*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

 

Economic Analysis of the Proposed Significant New Use Rule for 

Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) 

November 3, 2010 

EO12866_PBDE SNUR_NPRM_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*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***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 

1 CONTRIBUTORS 

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

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

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*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***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

5 ABSTRACT 

6 This report estimates the costs of proposed amendments to an existing Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) 

7 (71 FR 34015, June 13, 2006). The existing SNUR applies to all manufacture and import of any one or 

8 more of six polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs): tetrabromodiphenyl ether (tetraBDE), 

9 pentabromodiphenyl ether (pentaBDE), hexabromodiphenyl ether (hexaBDE), heptabromodiphenyl ether 

10 (heptaBDE), octabromodiphenyl ether (octaBDE), and nonabromodiphenyl ether (nonaBDE). The 

11 proposed amendment extends the SNUR to the processing of any of these chemicals, and the 

12 manufacture, import, and processing of a seventh PBDE, decabromodiphenyl ether (decaBDE). It also 

13 makes inapplicable the article exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f), making articles containing the PBDEs 

14 subject to the SNUR, unless the PBDEs are present as impurities. EPA is proposing to designate 

15 processing for any use of tetraBDE, pentaBDE, hexaBDE, heptaBDE, octaBDE or nonaBDE after 

16 December 31, 2012 as a significant new use. EPA is proposing to designate manufacture, import or, 

17 processing of decaBDE after December 31, 2012, for any use other than military use or transportation use 

18 to be a significant new use. EPA is proposing to designate manufacture, import, or processing of 

19 decaBDE for any use after December 31, 2013 as a significant new use. 

20 

21 The PBDEs are a family of chemicals with a common structure of a diphenyl ether molecule which may 

22 have anywhere from one to ten bromine atoms attached. PBDEs can be grouped as homologs i.e., 

23 according to the number of bromine atoms present in the molecule. With the exception of decaBDE, each 

24 homolog group contains multiple congeners which differ according to the arrangement of bromine atoms 

25 on the diphenyl ether parent molecule. There is only one possible congener of decaBDE. TSCA 

26 inventory listings and regulations for PBDEs are based on homolog groups produced when the diphenyl 

27 ether molecule reacts with a fixed amount of bromine. The PBDE homologs used in flame retardants 

28 typically have between four and ten bromine atoms. The homolog groups relevant to commercial PBDE 

29 (c-PBDE) flame retardant products are: tetraBDE (4 bromine atoms), pentaBDE (5 bromine atoms), 

30 hexaBDE (6 bromine atoms), heptaBDE (7 bromine atoms), octaBDE (8 bromine atoms), nonaBDE (9 

31 bromine atoms), and decaBDE (10 bromine atoms). There are three types of c-PBDE products, c32 pentaBDE, c-octaBDE, and c-decaBDE; each c-PBDE is a mixture of PBDE homologs. The specific 

33 composition of c-PBDEs varies somewhat from manufacturer to manufacturer, but in general c-pentaBDE 

34 contains tetraBDE and pentaBDE as major components and hexaBDE as a minor component. C35 octaBDE contains heptaBDE and octa BDE as major components and hexaBDE, nonaBDE and decaBDE 

36 as minor components. C-decaBDE contains decaBDE as the major component with nonaBDE as a minor 

37 component. 

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

39 is no evidence to indicate their manufacture in any other countries, suggesting no domestic import of 

40 articles containing the chemicals. In addition, the major U.S. manufacturers and importer of c-decaBDE 

41 have agreed to phase out its manufacture, and import, for all uses other than transportation uses and 

42 military uses by the end of 2012, and for all uses by the end of 2013. If the manufacture, import, or 

43 processing, of these chemicals has ceased for any use, they will be designated as significant new uses. If 

44 there is any ongoing manufacture, import, or processing of these chemicals for any use, including in 

45 articles, after December 31, 2012 (December 31, 2013 for military and transportation uses) of c46 decaBDE, the chemical(s) will be subject to a test rule under section 4(a)(1)(A) of the Toxic Substances 

47 and Control Act (TSCA), proposed in conjunction with the amendment to the SNUR. The test rule would 

48 require companies that engage in these activities after the specified dates to perform testing in order to 

49 obtain data on the health effects, environmental effects, and chemical fate of the chemical. 

50 

51 PBDEs have been used as flame retardants in a variety of applications, including flexible polyurethane 

52 foam for mattresses, furniture, and automotive applications (c-pentaBDE); acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene 
*** 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 

53 plastic (ABS) for electronics applications (c-octaBDE); and high-impact polystyrene (HIPS)-based 

54 products such as textiles, electronic equipment, and building and construction materials (c-decaBDE). 

55 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing an amendment to a SNUR because it is 

56 concerned about the persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic effects of some PBDE congeners in humans 

57 and the environment. Some reports suggest that the levels of PBDEs in humans and the environment may 

58 be increasing, despite the phase out of c-pentaBDE and c-octaBDE production in the United States in 

59 2004. 

60 The proposed amendment to the SNUR would require persons to notify EPA at least 90 days before 

61 commencing import as part of an article or processing of tetraBDE, pentaBDE, hexaBDE, heptaBDE, 

62 octaBDE or nonaBDE after December 31, 2012. Persons who intend to manufacture, import or, process 

63 decaBDE after December 31, 2012, for any use other than military use or transportation use or to 

64 manufacture, import, or process decaBDE for any use after December 31, 2013 would be required to 

65 notify EPA at least 90 days in advance. A firm intending to engage in these activities would be required 

66 to submit a Significant New Use Notice (SNUN), incurring an estimated submission cost of $8,143 per 

67 chemical, plus other costs. 

68 In addition to the firms that make a SNUN submission, the proposed SNUR may also impact firms that do 

69 not make a submission. By avoiding a significant new use, a firm can avoid submission and testing costs 

70 but may incur other compliance costs. The firm may also incur “hidden” costs; for example, it could 

71 forego profitable opportunities to use the chemical in an application that would be a significant new use 

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

73 

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

75 submission. The hidden costs to the firms that do not make a submission are not quantified. EPA 

76 receives only a handful of SNUNs per year due to SNURs. However, the number of firms affected by not 

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

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 

79 TABLE OF CONTENTS

80 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

88 2. POTENTIALLY Affected entities ........................................................................................................ 4

89 2.1 c-PentaBDE ................................................................................................................................ 4

90 2.2 c-OctaBDE ................................................................................................................................. 5

91 2.3 c-DecaBDE ................................................................................................................................. 5

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

104 4.1 Labor Rates for EPA Staff ........................................................................................................ 18

105 4.2 SNUN Processing Costs ........................................................................................................... 19

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 

121 LIST OF TABLES 

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

123 Bookmark not defined.

124 Table 2: SIC and NAICS Codes that May Contain PentaBDE Treated Articles .......................................... 5

125 Table 3: Industry Sectors Using or Releasing DecaBDE .............................................................................. 6

126 Table 4: Products Containing DecaBDE by Product Category .................................................................... 7

127 Table 5: Loaded Industry Wage Rates, December 2009 ............................................................................... 9

128 Table 6: Rule Familiarization Burden and Cost for SNUR Submitters ...................................................... 10

129 Table 7: CDX Registration, CDX Electronic Signature, and Pay.gov Account Setup Burden and Cost for 

130 First-Time Submitters ................................................................................................................................. 11

131 Table 8: Industry Cost Estimate to Complete the SNUN Form .................................................................. 12

132 Table 9: Industry Cost Estimate to Complete and Submit the SNUN Form ............................................... 12

133 Table 10: Derivation of Total Mailing Cost for 12 Notices ........................................................................ 14

134 Table 11: TSCA 12(b) Export Notification Cost per Notification .............................................................. 15

135 Table 12: Compliance Options and Associated Costs Incurred by a Firm Due to the Proposed SNUR .... 15

136 Table 13: Derivation of Loaded Agency Wage Rates ................................................................................ 19

137 Table 14: Derivation of Inflation Factors for Agency Extramural Costs .................................................... 20

138 Table 15. Agency Costs for SNUN and Other Submission Review and Processing .................................. 21

139 Table 16: TSCA 12(b) Export Notification Cost: Agency Burden per Activity (2009$) ........................... 22

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 

141 1. INTRODUCTION 

142 This report presents the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Pollution Prevention and 

143 Toxics’ (OPPT’s) analysis of the potential costs incurred as a result of proposed amendments to a 

144 Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) that addresses a set of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs). 

145 SNURs are proposed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the authority granted by 

146 Section 5(a)(2) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The existing SNUR at 40 CFR 721.10000 

147 requires manufacturers and importers of any one or more of six PBDEs to notify EPA at least 90 days 

148 prior the manufacture or import of any one or more of these chemicals. EPA is proposing to amend the 

149 existing SNUR by 1) adding processors of the six PBDEs to those persons subject to the SNUR, 2) adding 

150 manufacturers, importers, and processors of decabromodiphenyl ether (decaBDE) to those persons subject 

151 to the SNUR, and 3) for this SNUR, making inapplicable the article exemption at 40 CFR 721.45. 

152 

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

154 releases of the substance. 

155 

156 The PBDEs are a family of chemicals with a common structure of a diphenyl ether molecule which may 

157 have anywhere from one to ten bromine atoms attached. PBDEs can be grouped as homologs i.e., 

158 according to the number of bromine atoms present in the molecule. With the exception of decaBDE, each 

159 homolog group contains multiple congeners which differ according to the arrangement of bromine atoms 

160 on the diphenyl ether parent molecule. There is only one possible congener of decaBDE. TSCA 

161 inventory listings and regulations for PBDEs are based on homolog groups produced when the diphenyl 

162 ether molecule reacts with a fixed amount of bromine. The PBDE homologs used in flame retardants 

163 typically have between four and ten bromine atoms. The homolog groups relevant to commercial PBDE 

164 (c-PBDE) flame retardant products are: tetraBDE (4 bromine atoms), pentaBDE (5 bromine atoms), 

165 hexaBDE (6 bromine atoms), heptaBDE (7 bromine atoms), octaBDE (8 bromine atoms), nonaBDE (9 

166 bromine atoms), and decaBDE (10 bromine atoms). There are three types of c-PBDE products, c167 pentaBDE, c-octaBDE, and c-decaBDE; each c-PBDE is a mixture of PBDE homologs. The specific 

168 composition of c-PBDEs varies somewhat from manufacturer to manufacturer, but in general c-pentaBDE 

169 contains tetraBDE and pentaBDE as major components and hexaBDE as a minor component. C170 octaBDE contains heptaBDE and octa BDE as major components and hexaBDE, nonaBDE and decaBDE 

171 as minor components. C-decaBDE contains decaBDE as the major component with nonaBDE as a minor 

172 component. 

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

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; DBDPO; DECA; Decabrom; Decabrome 

Decabromobiphenyl ether; Decabromobiphenyl oxide; Decabromodiphenyl ether; 

Decabromophenyl ether; 1,1 ́-Oxybis (2,3,4,5,6-pentabromobenzene) 

Pentabromophenyl ether

Sources: ChemIDplus Lite, 2009 

175 

176 1.1 Statutory Authority 

177 Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(2)) authorizes EPA to determine that a use of a chemical 

178 substance is a “significant new use.” EPA must make this determination by rule after considering all 

179 relevant factors, including those listed in TSCA section 5(a)(2). Once EPA determines that a use of a 

180 chemical substance is a significant new use, TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B) requires persons to submit a 

181 Significant New Use Notice (SNUN) to EPA at least 90 days before manufacturing, importing, or 

182 processing the chemical substance for that use (TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B)). 

183 

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

185 

186 1.2 Summary of Methodology 

187 

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

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

190 EPA of administering the rule. Industry costs consist of rule familiarization; registration with the Central 

191 Data Exchange (CDX) electronic reporting tool; collection, compilation, and submission of required 

192 information for significant new uses of the subject chemicals; export notification; and recordkeeping. 

193 Agency costs include reviewing and processing the data received as a result of the rule. Data sources for 

194 this analysis include burden estimates derived from previous information collection requests and 

195 economic analyses for related rules, compensation data acquired from government publications, and 

196 supplementary market research. 

197 

198 1.3 Organization of this Report 

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

200 chemical substances and industry sectors potentially affected are characterized in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 

201 contains estimates of the industry cost of complying with the proposed rule, and Chapter 4 shows 

202 estimates of the government costs associated with the administration of the proposed rule. Chapter 5 

203 presents additional impact analyses. 

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 analysis are reported in December 2009 dollars.1 205 

206 

207 

 

1 Q4 2009 is specified as the three-month period beginning 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 

208 2. POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ENTITIES 

209 Historically, PBDEs have been added to materials to reduce the risk of fires and to increase escape time 

210 when a fire occurs. They have been widely used in textiles, plastics, and polyurethane foam. PBDE211 treated articles have been used in the home, in business settings, and in the transportation sector. Articles 

212 which have often been treated with PBDEs include carpets, upholstery fabric, cushions, and plastics used 

213 as components in electrical appliances and equipment (EPA, 2009a). 

214 

215 Domestic manufacture of pentaBDE and octaBDE stopped in 2004 when the Great Lakes chemical 

216 Corporation (now Chemtura Corporation) voluntarily phased out their production (EPA, 2009a). The 

217 existing SNUR at 40 CFR 721.10000 requires that anyone who intends to manufacture or import the 

218 chemicals to notify EPA, by submitting a SNUN. The amendment to the SNUR now being proposed 

219 would extend this notification requirement to processors of these chemicals, and would also make the rule 

apply to manufacturers, processors, and importers of articles containing the chemicals.2 220 

221 

222 The rule amendment would also now make the SNUR notification requirements apply to decaBDE: 

223 manufacturers, importers, and processors of decaBDE, or articles containing decaBDE will be subject to 

224 the notification requirement. 

225 

226 The following sections describe the specific known uses of each of the three chemicals, including articles 

227 that may contain the chemicals, and the potentially affected industry sectors. 

228 

229 2.1 PentaBDE 

230 C-pentaBDE is one of the major brominated flame retardants. Because there has been no new 

231 manufacture of c-pentaBDE in the United States since 2004, no import since 2006, and there is no 

232 evidence of the import of any articles containing c-pentaBDE, it is expected that there are no current uses 

233 of the chemical (or articles containing the chemical) domestically (EPA, 2009a). 

234 

235 Historically, c-pentaBDE was used primarily as an additive flame retardant in flexible polyurethane 

236 foams (95 percent of c-pentaBDE’s historical consumption in the United States) (ERG, 2002). A minor 

237 amount was consumed in rigid foams (ERG, 2002). Articles treated with c-pentaBDE were most 

238 commonly used in the upholstery and furniture markets, though treated articles were also used in other 

239 applications including automotive seat cushions and padding, mattress foam padding, furniture foam 

240 padding, and pillows (ERG, 2002). A 2002 study estimated that 80 percent of c-pentaBDE was used in 

241 foam for furniture and mattresses, while the remaining amount was used in automotive applications 

242 (ERG, 2002). Minor amounts were also used in textiles 

243 

244 While the 2006 SNUR required notification prior to manufacture or import of PBDE congeners present in 

245 c-pentaBDE, it did not cover processing or the manufacture, import, or processing of articles treated with 

246 those congeners. However, there is no evidence to suggest that appreciable quantities of c-pentaBDE are 

manufactured anywhere in the world (Dawson, 2009).3 247 As a result, the Agency does not believe that any 

 

2

 There is no evidence to indicate the manufacture of appreciable quantities of c-penta- or c-octaBDE anywhere in 

the world, suggesting there is no domestic import of articles 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). Several 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 

248 articles containing c-pentaBDE are being imported. A letter from the executive director of the 

249 Polyurethane Foam Association (PFA) explains that imports of articles that are potentially treated with c250 pentaBDE would, if produced, generally fall under three SIC codes (PFA, 2006). Since SIC codes have 

251 been phased out, the closest corresponding NAICS codes were used to track imports. Table 2 shows the 

252 SIC codes that PFA identified as possible sources of pentaBDE treated articles, and their likely NAICS 

253 counterparts (Abt Associates, 2009). 

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 

256 2.2 OctaBDE 

257 C-octaBDE is a brominated flame retardant that has applications in the plastics industry. Because there 

258 has been no new manufacture of c-octaBDE in the United States since 2004, no import since 2006, and 

259 there is no evidence of the import of any articles containing octaBDE, it is expected that there are also no 

260 current uses of the chemical (or articles containing the chemical) domestically (EPA, 2009a). 

261 

262 Historically, c-octaBDE was used in acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene (ABS) plastic which was used as 

263 casing for certain electric and electronic devices that are used in both offices and home. For example, in 

264 Switzerland, 70 percent of c-octaBDE was used in electronic goods, 40 percent was used in TVs, 20 

265 percent in cars and 10 percent in building materials (Alvarez, 2008). Similar information was not 

266 available for the United States. One industry contact thought c-octaBDE was mostly used in ABS plastics 

267 for automotive applications because c-octaBDE gives the plastic a good quality finish that lends itself to 

268 high quality paint work (Dawson, 2009). Finished products typically contained five to 30 percent c269 octaBDE by weight (Alvarez, 2008). 

270 

271 Given the broad uses of c-octaBDE in final products, it was difficult to find specific NAICS codes for c272 octaBDE treated articles (Abt Associates, 2009). However, since production of c-octaBDE was recently 

273 phased out in the EU, Norway, Switzerland, Canada and the United States, there is no information 

indicating that c-octaBDE is being produced in developing countries (Alvarex, 2008),4 274 and none of the 

275 major global manufacturers produce c-octaBDE (Campbell, 2009; Dawson, 2009; Buzcek, 2009), it 

276 seems unlikely that any new goods imported into the United States contain c-octaBDE (Dawson, 2009). 

277 

278 2.3 DecaBDE 

279 

280 While uses of c-pentaBDE and c-octaBDE have been restricted in the United States and phased out 

281 internationally, c-decaBDE is still widely used. C-decaBDE is considered the most effective of the 

282 brominated flame retardants. Because relatively small quantities are required for outstanding flame 

 

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 

283 retardant properties, c-decaBDE has minimal influence on the physical and mechanical properties of the 

284 flame-retarded product. 

285 

286 Table 3 below shows the industry sectors using decaBDE as a flame retardant, according to 2006 

287 reporting year submissions under the Inventory Update Reporting (IUR) rule (EPA, 2006), and which 

288 release decaBDE according to the 2007 Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) reporting (Abt Associates, 2009). 

289 

Table 3: Industry Sectors Using 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 

291 Table 4 below provides a more detailed list of products potentially containing decaBDE. 

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 

294 Although there are currently no federal actions to restrict the use of decaBDE, certain states have initiated 

295 bans. Washington State banned the use of c-decaBDE in mattresses as of January 2008, and starting in 

296 January 2011, c-decaBDE will be prohibited from use in televisions, computers and upholstered furniture. 

297 Maine also banned decaBDE in mattresses and upholstered furniture as of January 2008 and will extend 

298 that ban to televisions and other plastic encased electronics by January 2010. Washington State and 

299 Maine conducted studies which concluded that adequate substitutes for c-decaBDE exist. Other states, 

300 such as Maryland and Oregon, have introduced similar legislation to ban the sale of products containing 

301 this flame retardant (Buckley, 2009). 

302 

303 Furthermore, the principal manufacturers and importer of c-decaBDE have committed to phase out the 

304 manufacture, import and sales of c-decaBDE starting in 2010. Ordinary production, import and sales of 

305 c-decaBDE would cease no later than December 31, 2012. Certain uses such as transportation uses or 

306 military applications may require an additional year to phase out. In any case the companies would cease 

307 sales for these uses no later than December 31, 2013. EPA intends to encourage other importers of c308 decaBDE to join this effort; however, the commitment under discussion would not affect articles made 

309 with decaBDE (EPA, 2009a). 

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 

311 3. INDUSTRY COMPLIANCE COSTS 

312 The proposed new requirements under the amendment to the existing SNUR discussed in this report 

313 specify as significant new uses of the PBDEs that require reporting under section 5(a)(1)(A) of TSCA the 

314 following activities: the processing of any of the six PBDEs already subject to the rule; the manufacture, 

315 import, and processing of decaBDE; and the manufacture, import, and processing of articles containing 

316 any of the seven PBDEs, unless these PBDEs are present as an impurity. A firm intending to process for 

317 any use tetraBDE, pentaBDE, hexaBDE, heptaBDE, octaBDE or nonaBDE after December 31, 2012, or 

318 to import any of these chemicals as part of an article after December 31, 2012 must submit a SNUN. A 

319 firm intending to manufacture, import or, process decaBDE, including as part of an article, after 

320 December 31, 2012, for any use other than military use or transportation use must submit a SNUN. After 

321 December 31, 2013 a firm intending to manufacture, import or, process decaBDE for any use would be 

322 required to submit a SNUN. Alternatively, a firm can decide not to manufacture, import, and/or process 

323 the chemicals or articles containing the chemicals. The firm, therefore, has two options 

324 

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

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

327 manufacture, importing, and/or processing of this chemical or articles containing the chemicals. The 

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

329 import, and/or processing of the substance; the SNUN provides EPA with the opportunity to evaluate 

330 the intended use and, if necessary, to prohibit or limit that activity before it occurs. If EPA allows the 

331 manufacture, import, or processing of the PBDEs, or articles to which the PBDEs have been added 

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

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

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

335 regulated under TSCA Section 5 (see Section 3.2.5 for details). 

336 

337 • Option 2: Decide not to manufacture, import, and/or process the chemical. The firm may simply 

338 decide to not manufacture, import, or process the PBDEs, or articles to which the PBDEs have been 

339 added. While this option avoids the costs of submitting a SNUN, it entails the “hidden” cost of the 

340 foregone profit as a result of not engaging in the commercial activity originally planned. Similarly, if 

341 the firm would have used a given amount of PBDE in the production of another product and must 

342 substitute the chemicals with a more costly substance, it will incur those additional “hidden” costs of 

343 production. If the firm elects to produce any of the PBDEs for research and development (R&D) 

344 purposes only (an exemption for R&D purposes is provided in 40 CFR §721.47), it may have costs 

345 associated with R&D recordkeeping. In addition, if the firm exports any existing stockpiles of the 

346 chemicals, it will incur the export notification costs (see Section 3.2.5 for details). 

347 

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

349 SNUR for these uses of the subject chemicals. Section 3.1 summarizes the wage rates used in this 

350 chapter. Section 3.2 provides the unit industry compliance costs, including the costs of rule 

351 familiarization, registration with the Central Data Exchange (CDX) electronic reporting tool, completing 

352 the SNUN form, submission fee, import certification, and export notification. A summary of costs under 

353 each option are presented in Section 3.3. 

354 

355 3.1 Wage Rates 

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 

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

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

359 required in each labor category and multiplying those burdens by the wage rate for each labor category. 

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

361 

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

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

364 “Wage Rates for Economic Analysis of the Toxics Release Inventory Program” (EPA, 2002b). Wage 

365 data for each labor category in December 2009 are provided by the Employer Costs for Employee 

366 Compensation (ECEC) Supplemental Tables available on the BLS website (BLS, 2010a). The loaded 

367 wage rate for managerial labor is $68.24; for technical labor, $59.49; and for clerical labor, $28.31. Table 

368 5 presents the basic data used to calculate the loaded wage rates for all three categories of labor. 

369 

Table 5: Loaded Industry Wage Rates, December 2009 

Labor 

Category Data Sources 

Wage 

(2009$) 

Fringe 

Benefit 

(2009$) 

Fringes 

as % 

wage 

Overhead % 

wage2

Fringe + 

overhead 

factor 

Loaded 

Wages1 

(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 closest 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 Amended Inventory Update Rule: Final Report (EPA, 

2002a). 

3

 Employer Costs for Employee Compensation Supplementary Tables: December 2009. US Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 

10, 201- (BLS, 2010a).

370 

371 3.2 Unit Industry Compliance Costs 

372 

373 3.2.1 Rule Familiarization 

374 

375 The proposed rule requires submitters and their staff to become familiar with the SNUR and its various 

376 requirements. The per company burden associated with rule familiarization is approximately 0.55 hours 

377 of technical labor and 0.27 hours of managerial labor, (EPA, 2009b). As shown in Table 6 the total labor 

378 cost associated with rule familiarization by a first-time reporter is $50.92. 

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 

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

382 

383 The proposed SNUR requires first-time submitters (that is, those companies who have not submitted 

384 information to EPA through CDX before) to register their company and key users with the CDX reporting 

tool, deliver a CDX electronic signature to EPA, and establish and use a Pay.gov E-payment account.5 385 

386 These activities are only required of first-time submitters (companies already registered with CDX would 

387 not need to re-register for the purposes of complying with the proposed SNUR). The burdens associated 

388 with these activities were estimated in the Economic Analysis of the Premanufacture Notification 

389 Electronic Reporting Final Rule (EPA, 2009b) and are described in more detail below: 

390 

391 • CDX registration: EPA estimates that companies will spend approximately 0.18 hours per 

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

393 manager will need to register for each company, totaling approximately 0.92 hours of burden per 

394 company. 

395 

396 • CDX electronic signature: EPA estimates that companies will spend 0.25 hours preparing, 

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

398 per employee. This burden will apply to four technical staff members and one manager per 

399 company, totaling to 1.25 hours per company. In addition, EPA estimates that a manager will 

400 spend an additional 0.50 hours accessing, preparing, and submitting verification forms 

401 (Verification of Authorization) for all authorized submitters to EPA. The total burden incurred 

402 by companies submitting and then verifying electronic signature agreements is 1.75 hours. Note 

403 that this burden does not include any additional time required to contact EPA’s CDX help desk to 

404 notify a change of submitter status, should one occur. 

405 

406 Filing the electronic signature agreement requires an additional mailing cost of $2.30 per 

407 company (including five $0.44 stamps and five $0.02 business envelopes) (USPS, 2010). 

408 

409 • Payment via Pay.gov account: EPA estimates that one manager per company will spend 

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

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

412 ‘submit’ on the form and wait for payment processing. 

413 

414 As shown in Table 7, the cost associated with CDX registration, CDX electronic signature, and Pay.gov 

415 account setup is $178.21, and this cost is only incurred by a first-time submitter. . 

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 

418 3.2.3 Form Completion and Submission Fee 

419 

420 Respondents are required to gather and submit information regarding the data elements identified in the 

421 applicable SNUN reporting form. The methodology and calculations used in this analysis assume that the 

422 employee responsible for collecting, filling out, and submitting the requested information has a 

423 reasonable level of familiarity with the company and knowledge of operations at the site. It is assumed 

424 that for most entities these tasks are similar to other employee duties that require familiarity with EPA, 

425 State, and other Federal agency requests for chemical information and do not require additional 

426 familiarization or training beyond the basic rule familiarization described above. In addition, this analysis 

427 focuses on the marginal costs of submitting information for the proposed rule and not the total costs for 

428 the company to comply with a range of other Federal and State environmental, health, and safety 

429 regulations or accounting requirements that rely on this type of information. 

430 

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

432 of completing a Premanufacture Notification (PMN) submission, since the data requirements are the same 

433 and the same form is used for both. The PMN submission costs came from EPA’s 1994 Regulatory 

434 Impact Analysis of Amendments to Regulations for TSCA Section 5 Premanufacture Notifications, which 

435 relied on industry estimates of the effort needed to collect and compile all data required for a PMN 

436 submission, prepare the form, submit the form and data to EPA, and maintain a file of the submission 

437 (EPA, 1994, Table III-2 and pages III-11, -12, and -13). The 1994 estimates were based on a survey 

438 conducted by the Chemical Manufacturers Association (CMA, 1991), which became the American 

439 Chemistry Council. These burdens “include the time spent reading and becoming familiar with the form, 

440 gathering the required information and preparing the report, producing sanitized responses for items 

441 claimed as confidential business information, and maintaining a file of the submission” (EPA, 1994. p. III 

442 11-13). The burden associated with SNUN submission and preparation has been adjusted to reflect 

443 burden reductions resulting from the 2009 final PMN Electronic Reporting (ePMN) Rule that requires the 

444 electronic submission of all TSCA section 5 notices. Electronic submission of SNUN forms is expected 

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

446 

447 SNUN form completion and electronic submission is estimated to require 74.20 hours of technical labor 

448 and 18.00 hours of managerial labor (EPA, 2009b). Table 8 combines the estimated reporting burden and 

449 loaded wage rates for all three labor categories to estimate the per-SNUN cost of form completion. The 

450 labor cost incurred by a SNUN submission for both large and small business submitters is $5,643. 

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 

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

454 submitting small business must pay a $100 per-SNUN submission fee. Table 9 adds the labor cost and 

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

456 $8,142.74 for large business submitters and $5,742.74 for small business submitters. 

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 

459 3.2.4 Import Certification 

460 

461 In general, promulgation of a final SNUR triggers a TSCA Section 13 import certification requirement 

462 and the corresponding regulations at 19 CFR 12.118 to 12.127 and 19 CFR 127.28 for all imports of the 

463 relevant chemical substances. Thus, any U.S. manufacturer, importer, or processor receiving an imported 

464 shipment of chemicals subject to the proposed SNUR would have to certify that all chemical substances 

465 in the shipment either comply with all applicable rules and orders under TSCA or that all chemical 

substances in the shipment are not subject to TSCA.6 466 The statement must be on or attached to a 

467 commercial invoice or entry document belonging to the imported shipment. 

468 

469 In practice, import certification is fulfilled by checking a box on an invoice or entry document and 

470 generally imposes no additional burden or cost on the importer (EPA, 2009c). Any potential burden 

471 associated with a submitter’s familiarization with this requirement is assumed to be included in the more 

472 general SNUR familiarization burden discussed above. 

473 

474 3.2.5 Export Notification 

475 

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

imports of chemical substances not subject to TSCA (e.g., pesticides), “I certify that all 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 requirement7 479 per destination country for each exporter of a chemical substance. After 

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

481 Department (40 CFR §707.70). To calculate the burden associated with making export notifications, EPA 

482 first estimated the average annual number of export notifications made by an exporter. EPA then derived 

483 the annual and per notification burden associated with preparing and submitting an export notification. 

484 

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

486 total number of exporters of a SNUR chemical or the number of notifications per SNUR chemical. (This 

487 approach is consistent with that used in economic analyses for other proposed SNURs, such as Economic 

488 Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 25 Chemical Substances, not yet published.) 

489 

490 Most underlying data in this section come from the 2009 TSCA Section 12(b) ICR, ICR No.: 0795.13 

491 [Information Collection Request for] Notification of Chemical Exports - TSCA Section 12(b) Supporting 

492 Statement for Request for OMB Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act (EPA, 2009d), with updating 

493 for inflation. 

494 

495 3.2.5.1 Estimated Number of Annual Export Notifications per Exporter 

496 

497 EPA’s 2009 TSCA Section 12(b) ICR estimated that the average exporter making notifications will make 

12 notifications per year.

8 498 This includes notifications resulting from SNURs and notifications resulting 

499 from other TSCA activities. A notification is typically no more than one page per chemical/country 

combination, and one notification mailing often includes multiple chemicals and/or destination countries.9 500 

501 

502 The percent of notifications due to SNURs is unknown, and it is also unknown how many notifications 

503 may result from this rulemaking, as not all manufacturers may choose to export a chemical, or they may 

504 make several notifications for a single chemical. 

505 

506 3.2.5.2 Exporter Costs 

507 

508 The 2009 TSCA Section 12(b) ICR (EPA, 2009d, page 11, Table 3), estimated the annual export 

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

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

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

512 and sending the notification letters with the associated shipping costs 

513 

514 The per-notification cost was calculated based on the average burden per firm making notifications. 

515 Exporters making more notifications per year may benefit from economies of scale and have lower costs 

516 per notification; those making fewer notifications may have higher costs per notification. 

517 

 

7 On November 14, 2006, EPA revised the export notification requirement for chemicals subject to TSCA §5(a)(2), 

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

(November 14, 2006, 71 FR 66234). 

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 weeks 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 

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

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

520 first-class registered mail with a return receipt (USPS, 2010). The estimated per-shipment and annual 

521 mailing costs incurred by individual submitters are detailed in Table 10. 

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 

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

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

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

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

528 technical time, which may also include some proportion of legal time (EPA, 2009d). The total burden can 

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

530 by the company and the number of their products subject to TSCA §12(b) (EPA, 2009d). 

531 

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

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

534 estimated there would be approximately 300 submitters per year in near-future years (EPA, 2009c). Of 

535 these 300 submitters, EPA estimated that 200 companies were near the lower burden estimate of 2 hours 

536 per year, and 100 companies were near the upper estimate of 24 hours per year. Compiling the list for all 

537 respondents was therefore estimated to take 2,800 hours (2 hours x 200 firms plus 24 hours x 100 firms), 

538 or an average of about 9.3 hours of technical time per firm per year for 12 notifications per year (EPA, 

539 2009c). 

540 

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

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

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

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

545 include some proportion of legal time) per firm per year for 12 notifications per year (EPA, 2009c). 

546 

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

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

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

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

551 or 6 hours for 12 notifications (EPA, 2009d). 
*** 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 

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

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 cost1 -- -- -- $160 - 

Total per facility2` 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 assumed 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 

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

557 

558 The number of firms affected by not making submissions to EPA is not known; therefore, costs are not 

559 aggregated across the affected entities. The following table summarizes the costs to comply with the 

560 proposed rule amendment, as described in more detail in section 3.2 above. 

561 

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

SNUR

Option1 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 submission 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 Costs 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 describe 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 

563 3.4 Likelihood of a SNUN Submission 

564 

565 Along with the proposed amendments to the SNUR discussed in this report, EPA is concurrently 

566 proposing a test rule applicable to manufacturers, importers, and processors of c-pentaBDE, c-octaBDE, 

567 and c-decaBDE, and of articles to which these chemical mixtures have been added. This test rule would 

568 require testing for health effects, ecological effects, and chemical fate characteristics. However, only one 

569 of these rules (SNUR or test rule) will apply to each of the PBDEs. If no companies remain in the market 

570 on the effective date of the final rule, the SNUR will apply and no company may enter or reenter the 

571 market without submitting a SNUN to EPA. If the current, or any new, companies manufacture, import, 

572 or process any of the three c-PBDEs on or after the effective date of the final rule, those companies will 

573 be subject to the test rule. 

574 

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

576 believes that there is no current domestic manufacture or processing of these chemicals. In addition, there 

577 is no evidence to suggest that appreciable quantities of c-pentaBDE or c-octaBDE are manufactured 

578 anywhere in the world (see Sections 2.1 and 2.2). As a result, the Agency does not believe that any 

579 articles containing c-pentaBDE are being imported into the United States. Given this, and that there are 

580 readily available substitutes, EPA believes that submission of a SNUN for the congeners contained in c581 pentaBDE, c-octaBDE or articles containing the chemicals is unlikely.

582 

583 While c-decaBDE remains available for all uses in the U.S., the principal manufacturers and importer of 

584 c-decaBDE have committed to phase out the manufacture, import and sales of c-decaBDE starting in 

585 2010 and the companies would cease s manufacture and import for all uses no later than December 31, 

586 2013 (EPA, 2009a). However, the commitment under discussion would not affect articles made with 

587 decaBDE. To the extent that manufacture, import, and sales for a particular use of c-decaBDE do not 

588 cease by the effective date of the amended SNUR, the SNUR would not apply to manufacture import or 

589 processing for that use c-decaBDE. 

590 

591 3.5 Potential for Subsequent Regulatory Action 

592 EPA recognizes that if submission of a SNUN does result from the proposed SNUR, the Agency may 

593 take additional regulatory actions under TSCA. These additional regulatory actions might be necessary to 

594 further evaluate an intended new use and associated activities, or to prohibit or limit that activity before it 

595 occurs to prevent unreasonable risk of injury to human health or the environment. It is not known what 

596 specific subsequent regulatory actions, if any, the Agency may determine are necessary after reviewing a 

597 SNUN. Any such actions are highly dependent on the circumstances surrounding the individual SNUN 

598 (e.g., available information and scientific understanding of the chemical and its risks at the time the 

599 SNUN is being reviewed). 

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 

601 Should EPA’s review of the SNUN result in further regulatory actions, the Agency will initiate and 

602 follow the appropriate procedures for taking those actions. Included in those procedures would be an 

603 assessment of the costs and benefits of those actions. 

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 

606 4. AGENCY COSTS 

607 As described in the sections below, EPA’s costs to review and process industry submissions (SNUNs, 

608 requests to modify or revoke the SNUR, and requests for equivalency determinations) are assumed to be 

609 the same as EPA costs to review PMNs. 

610 

611 4.1 Labor Rates for EPA Staff 

612 

613 Agency labor costs are calculated based on annual Federal salaries for the Washington-Baltimore area 

614 published by the Office of Personnel Management effective January 2009 (OPM, 2009). EPA assumes 

615 that, on average, a federal GS-13, Step 5 full-time equivalent (FTE) will conduct its collection and 

administrative activities under the proposed rule. 10 616 The average salary for a GS-13 Step 5 employee was 

617 $98,518 in 2009 without fringe benefits and overhead costs. In order to derive the fully loaded salary, 

618 EPA multiplied the annual salary by an assumed loading factor of 1.6 to reflect federal fringe benefits and 

619 overhead, which results in a fully loaded annual salary of $157,629 (see Table 13). Dividing the fully 

620 loaded annual salary by 2,080 hours (i.e., the number of hours in a work year) yields an hourly FTE wage 

621 rate of $75.78. 

622 

623 The Agency loading factor of 1.6 is from an EPA guide entitled Instructions for Preparing Information 

624 Collection Requests (ICRs) (EPA, 1992, page 30, footnote 9). The 60 percent assumption was labeled 

625 “the benefits multiplication factor” in the EPA guide, but has been used in many EPA OPPT ICRs to 

626 reflect both fringe benefits and overhead for federal staff. For example, it was used in a document 

627 supporting EPA ICR No. 1139.06 (EPA, 2000), with the following explanation: 

628 

629 The annual costs per FTE are derived by multiplying the annual pay rate by 1.6 (the benefits 

630 multiplication factor). The multiplication factor used is recommended in EPA’s Office of Policy, 

631 Planning, and Evaluation’s Instructions for Preparing Information Collection Requests (ICRs)

632 (June 1, 1992). An EPA internal phone call between Carol Rawie (OPPT/EETD/RIB) and Carl 

633 Koch (OPPE/RMD/IMB) on May 3, 1994, indicated that the 1.6 factor included not only benefits 

634 but also overhead. 

635 

636 Fully loaded costs for Agency labor are shown in Table 13. 

 

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 introduced in EPA, 2007b. That report represented a change from an earlier PMN SNUR 

economic analysis (EPA, 2003), which used an average of GS-12 Step 1 and GS-12 Step 10 salaries.
*** 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-Northern 

Virginia, 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 Locality Pay Area (OPM, 2009). Hourly rates are based on annual salary divided by 

2,080 hours. 

b

 The 60% fringes-and-overhead rate is from an EPA guide, Instructions for Preparing Information Collection Requests (ICRs) 

(EPA, 1992, page 30, footnote 9).

638 

639 4.2 SNUN Processing Costs 

640 

641 The list of review steps, estimates of extramural costs, and the percent of chemicals requiring a particular 

642 review step are derived from the costs for processing PMN submissions in Table VII-1 of a 1994 EPA 

643 report, Regulatory Impact Analysis of Amendments to Regulations for TSCA Section 5 Premanufacture 

644 Notifications (EPA, 1994). The Agency burden associated with processing a PMN has been adjusted to 

645 reflect burden reductions resulting from the 2009 final PMN Electronic Reporting (ePMN) Rule that 

requires the electronic submission of all TSCA section 5 notices.11 646 Electronic submission of SNUN forms 

647 is expected reduce Agency burden by 16.5 percent (EPA, 2009c, p.28). 

648 

649 For each review step, the “EPA staff” cost is calculated by multiplying the number of FTEs (in the first 

650 column) by the fully loaded hourly salary. This shows EPA staff cost for chemicals requiring the selected 

651 review step. 

652 

653 The Extramural Cost column shows costs for contractor support and other outside purchases for 

654 chemicals requiring the selected review step is inflated from 1993 prices using the Bureau of Labor 

655 Statistics (BLS) Employment Cost Index (ECI) data (BLS, 2010b). The not seasonally adjusted ECI for 

656 total compensation of private industry professional and related workers (Series ID CIU2010000120000I) 

657 is used because it is the only series with continuous data since 1985, and that includes professional and 

658 technical labor, which perform the majority of Agency extramural activities. Table 14, below contains 

659 the derivation of inflation factors for Agency extramural costs. 

660 

 

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

Docket OPPT-2009-0922, 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 Factors 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, 

4th 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 

662 The Percent of Cases column in Table 15 is a weighting factor applied to reflect the fact that not all 

663 chemicals require each review step. For example, in the PMN process, all chemicals require 

664 Administrative Prescreening, but not all chemicals require the intensive scrutiny of “Standard Review.” 

665 The three types of submissions resulting from a SNUR may have weighting factors that differ from each 

666 other and from the weighting factors for PMNs. Changes in weighting factors could cause actual review 

667 costs to be higher or lower than calculated here. For example, some SNUNs require little review because 

668 they are determined to be “invalid” – i.e. not required in the first place. However, often a SNUN may 

669 take more Agency time than a typical PMN because of factors such as the need to retrieve old PMN 

670 records from archives, and the likelihood that more data requiring EPA review is submitted with a SNUN 

671 than would be submitted on average with a PMN. Resources were not available to update the review 

672 hours to reflect the current review process or to tailor the cost estimates to SNUNs. Therefore, for this 

673 analysis, the review steps and weighting factors are assumed to be the same as those derived in 1994 for 

674 PMNs. 

675 

676 The Weighted Cost column is calculated by multiplying the Unweighted Costs (EPA staff cost plus 

677 extramural costs) by the percentage of cases requiring this review step. Weighted costs are then 

678 multiplied by the burden reduction of 16.5 percent to account for burden savings generated electronic 

679 submission. This calculation yields total Agency costs of $4,934, per SNUN, for submission review and 

680 processing, as shown in Table 15. 
*** 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 21 Economic and Policy Analysis Branch 

Table 15. Agency Costs for SNUN and Other Submission Review and Processing 

Review Steps 

EPA staff (FTE) Cost Extramural Cost 2 Unweighted 

Cost 

Pct. of 

Cases 

Weighted 

Cost3

ePM

Burd

Reduc

FTE 

fraction 

Cost per 

FTE 1

FTE Total 

($2009) 

1993 

dollars 

2009 

dollars 

(a) (b) (c)=(a)*(b) (d) (e) (f)=(c)+(e) (g) (h)=(f)*(g) (i

Pre-notice consultation 0.0024 $157,629 $378 $4.00 $6.65 $385 41% $158 0.1Administrative prescreen/ notice receipt/user fee 0.0024 $157,629 $378 $92.00 $152.97 $531 100% $531 0.1CRSS (Chemical Review and Search Strategy) 0.0025 $157,629 $394 $268.00 $445.60 $840 100% $840 0.1SAT (Structure Activity Team) 0.0006 $157,629 $95 $14.00 $23.28 $118 100% $118 0.1Engineering/Exposure 0.0015 $157,629 $236 $56.00 $93.11 $330 100% $330 0.1Exposure/Fate 0.0008 $157,629 $126 $0.00 $0.00 $126 100% $126 0.1Focus 0.0009 $157,629 $142 $23.00 $38.24 $180 100% $180 0.1Standard Review Functions 0.0219 $157,629 $3,452 $511.00 $849.63 $4,302 29% $1,247 0.1Division Directors Meeting 0.0129 $157,629 $2,033 $113.00 $187.88 $2,221 15% $333 0.1Order Development/Negotiation Review 

0.0171 $157,629 $2,695 $22.00 $36.58 $2,732 3% $82 0.1

Post Order Data Review 0.0886 $157,629 $13,966 $0.00 $0.00 $13,966 3% $419 0.1Order Modification 0.2167 $157,629 $34,158 $0.00 $0.00 $34,158 3% $1,025 0.1New Chemical SNUR Development 0.0277 $157,629 $4,366 $85.00 $141.33 $4,508 7% $316 0.1Notices of Commencement 0.0012 $157,629 $189 $40.00 $66.51 $256 31% $79 0.1FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) Requests 0.0333 $157,629 $5,249 $287.00 $477.19 $5,726 1% $57 0.1CBI (Confidential Business Information) Substantiation 0.0004 $157,629 $63 $3.00 $4.99 $68 100% $68 0.1TOTAL $5,909 0.16Notes: 1 GS-13 Step 5 salaries loaded with benefits and overhead. See Table 13 for derivation.

2 Extramural costs consist of contracting support and other purchases directly attributable to the PMN review process inflated from 1993 prices (See Table 

3 Weighted costs were calculated using unrounded unit cost estimates, so results may differ from calculations using the rounded values shown in this table. 4 Electronic submission is expected to generate 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 

681 4.3 Export Notification Cost 

682 

683 Under TSCA Section 12(b), exporters must notify EPA if they intend to export chemicals subject to 

684 SNURs, as described in Section 3 above. The Agency burden and cost due to TSCA §12(b) export 

685 notification result from three tasks. In the first task, EPA receives export notifications from companies 

686 that intend to export one of the chemicals subject to TSCA §12(b) (EPA, 2009d). In the second task, 

687 EPA staff prepares separate notification letters that are subsequently reviewed and delivered to importing 

688 countries, their embassies, or representatives, and to the importing country’s US embassies (EPA, 2009d). 

689 (See Table 10 for the cost of mailing one notification). The third task is comprised of EPA staff 

690 responses to public inquiries and other TSCA 12(b) activities. The work of responding to non-routine 

691 requests for information and clarification from industry and importing countries, and of handling other 

692 tasks associated with the TSCA §12(b) program, was estimated to require roughly 400 hours per year 

693 (EPA, 2009c). Since the current rulemaking covers only a very small percent of the chemicals subject to 

694 TSCA 12(b) reporting, a very small percent of such activity will be attributable to the current rulemaking. 

695 

696 Because it is unknown how many, if any, notifications EPA will receive or send as a result of the current 

697 rulemaking, the costs to the Agency are presented per activity. The burden for the first two Agency 

698 activities is provided in Table 16 below. To estimate the Agency cost, hourly burdens are multiplied by 

699 the loaded wage rate of a GS-13, Step 5, which is derived in Table 13. 

700 

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

Agency Activity 

Hours per 

Activity 

FTE per 

Activity1

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 activity 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 costs are from Table 10 of this report. Other burdens are 

from 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), 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 

705 5. ADDITIONAL ANALYSES 

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

707 various statutes and executive orders. 

708 

709 5.1 Regulatory Flexibility Act 

710 

711 The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et. seq.), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory 

712 Enforcement Fairness Act, requires regulators to consider the impact of regulations on small entities, in 

713 particular small businesses. EPA’s experience to date is that, in response to the promulgation of SNURs 

714 covering over 1,000 chemicals, the Agency receives only a handful of notices per year. For example, the 

715 number of SNUNs was four in Federal fiscal year in 2005, eight in FY2006, six in FY2007, eight in 

FY2008, and 7 in FY2009.12 During this five-year period, three small entities submitted a SNUN.13 716 The 

717 criteria for ‘small business’ was that the company checked the box on the PMN form, page 2, stating that 

718 it was a small business for the purpose of paying the $100 fee instead of the normal fee. 

719 

720 This leaves open the question of how many small businesses are affected but do not submit SNUNs. For 

721 example, businesses may change their behavior in order to use a chemical in a manner that avoids 

722 triggering significant new use notification requirements and make no submission to EPA. Data and 

723 resources were not available to estimate the number of small businesses affected by the current rule. 

724 

725 Small businesses may be affected by SNURs without EPA being aware; for example, if the firms have 

726 made no submissions or comments to EPA. However, even if a small business were interested in 

727 supplying a SNUR chemical, the SNUR’s impact on profits is generally expected to be minor. For 

728 example, the firm may have a small expense of keeping records and/or of changing workplace practices to 

729 comply with any new restrictions. If modifying production practices would be overly costly, or if the 

730 firm wishes to engage in a significant new use but believes that expensive testing is needed to support a 

731 submission to EPA, it may instead forego production, thus sacrificing profits. The amounts of lost 

732 profits, if any, were not quantified for this report, but are expected to be low because domestic 

733 manufacture or processing of c-pentaBDE and c-octaBDE has already ceased, and manufacture of c734 decaBDE is expected to cease by 2013 due to state bans and voluntary programs. Any remaining 

735 consumer uses are expected to be new so that they are unlikely to be central to a firm’s business. Based 

736 on these considerations and on the limited data available, EPA expects that any compliance with a SNUR 

737 will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 

738 

739 5.2 Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

740 

741 EPA has determined that this regulatory action does not impose any enforceable duty, contain any 

742 unfunded mandate, or otherwise have any effect on small governments subject to the requirements of 

743 sections 202, 203, 204, or 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4). 

744 

 

12 February 5, 2009 email from Carol Rawie, EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, to Tulika Narayan and Kimberly 

Wilson, Abt Associates, and counts of SNUN 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 Rawie, EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics to Tulika Narayan and Kimberly 

Wilson, Abt Associates and reviews of SNUN submissions 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 

745 5.3 Paperwork Reduction Act 

746 

747 According to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 USC 3501 et seq., an agency may not conduct or 

748 sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information that requires Office of 

749 Management and Budget (OMB) approval under the PRA, unless it has been approved by OMB and 

750 displays a currently valid OMB control number. The information collection requirements related to this 

751 action have already been approved by OMB pursuant to the PRA under OMB control number 2070-0038 

752 (EPA ICR No. 1188). This action does not impose any additional burden requiring OMB approval. 

753 

754 5.4 National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act 

755 

756 This action does not involve any technical standards; therefore, section 12(d) of the National Technology 

757 Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 

758 note), does not apply to this action. 

759 

760 5.5 Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review 

761 

762 Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, requires OMB review for rules with an impact 

763 on the economy of $100 million or more, or with any other potential significant impact. OMB has 

764 previously determined that these types of SNURs are not a “significant regulatory action” that would 

765 require OMB review under this Executive Order. 

766 

767 5.6 Executive Order 12898: Environmental Justice 

768 

769 This action does not involve special considerations of environmental justice-related issues as required by 

770 Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and 

771 Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

772 

773 5.7 Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children 

774 

775 Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 

776 19885, April 23, 1997), requires EPA to identify and assess environmental health and safety risks that 

777 may disproportionately affect children. This type of analysis is required for rules that will have an impact 

778 of $100 million or more only. The impact of the proposed SNUR will be less than $100 million, and 

779 therefore no analysis of such impacts on children is required. 

780 

781 5.8 Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

782 

783 Executive Order 13132, Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an 

784 accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 

785 development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.” This action will not have a 

786 substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or 

787 on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in 

788 Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). 

789 

790 5.9 Executive Order 13175: Tribal Governments 

791 

792 Executive Order 13175 is Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (59 FR 22951, 

793 November 6, 2000). This rule does not have Tribal implications because it is not expected to have 

794 substantial direct effects on Indian Tribes. 

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 

796 5.10 Executive Order 13211: Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

797 

798 This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning Regulations That 

799 Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because this 

800 action is not expected to affect energy supply, distribution, or use. 

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 

804 6. REFERENCES 

805 

806 15 U.S.C. 272, National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104–

807 113, Section 12(d). 

808 

809 19 CFR 12, Customs Duties: Special Classes of Merchandise, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 12, Title 

810 19, August 1, 1983. 

811 

812 40 CFR 707, Chemical Imports and Exports, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 707, Title 40, July 1, 

813 2003. 

814 

815 40 CFR 720, Premanufacture Notification, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 720, Title 40, July 1, 2003. 

816 

817 40 CFR 721, Significant New Use of Chemical Substances, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 721, Title 

818 40, July 1, 2003. 

819 

820 59 FR 7629, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 

821 Populations, Federal Register, Volume 59, February 16, 1994. 

822 

823 59 FR 22951, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, Federal Register, Volume 

824 59, November 6, 2000. 

825 

826 62 FR 19885, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks, Federal 

827 Register, Volume 62, April 23, 1997. 

828 

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

830 

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

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

833 

834 71 FR 34015, Certain Polybrominated Diphenylethers; Significant New Use Rule, Federal Register, 

835 Volume 71, June 13, 2006. Available in docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2004-0085 at 

836 http://www.regulations.gov. 

837 

838 71 FR 66234, Export Notification; Change to Reporting Requirements, Final Rule, Federal Register, 

839 Volume 71, November 14, 2006. Available in docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0058 at 

840 http://www.regulations.gov. 

841 

842 Abt Associates Inc., 2009. Pentabromodiphenyl Ether, Octabromodiphenyl Ether and 

843 Decabromodiphenyl Ether Market Profile. October 20, 2009. 

844 

845 Alvarez, Jacqueline. Draft Risk Management Evaluation for Commercial Octabromodiphenyl ether. 

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

847 

848 BLS, 2006a. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employer Costs for Employee Compensation: Changes to 

849 NAICS and SOC, Table 2. ECEC Occupational Comparability between SOC and OCS. 

850 Downloaded February 2006 from http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ect/sp/ecsm0003.htm.

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 

852 BLS, 2006b. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment Cost Index News Release Text: Employment 

853 Cost Index, March 2006 (April 28, 2006), at http://www.bls.gov. 

854 

855 BLS, 2006c. Unpublished Employer Costs for Employee Compensation: Private Manufacturing Industry 

856 by Occupation, December 2005. Data received May 10, 2006, by Carol Rawie, US EPA, from 

857 Raphael Branch, US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS 2006). The data is not seasonally adjusted 

858 (email from Raphael Branch to Carol Rawie, November 17, 2005). 

859 

860 BLS, 2008a. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Table 5. Compensation (Not Seasonally Adjusted): Employment 

861 Cost Index for total compensation, for private industry workers, by occupational group and 

862 industry. (April 30, 2008) at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/eci.t05.htm.

863 

864 BLS, 2008b. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer Price Index- Inflation Calculator, data inflated to 

865 2007 values, extracted May 1, 2008. 

866 

867 BLS, 2010a. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Employer Costs for Employee Compensation

868 Supplementary Tables December 2009”. (March 10, 2010) at

869 http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ect/sp/ecsuptc13.pdf. (Note: The BLS report title and content is updated 

870 periodically to include more recent data, on the same website.) 

871 

872 BLS, 2010b. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employment Cost Index – Total Compensation: Professional and 

873 Related Private Industry, Not Seasonally Adjusted. (Series ID: CIU2010000120000I), extracted 

874 April 12, 2010. 

875 

876 Branch R.E. and Lowell Mason, 2006. Seasonal adjustment in the ECI and the conversion to NAICS and 

877 SOC, Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics, April, 2006. 

878 

879 Buckley, Liz. “Environment Canada proposes ban on decaBDE in electronics.” Pesticide & Toxic 

880 Chemical News, volume 37, number 22, page 1, April 6, 2009. 

881 

882 Buzcek, Mark. Independent Consultant. Personal communication with Brian Segal of Abt Associates via 

883 telephone. August 13, 2009. 

884 

885 Campbell, Bob. Chemtura. Personal communication with Brian Segal of Abt Associates via telephone. 

886 August 14, 2009. 

887 

888 Caroll, Richard E., 2006. Changes affecting the Employment Cost Index: an overview, Monthly Labor 

889 Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics, April 1, 2006. 

890 

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

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

893 

894 Dawson, Ray. Albemarle. Personal communication with Brian Segal of Abt Associates via telephone. 

895 August 17, 2009. 

896 

897 DOC, 2003. U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, “2002 NAICS Definitions” Available at: 

898 http://www.census.gov/epcd/naics02/naics02definitions.txt. 

899 

900 EPA, 1992. U.S. EPA, Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation. Instructions for Preparing Information 

901 Collection Requests (ICRs). Washington, DC, June 1, 1992. 

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 

903 EPA, 1994. US EPA, Office of Toxic Substances, Regulatory Impacts Branch. Regulatory Impact 

904 Analysis of Amendments to Regulations for TSCA Section 5 Premanufacture Notifications. 

905 Washington, DC: U.S. EPA/OPPT/EETD/RIB, September 9, 1994. (OTS/RIB later became 

906 OPPTS/EPAB.) 

907 

908 EPA, 2000. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, ICR No. 1139.06. [Information 

909 Collection Request for] TSCA Existing Chemical Test Rules, Consent Orders, Test Rule 

910 Exemptions, and Voluntary Test Data Submissions: Supporting Statement for Request for OMB 

911 Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Attachment 5, Wage Rates Estimation, August 29, 

912 2000. 

913 

914 EPA, 2002a U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis Branch. 

915 Revised Economic Analysis for the Amended Inventory Update Rule: Final Report. Washington, 

916 DC. August 2002. 

917 

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

919 Branch. Wage Rates for Economic Analysis of the Toxics Release Inventory Program. 

920 Washington, DC, June 10, 2002. 

921 

922 EPA, 2003. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis Branch. 

923 Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 65 Chemical Substances. 

924 Washington, DC, 2003. Available in docket EPA-HQ-OPPTS-2002-0078 at 

925 http://www.regulations.gov. 

926 EPA, 2005. Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis Branch. Economic 

927 Analysis of the Proposed Change to TSCA Section 12(b) Export Notification Requirements, 

928 November 2005, available from the Federal Docket Management System as EPA-HQ-OPPT929 2005-005 8-0017 at http://www.regulations.gov. 

930 

931 EPA, 2006. U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics Non-Confidential 2006 IUR Records by 

932 Chemical, including Manufacturing, Processing and Use Information 

933 (http://cfpub.epa.gov/iursearch/index.cfm?s=chem). Accessed October 15, 2009. 

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

935 Branch. Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 38 Chemical 

936 Substances (EPA Docket OPPT-2006-0898), August 17, 2007. 

937 EPA, 2007b. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, ICR No. 0574.14. [Information 

938 Collection Request for] Pre-Manufacture Review Reporting and Exemption Requirements for 

939 New Chemical Substances and Significant New Use Reporting Requirements for Chemical 

940 Substances: Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB Review under The Paperwork 

941 Reduction Act, December 6, 2007. 

942 

943 EPA, 2008. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis Branch. 

944 Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 56 Chemical Substances. 

945 Washington, DC, 2008. Available from the Federal Docket Management System as EPA-HQ946 OPPTS- 2008-0251 at http://www.regulations.gov.

947 

948 EPA 2009a. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers 

949 (PBDEs) Action Plan. December 30, 2009 at 
*** 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 

950 http://www.epa.gov/oppt/existingchemicals/pubs/pbdes_ap_2009_1230_final.pdf. 

951 

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

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

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

955 

956 EPA, 2009c. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. ICR No.: 0795.13 [Information 

957 Collection Request for] Notification of Chemical Exports - TSCA Section 12(b) Supporting 

958 Statement for Request for OMB Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act. March 6, 2009 at 

959 http://www.regulations.gov. 

960 

961 EPA, 2010 [expected]. U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and 

962 Policy Analysis Branch. Economic Analysis of Expedited Significant New Use Rules for 25 

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

964 

965 ERG, 2002. Market Analysis for the use of Polybrominated Diphenyl Etheres (PBDEs) as Flame 

966 Retardants – Focusing on Pentabromodiphenyl Ether (pentaBDE). October 3, 2002. 

967 

968 National Library of Medicine. “NIH ChemID Lite” available at 

969 http://chem2.sis.nlm.nih.gov/chemidplus/chemidlite.jsp. Accessed October 19, 2009. 

970 

971 OPM, 2009. Office of Personnel Management, Salary Table 2009-DCB, Washington BaltimoreNorthern 

972 Virginia, DC-MD-PA-VA-WV. Accessed from http://www.opm.gov/oca/09tables/pdf/DCB.pdf. 

973 

974 PFA, 2006. Letter US EPA Re: Docket Number OPPT-2004-0085; Proposed Significant New Use Rule. 

975 Polyurethane Foam Association. March 10, 2006. 

976 

977 Rawie, Carol. 2009. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Personal communication with Tulika 

978 Narayan and Kimberly Wilson of Abt Associates via e-mail. February 5, 2009. 

979 

980 Sleemi, Fehmida, 2006. Employment Cost Index publication plans, Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of 

981 Labor Statistics, April 1, 2006. 

982 

983 UK Health Protection Agency, 2007. HPA Compendium of Chemical Hazards: Polybromodiphenyl 

984 Ethers (Decabromodiphenyl Ether). CHAPD HQ, HPA 2007/9 Version 1. J C Wakefield. 

985 http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1236845862204 

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

987 23, 2010.