64738 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 236 / Tuesday, December 9, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

health and the environment in a way

that is consistent with safety concerns.

As mentioned above, EPA has been

investigating and will continue to

investigate the cause of these incidents.

During the one year suspension period,

the Agency will provide the public with

the results of the investigation. At the

conclusion of the one year period, EPA

expects to have addressed any safety

concerns with the EO NESHAP

requirements. If the Agency finds that

changes to the EO NESHAP are

necessary to address safety concerns,

EPA will conduct a rulemaking to

promulgate a revised standard and

sources will be given adequate

opportunity to comply with the revised

rule. If, however, EPA concludes that no

changes are necessary, EO facilities will

be expected to be in compliance with

the EO NESHAP by December 6, 1998.

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection

requirements of the EO NESHAP were

submitted to and approved by the Office

of Management and Budget (OMB). A

copy of this Information Collection

Request (ICR) document (OMB control

number 2060–0283) may be obtained

from Ms. Sandy Farmer, Information

Policy Branch (2136); U.S. EPA; 401 M

Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460, or

by calling (202) 260–2740.

Today’s action has no impact on the

information collection burden estimates

made previously. Today’s action merely

suspends the EO NESHAP for one year.

This change does not impose new

requirements. Consequently, the ICR has

not been revised.

B. Executive Order 12866, Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act, and Regulatory

Flexibility Act

Today’s action serves to reduce the

burden on certain sources by

temporarily suspending the EO

NESHAP. Consequently, under

Executive Order 12866, this action is

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and

is therefore not subject to review by the

Office of Management and Budget.

Since this action is not subject to noticeand-comment rulemaking requirements

under the APA or any other law, it is

also not subject to sections 202, 204 or

205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform

Act (UMRA). In addition, since this

action does not impose annual costs of

$100 million or more and will not

significantly or uniquely affect small

governments, the Agency has no

obligations under section 203 of UMRA.

Moreover, since this action is not

subject to notice-and-comment

requirements under the APA or any

other statute as discussed above, it is

not subject to section 603 or 604 of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act.

C. Submission to Congress and the

Comptroller General

EPA submitted a report containing

this action and other information to the

U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of

Representatives, and the Comptroller

General of the United States prior to

publication in today’s Federal Register.

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule is

effective immediately pursuant to 5

U.S.C. 808(2) because the EPA for good

cause finds that notice and comment is

impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary

to the public interest, for the reasons

stated previously.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Ethylene oxide

sterilization, Hazardous substances,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: December 4, 1997.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, Title 40, Part 63, Subpart O

of the Code of Federal Regulations, is

hereby suspended until December 6,

1998.

[FR Doc. 97–32328 Filed 12–5–97; 1:16 pm]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 721

[OPPTS–50608E; FRL–5746–2]

RIN 2070–AB27

Polyalkylene Polyamine; Significant

New Use Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is issuing a significant

new use rule (SNUR) under section

5(a)(2) of the Toxic Substances Control

Act (TSCA) for the chemical substance

described as polyalkylene polyamine

which is the subject of premanufacture

notice (PMN) P–89–963. This rule

would require certain persons who

intend to manufacture, or import this

substance for a significant new use to

notify EPA at least 90 days before

commencing any manufacturing or

importing activities for a use designated

by this SNUR as a significant new use.

The required notice would provide EPA

with the opportunity to evaluate the

intended use and, if necessary, to

prohibit or limit that activity before it

can occur.

DATES: This rule is effective January 8,

1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Susan B. Hazen, Director,

Environmental Assistance Division

(7408), Office of Pollution Prevention

and Toxics, Environmental Protection

Agency, Rm. E–543B, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460, telephone: (202)

554–1404, TDD: (202) 554–0551; e-mail:

TSCA-Hotline@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Availability: Electronic

copies of this document are available

from the EPA Home Page at the Federal

Register-Environmental Documents

entry for this document under ‘‘Laws

and Regulations’’ (http://www.epa.gov/

fedrgstr/).

This final SNUR would require

persons to notify EPA at least 90 days

before commencing the manufacture or

import of P–89–963 for the significant

new uses designated herein. The

required notice would provide EPA

with information with which to evaluate

an intended use and associated

activities.

I. Authority

Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA (15 U.S.C.

2604(a)(2)) authorizes EPA to determine

that a use of a chemical substance is a

‘‘significant new use.’’ EPA must make

this determination by rule after

considering all relevant factors,

including those listed in section 5(a)(2).

Once EPA determines that a use of a

chemical substance is a significant new

use, section 5(a)(1)(B) of TSCA requires

persons to submit a notice to EPA at

least 90 days before they manufacture,

import, or process the chemical

substance for that use. Section 26(c) of

TSCA authorizes EPA to take action

under section 5(a)(2) with respect to a

category of chemical substances.

Persons subject to this SNUR would

comply with the same notice

requirements and EPA regulatory

procedures as submitters of

premanufacture notices under section

5(a)(1) of TSCA. In particular, these

requirements include the information

submission requirements of section 5(b)

and (d)(1), the exemptions authorized

by section 5(h)(1), (h)(2), (h)(3), and

(h)(5), and the regulations at 40 CFR

part 720. Once EPA receives a SNUR

notice, EPA may take regulatory action

under section 5(e), 5(f), 6, or 7 to control

the activities for which it has received

a SNUR notice. If EPA does not take
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 236 / Tuesday, December 9, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 64739

action, section 5(g) of TSCA requires

EPA to explain in the Federal Register

its reasons for not taking action.

Persons who intend to export a

substance identified in a proposed or

final SNUR are subject to the export

notification provisions of TSCA section

12(b). The regulations that interpret

section 12(b) appear at 40 CFR part 707.

II. Applicability of General Provisions

General regulatory provisions

applicable to SNURs are codified at 40

CFR part 721, subpart A. On July 27,

1988 (53 FR 28354) and July 27, 1989

(54 FR 31298), EPA promulgated

amendments to the general provisions

which apply to this SNUR. In the

Federal Register of August 17, 1988 (53

FR 31252), EPA promulgated a ‘‘User

Fee Rule’’ (40 CFR part 700) under the

authority of TSCA section 26(b).

Provisions requiring persons submitting

SNUR notices to submit certain fees to

EPA are discussed in detail in that

Federal Register document. Interested

persons should refer to these documents

for further information.

III. Background and Response to

Comments

EPA published a direct final SNUR for

the chemical substance, which was the

subject of (PMN) P–89–963 and a TSCA

5(e) consent order issued by EPA, in the

Federal Register of June 8, 1993 (58 FR

32227). EPA received a notice of intent

to submit adverse comments for this

chemical substance following

publication. Therefore, as required by

§ 721.160, the final SNUR for P–89–963

was withdrawn on December 19, 1994

(59 FR 65248) (FRL–4758–2), and a

proposed rule on the substance was

issued on December 19, 1994 (59 FR

65289) (FRL–4758–3).

The background and reasons for the

SNUR were set forth in the preamble to

the proposed rule. EPA received

comments from the current

manufacturer of the PMN substance.

EPA’s response to the comments and

changes to the proposed rule are

discussed in this document.

All but one of the comments can be

summarized as follows: Since the 5(e)

consent order requires only that

manufacturers and importers be subject

to hazard communication requirements

concerning environmental effects, water

release restrictions, and recordkeeping

requirements, the SNUR should reflect

similar regulation, and processors

should not be subject to these SNUR

requirements. EPA agrees with this

clarification. The proposed SNUR

would have required that only

manufacturers notify the Agency if the

substance was released to water. In

addition, EPA is revising both the

hazard communication and

recordkeeping sections to make it clear

that only manufacturers and importers

are subject to the requirements of the

SNUR.

The other comment was that since the

toxicity testing (a 28-day oral study in

rats) required by the 5(e) consent order

at a designated production volume limit

had already been completed and

submitted to EPA, the corresponding

production volume limit in the

proposed SNUR should not be included

in the final SNUR. EPA agrees and

accordingly has eliminated this

notification requirement from the final

SNUR. In addition, the hazard

communication requirements

designated in the proposed SNUR at

§ 721.72 (a)(2)(i)(A) and (B) have been

eliminated. These requirements would

have compelled manufacturers,

importers, or processors to incorporate

into a Material Safety Data Sheet

(MSDS) any risks to human health and

methods for protecting against such risk,

if such risks were demonstrated by the

results of toxicity testing required under

the section 5(e) consent order. EPA

eliminated these requirements, since the

order and the SNUR no longer require

toxicity testing and the test data already

submitted did not warrant additional

hazard communication notification.

IV. Applicability of SNUR to Uses

Occurring Before Effective Date of the

Final SNUR

EPA has decided that the intent of

section 5(a)(1)(B) is best served by

designating a use as a significant new

use as of the date of proposal rather than

as of the effective date of the rule.

Because this SNUR was first published

on June 8, 1993, as a direct final rule,

that date will serve as the date after

which uses would be considered to be

new uses. If uses which had

commenced between that date and the

effective date of this rulemaking were

considered ongoing, rather than new,

any person could defeat the SNUR by

initiating a significant new use before

the effective date. This would make it

difficult for EPA to establish SNUR

notice requirements. Thus, persons who

begin commercial manufacture, import,

or processing of the substance for uses

that would be regulated through this

SNUR after June 8, 1993, would have to

cease any such activity before the

effective date of this rule. To resume

their activities, such persons would

have to comply with all applicable

SNUR notice requirements and wait

until the notice review period,

including all extensions, expires. EPA,

not wishing to unnecessarily disrupt the

activities of persons who begin

commercial manufacture, import, or

processing for a proposed significant

new use before the effective date of the

SNUR, has promulgated provisions to

allow such persons to comply with this

SNUR before it is promulgated. If a

person were to meet the conditions of

advance compliance as codified at

§ 721.45(h) (53 FR 28354, July 17, 1988),

the person would be considered to have

met the requirements of the SNUR for

those activities. If persons who begin

commercial manufacture, import, or

processing of the substance between

proposal and the effective date of the

SNUR do not meet the conditions of

advance compliance, they must cease

that activity before the effective date of

the rule. To resume their activities,

these persons would have to comply

with all applicable SNUR notice

requirements and wait until the notice

review period, including all extensions,

expires.

V. Economic Analysis

EPA has evaluated the potential costs

of establishing significant new use

notice requirements for potential

manufacturers, and importers of the

chemical substance at the time of the

direct final rule. The analysis is

unchanged for the substance in the final

rule. The Agency’s complete economic

analysis is available in the public record

for this final rule (OPPTS–50608E).

VI. Public Record

The official record for this

rulemaking, as well as the public

version, has been established for this

rulemaking under docket control

number OPPTS–50608E (including

comments and data submitted

electronically). A public version of this

record, including printed, paper

versions of electronic comments, which

does not include any information

claimed as Confidential Business

Information (CBI) is available for

inspection from 12 noon to 4 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, excluding legal

holidays. The official rulemaking record

is located in the TSCA Nonconfidential

Information Center, Rm. NE–B607, 401

M St., SW., Washington, DC.

VII. Regulatory Assessment

Requirements

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

subject to review by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB). In

addition, this action does not impose

any enforceable duty or contain any

unfunded mandate as described in the

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
64740 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 236 / Tuesday, December 9, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

(Pub. L. 104–4), or require prior

consultation with State officials as

specified by Executive Order 12875 (58

FR 58093, October 28, 1993), or involve

special considerations of environmental

justice related issues as required by

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,

February 16, 1994).

An agency may not conduct or

sponsor, and a person is not required to

respond to, an information collection

request unless it displays a currently

valid OMB control number. The

information collection requirements

related to this action have already been

approved by OMB pursuant to the

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq., under OMB control

number 2070–0012 (EPA ICR No. 574).

This action does not impose any

burdens requiring additional OMB

approval. The public reporting burden

for this collection of information is

estimated to average 100 hours per

response. The burden estimate includes

the time needed to review instructions,

search existing data sources, gather and

maintain the data needed, and complete

and review the collection of

information.

In addition, pursuant to section 605(b)

of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Agency has

determined that the promulgation of a

SNUR does not have a significant

adverse economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

The Agency’s generic certification for

promulgation of new SNURs appears on

June 2, 1997 (62 FR 29684) (FRL–5597–

1), and was provided to the Chief

Counsel for Advocacy of the Small

Business Administration.

VIII. Submission to Congress and the

General Accounting Office

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), as added

by the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, the

Agency has submitted a report

containing this rule and other required

information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S.

House of Representatives, and the

Comptroller General of the General

Accounting Office prior to publication

of this rule in today’s Federal Register.

This is not a major rule as defined by

5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 721

Environmental protection, Chemicals,

Hazardous substances, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: November 24, 1997.

Charles M. Auer,

Director, Chemical Control Division, Office

of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.

Therefore, 40 CFR part 721 is

amended as follows:

PART 721—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 721

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2604, 2607, and

2625(c).

2. By adding new § 721.6193 to

subpart E to read as follows:

§ 721.6193 Polyalkylene polyamine.

(a) Chemical substance and

significant new uses subject to reporting.

(1) The chemical substance generically

identified as a polyalkylene polyamine

(PMN P–89–963) is subject to reporting

under this section for the significant

new uses described in paragraph (a)(2)

of this section.

(2) The significant new uses are:

(i) Hazard communication program.

Requirements as specified in § 721.72

(a), (b), (c), (d), (f), (g)(3)(i), (g)(4) (users

minimize release to water), and (g)(5)

are applicable to manufacturers and

importers.

(ii) Release to water. Requirements as

specified in § 721.90(a)(1).

(b) Specific requirements. The

provisions of subpart A of this part

apply to this section except as modified

by this paragraph.

(1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping

requirements as specified in § 721.125

(a), (b), (c), (f), (g), (h), (i), and (k) are

applicable to manufacturers and

importers of this substance.

(2) Limitations or revocation of

certain notification requirements. The

provisions of § 721.185 apply to this

section.

[FR Doc. 97–32179 Filed 12–8–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

GENERAL SERVICES

ADMINISTRATION

41 CFR Part 105–60

RIN 3090–AG65

Public Availability of Agency Records

and Informational Materials

AGENCY: Office of Management and

Workplace Programs, GSA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The General Services

Administration (GSA) is revising its

regulations that implement the Freedom

of Information Act (FOIA), to

incorporate the time limit provisions of

the Electronic Freedom of Information

Act Amendments of 1996.

DATES: This rule is effective December 9,

1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mary Cunningham, GSA Freedom of

Information Act (FOIA) Officer (202–

501–3415); or Helen C. Maus, Office of

General Counsel (202–501–1460).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule

was not submitted to the Office of

Management and Budget pursuant to

Executive Order 12866 of September 30,

1993, Regulatory Planning and Review,

because it is not a significant regulatory

action as defined in Executive Order

12866.

The Paperwork Reduction Act does

not apply because the rule does not

impose information collection

requirements which require the

approval of the Office of Management

and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

The Administrator certifies that this

regulatory amendment will not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities as

they are defined in the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612.

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b) this rule is

therefore exempt from the initial and

final regulatory flexibility analyses

requirements of sections 603 and 604.

Comprehensive Summary

The regulations of which this interim

rule is a part implement the FOIA, that

codified Pub. L. 89–487 and amended

section 3 of the Administrative

Procedure Act, formerly 5 U.S.C. 1002

(1964 ed.). The revision incorporates the

time limit provisions of the Electronic

Freedom of Information Act

Amendments of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–231,

110 Stat. 3048), changing response time

for initial requests from 10 working days

to 20 working days. The remaining

provisions of the 1996 amendments will

be incorporated in a forthcoming edition

of the regulations.

Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking

In developing this final rule, we are

waiving the usual notice of proposed

rulemaking and public comment

procedures set forth in the

Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.

553 (APA). The APA provides an

exception to the notice and comment

procedures when an agency finds there

is good cause for dispensing with such

procedures on the basis that they are

impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary

to the public interest. We have

determined that under 5 U.S.C.

553(b)(3)(B) good cause exists for