59186 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 190 / Wednesday, October 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

Operation and Maintenance 

The ROD called for the development 

of an SMP to provide for the proper 

management of all post-construction 

remedy components. The SMP was 

approved in June 2014. 

The SMP includes operation and 

maintenance (O&M) activities required 

for the Site. Because there are no 

mechanical systems installed at the Site, 

O&M activities consist of periodic 

inspections of the Site property 

(minimally once per year and 

additionally following severe weather 

events) to note general Site conditions 

and to ensure that the security fence and 

monitoring wells are in good repair. 

Groundwater sampling of the ten onSite monitoring wells is conducted in 

accordance with the schedule 

established in the SMP to verify that the 

low levels of contamination in Site 

groundwater are attenuating and that 

groundwater quality improves as a 

result of the Site remediation. 

In addition to media monitoring, 

O&M activities include periodic 

certification that the institutional 

controls established in the 

environmental easement attached to the 

Site property are unchanged and that 

nothing has occurred that would impair 

the ability to protect public health and 

the environment or otherwise constitute 

a violation or failure to comply with 

Site controls. This certification is 

provided in the Periodic Review Report, 

to be submitted annually by the Site 

owner. 

Five-Year Review 

Hazardous substances remain at this 

Site above levels that would allow for 

unlimited use and unrestricted 

exposure. Therefore, pursuant to 

CERCLA Section 121(c), EPA is required 

to conduct a review of the remedy at 

least once every five years. The first 

five-year review was completed on July 

16, 2014. No issues, recommendations 

or follow-up actions have been 

identified during the five-year review. 

The five-year review concluded that the 

implemented remedy for the Site is 

protective of human health and the 

environment. 

Community Involvement 

Public participation activities for this 

Site have been satisfied as required in 

CERCLA Sections 113(k) and 117, 42 

U.S.C. 9613(k) and 9617. As part of the 

remedy selection process, the public 

was invited to comment on the 

proposed remedy. All other documents 

and information that EPA relied on or 

considered in recommending this 

deletion are available for the public to 

review at the information repositories 

identified above. 

Determination That the Site Meets the 

Criteria for Deletion From the NCP 

All of the completion requirements 

for this Site have been met, as described 

in the June 30, 2014 Final Close-Out 

Report. The State of New York, in a May 

30, 2014 letter, concurred with the 

proposed deletion of this Site from the 

NPL. As described in this Notice of 

Intent to Delete, the implemented 

remedy achieves the degree of cleanup 

specified in the ROD for all exposure 

pathways; the selected RAOs for the Site 

and associated cleanup levels are 

consistent with agency policy and 

guidance; and no further Superfund 

response is needed to protect human 

health and the environment. 

The NCP specifies that EPA may 

delete a site from the NPL if all 

appropriate Fund-financed response 

under CERCLA has been implemented, 

and no further response action by 

responsible parties is appropriate [40 

CFR 300.425(e)]. EPA, with the 

concurrence of the State of New York, 

believes that this criterion for deletion 

has been met. Consequently, EPA is 

intending to delete this Site from the 

NPL. Documents supporting this action 

are available for review at the 

information repositories identified 

above. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous 

substances, Hazardous waste, 

Intergovernmental relations, Natural 

resources, Oil pollution, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Superfund, Water 

pollution control, Water supply. 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 

9601–9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR 

1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O.12580, 52 FR 2923, 

3 CFR 1987 Comp., p. 193. 

Dated: September 19, 2014. 

Judith A. Enck, 

Regional Administrator, EPA, Region 2. 

[FR Doc. 2014–23354 Filed 9–30–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 721 

[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2007–0490; FRL–9912–87] 

RIN 2070–AJ96 

Certain Nonylphenols and 

Nonylphenol Ethoxylates; 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 15 

related chemical substances commonly 

known as nonylphenols (NP) and 

nonylphenol ethoxylates (NPE). For 13 

NPs and NPEs, EPA is proposing to 

designate any use as a ‘‘significant new 

use,’’ and for 2 additional NPs, EPA is 

proposing that any use other than use as 

an intermediate or use as an epoxy cure 

catalyst would constitute a ‘‘significant 

new use.’’ Persons subject to these 

SNURs would be required to notify EPA 

at least 90 days before they manufacture 

(including import) or process any of 

these 15 chemical substances for a 

significant new use. The required 

notification would provide EPA with 

the opportunity to evaluate the new 

uses and protect against unreasonable 

risks, if any, from potential new 

exposures to NPs and NPEs, before that 

activity occurs. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 1, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2007–0490, 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. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 190 / Wednesday, October 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules 59187 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

technical information regarding the 

SNUR, contact: Jeffrey Taylor, Chemical 

Control Division (7405M), Office of 

Pollution Prevention and Toxics, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001; telephone number: 

(202) 564–8828; email address: 

taylor.jeffrey@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. Executive Summary 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

these actions if you manufacture 

(including import) or process any of the 

chemical substances covered by this 

proposed SNUR. The North American 

Industrial Classification System 

(NAICS) codes that are identified in this 

unit are not intended to be exhaustive, 

but rather provide a guide to help 

readers determine whether this rule 

applies to them. Potentially affected 

entities may include: 

• Manufacturers (including 

importers) or processors of one or more 

of the subject chemical substances 

(North American Industrial 

Classification System (NAICS) codes 

325 and 324110), e.g., chemical 

manufacturing and petroleum refineries. 

• Surface active agent manufacturers 

(NAICS code 325613). 

This action may also affect certain 

entities due to pre-existing import 

certification and export notification 

rules under TSCA. Persons who import 

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, any persons who export or 

intend to export a chemical substance 

that is the subject of this proposed rule 

on or after October 31, 2014 are subject 

to the export notification provisions of 

TSCA section 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611(b)) 

(see 40 CFR 721.20) and must comply 

with the export notification 

requirements in 40 CFR part 707, 

subpart D. 

To determine whether you or your 

business may be affected by this action, 

you should carefully examine the 

applicability of provisions in 40 CFR 

721.5. 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. 

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). Once EPA determines that a use 

of a chemical substance is a significant 

new use, TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B) 

requires persons to submit a significant 

new use notice (SNUN) to EPA at least 

90 days before they manufacture or 

process the chemical substance for that 

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

and NPEs. EPA is proposing to 

designate any use of the 13 NPs and 

NPEs listed in Table 1 of Unit II.A. as 

a significant new use, and any use other 

than use as an intermediate or use as an 

epoxy cure catalyst as a significant new 

use of the 2 additional NPs listed in 

Table 2 of Unit II.A. 

This proposed SNUR would apply to 

the uses that are not ongoing at the time 

of this proposed rule. Uses not ongoing 

at the time of the proposal would be 

designated significant new uses in the 

final SNUR. EPA is requesting public 

comment on this proposal, and 

specifically on whether the Agency has 

correctly identified the current and 

ongoing uses of the 15 NPs and NPEs 

covered by this proposed rule. EPA is 

particularly interested in whether 

anyone is currently using these 

chemicals in a manner that is not 

described in this proposal. 

Persons subject to a SNUR would be 

required to notify EPA at least 90 days 

before commencing manufacture 

(including import) or processing of any 

of the subject chemical substances for a 

significant new use, consistent with the 

requirements at 40 CFR 721.25. 

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 and 

processing of these chemical substances 

for the designated new uses to allow the 

Agency to evaluate any potential 

changes in human and environmental 

exposures. The rationale and objectives 

for this proposed SNUR are explained 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 and processors of the 

chemical substances included in this 

proposed rule. This analysis, 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 at 

approximately $8,589 per SNUN 

submission for large business submitters 

and $6,189 for small business 

submitters. These estimates include the 

cost to prepare and submit the SNUN 

and the payment of a user fee. In 

addition, for persons exporting a 

substance that is the subject of a SNUR, 

a one-time notice must be provided for 

the first export or intended export to a 

particular country, which is estimated 

to cost less than $100 on average per 

notification. 

Since EPA is unable to predict 

whether anyone might engage in future 

activities that would require reporting, 

potential total costs are estimated to 

range from $0 to less than $10,000. 

II. Chemical Substances Subject to This 

Proposed Rule 

A. What chemicals are subject to this 

proposed SNUR? 

This proposed SNUR would apply to 

the 15 NPs and NPEs in Tables 1 and 

2 of this unit. To ascertain whether 

these chemicals are currently in 

commerce, EPA analyzed uses that are 

described in Unit II.B, and also 

reviewed the most recent data from 

EPA’s Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) 

database (Ref. 1). Twelve of the 13 linear 

NPs and NPEs in Table 1 of this unit are 

not reported on CDR. One NPE 

chemical, known as poly(oxy-1,2- 

ethanediyl), a(nonylphenyl)-w-hydroxy- 

(CASRN 9016–45–9), also listed in 

Table 1 of this unit, was reported to the 

2012 CDR. EPA believes, however, that 

the manufacturer incorrectly identified 

the chemical in its CDR report, and that, 

in fact, poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), 

a(nonylphenyl)-w-hydroxy-(CASRN 

9016–45–9) is not currently 

manufactured for any use. The 

manufacturer reported the chemical 

identity as a linear form of NPE, but the 

available information indicates that the 

manufacturer should have reported the 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
59188 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 190 / Wednesday, October 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

identity as a branched NPE. Based on 

chemical engineering literature and 

industry expert sources, as described 

later in this unit, EPA’s understanding 

is that only branched forms of NP and 

NPE chemical substances are currently 

manufactured for commercial purposes. 

The two chemical substances listed in 

Table 2 were both reported to the 2012 

CDR and are used as an intermediate 

and as an epoxy cure catalyst. 

TABLE 1—NPS AND NPES FOR WHICH ANY USE IS A SIGNIFICANT NEW USE

Chemical name Chemical abstracts index name 

Chemical Abstracts Service 

Registry No. 

(CASRN) 

NP or 

NPE 

4-nonylphenol ..................................................................... Phenol, 4-nonyl- ................................................................ 104–40–5 NP 

2-[2-[2-[2-(4-nonylphenoxy)ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethanol .. Ethanol, 2-[2-[2-[2-(4-nonylphenoxy)ethoxy]ethoxy]

ethoxy]-.

7311–27–5 NPE 

a(Nonylphenyl)-w-hydroxy-poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) .......... Poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), a(nonylphenyl)-w-hydroxy- ....... 9016–45–9 NPE 

2-[2-(4-nonylphenoxy)ethoxy]ethanol ................................. Ethanol, 2-[2-(4-nonylphenoxy)ethoxy]- ............................ 20427–84–3 NPE 

Nonylphenol ........................................................................ Phenol, nonyl- ................................................................... 25154–52–3 NP 

a-(4-Nonylphenyl)-w-hydroxy-poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) ...... Poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), a-(4-nonylphenyl)-w-hydroxy- .. 26027–38–3 NPE 

2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-(Nonylphenoxy)ethoxy]ethoxy]

ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethanol.

3,6,9,12,15,18,21,24-Octaoxahexacosan-1-ol, 26- 

(nonylphenoxy)-.

26571–11–9 NPE 

2-[2-(Nonylphenoxy)ethoxy]ethanol .................................... Ethanol, 2-[2-(nonylphenoxy)ethoxy]- ............................... 27176–93–8 NPE 

2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-(nonylphenoxy)ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]

ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethanol.

3,6,9,12,15,18,21-Heptaoxatricosan-1-ol, 23- 

(nonylphenoxy)-.

27177–05–5 NPE 

2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-(nonylphenoxy)ethoxy]ethoxy]

ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethanol.

3,6,9,12,15,18,21,24,27-Nonaoxanonacosan-1-ol, 29- 

(nonylphenoxy)-.

27177–08–8 NPE 

2-(Nonylphenoxy)ethanol .................................................... Ethanol, 2-(nonylphenoxy)- ............................................... 27986–36–3 NPE 

a-(Isononylphenyl)-w-hydroxy-poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) ..... Poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), a-(isononylphenyl)-w-hydroxy- 37205–87–1 NPE 

a-(2-Nonylphenyl)-w-hydroxy-poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), ..... Poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), a-(2-nonylphenyl)-w-hydroxy- .. 51938–25–1 NPE 

TABLE 2—NPS FOR WHICH ANY USE OTHER THAN AS AN INTERMEDIATE OR EPOXY CURE CATALYST IS A SIGNIFICANT

NEW USE

Chemical name Chemical abstracts index name 

Chemical Abstracts Service 

Registry No. 

(CASRN) 

NP or 

NPE 

4-nonylphenol, branched .................................................... Phenol, 4-nonyl-, branched ............................................... 84852–15–3 NP 

2-nonylphenol, branched .................................................... Phenol, 2-nonyl-, branched ............................................... 91672–41–2 NP 

NPs and NPEs consist of a nine 

carbon nonyl group in either branched 

or linear form bound at various 

positions (ortho, meta, or para) around 

a phenol ring. Nonylphenol is produced 

by the acid-catalyzed reaction of nonene 

and phenol. The degree of branching of 

the nonene used in that reaction 

determines the degree of branching in 

the product NP. EPA’s understanding of 

the chemistry and engineering of 

commercial NP production is that it 

starts with nonene that is produced by 

acid-catalyzed propylene trimerization. 

Nonene produced in this way is a 

complex mixture of highly branched 

alkenes and contains negligible amounts 

of linear olefins. Manufacturers combine 

this highly branched nonene with 

phenol in an acid-catalyzed reaction. 

This reaction pathway is described in 

the literature and industry publications. 

For example, the Kirk-Othmer 

Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology 

states, ‘‘All commercially produced PNP 

[para-nonylphenol, or 4-nonylphenol] is 

made from nonene based on the 

trimerization of propylene’’ (and 

therefore is highly branched) (Ref. 2). 

Similarly, industry assessments state 

that commercial nonene (used to make 

NP) does not contain linear C9H18 alphaolefin; rather, it is a complex mixture of 

highly branched, predominantly ninecarbon olefins known as propylene 

trimers (Ref. 3). Additionally, some 

industrial sources assert that linear NP 

is a laboratory chemical substance that 

is not used in commerce and is not a 

degradant found in the environment 

(Ref. 4). 

During the development of a testing 

consent order on 4-nonylphenol (Ref. 5), 

the Alkylphenols and Ethoxylates Panel 

of the American Chemistry Council 

(ACC) confirmed EPA’s assessment, 

stating that, as it is currently 

manufactured, nonylphenol is a 

substance comprising mostly branched 

C9-alkyl phenols and is best represented 

by 4-nonylphenol, Chemical Abstract 

Services Registry Number (CASRN) 

84852–15–3. 

B. What are the uses and production 

levels of the NPs and NPEs covered by 

this proposed SNUR? 

Branched 4-nonylphenol (CASRN 

84852–15–3), in Table 2 of this unit, 

was reported to the 2012 CDR at 100– 

500 million pounds production volume. 

Branched 2-nonylphenol (CASRN 

91672–41–2), also in Table 2 of this 

unit, was reported to the 2012 CDR at 

1–10 million pounds production 

volume. 

Linear NPE, poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), 

a(nonylphenyl)-w-hydroxy-(CASRN 

9016–45–9), in Table 1 of this unit, was 

reported to the 2012 CDR with a 2011 

production volume ranging from 10 

million to 50 million pounds. As 

described earlier in this unit, EPA 

believes that this linear NPE was 

incorrectly identified and the 

manufacturer was in fact producing a 

branched NPE (i.e., another chemical 

entirely). The other 12 linear NPs and 

NPEs have no reported production 

volume on the 2012 CDR. Nonylphenol 

(CASRN 25154–52–3), in Table 1 of this 

unit, was initially reported to the 2012 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 190 / Wednesday, October 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules 59189 

CDR, but EPA understands that the 

chemical should have been reported as 

either branched NP CASRN 84852–15– 

3 or branched NP CASRN 91672–41–2. 

Companies who reported nonylphenol 

with CASRN 25154–52–3 to the 2012 

CDR have corrected their reports, which 

results in the chemical having no 

production volume on the 2012 CDR. 

Certain NPs are used primarily as 

intermediates to produce other chemical 

substances, notably NPEs. NPEs are 

manufactured by reacting the hydroxyl 

group (-OH) of NP with ethylene oxide 

in an iterative process, forming a 

combination of NPEs of various chain 

lengths, typically ranging from 4 to 80 

ethoxylate (EO) groups. The commonlyused NPEs have chain lengths averaging 

8 to 12 EO groups, and commercial 

NPEs will contain NPEs of various chain 

lengths. Different degrees of 

ethoxylation impart different properties, 

which make the chemical substances 

useful in a variety of applications. 

EPA accessed information from the 

2012 CDR database, along with the 

Household Products Database and the 

Consumer Product Information 

Database, in order to analyze use of NPs 

and NPEs broadly within U.S. 

commerce (Refs. 1, 6, and 7). Reported 

NPs are used as intermediates to create 

NPEs, and they are also used as epoxy 

cure catalysts. Reported NPEs are used 

in a wide range of applications, and can 

be found in consumer products related 

generally to home care, personal 

hygiene, automotive, and lawn care. 

Specifically, the NPEs are used in: 

Laundry detergents, engine and battery 

cleaners, all-purpose cleaners, paints, 

metal polishers, stain pretreatment, 

sealants, paint/varnish strippers, 

wallpaper removers, hand cleaners, 

floor strippers, disinfectant/mold 

inhibitors, concrete cleaners, tile/grout 

cleaners, degreasers, brush cleaners, tile 

adhesives, and wood finishes (Refs. 1, 6, 

7, 8, and 9). 

C. What are the potential environmental 

effects of, and routes and sources of 

exposure to, the NPs and NPEs covered 

by this proposed SNUR? 

NPs and NPEs with only one or two 

EO groups are persistent, low-tomoderately bioaccumulative, and highly 

toxic to aquatic organisms. In general, 

toxicity to environmental organisms 

increases with decreasing degrees of 

ethoxylation for nonylphenolic 

compounds, with NPs being most toxic. 

NPEs with greater degrees of 

ethoxylation, while less toxic, degrade 

to the more toxic and persistent, less 

ethoxylated forms of these chemical 

substances in the environment. 

Available data indicate that these 

chemical substances are highly toxic to 

fish and invertebrates, causing lethality 

on an acute basis and effects on 

survival, growth, development, 

metabolism, reproduction, and 

fecundity with low-level chronic 

exposures (Refs. 10 and 11). EPA has 

established water quality criteria for 

NPs of 6.6 microgram per litre (mg/L) for 

acute exposures and 1.7 mg/L for chronic 

exposures (Ref. 12). EPA has not 

established water quality criteria for 

NPEs. Environment Canada has also 

established a concern level for NPs (and 

NPEs, as expressed in NP toxic 

equivalency units) of 0.7 mg/L for 

indefinitely chronic exposures (Refs. 12 

and 13). EPA recognizes that NPs and 

NPEs may be endocrine bioactive (Refs. 

14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 

24). 

Certain NPs and NPEs are produced 

in large volumes, with uses in a wide 

range of applications (e.g., home care, 

personal hygiene, automotive, and lawn 

care consumer products) that lead to 

widespread releases to the aquatic 

environment. NPEs are clear to light 

orange oily liquids or waxy solids, and 

are considered to be chemically stable 

and unreactive (Ref. 25). NPEs show a 

gradual, linear increase in water 

solubility with greater degree of 

ethoxylation (e.g., the reported water 

solubility of NP with five ethoxyl 

groups attached, NP5EO, is 9.48 mg/L; 

and the reported water solubility of NP 

with twelve ethoxyl groups attached, 

NP12EO, is 42.5 mg/L) (Refs. 26 and 27). 

The most important processes affecting 

the persistence, distribution, and 

bioavailability of nonylphenolic 

substances in the environment are 

biodegradation and sorption (Refs. 28, 

29, 30, and 31). NPEs with greater 

degrees of ethoxylation degrade to less 

ethoxylated forms of these chemical 

substances in the environment. NPEs 

with fewer degrees of ethoxylation 

continue to degrade slowly to NPs. NPs, 

especially highly branched NPs, degrade 

most slowly (Refs. 8 and 9). The aerobic 

and anaerobic biodegradation of NPEs 

occurs through different reaction 

pathways resulting in the formation of 

different degradation products. Under 

aerobic conditions, evidence shows that 

carboxylated NPEs (NPECs) of higher 

ethoxamers are quickly formed (e.g., 

NP9EC from NP9EO), followed by 

shortening of the ethoxylate chain 

through the deethoxylation pathway 

(e.g., NP2EC from NP9EC), and 

oxidation of the nonyl chain to form 

dicarboxylated derivatives. Such 

dicarboxylated products are referred to 

as carboxylated nonylphenyl 

ethoxycarboxylates, or CAPECs. Under 

anaerobic conditions, the dominant 

degradation pathways for NPEs is most 

likely deethoxylation (e.g., NP1EO and 

NP2EO from higher ethoxamers) and Odealkylation (e.g., NP from NP2EO) 

(Refs. 32 and 33). The resistance of NPs 

to further degradation under anaerobic 

conditions is a contributing factor to 

their accumulation in sludge. 

Ecological receptors can potentially 

be significantly exposed to NPs and 

NPEs under current manufacturing 

practices as a result of surface water 

discharges from facilities that 

manufacture products containing NPs or 

NPEs (Ref. 34). Once released into the 

environment, NPs and NPEs tend to 

partition to sediments and accumulate 

(Ref. 35). Thus, even if the discharges 

decrease, or cease, environmental 

exposures can continue. 

A range of levels of NPs and NPEs 

have been measured in surface water 

and sediment in U.S. waters. Certain 

NPEs are widely used in industrial 

processes and cleaning products, 

including industrial laundry detergents, 

and are frequently found in wastewater 

and sewage treatment plant effluents, 

with subsequent discharge into the 

environment (Ref. 36). Localized 

monitoring studies have found surface 

waters near industrial discharges 

contained NPs in concentrations ranging 

from 2 to 1,617 mg/L (Ref. 37) and NP 

concentrations in more diffuse surface 

water and sediments in the Great Lakes 

ranging from 0.01 to 0.92 mg/L for water 

and 37 to 300 mg/g for sediments (Ref. 

36). In surface water samples collected 

along the Ohio River, total NPEs ranged 

from 0.13 to 1.0 mg/L for water, from 250 

to 1,020 mg/g for sediments, and from 32 

to 920 mg/g for carp, a bottom dwelling 

fish (Ref. 38). Some of the measured 

surface water concentrations, 

particularly those near industrial 

discharges, exceeded the EPA Water 

Quality Criteria set for freshwater 

species living in the water column. 

Nonylphenol has also been found in 

Minnesota lakes, with maximum 

concentrations reaching 20 ng/L (Ref. 

39). NPs and NPEs in freshwater and 

saltwater ecosystems can potentially 

cause ecological effects on all trophic 

levels of aquatic species exposed to 

them (Ref. 12). 

III. Rationale and Objective 

A. Rationale 

NPs and short-chain NPE ethoxymers 

(NP with one ethoxyl group attached, 

NP1EO, and NP with two ethoxyl 

groups attached, NP2EO) are persistent, 

low-moderately bioaccumulative, and 

highly toxic to aquatic organisms. 

Available data indicate that these 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
59190 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 190 / Wednesday, October 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

substances are highly toxic to fish and 

invertebrates, causing lethality on an 

acute basis and effects on survival, 

growth, development, metabolism, 

reproduction, and fecundity with lowlevel chronic exposures (Refs. 10 and 

11). Exposure occurs through industrial 

and wastewater discharges that 

ultimately reach surface waters and 

sediments. NPs and NPEs can 

potentially cause ecological effects on 

all trophic levels of aquatic species 

exposed to them in freshwater and 

saltwater ecosystems (Ref. 12). 

Of the 13 linear NPs and NPEs listed 

in Table 1 of Unit II.A., 12 of the 

chemical substances were not reported 

to the 2012 CDR. One of these 13 

substances was reported to the 2012 

CDR, but as discussed in Unit II.B., the 

available information indicates that the 

chemical substance is not currently 

being manufactured or is otherwise used 

or distributed in commerce. The two 

branched NPs listed in Table 2 of Unit 

II.A. are not in use except as 

intermediates and epoxy cure catalysts. 

Based on the reasonably anticipated 

manner and methods of manufacturing, 

processing, distribution in commerce, 

and disposal of these chemical 

substances, EPA is concerned that 

future manufacturing or processing of 

these 15 NP and NPE chemicals could 

have the potential to significantly 

increase the magnitude and duration of 

environmental exposures. As previously 

discussed, based on current use and 

manufacturing practices, NPEs are 

frequently found in wastewater and 

sewage treatment plant effluents, with 

subsequent discharge into the 

environment. EPA has no reason to 

anticipate that future manufacturing 

practices and uses are likely to result in 

lower discharges. 

Accordingly, EPA has determined that 

individual evaluation of the activities 

associated with those new uses is 

warranted to allow the Agency to 

determine whether any controls are 

necessary before such manufacturing 

(including importing) or processing 

starts or resumes. The required 

notification provided by a SNUN would 

provide EPA with the opportunity to 

evaluate the new uses and protect 

against unreasonable risks, if any, from 

potential new exposures to NPs and 

NPEs. 

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. 

Rather, the Agency action is based on 

EPA’s determination that if the use 

begins or resumes, it may present a risk 

that EPA should evaluate under TSCA 

before the manufacturing or processing 

for that use begins. Since the new use 

does not currently exist, deferring a 

detailed consideration of potential risks 

or hazards related to that use is an 

effective use of resources. If a person 

decides to begin manufacturing or 

processing the chemical substance for 

the use, the notice to EPA allows the 

Agency to evaluate the use according to 

the specific parameters and 

circumstances surrounding that 

intended use. 

B. Objective 

Based on the considerations in Unit 

IV.A., EPA wants to achieve the 

following objectives through this action: 

1. EPA would receive notice of any 

person’s intent to manufacture 

(including import) or process the 15 NPs 

and NPEs for the described significant 

new uses before that activity begins. 

2. EPA would have an opportunity to 

review and evaluate any data submitted 

in a SNUN before the notice submitter 

begins manufacturing (including 

importing) or processing of the 15 NPs 

and NPEs for the described significant 

new use. 

3. EPA would be able to regulate 

prospective manufacturers (including 

importers) or processors of these 

chemical substances before the 

described significant new use of the 

chemical substance occurs, provided 

that regulation is warranted pursuant to 

TSCA sections 5(e), 5(f), 6, or 7. 

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. 

To determine what would constitute a 

significant new use of the 15 NPs and 

NPEs subject to this proposed rule, EPA 

considered relevant information about 

the toxicity of the substances, 

exposures, environmental releases, and 

the four factors listed in section 5(a)(2) 

of TSCA. 

EPA has preliminarily determined 

that any use of the 13 linear NPs and 

NPEs listed in Table 1 of Unit II.A. is 

a significant new use. EPA has also 

preliminarily determined that any use of 

the branched NPs listed in Table 2 of 

Unit II.A., other than use as an 

intermediate or use as an epoxy cure 

catalyst, is a significant new use. As 

discussed previously in this unit, EPA 

is concerned that future manufacturing 

or processing of these 15 NP and NPE 

chemicals could have the potential to 

significantly increase the magnitude and 

duration of environmental exposures, 

and EPA has no reason to anticipate that 

future manufacturing practices and uses 

are likely to result in lower discharges. 

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, exemptions to reporting 

requirements, and applicability of the 

rule to uses occurring before the 

effective date of the final rule. 

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 section 5(b) and 5(d)(1), the 

exemptions authorized by TSCA section 

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

regulations at 40 CFR part 720. Once 

EPA receives a SNUN, EPA may take 

regulatory action under TSCA sections 

5(e), 5(f), 6, or 7 to control the activities 

on which it has received the SNUN. If 

EPA does not take action, EPA is 

required under TSCA section 5(g) to 

explain in the Federal Register its 

reasons for not taking action. 

Persons who export or intend to 

export a chemical substance that is the 

subject of a proposed or final SNUR are 

subject to the export notification 

provisions of TSCA section 12(b). The 

regulations that interpret TSCA section 

12(b) appear at 40 CFR part 707, subpart 

D. Persons who import a chemical 

substance identified in a final SNUR are 

subject to the TSCA section 13 import 

certification requirements, codified at 

19 CFR 12.118 through 12.127; see also 

19 CFR 127.28. Such persons must 

certify that the shipment of the chemical 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 190 / Wednesday, October 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules 59191 

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. 

VI. Applicability of the Rule to Uses 

Occurring Before Effective Date of the 

Final Rule 

As discussed in the Federal Register 

of April 24, 1990 (55 FR 17376) (FRL– 

3658–5), EPA has decided that the 

intent of section 5(a)(1)(B) of TSCA is 

best served by designating a use as a 

significant new use as of the date of 

publication of the proposed rule rather 

than as of the effective date of the final 

rule. If uses that had begun after the 

proposed rule was published were 

considered ongoing rather than new, 

any person could defeat the SNUR by 

initiating the significant new use before 

the final rule was issued. Therefore, 

EPA designates October 1, 2014 as the 

cutoff date for determining whether any 

of the uses that are the subject of this 

proposal are ongoing. Persons who 

begin commercial manufacture or 

processing of the chemical substances 

for a significant new use identified as of 

that date 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 

the notice review period, including any 

extensions, expires. If such a person met 

the conditions of advance compliance 

under 40 CFR 721.45(h), the person 

would be considered exempt from the 

requirements of the SNUR. Consult the 

Federal Register final rule of April 24, 

1990 for a more detailed discussion of 

the cutoff date for ongoing uses. 

VII. Test Data and Other Information 

EPA recognizes that TSCA section 5 

does not usually require developing any 

particular test data before submission of 

a SNUN. There are two exceptions: 

• Development of test data is required 

where the chemical substance subject to 

the SNUR is also subject to a test rule 

under TSCA section 4 (see TSCA 

section 5(b)(1)); and 

• Development of test data may be 

necessary where the chemical substance 

has been listed under TSCA section 

5(b)(4) (see TSCA section 5(b)(2)). 

In the absence of a section 4 test rule 

or a section 5(b)(4) listing covering the 

chemical substance, persons are 

required to submit only test data in their 

possession or control and to describe 

any other data 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 data that would permit a 

reasoned evaluation of risks posed by 

the chemical substance during its 

manufacture, 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 data that may be useful in 

evaluating a significant new use. SNUNs 

submitted for significant new uses 

without any test data may increase the 

likelihood that EPA will take action 

under TSCA section 5(e) to prohibit or 

limit activities associated with this 

chemical substance. 

SNUN submitters should be aware 

that EPA will be better able to evaluate 

SNUNs that provide detailed 

information on: 

1. Human exposure and 

environmental releases that may result 

from the significant new uses of the 

chemical substance, 

2. Potential benefits of the chemical 

substance, and 

3. Information on risks posed by the 

chemical substances compared to risks 

posed by potential substitutes. 

VIII. SNUN Submissions 

EPA recommends that submitters 

consult with the Agency prior to 

submitting a SNUN to discuss what data 

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 and processors of the 

chemical substance included in this 

proposed rule (Ref. 40). In the event that 

a SNUN is submitted, costs are 

estimated at approximately $8,589 per 

SNUN submission for large business 

submitters and $6,189 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)). EPA’s 

complete economic analysis is available 

in the public docket for this proposed 

rule (Ref. 40). 

B. Export Notification 

Under TSCA section 12(b) 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. For persons exporting 

a substance that is the subject of a 

SNUR, a one-time notice must be 

provided for the first export or intended 

export to a particular country. The total 

costs of export notification will vary by 

chemical substance, depending on the 

number of required notifications (i.e., 

the number of countries to which the 

chemical substance is exported). EPA is 

unable to make any estimate of the 

likely number of export notifications for 

the chemical substance covered in this 

proposed SNUR. 

X. Alternatives 

Before proposing the SNUR, EPA 

considered the following alternative 

regulatory actions: 

A. 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 substance for 

a specific use or any use. However, for 

the 15 NPs and NPEs subject to this 

proposed rule, 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) reporting for new uses 

instead of TSCA section 5(a), then EPA 

would not have the opportunity to 

review human and environmental 

hazards and exposures associated with 

the proposed significant new use and, if 

necessary, take immediate follow-up 

regulatory action under TSCA sections 

5(e) or 5(f) to prohibit or limit the 

activity before it begins. In addition, 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
59192 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 190 / Wednesday, October 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

EPA may not receive important 

information from small businesses 

because such firms generally are exempt 

from TSCA section 8(a) reporting 

requirements. In view of the level of 

environmental concerns about the 15 

NPs and NPEs, EPA believes that a 

TSCA section 8(a) rule for this 

substance would not meet EPA’s 

regulatory objectives. 

B. Regulate NPs and NPEs Under TSCA 

Section 6 

Under TSCA section 6, EPA may 

regulate a chemical substance if ‘‘the 

Administrator finds that there is a 

reasonable basis to conclude that the 

manufacture, processing, distribution in 

commerce, use or disposal of a chemical 

substance or mixture . . . presents or 

will present an unreasonable risk of 

injury to health or the environment’’ 

(TSCA section 6(a)). Because EPA 

believes that the 13 NP and NPE 

chemical substances listed in Table 1 of 

Unit II.A. are not being used and the 2 

NPs listed in Table 2 of Unit II.A. are 

not being used other than as an 

intermediate or epoxy cure catalyst, 

EPA concluded that risk management 

action under TSCA section 6 is not 

warranted at this time. EPA believes 

that this proposed SNUR would allow 

the Agency to effectively address 

concerns surrounding any proposed 

significant new use, should they arise, 

by requiring prior notice of the use and 

allowing EPA a 90-day review period in 

which EPA would evaluate the use and 

could take action, as appropriate, under 

TSCA sections 5(e), 5(f), 6, or 7 to 

control the activities on which it has 

received the SNUN. 

XI. 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 

these chemical substances on the 2012 

CDR submissions, engineering 

literature, and communications with 

industry representatives. To confirm 

EPA’s understanding, the Agency is 

requesting public comment on all 

aspects of this proposed rule, including 

the commercial production of linear 

forms of NPs and NPEs, as well as any 

ongoing uses of the subject chemical 

substances. 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. 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 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. 

2. Tips for preparing your comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

i. Identify the document by docket ID 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date, and page number). 

ii. Follow directions. The Agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

iv. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

v. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

vi. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns and suggest 

alternatives. 

vii. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

viii. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

XII. References 

The following is a listing of the 

documents that are specifically 

referenced in this document. The docket 

includes these documents and other 

information considered by EPA, 

including documents that are referenced 

within the documents that are 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. EPA (2013). Chemical Data Reporting. 

August 7, 2014; Available from: http://

www.epa.gov/cdr. 

2. Lorenc, J.F., Lambeth, Gregory, and 

Scheffer, William (2000). Alkylphenols. 

Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical 

Technology. 

3. Klecka, G.M., Staples, C.A., Losey, B.S., 

and Woodburn, K.B. (2005). APERC 

Assessment of the Persistence and 

Bioaccumulation Potential for 

Nonylphenol, Octylphenol, and Their 

Ethoxylates for Categorization and 

Screening of the Canadian Domestic 

Substance List (DSL). 

4. APERC (2010). Statement on EPA 

Estrogenic Screening Results for 

Nonylphenol and Nonylphenol 

Ethoxylates. 

5. EPA (1990). Testing Consent Order on 4- 

Nonylphenol, Branched. Final Rule. 55 

FR 5991. 

6. NIH (2013). Household Products Database: 

Nonylphenol and Nonylphenol 

Ethoxylates. August 6, 2014; Available 

from: http://hpd.nlm.nih.gov/index.htm. 

7. CPID (2013). Consumer Product 

Information Database: Nonylphenol and 

Nonylphenol Ethoxylates. August 6, 

2014; Available from: http://

whatsinproducts.com/index.php. 

8. EPA (2010). Nonylphenol (NP) and 

Nonylphenol Ethoxylates (NPEs) Action 

Plan. 

9. EPA (2009). Testing of Certain 

Nonylphenol and Nonylphenol 

Ethoxylate Substances: Advance Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM). 40 

CFR part 799. 

10. Staples, C., Mihaich, E., Carbone, J., 

Woodburn, K., and Klecka, G. (2004). A 

Weight-of-Evidence of the Chronic 

Ecotoxicity of Nonylphenol Ethoxylates, 

Nonylphenol Ether Carboxylates, and 

Nonylphenol. Human and Ecological 

Risk Assessment. 10: p. 999–1017. 

11. Servos, M.R. (1999). Review of the 

Aquatic Toxicity, Estrogenic Responses, 

and Bioaccumulation of Alkylphenols 

and Alkylphenol Polyethoxylates. Water 

Quality Research Journal of Canada. 34: 

p. 123–1777. 

12. EPA (2005). Ambient Aquatic Life Water 

Quality Criteria—Nonylphenol Final. 

(EPA–822–R–05–005). 

13. Canada (2002). Canadian Environmental 

Quality Guidelines for Nonylphenol and 

its Ethoxylates (Water, Sediment, and 

Soil) Scientific Supporting Document. 

Ecosystem Health: Science-Based 

Solutions Report. No. 1–3. 

14. Balaguer, P., Franois, F., Comunale, F., 

Fenet, H., Boussioux, A.M., Pons, M., 

Nicolas, J.C., and Casallas, C. (1999). 

Reporter cell lines to study the estrogenic 

effects of xenoestrogens. Science Total 

Environment. 233: p. 47–56. 

15. Blair, R.M., Fang, H., Branham, W.S., 

Hass, B.S., Dial, S.L., Moland, C.L., Tong, 

W., Shi, L., Perkins, R. and Sheehan, 

D.M. (2000). The estrogen receptor 

relative binding affinities of 188 natural 

and xenochemicals: Structural diversity 

of ligands. Toxicological Sciences. 

54(138–153). 

16. Bonefeld-J<rgensen, E., Long, M, 

Hofmeister, M.V., and Vinggaard, A.M. 

(2007). Endocrine-Disrupting Potential of 

Bisphenol A, Bisphenol A 

Dimethacrylate, 4-n-Nonylphenol, and 4- 

n-Octylphenol in Vitro: New Data and a 

Brief Review. Environmental Health 

Perspectives. 115(S–1): p. 69–76. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 190 / Wednesday, October 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules 59193 

17. Danzo, B.J. (1997). Environmental 

xenobiotics may disrupt normal 

endocrine function by interfering with 

the binding of physiological ligands to 

steroid receptors and binding proteins. 

Environmental Health Perspectives. 

105(3): p. 294–301. 

18. Legler, J., Van Den Brink, C.E., Brouwer, 

A., Murk, A.J., Van Der Saag, P.T., 

Vethaak, A.D., and Van Der Burg, B. 

(1999). Development of a stably 

transfected estrogen receptor-mediated 

luciferase reporter gene assay in the 

human T47D breast cancer cell line. 

Toxicological Sciences. 48(55–66). 

19. Satoh, K., Nagai, F., and Aoki, N. (2001). 

Several environmental pollutants have 

binding affinities for both androgen 

receptor and estrogen receptor. Journal 

of Health Science. 47(5): p. 495–501. 

20. White, R., Jobling, S., Hoare, S., Sumpter, 

J., and Parker, M. (1994). 

Environmentally persistent alkylphenolic 

compounds are estrogenic. 

Endocrinology. 135(1): p. 175–182. 

21. Lee, H., Chattopadhyay, Soma, Gong, 

Eun-Yeung, Ahn, Ryun Sup, and Lee, 

Keesook (2003). Antiandrogenic Effects 

of Bisphenol A and Nonylphenol on the 

Function of Androgen Receptor. 

Toxicological Sciences. 75: p. 40–45. 

22. Gong, Y., Han, X.D. (2006). Effect of 

nonylphenol on steroidogenesis of rat 

Leydig cells. Journal of Environmental 

Science and Health. 41(5): p. 705–15. 

23. Kortner, T., Vang, S.H., Arukwe, A. 

(2009). Modulation of salmon ovarian 

steroidogenesis and growth factor 

responses by the xenoestrogen, 4- 

nonylphenol. Chemosphere. 77(7): p. 

989–98. 

24. RTI-International (2007). 

Characterization of the inhibition of 

aromatase activity by nonylphenol. EPA 

Task Order 3. p. 158. 

25. SEPA (2010). Scottish Pollutant Release 

Inventory; Pollutant Fact Sheet, 

Nonylphenol Ethoxylates. Scottish 

Environment Protection Agency. 

26. Ahel, M., and Giger, W. (1993). Aqueous 

Solubility of Alkylphenols and 

Alkyphenol Polyethoxylates. 

Chemosphere. 26(8): p. 1461–1470. 

27. Brix, R., Hvidt, S., and Carlsen, L. (2001). 

Solubility of Nonylphenol and 

Nonylphenol Ethoxylates: On the 

Possible Role of Micelles. Chemosphere. 

44: p. 759–763. 

28. Ahel, M., Giger, W., and Schaffner, C. 

(1994). Behaviour of alkylphenol 

polyethoxylate surfactants in the aquatic 

environment—II. Occurrence and 

transformation in rivers. Water Research. 

28(5): p. 1143–1152. 

29. Kvestak, R., Terzic, S., and Ahel, M. 

(1994). Input and distribution of 

alkylphenol polyethoxylates in a 

stratified estuary. Marine Chemistry. 

46(1–2): p. 89–100. 

30. Sekela, M., Brewer, R., Moyle, G., and 

Tuominen, T. (1999). Occurrence of an 

environmental estrogen (4-nonylphenol) 

in sewage treatment plant effluent and 

the aquatic receiving environment. Water 

Science and Technology. 39(10–11): p. 

217–220. 

31. John, D.M., House, W.A., and White, G.F. 

(2000). Environmental fate of 

nonylphenol ethoxylates: Differential 

adsorption of homologs to components 

of river sediment. Environmental 

Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(2): p. 293– 

300. 

32. Jonkers, N., Knepper, T.P., and De Voogt, 

P. (2001). Aerobic Biodegradation 

Studies of Nonylphenol Ethoxylates in 

River Water Using Liquid 

Chromatography-Electrospray Tandem 

Mass Spectrometry. Environ. Sci. 

Technol. 35(2): p. 335–340. 

33. Giger, W., Brunner, P.H., and Schaffner, 

C. (1984). 4-Nonylphenol in sewage 

sludge: accumulation of toxic 

metabolites from non ionic surfactants. 

Science. 225: p. 623–625. 

34. Ellis, D.D., Jones, C.M., Larson, R.A., and 

Schaeffer, D.J. (1982). Organic 

constituents of mutagenic secondary 

effluents from wastewater treatment 

plants. Archives of Environmental 

Contamination and Toxicology. 11: p. 

373–382. 

35. Naylor, C.G., Mieure, J.P., Adams, W.J., 

Weeks, J.A., Castaldi, F.J., Ogle, F.D., and 

Romano, R.R. (1992). Alkylphenol 

ethoxylates in the environment. Journal 

of the American Oil Chemists’ Society. 

69: p. 695–708. 

36. Bennett, E.R., and Metcalf, C.D. (1997). 

Distribution of Alkylphenol Compounds 

in Great Lakes Sediments. 

Environmental Toxicology and 

Chemistry. 17(7): p. 1230–1235. 

37. Shackelford, W.M., Cline, D.M., Faas, L., 

and Kurth, G. (1983). Evaluation of 

automated spectrum matching for survey 

identification of wastewater components 

by gas chromatography-mass 

spectrometry. National Technical 

Information Service. (PB83–182931). 

38. Rice, C.P., Schmitz-Afonso, I., LoyoRosales, J.E., Link, E., Thoma, R., Fay, L, 

Altfater, D., and Camp, M.J. (2003). 

Alkylphenol and AlkylphenolEthoxylates in Carp, Water, and 

Sediment from the Cuyahoga River, 

Ohio. Environ. Sci. Technol. 37(17): p. 

3747–3754. 

39. Ferrey, M. (2013). Pharmaceuticals and 

Endocrine Active Chemicals in 

Minnesota Lakes. Minnesota Pollution 

Control Agency. 

40. EPA (2014). Economic Analysis of the 

Significant New Use Rule for 

Nonylphenols (NPs) and Nonylphenol 

Ethoxylates (NPEs). 

XIII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has determined that is proposed 

SNUR is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action,’’ under section 3(f) of Executive 

Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 

1993). Accordingly, this action was not 

submitted to OMB for review under 

Executive Order 12866 and 13563 (76 

FR 3821, January 21, 2011). 

B. 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 by OMB 

under OMB control number 2070–0038 

(EPA ICR No. 1188); and the 

information collection activities 

associated with export notifications are 

already approved by OMB under OMB 

control number 2070–0030 (EPA ICR 

No. 0795). If an entity were to submit a 

SNUN to the Agency, the annual burden 

is estimated to be less than 100 hours 

per response, and the estimated burden 

for an export notifications is less than 

1.5 hours per notification. In both cases, 

burden is estimated to be reduced for 

submitters who have already registered 

to use the electronic submission system. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

Pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA, 

5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., the Agency hereby 

certifies 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 activity. Since this 

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 submission. 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 and that the requirement 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
59194 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 190 / Wednesday, October 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

to submit a SNUN generally does not 

have a significant economic impact. 

Therefore, EPA has determined that 

the potential economic impact of 

complying with this 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, which was provided to the 

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration. 

D. 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 be 

of the opinion that any State, local, or 

Tribal government would be impacted 

by this rulemaking. As such, EPA has 

determined that this regulatory action 

would not impose any enforceable duty, 

contain any unfunded mandate, or 

otherwise have any effect on small 

governments subject to the requirements 

of sections 202, 203, 204, or 205 of 

UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action will not have a substantial 

direct effect on States, on the 

relationship between 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 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999). 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This proposed rule does not have 

Tribal implications because it is not 

expected to have any effect (i.e., there 

will be no increase or decrease in 

authority or jurisdiction) 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. Thus, the requirements of 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000) do not apply to this 

rulemaking. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13045, entitled Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), because this action is 

not intended to address environmental 

health or safety risks affecting children. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This proposed rule is not subject to 

Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, 

May 22, 2001), because this action is not 

expected to affect energy supply, 

distribution, or use. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

Since this action does not involve any 

technical standards, section 12(d) of the 

NTTAA, 15 U.S.C. 272 note, does not 

apply to this action. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

This proposed rule does not entail 

special consideration of environmental 

justice related issues as delineated by 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) because EPA has 

determined that this action will not 

have disproportionately high and 

adverse human health or environmental 

effects on minority or low-income 

populations. 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, Chemicals, 

Hazardous substances, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: September 24, 2014. 

Wendy C. Hamnett, 

Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and 

Toxics. 

Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR 

chapter I be amended as follows: 

PART 721—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 721 

continues to read as follows: 

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

2625(c). 

■ 2. Add § 721.10765 to subpart E to 

read as follows: 

§ 721.10765 Nonylphenols and 

nonylphenol ethoxylates. 

(a) Chemical substances and 

significant new uses subject to reporting. 

(1) The chemical substances listed in 

Table 1 and Table 2 of this section are 

subject to reporting under this section 

for the significant new uses described in 

paragraph (a)(2) of this section. 

(2) The significant new uses are: 

(i) For the chemical substances listed 

in Table 1 of this section, any use. 

(ii) For the chemical substances listed 

in Table 2 of this section, any use other 

than as an intermediate or an epoxy 

cure catalyst. 

TABLE 1—NP AND NPE CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES SUBJECT TO REPORTING ANY USE

Chemical name Chemical abstracts index name 

Chemical Abstracts Service 

Registry No. 

(CASRN) 

NP or 

NPE 

4-nonylphenol ..................................................................... Phenol, 4-nonyl- ................................................................ 104–40–5 NP 

2-[2-[2-[2-(4-nonylphenoxy)ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethanol .. Ethanol, 2-[2-[2-[2-(4-nonylphenoxy)ethoxy]ethoxy]

ethoxy]-.

7311–27–5 NPE 

a(Nonylphenyl)-w-hydroxy-poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) .......... Poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), a(nonylphenyl)-w-hydroxy- ....... 9016–45–9 NPE 

2-[2-(4-nonylphenoxy)ethoxy]ethanol ................................. Ethanol, 2-[2-(4-nonylphenoxy)ethoxy]- ............................ 20427–84–3 NPE 

Nonylphenol ........................................................................ Phenol, nonyl- ................................................................... 25154–52–3 NP 

a-(4-Nonylphenyl)-w-hydroxy-poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) ...... Poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), a-(4-nonylphenyl)-w-hydroxy- .. 26027–38–3 NPE 

2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-(Nonylphenoxy)ethoxy]ethoxy]

ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethanol.

3,6,9,12,15,18,21,24-Octaoxahexacosan-1-ol, 26- 

(nonylphenoxy)-.

26571–11–9 NPE 

2-[2-(Nonylphenoxy)ethoxy]ethanol .................................... Ethanol, 2-[2-(nonylphenoxy)ethoxy]- ............................... 27176–93–8 NPE 

2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-(nonylphenoxy)ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]

ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethanol.

3,6,9,12,15,18,21-Heptaoxatricosan-1-ol, 23- 

(nonylphenoxy)-.

27177–05–5 NPE 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 190 / Wednesday, October 1, 2014 / Proposed Rules 59195 

TABLE 1—NP AND NPE CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES SUBJECT TO REPORTING ANY USE—Continued 

Chemical name Chemical abstracts index name 

Chemical Abstracts Service 

Registry No. 

(CASRN) 

NP or 

NPE 

2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-[2-(nonylphenoxy)ethoxy]ethoxy]

ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethoxy]ethanol.

3,6,9,12,15,18,21,24,27-Nonaoxanonacosan-1-ol, 29- 

(nonylphenoxy)-.

27177–08–8 NPE 

2-(Nonylphenoxy)ethanol .................................................... Ethanol, 2-(nonylphenoxy)- ............................................... 27986–36–3 NPE 

a-(Isononylphenyl)-w-hydroxy-poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl) ..... Poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), a-(isononylphenyl)-w-hydroxy- 37205–87–1 NPE 

a-(2-Nonylphenyl)-w-hydroxy-poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), ..... Poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), a-(2-nonylphenyl)-w-hydroxy- .. 51938–25–1 NPE 

TABLE 2—NP AND NPE CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES SUBJECT TO REPORTING ANY USE OTHER THAN AS AN INTERMEDIATE

OR AN EPOXY CURE CATALYST

Chemical name Chemical abstracts index name 

Chemical Abstracts Service 

Registry No. 

(CASRN) 

NP or 

NPE 

4-nonylphenol, branched ..................................................... Phenol, 4-nonyl-, branched ................................................ 84852–15–3 NP 

2-nonylphenol, branched ..................................................... Phenol, 2-nonyl-, branched ................................................ 91672–41–2 NP 

(b) Specific requirements. The 

provisions of subpart A of this part 

apply to this section except as modified 

by this paragraph. 

(1) Persons who must report. Section 

721.5 applies to this section except 

§ 721.5(a)(2). 

A person who intends to manufacture, 

import, or process for commercial 

purpose a substance identified in 

paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section and 

intends to distribute the substance in 

commerce must submit a significant 

new use notice. 

(2) [Reserved] 

[FR Doc. 2014–23253 Filed 9–30–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R7–ES–2014–0043; 

4500030113] 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a 

Petition To List the Yellow-Billed Loon 

as an Endangered or a Threatened 

Species 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of 12-month petition 

finding. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce a 

12-month finding on a petition to list 

the yellow-billed loon (Gavia adamsii) 

as an endangered or threatened species 

under the Endangered Species Act of 

1973, as amended (Act). After reviewing 

the best scientific and commercial data 

available we find that listing the yellowbilled loon is not warranted. We invite 

the public to submit to us any new 

information that becomes available 

concerning the threats to the yellowbilled loon or its habitat. 

DATES: The finding announced in this 

document was made on October 1, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: This finding and the 

Yellow-billed Loon Species Status 

Assessment Report (SSA Report; Service 

2014, entire; see Status Assessment for 

the Yellow-billed Loon section, below) 

is available on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov at Docket Number 

FWS–R7–ES–2014–0043. 

Supporting documentation we used in 

preparing this finding is available for 

public inspection, by appointment, 

during normal business hours at the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Office, 101 

12th Ave., Room 110, Fairbanks, AK 

99701. Please submit any new 

information, materials, comments, or 

questions concerning this finding to the 

above street address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sarah Conn, Field Supervisor, Fairbanks 

Fish and Wildlife Office (see 

ADDRESSES); telephone at 907–456– 

0499; or facsimile at 907–456–0208. If 

you use a telecommunications device 

for the deaf (TDD), please call the 

Federal Information Relay Service 

(FIRS) at 800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that, for 

any petition to revise the Federal Lists 

of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants that contains substantial 

scientific or commercial information 

that listing the species may be 

warranted, we make a finding within 12 

months of the date of receipt of the 

petition. In the finding, we will 

determine that the petitioned action is: 

(1) Not warranted, (2) warranted, or (3) 

warranted, but the immediate proposal 

of a regulation implementing the 

petitioned action is precluded by other 

pending proposals to determine whether 

species are endangered or threatened, 

and expeditious progress is being made 

to add or remove qualified species from 

the Federal Lists of Endangered and 

Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Section 

4(b)(3)(C) of the Act requires that we 

treat a petition for which the requested 

action is found to be warranted but 

precluded as though resubmitted on the 

date of such finding, that is, requiring a 

subsequent finding to be made within 

12 months. We must publish these 12- 

month findings in the Federal Register. 

Previous Federal Actions 

On April 5, 2004, we received a 

petition from the Center for Biological 

Diversity, Natural Resources Defense 

Council, Pacific Environment, Trustees 

for Alaska, Kaira Club, Kronotsky 

Nature Preserve, Taiga Rangers, 

Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk Local Public Fund, 

Interregional Public Charitable 

Organization of Far Eastern Resource 

Centers, Kamchatka Branch of Pacific 

Institute of Geography (PetropavlovskKamchatsky, Russia), and Kamchatka 

League of Independent Experts to list 

the yellow-billed loon as an endangered 

or threatened species throughout its 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS