Page 1 of 16 **Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB Review under**

**The Paperwork Reduction Act**

**1 IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION**  **1(a) Title and Number of the Information Collection**  **Title: Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements for Allegations**  **of Significant Adverse Reactions to Human Health or the Environment**  **EPA ICR No.: 1031.11**  **OMB Control No.: 2070**
**- 0017**  **1(b) Short Characterization**  Section 8(c) of the Toxic Substances Contro l Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2607(c) (Attachment 1) , requires th at “any

person who manufactures (including imports), processes, or distributes in commerce any chemical substance or mixture” must keep “records of significant adverse reactions to health or the environment, as determined by the Administrator by

rule, alle ged to have been caused b y the substance or mixture.” TSCA section 8(c) requires that allegations of adverse reactions to the health of employees be kept for thirty ye ars, and all other allegations be kept for five years. EPA promulgated 40 CFR 717, “All egations that Chemical Substances Cause Significant Adverse Reactions to Health or the Environment; Subpart A

-- Recordkeeping and Reporting,” on August 22, 1983 (48 FR 38178) (Attachment 2) . This rule became effective on November 21, 1983. The rule requires manufacturers (including importers) and processors of chemical substances and mixtures to keep records of “significant adverse reactions” alleged to have been caused b y such substances or mixtures. The rule also prescribes the conditions under which a firm must submit or make the records available to a duly designated representative of the Administrator.

**2 NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION**  **2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection**  The recordkeeping and reporting activities associated with this collection of information are required b y statute. The TSCA section 8(c) reporting and recordkeeping requirements are of central importance in the administration of TSCA section 8 as a whole. Without the ability to administer these paperwork requirements, EPA would not be able to meet its obligation under TSCA. Since the statute does not contain an automatic reporting provision, EPA must either inspect compan y files or require reporting o f records that relate to specific substances of concern in order to obtain and use information about allegations of significant adverse reactions. EPA’s authority to inspect and require such reporting is codified in 40 CFR 717.17. EPA will review relevant TSCA section 8(c) records in connection with its TSCA chemical assessment activities. All studies submitted to EPA will be verified and the contents of the submissions recorded and inspected for the inclusion of confidential business information. Copi es of the documents will then bePage 2 of 16

prepared for inclusion in EPA’s public docket and distributed, as appropriate and based on the associated chemical identity , to program offices at EPA and/or to other federal agencies for scientific anal ys is. A coding form will be completed to capture certain descriptive information such as identity , document control number, confidentiality indicator, document title, document date, receipt date and chemical identity . The document will be recorded on microfiche and stored for archival purposes. **2(b) Use/Users of the Data**  By using the TSCA section 8(c) reporting authority , EPA can examine such records whenever a chemical is discovered to present possible risks to human health or the environment. Information contained in the TSCA section 8(c) allegation records will have several uses. The information collected will be used on a case

- specific basis to evaluate suspected adverse health or environmental effects of a chemical substance or mixture already under assessment by EPA' s Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT). Most of these substances will be “existing” chemicals, e.g., chemicals for test rule consideration, substances that are the subjects of TSCA section 8(e) notices of substantial risk, or substances or mix tures brought to the attention of OPPT by other EPA programs, other government agencies, industry , or the public. However, TSCA section 8(c) reports also may be required on “new” chemicals as one means of monitoring for any suspected or potential hazards identified during the premanufacture notification (PMN) review period. On a case

- specific basis, requiring reporting of TSCA section 8(c) records will also serve as a discovery function. It will help identify trends of adverse e ffects across the industry that may not be apparent to an y one company . It will also serve as a long

- term trend identification function because of the 5

- ye ar and 30

- ye ar recordkeeping feature of the statute.

**3 NON** 
**- DUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA**  **3(a) Non** 
**- Duplication** 
In formation recorded and reported on alleged adverse effects on health or the environment is specific for compliance with the TSCA section 8(c) rule. Records required to be maintained under this rule include records of consumer allegatio ns of personal injury or harm to health, reports of occupational disease or injury , and reports or complaints of injury to the environment submitted to the manufacturer, processor, or distributor in commerce from any source. Allegation means a statement, made without formal proof or regard for evidence, that a chemical substance or mixture has caused a significant adverse reaction to health or the environment. TSCA section 8(c) requires that allegations of adverse reactions to the health of employees be kept for 30 years, and all other relevant allegations be kept for 5 ye ars. No other EPA programs or other agencies/departments that require this specific set of information on alleged adverse effects to be recorded and maintained for this retention perio d nor does any other government program have direct authority to access such information. If any records or reports relating to the allegation are required b y another agency, then copies of those records or reports must be maintained in the TSCA section 8 (c) allegation record. For example, if an employee allegation results in a requirement for the firm to record the case on Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Form 301, or equivalent form, which must be maintained by the firm for only

5 ye ars (see 29 CFR part 1904 for recording and reporting requirements for occupational injuries andPage 3 of 16

illnesses under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970), then a copy of that OSHA record must be included in the allegation record. **3(b) Public**  **Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB** Prior to submission to OMB, this I CR will be made available to the public for comment through a Federal Register notice. The public will have 60 day s to provide comments. Any comments received will be given c onsideration when completing the supporting statement that is submitted to OMB. **3(c) Consultations**  Prior to proposing the original TSCA section 8(c) rule, EPA held information meetings with the following groups:
 Oil, Chemical, and Atomic Workers Union
 AFL/CIO
 Environmental Defense Fund
 American Textile Manufacturing Association
 Chemical Manufacturers Association
 Chemical Specialty

Manufacturers Association
 Rubber Manufacturers Association
 National Congress of Petroleum Retailers
 National Association of Chain Drugstores During the public comment period, EPA received 160 comments from a wide variety of groups including the Chemical Manufacturers Association (now called the American Chemistry Council), American Petroleum Institute, chemical manufacturers and processors, chemical industry representatives, and environmental and labor organizations. In addition, EPA held public meetings on the proposed rule in Washington, D.C., Newark, New Jersey , and Houston, Texas. In promulgating the final TSCA section 8 (c) rule, EPA contacted Allied Chemical, American Cyanamid, Monsanto, Proctor and Gamble, Stauffer Chemical, and Union Carbide to obtain industry estimates on the number of expected allegations and company indirect costs. In addition, the TSCA section 8(c ) final rule concept was reviewed by the Administrator’s Toxic Substance Advisory Committee, which was composed of representatives of business and environmental groups. Since promulgation, provisions of the final rule have been thoroughl y discussed in bri efings with representatives of the chemical industry . Also, certain aspects of the rule were subsequently modified via notice and comment rulemaking based upon recommendations by members of the industry and after full consideration of comments from repres entatives of industry , labor groups, environmental groups, and the general public. OPPT has provided continuing interpretive guidance to interested parties whenever the need has arisen. In July

of 1986, OPPT conducted a seminar for industry representatives on TSCA that included information exchange regarding TSCA section 8(c). Another such industry seminar was conducted in 1990. TSCA section 8(c) has also been discussed at a variety of other seminars and meetings with industry

.Page 4 of 16

Additionall y, under 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1) OMB requires agencies to consult with potential I CR respondents and data users about specific aspects of I CRs before submitting an original or renewal ICR to OMB for review and approval. In accordance with this regulation, EPA w ill pursue additional consultations with interested parties during the development of the renewal of this collection. **3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection**  Currently , EPA uses its authority to collect information pursuant to the TSCA section 8(c) rule sparingl y. Currently , EPA anticipates issuing infrequent requests (less than 2 per year) for TSCA section 8(c) reporting. However, reporting requests may occur more frequentl y because individual notices or letters containing such TSCA section 8(c) re quests may be clustered in the same ye ar. The information will be collected on a case

- specific basis to evaluate suspected adverse health or environmental effects of a chemical substance or mixture already under assessment by OPPT or when a chemical not under assessment by

OPPT is discovered to present possible risks to human health or the environment. For example, chemical disasters are obviously unpredictable and OPPT must reserve the capability to require records submission on an as

- needed basis in ord er to gather relevant information related to such matters. TSCA section 8(c) allegation records are part of such related information. **3(e) General Guidelines**  The record retention provisions of TSCA section 8(c) and 40 CFR part 717 exceed the Paperwork Reduction Guidelines (5 CFR 1320.6) in that they require respondents to maintain records other than health, medical, or tax records, for more than three ye ars. TSCA section 8(c) authorizes EPA to require persons (i.e., manufacturers (including importers) , processors, or distributors) to maintain records of adverse reactions to the health of employees for a period of 30 years from the date such reactions were first reported or known to the person maintaining the record. Any other record of such adverse re actions (e.g., to the environment, non

- employees) is required to be retained for a period of 5 ye ars. 40 CFR part 717 incorporates these record retention provisions authorized by TSCA. **3(f) Confidentiality**  Respondents may

assert a claim of business co nfidentiality with respect to all or part of an allegation submission. Such submissions will be handled in accordance with the provisions at 40 CFR Part 2. **3(g) Sensitive Questions**  This section is not applicable. The information does not include respo nses to questions of a sensitive nature.Page 5 of 16

**4 THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED**  **4(a) Respondent NAICS Codes**  Respondents affected b y this collection activity are mainly

NAICS categories 325 and 32411 ( Chemicals and Allied Products Manufacturers and Petroleum Refining , respectivel y). **4(b) Information Requested**  (i) Data Items Records maintained pursuant to 40 CFR Part 717 must consist of the following: a. The original allegation as received. b. An abstract of the allegation an d other pertinent information as follows: 1. The name and address of the plant site that received the allegation. 2. The date the allegation was received at that site. 3. The implicated substance, mixture, article, company process or operation, or site discharge. 4. A description of the alleger (e.g., emplo yee, neighbor), including age and sex, if ascertainable. 5. A description of the health effects, including explanation of how the effects became known and the route of exposure, if explained in the allegation. c. The results of an y self

- initiated investigation with respect to an allegation. EPA does not require such investigation under the TSCA section 8(c) rule.) d. Copies of an y furthe r required records relating to the allegation (e.g., records required under OSHA). Each person who is required to keep records under this part must submit copies of those records to EPA as required b y the Administrator or appropriate designee. EPA will notify those responsible for reporting b y letter or will announce any such requirements b y notice in the Federal Register

. (ii) Respondent Activities Respondents must do two things: (1) maintain records of allegations of significant adverse react ions, and (2) submit copies of these allegation records when required by EPA. Entities subject to the rule must record significant reactions alleged to have been caused b y substances or mixtures that they manufacture, import, or process. These firms must establish a recordkeeping system for such allegations and monitor incoming complaints to determine if they meet the criteria for filing. Allegations that are filed must be retained for 30 years if they are employee

- related and for 5 ye ars for all other typ es/sources of allegations. Firms subject to the rule must keep their TSCA section 8(c) records at company headquarters or at a site central to their chemical operations. A multi

- site company will usually

require the responsible official at the individ

ual plant site to forward potentially recordable TSCA section 8(c) allegations to a designated TSCA coordinator at their operations headquarters. Depending on the size of the company , such allegations will be reviewed b y a committee to determine if the al legations relate to the company ’s product, operations, or discharges. If so, the effects cited in the allegation are compared against thePage 6 of 16

rule’s definition and examples of “significant adverse reaction.” If the allegation meets this test, it is recorded. The actual allegation record is to be comprised of an abstract of the allegation along with a record of an y compan y- initiated investigation and other pertinent documents. The rule does not require further investigation. EPA requires that allegations be filed so that they may be readil y retrievable by the alleged “cause” of the reaction. EPA does not, however, require a specific form under this rule. Firms subject to this rule must maintain an awareness of their reporting requirements. A reporting re quirement will take the form of a letter directed to selected respondents or it will be a notice in the Federal Register . Respondents are responsible for monitoring the Federal Register for such notices. Whenever feasible, EPA will also notify those comp anies that can be identified with the production, importation or processing of a substance or mixture in question. Respondents then must determine if they

manufacture or process the chemical substance or mixture. If so, they must conduct a search of thei r TSCA section 8(c) files to determine if there are any relevant records of significant adverse reactions alleged to have been caused b y the substance or mixture. If such records are present, they must make a photocopy

of those records and mail it with a cover letter to EPA. The company should note that they

have submitted such records to EPA so that future duplicative reporting will not occur.

**5 THE INFORMATION COLLECTED** 
**- AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION**  **METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 5(a)**  **Age ncy Activities**  OPPT is the primary

user of the information gathered under the authority of this rule. In addition, information may be gathered for other EPA program offices/regions, and other Federal or state health or environmental agencies. EPA personnel involved in monitoring recordkeeping, initiating reporting requests, and reviewing responses will be staff of the Chemical Information and Testing Branch (CITB) of the Chemical Control Division (CCD), the Director of CCD , and the Director of the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT). (For more information about the Chemical Testing Program, go to: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/chemtest/index.html.) As OPPT receives submissions, they will be logged in and reviewed for confidentiality consi derations. Copies of submissions will be made available to offices within OPPT that are assessing the substances of concern. Non

- confidential versions of the submissions will be placed in a public docket and will be available for review b y other government agencies and the public. **5(b) Collection Methodology and Management**  EPA has not identified a more efficient, less expensive or more flexible means of obtaining the required data. At present there is no new technology applicable to the collection of this information that would minimize the collection burden. Any reporting requirements will have a minimum reporting schedule of forty

- five day s as outlined in the regulation. Neither the rule nor EPA requires the use of any particular methodology or t echnology

for the retention or transmittal of TSCA section 8(c) records.Page 7 of 16

To aid persons subject to this information collection, OPPT has set up a TSCA Hotline that provides information regarding TSCA section 8(c) reporting as well as other regulatory info rmation. When Hotline staff members are unable to answer questions regarding TSCA section 8(c), the questions are referred to OPPT/CCD staff for appropriate resolution. **5(c) Small Entity Flexibility**  Unlike TSCA section 8(a) of TSCA, Congress did not i nclude a specific exemption of small businesses in TSCA section 8(c). This rule does not exempt small manufacturers (including importers) or processors of chemicals from its provisions. This is due to EPA’s belief that workers, plant neighbors and consum ers may

be adversel y affected b y products, emissions, etc., produced or created b y firms of all sizes. However, the TSCA section 8(c) rule was written to concentrate the recordkeeping and reporting burdens on those firms generall y associated with the mai nstream chemical industry . EPA specifically eliminated most distributors and effectivel y limits the number of processors subject to the rule. By doing so, EPA has eliminated a large number of small businesses from the purview of the rule without compromi sing its objectives. **5(d) Collection Schedule**  If EPA publishes in the Federal Register a reporting requirement relating to a chemical substance or mixture, or requests such reporting b y letter, then manufacturers (including importers) and processors of such substance or mixture must submit a copy of relevant allegation records in their files. TSCA section 8(c) reporting requirements will be developed on an as

- needed basis and could initially require only the submission of an abstract of the allegation record, which is generally one page in length, not the full allegation file.

**6 ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION**  This section presents the estimates of the industry burden hours and costs associated with TSCA section 8(c) activities. Th e specific action required to comply with a TSCA section 8(c) reporting are assumed to include review of the Federal Register for notices regarding specific chemicals, recording pertinent information on allegations and storing such records, and reporting a llegations to EPA when required. Table 1 below, contains a cross

- walk between the required activities and the related information collections.Page 8 of 16

**Table 1**  **: Cross**
**- Walk between Industry Activities and Related Information Collections (ICs)**  **Activity Description**  **Related IC(s) Recordkeeping**  Manufacturers, importers and processors of

chemical substances or mixtures are required to maintain records of significant adverse reactions to health or the environment that are alleged to be caused by the substance or mixtur e, or alleged to be associated with its manufacture, processing, or distribution. Allegations that must be recorded include any statement of belief made by any person regarding a link between a particular company’s product, process or emission and a signif icant adverse health or environmental effect. Prepare and maintain records

**Reporting** If EPA has requested TSCA 8(c) records via a

Federal Register notice or letter, respondents must find and submit the relevant data. They must also need to prepare and su bmit a transmittal letter and other explanatory material to accompany the allegation records. Prepare and submit records, a transmittal letter, and other relevant materials to EPA

**Federal Register notice review**  Manufacturers, importers and processors of

chemical substances or mixtures will need to review each Federal Register notice to see if EPA has requested any TSCA 8(c) record Review Federal Register

**6(a) Estimating Respondent Burden and Cost**  The steps required to estimate burden associated with the activities of (1) maintaining records of significant adverse effects, and (2) submitting copies of allegation records when required b y EPA, include estimating the number of affected firms and employees, the number of allegations, and number of reports requested b y EPA. Unit estimates of burden for the various activities are also required. These unit estimates are then coupled with the number of allegations, reports, and Federal Register notice reviews to dev elop total burden estimates for the industry reporting community

. Estimates of costs require estimation of wage rates for personnel who are expected to participate in TSCA section 8(c) activities. These, coupled with the burden hours associated with the various tasks, provide the bases for industry cost estimates. Estimate of the Number of Firms As in the previous TSCA section 8(c) IC R burden anal ys i s, EPA utilizes Census’ County Business Patterns database to determine numbers of firms/plants and their employ ment. The anal ys is entails computing the average number of employees per firm. 1

1 EPA has used this methodology from 2006 forward because the data source is publically available, making the analysis mo re transparent. In the program’s initial ICR burden analysis, EPA used Dun’s Market Identifiers (DMI) from a Dun and Bradstreet database (se e U.S. EPA, “Comparison of Data Sources for Characterizing Manufacturers and Processors,” Draft Report, Prepared by Centaur Associates, Inc under EPA contract No. 68

- 02

- 3980, Washington, DC; November 6, 1986)

.Page 9 of 16

The first step is to gather information on the number of firms and employees from the Bureau of the Census’s C

ounty Business Patterns for NAICS code 325 (Chemical and Allied Products) and NAI CS code 32411 (Petroleum Refining and Related Industries). EPA chose those NAICS codes to define the firms that manufacture (including import) and process chemical substances

. The most recent dataset available is from 2013

. The number of employees per firms is calculated using employ ment figures from County Business Patterns for those firms that fall under NAI CS 325 or NAICS 32411. Data from County Business Patterns show that compared to the previous I CR renewal, the number of and employees decreased, resulting in about a 6% decrease the number of firms, and a 9% decrease in the number of employees, and a slight 3% decrease in average number of employees per firm. Current estimates using 2013 Census data are provided in Table 2

. **Table 2**  **. Numbers of Firms and Em ployees for NAICS 325 and 32411, for**  **20 13**  **Number of Firms*** **Total Number of Employees*** **Average Num ber of Employees**  **per Firm** 13,160 801,477 61 * Excludes most government employees, railroad employees, and self

- employed persons. Source: US Census Bureau. 20 13 County Business Patterns. Release Date: April 2015

. Estimate of the Number of Allegations of Significant Adverse Health Reactions The total number of allegations is based upon the average number of employees per firm and the number of firms, multiplied by a standard annual allegation rate per firm. The Agency

received numerous public comments following the issuance of the initial TSCA section 8(c) proposal, including many comments about the Agency’s estimate of the number of allegations. In response to these comments, EPA contacted a number of firms to develop a consensus estimate. According to the 1983 I CR, the consensus opinion of the firms contacted is that recordable TSCA section 8(c) allegations are likely to be made by

0.5 percent of the employees at an average firm. Additionally , and per the 1983 I CR, EPA assumes that the rate of allegations made by the general public would be about one

- third the employee allegation rate. Based on the average number of employees per firm, the estimated annual number of allegations per firm is presented below in Table 3 . The total number of allegations is calculated b y multiplying the total number of firms (13, 160 ) b y the average annual number of allegations per firm (.42), for a total of 5, 527 allegations per year. **Table 3**  **. Estimated Total Number of Allegations per Year**  **for 201**  **6**
**- 201**  **9 Firms**  **Avg. Number of**

**Employees Average Annual # of**  **Allegations per Firm Total**  **Allegations Employee**  **Public Total**  13,160 61 0.31 0.1 0.42 5,527 Estimate of the Number of Reports Requested b y EPA EPA’s long

- term experience shows that onl y a very limited amount of reporting has been required under TSCA section 8(c); this is not expected to change during the period covered by this ICR.Page 10 of 16

To date, only

two reporting notices have been issued under TSCA section 8(c) 2 and these two notices covered two chemicals and two chemical categories. A total of 31 reports 3 , 4 have been received under TSCA section 8(c) , an average of approximately 16 reports per notice

. This represents an average of only about 1.1 reports per year since the rule was promulgated in 1983. 5 EPA expects to issue one additional notice per ye ar during the three ye ar IC R collection period, and therefore , in light of past experience, EPA anticipates that it may receive an additional 16 reports annually

. Estimated Wage Rates Loaded wage rates for technical, managerial, and clerical personnel are derived using a standard methodology

for the TSCA

- regulated community . Wage rate data are obtained from the regularl y updated Bureau of Labor Statistics (BL S) Employer Costs for Employee Compensation Supplementary Tables. Wages and fringe benefits for managerial, professional/technical, and clerical labor are taken from the BLS Employer Costs for Employee Compensation (ECEC) data for March 2014 , for manufacturing industries. 6 The cost of fringe benefits (paid leave, insurance and other items) specific to each labor category

is taken from the same BLS series. An additional loading factor of 17 percent is applied to wages to account for overhead. This approach is consistent with OPPT practice, as established in economic analy ses for two major rulemakings. 7 See Table 4 below for calculation details.

2 U.S.EPA. “Chemical on Reporting Rules Databas e (CORR),” CCD and CSB, June 1990; and U.S.EPA. “Chemical on Reporting Rules Database (CORR): Update,” CCD and CSB; October 31, 1992. 3 U.S.EPA. [Untitled Computer Printout], IMD; June 3, 1992. 4 Sherlock, Scott, Information Management Division. Phone conversation with Wendy Hoffman based upon “TSCA Reports to Congress for EPA Fiscal Years 1992

- 93;” August 1994. 5 In comparison to the estimate of over 5800 allegations, it appears that the allegations rate used to estimate total allegations in Table 2 is ov erstated. However, given potentials for higher counts of allegations, EPA retain s the existing methodology, which provides for a large contingency in additional burden . Moreover, the total burden for this information collection is relatively small despite the use of an overstated estimate for total allegations. 6Employer Costs for Employee Compensation Supplementary Tables: December 2006

-March 2015 , US Bureau of Labor Statistics, June 10, 2015 (pp 31 , 33 , 37 ) (http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ect/sp/ecsuphst.pdf, acces sed August 6 , 201 5) 7 For methodology, s ee: Wage Rates for Economic Analyses of the Toxics Release Inventory Program (U.S.EPA/OEI/EAD/ASB, June 10, 2002) and the Revised Economic Analysis for the Amended Inventory Update Rule: Final Report (U.S. EPA/OPPT/E ETD/EPAB. August 2002.Page 11 of 16

**Table 4**  **: Loaded Industry Wage Rates (March, 2014**  **)**

**EPAB Labor Category**  **Data Sources d**  **Date Wage**  **Fringe Benefit**  **Fringes as**

**% w age**  **Over**
 

** head %** **wage b**  **Fringe +**

**overhead factor**  **c Loaded** 

**Wages a**  (A) (B) (C)

=(B)/(A) (D) (E)

=(C)+(D)+ 1 (F) =(A)*(E)

**Managerial** BLS ECEC, Private

**Manufacturing industries** , “Mgt, Business, and Financial” 14

- Dec $47.90 $24.18 50% 17% 1.67 $80.22

**Professional/ Technical**  BLS ECEC, Private

**Manufacturing industries**  , “Professional and related“ 14

- Dec $42.19 $22.86 54% 17% 1.71 $72.22

**Clerical** BLS ECEC, Private

**Manufacturing industries,**  “Office and Administrative Support” 14

- Dec $18.68 $9.40 50% 17% 1.67 $31.26

**Notes:**

a Wage data are rounded to the closest dollar figure in this table; however, in calculations using these numbers for this report, unrounded values were used.
b An overhead rate of 17% was used based on assumptions in Wage Rates for Economic Analyses of the Toxics Release Inventory Program (Ric e, 2002), and the Revised Economic Analysis for the Amended Inventory Update Rule: Final Report (EPAB, 2002).

c An inflation factor of “1” means wage data were not escalated to reflect inflation. d Source: Employer Costs for Employee Compensation Supplementary Tables: December 2006

-March 2015 , US Bureau of Labor Statistics, June 10, 2015 (pp 31 , 33 , 37 ) (http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ect/sp/ecsuphst.pdf, accessed August 6 )

. Unit Burden Hours and Costs Unit costs for each of the burdens associated with the TSCA section 8(c) requirements are calculated in this section and summarized in Table 5 using the wage rates referred to above. i. Unit Recordkeeping Burden and Cost Based on the original TSCA section 8(c) anal ys is, EPA estimates that a firm’s TSCA section 8(c) coordinator will spend 2 to 3 hours to determine the status of an allegation. 8 For the purposes of this anal ys is, it is assumed that 3 hours are needed. This level of effort will occur for all allegations received. If the allegation is found to be recordable, the coordinator completes a form, has it ty ped, and checks it for accura cy . This requires 0.5 hours of clerical time and an additional 0.5 hours of managerial time. Assuming that all allegations are recordable, a total of 4 hours are expended per allegation (3.5

8 U.S.EPA. “Economic Analysis of TSCA Section 8(c) Significant Adverse Reaction Recordkeeping Rule, OTS/ETD/RIB.” January 1983.Page 12 of 16

hours managerial plus 0.5 hours clerical). Storage costs for the allegations are believed to be negligible. The unit cost per allegation is $ 296.41

. ii. Unit Reporting Burden and Cost Based on the original TSCA section 8(c) anal ys is, EPA estimates that a management level compan y official will spend one hour revi ewing the Federal Register notice or letter from EPA to determine whether the company manufactures (including imports) or processes substances subject to the reporting requirement. Technical personnel would then spend an estimated two hours conducting a search of the compan y’s TSCA section 8(c) files for an y relevant allegation records. Once the file search is complete, EPA estimates that a managerial emplo ye e would spend two hours preparing a transmittal letter and other explanatory

material to accompany the allegation records. An upper

- level management official would spend an additional two hours reviewing these materials. One hour of clerical labor would be required to prepare and mail the response. A total of eight hours is expended per report (fiv e managerial hours, two technical hours and one clerical hour). The unit cost for reporting, per report, is $ 576.82

. iii. Unit Federal Register Notice Review Burden and Cost Based on the original TSCA section 8(c) anal ys is, EPA estimates that 0.25 hour of managerial labor would be required to review each Federal Register notice (see Table 4). The unit cost for Federal Register notice review is $ 20.06.
**Table 5**  **. Unit Respondent Burden and Cost Estimates Activity**  **Clerical Technical**  **Managerial Total**  **Hours Cost** 

**($2014) Hours**  **Cost**

**($2014) Hours**  **Cost**

**($2014) Hours**  **Cost**

**($2014)** Recordkeeping, per allegation 0.5 $15.63 0 $0.00 3.5 $280.78 **4 $296.41**  Reporting, per report 1 $31.26 2 $144.44 5 $401.12 **8 $576.82**  Federal Register notice review, per notice 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0.25 $20.06 **0.25 $20.06** 

Total Industry

Burden and Cost Estimates for Burden and Cost are summarized in Table 6 by activity, and are thereafter presented in more detail.Page 13 of 16 **Table 6**  **. Summary of Total Annual**  **Industry Burden and Cost Activity**  **Unit**

**Burden, Hours**  **Unit**

**Cost Applicable # and Unit**  **# Firms**  **Burden,**

**Hours Cost**  Recordkeeping, per allegation 4 $296.41 5,527 Allegations per year N/A 22,109 $1,638,308 Reporting, per report 8 $576.82 16 Reports per year N/A 128 $9,229 Federal Register Notice review, per Notice 0.25 $20.06 1 Notices per year per firm 13,

160 3,290 $263,934
**Total Burden/Cost 25,527**  **$1,911,471**
i. Total Recordkeeping Burden and Cost The unit burden for recordkeeping is multiplied by the total number of allegations. Total annual recordkeeping burden is 25,527 hours. The unit cost for recordkeeping of $ 296.41 is multiplied by the average annual number of allegations per ye ar (5,527) an d the t otal annual recordkeeping cost is $1, 638,308

. ii. Total Reporting Burden and Cost Despite the infrequency

with which the Agency

actually publishes TSCA section 8(c) notices, EPA conservativel y assumes that 16 TSCA section 8(c) reports will be s ubmitted annually , in response to the publication of a single, assumed TSCA section 8(c) notice per ye ar. The estimated number of 16 annual responses is based on the 31 reports received in response to the two TSCA section 8(c) notices published in the 27

–year history of the rule . T he estimated annual reporting burden hour is 16 reports x 8 hours per report (from Unit Reporting Burden and Costs), or 128 hours. The cost of submitting these reports is determined b y multiplying the annual number of reports by the unit reporting cost of $ 576.82

. The estimated annual reporting cost is $ 9,229

. iii. Total Federal Register Notice Review Burden and Cost Historically , the Agency

has published an average of only 0.08 notices each year since 1983, as EPA has publish ed only

two notices to date. In light of that history , EPA conservativel y assumes that it will publish a single, TSCA section 8(c) notice each year. Given this assumption , an estimated unit burden of 0 .25 hours per notice , and an estimated 13, 160 firms th at will read the Federal Register notice to determine compliance obligations , the estimated annual industry burden is 3, 290 hours. The estimated annual cost to industry of reviewing the Federal Register notices is estimated using the unit cost for Federal Register review at $ 20.06 and multiplying by 13, 160 firms reading 1 notice per year to obtain $ 263,936

. iv. Total Industry Burden and Costs The total economic burden on the regulated community imposed by

TSCA section 8(c) is the sum of the three comp onents identified above (recordkeeping, reporting, and Federal Register notice review) and estimated at 25,527 hours annuall y with an associated annual cost of $ 1, 911,471 . These costs, shown in the table below, would be incurred in each of the three ye ars covered b y this ICR.Page 14 of 16

**Table 7**  **. Total Industry Burden and Cost**  **Collection Activity Number of**  **Respondents Total Annual** 

**Burden, Hours Total Annual Cost**  Recordkeeping 13,160 22,109 $1,638,308 Reporting 16 128 $9,229 Federal Register Review 13,160 3,290 $263,934 **Total/Overall 13,160**  **25,527 $1,911,471**  Average Burden and Cost per Respondent Table 9 presents the average annual cost and burden per respondent. On average each firm will spend a total of 1.94 hours and $145.25 annually to complete TSCA 8(c) information collection activities.
**Table 8**  **. Average Annual Burden and Cost**  **per Firm Activity**  **Hours/Firm Cost/Firm**  Recordkeeping a 1.68 $124.49 Reporting b 0.01 $0.70 Federal Register notice review c 0.25 $20.06 **Average burden per firm 1.94**  **$145.25**

Notes:
a Calculated as the average cost (or hourly burden) per allegation times the average num ber of allegations per year.
b Calculated as the total industry reporting costs (or total burden) divided by the total number of firms.
c Calculated as the total industry review costs (or total burden) divided by the total number of firms. **6(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost**  The total annual cost to EPA for TSCA section 8(c) for each of the three years covered b y this ICR is estimated to be $ 62,739 . This figure is based on activities identified in the 1986 and 1989 I CRs. Costs are estimate d based on wages and salaries in 2014 GS

- schedule for the Washington

- Baltimore

Northern Virginia Locality Pay Area , for GS

- 15, Step 1, GS

- 13, Step 1 , and GS

- 12, Step 1 employees. Wages include an additional 60 percent loading rate to account for overhead and benefits. Annual costs to EPA associated with the recordkeeping portion of the rule include general administration of the rule, education and outreach activities, and compliance monitoring. Costs associated with reporting involve preparation of rep orting notices, Federal Register printing costs, document control, and document review. Annual costs to EPA are derived based on an anal ys is of the cost of performing these various activities. The various factors that contribute to EPA costs include:

 Each ye ar, general administration of the rule involves approximately one - tenth of a staff specialist’s time plus approximately one week’s time each for two management personnel at the branch, division and OPPT Office Director’s level.

 Education and outrea ch activities will include ongoing rule support by the Environmental Assistance Division (EAD) in OPPT.Page 15 of 16

 Compliance monitoring costs primarily involve the costs of the TSCA section 8(c) portion of inspection carried out by

regional personnel and other admi nistrative costs for headquarters personnel to target and review results of such inspections.

 To date , a total of onl y 31 reports have been received. Based on historical data, over the life of the rule an average of only 0.08 notices have been issued per year and an average of onl y 1.3 reports received. EPA expects that reporting activity under TSCA section 8(c) will remain at low level s during the period covered b y this ICR renewal. EPA costs associated with reporting have been adjusted to reflect this large decrease in the level of expected activity . Labor involved in developing the reporting notices will require decision meetings and either the development of letters, separate Federal Register notices, or the insertion of boilerplate segments in othe r rule preambles.

 Time will be required to process submissions based upon reporting requirements and to review them for confidentiality considerations.

 The Federal Register notices will be reviewed b y the office directl y requesting the information as well as b y the Chemical Information and Testing Branch (CITB) of the Chemical Control Division (CCD).
**Table 9**  **. Annual Burden and Cost to the Federal Government Activity**  **GS**
**- Level**  **Loaded Hourly Wage ($2014)**  **Burden Hours Annual Cost** 
Administrative maintenance GS

- 13, Step 1 $68.94 208 $14,340

GS

- 15, Step 1 $95.82 80 $7,666

Total 288 $22,005 Education/Outreach GS

- 12, Step 1 $57.97 240 $13,913 Compliance monitoring GS

- 12, Step 1 $57.97 400 $23,188 Develop reporting notices GS

- 12, Step 1 $57.97 16 $928 Document control functions GS

- 12, Step 1 $57.97 1 $58 Notice review, referral and data entry GS

- 12, Step 1 $57.97 16 $928 **Totals 961**  **$62,739**Page 16 of 16

**6(e) Reasons for Change**  **in Burden** There is decrease of 1, 45 1 hours (from 26,978 hours to 25,527 hours) in the total estimated respondent burden compared with that identified in the I CR currentl y approved by OMB. This decrease reflects EPA's estimate of a fewer number of potential respondents affected by the reporting requirement , as the number of firms decreased to 13, 160 firms compared with 13,951 in the I CR most recentl y approved b y OMB. Th ese change s are the result of adjustment s
. **Table 10**  **: Estimate of Changes in**  **Annual Burden Hours from Previous ICR by Activity**  **Annual Burden Hours** Current OMB Inventory 26,978 Change in Burden due to Adjustments Changes in the number of firms and employees per firm

- 1, 451 Change in Burden due to Program Changes 0 **Total Change in Burden**
**- 1** **, 451**  **6(f) Burden Statement**  The annual public burden for this collection of information, which is approved under OMB Control No. 2070

- 00 17 , is estimated to range between approximately 1 minute and 8 hours per response , depending upon the type(s) of activity that a respondent must complete , with an average annual response of 1. 36 hours per response
. Burden is defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(b). An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a c ollection of information unless it displays a current and 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 colle ction instrument or form, if applicable. The Agency

has established a public docket for this I CR under Docket ID No. EPA

- HQ

- OPPT

2011

- 0699 , which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC). The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is located in the EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday , excluding legal holiday s. The telephone number for the EPA/DC Public Reading Room is (202) 566

- 1744, and the telephone number for the Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket is (202) 566

- 0280. You may submit comments reg arding the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques. Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. E PA

- HQ

OPPT

- 2011

- 0699 and OMB Control No. 2070

- 00 17 , to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or b y mail to: Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket , Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), Mailcode: 28221T, 1200 P ennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460 , and (2) OMB b y mail to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503.