americanchemistry.com®

 700 Second St., NE | Washington, DC | 20002 | (202) 249-7000 

 

November 2, 2015

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL 

Mr. Greg Schweer

Chemical Control Division

Chief, New Chemicals Branch

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics

USEPA Headquarters 

William Jefferson Clinton Building 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Mail Code: 7405M 

Washington, DC 20460-0001

Re: Information Collection Request for TSCA Section 5(a)(2) Significant New Use Rules for 

Existing Chemicals, 80 Fed.Reg. 53151 (Sept. 2, 2015); ICR 1188.12, OMB Control No. 2070-

0038, EPA–HQ–OPPT–2015–0273; FRL–9931–70

Dear Mr. Schweer:

The American Chemistry Council (ACC)

1

appreciates the opportunity to submit comments on the 

Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) proposed revision of the Information Collection 

Request (ICR) on “TSCA Section 5(a)(2) Significant New Use Rules for Existing Chemicals’’

published in the above-referenced Federal Register notice. 

ACC and its members recognize that the information gathered during pre-manufacturing and 

significant new use reviews helps EPA fulfill its mission to protect the health and safety of the

public and environment. It is important that EPA accurately reflect the burden on U.S. 

businesses associated with compliance under this obligation.

EPA has estimated the burden based on the five existing chemical SNURs it expects to issue per 

year, and activities or significant new uses notices (SNUNs) these SNURs may trigger 

(10/year). ACC has the following comments on the proposed ICR regarding additional burdens:

 

1

The American Chemistry Council (ACC) represents the leading companies engaged in the business of chemistry. ACC members 

apply the science of chemistry to make innovative products and services that make people's lives better, healthier and safer. ACC is 

committed to improved environmental, health and safety performance through Responsible Care®, common sense advocacy 

designed to address major public policy issues, and health and environmental research and product testing. The business of 

chemistry is an $812 billion enterprise and a key element of the nation's economy. It is the nation’s largest exporter, accounting for 

twelve percent of all U.S. exports. Chemistry companies are among the largest investors in research and development. Safety and 

security have always been primary concerns of ACC members, and they have intensified their efforts, working closely with 

government agencies to improve security and to defend against any threat to the nation’s critical infrastructure.
Greg Schweer

November 2, 2015

Page 2 of 2

americanchemistry.com® 700 Second St., NE | Washington, DC 20002 | (202) 249.7000 

 

 EPA’s burden estimate is based primarily on SNUN filings for final SNURs. In our 

companies’ experience, there is a significant burden from the impact analysis of each 

proposed SNUR. One ACC member company has spent approximately 100 hours 

preparing comments on each of two recently proposed SNURs on existing chemicals. On 

just one of those SNURs, that member company required five supporting personnel, who 

spent another 50 hours gathering data and information to help prepare comments on the 

SNUR. That resource commitment amounted to $15,000 for that one SNUR alone.

 In EPA’s analysis, it acknowledged there will be costs associated with ensuring all 

provisions of the SNUR are implemented. EPA concluded that because this burden will 

vary depending on the significant new uses, it could not estimate the burden. Yet the 

implementation burden is significant for many SNURs, especially in circumstances where 

some uses are banned and other uses approved or not affected by the SNUR. Some 

estimated burden, even if only based on recent SNURs, should be included in EPA’s 

analysis.

 While the time required for a customer notification (1 hour per manufacturer per chemical) 

seems reasonable, the number of companies that would be required to notify customers 

appears to be too low. Customer notification requirements affect processors in addition to 

manufacturers and importers, so the estimate of two manufacturers per SNUR does not 

seem realistic.

 It also appears that the burden for notification and compliance with the 12(b) export 

notification requirements for proposed and final SNURs has been omitted or overlooked. 

This should be included in EPA’s estimations.

 A number of SNURs for existing chemicals have lifted the customary regulatory article 

exemption. EPA has not included a burden estimate for importers of articles to verify that 

the articles are in compliance with these SNURs. 

ACC believes that EPA must revise its proposed revision of the ICR to account for the costs and 

potential burdens we have identified in these comments in order to more accurately reflect the 

burden that will be imposed on U.S. businesses that must comply with significant new use 

requirements. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to comment on this ICR. Should you have questions, please 

contact me by phone at 202-249-6406.

Regards,

Christina Franz

Senior Director, Regulatory & Technical Affairs