide variety of activities and uses 603
many different chemical substances and mixtures de pending on site characteristics

. 604
Although petitio ners provided examples of spills and releases and cited existing 605
databases collecting health effects data, they did not show that any individual chemical 606

substance or mixture, or the entire class of chemical substances and mixtures used in all 607
phases of th e E&P industry, may present an unreasonable risk. While it is possible that 608
such a finding could be made for some chemical substances and mixtures used in some 609
operations, it is also likely that many are benign, and petitioners did not provide sufficient 610

i nformation for the broad finding they request. For these reasons, the petitioners have not 611
demonstrated that it is necessary to issue the requested TSCA section 4 rule. 612
With respect to E&P mixtures, petitioners have not made any attempt to show that 613

eval uating the effects of mixtures would be reasonable and more efficient than testing 614
chemical substances in the mixtures. See 15 USC 2603(a)(2). EPA is not prepared to 615
make this finding without more complete information regarding the chemical substances 616

and mixtures currently in use and the existing available information regarding potential 617
health effects. EPA understands that mixtures can change frequently in hydraulic 618
fracturing operations, and in the E&P industry more broadly, and the petition does not 619

pro vide sufficient information to enable EPA to effectively identify what mixtures, or 620
classes of mixtures, if any, might most efficiently be tested. A ny existing mixture tested 621*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 28 of 32 might not still be in use once testing has been completed, and additional mixture s might 622
be in use at that point. A requirement to test certain representative mixtures m ight be 623
reasonable and more efficient than testing individual chemical s ubstances , but petitioners 624
did not provide sufficient information to support such a finding. 625
EPA may consider a TSCA section 4 rule at a later date. EPA is in the process of 626
evaluating information in its possession and plans to request additional information as 627
described in this notice. While EPA agrees with petitioners that the ORD study focuses 628

on the potential impacts on drinking water resources and does not require companies to 629
conduct testing or to develop health and safety data, EPA plans to use the data to identify 630
potentially hazardous chemical substances and mixtures associated with hydrau lic 631
fracturing , which will aid in EPA’s understanding of potential effects beyond drinking 632
water impacts . EPA also plans to summarize the available data (including data the 633
Agency may already have collected) on the toxicity of chemical substances and mixtu res 634
used in hydraulic fracturing, and to identify and prioritize data gaps for further 635
investigation. EPA also plans to review the results from the Agency’s other activities and 636
those from other agencies (see Unit II.F). 637

IV. References 638
The following is a list of the documents that are specifically referenced in this 639
notice and placed in the docket that was established under docket ID number EPA

- HQ

640

OPPT

- 20 11

- 0683 . For information on accessing the docket, refer to Unit I.B. 641

1. House Conference Report 94

– 1679

. A L egislative History of the Toxic Sub stances 642

Control Act, (Committee Print 1976) (Legislative History, pp. 97

- 99 ). 643

2. Earthjustice and 114 other organizations. Letter from Deborah Goldberg, Earthjustice 644*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 29 of 32 to Wendy Cleland

- Hamnett, Office Director, Office of Pol lution Prevention and 645
Toxics. Re: Citizen Petition Under Toxic Substances Control Act Regarding the 646
Chemical Substances and Mixtures Used in Oil and Gas Exploration or Production. 647
August 4, 2011. 648

3. EPA, Office of Research and Development. Plan to Study the Potential Impacts of 649
Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources. November , 2011. Available on

650

line at: 651
http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwater/uic/class2/hydraulicfracturing/upload/FINAL

652

STUDY

- PLAN

- HF_Web_2.pdf

. 653

4. Ground Water Protection Council and the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact 654
Commission. FracFocus. Chemical Disclosure Registry. October 2011. Available on

655

line at: http://fracfocus.org/

. 656

5. The Endocrine Disruption Exchange. Health Effects Summary Statement. January 27, 657

2011. Available on

- line at: 658
http://www.endocrinedisruption.com/chemicals.multistate.php

. 659

6. New York St ate Department of Environmental Conservation. Draft Supplemental 660
Generic Environmental Impact Statement on the Oil, Gas, and Solution Mining 661
Regulatory Program. September 30, 2009. Available on

- line at: 662
http://www.dec.ny.gov/energy/58440.html

. 663

7. Waxman, Henry A., Markey, Edward, J., and DeGette, Diana. United States House of 664
Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce Minority Staff Report

. 665
Chemicals Used in Hydraulic Fracturing. April 2011. Availabl e on

- line at: 666
http://democrats.energycommerce.house.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Hydraulic 667*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 30 of 32 %20Fracturing%20Report%204.18.11.pdf. 668

8. EPA, Office of Research and Development. 2010 Hydraulic Fracturing Information 669
Request. September 9, 2010. Available on

- lin e at: 670
http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwater/uic/class2/hydraulicfracturing/upload/HFvolu 671
ntaryinformationrequest.pdf

. 672

9. EPA, Office o f Research and Development. 2011 Hydraulic Fracturing Information 673
Request. August 11, 2011. Available on

- line at: 674
http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwater/uic/class2/hydraulicfracturing/upload/LetterT 675
o9HFCompanies_August2011.pdf. 676

10. API Energy. About Oil and Natural Gas. Industry Sectors. September 14, 2011. 677

Available on

- line at: http://www.api.org/aboutoilgas/sectors/

. 678

11. Letter from Erik Milito, Group Director Upstream and Industry Operations, American 679

Petroleum Institute (API) to Wend y Cleland

- Hamnett, Director OPPT , US EPA: 680
"Comments on August 4, 2011 Citizen Petition under Toxic Substances Control Act 681
Regarding the Chemical Substances and Mixtures Used in Oil and Gas Exploration or 682

Production", October 13, 2011. 683

12. North American Indust ry Classification System. 2007 NAICS Definition. August 684

2011. http://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/index.html

. 685

13. EPA. Summary of the Toxic Substances Control Act. Available on

- line at: 686
http://www.epa.gov/lawsregs/laws/tsca.html

. 687

14. EPA. Oil and Natural Gas Sector: New Source Performance Standards and National 688
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Reviews. Proposed Rule. Federal 689
Register ( 76 FR 52738, August 23, 2011). ( FRL

– 9448

– 6 ). 690*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 31 of 32 15. EPA. EPA Press Release

- EPA Announces Schedule to Develop Wastewater 691
Standards/Announcement is part of administrator's priority to ensure natural gas 692
development continues safely and responsibly Available on

- line at: 693
http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpres s.nsf/d0cf6618525a9efb85257359003fb69d/91e7 694
fadb4b114c4a8525792f00542001!OpenDocument. 695

16. U.S. Department of the Interior. Bureau of Land Management. BLM to Hold 696
Regional Forums on Hydraulic Fracturing in Natural Gas Production. Available on

697

line at: 698
http://ww w.blm.gov/wo/st/en/info/newsroom/2011/april/NR_04_01_2011.html

. 699

17. U.S. Department of Energy. The SEAB Shale Gas Production Subcommittee Second 700
Ninety

- Day Report. November 1 8 , 2011 . Available on

- line at: 701
http://www.shalegas.energy.gov/resources/111811_final_r eport.pdf 702

18. EPA. Claims of Confidentiality of Certain Chemical Identities Contained in Health 703
and Safety Studies and Data from Health and Safety Studies Submitted Under the 704

Toxic Substances Control Act. Notice. Federal Register ( 75 FR 29754, May 27, 705

2010). ( FRL

- 8827

- 3 ). 706

19. Letter from Christina Franz
, Senior Director, Regulatory & Technical Affairs, 707

American Chemistry Council (ACC ) to Wendy Cleland

- Hamnett, Director OPPT
, 708

US EPA: "Comments of the American Chemistry Council on the TSCA Section 21 709
Petition Concerning Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Chemicals ", Octob er 20
, 710

2011. 711

20. Letter from Mark N. Duvall
, Council for Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. to Wendy 712

Cleland

- Hamnett, Director O PPT , US EPA: " TSCA Section 21 Petit ion Regarding 713*** OMB Review Draft

– Deliberative

– Do Not Cite, Quote or Release ***

Page 32 of 32 Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Chemicals; Comments of Halliburton Energy 714

Services, Inc. ", Octob er 26 , 2011. 715

21. U.S. Department of Energy. The SEAB Shale Gas Production Subcommittee Ninety

716

Day Report. August 1 8 , 2011 . Available on

- line at : 717
http://www.shalegas.energy.gov/resources/081811_90_day_report_final.pdf

. 718

22. EPA. TSCA Inventory Update Reporting Modifications; Chemical Data Reporting. 719

Final Rule. Federal Register ( 76 FR 50816, August 16, 2011). ( FRL

– 8872

– 9). 720

23. EPA. TSCA Section 4(a ) Final St atement of Policy; Criteria for Eva luating 721

Substantial Production, Subst antial Release, and Substantial or Significant Human 722

Exposure

. Final Statement of Policy. Federal Register ( 58 FR 28736 , May 14, 723

1993 ). (FRL

- 4059

- 9 ). 724
List of Subjects 725

Enviro nmental protection, exploration and production (E&P), hydraulic 726
fracturing , oil and gas, Toxic Substance s Control Act (TSCA). 727

Dated: ____________________ 728 729 730 731 James J. Jones
, 732 Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention

. 733