26922 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

Congress, through OMB, explanations 

when the Federal agency decides not to 

use available and applicable voluntary 

consensus standards. This authorization 

does not involve technical standards. 

Therefore, EPA is not considering the 

use of any voluntary consensus 

standards. 

10. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) establishes Federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

Federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. EPA 

has determined that this authorization 

will not have disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on minority or 

low-income populations. This 

authorization does not affect the level of 

protection provided to human health or 

the environment because this document 

authorizes pre-existing State rules 

which are equivalent to and no less 

stringent than existing Federal 

requirements. 

11. The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801–808 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801–808, generally provides that 

before a rule may take effect, the agency 

promulgating the rule must submit a 

rule report, which includes a copy of 

the rule, to each House of the Congress 

and to the Comptroller General of the 

United States. EPA will submit a report 

containing this document and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication in the 

Federal Register. A major rule cannot 

take effect until 60 days after it is 

published in the Federal Register. This 

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

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Confidential business information, 

Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste 

transportation, Indian lands, 

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Authority: This proposed action is issued 

under the authority of sections 2002(a), 3006 

and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, 

as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b). 

Dated: May 2, 2018. 

Cosmo Servidio, 

Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2018–12507 Filed 6–8–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 721 

[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2018–0159; FRL–9978–76] 

RIN 2070–AK45 

Asbestos; Significant New Use Rule 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA), EPA is proposing a 

significant new use rule (SNUR) for 

asbestos as defined under the Asbestos 

Hazard Emergency Response Act. The 

proposed significant new use of asbestos 

(including as part of an article) is 

manufacturing (including importing) or 

processing for certain uses identified by 

EPA as no longer ongoing. The Agency 

has found no information indicating 

that the following uses are ongoing, and 

therefore, the following uses are subject 

to this proposed SNUR: Adhesives, 

sealants, and roof and non-roof coatings; 

arc chutes; beater-add gaskets; extruded 

sealant tape and other tape; filler for 

acetylene cylinders; high-grade 

electrical paper; millboard; missile 

liner; pipeline wrap; reinforced plastics; 

roofing felt; separators in fuel cells and 

batteries; vinyl-asbestos floor tile; and 

any other building material (other than 

cement). Persons subject to the SNUR 

would be required to notify EPA at least 

90 days before commencing any 

manufacturing (including importing) or 

processing of asbestos (including as part 

of an article) for a significant new use. 

The required notification initiates EPA’s 

evaluation of the conditions of use 

associated with the intended use within 

the applicable review period. 

Manufacturing (including importing) 

and processing (including as part of an 

article) for the significant new use may 

not commence until EPA has conducted 

a review of the notice, made an 

appropriate determination on the notice, 

and taken such actions as are required 

in association with that determination. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 10, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2018–0159, by 

one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. 

• Mail: Document Control Office 

(7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention 

and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: To make special 

arrangements for hand delivery or 

delivery of boxed information, please 

follow the instructions at http://

www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. 

Additional instructions on commenting 

or visiting the docket, along with more 

information about dockets generally, is 

available at http://www.epa.gov/ 

dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For technical information contact: 

Robert Courtnage, National Program 

Chemicals Division (Mail Code 7404T), 

Office of Pollution Prevention and 

Toxics, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone 

number: (202) 566–1081; email address: 

courtnage.robert@epa.gov. 

For general information contact: The 

TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 

South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 

14620; telephone number: (202) 554– 

1404; email address: TSCA-Hotline@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you manufacture 

(including import), process, or 

distribute in commerce asbestos as 

defined by TSCA Title II, Section 202 

(15 U.S.C. 2642) (including as part of an 

article). The following list of North 

American Industrial Classification 

System (NAICS) codes is not intended 

to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 

guide to help readers determine whether 

this document applies to them. 

Potentially affected entities may 

include: 

• Construction (NAICS code 23) 

• Manufacturing (NAICS codes 31– 

33) 

• Wholesale Trade (NAICS code 42) 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules 26923 

• Transportation (NAICS code 48) 

This action may also affect certain 

entities through pre-existing import 

certification and export notification 

rules under TSCA (15 U.S.C.2601 et 

seq.). Persons who import or process 

any chemical substance governed by a 

final SNUR are subject to the TSCA 

section 13 (15 U.S.C. 2612) import 

certification requirements and the 

corresponding regulations at 19 CFR 

12.118 through 12.127 (see also 19 CFR 

127.28). Those persons must certify that 

the shipment of the chemical substance 

complies with all applicable rules and 

orders under TSCA, including any 

SNUR requirements. The EPA policy in 

support of import certification appears 

at 40 CFR part 707, subpart B. 

In addition, asbestos, as defined in 

this proposed rule, is already subject to 

TSCA section 6(a) (40 CFR part 763, 

subparts G and I) rules that trigger the 

export notification provisions of TSCA 

section 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611(b); see also 

40 CFR 721.20). Any person who 

exports or intends to export asbestos 

must comply with the export 

notification requirements in 40 CFR part 

707, subpart D; however, although EPA 

is proposing to make inapplicable the 

exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f) for 

persons who import or process any 

asbestos as part of an article in a 

category listed in Table 2, the Agency is 

not proposing to require export 

notification for articles containing 

asbestos. 

If you have any questions regarding 

the applicability of this action to a 

particular entity, consult the technical 

information contact listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

B. What is the Agency’s authority for 

taking this action? 

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 TSCA section 

5(a)(2) (see Unit IV). Once EPA 

determines that a use of a chemical 

substance is a significant new use, 

TSCA section 5(a)(1) requires persons to 

submit a significant new use notice 

(SNUN) to EPA at least 90 days before 

they manufacture (including import) or 

process the chemical substance for that 

use (15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(1)(B)(i)). TSCA 

further prohibits such manufacturing 

(including importing) or processing 

from commencing until EPA has 

conducted a review of the notice, made 

an appropriate determination on the 

notice, and taken such actions as are 

required in association with that 

determination (15 U.S.C. 

2604(a)(1)(B)(ii)). As described in Unit 

V., the general SNUR provisions are 

found at 40 CFR part 721, subpart A. 

C. What action is the Agency taking? 

EPA is proposing a SNUR for 

asbestos, using the definition in TSCA 

Title II, Section 202, which defines 

asbestos as the ‘‘asbestiform varieties of 

six fiber types—chrysotile (serpentine), 

crocidolite (riebeckite), amosite 

(cummingtonite-grunerite), 

anthophyllite, tremolite or actinolite.’’ 

The proposed significant new use of 

asbestos (including as part of an article) 

is manufacturing (including importing) 

or processing for certain uses no longer 

ongoing. The Agency found no 

information indicating that the 

following uses are ongoing, and 

therefore, the following uses are subject 

to this proposed SNUR: Adhesives, 

sealants, and roof and non-roof coatings; 

arc chutes; beater-add gaskets; extruded 

sealant tape and other tape; filler for 

acetylene cylinders; high-grade 

electrical paper; millboard; missile 

liner; pipeline wrap; reinforced plastics; 

roofing felt; separators in fuel cells and 

batteries; vinyl-asbestos floor tile; and 

any other building material (other than 

cement). 

The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical 

Safety for the 21st Century Act (Pub. L. 

114–182, 130 Stat. 448) amended TSCA 

in June 2016. The new law includes 

statutory requirements related to the 

risk evaluations of conditions of use for 

existing chemicals. Based on the 2014 

update of EPA’s TSCA Work Plan for 

Chemical Assessments, in December of 

2016, EPA designated asbestos as one of 

the first 10 chemical substances subject 

to the Agency’s initial chemical risk 

evaluations (81 FR 91927), as required 

by TSCA section 6(b)(2)(A) (15 U.S.C. 

2605(b)(2)(A)). 

EPA is separately conducting a risk 

evaluation of asbestos under its 

conditions of use, pursuant to TSCA 

section 6(b)(4)(A). Through scoping and 

subsequent research for the asbestos risk 

evaluation, EPA identified several 

conditions of use of asbestos to include 

in the risk evaluation. Those include 

imported raw bulk chrysotile asbestos 

for the fabrication of diaphragms for use 

in chlorine and sodium hydroxide 

production and several imported 

chrysotile asbestos-containing materials, 

including sheet gaskets for use in 

titanium dioxide chemical production, 

brake blocks for use in oil drilling, 

aftermarket automotive brakes/linings 

and other vehicle friction products, 

other gaskets and packing, cement 

products, and woven products. This 

proposed significant new rule would 

not identify as significant new uses 

those uses that EPA believes are 

currently ongoing. EPA is requesting 

public comment on this proposal and 

welcomes specific and verifiable 

documentation of any ongoing uses not 

identified by the Agency as well as 

additional uses not identified as no 

longer ongoing. This proposed SNUR 

would require persons that intend to 

manufacture (including import) or 

process any form of asbestos as defined 

under Title II of TSCA (including as part 

of an article) for a significant new use, 

consistent with the requirements at 40 

CFR 721.25, to notify EPA at least 90 

days before commencing such 

manufacturing (including importing) or 

processing. This proposed SNUR would 

preclude the commencement of such 

manufacturing (including importing) or 

processing until EPA has conducted a 

review of the notice, made an 

appropriate determination on the notice, 

and taken such actions as are required 

in association with that determination. 

D. Why is the Agency taking this action? 

This proposed SNUR is necessary to 

ensure that EPA receives timely advance 

notice of any future manufacturing 

(including importing) or processing of 

asbestos (including as part of an article) 

for new uses that may produce changes 

in human and environmental exposures, 

and to ensure that an appropriate 

determination (relevant to the risks 

associated with such manufacturing 

(including importing), processing, and 

use) has been issued prior to the 

commencement of such manufacturing 

(including importing) or processing. 

Today’s action is furthermore necessary 

to ensure that manufacturing (including 

importing) or processing for the 

significant new use cannot proceed 

until EPA has responded to the 

circumstances by taking the required 

actions under Sections 5(e) or 5(f) of 

TSCA in the event that EPA determines 

any of the following: (1) That the 

significant new use presents an 

unreasonable risk under the conditions 

of use (without consideration of costs or 

other non-risk factors, and including an 

unreasonable risk to a potentially 

exposed or susceptible subpopulation 

identified as relevant by EPA); (2) that 

the information available to EPA is 

insufficient to permit a reasoned 

evaluation of the health and 

environmental effects of the significant 

new use; (3) that, in the absence of 

sufficient information, the 

manufacturing (including importing), 

processing, distribution in commerce, 

use, or disposal of the substance, or any 

combination of such activities, may 

present an unreasonable risk (without 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
26924 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

consideration of costs or other non-risk 

factors, and including an unreasonable 

risk to a potentially exposed or 

susceptible subpopulation identified as 

relevant by EPA); or (4) that there is 

substantial production and sufficient 

potential for environmental release or 

human exposure (as defined in TSCA 

section 5(a)(3)(B)(ii)(II)). 

There is a strong causal association 

between asbestos exposure and lung 

cancer and mesotheliomas (tumors 

arising from the thin membranes that 

line the chest (thoracic) and abdominal 

cavities and surround internal organs) 

(Ref. 1; Ref. 2; Ref. 3; Ref. 4; Ref. 5; Ref. 

6). In addition, other cancers, as well as 

non-cancer effects, such as respiratory 

and immune effects, have been 

associated with asbestos exposure (Ref. 

7). 

Agency research conducted in 

support of the TSCA risk evaluation of 

asbestos revealed that the use of 

asbestos has declined dramatically in 

the United States since the 1970s when 

asbestos use was at its peak. EPA is 

taking action in this proposed rule to 

ensure that EPA receives timely advance 

notice and makes an appropriate 

determination prior to the 

commencement of manufacturing 

(including importing) or processing for 

any significant new use of asbestos 

(including as part of an article) as 

identified in Table 2. The rationale and 

objectives for this proposed SNUR are 

explained in detail in Unit III. 

E. What are the estimated incremental 

impacts of this action? 

EPA has evaluated the potential costs 

of establishing SNUR reporting 

requirements for potential 

manufacturers (including importers) 

and processors of the chemical 

substance included in this proposed 

rule. This Economic Analysis (Ref. 8), 

which is available in the docket, is 

discussed in Unit IX. and is briefly 

summarized here. 

In the event that a SNUN is 

submitted, costs are estimated to be less 

than $10,000 per SNUN submission for 

large business submitters and $8,000 for 

small business submitters. In addition, 

for persons exporting a substance that is 

the subject of a SNUR, a one-time notice 

to EPA must be provided for the first 

export or intended export to a particular 

country, which is estimated to be 

approximately $96 per notification. 

However, asbestos is already subject to 

TSCA section 6(a) rules (40 CFR part 

763, subparts G and I) that trigger the 

export notification provisions of TSCA 

section 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611(b); see also 

40 CFR 721.20), and the Agency is not 

proposing to require export notifications 

for articles containing asbestos as 

articles are generally excluded from the 

TSCA section 12(b) export notification 

requirements. Therefore, EPA assumes 

no additional costs under TSCA section 

12(b) for this proposed rule. 

The proposed rule may also affect 

firms that plan to import or process 

articles that may be subject to the 

SNUR. Although there are no specific 

requirements in the rule for these firms, 

they may choose to undertake some 

activity to assure themselves they are 

not undertaking a new use. In the 

accompanying Economic Analysis for 

this proposed SNUR (Ref. 8), example 

steps (and their respective costs) that an 

importer or processor might take to 

identify asbestos in articles are 

provided. These steps can include 

gathering information through 

agreements with suppliers, declarations 

through databases or surveys, or use of 

a third-party certification system. 

Additionally, importers may require 

suppliers to provide certificates of 

testing analysis of the products or 

perform their own laboratory testing of 

certain articles. EPA is unable to 

predict, however, what, if any, 

particular steps an importer might take; 

thus, potential total costs were not 

estimated. 

II. Chemical Substances Subject to This 

Proposed Rule and Associated 

Background Information 

A. What chemicals are included in the 

proposed SNUR? 

This proposed SNUR applies to 

asbestos, using the definition in TSCA 

Title II (added to TSCA in 1986), 

Section 202, which defines asbestos as 

the ‘‘asbestiform varieties of six fiber 

types—chrysotile (serpentine), 

crocidolite (riebeckite), amosite 

(cummingtonite-grunerite), 

anthophyllite, tremolite or actinolite.’’ 

This proposed SNUR Applies to the 

manufacturing (including importing) or 

processing of asbestos (including as part 

of an article) for certain uses no longer 

ongoing. EPA found no information 

indicating that the following uses are 

ongoing, and therefore, the following 

uses are subject to this proposed SNUR: 

Adhesives, sealants, and roof and nonroof coatings; arc chutes; beater-add 

gaskets; extruded sealant tape and other 

tape; filler for acetylene cylinders; highgrade electrical paper; millboard; 

missile liner; pipeline wrap; reinforced 

plastics; roofing felt; separators in fuel 

cells and batteries; vinyl-asbestos floor 

tile; and any other building material 

(other than cement). Under this 

proposed SNUR, the exemption at 40 

CFR 721.45(f) would not apply to 

persons who import or process asbestos 

as part of an article (which includes as 

a component of an article) because there 

is reasonable potential for exposure to 

asbestos if the substance is incorporated 

into articles and then imported or 

processed. However, in accordance with 

the impurity exclusion at 40 CFR 

721.45(d), this proposed significant new 

use rule would not apply to persons 

who manufacture (including import) or 

process asbestos (including as part of an 

article) only as an impurity. 

B. What are the production volumes and 

uses of asbestos? 

Asbestos has not been mined or 

otherwise produced in the United States 

since 2002; therefore, any new raw bulk 

asbestos used in the United States is 

imported. According to the U.S. 

Geological Survey (USGS), 

approximately 300 metric tons of raw 

bulk asbestos was imported into the 

United States in 2017 (Ref. 9). 

Chrysotile is the only form of raw bulk 

asbestos currently imported, and the 

chlor-alkali industry is the only known 

importer (Ref. 9). EPA did not identify 

any domestic entity that uses raw bulk 

asbestos other than the chlor-alkali 

industry, which uses chrysotile asbestos 

to fabricate diaphragms for use in 

chlorine and sodium hydroxide 

production. 

In an effort to identify national import 

volumes and conditions of use for the 

asbestos risk evaluation under TSCA 

section 6(b)(4)(A), EPA searched a 

number of available data sources 

including EPA’s Chemical Data 

Reporting (CDR) database, USGS’s 

Mineral Commodities Summary and the 

Minerals Yearbook, the U.S. 

International Trade Commission’s 

Dataweb, the U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection’s Automated Commercial 

Environment (ACE) System, and the Use 

and Market Profile for Asbestos (EPA– 

HQ–OPPT–2016–0736–0085). Based on 

this search, EPA published a 

preliminary list of information and 

sources related to asbestos conditions of 

use (see Preliminary Information on 

Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution, 

Use, and Disposal: Asbestos, EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2016–0736–0005) prior to a 

February 2017 public meeting on the 

scoping efforts for the risk evaluation 

convened to solicit public comment. 

EPA also convened meetings with 

companies, associated industry groups, 

chemical users and other stakeholders 

to aid in identifying conditions of use 

and verifying conditions of use 

identified by EPA. On June 22, 2017, 

EPA published the Scope of the Risk 

Evaluation for Asbestos (EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2016–0736–0086), which further 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules 26925 

provided opportunity for the public and 

private sector to identify conditions of 

use of asbestos in the United States. 

During the public comment period for 

the Preliminary Information on 

Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution, 

Use, and Disposal: Asbestos (EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2016–0736–0005), one company 

identified the use of asbestos-containing 

gaskets, which are imported, for use 

during the production of titanium 

dioxide. During stakeholder discussions 

another company confirmed importing 

and distributing brake blocks for use in 

drawworks by the oil industry. EPA 

believes that aftermarket automotive 

brakes/linings and other vehicle friction 

products, other gaskets and packing, 

cement products, and woven products 

containing asbestos could also be 

imported, as reported by USGS (Ref. 10) 

and also appear in data from ACE (Ref. 

11); however, the volume of products 

and the quantity of asbestos within 

imported products is unknown. ACE is 

not a publicly accessible database 

because it contains information that is 

protected under the provisions of 

Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 

552), the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a), 

and the Trade Secrets Act (18 U.S.C. 

1905), and the information in ACE 

related to importer identity cannot be 

released. 

C. What are the potential health effects 

of asbestos? 

Asbestos was listed as a known 

human carcinogen in the National 

Toxicology Program’s First Annual 

Report on Carcinogens in 1980 (Ref. 1). 

In 1988, EPA assessed the health 

hazards and effects caused by exposure 

to asbestos under the Integrated Risk 

Information System (IRIS) program, and 

determined that asbestos exposure can 

lead to lung cancer and mesotheliomas 

(tumors arising from the thin 

membranes that line internal organs) 

(Ref. 2). Many authorities have 

established that there is causal 

association between asbestos and lung 

cancer and mesotheliomas (Ref. 1; Ref. 

3; Ref. 4). EPA also noted in the Scope 

of the Risk Evaluation for Asbestos that 

there is a causal association between 

exposure to asbestos and cancer of the 

larynx and cancer of the ovary (Ref. 4). 

There is also suggestive evidence of a 

positive association between asbestos 

and cancer of the pharynx (Ref. 4; Ref. 

12), stomach (Ref. 3; Ref. 4), and 

colorectum (Ref. 1; Ref. 3; Ref. 4; Ref. 

12; Ref. 13; Ref. 14). All types of 

asbestos fibers have been reported to 

cause mesothelioma. (Ref. 4). 

Increases in lung cancer mortality 

have been reported in both workers and 

residents exposed to various asbestos 

fiber types as well as fiber mixtures (Ref. 

4). There is evidence in in-vitro, animal, 

and human studies that asbestos is 

genotoxic, meaning asbestos can damage 

an organism’s genetic material (Ref. 3). 

There is also evidence that asbestos 

exposure is associated with adverse 

respiratory system effects, such as 

asbestosis and immunotoxicity (Ref. 3; 

Ref. 7). 

D. What are the potential routes and 

sources of exposure to asbestos? 

The greatest risk of exposure to 

asbestos occurs when the substance is in 

a friable state, meaning the fibers can be 

crumbled, pulverized or reduced to a 

powder under hand pressure (Ref. 3). 

During use and over time, non-friable 

asbestos has the potential to become 

friable (Ref. 3). For example, testing has 

shown that non-friable asbestoscontaining material can become friable 

during use such as cutting, crumbling, 

and tearing, and as a result of such use, 

asbestos fibers can be released into the 

air (Ref. 15). Similarly, non-friable 

asbestos-containing building materials 

can release fibers if disturbed during 

building repair or demolition (Ref. 16). 

Exposures to workers, consumers and 

the general population, as well as 

environmental receptors, may occur 

from industrial releases and use of 

asbestos-containing products. Based on 

EPA’s research conducted during the 

early stages of the TSCA risk evaluation, 

most of the ongoing uses of asbestos 

pertain to industrial and commercial 

uses (Ref. 7). 

The primary exposure route for 

asbestos is inhalation. Asbestos fibers 

can be released into the air during 

processing of raw bulk asbestos and 

asbestos-containing products. 

Weathering and the disturbance and/or 

degradation of asbestos-containing 

products can also cause asbestos fibers 

to be suspended in air (Ref. 3). Fibers 

can then enter the lungs through 

inhalation. Exposures to asbestos can 

potentially occur via oral and dermal 

routes; however, EPA anticipates that 

the most likely exposure route is 

inhalation. 

III. Rationale and Objectives 

A. Rationale 

EPA is concerned about the potential 

for adverse health effects of asbestos 

based on established sound scientific 

data indicating that asbestos is a known 

human carcinogen. Asbestos was listed 

as a human carcinogen in the National 

Toxicology Program’s First Annual 

Report on Carcinogens in 1980 (Ref. 1). 

Asbestos, in particular chrysotile 

asbestos, has several unique properties, 

including low electrical conductivity 

while maintaining high tensile strength, 

high friction coefficient, and high 

resistance to heat (Ref. 17). These 

properties made asbestos ideal for use in 

friction materials (e.g., brakes), 

insulation (e.g., sound, heat, and 

electrical), and building materials (e.g., 

cement pipes, roofing compounds, 

flooring) over the past century. 

However, the use of asbestos has 

declined dramatically due to health 

concerns and consumer preference (Ref. 

17), which has led to the elimination of 

some exposure scenarios associated 

with such uses. According to USGS, in 

1973, national consumption, including 

manufacturing/importing and 

processing, of raw bulk asbestos peaked 

around 800,000 metric tons and has 

since fallen approximately 99 percent to 

between 300 and 800 metric tons in 

recent years (Ref. 9). Today, most 

manufactured products in the United 

States are now asbestos-free (Ref. 17). 

In 1989, EPA published a final rule 

Asbestos: Manufacture, Importation, 

Processing, and Distribution in 

Commerce Prohibitions (54 FR 29460, 

July 12, 1989) (FRL–3476–2), which was 

intended ‘‘to prohibit, at staged 

intervals, the future manufacture, 

importation, processing and distribution 

in commerce of asbestos in almost all 

products, as identified in the rule . . .’’ 

and to ‘‘reduce the unreasonable risks 

presented to human health by exposure 

to asbestos during activities involving 

these products.’’ The 1989 final rule 

applied to the asbestos product 

categories identified in the Regulatory 

Impact Analysis of Controls on Asbestos 

and Asbestos Products, which was 

conducted in support of the rule (Ref. 

20). However, the ban against most of 

the asbestos product categories was 

overturned by the Fifth Circuit Court of 

Appeals in 1991. In addition to the 

asbestos products that remain banned 

after the court ruling, which are 

identified in Table 1 below, any new 

use of asbestos was also banned. The 

prohibition on any new uses of asbestos 

is for uses initiated for the first time 

after August 25, 1989. As a point of 

clarification, in this proposed 

rulemaking, a significant new use of 

asbestos addresses multiple uses that 

were initiated prior to August 25, 1989, 

for which manufacturing and processing 

are no longer ongoing in the United 

States. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
26926 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1—ASBESTOS CONTAINING PRODUCT CATEGORIES BANNED UNDER TSCA SECTION 6 

Product category Definition 

(40 CFR 763.163) 

Corrugated Paper ........................... Corrugated paper means an asbestos-containing product made of corrugated paper, which is often cemented to a flat backing, may be laminated with foils or other materials, and has a corrugated surface. 

Major applications of asbestos corrugated paper include: Thermal insulation for pipe coverings; block insulation; panel insulation in elevators; insulation in appliances; and insulation in low-pressure steam, hot 

water, and process lines. 

Rollboard ......................................... Rollboard means an asbestos-containing product made of paper that is produced in a continuous sheet, is 

flexible, and is rolled to achieve a desired thickness. Asbestos rollboard consists of two sheets of asbestos paper laminated together. Major applications of this product include: Office partitioning; garage paneling; linings for stoves and electric switch boxes; and fire-proofing agent for security boxes, safes, and 

files. 

Commercial Paper .......................... Commercial paper means an asbestos-containing product that is made of paper intended for use as general insulation paper or muffler paper. Major applications of commercial papers are insulation against 

fire, heat transfer, and corrosion in circumstances that require a thin, but durable, barrier. 

Specialty Paper ............................... Specialty paper means an asbestos-containing product that is made of paper intended for use as filters for 

beverages or other fluids or as paper fill for cooling towers. Cooling tower fill consists of asbestos paper 

that is used as a cooling agent for liquids from industrial processes and air conditioning systems. 

Flooring Felt .................................... Flooring felt means an asbestos-containing product that is made of paper felt intended for use as an 

underlayer for floor coverings, or to be bonded to the underside of vinyl sheet flooring. 

New Uses * ...................................... The commercial uses of asbestos not identified in § 763.165 the manufacture, importation or processing of 

which would be initiated for the first time after August 25, 1989. 

* Note: A ‘‘new use’’ as defined in 40 CFR 763.163 is distinct from a significant new use per TSCA section 5(a)(2), which is explained for the 

purposes of this proposed rule in Table 2. 

As part of the information gathering 

activity associated with the current 

asbestos risk evaluation, the Agency 

researched market availability for the 

asbestos product categories subject to 

the 1989 asbestos ban and phase-out 

rule that was later overturned. EPA 

identified several asbestos product 

categories where manufacturing 

(including importing) and processing for 

the use is no longer ongoing. Through 

further refinement of the Scope of the 

Risk Evaluation for Asbestos, the 

Agency determined that asbestoscontaining cement products (e.g., pipe, 

shingles and replacement parts) are the 

only condition of use of asbestos in 

building materials; therefore, this 

proposed SNUR also applies to all 

asbestos-containing building materials 

other than asbestos cement products. 

These product categories and 

descriptions are listed in Table 2, and 

manufacturing and processing for these 

product categories are significant new 

uses subject to this proposed 

rulemaking. The product category 

descriptions are based on the product 

category descriptions presented in the 

Regulatory Impact Analysis of Controls 

on Asbestos and Asbestos Products for 

the 1989 final rule (Ref. 20) and may not 

be all-encompassing. 

TABLE 2—PRODUCT CATEGORIES OF PROPOSED SIGNIFICANT NEW USES OF ASBESTOS

Product category Description of the product category 

Arc Chutes ...................................... Ceramic arc chutes containing asbestos were used to guide electric arcs in motor starter units in electric 

generating plants. 

Beater-Add Gaskets ........................ Asbestos fibers were incorporated within various elastomeric binders and other fillers to form the beateradd paper. These products were used extensively for internal combustion applications and for the sealing component of spiral wound gaskets. Gaskets were used to seal one compartment of a device from 

another in non-dynamic applications such as engine and exhaust manifolds. 

Extruded Sealant Tape and Other 

Tape.

Sealant tape was made from a semi-liquid mixture of butyl rubber and asbestos. On exposure to air, the 

sealant solidified forming a rubber tape about an inch wide and an eighth of an inch thick. The tape 

acted as a gasket for sealing building windows, automotive windshields, and mobile home windows. It 

was also used in the manufacture of parts for the aerospace industry and in the manufacture of insulated glass. 

Filler for Acetylene Cylinders .......... Asbestos was used to produce a sponge-like filler, which held the liquefied acetylene gas (acetone) in suspension in the steel cylinder and puled the acetone up through the tank as the gas was released 

through the oxyacetylene torch. The torch was used to weld or cut metal and sometimes used as an illuminant gas. The filler also acted as an insulator that offered fire protection in case the oxidation of the 

acetylene became uncontrollable. 

High-Grade Electrical Paper ........... The major use of asbestos electrical paper was insulation for high temperature, low voltage applications 

such as in motors, generators, transformers, switch gears, and other heavy electrical apparatuses. 

Millboard .......................................... Asbestos millboard was essentially a heavy cardboard product that was used for gasketing, insulation, fireproofing, and resistance against corrosion and rot. Millboard was used in many industrial applications to 

include linings in boilers, kilns, and foundries; insulation in glass tank crowns, melters, refiners, and sidewalls in the glass industry; linings for troughs and covers in the aluminum, marine, and aircraft industries; and thermal protection in circuit breakers in the electrical industry. In addition, thin millboard was 

inserted between metal to produce gaskets. Commercial applications for millboard included fireproof linings for safes, dry-cleaning machines, and incinerators. 

Missile Liner .................................... A missile liner was an asbestos and rubber compound used to insulate the outer casing of the rocket from 

the intense heat generated in the rocket motor while the rocket fuel was burned. Rockets and rocket 

boosters were used to propel a number of objects including military weapons and the space shuttle. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules 26927 

TABLE 2—PRODUCT CATEGORIES OF PROPOSED SIGNIFICANT NEW USES OF ASBESTOS—Continued 

Product category Description of the product category 

Adhesives, Sealants, and Roof and 

Non-Roof Coatings.

The automobile industry historically used asbestos in a wide variety of adhesive, sealant, and coating applications. The aerospace industry used asbestos in extremely specialized applications such as firewall 

sealants and epoxy adhesives. Non-roof coatings were used to prevent corrosion (e.g., as vehicle undercoatings and underground pipe coatings). Roof coatings were used to repair and patch roofs, seal 

around projections such as chimneys and vent pipes, and bond horizontal and vertical surfaces. 

Pipeline Wrap .................................. Pipeline wrap was an asbestos felt product primarily used by the oil and gas industry for coating its pipelines. Asbestos pipeline wrap was also used in the coal tar enamel method of coating pipes, some 

above-ground applications (such as for special piping in cooling towers), and was also used by the 

chemical industry for underground hot water and steam piping. 

Reinforced Plastics ......................... Asbestos-reinforced plastics were used for electro-mechanical parts in the automotive and appliance industries and as high-performance plastics for the aerospace industry. Asbestos-reinforced plastic was typically a mixture of some type of plastic resin (usually phenolic or epoxy), a general filler (often chalk or 

limestone), and raw asbestos fiber. 

Roofing Felt ..................................... Asbestos roofing felt was single or multi-layered grade and used for built-up roofing. Asbestos was used in 

roofing felts because of its dimensional stability and resistance to rot, fire, and heat. 

Separators in Fuel Cells and Batteries.In very specialized aerospace applications, asbestos functioned as an insulator and separator between the 

negative and positive terminals of a fuel cell/battery. 

Vinyl-Asbestos Floor Tile ................ Vinyl-asbestos floor tile was used in commercial, residential, and institutional buildings in heavy traffic 

areas such as supermarkets, department stores, commercial plants, kitchens, and ‘‘pivot points’’—entry 

ways and areas around elevators 

Any Other Building Materials (other 

than cement) *.

Examples include insulation, plasters, mastics, textured paints (e.g., simulates stucco), and block filler 

paints (e.g., for coating masonry). 

* Note: Not a product category described in the same terms in the Regulatory Impact Analysis; this broader product category is used generally 

to describe a number of specific product categories identified during the TSCA section 6 risk evaluation process. 

As part of the current asbestos risk 

evaluation process, the Agency 

identified conditions of use to be 

considered under the TSCA risk 

evaluation. Those include: Imported 

raw bulk chrysotile asbestos for the 

fabrication of diaphragms for use in 

chlorine and sodium hydroxide 

production and several imported 

chrysotile asbestos-containing materials 

including sheet gaskets for use in 

titanium dioxide chemical production, 

brake blocks for use in oil drilling, 

aftermarket automotive brakes/linings 

and other vehicle friction products, 

other gaskets and packing, cement 

products, and woven products. These 

ongoing uses identified by EPA are not 

among the significant new uses 

identified in this proposal and therefore 

would not require a significant new use 

notification submission to the Agency. 

EPA requests comment regarding any 

ongoing uses not identified by the 

Agency and welcomes specific and 

verifiable documentation. EPA also 

requests comment on additional uses 

not identified as no longer ongoing. 

In the absence of this proposed rule, 

the importing or processing of asbestos 

(including as part of an article) for the 

significant new uses proposed in this 

rule may begin at any time, without 

prior notice to EPA. Thus, EPA is 

concerned that commencement of the 

manufacturing (including importing) or 

processing for the significant new uses 

of asbestos identified in Table 2 could 

significantly increase the volume of 

manufacturing (including importing) 

and processing of asbestos as well as the 

magnitude and duration of exposure to 

humans over that which would 

otherwise exist currently. EPA has 

preliminarily concluded that action on 

this chemical substance is warranted 

and therefore proposes that any 

manufacturing (including importing) or 

processing of asbestos (including as part 

of an article), using the definition under 

Title II of TSCA, for any use identified 

in Table 2 would be a significant new 

use. 

Consistent with EPA’s past practice 

for issuing SNURs under TSCA section 

5(a)(2), EPA’s decision to propose a 

SNUR for a particular chemical use 

need not be based on an extensive 

evaluation of the hazard, exposure, or 

potential risk associated with that use. 

If a person decides to begin 

manufacturing (including importing) or 

processing asbestos (including as part of 

an article) for a use identified in Table 

2, the notice to EPA allows the Agency 

to evaluate the use according to the 

specific parameters and circumstances 

surrounding the conditions of use. 

B. Rationale for Making Inapplicable the 

Exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f) for 

Persons Who Import or Process Asbestos 

Chemical substances that are part of 

an article may still result in exposure if 

the chemical substance has certain 

physical-chemical properties—as in the 

case of asbestos, fibers can degrade with 

use and become friable over time where 

human exposures can occur leading to 

increased risks for disease (Ref. 3; Ref. 

15; Ref. 16). During use and over time, 

non-friable asbestos has the potential to 

become friable (Ref. 3). For example, 

testing has shown that non-friable 

asbestos-containing material can 

become friable during use such as 

cutting, crumbling, and tearing, and as 

a result of such use, asbestos fibers can 

be released into the air (Ref. 15). 

Similarly, non-friable asbestoscontaining building materials can 

release fibers if disturbed during 

building repair or demolition (Ref. 16). 

Therefore, EPA is proposing to make 

inapplicable the exemption at 40 CFR 

721.45(f) for persons who import or 

process any asbestos as part of an article 

for the proposed significant new uses, 

which are identified in Table 2. A 

person who imports or processes 

asbestos (including as part of an article) 

for a proposed significant new use 

identified in Table 2 would be subject 

to the significant new use notification 

requirements in this proposed rule. No 

person would be able to begin importing 

or processing asbestos (including as part 

of an article) for a proposed significant 

new use without first submitting a 

SNUN to EPA and until the Agency has 

conducted a review of the notice, made 

an appropriate determination on the 

notice, and taken such actions as are 

required in association with that 

determination. 

As requested in Unit XII., EPA asks 

for comment on the Agency’s 

understanding of ongoing uses. When 

submitting a comment to the Agency, 

EPA requests specific and verifiable 

information that provides evidence of 

ongoing uses beyond those identified in 

this proposed rule. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
26928 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

C. Objectives 

Based on the considerations in Unit 

III.A., EPA wants to achieve the 

following objectives with regard to the 

significant new use of asbestos 

(including as part of an article) as 

designated in this proposed rule: 

1. EPA would receive notice of any 

person’s intent to manufacture 

(including import) or process asbestos 

(including as part of an article) for the 

described significant new use before 

that activity begins. 

2. EPA would have an opportunity to 

review and evaluate data submitted in a 

SNUN before the notice submitter 

begins manufacturing (including 

importing) or processing asbestos 

(including as part of an article) for the 

described significant new use. 

3. EPA would be able to either 

determine that the significant new use 

is not likely to present an unreasonable 

risk, or take necessary regulatory action 

associated with any other determination 

before the described significant new use 

of asbestos (including as part of an 

article) occurs. 

IV. Significant New Use Determination 

Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA states that 

EPA’s determination that a use of a 

chemical substance is a significant new 

use must be made after consideration of 

all relevant factors including: 

1. The projected volume of 

manufacturing and processing of a 

chemical substance. 

2. The extent to which a use changes 

the type or form of exposure of human 

beings or the environment to a chemical 

substance. 

3. The extent to which a use increases 

the magnitude and duration of exposure 

of human beings or the environment to 

a chemical substance. 

4. The reasonably anticipated manner 

and methods of manufacturing, 

processing, distribution in commerce, 

and disposal of a chemical substance. 

In addition to these factors 

enumerated in TSCA section 5(a)(2), the 

statute authorizes EPA to consider any 

other relevant factors. 

Both federal and state environmental 

protection agencies and occupational 

safety and health organizations provide 

existing regulation pertaining to certain 

aspects of the manufacturing (including 

importing), processing, use, and/or 

disposal of asbestos in order to protect 

consumers, workers, and the 

environment. EPA believes the 

significant new uses of asbestos 

identified in Table 2 could increase the 

volume of manufacturing (including 

importing) and processing of asbestos, 

as well as the duration and magnitude 

of human and environmental exposure 

to the substance, reverse the declining 

trend of national import volumes of the 

substance, and reintroduce exposure 

scenarios that have become obsolete 

over the past several decades. It is 

imperative that EPA be notified of any 

intended significant new use of asbestos 

identified in Table 2 and be provided 

the opportunity to evaluate such 

proposed new use. Once a SNUR is 

finalized, failure to notify EPA and file 

a SNUN prior to manufacturing or 

processing for the significant new uses 

would constitute a violation of TSCA 

and would be subject to penalties, 

accordingly. 

To determine what would constitute a 

significant new use of asbestos as 

discussed in this unit, EPA considered 

relevant information about the toxicity 

or expected toxicity of the substance, 

likely human exposures and 

environmental releases associated with 

possible uses, and the four factors listed 

in Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA. In addition 

to these factors enumerated in TSCA 

section 5(a)(2), the statute authorizes 

EPA to consider any other relevant 

factors. 

The article exemption at 40 CFR 

721.45(f) is based on an assumption that 

people and the environment will 

generally not be exposed to chemical 

substances in articles (Ref. 18). 

However, even when contained in an 

article, asbestos can become friable over 

time with use (Ref. 3; Ref. 15; Ref. 16). 

Based on this understanding, upon 

submission of a SNUN, EPA intends to 

evaluate the potential risk of exposure 

to human health and the environment 

for any proposed significant new use of 

asbestos (including as part of an article). 

This understanding warrants making the 

exemption at 40 CFR 721.45(f) 

inapplicable to importers or processors 

of articles containing asbestos. 

Considering the potential friability of 

asbestos, even when incorporated in 

articles, and the health risks associated 

with exposure to asbestos, EPA 

proposes to affirmatively find under 

TSCA section 5(a)(5) that notification is 

justified by the reasonable potential for 

exposure to asbestos through the articles 

subject to this SNUR. EPA intends to 

evaluate such potential uses whether in 

the form of an article or not before those 

uses would begin for any associated 

risks or hazards that might exist. EPA 

has reason to anticipate that importing 

or processing asbestos as part of an 

article would create the potential for 

exposure to asbestos, and that EPA 

should have an opportunity to review 

the intended use before such use could 

occur. Persons subject to this proposed 

SNUR are required to notify EPA at least 

90 days prior to commencing 

manufacturing (including importing) or 

processing of the substance for the new 

use. This required notification provides 

EPA with the opportunity to evaluate an 

intended significant new use of the 

regulated chemical substance and, if 

necessary, an opportunity to protect 

against potential unreasonable risks. 

V. Applicability of General Provisions 

General provisions for SNURs appear 

under 40 CFR part 721, subpart A. 

These provisions describe persons 

subject to the rule, recordkeeping 

requirements, and exemptions to 

reporting requirements. 

Provisions relating to user fees appear 

at 40 CFR part 700. According to 40 CFR 

721.1(c), persons subject to SNURs must 

comply with the same notice 

requirements and EPA regulatory 

procedures as submitters of 

Premanufacture Notices (PMNs) under 

TSCA section 5(a)(1)(A). In particular, 

these requirements include the 

information submission requirements of 

TSCA sections 5(b) and 5(d)(1), the 

exemptions authorized by TSCA 

sections 5(h)(1), (h)(2), (h)(3), and (h)(5), 

and the regulations at 40 CFR part 720. 

Once EPA receives a SNUN, EPA must 

either determine that the significant 

new use is not likely to present an 

unreasonable risk of injury or take such 

regulatory action as is associated with 

an alternative determination before the 

manufacturing (including importing) or 

processing for the significant new use 

can commence. If EPA determines that 

the significant new use is not likely to 

present an unreasonable risk, EPA is 

required under TSCA section 5(g) to 

make public, and submit for publication 

in the Federal Register, a statement of 

EPA’s finding. 

VI. Applicability of Rule to Uses 

Occurring Before Effective Date of the 

Final Rule 

EPA designates June 1, 2018 (the date 

of web posting of this proposed rule) as 

the cutoff date for determining whether 

the new use is ongoing. The objective of 

EPA’s approach is to ensure that a 

person cannot defeat a SNUR by 

initiating a significant new use before 

the effective date of the final rule. In 

developing this proposed rule, EPA has 

recognized that, given EPA’s general 

practice of posting proposed and final 

SNURs on its website a week or more 

in advance of Federal Register 

publication, this objective could be 

thwarted even before that publication. 

Persons who begin commercial 

manufacturing (including importing) or 

processing of the chemical substance (to 

include importing or processing articles 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules 26929 

and components thereof containing the 

chemical substance) for a significant 

new use identified as of June 1, 2018 

would have to cease any such activity 

upon the effective date of the final rule. 

To resume their activities, these persons 

would have to first comply with all 

applicable SNUR notification 

requirements and wait until all TSCA 

prerequisites for the commencement of 

manufacturing (including importing) or 

processing have been satisfied (see 

Federal Register documents of April 24, 

1990 (55 FR 17376) (FRL–3658–5) and 

November 28, 2016 (81 FR 85472) (FRL– 

9945–53) for additional information). 

VII. Development and Submission of 

Information 

EPA recognizes that TSCA section 5 

does not usually require developing 

new information (e.g., generating test 

data) before submission of a SNUN; 

however, there is an exception: 

Development of information is required 

where the chemical substance subject to 

the SNUR is also subject to a rule, order, 

or consent agreement under TSCA 

section 4 (see TSCA section 5(b)(1)). 

Also pursuant to TSCA section 4(h), 

which pertains to reduction of testing of 

vertebrate animals, EPA encourages 

consultation with the Agency on the use 

of alternative test methods and 

strategies (also called New Approach 

Methodologies or NAMs), if available, to 

generate any recommended test data. 

EPA encourages dialogue with Agency 

representatives to help determine how 

best the submitter can meet both the 

data needs and the objective of TSCA 

section 4(h). 

In the absence of a TSCA section 4 

test rule covering the chemical 

substance, persons are required to 

submit only information in their 

possession or control and to describe 

any other information known to or 

reasonably ascertainable by them (15 

U.S.C. 2604(d); 40 CFR 721.25, and 40 

CFR 720.50). However, as a general 

matter, EPA recommends that SNUN 

submitters include information that 

would permit a reasoned evaluation of 

risks posed by the chemical substance 

during its manufacturing (including 

importing), processing, use, distribution 

in commerce, or disposal. EPA 

encourages persons to consult with the 

Agency before submitting a SNUN. As 

part of this optional pre-notice 

consultation, EPA would discuss 

specific information it believes may be 

useful in evaluating a significant new 

use. 

Submitting a SNUN that does not 

itself include information sufficient to 

permit a reasoned evaluation may 

increase the likelihood that EPA will 

either respond with a determination that 

the information available to the Agency 

is insufficient to permit a reasoned 

evaluation of the health and 

environmental effects of the significant 

new use or, alternatively, that in the 

absence of sufficient information, the 

manufacturing (including importing), 

processing, distribution in commerce, 

use, or disposal of the chemical 

substance may present an unreasonable 

risk of injury. 

SNUN submitters should be aware 

that EPA will be better able to evaluate 

SNUNs and define the terms of any 

potentially necessary controls if the 

submitter provides detailed information 

on human exposure and environmental 

releases that may result from the 

significant new uses of the chemical 

substance. 

VIII. SNUN Submissions 

EPA recommends that submitters 

consult with the Agency prior to 

submitting a SNUN to discuss what 

information may be useful in evaluating 

a significant new use. Discussions with 

the Agency prior to submission can 

afford ample time to conduct any tests 

that might be helpful in evaluating risks 

posed by the substance. According to 40 

CFR 721.1(c), persons submitting a 

SNUN must comply with the same 

notice requirements and EPA regulatory 

procedures as persons submitting a 

PMN, including submission of test data 

on health and environmental effects as 

described in 40 CFR 720.50. SNUNs 

must be submitted on EPA Form No. 

7710–25, generated using e-PMN 

software, and submitted to the Agency 

in accordance with the procedures set 

forth in 40 CFR 721.25 and 40 CFR 

720.40. E–PMN software is available 

electronically at http://www.epa.gov/ 

opptintr/newchems. 

IX. Economic Analysis 

A. SNUNs 

EPA has evaluated the potential costs 

of establishing SNUR reporting 

requirements for potential 

manufacturers (including importers) 

and processors of the chemical 

substance included in this proposed 

rule (Ref. 8). In the event that a SNUN 

is submitted, average costs are estimated 

at approximately $9,937 per SNUN 

submission for large business submitters 

and $7,537 for small business 

submitters. These estimates include the 

cost to prepare and submit the SNUN, 

and the payment of a user fee. 

Businesses that submit a SNUN would 

be subject to either a $2,500 user fee 

required by 40 CFR 700.45(b)(2)(iii), or, 

if they are a small business with annual 

sales of less than $40 million when 

combined with those of the parent 

company (if any), a reduced user fee of 

$100 (40 CFR 700.45(b)(1)). On February 

26, 2018, EPA proposed raising the fee 

for SNUNs to $2,800 for small 

businesses and $16,000 for other 

businesses (83 FR 8212). Further, on 

November 30, 2017, EPA determined 

that revisions to the current small 

business size standards for TSCA 

reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements are warranted (82 FR 

56824). Businesses that submit a SNUN 

are also estimated to incur average costs 

of $67 for rule familiarization. First time 

submitters will incur an average cost of 

$128 for Central Data Exchange (CDX) 

registration and associated activities. 

Companies manufacturing, importing, 

or processing asbestos or articles 

containing asbestos will incur an 

average cost of $80 for notifying their 

customers of SNUR regulatory activities. 

The costs of submitting a SNUN will 

not be incurred by any company unless 

a company decides to pursue a 

significant new use as defined in this 

proposed SNUR. Additionally, these 

estimates reflect the costs and fees as 

they are known at the time this rule is 

promulgated. EPA’s complete economic 

analysis is available in the public docket 

for this proposed rule (Ref. 8). 

B. Export Notification 

Under Section 12(b) of TSCA and the 

implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 

707, subpart D, exporters must notify 

EPA if they export or intend to export 

a chemical substance or mixture for 

which, among other things, a rule has 

been proposed or promulgated under 

TSCA section 5. As explained in Unit I., 

export notifications are required for 

asbestos, but not for articles containing 

asbestos. EPA is not proposing that 

asbestos-containing articles be subject to 

the export notification requirements; 

therefore, EPA assumes no additional 

costs under TSCA section 12(b) for this 

proposed rule. 

In general, for persons exporting a 

substance that is the subject of a SNUR, 

a one-time notice to EPA must be 

provided for the first export or intended 

export to a particular country. The total 

costs of export notification will vary by 

chemical, depending on the number of 

required notifications (i.e., the number 

of countries to which the chemical is 

exported). While EPA is unable to make 

any estimate of the likely number of 

export notifications for the chemical 

covered in this proposed SNUR, as 

stated in the accompanying economic 

analysis of this proposed SNUR, the 

estimated cost of the export notification 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
26930 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

requirement on a per unit basis is 

approximately $96. 

C. Import or Processing Chemical 

Substances as Part of an Article 

In making inapplicable the exemption 

relating to persons that import or 

process certain chemical substances as 

part of an article, this action may affect 

firms that plan to import or process 

types of articles that may contain the 

asbestos. Some firms have an 

understanding of the contents of the 

articles they import or process. 

However, EPA acknowledges that 

importers and processors of articles may 

have varying levels of knowledge about 

the chemical content of the articles that 

they import or process. These parties 

may need to become familiar with the 

requirements of the rule. And, while not 

required by the SNUR, these parties may 

take additional steps to determine 

whether the subject chemical substance 

is part of the articles they are 

considering for importing or processing. 

This determination may involve 

activities such as gathering information 

from suppliers along the supply chain 

and/or testing samples of the article 

itself. Costs vary across the activities 

chosen and the extent of familiarity a 

firm has regarding the articles it imports 

or processes. Cost ranges are presented 

in the Understanding the Costs 

Associated with Eliminating 

Exemptions for Articles in SNURs (Ref. 

19). Based on available information, 

EPA believes that article importers or 

processors that choose to investigate 

their products would incur costs at the 

lower end of the ranges presented in the 

Economic Analysis. For those 

companies choosing to undertake 

actions to assess the composition of the 

articles they import or process, EPA 

expects that importers or processors 

would take actions that are 

commensurate with the company’s 

perceived likelihood that a chemical 

substance might be a part of an article 

for the significant new uses subject to 

this proposed rulemaking (identified in 

Table 2) and the resources it has 

available. Example activities and their 

costs are provided in the accompanying 

Economic Analysis of this proposed rule 

(Ref. 8). 

X. Alternatives 

Before proposing this SNUR, EPA 

considered the following alternative 

regulatory action: Promulgate a TSCA 

section 8(a) Reporting Rule. 

Under a TSCA section 8(a) rule, EPA 

could, among other things, generally 

require persons to report information to 

the Agency when they intend to 

manufacture (including import) or 

process a listed chemical for a specific 

use or any use. However, for asbestos, 

the use of TSCA section 8(a) rather than 

SNUR authority would have several 

limitations. First, if EPA were to require 

reporting under TSCA section 8(a) 

instead of TSCA section 5(a), that action 

would not ensure that EPA receives 

timely advance notice of future 

manufacturing (including importing) or 

processing of asbestos (including as part 

of an articles and components thereof) 

for new uses that may produce changes 

in human and environmental exposures. 

Nor would action under 8(a) ensure that 

an appropriate determination (relevant 

to the risks of such manufacturing 

(including importing) or processing) has 

been issued prior to the commencement 

of such manufacturing (including 

importing) or processing. Furthermore, a 

TSCA section 8(a) rule would not 

ensure that manufacturing (including 

importing) or processing for the 

significant new use cannot proceed 

until EPA has responded to the 

circumstances by taking the required 

actions under Sections 5(e) or 5(f) of 

TSCA in the event that EPA determines 

any of the following: (1) That the 

significant new use presents an 

unreasonable risk under the conditions 

of use (without consideration of costs or 

other non-risk factors, and including an 

unreasonable risk to a potentially 

exposed or susceptible subpopulation 

identified as relevant by EPA); (2) that 

the information available to EPA is 

insufficient to permit a reasoned 

evaluation of the health and 

environmental effects of the significant 

new use; (3) that in the absence of 

sufficient information, the manufacture 

(including import), processing, 

distribution in commerce, use, or 

disposal of the substance, or any 

combination of such activities, may 

present an unreasonable risk (without 

consideration of costs or other non-risk 

factors, and including an unreasonable 

risk to a potentially exposed or 

susceptible subpopulation identified as 

relevant by EPA); or (4) that there is 

substantial production and sufficient 

potential for environmental release or 

human exposure (as defined in TSCA 

section 5(a)(3)(B)(ii)(II)). 

In addition, EPA may not receive 

important information from small 

businesses, because such firms generally 

are exempt from TSCA section 8(a) 

reporting requirements (see TSCA 

sections 8(a)(1)(A) and 8(a)(1)(B)). In 

view of the level of health concerns 

about asbestos if used for a proposed 

significant new use, EPA believes that a 

TSCA section 8(a) rule for this 

substance would not meet EPA’s 

regulatory objectives. 

XI. Scientific Standards, Evidence, and 

Available Information 

EPA has used scientific information, 

technical procedures, measures, 

methods, protocols, methodologies, and 

models consistent with the best 

available science, as applicable. These 

sources supply information relevant to 

whether a particular use would be a 

significant new use, based on relevant 

factors including those listed under 

TSCA section 5(a)(2). As noted in Unit 

III., EPA’s decision to promulgate a 

SNUR for a particular chemical use 

need not be based on an extensive 

evaluation of the hazard, exposure, or 

potential risk associated with that use. 

The clarity and completeness of the 

data, assumptions, methods, quality 

assurance, and analyses employed in 

EPA’s decision are documented, as 

applicable and to the extent necessary 

for purposes of this proposed significant 

new use rule, in Unit II. and in the 

references cited throughout the 

preamble of this proposed rule. EPA 

recognizes, based on the available 

information, that there is variability and 

uncertainty in whether any particular 

significant new use would actually 

present an unreasonable risk. For 

precisely this reason, it is appropriate to 

secure a future notice and review 

process for these uses, at such time as 

they are known more definitively. The 

extent to which the various information, 

procedures, measures, methods, 

protocols, methodologies or models 

used in EPA’s decision have been 

subject to independent verification or 

peer review is adequate to justify their 

use, collectively, in the record for a 

significant new use rule. 

XII. Request for Comment 

A. Do you have comments or 

information about ongoing uses? 

EPA welcomes comment on all 

aspects of this proposed rule. EPA based 

its understanding of the use profile of 

this chemical on the published 

literature, the 2016 Chemical Data 

Reporting submissions, market research, 

review of Safety Data Sheets, and 

extensive research conducted during the 

early stages of the TSCA risk evaluation 

for asbestos. To confirm EPA’s 

understanding, the Agency is requesting 

public comment on all aspects of this 

proposed rule. In providing comments 

on an ongoing use of asbestos, it would 

be helpful to provide specific 

information and documentation 

sufficient for EPA to substantiate any 

assertions of use. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules 26931 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. It is EPA’s policy 

to include all comments received in the 

public docket without change or further 

notice to the commenter and to make 

the comments available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless a 

comment includes information claimed 

to be CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. Do 

not submit this information to EPA 

through regulations.gov or email. 

Clearly mark the part or all of the 

information that you claim to be CBI. 

For CBI information in a disk or CD 

ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the 

outside of the disk or CD ROM that you 

mail to EPA as CBI and then identify 

electronically within the disk or CD 

ROM the specific information that is 

claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2, subpart B. 

2. Tips for preparing your comments. 

When preparing and submitting your 

comments, see the commenting tips at 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets#tips. 

XIII. References 

The following is a listing of the 

documents that are specifically 

referenced in this document. The 

docket, EPA–HQ–OPPT–2018–0159, 

includes these documents and other 

information considered by EPA, 

including documents that are referenced 

within the documents that are included 

in the docket, even if the referenced 

document is not physically located in 

the docket. For assistance in locating 

these other documents, please consult 

the technical person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

1. National Toxicology Program. (NTP, 2016). 

Report on Carcinogens, Fourteenth 

Edition.; Research Triangle Park, NC: 

U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, Public Health Service. 

Retrieved from https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ 

ntp/roc/content/profiles/asbestos.pdf. 

2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

(EPA, 1988). IRIS summary for asbestos 

(CASRN 1332–21–4). Washington, DC: 

Integrated Risk Information System. 

Retrieved from http://cfpub.epa.gov/ 

ncea/iris/iris_documents/documents/ 

subst/0371_summary.pdf. 

3. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease 

Registry. (ATSDR, 2001). Toxicological 

profile for asbestos (update). Retrieved 

from https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ 

ToxProfiles/tp.asp?id=30&tid=4. 

4. International Agency for Research on 

Cancer. (IARC, 2012). A review of human 

carcinogens. Part C: Arsenic, metals, 

fibres, and dusts [IARC Monograph]. 

Lyon, France: World Health 

Organization. Retrieved from http://

monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/ 

vol100C/mono100C.pdf. 

5. International Agency for Research on 

Cancer. (IARC, 1977). IARC monographs 

on the evaluation of carcinogenic risk of 

chemicals to man: Asbestos. Lyon, 

France: World Health Organization. 

Retrieved from http://

monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/ 

vol1-42/mono14.pdf. 

6. International Agency for Research on 

Cancer. (IARC, 1987). Asbestos and 

certain asbestos compounds [IARC 

Monograph]. In IARC Monographs on the 

Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to 

Humans (pp. 106–116). Lyon, France. 

Retrieved from http://

monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/ 

suppl7/index.php. 

7. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

(EPA, 2017). Scope of the Risk 

Evaluation for Asbestos. Retrieved from 

https://www.regulations.gov/ 

document?D=EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0736- 

0086. 

8. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

(EPA, 2018). Economic Analysis for the 

Proposed Significant New Use Rule for 

Asbestos. 

9. U.S. Geological Survey. (USGS, 2018). 

Mineral Commodity Summaries 2018. 

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the 

Interior. Retrieved from https://

minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/mcs/ 

2018/mcs2018.pdf. 

10. U.S. Geological Survey. (USGS, 2017). 

Mineral Commodity Summaries: 

Asbestos. Retrieved from https://

minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/ 

commodity/asbestos/mcs-2017- 

asbes.pdf. 

11. U.S. Customs and Border Protection. 

(2017). Automated Commercial 

Environment System (ACE). 

12. National Research Council. (NRC, 2006). 

Asbestos: Selected cancers. Institute of 

Medicine (US) Committee on Asbestos: 

Selected Health Effects. Washington, DC: 

The National Academies Press. 

13. National Research Council. (NRC, 1983). 

Drinking Water and Health. Washington, 

DC: Safe Drinking Water Committee, 

Board on Toxicology and Environmental 

Health Hazards. Retrieved from http://

dx.doi.org/10.17226/326. 

14. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

(EPA, 1980). Ambient water quality 

criteria for asbestos [EPA Report]. (EPA/ 

440/5–80/022). Washington, DC. 

15. Anderson, P.H. and Farino, W.J. (1982). 

Analysis of Fiber Release from Certain 

Asbestos Products. Draft Final Report. 

Prepared by GCA Corporation for the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

Retrieved from https://nepis.epa.gov/ 

Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/9101PBZ6.PDF?Dockey=

9101PBZ6.PDF. 

16. 40 CFR part 61, subpart M, Asbestos 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP). 

17. Virta, R. (2011). Asbestos. Kirk-Othmer 

Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology. 

Retrieved from http://

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ 

0471238961.01190205

10151209.a01.pub3/pdf. 

18. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

(EPA, 1984). Significant New Uses of 

Chemical Substances; Certain Chemicals. 

49 FR 35014, September 5, 1984 (FRL– 

2541–8). 

19. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

(EPA, 2013). Understanding the Costs 

Associated with Eliminating Exemptions 

for Articles in SNURs. May 1, 2013. 

20. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

(EPA, 1989). Regulatory Impact Analysis 

of Controls on Asbestos and Asbestos 

Products: Final Report: Volume III. 

(5601989ICF001). Washington, DC: 

Office of Toxic Substances, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency. 

XIV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Additional information about these 

statutes and Executive Orders can be 

found at http://www2.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders. 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is not a significant 

regulatory action and was therefore not 

submitted to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) for review under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011). 

B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing 

Regulations and Controlling Regulatory 

Costs 

This action is not expected to be a 

regulatory action subject to Executive 

Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 

2017), because this action is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This action does not impose any new 

information collection burden under the 

PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is 

defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(b). The 

information collection activities 

associated with existing chemical 

SNURs are already approved under 

OMB control number 2070–0038 (EPA 

ICR No. 1188); and the information 

collection activities associated with 

export notifications are already 

approved under OMB control number 

2070–0030 (EPA ICR No. 0795). If an 

entity were to submit a SNUN to the 

Agency, the burden is estimated to be 

approximately 100 hours per response 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
26932 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

(slightly less for submitters who have 

already registered to use the electronic 

submission system). 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to a collection of information 

that requires OMB approval under the 

PRA, unless it has been approved by 

OMB and displays a currently valid 

OMB control number. The OMB control 

numbers for EPA’s regulations in Title 

40 of the CFR, after appearing in the 

Federal Register, are listed in 40 CFR, 

part 9, and included on the related 

collection instrument, or form, as 

applicable. 

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

Pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA, 

5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., I certify that 

promulgation of this SNUR would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

The rationale supporting this 

conclusion is as follows. 

A SNUR applies to any person 

(including small or large entities) who 

intends to engage in any activity 

described in the rule as a ‘‘significant 

new use.’’ By definition of the word 

‘‘new’’ and based on all information 

currently available to EPA, it appears 

that no small or large entities presently 

engage in such activities. Since this 

proposed SNUR will require a person 

who intends to engage in such activity 

in the future to first notify EPA by 

submitting a SNUN, no economic 

impact will occur unless someone files 

a SNUN to pursue a significant new use 

in the future or forgoes profits by 

avoiding or delaying the significant new 

use. Although some small entities may 

decide to conduct such activities in the 

future, EPA cannot presently determine 

how many, if any, there may be. 

However, EPA’s experience to date is 

that, in response to the promulgation of 

SNURs covering over 1,000 chemical 

substances, the Agency receives only a 

handful of notices per year. During the 

six-year period from 2005–2010, only 

three submitters self-identified as small 

in their SNUN submissions (Ref. 8). EPA 

believes the cost of submitting a SNUN 

is relatively small compared to the cost 

of developing and marketing a chemical 

new to a firm or marketing a new use 

of the chemical and that the 

requirement to submit a SNUN 

generally does not have a significant 

economic impact. 

Therefore, EPA believes that the 

potential economic impact of complying 

with this proposed SNUR is not 

expected to be significant or adversely 

impact a substantial number of small 

entities. In a SNUR that published as a 

final rule on August 8, 1997 (62 FR 

42690) (FRL–5735–4), the Agency 

presented its general determination that 

proposed and final SNURs are not 

expected to have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

Based on EPA’s experience with 

proposing and finalizing SNURs, State, 

local, and Tribal governments have not 

been impacted by these rulemakings, 

and EPA does not have any reason to 

believe that any State, local, or Tribal 

government would be impacted by this 

rulemaking. As such, the requirements 

of sections 202, 203, 204, or 205 of 

UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, do not 

apply to this action. 

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action will not have federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999), because it will not have 

substantial direct effect on States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), because it will not have any 

effect on tribal governments, on the 

relationship between the Federal 

Government and the Indian tribes, or on 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes. 

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 

1997), because this action does not 

address environmental health or safety 

risks, and EPA interprets Executive 

Order 13045 as applying only to those 

regulatory actions that concern 

environmental health or safety risks that 

EPA has reason to believe may 

disproportionately affect children, per 

the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory 

action’’ in section 2–202 of the 

Executive Order. 

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ as defined in Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 

2001), because it is not likely to have 

any effect on energy supply, 

distribution, or use. 

J. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

This rulemaking does not involve any 

technical standards, and is therefore not 

subject to considerations under section 

12(d) of NTTAA, 15 U.S.C. 272 note. 

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

This action will not have 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority or low-income populations 

as specified in Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). This 

action does not affect the level of 

protection provided to human health or 

the environment. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 721 

Environmental protection, Asbestos, 

Chemicals, Hazardous substances, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: May 31, 2018. 

Tala R. Henry, 

Acting Director, Office of Pollution Prevention 

and Toxics. 

Therefore, for the reasons stated in the 

preamble, the Environmental Protection 

Agency proposes that 40 CFR chapter I 

be amended as follows: 

PART 721—SIGNIFICANT NEW USES 

OF CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 721 

continues to read as follows: 

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

2625(c). 

■ 2. Add § 721.11095 to subpart E to 

read as follows: 

§ 721.11095 Asbestos. 

(a) Chemical substance and 

significant new use subject to reporting. 

(1) The chemical substance identified as 

asbestos (as defined by 15 U.S.C. 

2642(3) as the asbestiform varieties of 

chrysotile (serpentine), crocidolite 

(riebeckite), amosite (cummingtonitegrunerite), anthophyllite, tremolite or 

actinolite) is subject to reporting under 

this section for the significant new use 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 112 / Monday, June 11, 2018 / Proposed Rules 26933 

described in paragraph (a)(2) of this 

section. 

(2) The significant new use is: 

Manufacturing (including importing) or 

processing for any of the following uses: 

(i) Arc chutes; 

(ii) Beater-add gaskets; 

(iii) Extruded sealant tape and other 

tape; 

(iv) Filler for acetylene cylinders; 

(v) High grade electrical paper; 

(vi) Millboard; 

(vii) Missile liner; 

(viii) Adhesives, sealants, roof and 

non-roof coatings; 

(ix) Pipeline wrap; 

(x) Reinforced plastics; 

(xi) Roofing felt; 

(xii) Separators in fuel cells and 

batteries; 

(xiii) Vinyl-asbestos floor tile; or 

(xiv) Other building products (other 

than cement products). 

(b) Specific requirements. (1) Section 

721.45(f) does not apply to this section. 

A person who intends to manufacture 

(including import) or process the 

substance identified in paragraph (a)(1) 

of this section for the significant new 

use identified in (a)(2) of this section as 

part of an article is subject to the 

notification provisions of § 721.25. 

(2) [Reserved] 

[FR Doc. 2018–12513 Filed 6–8–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

46 CFR Parts 10, 11, and 15 

[Docket No. USCG–2018–0100] 

RIN 1625–AC46 

Amendments to the Marine Radar 

Observer Refresher Training 

Regulations 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

revise its merchant mariner 

credentialing regulations to remove 

obsolete portions of the radar observer 

requirements and harmonize the radar 

observer endorsement with the 

merchant mariner credential. Under this 

proposed rule, an active mariner who 

serves in a relevant position for 1 year 

in the previous 5 years using radar for 

navigation and collision avoidance 

purposes on vessels equipped with 

radar, or has served as a qualified 

instructor for a Coast Guard-approved 

radar course at least twice within the 

past 5 years, would not be required to 

complete a Coast Guard-approved radar 

refresher or re-certification course in 

order to renew his or her radar observer 

endorsement. This proposed rule would 

not change the existing requirements for 

mariners seeking an original radar 

observer endorsement or mariners who 

do not have either 1 year of relevant sea 

service on board radar-equipped vessels 

in the previous 5 years or service as a 

qualified instructor for a Coast Guardapproved radar course at least twice 

within the past 5 years. Elimination of 

the requirement to take a radar refresher 

or re-certification course every 5 years 

would reduce burden on affected 

mariners without impacting safety. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before July 11, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2018–0100 using the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at http://

www.regulations.gov. See the ‘‘Public 

Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for 

further instructions on submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information about this document call or 

email Mr. Davis Breyer, Coast Guard; 

telephone 202–372–1445, email 

davis.j.breyer@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents for Preamble 

I. Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

II. Abbreviations 

III. Basis and Purpose 

IV. Background 

V. Discussion of Proposed Rule 

VI. Regulatory Analyses 

A. Regulatory Planning and Review 

B. Small Entities 

C. Assistance for Small Entities 

D. Collection of Information 

E. Federalism 

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

G. Taking of Private Property 

H. Civil Justice Reform 

I. Protection of Children 

J. Indian Tribal Governments 

K. Energy Effects 

L. Technical Standards 

M. Environment 

I. Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

The Coast Guard views public 

participation as essential to effective 

rulemaking, and will consider all 

comments and material received during 

the comment period. Your comment can 

help shape the outcome of this 

rulemaking. If you submit a comment, 

please include the docket number for 

this rulemaking, indicate the specific 

section of this document to which each 

comment applies, and provide a reason 

for each suggestion or recommendation. 

We encourage you to submit 

comments through the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at http://

www.regulations.gov. If your material 

cannot be submitted using http://

www.regulations.gov, contact the person 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section of this proposed rule 

for alternate instructions. Documents 

mentioned in this proposed rule, and all 

public comments, are available in our 

online docket at http://

www.regulations.gov, and can be viewed 

by following that website’s instructions. 

Additionally, if you go to the online 

docket and sign up for email alerts, you 

will be notified when comments are 

posted or a final rule is published. 

We accept anonymous comments. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http://

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. For more about privacy and 

the docket, visit http://

www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice. 

We do not plan to hold a public 

meeting but we will consider doing so 

if public comments indicate that a 

meeting would be helpful. We would 

issue a separate Federal Register notice 

to announce the date, time, and location 

of such a meeting. 

II. Abbreviations 

BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

CGAA 2015 Coast Guard Authorization Act 

of 2015 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

MERPAC Merchant Marine Personnel 

Advisory Committee 

MMLD Merchant Mariner Licensing and 

Documentation 

MMC Merchant Mariner Credential 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

§ Section 

STCW International Convention on the 

Standards of Training, Certification and 

Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, as 

amended 

STCW Code Seafarers’ Training, 

Certification and Watchkeeping Code 

U.S.C. United States Code 

III. Basis and Purpose 

The purpose of this proposed rule is 

to amend the radar observer 

endorsement requirements by removing 

obsolete portions and harmonizing the 

expiration dates of the radar observer 

endorsement and the merchant mariner 

credential (MMC). 

The Coast Guard is authorized to 

determine and establish the experience 

and professional qualifications required 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS