56472 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 179 / Thursday, September 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

■ 2. Section 501.15 is amended by 

revising paragraph (i) to read as follows: 

§ 501.15 Computerized Meter Resetting 

System. 

* * * * * 

(i) Security and Revenue Protection. 

To receive Postal Service approval to 

continue to operate systems in the 

CMRS environment, the RC must submit 

to a periodic examination of its CMRS 

system and any other applications and 

technology infrastructure that may have 

a material impact on Postal Service 

revenues, as determined by the Postal 

Service. The examination shall be 

performed by a qualified, independent 

audit firm and shall be conducted in 

accordance with the Statement on 

Auditing Standards (SAS) No. 70, 

Service Organizations, developed by the 

American Institute of Certified Public 

Accountants (AICPA), as amended or 

superseded. The examination shall 

include testing of the operating 

effectiveness of relevant RC internal 

controls (Type II SAS70 Report). If the 

service organization uses another 

service organization (sub-service 

provider), Postal Service Management 

should consider the nature and 

materiality of the transactions processed 

by the sub-service organization and the 

contribution of the sub-service 

organization’s processes and controls in 

the achievement of the Postal Service’s 

information processing objectives. The 

Postal Service should have access to the 

sub-service organization’s SAS 70 

report. The control objectives to be 

covered by the SAS 70 report are subject 

to Postal Service review and approval 

and are to be provided to the Postal 

Service 30 days prior to the initiation of 

each examination period. As a result of 

the examination, the auditor shall 

provide the RC and the Postal Service 

with an opinion on the design and 

operating effectiveness of the RC’s 

internal controls related to the CMRS 

system and any other applications and 

technology infrastructure considered 

material to the services provided to the 

Postal Service by the RC. Such 

examinations are to be conducted on no 

less than an annual basis, and are to be 

as of and for the twelve months ended 

June 30 of each year (except for the 

period ending June 30, 2010, for which 

the period of coverage will be no less 

than six months, and except for new 

contracts for which the examination 

period will be no less than the period 

from the contract date to the following 

June 30, unless otherwise agreed to by 

the Postal Service). The examination 

reports are to be provided to the Postal 

Service by August 15 of each year. To 

the extent that internal control 

weaknesses are identified in a Type II 

SAS 70 report, the Postal Service may 

require the remediation of such 

weaknesses and review working papers 

and engage in discussions about the 

work performed with the auditor. Postal 

Service requires that all remediation 

efforts (if applicable) are completed and 

reported by the RC prior to the Postal 

Service’s fiscal year end (September 30). 

The RC will be responsible for all costs 

to conduct these examinations. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Section 501.16 is amended by 

revising paragraph (f) to read as follows: 

§ 501.16 PC postage payment 

methodology. 

* * * * * 

(f) Security and revenue protection. 

To receive Postal Service approval to 

continue to operate PC Postage systems, 

the provider must submit to a periodic 

examination of its PC Postage system 

and any other applications and 

technology infrastructure that may have 

a material impact on Postal Service 

revenues, as determined by the Postal 

Service. The examination shall be 

performed by a qualified, independent 

audit firm and shall be conducted in 

accordance with the Statement on 

Auditing Standards (SAS) No. 70, 

Service Organizations, developed by the 

American Institute of Certified Public 

Accountants (AICPA), as amended or 

superseded. The examination shall 

include testing of the operating 

effectiveness of relevant provider 

internal controls (Type II SAS 70 

Report). If the service organization uses 

another service organization (subservice provider), Postal Service 

Management should consider the nature 

and materiality of the transactions 

processed by the sub-service 

organization and the contribution of the 

sub-service organization’s processes and 

controls in the achievement of the 

Postal Service’s information processing 

objectives. The Postal Service should 

have access to the sub-service 

organization’s SAS 70 report. The 

control objectives to be covered by the 

SAS 70 report are subject to Postal 

Service review and approval and are to 

be provided to the Postal Service 30 

days prior to the initiation of each 

examination period. As a result of the 

examination, the auditor shall provide 

the provider, and the Postal Service, 

with an opinion on the design and 

operating effectiveness of the internal 

controls related to the PC Postage 

system and any other applications and 

technology infrastructure considered 

material to the services provided to the 

Postal Service by the provider. Such 

examinations are to be conducted on no 

less than an annual basis, and are to be 

as of and for the twelve months ended 

June 30 of each year (except for the 

period ending June 30, 2010 for which 

the period of coverage will be no less 

than six months, and except for new 

contracts for which the examination 

period will be no less than the period 

from the contract date to the following 

June 30, unless otherwise agreed to by 

the Postal Service). The examination 

reports are to be provided to the Postal 

Service by August 15 of each year. To 

the extent that internal control 

weaknesses are identified in a Type II 

SAS 70 report, the Postal Service may 

require the remediation of such 

weaknesses and review working papers 

and engage in discussions about the 

work performed with the auditor. The 

provider will be responsible for all costs 

to conduct these examinations. 

* * * * * 

Neva R. Watson, 

Attorney, Legislative. 

[FR Doc. 2010–23031 Filed 9–15–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–12–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 790 

[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2009–0894; FRL–8832–8] 

RIN 2070–AJ59 

Amendments to Enforceable Consent 

Agreement Procedural Rules 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is revising the 

procedures for developing Enforceable 

Consent Agreements (ECAs) to generate 

test data under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). The main features 

of the ECA process that EPA is changing 

include when and how to initiate 

negotiations and inserting a firm 

deadline at which negotiations will 

terminate. EPA is also deleting, 

modifying, or consolidating several 

sections of 40 CFR part 790 to place the 

ECA provisions in one section and the 

Interagency Testing Committee (ITC) 

provisions in a separate section, to make 

it clearer that there is one ECA 

negotiation procedure applicable to all 

circumstances when an ECA would be 

appropriate, and to make conforming 

changes in other sections that reference 

the ECA procedures. 

DATES: This final rule is effective 

October 18, 2010. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 179 / Thursday, September 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 56473 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under docket 

identification (ID) number EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2009–0894. All documents in the 

docket are listed in the docket index 

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

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available in the electronic docket at 

http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only 

available in hard copy, at the OPPT 

Docket. The OPPT Docket is located in 

the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) at Rm. 

3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301 

Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room 

hours of operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 

p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 

legal holidays. The telephone number of 

the EPA/DC Public Reading Room is 

(202) 566–1744, and the telephone 

number for the OPPT Docket is (202) 

566–0280. Docket visitors are required 

to show photographic identification, 

pass through a metal detector, and sign 

the EPA visitor log. All visitor bags are 

processed through an X-ray machine 

and subject to search. Visitors will be 

provided an EPA/DC badge that must be 

visible at all times in the building and 

returned upon departure. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical information contact: Jessica 

Barkas, Chemical Control Division 

(7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention 

and Toxics, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone 

number: (202) 250–8880; e-mail address: 

barkas.jessica@epa.gov. 

For general information contact: The 

TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 

South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 

14620; telephone number: (202) 554– 

1404; e-mail address: TSCAHotline@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Does this Action Apply to Me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you manufacture (defined 

by statute to include import) or process 

chemical substances or mixtures 

(defined as ‘‘chemical’’ in 40 CFR part 

790). Potentially affected entities may 

include, but are not limited to: 

• Manufacturers (defined by statute to 

include importers) of chemical 

substances (NAIC codes 325 and 

324110), e.g., chemical manufacturing 

and petroleum refineries. 

• Processors of chemical substances 

(NAIC codes 325 and 324110), e.g., 

chemical manufacturing and petroleum 

refineries. 

This listing is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. Other types of 

entities not listed in this unit could also 

be affected. The North American 

Industrial Classification System 

(NAICS) codes have been provided to 

assist you and others in determining 

whether this action might apply to 

certain entities. If you have any 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity, consult 

the technical person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

II. Background 

A. What is the Agency’s Authority for 

Taking this Action? 

Section 4 of TSCA authorizes EPA to 

require manufacturers and processors of 

chemical substances and mixtures to 

test these chemical substances to 

generate data that is relevant to 

determining whether the chemical 

substances present an unreasonable risk. 

Section 4(a) of TSCA empowers the 

Agency to promulgate rules which 

require such testing. Section 4 of TSCA 

provides implied authority to enter into 

ECAs requiring testing where such 

agreements provide procedural 

safeguards equivalent to those that 

apply where testing is conducted by 

rule. 

B. What Action is the Agency Taking? 

EPA is finalizing a rule revising the 

procedures for initiating and negotiating 

an ECA. ECAs are enforceable 

agreements between EPA and one or 

more chemical manufacturers or 

processors to conduct specific testing on 

a particular chemical substance. These 

agreements are designed to provide EPA 

with data identified as necessary to 

evaluate a particular chemical substance 

without the need for EPA to first make 

the risk- or exposure-based findings for, 

or promulgate, a TSCA section 4 test 

rule, and without introducing delays 

inherent in the rulemaking process. 

ECAs were intended to permit EPA to 

obtain test data more quickly than test 

rules, while preserving opportunity for 

input from the public and the affected 

manufacturer(s). 

The main features of the ECA process 

that EPA is changing include when and 

how to initiate negotiations and 

inserting a firm deadline at which 

negotiations will terminate. EPA is also 

deleting, modifying, or consolidating 

several parts of 40 CFR part 790 to place 

the ECA provisions in one section and 

the ITC provisions in a separate section, 

to make it clearer that there is one ECA 

negotiation procedure applicable to all 

circumstances when an ECA would be 

appropriate, and to make conforming 

changes in other sections that reference 

the ECA procedures. 

The proposed rule was published in 

the Federal Register of February 19, 

2010 (75 FR 7428) (FRL–8802–6). 

Additional detail about ECAs, the 

specific changes, and the rationale for 

those changes can be found in that 

Federal Register document. One 

comment was received on the proposed 

rule. No changes have been made to the 

rule since it was proposed. 

C. What Was EPA’s Response to 

Comment? 

The comment period for the proposed 

rule ended on March 22, 2010. One 

comment was received, from the 

American Chemistry Council (ACC). 

The ACC comments indicated support 

for the ECA procedural changes, and 

had a few specific suggestions: 

Comment 1: EPA should include in 

the ECA rule what ‘‘office or program 

and level of management within EPA 

will have the organizational authority to 

officially speak on behalf of the Agency 

on such perceived [testing] needs, and 

how EPA will communicate this request 

to industry and through what vehicle.’’ 

EPA response: Under the current 

delegation, the EPA Assistant 

Administrator for the Office of Chemical 

Safety and Pollution Prevention 

(OCSPP) (formerly the Office of 

Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic 

Substances (OPPTS)) has the authority 

to make the final decision on whether 

testing is necessary under TSCA section 

4. As explained in the preamble to the 

proposed rule, EPA will invite testing 

proposals through Federal Register 

documents, EPA’s website, and other 

forms of public communication. 

Depending on the circumstances (e.g., 

the size and geographical distribution of 

the group potentially required to 

conduct testing), EPA may use more 

than one of these methods, as necessary 

to reach the affected companies. For 

instance, one of the public forms of 

communication that EPA may use is 

speeches or presentations by Agency 

officials at industry conferences, where 

representatives from individual 

companies and trade associations will 

be present, and able to pass the word 

along to their companies and members. 

Of course, individual companies, trade 

associations and other organizations, 

and their representatives can always 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
56474 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 179 / Thursday, September 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

contact EPA, using the contact 

information provided in the Federal 

Register document, EPA website, or 

other public communication of testing 

needs, with questions about specific 

testing requirements and other details 

for individual chemical substances. 

Comment 2: EPA should describe in 

greater detail what EPA believes should 

be contained in the proposed consent 

agreement. 

EPA response: The testing needs, 

timeline, and other details will 

necessarily vary for each individual 

chemical substance, so it is impossible 

for EPA to generalize about what will 

form an adequate proposal in each 

circumstance. The standard provisions 

that must be included in all consent 

agreements are listed in 40 CFR 790.60, 

‘‘Contents of consent agreements,’’ 

which this action will not change. 

Again, individual companies, trade 

associations, and other organizations, 

and their representatives can always 

contact EPA, using the contact 

information provided in the Federal 

Register document, EPA website, or 

other public communication of testing 

needs, with questions about specific 

testing requirements and other details 

for individual chemicals. In addition, as 

stated in the rule, ‘‘EPA may request 

additional clarifications of or revisions 

to the proposal(s).’’ This statement in the 

rule makes it explicit that submitters 

will have an opportunity to clarify, 

correct, and otherwise revise their 

proposal(s), if EPA decides that 

clarification is needed, or the proposal 

needs expansion or elaboration to 

adequately meet testing needs. 

Comment 3: The ECA procedures 

should include a provision that would 

permit the Agency to agree to an ECA 

where some or most, but not all, data 

needs might be filled. 

EPA response: There is nothing in the 

original or revised ECA procedural rules 

that would prohibit EPA from agreeing 

to an ECA that covers some, but not all, 

needed testing, then pursuing a test rule 

or follow-up ECA, to fill remaining data 

needs—if no other interested parties 

submit a timely written objection, and if 

EPA concludes that such a multi-part 

process is likely to be an efficient and 

successful means of obtaining the 

needed test data. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Regulatory Review 

Under Executive Order 12866, 

entitled Regulatory Planning and 

Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has determined that this final 

rule is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review under 

Executive Order 12866, because it does 

not meet the criteria in section 3(f)(4) of 

the Executive Order. Accordingly, EPA 

did not submit this final rule to OMB for 

review under Executive Order 12866. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose any new 

information collection burden, because 

the development of the ECA regulations 

does not involve information collection 

activities as defined by the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et 

seq. However, the information 

collection requirements contained in an 

ECA are already approved by OMB 

pursuant to PRA under OMB control 

number 2070–0033 (EPA ICR No. 1139). 

Under PRA, 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 control number assigned by OMB. 

The OMB control numbers for EPA’s 

regulations in title 40 of the CFR are 

listed in 40 CFR part 9, and will be 

included in the individual ECAs. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Pursuant to section 605(b) of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.), after considering the 

potential economic impacts of this final 

rule on small entities, the Agency 

hereby certifies that this final rule 

would not have a significant adverse 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

Small entities include small 

businesses, small organizations, and 

small governmental jurisdictions. For 

purposes of assessing the impacts of this 

final rule on small entities, small entity 

is defined as: 

1. A small business as defined by the 

Small Business Administration’s (SBA) 

regulations at 13 CFR 121.201. 

2. A small governmental jurisdiction 

that is a government of a city, county, 

town, school district, or special district 

with a population of less than 50,000. 

3. A small organization that is any 

not-for-profit enterprise which is 

independently owned and operated and 

is not dominant in its field. 

This action will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. In determining 

whether a final rule has a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities, the impact of 

concern is any significant adverse 

economic impact on small entities, 

since the primary purpose of regulatory 

flexibility analysis is to identify and 

address regulatory alternatives ‘‘which 

minimize any significant economic 

impact of the rule on small entities.’’ 5 

U.S.C. 603 and 604. Thus, an agency 

may certify that a final rule will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities if 

the final rule relieves regulatory burden, 

or otherwise has a positive economic 

effect on all of the small entities subject 

to the final rule. 

The changes discussed in this 

document are expected to streamline 

and improve the ECA procedures in a 

way that will benefit all participants. 

EPA has therefore concluded that this 

final rule will not have any adverse 

impacts on affected small entities. EPA 

did not receive any comments on the 

proposed rule regarding the impact on 

small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This action does not impose any 

enforceable duty or contain any 

unfunded mandate as described under 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), (2 U.S.C. 

1531–1538). Therefore, this action is not 

subject to the requirements of UMRA. 

E. Federalism 

Pursuant to Executive Order 13132, 

entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999), EPA has determined 

that this final rule does not have 

‘‘federalism implications,’’ because it 

will not have substantial direct effects 

on the 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, as 

specified in Executive Order 13132. 

Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not 

apply to this final rule. 

F. Tribal Implications 

Under Executive Order 13175, 

entitled Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 

67249, November 9, 2000), EPA has 

determined that this final rule does not 

have tribal implications 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, as specified in the Order. Thus, 

Executive Order 13175 does not apply 

to this action. 

G. Children’s Health Protection 

Executive Order 13045, entitled 

Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), 

does not apply to this action because 

this is not designated as an 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 179 / Thursday, September 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 56475 

‘‘economically significant’’ regulatory 

action as defined by Executive Order 

12866 (see Unit III.A.), nor does this 

action establish an environmental 

standard that is intended to have a 

disproportionate effect on children. To 

the contrary, this action will revise 

procedures which will facilitate the 

development of data and information 

that EPA and others can use to assess 

the risks of chemical substances, 

including potential risks to children. 

H. Energy Effects 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, entitled Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001), because this action is not 

expected to affect energy supply, 

distribution, or use. 

I. Technology Standards 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), section 12(d) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note), directs EPA to use 

voluntary consensus standards in its 

regulatory activities unless to do so 

would be inconsistent with applicable 

law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary 

consensus standards are technical 

standards (e.g., materials specifications, 

test methods, sampling procedures, and 

business practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. The NTTAA directs 

EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency decides 

not to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. 

This final rule does not involve 

technical standards. Therefore, EPA is 

not considering the use of any voluntary 

consensus standards. 

J. Environmental Justice 

This action does not involve special 

considerations of environmental justice 

related issues as delineated by 

Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994). 

IV. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., 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 rule 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 of the rule in 

the Federal Register. This rule is not a 

‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 

804(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 790 

Environmental protection, Chemicals, 

Hazardous substances, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: September 8, 2010. 

Stephen A. Owens, 

Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical 

Safety and Pollution Prevention. 

■ Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is 

amended as follows: 

PART 790—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 790 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2603. 

§ 790.1 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 790.1 is amended by 

removing the last sentence of paragraph 

(c) and by removing paragraph (d). 

■ 3. Section 790.20 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§790.20 Recommendation, 

recommendation with an intent to 

designate, and designation of testing 

candidates by the ITC. 

(a) ITC recommendations and 

recommendations with intent to 

designate. The ITC has advised EPA that 

it will discharge its responsibilities 

under section 4(e) of TSCA in the 

following manner: 

(1) When the ITC identifies a 

chemical substance or mixture that it 

believes should receive expedited 

consideration by EPA for testing, the 

ITC may add the substance or mixture 

to its list of chemicals recommended for 

testing and include a statement that the 

ITC intends to designate the substance 

or mixture for action by EPA in 

accordance with section 4(e)(1)(B) of 

TSCA. 

(2) Chemical substances or mixtures 

selected for expedited review under 

paragraph (a)(1) of this section may, at 

a later time, be designated for EPA 

action within 12 months of such 

designation. The ITC’s subsequent 

decision would be based on the ITC’s 

review of TSCA sections 8(a) and 8(d) 

data and other relevant information. 

(3) Where the ITC concludes that a 

chemical substance or mixture warrants 

testing consideration but that expedited 

EPA review of testing needs is not 

justified, the ITC will add the substance 

or mixture to its list of testing 

recommendations without expressing an 

intent to designate the substance or 

mixture for EPA action in accordance 

with section 4(e)(1)(B) of TSCA. 

(4) The ITC reserves its right to 

designate any chemical substance or 

mixture that it determines the Agency 

should, within 12 months of the date 

first designated, initiate a proceeding 

under section 4(a) of TSCA. 

(b) Preliminary EPA evaluation of ITC 

recommendations with intent to 

designate. Following receipt of an ITC 

report containing a recommendation 

with an intent to designate, EPA will 

use the following procedure for 

completing a preliminary evaluation of 

testing needs on those chemical 

substances that the ITC has 

recommended with intent to designate: 

(1) EPA will publish the ITC report in 

the Federal Register and announce that 

interested persons have 30 days to 

submit comments on the ITC’s testing 

recommendations. 

(2) EPA will publish a Federal 

Register document adding all ITCrecommended chemicals to the 

automatic reporting provisions of its 

rules under sections 8(a) and 8(d) of 

TSCA (40 CFR parts 712 and 716). 

(3) EPA will hold a public ‘‘focus 

meeting’’ to discuss the ITC’s testing 

recommendations and obtain comments 

and information from interested parties. 

(4) EPA will evaluate submissions 

received under TSCA sections 8(a) and 

8(d) reporting requirements, comments 

filed on the ITC’s recommendations, 

and other information and data 

compiled by the Agency. 

(5) EPA will make a preliminary staff 

determination of the need for testing 

and, where testing appears warranted, 

will tentatively select the studies to be 

performed. 

(6) EPA will hold a public meeting to 

announce its preliminary testing 

determinations. 

(c) EPA response to ITC designations 

and recommendations—(1) Where a 

chemical substance or mixture is 

designated for EPA action under section 

4(e)(1)(B) of TSCA, the Agency will take 

either one of the following actions 

within 12 months after receiving the ITC 

designation: 

(i) Initiate rulemaking proceedings 

under section 4(a) of TSCA. Where the 

testing recommendations of the ITC 

raise unusually complex and novel 

issues that require additional Agency 

review and opportunity for public 

comment, the Agency may initiate 

rulemaking by publishing an Advance 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(ANPRM). 

(ii) Publish a Federal Register notice 

explaining the Agency’s reasons for not 

initiating such rulemaking proceedings. 

EPA may conclude that rulemaking 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
56476 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 179 / Thursday, September 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

proceedings under section 4(a) of TSCA 

are unnecessary if it determines that the 

findings specified in section 4(a) of 

TSCA cannot be made or if the Agency 

entered into a consent agreement 

requiring the testing identified by the 

ITC. 

(2) Where a chemical substance or 

mixture has been recommended for 

testing by the ITC, whether with or 

without an intent to designate, EPA will 

use its best efforts to act on the ITC’s 

recommendations as rapidly as possible 

consistent with its other priorities and 

responsibilities. EPA may respond to 

the ITC’s recommendations with action 

such as: 

(i) Initiating rulemaking proceedings 

under section 4(a) of TSCA, 

(ii) Publishing a Federal Register 

notice explaining the Agency’s reasons 

for concluding that testing is 

unnecessary, or 

(iii) Entering into a consent agreement 

in accordance with this subpart. 

■ 4. Section 790.22 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 790.22 Procedures for developing 

consent agreements. 

(a) Preliminary EPA evaluation of 

proposed consent agreement. Where 

EPA believes that testing of a chemical 

substance or mixture may be needed, 

and wishes to explore whether a 

consent agreement may satisfy the 

identified testing needs, EPA will invite 

manufacturers and/or processors of the 

affected chemical substance or mixture 

to submit a proposed consent agreement 

to EPA. EPA will evaluate the 

proposal(s) and may request additional 

clarifications of or revisions to the 

proposal(s). 

(b) Negotiation procedures for consent 

agreements. If, after evaluating the 

proposed consent agreement(s), EPA 

believes it is likely that proceeding with 

negotiation of a consent agreement 

would be an efficient means of 

developing the data, EPA will use the 

following procedures to conduct such 

negotiations: 

(1) In the Federal Register, EPA will 

give notice of the availability of the 

proposal(s) that is the basis for 

negotiation, invite persons interested in 

participating in or monitoring 

negotiations to contact the Agency in 

writing, set a deadline for interested 

parties to contact the Agency in writing, 

and set a date for the negotiation 

meeting(s). 

(2) The Agency will meet with 

interested parties at the negotiation 

meeting(s) for the purpose of attempting 

to negotiate a consent agreement. Only 

the submitter(s) of the proposal(s) that is 

the basis for negotiation and those 

persons who submit written requests to 

participate in or monitor negotiations by 

the deadline established under 

paragraph (b)(1) of this section will be 

deemed ‘‘interested parties’’ for purposes 

of this section. 

(3) All negotiation meetings will be 

open to members of the public, but only 

interested parties will be permitted to 

participate in negotiations. The minutes 

of each meeting will be prepared by 

EPA. Meeting minutes, the proposed 

consent agreement(s), background 

documents, and other materials 

distributed at negotiation meetings will 

be placed in an Internet-accessible 

public docket established by EPA. 

(4) If EPA concludes at any time that 

negotiations are unlikely to produce a 

final agreement, EPA will terminate 

negotiations and may proceed with 

rulemaking. If EPA terminates 

negotiations, no further opportunity for 

negotiations will be provided. EPA will 

notify all interested parties of the 

termination. 

(5) The period between the first 

negotiation meeting and final 

agreement, if any (‘‘the negotiation 

period’’), will be no longer than 6 

months, unless extended prior to its 

expiration in accordance with paragraph 

(b)(7) of this section. This period will 

include all negotiation meetings, and 

the processes discussed in paragraphs 

(b)(6) and (b)(9) of this section. If the 

negotiation period passes without the 

production of a final agreement, 

negotiations and development of the 

subject ECA will terminate 

automatically. 

(6) EPA will circulate a draft of the 

consent agreement to all interested 

parties if EPA concludes that such draft 

is likely to achieve final agreement. A 

period of 30 days will be provided for 

submitting comments or written 

objections under paragraph (b)(8)(i)(B) 

of this section. 

(7) If, prior to the expiration of the 

negotiation period, final agreement has 

not been reached, EPA may at its 

discretion provide one or more 

extensions, each of which may be up to 

60 days, if it seems likely to EPA that 

a final agreement will be reached during 

that time. EPA will notify all interested 

parties of any extension(s). 

(8) (i) EPA will enter into consent 

agreements only where there is a 

consensus among the Agency, one or 

more manufacturers and/or processors 

who agree to conduct or sponsor the 

testing, and all other interested parties 

who identify themselves in accordance 

with paragraph (b)(2) of this section. 

EPA will not enter into a consent 

agreement in either of the following 

circumstances: 

(A) EPA and affected manufacturers 

and/or processors cannot reach a 

consensus in the timeframe described in 

paragraph (b)(5) of this section. 

(B) A draft consent agreement is 

considered inadequate by other 

interested parties who have submitted 

timely written objections to the draft 

consent agreement, which provide a 

specific explanation of the grounds on 

which the draft agreement is 

objectionable. 

(ii) EPA may reject objections 

described in paragraph (b)(8)(i)(B) of 

this section only where the Agency 

concludes the objections: 

(A) Are not made in good faith; 

(B) Are untimely; 

(C) Do not involve the adequacy of the 

proposed testing program or other 

features of the agreement that may affect 

EPA’s ability to fulfill the goals and 

purposes of TSCA; or 

(D) Are not accompanied by a specific 

explanation of the grounds on which the 

draft agreement is considered 

objectionable. 

(iii) The unwillingness of some 

manufacturers and/or processors to sign 

the draft consent agreement does not, in 

itself, establish a lack of consensus if 

EPA concludes that those manufacturers 

and/or processors who are prepared to 

sign the agreement are capable of 

accomplishing the testing to be required 

and that the draft agreement will 

achieve the purposes of TSCA in all 

other respects. 

(9) Where a consensus exists, as 

described in paragraph (b)(8) of this 

section, concerning the contents of a 

draft consent agreement, the draft 

consent agreement will be circulated to 

EPA management and the parties that 

are to conduct or sponsor testing under 

the agreement, for final approval and 

signature. 

(10) Upon final approval and 

signature of a consent agreement, EPA 

will publish a Federal Register 

document announcing the availability of 

the consent agreement and codifying (in 

subpart C of 40 CFR part 799) the name 

of the chemical substance(s) and/or 

mixture(s) to be tested and the citation 

to the Federal Register document. 

§§ 790.24, 790.26, and 790.28 [Removed] 

■ 5. Remove §§ 790.24, 790.26, and 

790.28. 

§ 790.68 [Amended] 

■ 6. Remove the cross-reference ‘‘§ 

790.24’’ in ‘‘§ 790.68(a)(2)’’ and add in its 

place ‘‘§ 790.22(b)(8).’’ 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 179 / Thursday, September 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 56477 

Appendix A to subpart E of part 790 

[Removed] 

■ 7. Remove Appendix A to subpart E 

of part 790. 

[FR Doc. 2010–23131 Filed 9–15–10 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 1060 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0270; FRL–9202–4] 

RIN 2060–AQ18 

Technical Amendments for Marine 

Spark-Ignition Engines and Vessels 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: In the final rulemaking for 

new exhaust and evaporative emissions 

standards for nonroad spark-ignition 

engines, vessels, and equipment (73 FR 

59034, October 8, 2008), EPA 

established first-ever evaporative 

emissions standards for marine vessels. 

These requirements included portable 

marine fuel tanks commonly used in 

recreational boating. During their efforts 

to certify portable fuel tanks to these 

new requirements, manufacturers 

working together on systems integration 

identified several technical issues with 

the performance of the tanks/fuel 

systems in use that were not fully 

apparent to them before these standards 

were developed. Systems integration 

work conducted by the fuel tank, boat 

and engine manufacturers highlighted 

that under some circumstances there 

was the potential for fuel spillage to 

occur. Work conducted by these parties 

indicated that this issue applies to 

existing systems and tanks as well as 

those built to comply with EPA’s 

evaporative emission design standard. 

We have engaged the industry to 

identify a simple, safe, and emissions 

neutral solution to this concern. EPA is 

taking direct final action to make 

technical amendments to the design 

standard for portable tanks that will 

allow for this solution. In addition, we 

are incorporating safe recommended 

practices, developed through industry 

consensus, for portable marine fuel 

tanks. This action is emissions neutral 

with respect to the diurnal emissions 

standard; however, to the extent that it 

helps reduce fuel spillage, incorporating 

safe recommended practices will result 

in a net benefit to the environment and 

lead to fuel savings. 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

November 15, 2010 without further 

notice, unless EPA receives adverse 

comment by October 18, 2010 If EPA 

receives adverse comment, we will 

publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that the rule will not take effect. 

Similarly, the incorporation by 

reference of the published standard 

listed in this regulation is approved by 

the Director of the Federal Register as of 

November 15, 2010 without further 

notice, unless EPA receives adverse 

comment. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2010–0270, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (202) 566–9744. 

• Mail: Environmental Protection 

Agency, Air Docket, Mail-Code 6102T, 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460. In addition, 

please mail a copy of your comments on 

the information collection provisions to 

the Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs, Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB), Attn: Desk Officer for 

EPA, 725 17th St., NW., Washington, DC 

20503. 

• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center 

(EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC, Attention Docket No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2010–0270. Such deliveries are 

only accepted during the Docket’s 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010– 

0270. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an e-mail 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov your email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http://www.

epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. For 

additional instructions on submitting 

comments, go to Unit III of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the ‘‘Technical Amendments for Marine 

Spark-Ignition Engines and Vessels’’ 

Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 

1301 Constitution Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC. The Public Reading 

Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 

p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 

legal holidays. The telephone number 

for the Public Reading Room is (202) 

566–1744, and the telephone number for 

the ‘‘Technical Amendments for Marine 

Spark-Ignition Engines and Vessels’’ 

Docket is (202) 566–2426. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Samulski, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of 

Transportation and Air Quality, 

Assessment and Standards Division, 

2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, 

Michigan 48105; telephone number: 

734–214–4532; fax number: 734–214– 

4050; e-mail address: 

samulski.michael@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Why is EPA using a Direct Final 

Rule? 

EPA is publishing this rule without a 

prior proposed rule because we view 

this as a noncontroversial action and 

anticipate no adverse comment. 

However, in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ 

section of today’s Federal Register, we 

are publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposed rule to adopt 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES