*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***



## Economic Analysis of the Propos ed Significant New Use Rule for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs)

November 3, 2010



## EO12866_PBDE SNUR_NPR M_EA_2010-11-3.doc

—Does not contain TSCA CBI—

Prepared by:

Economic and Policy Analysis Branch Economics, Exposure and Technology Division

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20460*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers i Economic and Policy Analysis Branch CONTRIBUTORS 1

The EPA analyst responsible for this report was Ti mothy Lehman. Analytical and draft preparation 2 support was provided by Abt Associates Inc. under EPA Contract No. EP-W-08-010. 3

4*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers ii Economic and Policy Analysis Branch ABSTRACT 5

This report estimates the costs of proposed amendmen ts to an existing Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) 6 (71 FR 34015, June 13, 2006). The existing SNUR a pplies to all manufacture and import of any one or 7 more of six polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs): tetrabromodiphenyl ether (tetraBDE), 8 pentabromodiphenyl ether (pentaBDE), hexabromodiphe nyl ether (hexaBDE), heptabromodiphenyl ether 9 (heptaBDE), octabromodiphenyl ether (octaBDE), and nonabromodiphenyl ether (nonaBDE). The 10 proposed amendment extends the SNUR to the processing of any of these chemicals, and the 11 manufacture, import, and processing of a seventh PB DE, decabromodiphenyl ether (decaBDE). It also 12 makes inapplicable the article exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f), making articles containing the PBDEs 13 subject to the SNUR, unless the PBDEs are present as impurities. EPA is proposing to designate 14 processing for any use of tetraBDE, pentaBDE, he xaBDE, heptaBDE, octaBDE or nonaBDE after 15 December 31, 2012 as a significant new use. EPA is proposing to designate manufacture, import or, 16 processing of decaBDE after December 31, 2012, for any use other than military use or transportation use 17 to be a significant new use. EPA is proposing to designate manufacture, import, or processing of 18 decaBDE for any use after December 31, 2013 as a significant new use. 19

20 The PBDEs are a family of chemicals with a common structure of a diphenyl ether molecule which may 21 have anywhere from one to ten bromine atoms a ttached. PBDEs can be grouped as homologs i.e., 22 according to the number of bromine atoms present in the molecule. With the exception of decaBDE, each 23 homolog group contains multiple conge ners which differ according to the arrangement of bromine atoms 24 on the diphenyl ether parent molecule. There is only one possible congener of decaBDE. TSCA 25 inventory listings and regulations for PBDEs are ba sed on homolog groups produced when the diphenyl 26 ether molecule reacts with a fixed amount of bromine. The PBDE homologs used in flame retardants 27 typically have between four and ten bromine atoms. The homolog groups relevant to commercial PBDE 28 (c-PBDE) flame retardant products are: tetraBDE (4 bromine atoms), pentaBDE (5 bromine atoms), 29 hexaBDE (6 bromine atoms), heptaBDE (7 bromin e atoms), octaBDE (8 bromine atoms), nonaBDE (9 30 bromine atoms), and decaBDE (10 bromine atoms). There are three types of c-PBDE products, c31 pentaBDE, c-octaBDE, and c-decaBDE; each c-PBDE is a mixture of PBDE homologs. The specific 32 composition of c-PBDEs varies somewhat from manufacturer to manufacturer, but in general c-pentaBDE 33 contains tetraBDE and pentaBDE as major co mponents and hexaBDE as a minor component. C34 octaBDE contains heptaBDE and octa BDE as ma jor components and hexaBDE, nonaBDE and decaBDE 35 as minor components. C-decaBDE contains decaBDE as the major component with nonaBDE as a minor 36
component. 37

C -pentaBDE and c-octaBDE are no longer manufactured in or imported into the United States, and there 38

is no evidence to indicate their manufacture in an y other countries, suggesting no domestic import of 39 articles containing the chemicals. In addition, the major U.S. manufacturers and importer of c-decaBDE 40 have agreed to phase out its manufacture, and import, for all uses other than transportation uses and 41 military uses by the end of 2012, and for all uses by the end of 2013. If the manufacture, import, or 42 processing, of these chemicals has ceased for any use, they will be designated as significant new uses. If 43 there is any ongoing manufacture, import, or pro cessing of these chemicals for any use, including in 44 articles, after December 31, 2012 (December 31, 2013 for military and transportation uses) of c45 decaBDE, the chemical(s) will be subject to a test rule under section 4(a)(1)(A) of the Toxic Substances 46 and Control Act (TSCA), proposed in conjunction with the amendment to the SNUR. The test rule would 47 require companies that engage in these activities after the specified dates to perform testing in order to 48 obtain data on the health effects, environmental effects, and chemical fate of the chemical. 49

50

PBDEs have been used as flame retardants in a vari ety of applications, including flexible polyurethane 51 foam for mattresses, furniture, and automotive applica tions (c-pentaBDE); acryl onitrile-butadiene-styrene 52*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers iii Economic and Policy Analysis Branch plastic (ABS) for electronics applications (c-oct aBDE); and high-impact polystyrene (HIPS)-based 53 products such as textiles, electronic equipment, and building and construction materials (c-decaBDE). 54 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing an amendment to a SNUR because it is 55 concerned about the persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic effects of some PBDE congeners in humans 56 and the environment. Some reports suggest that th e levels of PBDEs in humans and the environment may 57 be increasing, despite the phase out of c-pentaBDE and c-octaBDE production in the United States in 58

2004. 59

The proposed amendment to the SNUR would require persons to notify EPA at least 90 days before 60 commencing import as part of an article or pro cessing of tetraBDE, pentaBDE, hexaBDE, heptaBDE, 61 octaBDE or nonaBDE after December 31, 2012. Pe rsons who intend to manufacture, import or, process 62 decaBDE after December 31, 2012, for any use othe r than military use or transportation use or to 63 manufacture, import, or process decaBDE for any u se after December 31, 2013 would be required to 64 notify EPA at least 90 days in advance. A firm in tending to engage in these activities would be required 65 to submit a Significant New Use Notice (SNUN), incurri ng an estimated submission cost of $8,143 per 66 chemical, plus other costs. 67

In addition to the firms that make a SNUN submission, the proposed SNUR may also impact firms that do 68 not make a submission. By avoiding a significant new use, a firm can avoid submission and testing costs 69 but may incur other compliance costs. The firm may also incur “hidden” costs; for example, it could 70 forego profitable opportunities to use the chemical in an application that would be a significant new use 71 or limit production volume to avoid a significant new use. 72

73

Costs are estimated at the firm level and reflect the burden of a SNUR on the firms that make a 74

submission. The hidden costs to the firms that do not make a submission are not quantified. EPA 75 receives only a handful of SNUNs per year due to SNURs. However, the number of firms affected by not 76 making submissions to EPA is not known; therefore, costs are not aggregated acr oss the affected entities. 77

78*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers iv Economic and Policy Analysis Branch TABLE OF CONTENTS 79

80

CONTRIBUTORS .................................................................................................................. ....................... i 81

ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... ............................ ii 82

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................ ........................ v 83

1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. .............. 1 84

1.1 Statutory Authority ........................................................................................................... .......... 2 85

1.2 Summary of Methodology ........................................................................................................ .. 2 86

1.3 Organization of this Report ................................................................................................... ..... 2 87

2. POTENTIALLY Aff ected entities ................................................................................................. ....... 4 88

2.1 

### c- PentaBDE ...................................................................................................................... .......... 4 89

2.2 

### c- OctaBDE ....................................................................................................................... .......... 5 90

2.3 

### c- DecaBDE ....................................................................................................................... .......... 5 91

3. INDUSTRY COMPLIANCE COSTS .................................................................................................. 8 92

3.1 Wage Rates .................................................................................................................... ............. 8 93

3.2 Unit Industry Compliance Costs ................................................................................................ . 9 94

3.2.1 Rule Familiarization ...................................................................................................... 9 95

3.2.2 CDX Registration, CDX Electronic Signat ure, and Pay.gov Account Setup .............. 10 96

3.2.3 Form Completion and Submission Fee ........................................................................ 11 97

3.2.4 Import Certification ..................................................................................................... 12 98

3.2.5 Export Notification ...................................................................................................... 12 99

3.3 Summary of Industry Costs for SNUR, by Option (per Submission) ....................................... 15 100

3.4 Likelihood of a SNUN Submission .......................................................................................... 16 101

3.5 Potential for Subsequent Regulatory Action ............................................................................ 16 102

4. Agency Costs .................................................................................................................. .................... 18 103

4.1 Labor Rates fo r EPA Staff ..................................................................................................... ... 18 104

4.2 SNUN Processi ng Costs ......................................................................................................... .. 19 105

4.3 Export Notification Cost ...................................................................................................... ..... 22 106

5. ADDITIONAL ANALYSES ........................................................................................................... ... 23 107

5.1 Regulatory Flexibility Act .................................................................................................... .... 23 108

5.2 Unfunded Mandates Reform Act .............................................................................................. 23 109

5.3 Paperwork Reduction Act ....................................................................................................... .. 24 110

5.4 National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act ............................................................. 24 111

5.5 Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review ...................................................... 24 112

5.6 Executive Order 12898: Environmental Justice ....................................................................... 24 113

5.7 Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children ....................................................................... 24 114

5.8 Executive Order 13132: Federalism ......................................................................................... 24 115

5.9 Executive Order 13175: Tribal Governments ........................................................................... 24 116

5.10 Executive Order 13211: Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use ................................................. 25 117

6. ReFERENCES .................................................................................................................... ................ 26 118

119

120*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers v Economic and Policy Analysis Branch LIST OF TABLES 121

Table 1: CAS Number and Common Name for PBDEs Covered by the Proposed SNUR ................. Error! 122

Bookmark not defined. 123 Table 2: SIC and NAICS Codes that May Contain PentaBDE Treated Articles .......................................... 5 124 Table 3: Industry Sectors Using or Releasing DecaBDE .......................................................................... .... 6 125 Table 4: Products Containing D ecaBDE by Produc t Category .................................................................... 7 126 Table 5: Loaded Industry Wa ge Rates, December 2009 ............................................................................ ... 9 127

Table 6: Rule Familiarization Burden and Cost for SNUR Submitters ...................................................... 10 128 Table 7: CDX Registration, CDX Electronic Signature , and Pay.gov Account Setup Burden and Cost for 129

First-Time Submitters ......................................................................................................... ........................ 11 130 Table 8: Industry Cost Estimate to Complete the SNUN Form .................................................................. 12 131 Table 9: Industry Cost Estimate to Complete and Submit the SNUN Form ............................................... 12 132 Table 10: Derivation of Total Mailing Cost for 12 Notices ..................................................................... ... 14 133 Table 11: TSCA 12(b) Export Notifi cation Cost per Notification .............................................................. 1 5 134 Table 12: Compliance Options and Associated Costs Incurred by a Firm Due to the Proposed SNUR .... 15 135 Table 13: Derivation of Loaded Agency Wage Rates .............................................................................. .. 19 136 Table 14: Derivation of Inflation Factors for Agency Extramural Costs .................................................... 20 137 Table 15. Agency Costs for SNUN and Ot her Submission Review and Processing .................................. 21 138 Table 16: TSCA 12(b) Export Notification Co st: Agency Burden per Activity (2009$) ........................... 22 139

140*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 1 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch 

### 1. INTRODUCTION 141

This report presents the U.S. Environmental Protecti on Agency (EPA), Office of Pollution Prevention and 142 Toxics’ (OPPT’s) analysis of the potential costs incurred as a result of proposed amendments to a 143 Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) that addresses a set of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs). 144 SNURs are proposed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the authority granted by 145 Section 5(a)(2) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The existing SNUR at 40 CFR 721.10000 146 requires manufacturers and importers of any one or more of six PBDEs to notify EPA at least 90 days 147 prior the manufacture or import of any one or more of these chemicals. EPA is proposing to amend the 148 existing SNUR by 1) adding processors of the six PBDE s to those persons subject to the SNUR, 2) adding 149 manufacturers, importers, and processors of decabrom odiphenyl ether (decaBDE) to those persons subject 150 to the SNUR, and 3) for this SNUR, making inapplicable the article exemption at 40 CFR 721.45. 151

152 EPA promulgates a SNUR for a substance when poten tial uses could result in increased exposure to or 153

releases of the substance. 154

155 The PBDEs are a family of chemicals with a common structure of a diphenyl ether molecule which may 156 have anywhere from one to ten bromine atoms a ttached. PBDEs can be grouped as homologs i.e., 157 according to the number of bromine atoms present in the molecule. With the exception of decaBDE, each 158 homolog group contains multiple conge ners which differ according to the arrangement of bromine atoms 159 on the diphenyl ether parent molecule. There is only one possible congener of decaBDE. TSCA 160 inventory listings and regulations for PBDEs are ba sed on homolog groups produced when the diphenyl 161 ether molecule reacts with a fixed amount of bromine. The PBDE homologs used in flame retardants 162 typically have between four and ten bromine atoms. The homolog groups relevant to commercial PBDE 163 (c-PBDE) flame retardant products are: tetraBDE (4 bromine atoms), pentaBDE (5 bromine atoms), 164 hexaBDE (6 bromine atoms), heptaBDE (7 bromin e atoms), octaBDE (8 bromine atoms), nonaBDE (9 165 bromine atoms), and decaBDE (10 bromine atoms). There are three types of c-PBDE products, c166 pentaBDE, c-octaBDE, and c-decaBDE; each c-PBDE is a mixture of PBDE homologs. The specific 167 composition of c-PBDEs varies somewhat from manufacturer to manufacturer, but in general c-pentaBDE 168 contains tetraBDE and pentaBDE as major co mponents and hexaBDE as a minor component. C169 octaBDE contains heptaBDE and octa BDE as ma jor components and hexaBDE, nonaBDE and decaBDE 170 as minor components. C-decaBDE contains decaBDE as the major component with nonaBDE as a minor 171
component. 172

Table 1 presents summary information on the chem icals regulated under this proposed SNUR. 173

174*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 2 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch Table 1: Common Name for PBDEs Covered by the Proposed SNUR

Common Chemical

Name Synonyms c-Pentabromodiphenyl Ether (PentaBDE) Bromkal G 1; CCRIS 4851; EINECS 251-084-2; HSDB 7109l; Pentabromodiphenyl ether; Pentabromodiphenyl oxide; Pentabromophenoxybenzene; Planelon PB 501; Saytex 125

c-Octabromodiphenyl Ether (OctaBDE) 1,1'-Oxybisbenzene octabromo deriv.; Bromkal 79-8DE; CD 79; DE 79; EB 8; EINECS 251-087-9; FR 1208; FR 143; HSDB 7110; Octabromobiphenyl ether; Octabromodiphenyl ether; Octabromodiphenyl oxide; Tardex 80

c-Decabromodiphenyl Ether (DecaBDE) Bis (pentabromophenyl) ether; DB DPO; DECA; Decabrom; Decabrome Decabromobiphenyl ether; Decabromobipheny l oxide; Decabromodiphenyl ether; Decabromophenyl ether; 1,1 ́-Oxybi s (2,3,4,5,6-pentabromobenzene) Pentabromophenyl ether

Sources : ChemIDplus Lite, 2009

175

1.1 Statutory Authority 176

Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(2)) author izes EPA to determine that a use of a chemical 177 substance is a “significant new use.” EPA must make this determination by ru le after considering all 178 relevant factors, including those listed in TSCA sec tion 5(a)(2). Once EPA determines that a use of a 179 chemical substance is a significant new use, TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B) requires persons to submit a 180 Significant New Use Notice (SNUN) to EPA at least 90 days before manufacturing, importing, or 181 processing the chemical substance for that use (TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B)). 182

183 The general SNUR provisions are found at 40 CFR Part 721, Subpart A. 184

185

1.2 Summary of Methodology 186

187 This analysis quantifies, to the extent possible, the co sts to society of the propo sed rule by identifying the 188 costs to industry associated with performing the requi red reporting and recordkeeping, and the costs to 189 EPA of administering the rule. Industry costs consist of rule familiarization; registration with the Central 190 Data Exchange (CDX) electronic reporting tool; co llection, compilation, and submission of required 191 information for significant new uses of the subject ch emicals; export notification; and recordkeeping. 192 Agency costs include reviewing and processing the data received as a result of the rule. Data sources for 193 this analysis include burden estimates derived from previous information collection requests and 194 economic analyses for related rules, compensati on data acquired from government publications, and 195 supplementary market research. 196

197

1.3 Organization of this Report 198

The remainder of this report provides EPA’s economic analysis in support of the proposed rule. The 199 chemical substances and industry sectors potentially aff ected are characterized in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 200 contains estimates of the industry cost of comp lying with the proposed rule, and Chapter 4 shows 201 estimates of the government costs associated with the administration of the proposed rule. Chapter 5 202 presents additional impact analyses. 203

204*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 3 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch Note that all dollar amounts in this anal ysis are reported in December 2009 dollars. 1 205

206

207

1 Q4 2009 is specified as the three-month period beginnin g September 1, 2009 and ending December 31, 2009. It is the final quarter of the most recent full year of data available.*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 4 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch 

### 2. POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ENTITIES 208

Historically, PBDEs have been added to materials to reduce the risk of fires and to increase escape time 209 when a fire occurs. They have b een widely used in textiles, plas tics, and polyurethane foam. PBDE210 treated articles have been used in the home, in bus iness settings, and in the transportation sector. Articles 211

which have often been treated with PBDEs include carpets, upholstery fabric, cushions, and plastics used 212 as components in electrical appliances and equipment (EPA, 2009a). 213

214 Domestic manufacture of pentaBDE and octaBDE stopped in 2004 when the Great Lakes chemical 215 Corporation (now Chemtura Corporation) voluntari ly phased out their production (EPA, 2009a). The 216 existing SNUR at 40 CFR 721.10000 requires that a nyone who intends to manufacture or import the 217 chemicals to notify EPA, by submitting a SNUN. The amendment to the SNUR now being proposed 218 would extend this notification require ment to processors of these chemicals, and would also make the rule 219 apply to manufacturers, processors, and impor ters of articles containing the chemicals. 2 220

221

The rule amendment would also now make the SN UR notification requirements apply to decaBDE: 222 manufacturers, importers, and processors of decaBDE, or articles containing decaBDE will be subject to 223 the notification requirement. 224

225 The following sections describe the specific known uses of each of the three chemicals, including articles 226 that may contain the chemicals, and the potentially affected industry sectors. 227

228

2.1 PentaBDE 229

C-pentaBDE is one of the major brominated flame retardants. Because there has been no new 230 manufacture of c-pentaBDE in the United States since 2004, no import since 2006, and there is no 231 evidence of the import of any articles containing c-pent aBDE, it is expected that there are no current uses 232 of the chemical (or articles containing the chemical) domestically (EPA, 2009a). 233

234 Historically, c-pentaBDE was used primarily as an additive flame retardant in flexible polyurethane 235 foams (95 percent of c-pentaBDE’s historical cons umption in the United States) (ERG, 2002). A minor 236 amount was consumed in rigid foams (ERG, 2002). Articles treated with c-pentaBDE were most 237 commonly used in the upholstery and furniture market s, though treated articles were also used in other 238 applications including automotive seat cushions and padding, mattress foam padding, furniture foam 239 padding, and pillows (ERG, 2002). A 2002 study estimated that 80 percent of c-pentaBDE was used in 240 foam for furniture and mattresses, while the rema ining amount was used in automotive applications 241 (ERG, 2002). Minor amounts were also used in textiles 242

243 While the 2006 SNUR required notification prior to manufacture or import of PBDE congeners present in 244 c-pentaBDE, it did not cover processing or the manufacture, import, or processing of articles treated with 245 those congeners. However, there is no evidence to su ggest that appreciable quantities of c-pentaBDE are 246 manufactured anywhere in the world (Dawson, 2009). 3 As a result, the Agency does not believe that any 247

2 There is no evidence to indicate the manufacture of a ppreciable quantities of c-penta- or c-octaBDE anywhere in the world, suggesting there is no domestic import of article s containing the chemicals (see Sections 2.1 and 2.2 for more details). 3 None of the major manufacturers produce pentaBDE (Buzcek, 2009; Dawson, 2009). However, a few Chinese manufacturers list pentaBDE as one of the chemicals they can produce, but any production of pentaBDE is probably on a to-order basis and not produced on a large scale (Buzcek, 2009). Seve ral industry contacts agreed that if c-*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 5 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch articles containing c-pentaBDE are being imported. A letter from the executive director of the 248 Polyurethane Foam Association (PFA) explains that imports of articles that are potentially treated with c249 pentaBDE would, if produced, generally fall under three SIC codes (PFA, 2006). Since SIC codes have 250 been phased out, the closest corresponding NAICS codes were used to track imports. Table 2 shows the 251 SIC codes that PFA identified as possible sources of pentaBDE treated articles, and their likely NAICS 252 counterparts (Abt Associates, 2009). 253

254

Table 2: SIC and NAICS Codes that May Contain PentaBDE Treated Articles

SIC NAICS
2512 (upholstered office furniture) 1 337121 (upholstered office furniture)

2515 (mattresses) 1 337910 (mattresses)

2522 (office furniture) 1 337214 (non-wood office furniture)

1 Source : PFA, 2006

255

2.2 OctaBDE 256

C-octaBDE is a brominated flame retardant that has applications in the plastics industry. Because there 257 has been no new manufacture of c-octaBDE in the United States since 2004, no import since 2006, and 258 there is no evidence of the import of any articles contai ning octaBDE, it is expected that there are also no 259 current uses of the chemical (or articles contai ning the chemical) domestically (EPA, 2009a). 260

261 Historically, c-octaBDE was used in acrylonitrile-b utadiene-styrene (ABS) plastic which was used as 262 casing for certain electric and electronic devices that ar e used in both offices and home. For example, in 263 Switzerland, 70 percent of c-octaBDE was used in electronic goods, 40 percent was used in TVs, 20 264 percent in cars and 10 percent in building materi als (Alvarez, 2008). Similar information was not 265 available for the United States. One industry contact thought c-octaBDE was mostly used in ABS plastics 266 for automotive applications because c-octaBDE gives the plastic a good quality finish that lends itself to 267 high quality paint work (Dawson, 2009). Finished pr oducts typically contained five to 30 percent c268 octaBDE by weight (Alvarez, 2008). 269

270 Given the broad uses of c-octaBDE in final products, it was difficult to find specific NAICS codes for c271 octaBDE treated articles (Abt Associates, 2009). Ho wever, since production of c-octaBDE was recently 272 phased out in the EU, Norway, Switzerland, Canada and the United States, there is no information 273 indicating that c-octaBDE is being produ ced in developing countries (Alvarex, 2008), 4 and none of the 274 major global manufacturers produce c-octaBDE (C ampbell, 2009; Dawson, 2009; Buzcek, 2009), it 275 seems unlikely that any new goods imported into the Un ited States contain c-octaBDE (Dawson, 2009). 276

277

2.3 DecaBDE 278

279 While uses of c-pentaBDE and c-octaBDE have been restricted in the United States and phased out 280 internationally, c-decaBDE is still widely used. C- decaBDE is considered the most effective of the 281 brominated flame retardants. Because relatively small quantities are required for outstanding flame 282

pentaBDE is being produced anywhere, it would likely be in China (Dawson, 2009; Buzcek, 2009; Campbell, 2009). One industry contact thought some c-pentaBDE might also be produced in India (Campbell, 2009). 4 However, if is produced anywhere in the world, it might be in China (Dawson, 2009).*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 6 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch retardant properties, c-decaBDE has minimal influen ce on the physical and mechanical properties of the 283 flame-retarded product. 284

285 Table 3 below shows the industry sectors using d ecaBDE as a flame retardant, according to 2006 286 reporting year submissions under the Inventory U pdate Reporting (IUR) rule (EPA, 2006), and which 287 release decaBDE according to the 2007 Toxics Relea se Inventory (TRI) reporting (Abt Associates, 2009). 288

289

Table 3: Industry Sectors Us ing or Releasing DecaBDE

NAICS Description Use (IUR) Release (TRI)

313230 Nonwoven Fabric Mills 9
31331 Textile and Fabric Finishing Mills 9 9
313320 Fabric Coating Mills 9

314999 All Other Miscellaneous Textile Product Mills 9
322121 Paper (except Newsprint) Mills 9
322221 Coated and Laminated Packaging Paper and Plastics Film Manufacturing 9
322222 Coated and Laminated Paper Manufacturing 9
325188 All Other Basic Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing 9
325199 All Other Basic Organic Chemical Manufacturing 9
325211 Plastics Material and Resin Manufacturing 9
325212 Synthetic Rubber Manufacturing 9
325520 Adhesive Manufacturing 9 9
325991 Custom Compounding of Purchased Resins 9
325998 All Other Miscellaneous Chemical Product and Preparation Manufacturing 9 9

326130 Laminated Plastics Plate, Sheet (except Packaging), and Shape Manufacturing 9

326150 Urethane and Other Foam Product (except Polystyrene) Manufacturing 9
326199 All Other Plastics Product Manufacturing 9
326220 Rubber and Plastics Hoses and Belting Manufacturing 9
326299 All Other Rubber Product Manufacturing 9
327993 Mineral Wool Manufacturing 9
331319 Other Aluminum Rolling and Drawing 9
331421 Copper Rolling, Drawing, and Extruding 9
331422 Copper Wire (except Mechanical) Drawing 9
33411 Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing 9 9
33522 Major Appliance Manufacturing 9
335929 Other Communication and Energy Wire Manufacturing 9
33593 Wiring Device Manufacturing 9 9

335999 All Other Miscellaneous Electrical Equipment and Component Manufacturing 9

337920 Blind and Shade Manufacturing 9
33611 Automobile and Light Duty Motor Vehicle Manufacturing 9
339999 All Other Miscellaneous Manufacturing 9
562211 Hazardous Waste Treatment and Disposal 9

Source : (EPA, 2006)

290*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 7 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch Table 4 below provides a more detailed list of products potentially containing decaBDE. 291

292

Table 4: Products Containing DecaBDE by Product Category

Product Category Product Description Source

Textiles Textiles for furnishings and upholstery such as sofas, office chairs and curtains UK HPA, 2007

Drapery Buckley, 2009

Mattresses Buckley, 2009

Electronic Equipment Casings for televisions, computers, audio/visual equipment and mobile phones UK HPA, 2007

Polypropylene used in communication cables and lamp sockets UK HPA 2007

293 Although there are currently no federal actions to rest rict the use of decaBDE, certain states have initiated 294 bans. Washington State banned the use of c-decaBDE in mattresses as of January 2008, and starting in 295 January 2011, c-decaBDE will be pr ohibited from use in televisions, co mputers and upholstered furniture. 296 Maine also banned decaBDE in mattresses and upholster ed furniture as of January 2008 and will extend 297 that ban to televisions and other plastic encased electronics by January 2010. Washington State and 298

Maine conducted studies which concl uded that adequate substitutes for c-decaBDE exist. Other states, 299 such as Maryland and Oregon, have introduced similar le gislation to ban the sale of products containing 300 this flame retardant (Buckley, 2009). 301

302 Furthermore, the principal manufacturers and importer of c-decaBDE have committed to phase out the 303 manufacture, import and sales of c-decaBDE starting in 2010. Ordinary production, import and sales of 304 c-decaBDE would cease no later than December 31, 2012. Certain uses such as transportation uses or 305 military applications may require an additional year to phase out. In any case the companies would cease 306 sales for these uses no later than December 31, 2013. EPA intends to encourage other importers of c307 decaBDE to join this effort; however, the commitme nt under discussion would not affect articles made 308 with decaBDE (EPA, 2009a). 309

310*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 8 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch 

### 3. INDUSTRY COMPLIANCE COSTS 311

The proposed new requirements under the amendment to the existing SNUR discussed in this report 312 specify as significant new uses of the PBDEs that require reporting under section 5(a)(1)(A) of TSCA the 313 following activities: the processing of any of the six PB DEs already subject to the rule; the manufacture, 314 import, and processing of decaBDE; and the manufactu re, import, and processing of articles containing 315 any of the seven PBDEs, unless these PBDEs are presen t as an impurity. A firm intending to process for 316 any use tetraBDE, pentaBDE, hexaBDE, heptaBDE, octaBDE or nonaBDE after December 31, 2012, or 317 to import any of these chemicals as part of an article after December 31, 2012 must submit a SNUN. A 318 firm intending to manufacture, import or, process decaBDE, including as part of an article, after 319 December 31, 2012, for any use other than military us e or transportation use must submit a SNUN. After 320 December 31, 2013 a firm intending to manufacture, import or, process decaBDE for any use would be 321 required to submit a SNUN. Alternatively, a firm ca n decide not to manufacture, import, and/or process 322 the chemicals or articles containing the chemi cals. The firm, therefore, has two options 323

324

• Option 1: Submit a SNUN. A SNUN indicates to EPA that the firm would like to manufacture, 325 import, and/or process the chemical for a signifi cant new use, which, in this case, means any 326 manufacture, importing, and/or processing of this chemical or articles containing the chemicals. The 327 firm must submit the SNUN to EPA at least 90 days before it plans to commence the manufacture, 328 import, and/or processing of the substance; the SNUN provides EPA with the opportunity to evaluate 329 the intended use and, if necessary, to prohibit or lim it that activity before it occurs. If EPA allows the 330 manufacture, import, or processing of the PBDEs, or articles to which the PBDEs have been added 331 for a significant new use, then th e costs associated with this op tion are the costs of submitting the 332 SNUN (including a user fee) plus, if there is an y export of these chemicals, the export notification 333 costs that result from TSCA Section 12(b) requirement s that are automatically triggered for chemicals 334 regulated under TSCA Section 5 (see Section 3.2.5 for details). 335

336

• Option 2: Decide not to manufacture, import, and/or process the chemical. The firm may simply 337 decide to not manufacture, import, or process the PB DEs, or articles to which the PBDEs have been 338 added. While this option avoids the costs of s ubmitting a SNUN, it entails the “hidden” cost of the 339 foregone profit as a result of not engaging in the commer cial activity originally planned. Similarly, if 340 the firm would have used a given amount of PBDE in the production of another product and must 341 substitute the chemicals with a more costly substan ce, it will incur those additional “hidden” costs of 342 production. If the firm elects to produce any of the PBDEs for research and development (R&D) 343 purposes only (an exemption for R&D purposes is pr ovided in 40 CFR §721.47), it may have costs 344 associated with R&D recordkeeping. In addition, if the firm exports any existing stockpiles of the 345 chemicals, it will incur the export notification costs (see Section 3.2.5 for details). 346

347 The remainder of this chapter estimates the quantif ied portion of costs associated with the proposed 348 SNUR for these uses of the subject chemicals. Sec tion 3.1 summarizes the wage rates used in this 349 chapter. Section 3.2 provides the unit industry compliance costs, including the costs of rule 350 familiarization, registration with the Central Data Exchange (CDX) electronic reporting tool, completing 351 the SNUN form, submission fee, import certification, and export notification. A summary of costs under 352 each option are presented in Section 3.3. 353

354

3.1 Wage Rates 355

356*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 9 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch The proposed rule involves activities that may require efforts by employees in three labor classifications: 357 managerial, technical, and clerical. Costs for each activity are calculated by estimating the labor hours 358 required in each labor category and multiplying those burdens by the wage rate for each labor category. 359 This section presents the estimated wa ge rate in each labor category. 360

361 Loaded wage rates for managerial, technical, and clerical personnel are derived by combining data on 362 wages and fringe benefits with estimates of overh ead rates, following the methodology described in 363 “Wage Rates for Economic Analysis of the Toxics Release Inventory Program” (EPA, 2002b). Wage 364 data for each labor category in December 2009 are provided by the Employer Costs for Employee 365 Compensation (ECEC) Supplemental Tables available on the BLS website (BLS, 2010a). The loaded 366 wage rate for managerial labor is $68.24; for technical labor, $59.49; and for clerical labor, $28.31. Table 367 5 presents the basic data used to calculate the lo aded wage rates for all three categories of labor. 368

369

Table 5: Loaded Industry Wage Rates, December 2009

Labor Category Data Sources Wage (2009$) Fringe

Benefit (2009$) Fringes

as %

wage Overhead %

wage 2 Fringe +

overhead

factor Loaded Wages 1
(2009$)

(a) (b) (c) =(b)/(a) (d) (e)=(c)+ (d)+1 (f)=(a) x (e)

Managerial BLS ECEC , Private Manufacturing industries

, “Mgt, Business, and Financial” 3 $42.36 $18.68 44.10% 17% 1.61 $68.24

Professional/

Technical BLS ECEC , Private Manufacturing industries,

“Professional and related“ 3 $35.96 $17.42 48.44% 17% 1.65 $59.49

Clerical BLS ECEC , Private Manufacturing industries,

“Office and Administrative Support” 3 $17.21 $8.17 47.47% 17% 1.64 $28.31

1 Wage data are rounded to the cl osest pennies in this table.

2 An overhead rate of 17% was used based on assumptions in Wage Rates for Economic Analyses of the Toxics Release Inventory Program (EPA, 2002b), and the Revised Economic Analysis for the Amen ded Inventory Update Rule: Final Report (EPA, 2002a).

3 Employer Costs for Employee Compensa tion Supplementary Tables: December 2009. US Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 10, 201- (BLS, 2010a).
370

3.2 Unit Industry Compliance Costs 371

372


### 3.2.1 Rule Familiarization 373

374 The proposed rule requires submitters and their staff to become familiar with the SNUR and its various 375 requirements. The per company burden associated with rule familiarization is approximately 0.55 hours 376 of technical labor and 0.27 hours of managerial labor , (EPA, 2009b). As shown in Table 6 the total labor 377 cost associated with rule familiarization by a first-time reporter is $50.92. 378

379*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 10 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch Table 6: Rule Familiarization Burden and Cost for SNUR Submitters

Reporting Activity Clerical Labor (at $28.31/hour) Technical Labor (at $59.49/hour) Managerial Labor (at $68.24/hour) Total Labor Cost

Burden (hours) Cost (2009$) Burden (hours) Cost (2009$) Burden (hours) Cost (2009$) Burden (hours) Cost (2009$) Rule Familiarization 0.00 $0.00 0.55 $32.72 0.27 $18.20 0.82 $50.92 Total 0.00 $0.00 0.55 $32.72 0.27 $18.20 0.82 $50.92

Source : BLS, 2010a (labor rates); EPA, 2009b (burden hours)

380


### 3.2.2 CDX Registration, CDX Electronic Signature, and Pay.gov Account Setup 381

382 The proposed SNUR requires first-time submitters (that is, those companies who have not submitted 383 information to EPA through CDX before) to register their company and key users with the CDX reporting 384 tool, deliver a CDX electronic signature to EPA, a nd establish and use a Pay.gov E-payment account. 5 385 These activities are only required of first-time submitters (companies already registered with CDX would 386 not need to re-register for the purposes of complying with the proposed SNUR). The burdens associated 387

with these activities were estimated in the Economic Analysis of the Premanufacture Notification 388 Electronic Reporting Final Rule (EPA, 2009b) and are described in more detail below: 389

390

• CDX registration: EPA estimates that companies will spend approximately 0.18 hours per 391 employee to register with CDX, and that an average of four technical staff members and one 392 manager will need to register for each company, totaling approximately 0. 92 hours of burden per 393

company. 394

395

• CDX electronic signature: EPA estimates that companies will spend 0.25 hours preparing, 396 submitting, and filing an electronic signature agreem ent (Authentication of Identity) form to EPA 397 per employee. This burden will apply to four technical staff members and one manager per 398 company, totaling to 1.25 hours per company. In addition, EPA estimates that a manager will 399 spend an additional 0.50 hours accessing, pr eparing, and submitting verification forms 400 (Verification of Authorization) for all authori zed submitters to EPA. The total burden incurred 401 by companies submitting and then verifying electroni c signature agreements is 1.75 hours. Note 402 that this burden does not include any additional tim e required to contact EPA’s CDX help desk to 403 notify a change of submitter status, should one occur. 404

405 Filing the electronic signature agreement requires an additional mailing cost of $2.30 per 406 company (including five $0.44 stamps and five $0.02 business envelopes) (USPS, 2010). 407

408

• Payment via Pay.gov account: EPA estimates that one manager per company will spend 409 approximately 0.13 hours setting up a Pay.gov ID account, logging into the system, finding the 410 appropriate form, and filling it out. This bur den does not include the time required to click 411 ‘submit’ on the form and wait for payment processing. 412

413 As shown in Table 7, the cost associated with C DX registration, CDX electronic signature, and Pay.gov 414 account setup is $178.21, and this cost is onl y incurred by a first-time submitter. . 415

416

5 Although the proposed rule does not specifically require submitters to establish and use a Pay.gov account, the burden estimates in this analysis are conservative insofar as to include the use of Pay.gov as a required activity.*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 11 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch Table 7: CDX Registration, CDX Electronic Signature, and Pay.gov Account Setup Burden

and Cost for First-Time Submitters

Reporting Activity Clerical Labor (at $28.31/hour) Technical Labor (at $59.49/hour) Managerial Labor (at $68.24/hour) Total Labor Cost

Burden (hours) Cost (2009$) Burden (hours) Cost (2009$) Burden (hours) Cost (2009$) Burden (hours) Cost (2009$) CDX Registration 0.00 $0.00 0.73 $43.63 0.18 $12.51 0.92 $56.13

CDX Electronic Signature 0.00 $0.00 1.00 $59.49 0.75 $51.18 1.75 $110.67 Mailing Cost $2.30 E-Payment (Pay.gov ID) 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00 0.13 $9.10 0.13 $9.10
Total 0.00 $0.00 1.73 $103.12 1.07 $72.79 2.80 $178.21

Source : BLS, 2010a (labor rates); EPA, 2009b (burden hours)

417


### 3.2.3 Form Completion and Submission Fee 418

419 Respondents are required to gather and submit informa tion regarding the data elements identified in the 420 applicable SNUN reporting form. The methodology and cal culations used in this analysis assume that the 421 employee responsible for collecting, filling out, and submitting the requested information has a 422 reasonable level of familiarity with the company and knowledge of operations at the site. It is assumed 423

that for most entities these tasks are similar to othe r employee duties that require familiarity with EPA, 424 State, and other Federal agency requests for chem ical information and do not require additional 425 familiarization or training beyond the basic rule familiari zation described above. In addition, this analysis 426 focuses on the marginal costs of submitting information for the proposed rule an d not the total costs for 427 the company to comply with a range of other Fe deral and State environmental, health, and safety 428 regulations or accounting requirements that rely on this type of information. 429

430 Estimates of the costs of completing a Significant New Use Notice (SNUN) form are based on the costs 431 of completing a Premanufacture Notification (PMN) s ubmission, since the data requirements are the same 432

and the same form is used for both. Th e PMN submission costs came from EPA’s 1994 Regulatory 433 Impact Analysis of Amendments to Regulations for TSCA Section 5 Premanufacture Notifications, which 434 relied on industry estimates of the effort needed to collect and compile all data required for a PMN 435 submission, prepare the form, submit the form and da ta to EPA, and maintain a file of the submission 436 (EPA, 1994, Table III-2 and pages III- 11, -12, and -13). The 1994 estimates were based on a survey 437 conducted by the Chemical Manufacturers Associa tion (CMA, 1991), which became the American 438 Chemistry Council. These burdens “include the time spent reading and becoming familiar with the form, 439 gathering the required information and preparing the report, producing sanitized responses for items 440 claimed as confidential business information, and mainta ining a file of the submission” (EPA, 1994. p. III 441 11-13). The burden associated with SNUN submission and preparation has been adjusted to reflect 442 burden reductions resulting from the 2009 final PMN Elect ronic Reporting (ePMN) Rule that requires the 443 electronic submission of all TSCA section 5 notices. Electronic submission of SNUN forms is expected 444

to remove all clerical burden associated with preparing these a SNUN (EPA, 2009b). 445

446 SNUN form completion and electronic submission is estimated to require 74.20 hours of technical labor 447 and 18.00 hours of managerial labor (EPA, 2009b). Table 8 combines the estimated reporting burden and 448 loaded wage rates for all three labor categories to estimate the per-SNUN cost of form completion. The 449 labor cost incurred by a SNUN submission for bot h large and small busin ess submitters is $5,643. 450

451*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 12 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch Table 8: Industry Cost Estimate to Complete the SNUN Form

Reporting Activity Clerical Labor (at $28.31/hour) Technical Labor (at $59.49/hour) Managerial Labor (at $68.24/hour) Total Labor Cost

Burden (hours) Cost (2009$) Burden (hours) Cost (2009$) Burden (hours) Cost (2009$) Burden (hours) Cost (2009$) Form Completion 0.00 $0.00 74.20 $4,414 18.00 $1,228 92.20 $5,643

Source : BLS, 2010a (labor rates); EPA, 2009b (burden hours)

452 In addition, each submitting large business must pay a $2,500 per-SNUN submission fee, and each 453 submitting small business must pay a $100 per-SNUN subm ission fee. Table 9 adds the labor cost and 454

submission fee to estimate the total cost of a SNUN su bmission. The total cost of a SNUN submission is 455 $8,142.74 for large business submitters a nd $5,742.74 for small business submitters. 456

457

Table 9: Industry Cost Estimate to Complete and Submit the SNUN Form

Reporting Population Labor Cost Submission Fee Total Cost (2009$) Large Business Submitters $5,643 $2,500 $8,143 Small Business Submitters $5,643 $100 $5,743

Source : EPA, 2009b.

458


### 3.2.4 Import Certification 459

460 In general, promulgation of a final SNUR trigge rs a TSCA Section 13 import certification requirement 461 and the corresponding regulations at 19 CFR 12.118 to 12.127 and 19 CFR 127.28 for all imports of the 462 relevant chemical substances. Thus, any U.S. ma nufacturer, importer, or processor receiving an imported 463 shipment of chemicals subject to the proposed SNUR would have to certify that all chemical substances 464 in the shipment either comply with all applicable rules and orders under TSCA or that all chemical 465 substances in the shipment are not subject to TSCA. 6 The statement must be on or attached to a 466 commercial invoice or entry document belonging to the imported shipment. 467

468 In practice, import certification is fulfilled by checking a box on an invoice or entry document and 469 generally imposes no additional burden or cost on th e importer (EPA, 2009c). Any potential burden 470

associated with a submitter’s familiarization with this requirement is assumed to be included in the more 471 general SNUR familiarization burden discussed above. 472

473


### 3.2.5 Export Notification 474

475 Under Section 12(b) of TSCA, exporters must notify EPA if they export or intend to export a chemical 476 subject to various TSCA sections (40 CFR §707.60 through 75). For TSCA 5(a)(2) (the section under 477 which EPA promulgates significant new use rules) a nd certain other TSCA sections, this is a one-time 478

6 The exact statements are as follows: For imports of chemical substances su bject to TSCA, “I certify that all chemical substances in this shipment comply with all applicable rules or orders under TSCA and that I am not offering a chemical substance for entry in violation of TSCA or any applicable rule or order under TSCA.” For imports of chemical substances not subject to TSCA (e.g., pesticides), “I certify that all chemicals in this shipment are not subject to TSCA.” (40 CFR 707.20)*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 13 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch notification requirement 7 per destination country for each exporte r of a chemical substance. After 479 receiving a notification from a firm, EPA notifies the importing country and the United States State 480 Department (40 CFR §707.70). To calculate the bur den associated with making export notifications, EPA 481 first estimated the average annual number of export notif ications made by an exporter. EPA then derived 482 the annual and per notification burden associated wi th preparing and submitting an export notification. 483

484 EPA estimated the average burden associated with making a single notification, but di d not estimate either the 485 total number of exporters of a SNUR chemical or th e number of notifications per SNUR chemical. (This 486 approach is consistent with that used in ec onomic analyses for other proposed SNURs, such as Economic 487 Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 25 Chemical Substances , not yet published.) 488

489 Most underlying data in this section come from the 2009 TSCA Section 12(b) ICR, ICR No.: 0795.13 490 [Information Collection Request for] Notification of Chemical Exports - TSCA Section 12(b) Supporting 491 Statement for Request for OMB Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act (EPA, 2009d), with updating 492

for inflation. 493

494 3.2.5.1 Estimated Number of Ann ual Export Notifications per Exporter 495

496 EPA’s 2009 TSCA Section 12(b) ICR estimated that the average e xporter making notifications will make 497 12 notifications per year

. 8 This includes notifications resulti ng from SNURs and notifications resulting 498 from other TSCA activities. A notification is typi cally no more than one page per chemical/country 499 combination, and one notification mailing often incl udes multiple chemicals and/or destination countries. 9 500

501 The percent of notifications due to SNURs is unknow n, and it is also unknown how many notifications 502 may result from this rulemaking, as not all manufactur ers may choose to export a chemical, or they may 503 make several notifications for a single chemical. 504

505 3.2.5.2 Exporter Costs 506

507 

### The 2009 TSCA Section 12(b) ICR (EPA, 2009d, page 11, Table 3) , estimated the annual export 508 notification cost for an exporter under the one-time export notification requirement. These costs include 509 the cost to the exporter of compiling a list of their products that are subject to TSCA Section 12(b) 510 requirements, writing or revising an export notifica tion letter to EPA, checking the outgoing shipments, 511 and sending the notification letters w ith the associated shipping costs 512

513


### The per-notification cost was calculated based on the average burden per firm making notifications. 514 Exporters making more notifications per year may be nefit from economies of scale and have lower costs 515 per notification; those making fewer notificati ons may have higher costs per notification. 516

517

7 On November 14, 2006, EPA revised the export notifica tion requirement for chemicals subject to TSCA §5(a)(2), 5(b), 5(e)(1) and 5(e)(2) from an annual to a one-time requirement per destination country for each exporter (November 14, 2006, 71 FR 66234). 8EPA calculated the average number of export notifications per exporter in the 2009 TSCA Section 12(b) ICR (EPA, 2009d) by dividing the estimated number of submitted notifications (3,500) by the estimated number of exporters (300). 9 Based on review by an EPA economist of notifications received under TSCA Sections 4, 5 and 6 over approximately three we eks in early 2010.*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 14 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch Estimated Submission (Mailing) Costs . Regulated companies will incur mailing costs for export 518

notifications delivered to EPA. Notifications are ass umed shipped via the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) as 519 first-class registered mail with a return receipt (USPS, 2010). The estimated per-shipment and annual 520 mailing costs incurred by individu al submitters are detailed in Table 10

. 521

522

Table 10: Derivation of Total Mailing Cost for 12 Notices

Dates that the rates were verified on United States Postal Service web site: April 2010

Postal services costs
Registered mail, regular, with $0 declared value $10.60

Return receipt, requested at time of mailing (receive by mail) $2.30

Postage, regular First Class, up to 1 ounce $0.44

Cost per export notice - Subtotal $13.34

× 12
Total Mailing Cost for 12 Notices $160.08

Source : Mailing rates are from the US Postal Service web site as of April 2010 (http ://www.usps.com/prices /). The mailing method comes from the Economic Analysis of the Proposed Change to TSCA Section 12(b) Export Notification Requirements, November 2005 (EPA, 2005), as clarified in a later SNUR economic analysis (EPA, 2007a, Table 8).

523 Compile and Maintain the List of Products. Since TSCA §12(b) information collection activity has been 524 in place for twenty years, most respondents will have al ready developed a list of their products subject to 525 TSCA §12(b) export notification. Respondents need onl y check for new regulations promulgated and any 526 new products exported by the company. Updating the lis t is estimated to take an average of one hour of 527 technical time, which may also include some proporti on of legal time (EPA, 2009d). The total burden can 528 vary from two hours per year up to two hours per m onth, depending on the numbe r of products exported 529 by the company and the number of their products subject to TSCA §12(b) (EPA, 2009d). 530

531 The number of submitters per year who report unde r TSCA §12(b) has varied over time, rising from 532 around 160 in 1991 to over 460 in 2000, and declining since. In the most recent TSCA §12(b) ICR, EPA 533 estimated there would be approxima tely 300 submitters per year in n ear-future years (EPA, 2009c). Of 534 these 300 submitters, EPA estimated that 200 companies were near the lower burden estimate of 2 hours 535 per year, and 100 companies were near the upper estimat e of 24 hours per year. Compiling the list for all 536 respondents was therefore estimated to take 2,800 ho urs (2 hours x 200 firms plus 24 hours x 100 firms), 537 or an average of about 9.3 hours of technical time pe r firm per year for 12 notifications per year (EPA, 538 2009c). 539

540 Write or Revise Export Notification. Companies that export chemicals subject to TSCA §12(b) reporting 541 must prepare an export notification to send to EPA when export shipments are made. Time for initial 542 preparation of the export notice may vary depending on whether the company has prior experience with 543 this requirement. This step is estimated to take an average of one hour of technical time (which may also 544 include some proportion of legal time) per firm per year for 12 notifications per year (EPA, 2009c). 545

546 Check Orders and Send Notifications . Companies that export chemicals subject to TSCA §12(b) 547 reporting must check outgoing shipments against the list of their products described above. A form letter 548 notifying EPA and providing the required data must be printed and mailed within the required time 549 period. This process is estimated to take an average one half hour of clerical time per export notification 550 or 6 hours for 12 notifications (EPA, 2009d). 551*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 15 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch 552

The burdens and associated costs for each notifica tion activity are provided in Table 11 below. 553

554

Table 11: TSCA 12(b) Export Notification Cost per Notification

Technical Clerical Total

$/Hr Hours 2009$ $/Hr Hours 2009$ 2009$ Hours Compile list $59.49 9.3 $553 -- -- -- $553 9.3

Write letter $59.49 1 $59.49 -- -- -- $59.49 1

Check order and send

notice -- -- -- $28.31 6 $170 $170 6

Mailing cost 1 -- -- -- $160 - Total per facility 2` 10.3 $613 6 $170 $943 16.3 Total per notification 0.86 $51.06 0.50 $14.15 $78.56 1.36

Notes:

1 Mailing costs reflect April 2010 USPS rates and can be found in Table 9.

2 An average facility submitting notifications is a ssumed to submit 12 export notifications per year.

Source: ICR No.: 0795.13 [Information Collection Request for] Notification of Chemical Exports - TSCA Section 12(b) Supporting Statement for Request for OMB Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act (EPA, 2009d, p.10), and are updated to 2009 dollars.

555

3.3 Summary of Industry Costs for SNUR, by Option (per Submission) 556

557 The number of firms affected by not making submissions to EPA is not known; therefore, costs are not 558 aggregated across the affected entiti es. The following table summari zes the costs to comply with the 559 proposed rule amendment, as described in more detail in section 3.2 above. 560

561

Table 12: Compliance Options and Associated Cost s Incurred by a Firm Due to the Proposed

SNUR

Option 1 Costs Quantified Costs per Chemical (2008$) 2

1. Submit a

SNUN. Costs of submitting a SNUN, including rule familiarization, CDX registration (for companies that are first-time submitters), form completion ,user fee, export notification, and any test costs, $50.92 rule familiarization cost; $8,143 submission cost (including SNUN recordkeeping and $2,500 fee). EPA usually receives well under ten SNUNs per year. Based on review of recent SNUNs, it appears that firms rarely conduct toxicity or fate testing to support a SNUN (such testing would be voluntary). 3 Export notifications costs are estimated at $78.56 per notification; total cost per company will vary. First time submitters would incur $176 for CDX registration and associated activities.

2. Decide not to manufacture, import, or process the

chemical. Cost of the profit foregone as a result of not engaging in the commercial activity originally planned, and recordkeeping costs only if manufacturing for research and development. Costs not quantified. Rule familiarization and export notification costs would apply.

Notes:

1 Firms may be subject to both options at once since submis sion of a SNUN results in profits foregone as a result of not manufacturing, importing, or processing the chemical.*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 16 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch Table 12: Compliance Options and Associated Cost s Incurred by a Firm Due to the Proposed

SNUR

2 Quantified costs are attributable to the SNUR only if a firm would not otherwise follow the specified practices.

Costs are detailed in Section 3.2.

3 EPA does not require the development of test data for submission of a SNUN, although a firm may submit test data already in its possession and/or descri be any other available data. Because EPA does not require the development of test data, EPA assumes that no firms will incur testing costs as a result of the proposed SNUR.

562

3.4 Likelihood of a SNUN Submission 563

564 Along with the proposed amendments to the SNUR discussed in this report, EPA is concurrently 565 proposing a test rule applicable to manufacturers, importers, and processors of c-pentaBDE, c-octaBDE, 566 and c-decaBDE, and of articles to which these chemical mixtures have been added. This test rule would 567 require testing for health effects, ecological effects, and chemical fate characteristics. However, only one 568 of these rules (SNUR or test rule) will apply to each of the PBDEs. If no compani es remain in the market 569 on the effective date of the final rule, the SNUR will apply and no company may enter or reenter the 570 market without submitting a SNUN to EPA. If the current, or any new, companies manufacture, import, 571 or process any of the three c-PBDEs on or after the e ffective date of the final rule, those companies will 572 be subject to the test rule. 573

574 As of 2008, EPA has not identified any current manufact urer of c-pentaBDE or c-octaBDE, and therefore 575

believes that there is no current domestic manufacture or processing of these chemicals. In addition, there 576 is no evidence to suggest that appreciable quan tities of c-pentaBDE or c-octaBDE are manufactured 577 anywhere in the world (see Sections 2.1 and 2.2). As a result, the Agency does not believe that any 578 articles containing c-pentaBDE are being imported into the United States. Given this, and that there are 579 readily available substitutes, EPA believes that subm ission of a SNUN for the congeners contained in c580 pentaBDE, c-octaBDE or articles containing the chemicals is unlikely

. 581

582

While c-decaBDE remains available for all uses in th e U.S., the principal manufacturers and importer of 583 c-decaBDE have committed to phase out the manufacture, import and sales of c-decaBDE starting in 584 2010 and the companies would cease s manufacture and import for all uses no later than December 31, 585 2013 (EPA, 2009a). However, the commitment under discussion would not affect articles made with 586 decaBDE. To the extent that manufacture, import, and sales for a particular use of c-decaBDE do not 587 cease by the effective date of the amended SNUR, th e SNUR would not apply to manufacture import or 588 processing for that use c-decaBDE. 589

590

3.5 Potential for Subsequent Regulatory Action 591

EPA recognizes that if submission of a SNUN does result from the proposed SNUR, the Agency may 592 take additional regulatory actions under TSCA. These additional regulatory actions might be necessary to 593

further evaluate an intended new use and associated activ ities, or to prohibit or li mit that activity before it 594 occurs to prevent unreasonable risk of injury to human health or the e nvironment. It is not known what 595 specific subsequent regulatory actions , if any, the Agency may determine are necessary after reviewing a 596 SNUN. Any such actions are highly dependent on the circumstances surrounding the individual SNUN 597 (e.g., available information and sci entific understanding of the chemical and its risks at the time the 598 SNUN is being reviewed). 599

600*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 17 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch Should EPA’s review of the SNUN result in furthe r regulatory actions, the Agency will initiate and 601 follow the appropriate procedures for taking those acti ons. Included in those procedures would be an 602

assessment of the costs and benefits of those actions. 603

604*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 18 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch 605



### 4. AGENCY COSTS 606

As described in the sections below, EPA’s costs to review and process industry submissions (SNUNs, 607 requests to modify or revoke the SNUR, and request s for equivalency determinations) are assumed to be 608

the same as EPA costs to review PMNs. 609

610

4.1 Labor Rates for EPA Staff 611

612 Agency labor costs are calculated based on annua l Federal salaries for the Washington-Baltimore area 613 published by the Office of Personnel Management effective January 2009 (OPM, 2009). EPA assumes 614 that, on average, a federal GS-13, Step 5 full-tim e equivalent (FTE) will conduct its collection and 615 administrative activities under the proposed rule. 10 The average salary for a GS-13 Step 5 employee was 616 $98,518 in 2009 without fringe benefits and overhead cost s. In order to derive the fully loaded salary, 617 EPA multiplied the annual salary by an assumed loading f actor of 1.6 to reflect federal fringe benefits and 618 overhead, which results in a fully loaded annual salar y of $157,629 (see Table 13). Dividing the fully 619 loaded annual salary by 2,080 hours (i.e., the number of hours in a work year) yields an hourly FTE wage 620 rate of $75.78. 621

622 The Agency loading factor of 1.6 is from an EPA guide entitled Instructions for Preparing Information 623 Collection Requests (ICRs) (EPA, 1992, page 30, footnote 9). The 60 percent assumption was labeled 624 “the benefits multiplication factor” in the EPA guide , but has been used in many EPA OPPT ICRs to 625 reflect both fringe benefits and ove rhead for federal staff. For example, it was used in a document 626 supporting EPA ICR No. 1139.06 (EPA, 2000), with the following explanation: 627

628 The annual costs per FTE are derived by multiplying the annual pay rate by 1.6 (the benefits 629 multiplication factor). The multiplication factor used is recommended in EPA’s Office of Policy, 630 Planning, and Evaluation’s Instructions for Preparing Information Collection Requests (ICRs) 631 (June 1, 1992). An EP A internal phone call between Carol Rawie (OPPT/EETD/RIB) and Carl 632 Koch (OPPE/RMD/IMB) on May 3, 1994, indicated that the 1.6 factor included not only benefits 633

but also overhead. 634
635 Fully loaded costs for Agency labor are shown in Table 13. 636

10 The GS-13 Step 5 is consistent with ICR No. 0574.14 (12/18 /2007) (EPA, 2007b), which covers PMN SNURs. Use of this grade level follows the approach introduc ed in EPA, 2007b. That report represente d a change from an earlier PMN SNUR economic analysis (EPA, 2003), which used an averag e of GS-12 Step 1 and GS-12 Step 10 salaries.*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 19 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch 637

Table 13: Derivation of Loaded Agency Wage Rates

Labor Category Data Source for Wage

Information Date Wage Fringe

Benefit Fringes as % wage Overhead as % wage Fringe +

overhead

factor Loaded Wages (a) (b) (c)=(b)/(a) (d) (e)=(c)+(d)+1 (f)=(a)*(e)

EPA staff

FTE Annual federal staff cost:OPM WashingtonBaltimore-NorthernVirginia, DC-MD-PAVA-WV, area, GS-13 Step 1 pay rates a Dec09 $98,518 (annual)

-- [Included

in 60% overhead] 60% b 1.60 $157,629 (annual)

$47.36 (hourly) $75.78 (hourly)

Notes :

a The Agency salary is the unloaded federal GS-13 Step 5 salary ($98,518 for 2009), from the OPM salary table for the Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia Lo cality Pay Area (OPM, 2009). Hourly rate s are based on annual salary divided by 2,080 hours.

b The 60% fringes-and-overhead rate is fro m an EPA guide, Instructions for Prepari ng Information Collect ion Requests (ICRs) (EPA, 1992, page 30, footnote 9).

638

4.2 SNUN Processing Costs 639

640 The list of review steps, estimates of extramural costs, and the percent of chemicals requiring a particular 641 review step are derived from the costs for processing PMN submissions in Table VII-1 of a 1994 EPA 642
report, Regulatory Impact Analysis of Amendments to Re gulations for TSCA Section 5 Premanufacture 643 Notifications (EPA, 1994). The Agency burden associated w ith processing a PMN has been adjusted to 644 reflect burden reductions resulting from the 2009 fi nal PMN Electronic Reporting (ePMN) Rule that 645 requires the electronic submission of all TSCA section 5 notices. 11 Electronic submission of SNUN forms 646 is expected reduce Agency burden by 16.5 percent (EPA, 2009c, p.28). 647

648 For each review step, the “EPA staff” cost is calcu lated by multiplying the number of FTEs (in the first 649 column) by the fully loaded hourly salary. This s hows EPA staff cost for chemicals requiring the selected 650 review step. 651

652

The Extramural Cost column shows costs for contractor support and other outside purchases for 653 chemicals requiring the selected review step is inflated from 1993 prices using the Bureau of Labor 654 Statistics (BLS) Employment Cost Index (ECI) data (BLS, 2010b). The not seasonally adjusted ECI for 655 total compensation of private industry professional and related workers (Series ID CIU2010000120000I) 656 is used because it is the only series with continuous data since 1985, and that includes professional and 657 technical labor, which perform the major ity of Agency extramural activities. Table 14 , below contains 658

the derivation of inflation factor s for Agency extramural costs. 659

660

11 Prior to this report, Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant Ne w Use Rules for 26 Chemical Substances: EPA

Docket OPPT-2009-092 2, all burdens were based upon 1994 paper submission estimates. This is the first report to consider the burden reductions resulting from electronic submission of SNUN forms.*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 20 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch Table 14: Derivation of Inflation Fa ctors for Agency Extramural Costs

Item Inflation index source Starting

year Index for starting

year

(a) Index

for

2009

(b) Inflation

factor (b)/(a) 2

Agency Extramural costs White collar labor; equipment; supplies BLS ECI, Total comp, Private industry, Professional and related

, 4 th Q [BLS 2010d] 4 1993 67.0 111.4 1.663

Source:

Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employment Cost Index – Total Compensation: Professional and Related Private Industry, Not Seasonally Adjusted. (Series ID: CIU2010000120000I) , extracted April 12, 2010 (BLS, 2010d).

661 The Percent of Cases column in Table 15 is a weighti ng factor applied to reflect the fact that not all 662 chemicals require each review step. For exampl e, in the PMN process, all chemicals require 663 Administrative Prescreening, but not all chemicals requ ire the intensive scrutiny of “Standard Review.” 664 The three types of submissions resulting from a SNUR may have weighting factors that differ from each 665 other and from the weighting factors for PMNs. Cha nges in weighting factors could cause actual review 666 costs to be higher or lower than calculated here. For example, some SNUNs require little review because 667 they are determined to be “invalid” – i.e. not requi red in the first place. However, often a SNUN may 668 take more Agency time than a typical PMN because of factors such as the need to retrieve old PMN 669 records from archives, and the likelihood that more data requiring EPA review is submitted with a SNUN 670 than would be submitted on average with a PMN. Resources were not available to update the review 671 hours to reflect the current review process or to tailo r the cost estimates to SNUNs. Therefore, for this 672 analysis, the review steps and weighting factors are assumed to be the same as those derived in 1994 for 673

PMNs. 674

675 The Weighted Cost column is calculated by multiply ing the Unweighted Costs (EPA staff cost plus 676 extramural costs) by the percentage of cases requiri ng this review step. Weighted costs are then 677 multiplied by the burden reduction of 16.5 percent to account for burden savings generated electronic 678 submission. This calculation yields total Agency co sts of $4,934, per SNUN, for submission review and 679 processing, as shown in Table 15

. 680***EO 12866 Review Draft – Do NotCite, Quote or Release During Review***Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNURU.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxicsfor Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 21 Economic and Policy Analysis BranchTable 15. Agency Costs for SNUN and Other Submission Review and ProcessingReview StepsEPA staff (FTE) CostExtramural Cost2UnweightedCostPct. ofCasesWeightedCost3ePMNBurdenReduction4Weighted Costwith ePMNBurden ReductionFTEfractionCost perFTE1FTE Total($2009)1993dollars2009dollars(a)(b)(c)=(a)*(b)(d)(e)(f)=(c)+(e)(g)(h)=(f)*(g)(i)(j)=(h)*(1-(i))Pre-notice consultation 0.0024 $157,629 $378 $4.00 $6.65 $385 41% $158 0.165 $132Administrative prescreen/notice receipt/user fee0.0024 $157,629 $378 $92.00 $152.97 $531 100% $531 0.165 $444CRSS (Chemical Review andSearch Strategy)0.0025 $157,629 $394 $268.00 $445.60 $840 100% $840 0.165 $701SAT (Structure ActivityTeam)0.0006 $157,629 $95 $14.00 $23.28 $118 100% $118 0.165 $98Engineering/Exposure 0.0015 $157,629 $236 $56.00 $93.11 $330 100% $330 0.165 $275Exposure/Fate 0.0008 $157,629 $126 $0.00 $0.00 $126 100% $126 0.165 $105Focus 0.0009 $157,629 $142 $23.00 $38.24 $180 100% $180 0.165 $150Standard Review Functions 0.0219 $157,629 $3,452 $511.00 $849.63 $4,302 29% $1,247 0.165 $1,042Division Directors Meeting 0.0129 $157,629 $2,033 $113.00 $187.88 $2,221 15% $333 0.165 $278OrderDevelopment/NegotiationReview0.0171 $157,629 $2,695 $22.00 $36.58 $2,732 3% $82 0.165 $68Post Order Data Review 0.0886 $157,629 $13,966 $0.00 $0.00 $13,966 3% $419 0.165 $350Order Modification 0.2167 $157,629 $34,158 $0.00 $0.00 $34,158 3% $1,025 0.165 $856New Chemical SNURDevelopment0.0277 $157,629 $4,366 $85.00 $141.33 $4,508 7% $316 0.165 $263Notices of Commencement 0.0012 $157,629 $189 $40.00 $66.51 $256 31% $79 0.165 $66FOIA (Freedom ofInformation Act) Requests0.0333 $157,629 $5,249 $287.00 $477.19 $5,726 1% $57 0.165 $48CBI (Confidential BusinessInformation) Substantiation0.0004 $157,629 $63 $3.00 $4.99 $68 100% $68 0.165 $57TOTAL$5,909 0.165$4,934Notes:1GS-13 Step 5 salaries loaded with benefits and overhead. See Table 13 for derivation.2Extramural costs consist of contracting support and other purchases directly attributable to the PMN review process inflated from 1993 prices (SeeTable 14)3Weighted costs were calculated using unrounded unit cost estimates, soresults may differ from calculations using the rounded values shown in this table.4Electronic submission is expected togenerate a cost savings of 16.5% to the Agency (EPA 2009c, p. 28).Sources:FTEs per review step, 1993 extramural costs, and percents of cases are from EPA, 1994 Table VII-1, GS-13 salaries are from OPM,2009.*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 22 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch 4.3 Export Notification Cost 681

682 Under TSCA Section 12(b), exporters must notify EPA if they intend to export chemicals subject to 683 SNURs, as described in Section 3 above. The Agency burden and cost due to TSCA §12(b) export 684

notification result from three tasks. In the first task, EPA receives export notifications from companies 685 that intend to export one of the chemicals subject to TSCA §12(b) (EPA, 2009d). In the second task, 686 EPA staff prepares separate notification letters that ar e subsequently reviewed and delivered to importing 687 countries, their embassies, or representatives, and to the importing country’s US embassies (EPA, 2009d). 688 (See Table 10 for the cost of mailing one notification). The third task is comprised of EPA staff 689 responses to public inquiries and other TSCA 12(b) activities. The work of responding to non-routine 690 requests for information and clarification from indus try and importing countries, and of handling other 691

tasks associated with th e TSCA §12(b) program, was estimated to require roughly 400 hours per year 692 (EPA, 2009c). Since the current rulemaking covers only a very small percent of the chemicals subject to 693 TSCA 12(b) reporting, a very small percent of such activ ity will be attributable to the current rulemaking. 694

695 Because it is unknown how many, if an y, notifications EPA will receive or send as a result of the current 696 rulemaking, the costs to the Agency are presented per activity. The burden for the first two Agency 697 activities is provided in Table 16 below. To estimate the Agency cost, hourly burdens are multiplied by 698 the loaded wage rate of a GS-13, Step 5, which is derived in Table 13. 699

700

Table 16: TSCA 12(b) Export Notification Co st: Agency Burden per Activity (2009$)

Agency Activity Hours per Activity FTE per Activity 1 Loaded Mailing

Cost Total Agency Cost per Activity GS-13, Step 5 FTE Wage Rate (a) (b) = (a)/2,080 (c) (d) (e) = ((b)*(c))+(d) Process an incoming

notification from an exporting company 0.10 0.000048 $157,629 $0.00 $7.58

Prepare and mail a

notification to an importing country 0.50 0.000240 $157,629 $13.34 $51.23

Notes :

1 The burden associated with an Agency acti vity is the burden for the Agency to process one incoming notification, or to prepare and mail an outgoing notification

Source: Table 13 of this report derives Agency labor costs. Mailing cost s are from Table 10 of this report. Other burdens are from ICR No.: 0795.13 [Information Collectio n Request for] Notification of Chemical Exports - TSCA Section 12(b) Supporting Statement for Request for OMB Review under the Pape rwork Reduction Act (EPA 2009d), updated for inflation.

701

702

703*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 23 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch 704



### 5. ADDITIONAL ANALYSES 705

This section presents additional analysis of other po tential impacts of this rulemaking, as required under 706

various statutes and executive orders. 707

708

5.1 Regulatory Flexibility Act 709

710 The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et. seq .), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory 711 Enforcement Fairness Act, requires regulators to consid er the impact of regulations on small entities, in 712 particular small businesses. EPA’s experience to date is that, in response to the promulgation of SNURs 713 covering over 1,000 chemicals, the Agency receives onl y a handful of notices per year. For example, the 714 number of SNUNs was four in Federal fiscal year in 2005, eight in FY2006, six in FY2007, eight in 715 FY2008, and 7 in FY2009. 12 During this five-year period, three small entities submitted a SNUN. 13 The 716

criteria for ‘small business’ was that the company checked the box on the PMN form, page 2, stating that 717 it was a small business for the purpose of paying the $100 fee instead of the normal fee. 718

719 This leaves open the question of how many small businesses are affected but do not submit SNUNs. For 720 example, businesses may change their behavior in or der to use a chemical in a manner that avoids 721 triggering significant new use notification requireme nts and make no submission to EPA. Data and 722 resources were not available to estimate the number of small businesses affected by the current rule. 723

724 Small businesses may be affected by SNURs without EPA being aware; for example, if the firms have 725 made no submissions or comments to EPA. However, even if a small business were interested in 726 supplying a SNUR chemical, the SNUR’s impact on pr ofits is generally expected to be minor. For 727 example, the firm may have a small expense of keep ing records and/or of changing workplace practices to 728 comply with any new restrictions. If modifying prod uction practices would be overly costly, or if the 729 firm wishes to engage in a significant new use but be lieves that expensive testing is needed to support a 730 submission to EPA, it may instead forego production, thus sacrificing profits. The amounts of lost 731 profits, if any, were not quantif ied for this report, but are expected to be low because domestic 732 manufacture or processing of c-pentaBDE and c-octaBDE has already ceased, and manufacture of c733 decaBDE is expected to cease by 2013 due to state bans and voluntary programs. Any remaining 734 consumer uses are expected to be new so that they are unlikely to be central to a firm’s business. Based 735

on these considerations and on the limited data availa ble, EPA expects that any compliance with a SNUR 736 will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 737

738

5.2 Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 739

740 EPA has determined that this regulatory action does not impose any enforceable duty, contain any 741 unfunded mandate, or otherwise have any effect on small governments subject to the requirements of 742 sections 202, 203, 204, or 205 of the Unfunded Ma ndates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4). 743

744

12 February 5, 2009 email from Carol Rawie, EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and T oxics, to Tulika Narayan and Kimberly Wilson, Abt Associates, and counts of S NUN submissions that had been assigned an identifying number by EPA. The counts include both “valid” and “invalid” SNUNs. SNUN numbering is according to Federal fiscal year, ending September 30. 13 February 5, 2009 email from Carol Rawi e, EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics to Tulika Narayan and Kimberly Wilson, Abt Associates and reviews of SNUN su bmissions on April 8, 2010 by Abt staff.*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 24 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch 5.3 Paperwork Reduction Act 745

746 According to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 USC 3501 et seq. , an agency may not conduct or 747 sponsor, and a person is not require d to respond to, a collection of information that requires Office of 748 Management and Budget (OMB) a pproval under the PRA, unless it has been approved by OMB and 749 displays a currently valid OMB control number. The information collection requir ements related to this 750 action have already been approved by OMB pursuant to the PRA under OMB control number 2070-0038 751 (EPA ICR No. 1188). This action does not impo se any additional burden requiring OMB approval. 752

753

5.4 National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act 754

755 This action does not involve any technical standards; therefore, section 12(d) of the National Technology 756 Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), P ublic Law 104–113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 757 note), does not apply to this action. 758

759

5.5 Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review 760

761 Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review , requires OMB review for rules with an impact 762 on the economy of $100 million or more, or with any other potential significant impact. OMB has 763 previously determined that these types of SNURs are not a “significant regulatory action” that would 764 require OMB review under this Executive Order. 765

766

5.6 Executive Order 12898: Environmental Justice 767

768 This action does not involve special considerations of environmental justice-related issues as required by 769 Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmenta l Justice in Minority Populations and 770 Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 771

772

5.7 Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children 773

774 Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 775 19885, April 23, 1997), requires EPA to identify and assess environmental health and safety risks that 776 may disproportionately affect children. This type of analysis is required for rules that will have an impact 777 of $100 million or more only. The impact of the proposed SNUR will be less than $100 million, and 778 therefore no analysis of such impacts on children is required. 779

780

5.8 Executive Order 13132: Federalism 781

782 Executive Order 13132, Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an 783 accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timel y input by State and local officials in the 784 development of regulatory policies that have federa lism implications.” This action will not have a 785 substantial direct effect on States, on the relationshi p between the national government and the States, or 786 on the distribution of power and responsibilities among th e various levels of government, as specified in 787 Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalis m (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). 788

789

5.9 Executive Order 13175: Tribal Governments 790

791

Executive Order 13175 is Consultation and Coordination wi th Indian Tribal Governments (59 FR 22951, 792 November 6, 2000). This rule does not have Tribal implications because it is not expected to have 793

substantial direct effects on Indian Tribes. 794

795*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 25 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch 5.10 Executive Order 13211: Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 796

797 This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning Regulations That 798 Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because this 799 action is not expected to affect energy supply, distribution, or use. 800

801

802

803*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 26 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch 

### 6. REFERENCES 804

805 15 U.S.C. 272, National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104– 806 113, Section 12(d). 807

808 19 CFR 12, Customs Duties: Special Classes of Merchandise, Code of Federal Regulations

, Part 12, Title 809 19, August 1, 1983. 810

811 40 CFR 707, Chemical Imports and Exports , Code of Federal Regulations

, Part 707, Title 40, July 1, 812

2003. 813

814 40 CFR 720, Premanufacture Notification , Code of Federal Regulations

, Part 720, Title 40 , July 1, 2003. 815

816 40 CFR 721, Significant New Use of Chemical Substances , Code of Federal Regulations

, Part 721, Title 817 40, July 1, 2003. 818

819 59 FR 7629, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Jus tice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 820 Populations , Federal Register, Volume 59, February 16, 1994. 821

822 59 FR 22951, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments , Federal Register, Volume 823 59, November 6, 2000. 824

825 62 FR 19885, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks, Federal 826 Register, Volume 62, April 23, 1997. 827

828 64 FR 43255, Federalism , Federal Register, Volume 65, August 10, 1999. 829

830 66 FR 28355, Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 831

Use , Federal Register, Volume 66, May 22, 2001. 832

833 71 FR 34015, Certain Polybrominated Diphenylethers; Significant New Use Rule , Federal Register, 834 Volume 71, June 13, 2006. Availa ble in docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2004-0085 at 835 http://www.regulations.gov. 836

837 71 FR 66234, Export Notification; Change to Reporting Requirements, Final Rule, Federal Register

, 838 Volume 71, November 14, 2006. Avai lable in docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0058 at 839 http://www.regulations.gov. 840

841 Abt Associates Inc., 2009. Pentabromodiphe nyl Ether, Octabromodiphenyl Ether and 842 Decabromodiphenyl Ether Market Profile. October 20, 2009. 843

844 Alvarez, Jacqueline. Draft Risk Management Ev aluation for Commercial Octabromodiphenyl ether. 845

Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. April, 2008. 846

847 BLS, 2006a. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics , Employer Costs for Emplo yee Compensation: Changes to 848 NAICS and SOC, Table 2. ECEC Occupational Comparability between SOC and OCS. 849 Downloaded February 2006 from 

### http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ect/sp/ecsm0003.htm. 850

851*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 27 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch BLS, 2006b. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment Cost Index News Release Text: Employment 852 Cost Index, March 2006 (April 28, 2006), at http://www.bls.gov

. 853

854 BLS, 2006c. Unpublished Employer Costs for Employee Compensa tion: Private Manufacturing Industry 855 by Occupation, December 2005. Data received May 10, 2006, by Carol Rawie, US EPA, from 856 Raphael Branch, US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS 2006). The data is not seasonally adjusted 857 (email from Raphael Branch to Carol Rawie, November 17, 2005). 858

859 BLS, 2008a. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Table 5. Compensation (Not Seasonally Adjusted): Employment 860 Cost Index for total compensation, for priv ate industry workers, by occupational group and 861 industry. (April 30, 2008) at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/eci.t05.htm. 862

863 BLS, 2008b. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer Price Index- Inflation Calculator, data inflated to 864 2007 values, extracted May 1, 2008. 865

866 BLS, 2010a. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. “ Employer Costs for Employee Compensation 867 Supplementary Tables December 2009 ”. (March 10, 2010) at 868 http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ect/sp/ecsuptc13.pdf. (Note: The BLS report title and content is updated 869 periodically to include more recent data, on the same website.) 870

871 BLS, 2010b. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employment Cost Index – Total Compensation: Professional and 872 Related Private Industry, Not Seasonally Adjusted. (Series ID: CIU2010000120000I) , extracted 873 April 12, 2010. 874

875 Branch R.E. and Lowell Mason, 2006. Seasonal adjustment in the ECI and the conversion to NAICS and 876
SOC, Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics, April, 2006. 877

878 Buckley, Liz. “Environment Canada proposes ban on decaBDE in electronics.” Pesticide & Toxic 879 Chemical News, volume 37, number 22, page 1, April 6, 2009. 880

881 Buzcek, Mark. Independent Consulta nt. Personal communication with Br ian Segal of Abt Associates via 882 telephone. August 13, 2009. 883

884 Campbell, Bob. Chemtura. Personal communication w ith Brian Segal of Abt Associates via telephone. 885 August 14, 2009. 886

887 Caroll, Richard E., 2006. Changes affecting the Employment Cost Index: an overview, Monthly Labor 888 Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics, April 1, 2006. 889

890 CMA, 1991. Chemical Manufacturers Association. Responses to Questions on Burden Associated with 891

PMN Submissions . Distributed by the Chemical Manufacturers Association, Washington, DC. 892

893 Dawson, Ray. Albemarle. Personal communication w ith Brian Segal of Abt Associates via telephone. 894 August 17, 2009. 895

896 DOC, 2003. U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, “2002 NAICS Definitions” Available at: 897 http://www.census.gov/epcd/naics02/naics02definitions.txt. 898

899 EPA, 1992. U.S. EPA, Office of Policy, Planning, and Ev aluation. Instructions for Preparing Information 900 Collection Requests (ICRs). Washington, DC, June 1, 1992. 901

902*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 28 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch EPA, 1994. US EPA, Office of Toxic Substances, Regulatory Impacts Branch. Regulatory Impact 903 Analysis of Amendments to Regulations fo r TSCA Section 5 Premanufacture Notifications

. 904 Washington, DC: U.S. EPA/OPPT/EETD/RIB, Sept ember 9, 1994. (OTS/RIB later became 905 OPPTS/EPAB.) 906

907 EPA, 2000. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, ICR No. 1139.06. [Information 908 Collection Request for] TSCA Existing Chemical Test Rules, Consent Orders, Test Rule 909 Exemptions, and Voluntary Test Data Submissions: Supporting Statement for Request for OMB 910 Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act . Attachment 5, Wage Rates Estimation, August 29, 911

2000. 912

913 EPA, 2002a U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis Branch. 914 Revised Economic Analysis for the Amended Inventory Update Rule: Final Report. Washington, 915 DC. August 2002. 916

917 EPA, 2002b. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis 918

Branch. Wage Rates for Economic Analysis of the Toxics Release Inventory Program. 919 Washington, DC, June 10, 2002. 920

921 EPA, 2003. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis Branch. 922 Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 65 Chemical Substances

. 923 Washington, DC, 2003. Available in docket EPA-HQ-OPPTS-2002-0078 at 924 http://www.regulations.gov. 925

EPA, 2005. Office of Pollution Prevention and To xics, Economic and Policy Analysis Branch. Economic 926 Analysis of the Proposed Change to TSCA Section 12(b) Export Notification Requirements, 927 November 2005, available from the Federal Do cket Management System as EPA-HQ-OPPT928 2005-005 8-0017 at http://www.regulations.gov. 929

930 EPA, 2006. U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics Non-Confidential 2006 IUR Records by 931 Chemical, including Manufacturing, Processing and Use Information 932 (http://cfpub.epa.gov/iursearch/index.cfm?s= chem). Accessed October 15, 2009. 933

EPA, 2007a. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Preven tion and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis 934

Branch. Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 38 Chemical 935 Substances (EPA Docket OPPT- 2006-0898 ), August 17, 2007. 936

EPA, 2007b. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics , ICR No. 0574.14. [Information 937 Collection Request for] Pre-Manufacture Review Reporting and Exemption Requirements for 938 New Chemical Substances and Significant New Use Reporting Requirements for Chemical 939 Substances: Supporting Statement fo r a Request for OMB Review under The Paperwork 940

Reduction Act , December 6, 2007. 941

942 EPA, 2008. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis Branch. 943 Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 56 Chemical Substances

. 944 Washington, DC, 2008. Available from the Fede ral Docket Management System as EPA-HQ945 OPPTS- 2008-0251 at http://www.regulations.gov. 946

947 EPA 2009a. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 948 (PBDEs) Action Plan . December 30, 2009 at 949*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Economic Analysis of Amendment to SNUR U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 29 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch http://www.epa.gov/oppt/existingchemical s/pubs/pbdes_ap_2009_1230_final.pdf. 950

951 EPA, 2009b. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis 952

Branch . Economic Analysis of the Premanufacture Notification Electronic Reporting Final Rule

. 953 (EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0296). July 13, 2009. 954

955 EPA, 2009c. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. ICR No.: 0795.13 [Information 956 Collection Request for] Notification of Chemic al Exports - TSCA S ection 12(b) Supporting 957 Statement for Request for OMB Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act . March 6, 2009 at 958 http://www.regulations.gov. 959

960 EPA, 2010 [expected]. U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and 961 Policy Analysis Branch. Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 25 962

Chemical Substances. (EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0922). Not yet published. 963

964 ERG, 2002. Market Analysis for the use of Pol ybrominated Diphenyl Etheres (PBDEs) as Flame 965 Retardants – Focusing on Pentabromodiphe nyl Ether (pentaBDE). October 3, 2002. 966

967 National Library of Medicine. “NIH ChemID Lite” available at 968 http://chem2.sis.nlm.nih.gov/chemidplus/che midlite.jsp. Accessed October 19, 2009. 969

970 OPM, 2009. Office of Personnel Management, Salary Table 2009-DCB, Washington BaltimoreNorthern 971 Virginia, DC-MD-PA-VA-WV. Accessed from http://www.opm.gov/oca/09tables/pdf/DCB.pdf. 972

973 PFA, 2006. Letter US EPA Re: Docket Number OPPT-2004-0085; Proposed Significant New Use Rule. 974 Polyurethane Foam Association. March 10, 2006. 975

976 Rawie, Carol. 2009. EPA Office of Pollution Preven tion and Toxics. Personal communication with Tulika 977 Narayan and Kimberly Wilson of Abt Associates via e-mail. February 5, 2009. 978

979 Sleemi, Fehmida, 2006. Employment Cost Index publication plans, Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of 980 Labor Statistics, April 1, 2006. 981

982 UK Health Protection Agency, 2007. HPA Compendium of Chemical Hazards: Polybromodiphenyl 983 Ethers (Decabromodiphenyl Ether). CHAPD HQ, HPA 2007/9 Version 1. J C Wakefield. 984 http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwe bFile/HPAweb_C/1236845862204 985

USPS, 2010. U.S. Postal Service Mailing and postag e rates. http://www.usps.com/prices. Accessed April 986 23, 2010. 987