*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 1 of 46 

1 EO12866_RIN2070-AJ44_Formaldehyde-TPCs-NPRM_ICR_Redline_Revisions_2013-03-04.docx 

2 Revised to address Interagency Comments received under EO 12866 Review. 

3 

4 Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB Review under 

5 the Paperwork Reduction Act 

6 

7 

8 1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION 

9 

10 l(a) Title of the Information Collection 

11 

12 TITLE: Formaldehyde Emissions From Composite Wood Products, Third13 party Certification Framework, Recordkeeping and Reporting – 

14 Proposed Rule (RIN 2070-AJ44) 

15 

16 EPA ICR No.: 2441.01 OMB Control No: 2070-[NEW] 

17 

18 1(b) Short Characterization 

19 

20 The Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products Act, which established Title 

21 VI of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), set forth formaldehyde emission standards for 

22 hardwood plywood, particleboard and medium-density fiberboard and directs EPA to promulgate 

23 implementing regulations by January 2013. TSCA Title VI includes a provision directing EPA 

24 to promulgate implementing regulations related to a third-party certification system for 

25 composite wood panels. This consolidated ICR covers the recordkeeping and reporting 

26 requirements for accreditation bodies and third-party certifiers that wish to participate in this 

27 third-party certification program. It is a rule-related ICR for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

28 entitled “Third-Party Certification Framework for the Formaldehyde Standards for Composite 

29 Wood Products Rule.” Additional information collection requests, such as those related to 

30 disclosure requirements for panel producers and product labeling requirements, will be covered 

31 later in a separate ICR. 

32 

33 Some examples of proposed reporting and third-party reporting requirements include: 

34 

35  Product accreditation bodies that wish to participate in the program must submit an 

36 application to become recognized by EPA. 

37  Laboratory accreditation bodies that wish to participate in the program must submit an 

38 application to become recognized by EPA. 

39  Third-party certifiers that wish to participate in the program must submit an application 

40 for accreditation to a recognized product accreditation body and a recognized laboratory 

41 accreditation body. 

42  Recognized product accreditation bodies must submit an annual report to EPA on their 

43 accreditation activities. 

44  Recognized laboratories accreditation bodies must submit an annual report to EPA on 

45 their accreditation activities. 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 2 of 46 

46  TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifiers must submit an annual report to their 

47 accreditation body or bodies (product accreditation body and laboratory accreditation 

48 body, if not the same entity) and to EPA on their TSCA Title VI accreditation activities. 

49 

50 Examples of proposed recordkeeping requirements would include: 

51  Recognized accreditation bodies must retain checklists and other records documenting 

52 compliance with the requirements for systems audits and on-site assessments of third53 party certifiers for as long as the third-party certifier is accredited or for 5 years, 

54 whichever is longer.3 years. 

55  A TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifier must retain a list of panel producers and 

56 their respective product types, including resins used, that it has certified. 

57  A TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifier must retain records on the results of 

58 inspections, audits, and emission tests conducted for and linked to each panel producer 

59 and product type. 

60  A TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifier must retain a list of laboratories that they 

61 use, test methods, including test conditions and conditioning time and test results. 

62  A TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifier must retain records on the methods and 

63 results for establishing test method correlations and equivalence. 

64 

65 The information collected under this ICR would be used by EPA’s Regional 

66 Administrators, the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA), and/or the 

67 Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP), as appropriate. Some of the 

68 information would also be made available to the public via the internet. Confidential business 

69 information (CBI) submitted to EPA will be maintained by the Agency pursuant to TSCA § 14 

70 and 40 CFR Part 2. 

71 

72 2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

73 

74 2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection

75 

76 The reporting and recordkeeping requirements of this consolidated ICR are implemented 

77 under the authority of TSCA Title VI. TSCA Title VI directs EPA to promulgate regulations, 

78 including provisions relating to “third-party testing and certification” in “a manner that ensures 

79 compliance with the emission standards.” To meet its statutory obligations, EPA must obtain 

80 sufficient information to establish and oversee a credible third-party certification program for 

81 composite wood products. This information will help EPA ensure that all program participants 

82 are carrying out their responsibilities diligently, impartially, and uniformly. The proposed 

83 regulations aim to ensure consistent application of the requirements of TSCA Title VI by using 

84 voluntary consensus standards as requirements, and by leveraging the expertise of international 

85 accreditation bodies. 

86 

87 High quality third-party certifiers are essential in ensuring that domestic and foreign 

88 composite wood panel producers supplying products to the U.S. have adequate quality assurance 

89 and quality control procedures, are adequately testing their products to determine that they are 

90 compliant, and are otherwise acting in manner that is consistent with the requirements of TSCA 

91 Title VI. The reporting and record maintenance requirements in this ICR would help ensure that 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 3 of 46 

92 all program participants remain qualified and are held accountable for their activities, and would 

93 allow panel producers to obtain credible TSCA Title VI certifications for their regulated 

94 composite wood products. 

95 

96 2(b) Use of the Data

97 

98 EPA would use the information collected to evaluate the credentials of entities that wish 

99 to participate in the program, oversee compliance with the program requirements, monitor issues 

100 as they arise, and inform interested parties where they can obtain EPA-recognized TSCA Title 

101 VI accreditation and certification services. 

102 

103 

104 3. NON-DUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA

105 

106 3(a) Non-Duplication 

107 

108 TSCA Title VI assigns the responsibility for promulgating regulations that ensure 

109 compliance with the statutorily established emission standards for formaldehyde from composite 

110 wood products to the EPA Administrator. The information collection requirements addressed in 

111 this ICR are not duplicative of any other Federal requirement. No other Federal agency requires 

112 respondents to report or maintain information on their accreditation or certification activities 

113 related to formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products. 

114 

115 EPA based the framework for this program on other Federal and State third-party 

116 certification systems. However, because the third-party certification framework is necessarily 

117 tailored to the unique TSCA Title VI requirements, these records and reports are the sole source 

118 of information for EPA to rely on in order to determine the number of program participants, 

119 evaluate their credentials, monitor their compliance with the program, determine the number of 

120 panel producers receiving certification services, and evaluate a panel producer’s compliance 

121 history. 

122 

123 3(b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

124 

125 This ICR will be made available to the public for comment through a Federal Register 

126 notice. The public will have 60 days to provide comments. Any comments received will be given 

127 consideration when completing the supporting statement that is submitted to OMB. 

128 

129 3(c) Consultations

130 

131 On numerous occasions during the course of developing the proposed regulation, the 

132 Agency has consulted with the regulated community and the public. These consultations have 

133 been held directly with industry officials and, on an ongoing basis, with owners and operators of 

134 regulated facilities. EPA has also consulted with the California Air Resources Board (CARB), 

135 which operates a similar third-party certification program for formaldehyde standards for 

136 composite wood products that are sold, supplied, or offered for sale in the State of California. 

137 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 4 of 46 

138 Since EPA began its regulatory investigation into formaldehyde emissions from pressed 

139 wood products with an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) published in 2008, 

140 EPA has met on numerous occasions with the composite wood panel and related industries. 

141 These meetings have been in the form of presentations at trade shows and industry association 

142 conferences, and meetings with the Composite Panel Association (CPA), the Hardwood Plywood 

143 and Veneer Association (HPVA), the Kitchen Cabinet Manufacturing Association (KCMA), the 

144 American Home Furnishings Alliance (AHFA), the Business and Institutional Furniture 

145 Manufacturer’s Association (BIFMA), and individual companies. EPA staff have, at the 

146 invitation of potentially regulated manufactures, conducted factory tours and site visits. 

147 

148 EPA convened a Small Business Advocacy Review Panel and hosted two panel outreach 

149 meetings with small entity representatives (SERSERs). Prior to each meeting, EPA distributed 

150 outreach materials to the SERs, and after each meeting the SERs were asked to provide written 

151 feedback on how EPA might reduce regulatory burden on small entities. The Panel received 

152 written comments from the SERs in response to the discussions at the meetings and the outreach 

153 materials. The Panel summarized written and oral comments from the SERs and developed Panel 

154 recommendations in its Panel Report. (See Panel Report of the Small Business Advocacy Review 

155 Panel on EPA’s Planned Proposed Rule Implementing the Formaldehyde Standards for 

156 Composite Wood Products Act (TSCA Title VI), April 4, 2011). 

157 

158 EPA intends to carry out further consultations and outreach with potentially regulated 

159 entities concurrent with the public comment period. These comments will be used to update the 

160 Supporting Statement as needed. 

161 

162 3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

163 

164 EPA has judged that the reporting and recordkeeping requirements of the ICR are the 

165 minimum amount necessary to fulfill its statutory mandate to promulgate regulations on a third166 party certification program that ensure compliance with the emission standards. Although the 

167 third-party certification program is critical to the implementation of TSCA Title VI, EPA cannot 

168 delegate its statutory duty to ensure compliance with TSCA Title VI to third-party certifiers. 

169 Likewise it cannot delegate its oversight duties to accreditation bodies. The reports and records 

170 in this ICR would allow EPA carry out its statutorily delegated roles in program design, 

171 enforcement, and oversight. EPA believes that requiring applications, annual reports, and certain 

172 one-time notifications from the accreditation bodies and third-party certifiers that wish to be 

173 recognized or accredited as program participants would allow EPA to effectively monitor the 

174 program. Annual reports and notifications that are triggered by specific occurrences will allow 

175 EPA to ensure compliance with the emission standards, as required by the statute. EPA believes 

176 that less frequent reporting and failure to require notice of significant events (e.g., a third-party 

177 certifier losing its accreditation) could result in uncertified and noncompliant products being 

178 distributed in commerce. 

179 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 5 of 46 

180 3(e) General Guidelines

181 

182 This information collection complies with the guidelines at 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2). The 

183 exceptions to OMB’s Paperwork Reduction Act Guidelines, and the explanation of why such 

184 characteristics are needed to fulfill the statutory requirements, are described below: 

185 

186 Under the information collection requirements, participating accreditation bodies must 

187 retain applications for accreditation from third-party certifier applicants for 5 years after the date 

188 the third-party certifier’s accreditation terminates. Because this initial application is unlikely to 

189 change, EPA believes the burden associated with maintaining a copy of the application in 

190 electronic form will be minimal. Moreover, the contents of these applications form the basis for 

191 the accreditation body’s ongoing accreditation of the third-party certifier. 

192 

193 Under the information collection requirements checklists and other records documenting 

194 compliance with the requirements for systems audits and on-site assessments of third-party 

195 certifiers must be retained for as long as the third-party certifier is accredited or for 5 years, 

196 whichever is longer. This period corresponds to the statute of limitations period. EPA believes 

197 the accrediting bodies should be required to maintain these records for the statute of limitations 

198 period because these records are the only source of information documenting how the accrediting 

199 body verifies the third-party certifier’s ongoing compliance with the accreditation requirements 

200 for TSCA Title VI accreditation. 

201 

202 A participating third-party certifier’s would be required to maintain the following records 

203 for five years: 1) A list of panel producers and their respective product types, including resins 

204 used, that it has certified; 2) Results of inspections, audits, and emission tests conducted for and 

205 linked to each panel producers and product type; 3) A list of laboratories it uses, test methods, 

206 including test conditions and conditioning time and test results; 4) Methods and results for 

207 establishing test method correlations and equivalence; and 5) A list of panel producers and 

208 products approved for reduced testing. EPA believes it is necessary for a third-party certifier to 

209 keep these records on the panel producers that receive its TSCA Title VI certification services in 

210 order to establish that the panel producers are complying with regulatory requirements and have 

211 earned that third-party certifier’s certification. Because accredited third-party certifiers would be 

212 continually responsible for auditing, testing, and certification of composite wood products, EPA 

213 believes that these records are both necessary to document a third-party certifier’s efforts to carry 

214 out its responsibilities under the program, and useful to the third-party certifiers while they 

215 evaluate products for certification. 

216 

217 There are a number of provisions that would require reporting within a certain number of 

218 days of an occurrence of a specific event. For example, notice that an accredited third-party 

219 certifier has failed to comply with any provision of this section must be provided to EPA within 

220 24 hours of the time the failure is identified. These reporting requirements are not triggered by 

221 the calendar (i.e., they are not required quarterly or at more frequent intervals). Therefore, the 

222 Agency does not believe that these provisions need special justification. Moreover, EPA believes 

223 that unless these notifications are provided within the intervals prescribed in the proposed rule, a 

224 change in circumstances could result in uncertified products being distributed in commerce, in 

225 violation of the statute. 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 6 of 46 

226 

227 3(f) Confidentiality

228 

229 Accreditation bodies or third-party certifiers may claim all or part of any information given to 

230 EPA as confidential business information (CBI). EPA handles claims of confidentiality pursuant 

231 to established CBI procedures, as found at Section 14 of TSCA and 40 CFR Part 2, and the 

232 Agency’s TSCA CBI Manual. CBI is also protected under the Freedom of Information Act (5 

233 USC Section 525). 

234 

235 Most of the information requested in the reporting requirements of these collections is not 

236 of a confidential nature. 

237 

238 3(g) Sensitive Questions

239 

240 EPA asks no questions of a sensitive nature. 

241 

242 

243 4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

244 

245 4(a) Respondents/NAICS Codes 

246 

247 The primary respondents would be accrediting bodies and third-party certifiers that wish 

248 to participate in the TSCA Title VI third-party certification program. 

249 

250 Third-party certifiers are independent entities that review products, processes or services 

251 to verify that a set of norms, criteria, claims, practices or standards are being met. In this case 

252 the set of standards would be set by EPA in the proposed TSCA Title VI implementing 

253 regulations and would require conformity with specified voluntary consensus standards. 

254 

255 An accreditation body is an organization that provides an impartial verification of the 

256 competency of conformity assessment bodies such as third-party certifiers. Accreditation bodies 

257 are themselves evaluated by their own international oversight bodies to ensure their compliance 

258 with voluntary consensus standards. 

259 

260 The following NAICS codes are relevant: 

261 

262  Engineering services (NAICS code 541330). 

263  Testing laboratories (NAICS code 541380). 

264  Administrative management and general management consulting services (NAICS code 

265 541611). 

266  All other professional, scientific, and technical services (NAICS code 541990). 

267  All other support services (NAICS code 561990). 

268  Business associations (NAICS code 813910). 

269  Professional organizations (NAICS code 813920). 

270 

271 4(b) Information Requested
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 7 of 46 

272 

273 (i) Data Items

274 

275 The information collection requirements are triggered when an entity desires to 

276 participate in the program either as an accrediting body or a third-party certifier. Entities that 

277 wish to participate in the program and offer services related to TSCA Title VI accreditation or 

278 certification must submit an application. Accreditation bodies would apply to be recognized 

279 through a memorandum of understandingrecognition agreement with EPA. Third-party certifiers 

280 would then apply to an EPA-recognized accreditation body to become TSCA Title VI accredited. 

281 

282 Once an accreditation body is recognized or a third-party certifier is TSCA Title VI 

283 accredited, that entity then becomes subject to other reporting, notification, and record keeping 

284 requirements. If an entity were to leave the program, the reporting and notification requirements 

285 would cease, and the record keeping requirements would lapse at the end of the record retention 

286 period. 

287 

288 The proposed recordkeeping requirements and reporting requirements include: 

289 

290 (A) Notifications/Reports. Respondents are required to submit information to EPA to 

291 accomplish the following reporting tasks: 

292 

293  Product accreditation bodies that wish to participate in the program must submit an 

294 application to become recognized by EPA via a memorandum of

295 understanding.recognition agreement. The application must include: 1) The name, 

296 address, telephone number, and email address of a primary contact; 2) Documentation of 

297 its International Accreditation Forum Inc., Multilateral Recognition Arrangement 

298 signatory status, or equivalent; 3) If not a domestic entity, the name and address of an 

299 agent for service located in the United States; and 4) A description of any other 

300 qualifications related to its experience in performing product accreditation of conformity 

301 assessment bodies or third-party certifiers. Qualifications required for applicants include 

302 ongoing conformance with International Organization for Standardization and 

303 International Electrotechnical Commission (ISO/IEC) 17011 (including associated 

304 recordkeeping and reporting requirements) and demonstrating basic competence to 

305 perform accreditation activities for product certification according to ISO/IEC Guide 65. 

306 

307  Laboratory accreditation bodies that wish to participate in the program must submit an 

308 application to become recognized by EPA via a memorandum of 

309 understanding.recognition agreement. The application would include: 1) The name, 

310 address, telephone number, and email address of primary contact; 2) Documentation of 

311 International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation Mutual Recognition Arrangement 

312 signatory status, or equivalent; 3) If not a domestic entity, the name and address of an 

313 agent for service located in the United States; and 4) a description of any other 

314 qualifications related to the laboratory accreditation body’s experience in performing 

315 laboratory accreditation and inspection certification of conformity assessment bodies or 

316 third-party certifiers. Qualifications required for applicants include ongoing conformance 

317 with ISO/IEC 17011 (including associated record keeping and reporting requirements) 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 8 of 46 

318 and a demonstration of basic competence to perform accreditation activities for 

319 laboratory accreditation according to ISO/IEC 17025. 

320 

321  Recognized product accreditation bodies would be required to submit an annual report to 

322 EPA on their accreditation activities. This report would include the number and locations 

323 of systems audits and on-site assessments performed, and the results of accredited third324 party certifier laboratory proficiency testing or inter-laboratory comparisons. 

325 

326  Recognized laboratory accreditation bodies would be required to submit an annual report 

327 to EPA on their accreditation activities. This report would include the number and 

328 locations of systems audits and on-site assessments performed, and the results of 

329 accredited third-party certifier laboratory proficiency testing or inter-laboratory 

330 comparisons. 

331 

332  Recognized product accreditation bodies would be required to forward copies of third333 party certifiers’ applications to EPA at the address identified in the memorandum of 

334 understandingrecognition agreement within 90 days of the date of receipt. 

335 

336  Recognized product accreditation bodies would be required to submit notice if it loses its 

337 status as a signatory to the International Accreditation Forum Inc. Multilateral 

338 Recognition Arrangement (or membership in an equivalent organization) within 5 

339 business days of the date that the body receives notice of the loss of its signatory status. 

340 

341  Recognized laboratory accreditation bodies would be required to submit notice if it loses 

342 its status as a signatory to the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation Mutual 

343 Recognition Arrangement (or membership in an equivalent organization) within 5 

344 business days of the date that the body receives notice of the loss of its signatory status. 

345 

346  Recognized accreditation bodies would be required to submit notice when it accredits a 

347 third-party certifier within 5 business days of the date that the certifier is TSCA Title VI 

348 accredited. 

349 

350  Recognized accreditation bodies would be required to submit notice that an accredited 

351 third-party certifier has failed to comply with any provision of the regulation within 24 

352 hours of the time the accreditation body identifies the failure. 

353 

354  A recognized accreditation body would be required to submit notice when it suspends or 

355 revokes a third-party certifier’s accreditation within 24 hours of the time that the 

356 suspension or revocation takes effect. 

357 

358  A recognized accreditation body would be required to submit notice of a decision to 

359 make changes in its organizational policies or management structure that could adversely 

360 affect the third-party certifier accreditation program within 30 days of the decision to 

361 make the changes. 

362 

363  Recognized accreditation bodies would be required to provide checklists and other 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 9 of 46 

364 records documenting compliance with the requirements for systems audits and on-site 

365 assessments of third-party certifiers to EPA within 30 days of request. The records must 

366 be retained for as long as the third-party certifier is accredited or for 53 years, whichever 

367 is longer. 

368 

369  TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifiers would be required to supply the following 

370 records to EPA within 30 days of request: 1) A list of panel producers that it has certified 

371 and their respective product types, including resins used; 2) The results of inspections, 

372 audits, and emission tests conducted for and linked to each panel producer and product 

373 type; 3) A list of laboratories it uses, test methods, including test conditions and 

374 conditioning time and test results; and 4) The methods and results for establishing test 

375 method correlations and equivalence. These records must be maintained for 53 years. 

376 

377  If a third-party certifier approves an application for reduced testing, it must notify and 

378 forward copies of the application for reduced testing to EPA within 30 days. 

379 

380 (B) Third-Party Reports. Respondents are required to submit information to entities 

381 other than EPA as follows: 

382 

383  Recognized product accreditation bodies would be required to provide a unique tracking 

384 number (i.e., third-party certified number) to every third-party-certifier it accredits. 

385 

386  Recognized laboratory accreditation bodies would be required, within 15 days of a 

387 request by a third-party certifier or their EPA-recognized product accreditation body, to 

388 forward copies of a third-party certifier’s laboratory application and accreditation 

389 documentation to the applicable EPA-recognized product accreditation body (if the 

390 laboratory accreditation body is not also recognized as a product accreditation body) at 

391 the address identified by the third-party certifier. 

392 

393  Third-party certifiers that wish to participate in the program must submit an application 

394 for accreditation to a recognized laboratory accreditation body and then to a recognized 

395 product accreditation body. The product accreditation body and laboratory accreditation 

396 body may, in some cases, be the same entity. In such cases, the applications can be made 

397 concurrently. The application to the product accreditation would be required to include: 

398 1) The name, address, telephone number, and email address of primary contact; 2) If not 

399 a domestic entity, the name and address of an agent for service located in the United 

400 States; 3) The type of composite wood products that the applicant intends to certify if 

401 accredited; and 4) A description of the third-party certifier’s qualifications including 

402 experience or ability in product certification and complying with ISO/IEC Guide 65 

403 (including associated record keeping requirements); experience in the composite wood 

404 product industry with the specific product(s) the applicant intends to certify, and ability to 

405 inspect and properly train and supervise inspectors pursuant to ISO/IEC 17020 (including 

406 associated record keeping requirements). The application to the laboratory accreditation 

407 would be required to include: 1) The name, address, telephone number, and email address 

408 of primary contact; 2) If not a domestic entity, the name and address of an agent for 

409 service located in the United States; 3) A description of the third-party certifier 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 10 of 46 

410 laboratory’s qualifications (including contract laboratories), including experience in 

411 performing or verifying formaldehyde testing on composite wood products, experience 

412 complying with ISO/IEC 17025 (including associated record keeping requirements), and 

413 experience with test method ASTM E-1333-96 (2002) and experience evaluating 

414 correlation between test methods. 

415 

416  TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifiers must provide their third-party certifier 

417 numbers to any panel producers receiving their TSCA Title VI certification services. 

418 

419  TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifiers must submit an annual report to their 

420 accreditation body or bodies (product accreditation body and laboratory accreditation 

421 body, if not the same entity) and to EPA on their TSCA Title VI accreditation activities. 

422 The report would include: 1) A list of panel producers that the certifier has certified 

423 during the previous year and their products, including resins used and the average and 

424 range of formaldehyde emissions by panel producer, resin, and product type; 2) A list of 

425 any noncomplying products or events by a panel producer; 3) A list of laboratories and 

426 test methods used by the certifier; and 4) the results of inter-laboratory comparison or 

427 proficiency testing for the laboratories used by the certifier. 

428 

429  TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifiers would be required to inform their 

430 accreditation body or bodies (product accreditation body and laboratory accreditation 

431 body, if not the same entity) within 30 days of any changes in personnel qualifications, 

432 procedures, or laboratories used by the certifier. 

433 

434  Should a TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifier withdraw from the program or 

435 lose its accreditation, it would be required to notify all panel producers that receive its 

436 TSCA Title VI accreditation services within 3 business days. 

437 

438  Should a recognized accreditation body be removed or withdraw from the program it 

439 must notify all third-party certifiers that receive its accreditation services within 5 

440 business days. 

441 

442  Third-party certifiers that receive applications from panel producers for reduced testing 

443 must act on those applications within 90 days. 

444 

445 (C) Records. Respondents are required to maintain records as follows: 

446 

447  Recognized accreditation bodies must retain checklists and other records documenting 

448 compliance with the requirements for systems audits and on-site assessments of third449 party certifiers for as long as the third-party certifier is accredited or for 5 years, 

450 whichever is longer3 years. 

451 

452  A TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifier must retain a list of panel producers that 

453 it has certified and their respective product types, including resins used, for 53 years. 

454 

455  TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifiers must retain records on the results of 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 11 of 46 

456 inspections, audits, and emission tests conducted for and linked to each panel producer 

457 and product type for 53 years. 

458 

459  A TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifier must retain a list of laboratories that it 

460 uses, test methods, including test conditions and conditioning time and test results for 53

461 years. 

462 

463  TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifiers must retain records on the methods and 

464 results for establishing test method correlations and equivalence for 53 years. 

465 

466 (ii) Respondent Activities

467 

468 Typical respondents include accreditation bodies and third-party certifiers that wish to 

469 offer TSCA Title VI accreditation or certification services. All respondents would need to read 

470 the rule and determine which provisions would be applicable to their operations; plan and modify 

471 their procedures to come into compliance with the rule; provide training to appropriate staff; 

472 process, compile, and review information for accuracy and appropriateness; and record, disclose, 

473 and/or report the required information. 

474 

475 

476 5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTION — AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION 

477 METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

478 

479 5(a) Agency Activities

480 

481 EPA resources would be devoted to reviewing and analyzing data submissions, compiling 

482 and recording data, maintaining hard-copy files of submitted data, auditing and inspecting 

483 facilities, producing audit and inspection reports, responding to public inquiries, providing 

484 regulatory interpretations and developing rulemakings. EPA plans to publish certain information 

485 on the internet, including a list of accredited third-party certifiers and recognized accreditation 

486 bodies. EPA plans to continue/expand its review of the use of the Internet to facilitate the 

487 transfer of information from EPA to the public. More specific Agency activities are as follows: 

488 

489  Receive and evaluate applications from accreditation bodies that wish to 

490 participate in the program. 

491 

492  Develop and enter into memoranda of understandingrecognition agreements with 

493 qualified accreditation bodies. 

494 

495  Supply a point of contact for each memorandum of understandingrecognition 

496 agreement for accreditation bodies to consult with on implementation of the 

497 memorandum of understandingrecognition agreement. 

498 

499  Maintain a current and publically available list of recognized accreditation bodies 

500 and accredited third-party certifiers. 

501 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 12 of 46 

502  Evaluate the annual reports from recognized accreditation bodies and TSCA Title 

503 VI accredited third-party certifiers. 

504 

505  Evaluate all notices received from accreditation bodies and third-party certifiers to 

506 determine whether further agency action is warranted. 

507 

508 5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

509 

510 While EPA would prepare an application form for accreditation bodies that wish to be 

511 recognized by EPA, the majority of the other information requirements would not require the use 

512 of a specific form or format, except that it must be submitted electronically. 

513 

514 Annual reports, and notifications triggered by a specific occurrences would be submitted 

515 electronically. Records are maintained at EPA by the staff overseeing the TSCA Title VI 

516 program. 

517 

518 The current proposal does not provide a required format for reports and notices. 

519 However, EPA is considering an electronic reporting requirement. If EPA finalizes a mandatory 

520 electronic reporting requirement all reports and notices covered by this action would be required 

521 to be submitted via that internet through EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX). The required use 

522 of CDX for submission of TSCA Title VI notices and reports would be consistent with the 

523 Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA, Pub. L. 105-277), which requires that, when 

524 practicable, federal organizations use electronic forms, electronic filings, and electronic 

525 signatures to conduct official business with the public. EPA’s Cross-Media Electronic Reporting 

526 Regulation (CROMERR) (October 13, 2005; 70 FR 59848; FRL-7977-1) provides that any 

527 requirement in Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations to submit a report directly to EPA can 

528 be satisfied with an electronic submission that meets certain conditions once the Agency 

529 publishes a notice that electronic document submission is available for that requirement.

530 To register in CDX, the CDX registrant (also referred to as “Electronic Signature Holder” 

531 or “Public/Private Key Holder”) would download two forms: the Electronic Signature 

532 Agreement and the Verification of Company Authorizing Official form. Registration enables 

533 CDX to perform two important functions: authentication of identity and verification of 

534 authorization. Within the “Electronic Signature Agreement” form, the Authorized Official (AO) 

535 would agree to certain CDX security conditions. On the “Verification of Company Authorizing 

536 Official” form, the AO would designate himself/herself as the AO and attest to the completeness 

537 and accuracy of the submitted information. When these forms are received, EPA would activate 

538 the submitter's registration in CDX and sends him or her an e-mail notification. 

539 

540 Most of the information requested in the reporting requirements of these collections is not 

541 of a confidential nature. Nonetheless, the any electronic reporting application would be designed 

542 to support TSCA Confidential Business Information needs by providing a secure environment 

543 that meets Federal standards. Users would be able to claim CBI for appropriate data fields. The 

544 electronic reporting application would use Transportation Layer Security (TLS) with 256-bit 

545 digital encryption, and the data would be encrypted at rest using a key that only a user knows. 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 13 of 46 

546 All data would remain encrypted until it is behind several EPA firewalls and within the EPA CBI 

547 LAN, and all encryption modules would be Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 

548 140-2 compliant. Also, users would be required to have valid CDX credentials (user name and 

549 password combination) to access the application, and they would be required to know the 

550 answers to the 20-5-1 series of questions associated with a CDX account in order to submit data 

551 to the EPA.

552 

553 While EPA is not currently proposing an electronic reporting requirement, EPA believes 

554 the adoption of electronic communications may reduce the reporting burden on industry by 

555 reducing both the cost and the time required to review, edit and transmit data to the Agency. All 

556 information sent via CDX would be transmitted securely to protect CBI. Furthermore, if 

557 anything in the submission has been claimed CBI, a sanitized copy of the notice must be 

558 provided by the submitter. With electronic reporting, this could be done automatically during the 

559 submission process, eliminating the need for the submitter to do this manually. Electronic 

560 reporting would also allow submitters to share a draft notice within their company during the 

561 creation of a notice and to save a copy of the final file for future use. Appendix B provides mock 

562 ups illustrating a potential electronic reporting system for TSCA Title VI submissions.

563 

564 The Agency would also benefit from receiving electronic submissions. Data systems 

565 would be populated electronically, as oppose to manual data entry, reducing the potential for 

566 human error that exists when data are entered by hand. Agency personnel would also be able to 

567 communicate more efficiently with submitters electronically, compared to using mail.

568 

569 

570 5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

571 

572 Small businesses are not exempt from the requirements of TSCA Title VI. The 

573 information collections would apply to all entities that wish to participate in the TSCA Title VI 

574 third-party certification program, regardless of size. EPA has elected to require equal disclosure 

575 by all participating accreditation bodies and third-party certifiers because the third-party 

576 certification program is essential to ensuring compliance with the highly technical requirements 

577 of TSCA Title VI. 

578 

579 5(d) Collection Schedule

580 

581 Most of the reporting activities are triggered by specific events or on an as needed basis 

582 rather than by specific dates, as shown on Table 5-1. 

583 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 14 of 46 

Table 5-1: Collection Requirements and Schedule 

Ref. # Collection Requirement Collection Schedule 

1 Application to EPA from a product accreditation body When product accreditation 

body wishes to participate in 

the program and every 3 years 

thereafter for as long as it 

wishes to continue to 

participate 

2 Application to EPA from a laboratory accreditation body When laboratory accreditation 

body wishes to participate in 

the program and every 3 years 

thereafter for as long as it 

wishes to continue to 

participate

3 Annual report to EPA from a product accreditation body Annually, on the month its 

recognition agreement was 

signed 

4 Annual report to EPA from a laboratory accreditation 

body

Annually, on the month its 

recognition agreement was 

signed 

5 Copies of third-party certifiers’ applications forwarded 

from a recognized product accreditation body to EPA 

Within 90 days of receipt of 

those applications 

6 A recognized product accreditation bodies must submit 

notice if it loses its status as a signatory to the 

International Accreditation Forum Inc., Multilateral 

Recognition Arrangement (or membership in an 

equivalent organization)

Within 5 business days of 

being informed of loss of 

status 

7 A recognized laboratory accreditation bodies must submit 

notice if it loses its status as a signatory to the 

International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation

Mutual Recognition Arrangement (or membership in an 

equivalent organization)

Within 5 business days of 

being informed of loss of 

status

8 A recognized accreditation body must submit notice when 

it accredits a third-party certifier 

Within 5 business days of the 

date that the certifier is 

accredited

9 A recognized accreditation body must submit notice that a 

TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifier has failed 

to comply with any provision of the regulation

Within 24 hours of the time 

the accreditation body 

identifies the failure 

10 A recognized accreditation body must submit notice when 

it suspends or revokes a third-party certifier’s 

accreditation

Within 24 hours of the time 

that the suspension or 

revocation takes effect 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 15 of 46 

Table 5-1: Collection Requirements and Schedule 

Ref. # Collection Requirement Collection Schedule 

11 A recognized accreditation body must submit notice of a 

decision to make changes in its organizational policies or 

management structure that could adversely affect the 

third-party certifier accreditation program

Within 30 days of the decision 

to make the changes

12 A recognized accreditation body must provide checklists 

and other records documenting compliance with the 

requirements for systems audits and on-site assessments 

of third-party certifiers to EPA 

Within 30 days of a request by 

EPA

13 A recognized product accreditation body must provide a 

unique tracking number to every third-party-certifier it 

accredits

At the time the third-party 

certifier receives its 

accreditation 

14 An accredited third-party certifier must supply the 

following records to EPA: 1) A list of panel producers 

and their respective product types, including resins used, 

that it has certified; 2) The results of inspections, audits, 

and emission tests conducted for and linked to each panel 

producer and product type; 3) A list of laboratories it 

uses, test methods, including test conditions and 

conditioning time and test results; and 4) The methods 

and results for establishing test method correlations and 

equivalence

Within 30 days of request by 

EPA

15 A recognized laboratory accreditation body must forward 

copies of a third-party certifier’s laboratory application 

and accreditation documentation to the applicable EPArecognized product accreditation body (if the product 

accreditation body is not also recognized as a laboratory 

accreditation body ) at the address identified by the thirdparty certifier

Within 15 days of a request by 

a third-party certifier or its 

EPA-recognized product 

accreditation body

16 A third-party certifier that wishes to participate in the 

program must submit an application for accreditation to a 

recognized laboratory accreditation body and then to a 

recognized product accreditation body 

When it desires to become 

accredited to perform TSCA 

Title VI certification services, 

and every three years 

thereafter for as long as it 

desires to continue providing 

TSCA Title VI certification 

services 

17 A TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifier would be 

required to provide its third-party certifier number to any 

panel producer receiving its TSCA Title VI certification 

services 

When a panel producer begins 

receiving its services 

18 A TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifier must 

submit an annual report to its accreditation body or bodies 

(product accreditation body and laboratory accreditation 

 Annual, on anniversary of 

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

February 26, 2013 Page 16 of 46 

Table 5-1: Collection Requirements and Schedule 

Ref. # Collection Requirement Collection Schedule 

body, if not the same entity) and to EPA on its TSCA 

Title VI certification activities

19 A TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifier must 

inform its accreditation body or bodies (product 

accreditation body and laboratory accreditation body) of 

any changes in the personnel qualifications, procedures, 

or laboratories used by the certifier

Within 30 days

20 Should a TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifier 

withdraw from the program or lose its accreditation, it 

would be required to notify all panel producers that 

receive its TSCA Title VI accreditation services

Within 3 business days

21 Should a recognized accreditation body be removed or 

withdraw from the program it must notify all third-party 

certifiers that receive its accreditation services

Within 5 business days

22 Notify EPA of approval of an application for reduced 

testing forward copies of all approved applications for 

reduced testing to EPA 

Notification with 5 days of 

approval, 

Forward copy of application 

within 30 days of receipt 

23 Third-party certifiers must act on applications for reduced 

testing 

Within 90 days of receipt of a 

complete application

584 

585 

586 6. ESTIMATING BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION 

587 

588 This section estimates the incremental burden of the recordkeeping and reporting 

589 requirements for accreditation bodies (ABs) and third-party certifiers (TPCs) that wish to 

590 participate in the TSCA Title VI third-party certification program for composite wood products. 

591 

592 The current proposal does not provide a required format for reports and notices, so the 

593 estimates in this section assume that reporting is done on paper. Since EPA is considering an 

594 electronic reporting requirement, Appendix A describes the incremental changes in burden and 

595 cost if EPA finalizes a mandatory electronic reporting requirement.

596 

597 6(a) Estimating Respondent Burden

598 

599 This ICR presents the estimated annual burden and associated annual costs for the 

600 following information collection components of the third party certification framework: 

601 

602  Accreditation Bodies:

603 o Rule Familiarization: Reading the rule in order to understand the requirements; 

604 o Application Submission: Submitting an application to enter into a Memorandum 

605 of Understanding (MOU)recognition agreement with EPA; 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 17 of 46 

606 o Prepare a MOURecognition Agreement: If the application is approved, enter 

607 into an MOUa recognition agreement with EPA; 

608 o EPA Notification: Provide EPA with notifications in the following instances: 

609 loss of signatory status; TPC application; TPC accreditation; TPC compliance 

610 failure; organization policy or management structure changes that could adversely 

611 affect accreditation program; and provide checklists and other records 

612 documenting compliance with systems audits and on-site assessments; 

613 o TPC Notification: Provide TPCs with notifications if they withdraw or are 

614 removed from the program; 

615 o Recordkeeping: Maintain records documenting TPC accreditation applications, 

616 and checklists and other records documenting compliance with systems audits and 

617 on-site assessments. Applications must be retained for a minimum of five3 years 

618 from the date that the TPC’s accreditation terminatesthey were submitted; and 

619 o Reporting: Provide an annual report to EPA with the number of TPC applications 

620 received; the number of TPCs approved and denied; the names and contact 

621 information of all accredited TPCs; the number and locations of systems audits 

622 and on-site assessments; and the results of accredited TPC proficiency testing and 

623 inter-laboratory comparisons.

624 

625  Third Party Certifiers: 

626 o Rule Familiarization: Reading the rule in order to understand the requirements; 

627 o Application Submission: submitting an application to the accrediting body; 

628 o Obtain Accreditation: initially obtain accreditation (i.e., to demonstrate 

629 compliance with the relevant ISO/IEC standards and test method ASTM E-1333-

630 96 and experience correlating between test methods); 

631 o Manufacturer Notifications and Recordkeeping: the annual cost of 

632 manufacturer notification and of maintaining records; and 

633 o Accrediting Body Notifications and Reporting: provide an annual report and 

634 other notifications to the accrediting body. 

635 

636 (i) Number of Respondents 

637 

638 The number of domestic accreditation bodies was estimated to be 8, the number of 

639 signatories to the International Accreditation Forum, Inc. (IAF) or the International Laboratory 

640 Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC). Of the 8 domestic accrediting bodies, 4 were determined to 

641 be small entities. The number of foreign accreditation bodies was estimated to be 17, the number 

642 of signatories for ISO Guide 65, ISO 17020, or ISO 17025 in countries with CARB-approved 

643 TPCs. Based on the small business determinations for domestic accrediting bodies, it is 

644 estimated that 9 of the foreign accrediting bodies are small entities. 

645 

646 As shown in Exhibit 6-1, CARB has approved a total of 36 TPCs, nine9 of which are 

647 located in the U.S. (although most U.S. TPCs provide services internationally). Of the nine9

648 U.S. firms, two2 are classified as “small” based on the U.S. Small Business Administration’s 

649 size standards, two2 are classified as large, and the small business status could not be determined 

650 for fivethe 5 remaining firms. Thus, it is estimated that half of all TPCs (both foreign and 

651 domestic) are small entities. It is assumed that there will be 9 domestic TPCs and 27 foreign 

652 TPCs in the TSCA Title VI program, the same as in the CARB program. 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 18 of 46 

653 

Exhibit 6-1: Summary of CARB-Approved Third Party Certifiers 

Country Where TPC is Located Number of TPCs 

Australia 1 

Austria 1 

Belgium 1 

China 5 

Czech Republic 1 

Denmark 1 

France 1 

Germany 4 

Hong Kong 3 

Indonesia 1 

Italy 3 

New Zealand 1 

Poland 1 

Spain 1 

Sweden 1 

Taiwan 1 

United States 9 

 Total 36 

Source: California Air Resources Board. 2011. List of CARB Approved Third Party 

Certifiers.

654 

655 Exhibit 6-2 presents a summary of the number of respondents by size and type. 

656 

Exhibit 6-2: Summary of Respondents 

Respondent Type 

Total 

Number of 

Respondents 

Total Number 

of Small 

Respondents 

Domestic Accrediting Bodies 8 4 

Foreign Accrediting Bodies 17 9 

Domestic Third Party Certifiers 9 5 

Foreign Third Party Certifiers 27 14 

657 

658 (ii) Burden Per Respondent 

659 

660 Exhibit 6-3 and Exhibit 6-4 present the estimated per-activity recordkeeping and 

661 reporting burdens for accreditation bodies and third party certifiers, respectively. Exhibit 6-5 

662 summarizes the total hour burden by type of firm. Exhibit 6-5 provides separate estimates for 

663 TPCs that are accredited for all three relevant ISO/IEC standards (Guide 65, 17020, and 17025) 

664 and for those that need to obtain an additional accreditation. The latter group will pay fees to an 

665 accreditation body, which are accounted for as costs in section 6(b)(ii), and described in more 

666 detail there. The recordkeeping and reporting requirements do not differ between TPCs that 

667 have all of their accreditations and those that do not, so the two groups have identical burdens in 

668 Exhibit 6-5. The two groups are listed separately here in order to carry them through the analysis 

669 consistently. 

670 

671 Exhibit A-1 and Exhibit A-2 in Appendix A present the incremental changes in burden if 

672 EPA finalizes a mandatory electronic reporting requirement.
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 

673 

Exhibit 6-3: Recordkeeping and Reporting Burden for Accreditation Bodies, by Activity 

Activity1

Per Activity Burden Hours Numbe

Annu

Activit

(d) 

Clerical 

(a) 

Technical 

(b) 

Managerial 

(c) 

1. Rule Familiarization 0.00 5.00 5.00 2. Application Submission 

Company Information (Name, Address, Telephone Number, and Email Address of Primary Contact)2 0.00 0.04 0.02 Documentation of IAF MLA, ILAC MRA, or Equivalent Signatory Status2 0.00 0.04 0.02 Description of Any Other Qualifications Related to Experience in Performing Accreditation of Conformity Assessment Bodies or Third Party Certifiers3 0.00 0.83 0.51 

3. Recognition agreement4 1.00 1.00 4.00 4. EPA Notification 

Loss of Status as a Signatory to the IAF MLA, ILAC MRA, or Equivalent Organization5 0.00 0.08 0.04 Third Party Certifier Applications5 0.00 0.08 0.04 Third Party Certifier Accreditation5 0.00 0.08 0.04 Third Party Certifier Compliance Failure5 0.00 0.08 0.04 Third Party Certifier Accreditation Suspension or Revocation (Product ABs) / Accredited Laboratory Compliance Failure (Laboratory ABs)5 0.00 0.08 0.04 Change to Organizational Policy or Management Structure that Could Adversely Affect Accreditation Program5 0.00 0.08 0.04 Checklists and Other Records Documenting Compliance with the Requirements for Systems Audits and On-site Assessment of Third Party Certifiers5 0.00 0.08 0.04 Change in Name or Address of Domestic Agent (Foreign Entities Only)

5 0.00 0.08 0.04 

5. Third Party Certifier Notification 

Unique Tracking Number2 0.00 0.04 0.02 Withdraw from or be Removed from Program2 0.00 0.04 0.02 

6. Recordkeeping 

Accreditation Applications6 0.75 1.50 0.75 Checklists and Other Records Documenting Compliance with the Requirements for Systems Audits and On-site Assessment of Third Party Certifiers6 0.75 1.50 0.75 

7. Annual Report to EPA 

Number of Third Party Certifier Applications Received7 0.25 0.50 0.25 Number of Third Party Certifier Applications Approved and Denied7 0.25 0.50 0.25 The Names and Contact Information of All Accredited Third Party Certifiers7 0.25 0.50 0.25 Number and Locations of Systems Audits and On-site Assessments7 0.25 0.50 0.25 Results of Accredited Third Party Certifier Laboratory Proficiency Testing or Inter-laboratory Comparisons7 0.25 0.50 0.25 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 

Exhibit 6-3: Recordkeeping and Reporting Burden for Accreditation Bodies, by Activity 

Activity1

Per Activity Burden Hours Numbe

Annu

Activit

(d) 

Clerical 

(a) 

Technical 

(b) 

Managerial 

(c) 

Domestic Total in First Year Foreign Total in First Year Domestic Total in Non-Reapplication Year (Year 2) Foreign Total in Non-Reapplications Year (Year 2) Domestic Total in Reapplication Year (Year 3) Foreign Total in Reapplication Year (Year 3) Notes: 1. Under the proposed rule, accreditation bodies are required to submit an application to renew their recognition agreement every 3 years. As a result, this analysi

bodies incur application submission and recognition agreement preparation costs in the first year and subsequently every 3 years thereafter. 2. Based on the estimated burden associated with reporting "company information" (EPA 2011). 3. Based on the estimated burden associated with answering substantiation questions when making plant site confidentiality claims (EPA 2011). 4. Based on conversations with accreditation bodies. 5. Based on the estimated burden associated with reporting "company information" (EPA 2011). Values have been doubled based on best professional judgment. 6. Based on the estimated burden associated with "recordkeeping" (EPA 2011). The rule requires that records be kept for 3 years that show the production volume, plant each reported substance. 7. Estimated as one-third of the burden associated with "recordkeeping" (EPA 2011). Estimate based on best professional judgment.

Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2011. Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act: the FPartial Update of the TSCA Section 8(b) TSCA Inventory Data Base, Production and Site Reports.

674 675 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 

Exhibit 6-4: Recordkeeping and Reporting Burden for Third Party Certifiers, by Activity 

Activity1

Per Activity Burden Hours Number 

Annua

Activitie

(d) 

Clerical 

(a) 

Technical 

(b) 

Managerial 

(c) 

1. Rule Familiarization 0.00 5.00 5.00 2. Product Accreditation Body Application Submission 

Company Information (Name, Address, Telephone Number, and Email Address of Primary Contact) and Type of Composite Wood Products Applicant Intends to Certify2

0.00 0.04 0.02 

Description of TPC's Experience or Ability in Product Certification and Complying with ISO/IEC Guide 653 0.00 0.83 0.51 Description of TPC's Experience in the Composite Wood Product Industry with the Product(s) Intended to be Certified3 0.00 0.83 0.51 Description of TPC's Ability to Inspect and Properly Train and Supervise Inspectors Pursuant to ISO/IEC 170203 0.00 0.83 0.51 

3. Laboratory Accreditation Body Application Submission 

Company Information (Name, Address, Telephone Number, and Email Address of Primary Contact; if foreign, name and address of an agent for service located in the U.S.)2

0.00 0.04 0.02 

Description of TPC's Experience in Performing or Verifying Formaldehyde Testing on Composite Wood Products3 0.00 0.83 0.51 Description of TPC's Experience Operating or Using Laboratories that Comply with ISO/IEC 170253 0.00 0.83 0.51 Description of TPC's Experience with Test Method ASTM E-1333-96 (2002) and Experience Evaluating Correlation between Test Methods3 0.00 0.83 0.51 

4. Manufacturer Notification 

Third Party Certifier Number2 0.00 0.04 0.02 Withdraw from Program or Lose Accreditation2 0.00 0.04 0.02 

5. Recordkeeping 

List of Manufacturers and their Product Types (including Resins Used) Certified by TPC4 0.75 1.50 0.75 Results of Inspections, Audits, and Emission Tests Conducted for Each Manufacturer and Product Type4 0.75 1.50 0.75 List of the TPC's Laboratories, Test Methods (including Test Conditions and Conditioning Time), and Test Results4 0.75 1.50 0.75 Methods and Results for Establishing Test Method Correlations and Equivalence4 0.75 1.50 0.75 List of Manufacturers and Products Approved for Reduced Testing4 0.75 1.50 0.75 

6. Annual Report to Accreditation Bodies 

List of Manufacturers and their Products Certified by the TPC during the Previous Year (including Resins Used, and the Average and Range of 0.25 0.50 0.25 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 

Exhibit 6-4: Recordkeeping and Reporting Burden for Third Party Certifiers, by Activity 

Activity1

Per Activity Burden Hours Number 

Annua

Activitie

(d) 

Clerical 

(a) 

Technical 

(b) 

Managerial 

(c) 

Formaldehyde Emissions by Manufacturer, Resin, and Product Type)5List of Noncomplying Products or Events by Manufacturer5 0.25 0.50 0.25 List of Laboratories and Test Methods Used by the TPC5 0.25 0.50 0.25 Results of Inter-Laboratory Comparison or Proficiency Testing for the Laboratories Used by the TPC4 0.25 0.50 0.25 

7. Accreditation Board Notification 

Personnel Qualification Changes2 0.00 0.04 0.02 Procedure Changes2 0.00 0.04 0.02 Laboratory Changes2 0.00 0.04 0.02 

8. EPA Notification 

Change in Name or Address of Domestic Agent (Foreign TPCs Only)

2 0.00 0.04 0.02 

Domestic Total in First Year Foreign Total in First Year Domestic Total in Non-Reapplication Year (Years 2 and 3) Foreign Total in Non-Reapplications Year (Years 2 and 3) Domestic Total in Reapplication Year (Year 4) Foreign Total in Reapplication Year (Year 4) Notes: 1. Under the proposed rule, TPCs are required to apply for re-accreditation every three years. As a result, application and accreditation costs are incurred ev

2. Based on the estimated burden associated with reporting "company information" (EPA 2011). 3. Based on the estimated burden associated with answering substantiation questions when making plant site confidentiality claims (EPA 2011). 4. Based on the estimated burden associated with "recordkeeping" (EPA 2011). The rule requires that records be kept for 3 years that show the production volume, p

status of each reported substance. 5. Estimated as one-third of the burden associated with "recordkeeping" (EPA 2011). Estimate based on best professional judgment. 

Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2011. Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act: Addendum to Partial Update of the TSCA Section 8(b) TSCA Inventory Data Base, Production and Site Reports.

676 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 23 of 46 

677 

678 6(b) Estimating Respondent Costs

679 

680 Respondent costs are estimated by combining burden estimates from the previous section 

681 with loaded wage rates, and adding in materials costs. 

682 

683 (i) Wage Rates 

684 

685 The fully loaded unit labor cost for managerial, professional/technical, and clerical labor 

686 in the regulated industry and for EPA staff is estimated by adding fringe benefits and overhead 

687 costs to the hourly wage or annual salary for each category following the method described in 

688 Wage Rates for Economic Analysis of the Toxics Release Inventory Program. This section 

689 describes the method employed to estimate the fully loaded unit labor costs for each labor 

690 category and presents the results of the analysis. 

Exhibit 6-5: Total Burden by Firm Type

Firm Type Number of 

Firms 

Burden Per Firm 

(hours) 

Total Burden 

(hours) 

Year 1 

Domestic Accrediting Body 8 29.6042 237

Foreign Accrediting Body 17 29.6642 504

Domestic TPC obtaining one additional accreditation 3 37.3250 112

Domestic TPC with current accreditations 6 37.3250 224

Foreign TPC obtaining one additional accreditation 9 37.3550 336

Foreign TPC with current accreditations 18 37.3550 672

Year 2

Domestic Accrediting Body 8 12.1442 97

Foreign Accrediting Body 17 12.2042 207

Domestic TPC obtaining one additional accreditation 3 19.1650 57

Domestic TPC with current accreditations 6 19.1650 115

Foreign TPC obtaining one additional accreditation 9 19.1950 173

Foreign TPC with current accreditations 18 19.1950 346

Year 3

Domestic Accrediting Body 8 19.6042 157

Foreign Accrediting Body 17 19.6642 334

Domestic TPC obtaining one additional accreditation 3 19.165 57

Domestic TPC with current accreditations 6 19.165 115

Foreign TPC obtaining one additional accreditation 9 19.195 173

Foreign TPC with current accreditations 18 19.195 346

Three Year Average

Domestic Accrediting Body 8 20.4509 164

Foreign Accrediting Body 17 20.5109 349

Domestic TPC obtaining one additional accreditation 3 25.2183 76

Domestic TPC with current accreditations 6 25.2183 151

Foreign TPC obtaining one additional accreditation 9 25.2483 227

Foreign TPC with current accreditations 18 25.2483 454

All Entities 61 23.2951 1,421
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 24 of 46 

691 

692 Labor categories used in the analysis correspond to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 

693 (BLS) Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system. In March 2004, BLS began using the 

694 North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) instead of the Standard Industrial 

695 Classification (SIC) System, and the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system instead 

696 of the Occupational Classification System (OCS). Exhibit 6-6 summarizes the crosswalk 

697 between old and new occupational titles, and lists the SOC titles that correspond to the 

698 managerial, professional/technical, and clerical labor categories used in this analysis. 

699 

Exhibit 6-6: Detail of Labor Categories Used in the Analysis 

Labor Category Used in the Analysis BLS Old Title (OCS) BLS New Title (SOC) 

Managerial Executive, administrative, and 

managerial Management, business, and financial 

Professional/Technical Professional specialty and technical Professional and related 

Clerical Administrative support, including 

clerical Office and administrative support 

700 

701 Wages and fringe benefit data for managerial, professional/technical, and clerical labor 

702 are from the BLS Employer Costs for Employee Compensation (ECEC) historical data for 

December 2006 – March 2011.1 703 

704 

705 The costs of fringe benefits such as paid leave and insurance, specific to each labor 

706 category, are taken from the same BLS report. Fringe benefits as a percentage of wages are 

707 calculated separately for each labor category. For example, for December 2010, the average 

708 wage rate for professional/technical labor was $36.57, and the average fringe benefit was 

$13.52.2 709 Therefore, fringe benefits as a percentage of wages were $13.52/$36.57, or 

710 approximately 37 percent (see Exhibit 6-7). 

711 

712 An additional loading factor of 17 percent is applied to wages to account for overhead. 

713 This approach is used for consistency with Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) 

714 economic analyses for two major rulemakings: Wage Rates for Economic Analyses of the Toxics 

715 Release Inventory Program, June 2002, and the Revised Economic Analysis for the Amended 

716 Inventory Update Rule: Final Report. This overhead loading factor is added to the benefits 

717 loading factor, and the total is then applied to the base wage to derive the fully loaded wage. For 

718 example, the December 2010 fully loaded wage for professional/technical labor is $36.9757 × 

719 (1+ 0.37 + 0.17) = $56.31. 

720 

 

1

 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2011. Employer Costs for Employee Compensation: Supplementary Tables: 

Historical Data: December 2006 - March 2011. Past economic analyses used ECEC data series specific to whitecollar workers in the manufacturing sector. However, those data sets were discontinued in March 2007, and these 

historical data were the best alternative. In a phone conversation (February 11, 2009), a BLS employee could not 

identify a better data set to use.

2

 Past analyses have used the term “technical” labor. Here the category is called “professional/technical” labor, to 

make clear how it relates to BLS categories. In 2004, BLS changed from the Occupational Classification System, 

OCS, to the Standard Occupational Classification system, SOC. In the process, the “Professional specialty and 

technical” category became the “Professional and related” category. However, the coverage of the old and new 

occupational groups is approximately the same. See the BLS article, “Comparing Current and Former Industry and 

Occupation ECEC Series” (Weinstein and Loewenstein, 2004). 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 25 of 46 

721 Fully loaded costs for managerial and clerical labor are calculated in a similar manner, as 

722 shown in Exhibit 6-7. 

723 

Exhibit 6-7: Derivation of Loaded Industry Wage Rates 

Labor 

Category 

Data Source for Wage 

Information Date 

Wage Fringe 

Benefit 

Fringes as 

% wage 

Overhead as 

% wage a 

Fringe + 

overhead factor

Loaded 

Wages 

(a) (b) (c)=(b)/(a) (d) (e)=(c)+(d)+1 (f)= 

(a)*(e) 

Clerical 

BLS ECEC, Private 

Professional and Business 

Services Industries, “Office 

and Administrative Support”b 

Dec-10 $16.72 $6.09 36.42% 17% 1.53 $25.65 

Professional/ 

Technical 

BLS ECEC, Private 

Professional and Business 

Services Industries, 

“Professional and related“b 

Dec-10 $36.57 $13.52 36.97% 17% 1.54 $56.31 

Managerial 

BLS ECEC, Private 

Professional and Business 

Services Industries, “Mgt, 

Business, and Financial”b 

Dec-10 $42.42 $17.15 40.43% 17% 1.57 $66.78 

Notes: 

a

 An overhead rate of 17% is used. 

b

 Data for this occupational series found in U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2011. Employer Costs for Employee Compensation: 

Supplementary Tables: Historical Data: December 2006 - March 2011. 

724 

725 (ii) Costs Per Respondent 

726 

727 Labor costs for accrediting bodies and third party certifiers are presented in Exhibit 6-8 

728 and Exhibit 6-9. These labor costs were estimated by multiplying the respondent burdens in 

729 Exhibit 6-3 and Exhibit 6-4 by the loaded wage rates presented in Exhibit 6-7. In addition to 

730 these labor costs, some TPCs will incur non-labor costs associated with obtaining accreditation. 

731 The accreditation costs of TPCs will depend on whether they have the systems and equipment in 

732 place to satisfy the accreditation requirements or whether they will have to establish these. 

733 Based on the telephone interviews, the cost of obtaining a single accreditation initially is about 

734 $20,000 to $30,000 for each quality system. This analysis uses the mid-point of the range, 

735 $25,000, as the cost estimate. The cost would be about three times that if the firm needed to be 

736 newly accredited for all three standards (Guide 65, 17020, and 17025). Based on discussions 

737 with the six TPCs, the analysis assumes that two-thirds of the CARB-certified TPCs will already 

738 have accreditations in place and that one-third will need to obtain one additional accreditation. 

739 As a result, this analysis assumes that one-third of TPCs will incur a cost of $25,000 to obtain 

740 one additional accreditation, while two-thirds of TPCs will not incur any additional costs 

741 associated with obtaining and maintaining additional accreditations. 

742 

743 In addition to obtaining the initial accreditation, the TPCs will need to renew their 

744 systems and testing certifications. Two respondents reported costs that ranged from $5,000 to 

745 $15,000 per year associated with maintaining certification, such as paying audit fees to their AB 

746 (typical accreditation lasts two years). Note that the systems and testing certifications for which 

747 the laboratories reported costs may cover more than the specific formaldehyde testing, and 

748 therefore these estimates may overstate costs if these labs would incur these costs even if they 

749 were not acting as TPCs under FSCWPA.TSCA Title VI. However, to be conservative and not 

750 underestimate costs, it is assumed that laboratories do not incur these costs in the baseline. 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 26 of 46 

751 Because the audits include tests other than formaldehyde, the analysis uses the low end of the 

752 costs reported as the annual reaccreditation cost, $5,000. As discussed above, based on 

753 discussions with the six TPCs the analysis assumes that two-thirds of the CARB-certified TPCs 

754 will already be maintaining these accreditations and that one-third will be maintaining one 

755 additional accreditation. Thus, one-third of TPCs will incur a cost of $5,000 from maintaining 

756 an additional accreditation, while two-thirds of TPCs will not incur any additional costs 

757 associated with obtaining and maintaining additional accreditations. 

758 

759 Exhibit A-1 and Exhibit A-2 in Appendix A present the incremental changes in cost if 

760 EPA finalizes a mandatory electronic reporting requirement.
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 

Exhibit 6-8: Recordkeeping and Reporting Labor Costs for Accreditation Bodies, by Activity (2010$) 

Activity Estimated Annual Frequency1 Clerical Cost2 Technical Cost2 Mana

1. Rule Familiarization 1 $0.00 $281.55 2. Application Submission 

Company Information (Name, Address, Telephone Number, and Email Address of Primary Contact)3 1 $0.00 $2.25 Documentation of IAF MLA, ILAC MRA, or Equivalent Signatory Status3 1 $0.00 $2.25 Description of Any Other Qualifications Related to Experience in Performing Accreditation of Conformity Assessment Bodies or Third Party Certifiers4

1 $0.00 $46.74 

Application Submission Subtotal 

3. Recognition agreement5 1 $25.65 $56.31 4. EPA Notification 

Loss of Status as a Signatory to the IAF MLA, ILAC MRA, or Equivalent Organization6 0.05 $0.00 $0.23 Third Party Certifier Application6 3 $0.00 $13.51 Third Party Certifier Accreditation6 3 $0.00 $13.51 Third Party Certifier Compliance Failure6 0.33 $0.00 $1.49 Third Party Certifier Accreditation Suspension or Revocation (Product ABs) / Accredited Laboratory Compliance Failure (Laboratory ABs)6 0.33 $0.00 $1.49 Change to Organizational Policy or Management Structure that Could Adversely Affect Accreditation Program6 0.2 $0.00 $0.90 Checklists and Other Records Documenting Compliance with the Requirements for Systems Audits and On-site Assessment of Third Party Certifiers6

1 $0.00 $4.50 

Change in Name or Address of Domestic Agent (Foreign Entities Only)

6 0.5 $0.00 $2.25 

EPA Notification Subtotal (Domestic) EPA Notification Subtotal (Foreign) 

5. Third Party Certifier Notification 

Unique Tracking Number3 3 $0.00 $6.76 Withdraw from or be Removed from Program3 0.25 $0.00 $0.56 TPC Notification Subtotal 

6. Recordkeeping 

Accreditation Applications7 1 $19.24 $84.47 Checklists and Other Records Documenting Compliance with the Requirements for Systems Audits and On-site Assessment of Third Party Certifiers7

1 $19.24 $84.47 

Recordkeeping Subtotal 

7. Annual Report to EPA 

Number of Third Party Certifier Applications Received8 1 $6.41 $28.16 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 

Exhibit 6-8: Recordkeeping and Reporting Labor Costs for Accreditation Bodies, by Activity (2010$) 

Activity Estimated Annual Frequency1 Clerical Cost2 Technical Cost2 Mana

Number of Third Party Certifier Applications Approved and Denied8 1 $6.41 $28.16 The Names and Contact Information of All Accredited Third Party Certifiers8 1 $6.41 $28.16 Number and Locations of Systems Audits and On-site Assessments8 1 $6.41 $28.16 Results of Accredited Third Party Certifier Laboratory Proficiency Testing or Inter-laboratory Comparisons8 1 $6.41 $28.16 Annual Report Subtotal 

Domestic Total in First Year Foreign Total in First Year Domestic Total in Non-Reapplication Year (Year 2) Foreign Total in Non-Reapplications Year (Year 2) Domestic Total in Reapplication Year (Year 3) Foreign Total in Reapplication Year (Year 3) Notes: 1. Based on best professional judgment and rule requirements. Under the proposed rule, accreditation bodies are required to submit an application to renew their ryears. As a result, this analysis assumes that accreditation bodies incur application submission and recognition agreement preparation costs in the first year and subseque

2. Based on Employer Costs for Employee Compensation wage and benefit data for private professional and business services industries (BLS 2011a). Clerical costs are 

"office and administrative support" occupational group; technical costs are estimated using data from the "professional and related" occupational group; and managerial cfrom the "management, business, and financial" occupational group. 3. Based on the estimated burden associated with reporting "company information" (EPA 2011a). 4. Based on the estimated burden associated with answering substantiation questions when making plant site confidentiality claims (EPA 2011a). 5. Based on conversations with accreditation bodies. 6. Based on the estimated burden associated with reporting "company information" (EPA 2011a). Values have been doubled based on best professional judgment. 

7. Based on the estimated burden associated with "recordkeeping" (EPA 2011a). The rule requires that records be kept for 3 years that show the production volume, plan

each reported substance. 8. Estimated as one-third of the burden associated with "recordkeeping" (EPA 2011a). Estimate based on best professional judgment. 

Sources: (1) U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2011. Employer Costs for Employee Compensation: Supplementary Tables: Historical Data: December 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2011. Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act: the Final Ru

Update of the TSCA Section 8(b) TSCA Inventory Data Base, Production and Site Reports.

761 762 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 

Exhibit 6-9: Recordkeeping and Reporting Labor Costs for Third Party Certifiers, by Activity (2010$) 

Activity Estimated Annual Frequency1 Clerical Cost2 Technical Cost2 Manageri

1. Rule Familiarization 1.00 $0.00 $281.55 2. Product Accreditation Body Application Submission 

Company Information (Name, Address, Telephone Number, and Email Address of Primary Contact; if foreign, name and address of an agent for service located in the U.S.) and Type of Composite Wood Products Applicant Intends to Certify3

1.00 $0.00 $2.25 

Description of TPC's Experience or Ability in Product Certification and Complying with ISO/IEC Guide 654 1.00 $0.00 $46.74 Description of TPC's Experience in the Composite Wood 

Product Industry with the Product(s) Intended to be Certified4 1.00 $0.00 $46.74 

Description of TPC's Ability to Inspect and Properly Train and Supervise Inspectors Pursuant to ISO/IEC 170204 1.00 $0.00 $46.74 Product Accreditation Subtotal 

3. Laboratory Accreditation Body Application Submission 

Company Information (Name, Address, Telephone Number, and Email Address of Primary Contact; if foreign, name and address of an agent for service located in the U.S.)3

1.00 $0.00 $2.25 

Description of TPC's Experience in Performing or Verifying Formaldehyde Testing on Composite Wood Products4 1.00 $0.00 $46.74 Description of TPC's Experience Operating or Using Laboratories that Comply with ISO/IEC 170254 1.00 $0.00 $46.74 Description of TPC's Experience with Test Method ASTM E1333-96 (2002) and Experience Evaluating Correlation between Test Methods4

1.00 $0.00 $46.74 

Laboratory Accreditation Subtotal 

4. Manufacturer Notification 

Third Party Certifier Number3 1.00 $0.00 $2.25 Withdraw from Program or Lose Accreditation3 0.25 $0.00 $0.56 Manufacturer Notification Subtotal 

5. Recordkeeping 

List of Manufacturers and their Product Types (including Resins Used) Certified by TPC5 1.00 $19.24 $84.47 Results of Inspections, Audits, and Emission Tests Conducted for Each Manufacturer and Product Type5 1.00 $19.24 $84.47 List of the TPC's Laboratories, Test Methods (including Test Conditions and Conditioning Time), and Test Results5 1.00 $19.24 $84.47 Methods and Results for Establishing Test Method Correlations and Equivalence5 1.00 $19.24 $84.47 List of Manufacturers and Products Approved for Reduced 1.00 $19.24 $84.47 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 

Exhibit 6-9: Recordkeeping and Reporting Labor Costs for Third Party Certifiers, by Activity (2010$) 

Activity Estimated Annual Frequency1 Clerical Cost2 Technical Cost2 Manageri

Testing5Recordkeeping Subtotal 

6. Annual Report to Accreditation Bodies 

List of Manufacturers and their Products Certified by the TPC during the Previous Year (including Resins Used, and the Average and Range of Formaldehyde Emissions by Manufacturer, Resin, and Product Type)6

1.00 $6.41 $28.16 

List of Noncomplying Products or Events by Manufacturer6 1.00 $6.41 $28.16 List of Laboratories and Test Methods Used by the TPC6 1.00 $6.41 $28.16 Results of Inter-Laboratory Comparison or Proficiency Testing for the Laboratories Used by the TPC6 1.00 $6.41 $28.16 Annual Report to AB Subtotal 

7. Accreditation Board Notification 

Personnel Qualification Changes3 0.50 $0.00 $1.13 Procedure Changes3 0.50 $0.00 $1.13 Laboratory Changes3 0.50 $0.00 $1.13 Accreditation Board Notification Subtotal 

8. EPA Notification 

Change in Name or Address of Domestic Agent (Foreign TPCs Only)

3 0.50 $0.00 $1.13 

Domestic Total in First Year Foreign Total in First Year Domestic Total in Non-Reapplication Year (Years 2 and 3) Foreign Total in Non-Reapplications Year (Years 2 and 3) Domestic Total in Reapplication Year (Year 4) Foreign Total in Reapplication Year (Year 4) Notes: 1. Based on best professional judgment and rule requirements. Under the proposed rule, TPCs are required to apply for re-accreditation every three years. As a r

accreditation costs are incurred every third year. 2. Based on Employer Costs for Employee Compensation wage and benefit data for private professional and business services industries (BLS 2011a). Clerical costs are 

"office and administrative support" occupational group; technical costs are estimated using data from the "professional and related" occupational group; and managerial from the "management, business, and financial" occupational group. 3. Based on the estimated burden associated with reporting "company information" (EPA 2011a). 4. Based on the estimated burden associated with answering substantiation questions when making plant site confidentiality claims (EPA 2011a). 5. Based on the estimated burden associated with "recordkeeping" (EPA 2011a). The rule requires that records be kept for 3 years that show the production volume, planeach reported substance. 6. Estimated as one-third of the burden associated with "recordkeeping" (EPA 2011a). Estimate based on best professional judgment.

Sources: (1) U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2011. Employer Costs for Employee Compensation: Supplementary Tables: Historical Data: December 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2011. Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act: the Final Ru

Update of the TSCA Section 8(b) TSCA Inventory Data Base, Production and Site Reports.
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** 

February 26, 2013 Page 31 of 46 

763 (iii) Total Burden and Costs 

764 

765 Exhibit 6-10 presents a summary of the total burden and costs for this information 

766 collection request by the type of firm. The total burden and cost are calculated by multiplying 

767 the burdens and costs per firm by the number of affected firms. 

768 

769 

770 

771 

Exhibit 6-10: Total Burden and Costs (2010$)

Firm Type Number 

of Firms

Per Firm Burden and Cost Total Burden and Cost 

Labor NonLabor 

Cost 

Labor NonLabor 

Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost 

Year 1 

Domestic Accrediting Body 8 29.6042 $1,685 237 $13,480 

Foreign Accrediting Body 17 29.6642 $1,688 504 $28,696 

Domestic TPC obtaining one additional accreditation 3 37.3250 $2,090 $25,000 112 $6,270 $75,000 

Domestic TPC with current accreditations 6 37.3250 $2,090 224 $12,540 

Foreign TPC obtaining one additional accreditation 9 37.3550 $2,092 $25,000 336 $18,828 $225,000 

Foreign TPC with current accreditations 18 37.3550 $2,092 672 $37,656 

Year 2

Domestic Accrediting Body 8 12.1442 $633 97 $5,064 

Foreign Accrediting Body 17 12.2042 $636 207 $10,812 

Domestic TPC obtaining one additional accreditation 3 19.1650 $983 $5,000 57 $2,949 $15,000 

Domestic TPC with current accreditations 6 19.1650 $983 115 $5,898 

Foreign TPC obtaining one additional accreditation 9 19.1950 $985 $5,000 173 $8,865 $45,000 

Foreign TPC with current accreditations 18 19.1950 $985 346 $17,730 

Year 3

Domestic Accrediting Body 8 19.6042 $1,070 157 $8,560 

Foreign Accrediting Body 17 19.6642 $1,073 334 $18,241 

Domestic TPC obtaining one additional accreditation 3 19.165 $983 $5,000 57 $2,949 $15,000 

Domestic TPC with current accreditations 6 19.165 $983 115 $5,898 

Foreign TPC obtaining one additional accreditation 9 19.195 $985 $5,000 173 $8,865 $45,000 

Foreign TPC with current accreditations 18 19.195 $985 346 $17,730 

Three Year Average

Domestic Accrediting Body 8 20.4509 $1,129.33 164 $9,035 

Foreign Accrediting Body 17 20.5109 $1,132.33 349 $19,250 

Domestic TPC obtaining one additional accreditation 3 25.2183 $1,352.00 $11,667 76 $4,056 $35,000 

Domestic TPC with current accreditations 6 25.2183 $1,352.00 151 $8,112 

Foreign TPC obtaining one additional accreditation 9 25.2483 $1,354.00 $11,667 227 $12,186 $105,000 

Foreign TPC with current accreditations 18 25.2483 $1,354.00 454 $24,372 

All Entities 61 23.2945 $1,262.46 $2,295.08 1421 $77,010 $140,000 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***

February 26, 2013 Page 32 of 46 

772 6(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost 

773 

774 EPA resources would be devoted to reviewing and analyzing data submissions, compiling 

775 and recording data, maintaining hard-copy files of submitted data, auditing and inspecting 

776 facilities, producing audit and inspection reports, responding to public inquiries, and providing 

777 regulatory interpretations. EPA anticipates that these activities will require the equivalent of one 

778 full-time employee (FTE) at Headquarters. Using the 2010 Washington/Baltimore area annual 

779 salary rate for a GS-13, Step 5 employee ($100,904), and multiplying by a loading factor of 1.6 

780 to reflect overhead and fringe benefits results in an estimated EPA cost of $161,446 per year. 

781 

782 Section A.2 in Appendix A discusses the incremental changes in EPA cost if EPA 

783 finalizes a mandatory electronic reporting requirement.

784 

785 6(d) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Costs/Master Table 

786 

787 Exhibit 6-10 presents the bottom line burden and costs. 

788 

789 

Exhibit 6-11: Total Burden and Costs

 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Average 

Number of Respondents and 

Responses 61 61 61 61

Total Burden Hours 2,085.64 995.38 1,181.88 1,421

Total Cost $417,470 $111,318 $122,243 $217,010 

790 

791 

792 EPA is considering an electronic reporting requirement for this information collection. 

793 Exhibit A-3 in Appendix A summarizes the incremental changes in bottom line burden and cost 

794 if EPA finalizes a mandatory electronic reporting requirement.

795 

796 6(e) Reasons for Changes in Burden

797 

798 Not applicable. These are new requirements so there was no previous ICR. 

799 

800 6(f) Burden Statement

801 

802 The annual public burden for this collection of information, which is approved under 

803 OMB Control No. xxxx-xxxx, is estimated to be 24.0823.29 hours per response (i.e., 1,469421

804 burden hours for an estimated 61 responses). According to the Paperwork Reduction Act, 

805 “burden” means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, 

806 maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. For this 

807 collection it includes such activities as annual familiarization with requirements, recordkeeping, 

808 notification, and reporting requirements. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is 

809 not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

810 control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA’s regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***

February 26, 2013 Page 33 of 46 

811 appearing in the Federal Register, are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and included on the related 

812 collection instrument or form, if applicable. 

813 

814 To comment on the Agency’s need for this information, the accuracy of the provided 

815 burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the 

816 use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under 

817 Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-XXXX-XXXX2011-0380. The docket is available for public 

818 viewing at the Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC). 

819 The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is located in the EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 

820 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from 

821 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number 

822 for the EPA/DC Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the 

823 Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket is (202) 566-0280. An electronic version of the public 

824 docket is available through the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at 

825 www.regulations.gov. Use FDMS to submit or view public comments, access the index listing 

826 of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are 

827 available electronically. Once in the system, select “search,” then key in the docket ID number 

828 identified above. Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory 

829 Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, 

830 Attention: Desk Office for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPPT831 XXXX-XXXX2011-0380 and OMB control number xxxx-xxxx2070-NEW in any 

832 correspondence. 

833 

834 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***

February 26, 2013 Page 34 of 46 

835 Appendix A – Incremental Impacts of Mandatory Electronic Reporting

836 

837 

838 EPA is considering requiring mandatory electronic reporting requirement for 

839 accreditation bodies and TPCs (both referred to here as respondents). If EPA adopts this 

840 requirement for the TPC rule, respondents would submit their notifications and reports to EPA 

841 using the Central Data Exchange (CDX). The changes in burden and costs for respondents and 

842 EPA are described below.

843 

844 A.1 Burden and Costs of Electronic Reporting for Accreditation Bodies and TPCs

845 

846 All respondents spend time in the first year to complete a subscriber agreement and 

847 register with CDX. Some respondents will spend time in subsequent years due to employee 

848 turnover or compromised electronic signatures. These burdens are offset by reductions in 

849 reporting and recordkeeping burden due to electronic reporting.

850 

851 CDX users are assigned to one of two roles in the CDX system, an Authorizing Official 

852 or a Support Registrant.

853 

854 Authorized Official (AO): The AO is the person legally responsible for the submission. The 

855 AO is typically a senior official for the respondent. The AO is the only user who can start a new 

856 form, or reopen a completed form to begin the amendment process, and is the only user who can 

857 electronically sign and submit a form. AOs can also assign Support Registrants to edit and 

858 complete forms on his or her behalf. AOs must submit a subscriber agreement to EPA, and 

859 register with CDX.

860 

861 Support Registrants: A Support Registrant is a person designated by an AO to submit 

862 supporting documents on his or her behalf. Support Registrants can edit a submission that is 

863 created by the AO. Support Registrants are only allowed to edit submissions that the AO has 

864 granted him or her access. Support Registrants do not have any access rights to create or submit 

865 a form. Once the AO creates a form, they will provide the Support Registrant with a passphrase 

866 to access the submission and complete all sections of the form. Once the Support Registrant has 

867 finished completing the form, the AO will access the submission, review it, and submit it. 

868 Support Registrants must register with CDX, but do not need to submit a subscriber agreement to 

869 EPA.

870 

871 This analysis uses a simplifying assumption that an average of five employees at each 

872 respondent will register with CDX: one manager (who will serve as AO) four technical staff 

873 members (who will serve as Support Registrants). 

874 

875 First Year Burden for Accreditation Bodies and TPCs 

876 

877 Respondents will incur electronic reporting costs in the first year to submit a subscriber 

878 agreement, register with CDX, and contact EPA’s CDX Help Desk.

879 

880 Subscriber Agreement. An AO must complete a subscriber agreement in order to establish 

881 their identity and their relation to the entity for which they will submit electronic documents, as 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***

February 26, 2013 Page 35 of 46 

882 well as to document a unique correlation with the device that will be used create their electronic 

883 signature. Users can comply with the subscriber agreement provisions in CDX either by 

884 submitting a paper subscriber agreement with a wet-ink signature, or by submitting an electronic 

885 signature agreement.

886 

887 • Paper subscriber agreement. Preparing, submitting, and filing a paper subscriber agreement 

888 is estimated to require an average of 20 minutes of time per registrant (EPA 2011), which is 

889 assumed to be managerial time. 

890 

891 • Electronic signature agreement. Preparing, submitting, and filing an electronic signature 

892 agreement is estimated to require an average of 15 minutes of time per registrant (EPA 

893 2011), which is assumed to be managerial time. 

894 

895 CDX Registration. CDX users will need to register with CDX, which involves selecting a user 

896 name and password, providing contact information, and identifying the facility and the 

897 registrant’s role at the facility. This is estimated to take an average of 10 minutes per user (EPA 

898 2011). This results in an estimate that each respondent will spend 10 minutes of managerial time 

899 and 40 minutes of technical time to register with CDX. 

900 

901 Help Desk. CDX users are assumed to spend an average of 4 minutes contacting EPA’s CDX 

902 Help Desk for technical support (EPA 2011), which results in an estimate of 4 minutes of 

903 managerial time and 16 minutes of technical time per respondent. 

904 

905 Problem Resolution. Three percent of respondents each year are assumed to spend an average 

906 of one hour of technical time working with EPA’s CDX Help Desk to resolve problems 

907 involving their registrations or agreements (EPA 2011).

908 

909 Subsequent Year Burden for Accreditation Bodies and TPCs

910 

911 In subsequent years, respondents may incur electronic reporting costs due to employee 

912 turnover and compromised electronic signatures.

913 

914 Employee Turnover. It is assumed that each year 10 percent of CDX users will be replaced by 

915 new employees, who will have to comply with the subscriber agreement and/or CDX registration 

916 requirements (EPA 2011). Thus, in subsequent years 10 percent of AOs will spend 15 to 20 

917 minutes of managerial time to complete a subscriber agreement. In addition, 10 percent of all 

918 users (both managerial and technical) will spend 10 minutes to register with CDX and 4 minutes 

919 contacting EPA’s CDX Help Desk.

920 

921 Report Compromised Signature. Each year 1 percent of respondents are assumed to report a 

922 compromised or surrendered electronic signature, which requires the submittal of a new 

923 subscriber agreement (EPA 2011). This will entail 15 to 20 minutes of managerial time to 

924 prepare, submit, and file a new agreement, and 4 minutes of managerial time to contact EPA’s 

925 CDX Help Desk.

926 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***

February 26, 2013 Page 36 of 46 

927 Savings for Accreditation Bodies and TPCs

928 

929 Electronic reporting is assumed to reduce the recordkeeping burden by 50 percent, and to 

930 eliminate the use of clerical time for reporting and recordkeeping (EPA 2009). For ABs, this is 

931 estimated to result in average savings of 3.75 hours of clerical time in the first year and 2.75 

932 hours in subsequent years, as well as 1 hour of technical time and 0.5 hours of managerial time in 

933 all years. For TPCs, this is estimated to result in average savings of 4.75 hours of clerical time, 

934 2.5 hours of technical time, and 1.25 hours of managerial time per year.

935 

936 Electronic reporting also results in savings for respondents due to the following:

937 

938 • The number of forms that need to be resubmitted because they are incomplete or invalid 

939 should be greatly reduced because forms cannot be submitted via CDX if any required fields 

940 are incomplete, or if the submission fails internal validation checks;

941 

942 • All of the respondent’s relevant staff will be able to access the CDX forms easily and directly 

943 input their information, so the system will facilitate easier internal review by the respondent 

944 prior to submission;

945 

946 • Filling out a form similar to one previously submitted will be faster with electronic reporting, 

947 as the respondent will already have an electronic copy of the earlier form to edit rather than 

948 having to fill out a new form; and

949 

950 • All routine correspondence with the Agency (including submission of supporting documents) 

951 will be via CDX, which saves time and delivery costs and reduces delays in EPA’s review.

952 

953 EPA has not estimated the value of these additional savings to respondents. 

954 

955 Changes in Burden and Costs to Accreditation Bodies and TPCs due to Electronic Reporting 

956 

957 As shown in Exhibit A-1, accreditation bodies would save 3.8 to 5.1 hours per year 

958 (equivalent to $99 to $177) depending on whether it is the initial year, reapplication year, or non959 reapplication year. TPCs would save 7.0 to 8.4 hours per year (equivalent to $259 to $337) 

960 depending on whether it is the initial year, a reapplication year, or non-reapplication year, as 

961 shown in Exhibit A-2. 

962 

963 As shown in Exhibit A-3, electronic reporting via CDX would reduce the total average 

964 burden of the rule to domestic and foreign respondents from 1,421 hours to 1,029 hours per year 

965 (a decrease of 392 hours). This decreases the cost of the rule from $217,010 to $203,334 per 

966 year, a savings of $14,666 per year. There are additional unquantified improvements in 

967 efficiency and higher data quality due to electronic reporting.

968 

969 

970 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***

February 26, 2013 

Exhibit A-1: Incremental Cost of Electronic Reporting Requirements: Burden and Cost Per Accrediting Body 

Activity 

Per Activity Burden Hours Number 

of 

Annual 

Activities

(d) 

 Total Burden 

(hours) 

Total Cost 

Clerical Technical Managerial Clerical ($25.65/hr) Technical ($56.31/hr) Manageri

($66.78/hr

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

1. CDX Electronic Reporting (First Year) 

Electronic Subscriber Agreements (domestic firms) - - 0.250 1.00 0.250 - - $16Paper Subscriber Agreements (foreign firms) - - 0.330 1.00 0.330 - - $22CDX Registration - 0.670 0.170 1.00 0.840 - $37.73 $1Help Desk - 0.270 0.070 1.00 0.340 - $15.20 $4Problem Resolution - 1.000 - 0.03 0.030 - $1.69 Subtotal (domestic) 1.460 Subtotal (foreign) 1.540 

2. CDX Electronic Reporting (Subsequent Years) 

Electronic Subscriber Agreements (domestic firms) - - 0.250 0.10 0.025 - - $Paper Subscriber Agreements (foreign firms) - - 0.330 0.10 0.033 - - $2CDX Registration - 0.670 0.170 0.10 0.084 - $3.77 $Help Desk - 0.270 0.070 0.10 0.034 - $1.52 $0Report Compromised Signature 0.400 0.01 0.004 - - $0Subtotal (domestic) 0.147 Subtotal (foreign) 0.155 

3. Recognition Agreement (1.000) - - 1.000 (1.000) $(25.65) - - 4. Recordkeeping 

Accreditation Applications (0.750) (0.500) (0.250) 1.000 (1.500) ($19.24) ($28.16) ($16Checklists and Other Records Documenting Compliance with the Requirements for Systems Audits and On-site Assessment of Third Party Certifiers 

(0.750) (0.500) (0.250) 1.000 (1.500) ($19.24) ($28.16) ($16

Subtotal (3.000) 

5. Annual Report to EPA 

Number of Third Party Certifier Applications Received (0.250) - - 1.000 (0.250) $(6.41) - - Number of Third Party Certifier Applications Approved and Denied (0.250) - - 1.000 (0.250) $(6.41) - - 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***

February 26, 2013 

Exhibit A-1: Incremental Cost of Electronic Reporting Requirements: Burden and Cost Per Accrediting Body 

Activity 

Per Activity Burden Hours Number 

of 

Annual 

Activities

(d) 

 Total Burden 

(hours) 

Total Cost 

Clerical Technical Managerial Clerical ($25.65/hr) Technical ($56.31/hr) Manageri

($66.78/hr

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

The Names and Contact Information of All Accredited Third Party Certifiers 

(0.250) - - 1.000 (0.250) $(6.41) - - 

Number and Locations of Systems Audits and On-site Assessments (0.250) - - 1.000 (0.250) $(6.41) - - Results of Accredited Third Party Certifier Laboratory Proficiency Testing or Inter-laboratory Comparisons 

(0.250) - - 1.000 (0.250) $(6.41) - - 

Subtotal (1.250) 

Domestic Total in First Year (3.790) Foreign Total in First Year (3.710) Domestic Total in Non-Reapplication Year (4.103) Foreign Total in Non-Reapplications Year (4.095) Domestic Total in Reapplication Year (5.103) Foreign Total in Reapplications Year (5.095) 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***

February 26, 2013 

Exhibit A-1: Incremental Cost of Electronic Reporting Requirements: Burden and Cost Per Accrediting Body 

Activity 

Per Activity Burden Hours Number 

of 

Annual 

Activities

(d) 

 Total Burden 

(hours) 

Total Cost 

Clerical Technical Managerial Clerical ($25.65/hr) Technical ($56.31/hr) Manageri

($66.78/hr

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

Notes: 1. CDX Electronic Reporting (first year): 

 Electronic signature agreement. Preparing, submitting, and filing an electronic signature agreement is estimated to require an average of 15 minutes of 

which is assumed to be managerial time (EPA 2011). 

 Paper subscriber agreement. Preparing, submitting, and filing a paper subscriber agreement is estimated to require an average of 20 minutes of time pe

assumed to be managerial time (EPA 2011). 

 CDX Registration. CDX users will need to register with CDX, which involves selecting a user name and password, providing contact information, and 

facility and the registrant’s role at the facility. This is estimated to take an average of 10 minutes per user (EPA 2011). This results in an estimate tha

spend 10 minutes of managerial time and 40 minutes of technical time to register with CDX. 

 Help Desk. CDX users are assumed to spend an average of 4 minutes contacting EPA’s CDX Help Desk for technical support (EPA 2011), which resu

minutes of managerial time and 16 minutes of technical time per respondent. 

 Problem Resolution. Three percent of respondents each year are assumed to spend an average of one hour of technical time working with EPA’s CDX 

problems involving their registrations or agreements (EPA 2011). 

2. CDX Electronic Reporting (subsequent years): 

 Employee Turnover. It is assumed that each year 10 percent of CDX users will be replaced by new employees, who will have to comply with the subs

and/or CDX registration requirements (EPA 2011). Thus, in subsequent years 10 percent of CDX users will spend 15 to 20 minutes of managerial tim

subscriber agreement. In addition, 10 percent of all CDX users (both managerial and technical) will spend 10 minutes to register with CDX and 4 min

CDX Help Desk. 

 Report Compromised Signature. Each year 1 percent of respondents are assumed to report a compromised or surrendered electronic signature, which r

of a new subscriber agreement (EPA 2011). This will entail 15 to 20 minutes (20 assumed here) of managerial time to prepare, submit, and file a new 

minutes of time to contact EPA’s CDX Help Desk. 

3. Recognition Agreement 

 Electronic reporting is assumed to eliminate the use of clerical time for the recognition agreement. 

4. Recordkeeping 

 Electronic reporting is assumed to reduce the recordkeeping burden by 50 percent (EPA 2009). 

5. Annual Report to EPA 

 Electronic reporting is assumed to reduce the recordkeeping burden by 50 percent (EPA 2009). 

Sources: (1) U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2011. Employer Costs for Employee Compensation: Supplementary Tables: Historical Data: December 

(2) EPA 2011

971 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***

February 26, 2013 

Exhibit A-2: Incremental Cost of Electronic Reporting Requirements: Burden and Cost Per Third Party Certifier 

Activity 

Per Activity Burden Hours Number 

of Annual 

Activities

(d) 

 Total Burden 

(hours) 

Total Cost 

Clerical Technical Manageria l Clerical ($25.65/hr) Technical ($56.31/hr) Manageri

($66.78/hr

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

1. CDX Electronic Reporting (First Year) 

Electronic Subscriber Agreements (domestic firms) - - 0.250 1.00 0.250 - - $16.Paper Subscriber Agreements (foreign firms) - - 0.330 1.00 0.330 - - $22.CDX Registration - 0.670 0.170 1.00 0.840 - $37.73 $11.Help Desk - 0.270 0.070 1.00 0.340 - $15.20 $4.Problem Resolution - 1.000 - 0.03 0.030 - $1.69 Subtotal (domestic) 1.460 Subtotal (foreign) 1.540 

2. CDX Electronic Reporting (Subsequent Years) 

Electronic Subscriber Agreements (domestic firms) - - 0.250 0.10 0.025 $0.00 $0.00 $1.Paper Subscriber Agreements (foreign firms) - - 0.330 0.10 0.033 $0.00 $0.00 $2.CDX Registration - 0.670 0.170 0.10 0.084 $0.00 $3.77 $1.Help Desk - 0.270 0.070 0.10 0.034 $0.00 $1.52 $0.Report Compromised Signature - - 0.400 0.01 0.004 $0.00 $0.00 $0.Subtotal (domestic) 0.147 Subtotal (foreign) 0.155 

3. Manufacturer Notification and Recordkeeping 

List of Manufacturers and their Product Types (including Resins Used) Certified by TPC 

(0.750) (0.500) (0.250) 1.00 (1.500) ($19.24) ($28.16) ($16.7

Results of Inspections, Audits, and Emission Tests Conducted for Each Manufacturer and Product Type 

(0.750) (0.500) (0.250) 1.00 (1.500) ($19.24) ($28.16) ($16.7

List of the TPC's Laboratories, Test Methods (including Test Conditions and Conditioning Time), and Test Results 

(0.750) (0.500) (0.250) 1.00 (1.500) ($19.24) ($28.16) ($16.7

Methods and Results for Establishing Test Method Correlations and Equivalence 

(0.750) (0.500) (0.250) 1.00 (1.500) ($19.24) ($28.16) ($16.7
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***

February 26, 2013 

Exhibit A-2: Incremental Cost of Electronic Reporting Requirements: Burden and Cost Per Third Party Certifier 

Activity 

Per Activity Burden Hours Number 

of Annual 

Activities

(d) 

 Total Burden 

(hours) 

Total Cost 

Clerical Technical Manageria l Clerical ($25.65/hr) Technical ($56.31/hr) Manageri

($66.78/hr

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

List of Manufacturers and Products Approved for Reduced Testing 

(0.750) (0.500) (0.250) 1.00 (1.500) ($19.24) ($28.16) ($16.7

Subtotal (7.500) 

4. Annual Report and Notifications of Changes 

List of Manufacturers and their Products Certified by the TPC during the Previous Year (including Resins Used, and the Average and Range of Formaldehyde Emissions by Manufacturer, Resin, and Product Type) 

(0.250) - - 1.00 (0.250) $(6.41) - - 

List of Noncomplying Products or Events by Manufacturer (0.250) - - 1.00 (0.250) $(6.41) - - List of Laboratories and Test Methods Used by the TPC (0.250) - - 1.00 (0.250) $(6.41) - - Results of Inter-Laboratory Comparison or Proficiency Testing for the Laboratories Used by the TPC 

(0.250) - - 1.00 (0.250) $(6.41) - - 

Subtotal (1.000) 

Domestic Total in First Year (7.040) Foreign Total in First Year (6.960) Domestic Total in NonReapplication Year (8.353) Foreign Total in NonReapplications Year (8.345) Domestic Total in Reapplication Year (8.353) Foreign Total in Reapplications Year (8.345) 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***

February 26, 2013 

Exhibit A-2: Incremental Cost of Electronic Reporting Requirements: Burden and Cost Per Third Party Certifier 

Activity 

Per Activity Burden Hours Number 

of Annual 

Activities

(d) 

 Total Burden 

(hours) 

Total Cost 

Clerical Technical Manageria l Clerical ($25.65/hr) Technical ($56.31/hr) Manageri

($66.78/hr

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

Notes: 

1. CDX Electronic Reporting (first year): 

 Electronic signature agreement. Preparing, submitting, and filing an electronic signature agreement is estimated to require an average of 15 minutes of 

which is assumed to be managerial time (EPA 2011). 

 Paper subscriber agreement. Preparing, submitting, and filing a paper subscriber agreement is estimated to require an average of 20 minutes of time pe

assumed to be managerial time (EPA 2011). 

 CDX Registration. CDX users will need to register with CDX, which involves selecting a user name and password, providing contact information, and 

facility and the registrant’s role at the facility. This is estimated to take an average of 10 minutes per registrant (EPA 2011). This results in an estimat

respondent will spend 10 minutes of managerial time and 40 minutes of technical time to register with CDX. 

 Help Desk. CDX users are assumed to spend an average of 4 minutes contacting EPA’s CDX Help Desk for technical support (EPA 2011), which resu

4 minutes of managerial time and 16 minutes of technical time per respondent. 

 Problem Resolution. Three percent of respondents each year are assumed to spend an average of one hour of technical time working with EPA’s CDX 

resolve problems involving their registrations or agreements (EPA 2011). 

2. CDX Electronic Reporting (subsequent years): 

 Employee Turnover. It is assumed that each year 10 percent of CDX users will be replaced by new employees, who will have to comply with the subs

and/or CDX registration requirements (EPA 2011). Thus, in subsequent years 10 percent of CDX users will spend 15 to 20 minutes of managerial tim

subscriber agreement. In addition, 10 percent of all registrants will spend 10 minutes to register with CDX and 4 minutes contacting EPA’s CDX Help subscriber agreement. Preparing, submitting, and filing a paper subscriber agreement is estimated to require an average of 20 minutes of time per regis

This results in an estimate of 20 minutes of managerial time per respondent submitting a paper subscriber agreement. 

 Report Compromised Signature. Each year 1 percent of respondents are assumed to report a compromised or surrendered electronic signature, which r

of a new subscriber agreement (EPA 2011). This will entail 15 to 20 minutes (20 assumed here) of managerial time to prepare, submit, and file a new minutes of time to contact EPA’s CDX Help Desk. 

 Problem Resolution. Three percent of respondents each year are assumed to spend an average of one hour of technical time working with EPA’s CDX 

resolve problems involving their registrations or agreements (EPA 2011). 

3. Recordkeeping 

 Electronic reporting is assumed to reduce the recordkeeping burden by 50 percent (EPA 2009). 

4. Annual Report to Recordkeeping Bodies 

 Electronic reporting is assumed to reduce the recordkeeping burden by 50 percent (EPA 2009). 

Sources: (1) U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2011. Employer Costs for Employee Compensation: Supplementary Tables: Historical Data: December 

2011, (2) EPA 2011Sources: (1) U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2011. Employer Costs for Employee Compensation: Supplementary Tables: Historic2006 - March 2011, 

972 973 974 975 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***

February 26, 2013 

976 

Exhibit A-3: Total Bottom Line Burden and Costs (Foreign and Domestic) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Average 

Costs without Electronic Reporting Requirements 

Number of Respondents and Responses 61 61 61 61Total Burden Hours 2,085.64 995.38 1,181.88 1,421Total Cost $417,470 $111,318 $122,243 $217,010 

Incremental Burden and Costs for Electronic Reporting Requirements 

Number of Respondents and Responses 61 61 61 61Total Burden Hours (344.67) (402.931) (427.93) (392)Total Cost ($11,535) ($15,907) ($16,557) ($14,666)

Total Burden and Costs, Including Incremental Burden and Costs for Electronic Reporting Requirements 

Number of Respondents and Responses 61 61 61 61Total Burden Hours 1,740.97 592.44 753.94 1,029Total Cost $405,935 $95,411 $105,686 $202,344 

977 978 979 980 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***

February 26, 2013 Page 44 of 46 

981 A.2 Costs of Electronic Reporting for EPA 

982 

983 A portion of the cost that EPA incurs to operate the CDX system can be attributed to the 

984 TSCA Title VI program. These costs are described below.

985 

986 CDX O&M – The cost of CDX operations and maintenance for TSCA Title VI electronic 

987 reporting is estimated to be approximately $3,000 per year.

988 

989 CDX Application Support O&M – The cost of application support operations and maintenance 

990 (for Help Desk support, resolving technical problems, software maintenance and upgrades, etc.) 

991 for TSCA Title VI electronic reporting is estimated to be approximately $25,000 per year.

992 

993 CDX Software Licensing Costs – EPA’s cost of software licensing attributable to TSCA Title 

994 VI is estimated to be approximately $6,000 per year.

995 

996 CDX CBI LAN O&M – The cost attributable of operations and maintenance of EPA’s 

997 confidential business administration (CBI) local area network (LAN) attributable to TSCA Title 

998 VI is estimated to be approximately $15,000 per year.

999 

1000 EPA staff – Managing the CDX system related to the TSCA Title VI program is estimated to 

1001 require approximately 0.1 FTE per year of EPA staff. Based on the 2010 Washington/Baltimore 

1002 area annual salary rate for a GS-13, Step 5 employee ($100,904) and a loading factor of 1.6 for 

1003 overhead and fringe benefits, the cost of the EPA staff needed to manage the CDX program 

1004 attributable to the TSCA Title VI is estimated to be $16,145 per year. 

1005 

1006 Overall, EPA’s cost for operating the CDX system that can be attributed to the TSCA Title VI 

1007 program is estimated at $65,145 per year.

1008 

1009 The use of electronic reporting and CDX also creates savings for EPA. It is expected to 

1010 improve efficiency and lead to higher quality data being available more quickly to EPA. EPA 

1011 typically keys or scans in the data from paper submissions, which can result in errors. 

1012 Consequently, EPA must perform quality assurance checks on extracted and scanned 

1013 information. When data is submitted electronically, the time required for EPA staff to review 

1014 and process the information is reduced because manual data entry or processing is eliminated. 

1015 Electronic reporting also improves data quality because it facilitates data correction and 

1016 validation by highlighting fields with omitted or inconsistent data prior to submission. EPA has 

1017 not estimated the value of these efficiencies and improvements in data quality.

1018 

1019 

1020 

1021 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***

February 26, 2013 Page 45 of 46 

1022 Appendix B – Mock-Ups for Potential TSCA Title VI Electronic Reporting Application 

1023 

1024 B.1 Summary of the Electronic Reporting Application Under Consideration

1025 

1026 The current proposed regulation does not provide a required format for reports and notices. 

1027 However, EPA is considering an electronic reporting requirement. If the EPA finalizes a 

1028 mandatory electronic reporting requirement all reports and notices covered by this action would 

1029 be required to be submitted via that internet through the EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX). 

1030 

1031 The EPA is requesting comment on a mandatory electronic reporting requirement for 

1032 Accrediting Bodies (ABs) and Third-Party Certifiers (TPCs). In order to give regulated entities 

1033 more information on which to base their comments, the EPA prepared mock-ups of a potential 

1034 electronic reporting application. The mock-ups are in draft form and should be considered for 

1035 illustrative purposes only. They contain two sections, an AB user interface which would be 

1036 visible to participating laboratory and product ABs and the TPC user interface which would be 

1037 visible to TSCA Title VI accredited TPCs.

1038 

1039 These mock-ups are not complete in that they do not address all aspects of the EPA's proposed 

1040 implementation of TSCA Title VI. To the extent that the EPA’s proposals change, conforming 

1041 changes would be made to the data elements and other aspects of the electronic reporting 

1042 application, should the EPA choose to implement a mandatory electronic reporting requirement. 

1043 Should the EPA develop this electronic reporting application, the EPA would allow regulated

1044 entities to participate in testing of the application and the EPA would provide training as 

1045 necessary. 

1046 B. Electronic Reporting and Confidential Business Information

1047 

1048 The EPA believes that most of the information that would be collected under TSCA Title VI is 

1049 not confidential in nature. Nonetheless, any electronic reporting application would be designed to 

1050 support TSCA Confidential Business Information (CBI) needs by providing a secure 

1051 environment that meets Federal standards. Users would be able to claim CBI for appropriate data 

1052 fields. 

1053 

1054 The draft mock-ups below contain CBI check boxes that illustrate how reporting entities would

1055 submit CBI claims for particular data elements. In the proposal, the EPA is requesting comment 

1056 on whether the data elements in the ABs’ and TPCs’ annual reports, and the required 

1057 notifications should be reported into a publicly viewable database. EPA requests comment on 

1058 whether such information might contain CBI, and if so, which data elements may be subject to 

1059 CBI claims. EPA believes that data elements related to the type or formulation of a resin may be 

1060 the subject of legitimate TSCA CBI claims. Notwithstanding the current placement of the CBI 

1061 check boxes, the EPA would modify their placement to conform with the final rule, should the 

1062 EPA finalize a mandatory electronic reporting requirement. 

1063 

1064 

1065 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***

February 26, 2013 Page 46 of 46 

TSCA Title VI 

eReporting Application

Mock-Up Screen Shots

1066