*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

February 26, 2013 Page 1 of 46 

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



## Revised to address Interagency Comm ents received under EO 12866 Review. 2

3 

### Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB Review under 4 

### the Paperwork Reduction Act 5

6

7



### 1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION 8

9 

### l(a) Title of the Information Collection 10

11 

### TITLE: Formaldehyde Emissions From Composite Wood Products, Third12 

### party Certification Framework, Recordkeeping and Reporting – 13 

### Proposed Rule (RIN 2070-AJ44) 14

15


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

17 

### 1(b) Short Characterization 18

19 

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

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

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

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

### to promulgate implementing regulations relate d to a third-party certification system for 24 

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

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

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

### entitled “Third-Party Certific ation Framework for the Formaldehyde Standards for Composite 28



### Wood Products Rule.” Additional information coll ection requests, such as those related to 29 

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

### later in a separate ICR. 31

32 

### Some examples of proposed reporting and th ird-party reporting re quirements include: 33

34



###  Product accreditation bodi es that wish to participate in the program must submit an 35 

### application to become recognized by EPA. 36



###  Laboratory accreditation bodies that wish to pa rticipate in the program must submit an 37 

### application to become recognized by EPA. 38



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

### for accreditation to a recognized product acc reditation body and a recognized laboratory 40 

### accreditation body. 41



###  Recognized product accreditation bodies must submit an annu al report to EPA on their 42



### accreditation activities. 43



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



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

February 26, 2013 Page 2 of 46 

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

### accreditation body or bodies (product accredi tation body and laboratory accreditation 47 

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

49 

### Examples of proposed recordkeeping requirements would include: 50



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

### compliance with the requirements for systems audits and on-site assessments of third52 

### party certifiers for as long as the third

- party certifier is accredited or for 5 years, 53 

### whichever is longer. 3 years. 54



###  A TSCA Title VI accredited thir d-party certifier mu st retain a list of panel producers and 55 

### their respective product type s, including resins used, that it has certified. 56



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

### inspections, audits, and emission tests conduc ted for and linked to each panel producer 58 

### and product type. 59



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

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



###  A TSCA Title VI accredited th ird-party certifier must reta in records on the methods and 62 

### results for establishing test met hod correlations and equivalence. 63

64



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


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

### Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Preven tion (OCSPP), as appropr iate. Some of the 67 

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

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



### and 40 CFR Part 2. 70

71



### 2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION 72

73 

### 2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection 74

75 

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

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

### including provisions relating to “t hird-party testing a nd certification” in “a manner that ensures 78 

### compliance with the emission standards.” To me et its statutory obliga tions, EPA must obtain 79



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

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

### are carrying out their responsibilities dilig ently, impartially, and uniformly. The proposed 82 

### regulations aim to ensure consistent applicati on of the requirements of TSCA Title VI by using 83 

### voluntary consensus standards as requirements, a nd by leveraging the expertise of international 84



### accreditation bodies. 85

86 

### High quality third-party certi fiers are essential in ensuri ng that domestic and foreign 87 

### composite wood panel producers supplying products to the U.S. have ade quate quality assurance 88 

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

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

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

February 26, 2013 Page 3 of 46 

### all program participants remain qualified and ar e held accountable for thei r activities, and would 92 

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

### composite wood products. 94

95 

### 2(b) Use of the Data 96

97



### EPA would use the information co llected to evaluate the creden tials of entities that wish 98 

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

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



### VI accreditation and certification services. 101

102

103 

### 3. NON-DUPLICATION, CONSULTATION S, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA 104

105 

### 3(a) Non-Duplication 106

107 

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

### compliance with the statutorily established emission standards fo r formaldehyde from composite 109 

### wood products to the EPA Administrator. The info rmation collection requirements addressed in 110 

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

### respondents to report or maintain information on their accreditation or ce rtification activities 112 

### related to formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products. 113

114 

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

### certification systems. However, because the th ird-party certification framework is necessarily 116 

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

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


### evaluate their credentials, mon itor their compliance with the program, determine the number of 119 

### panel producers receiving certifi cation services, and evaluate a panel producer’s compliance 120 

### history. 121

122 

### 3(b) Public Notice Required Prio r to ICR Submission to OMB 123

124 

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

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

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

128 

### 3(c) Consultations 129

130 

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

### Agency has consulted with the regulated commun ity and the public. These consultations have 132 

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

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

### which operates a similar third-party certifi cation program for formaldehyde standards for 135 

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

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

February 26, 2013 Page 4 of 46 

### Since EPA began its regulatory investigati on into formaldehyde emissions from pressed 138 

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



### EPA has met on numerous occasions with the co mposite wood panel and related industries. 140 

### These meetings have been in the form of pres entations at trade shows and industry association 141 

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

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

### American Home Furnishings Alliance (AHF A), the Business and Institutional Furniture 144 

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

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

147 

### EPA convened a Small Business Advocacy Revi ew Panel and hosted two panel outreach 148 

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


### outreach materials to the SERs, and after each m eeting the SERs were asked to provide written 150 

### feedback on how EPA might reduce regulatory bu rden on small entities. The Panel received 151 

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



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

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

### Panel on EPA’s Planned Proposed Rule Impl ementing the Formaldehyde Standards for 155 

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

157 

### EPA intends to carry out further consultati ons and outreach with potentially regulated 158 

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

### Supporting Statement as needed. 160

161 

### 3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection 162

163 

### EPA has judged that the reporting and record keeping requirements of the ICR are the 164 

### minimum amount necessary to fulfill its statutor y mandate to promulgate regulations on a third165 

### party certification program that ensure complia nce with the emission st andards. Although the 166 

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

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

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

### in this ICR would allow EPA carry out its st atutorily delegated roles in program design, 170 

### enforcement, and oversight. EPA believes that requi ring applications, annual reports, and certain 171



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

### recognized or accredited as progr am participants would allow EP A to effectively monitor the 173 

### program. Annual reports and notificat ions that are triggered by sp ecific occurrences will allow 174 

### EPA to ensure compliance with the emission standa rds, as required by the statute. EPA believes 175 

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

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



### distributed in commerce. 178

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

February 26, 2013 Page 5 of 46 

### 3(e) General Guidelines 180

181



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

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

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

185 

### Under the information collection requiremen ts, participating accreditation bodies must 186 

### retain applications for accreditation from third

- party certifi er applicants for 5 years after the date 187



### the third

- party certifier’s accreditation term inates. Because this initial application is unlikely to 188 

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



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

### the accreditation body’s ongoing acc reditation of the third

- party certifier. 191

192 

### Under the information collection requiremen ts checklists and other records documenting 193 

### compliance wit h the requirements for systems audits and on

- site assessments of third

- party 194



### certifiers must be retained for as long as the third

- party certifier is accredited or for 5 years, 195 

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

### the accrediting bodies should be requ ired to maintain these records for the statute of limitations 197 

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

### body verifies the third

- party certifier’s on going compliance with the ac creditation requirements 199



### for TSCA Title VI accreditation. 200

201 

### A participating third

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

### for five years: 1) A list of pane l producers and thei r respective product types, including resins 203 

### used, that it has certified; 2) Results of inspec tions, audits, and emissi on tests conducted for and 204 

### linked to each panel producers a nd product type; 3) A list of labor atories it uses, test methods, 205 

### including test conditions and con ditioning time and test results; 4) Methods and results for 206 

### establishing test method correla tions and equivalence; and 5) A list of panel producers and 207 

### products approved for reduced testing. EP A believes it is necessary for a third

- party certifier to 208 

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

### order to establish that the pane l producers are complying with regulatory requirements and have 210



### earned that third

- party certifier’ s certification. Because accre dited third

- party certifiers would be 211 

### continually responsible for auditing, testing, a nd certification of com posite wood products, EPA 212 

### believes that these records are both necessary to document a third

- party certifier’s efforts to carry 213 

### out its responsibil ities under the program, and useful to the third

- party certifiers while they 214 

### evaluate products for certification. 215

216 

### There are a number of provisi ons that would require reportin g within a certain number of 217 

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

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



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

### the calendar (i.e., they are not requ ired quarterly or at more fre quent intervals). Therefore, the 221 

### Agency does not believe that these provisions ne ed special justificati on. Moreover, EPA believes 222 

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

### change in circumstances could re sult in uncertified products bei ng distributed in commerce, in 224



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

February 26, 2013 Page 6 of 46 226 

### 3(f) Confidentiality 227

228



### Accreditation bodies or third

- party certifiers may claim a ll or part of any informa tion given to 229



### EPA as confidential busin ess information (CBI). EPA handles claims of confidentiality pursuant 230 

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

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

### USC Section 525). 233

234 

### Most of the information requested in the repo rting requirements of th ese collections is not 235



### of a confidential nature. 236

237 

### 3(g) Sensitive Questions 238

239 

### EPA asks no questions of a sensitive nature. 240

241

242 

### 4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED 243

244 

### 4(a) Respondents/NAICS Codes 245

246 

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

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

249 

### Third-party certifiers are indepe ndent entities that review pr oducts, processes or services 250 

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



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

### regulations and would require c onformity with specified voluntary consensus standards. 253

254 

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

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

### are themselves evaluated by their own internatio nal oversight bodies to ensure their compliance 257 

### with voluntary consensus standards. 258

259 

### The following NAICS codes are relevant: 260

261



###  Engineering services (NAICS code 541330). 262



###  Testing laboratories (NAICS code 541380). 263



###  Administrative management and general mana gement consulting services (NAICS code 264 

### 541611). 265



###  All other professional, sc ientific, and technical services (NAICS code 541990). 266



###  All other support servic es (NAICS code 561990). 267



###  Business associations (NAICS code 813910). 268



###  Professional organizatio ns (NAICS code 813920). 269

270 

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

February 26, 2013 Page 7 of 46 272 

### (i) Data Items 273

274 

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

### participate in the program either as an accreditin g body or a third-party cert ifier. Entities that 276 

### wish to participate in the program and offer serv ices related to TSCA Title VI accreditation or 277 

### certification must submit an application. Accr editation bodies would apply to be recognized 278 

### through a memorandum of understanding recognition agreement with EPA. Third-party certifiers 279 

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

281 

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

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

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

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

### period. 286

287 

### The proposed recordkeeping requirements and reporting requirements include: 288

289 

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

### accomplish the following reporting tasks: 291

292



###  Product accreditation bodi es that wish to participate in the program must submit an 293 

### application to become recognized by EPA via a memorandum of 294 

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

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

### its International Accreditation Forum Inc., Multilateral Recognition Arrangement 297 

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

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

### qualifications related to its experience in performing product accred itation of conformity 300 

### assessment bodies or third-party certifiers. Qual ifications required fo r applicants include 301 

### ongoing conformance with International Organization for Standardization and 302



### International Electrotechnical Commissi on (ISO/IEC) 17011 (including associated 303 

### recordkeeping and reporting requirements) and demonstrating basic competence to 304 

### perform accreditation activities for product ce rtification according to ISO/IEC Guide 65. 305

306



###  Laboratory accreditation bodies that wish to pa rticipate in the program must submit an 307 

### application to become recognized by EPA via a memorandum of 308 

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

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

### International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation Mutual Recognition Arrangement 311 

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

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

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

### laboratory accreditation and in spection certification of conformity assessment bodies or 315 

### third-party certifiers. Qualif ications required for applican ts include ongoing conformance 316 

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

February 26, 2013 Page 8 of 46 

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

### laboratory accreditation according to ISO/IEC 17025. 319

320



###  Recognized product accreditation bo dies would be required to submit an annual report to 321



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

### of systems audits and on-sit e assessments performed, and th e results of accredited third323 

### party certifier laboratory proficiency testing or inte r-laboratory comparisons. 324

325



###  Recognized laboratory accredita tion bodies would be required to submit an annual report 326



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

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

### accredited third-party certifie r laboratory proficiency testing or inter-laboratory 329 

### comparisons. 330

331



###  Recognized product accreditation bodies would be required to forward copies of third332 

### party certifiers’ applications to EP A at the address identified in the memorandum of 333



### u nderstanding recognition agreement within 90 days of the date of receipt. 334

335



###  Recognized product accreditation bo dies would be required to submit notice if it loses its 336 

### status as a signatory to the Internatio nal Accreditation Forum Inc. Multilateral 337 

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

### business days of the date that the body receives notice of the lo ss of its signatory status. 339

340



###  Recognized laboratory accredita tion bodies would be required to submit notice if it loses 341 

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

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

### business days of the date that the body receives notice of the lo ss of its signatory status. 344

345



###  Recognized accreditation bodies would be requir ed to submit notice when it accredits a 346 

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



### accredited. 348

349



###  Recognized accreditation bodies would be requir ed to submit notice that an accredited 350 

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



### hours of the time the accreditati on body identifies the failure. 352

353



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

### revokes a third-party certifie r’s accreditation w ithin 24 hours of the time that the 355 

### suspension or revocation takes effect. 356

357



###  A recognized accreditation body would be requir ed to submit notice of a decision to 358 

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

### affect the third-party certifie r accreditation program within 30 days of the decision to 360 

### make the changes. 361

362



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

February 26, 2013 Page 9 of 46 

### records documenting compliance with the re quirements for systems audits and on-site 364 

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



### be retained for as long as the third

- party certifier is accredited or for 5 3 years , whichever 366 

### is longer

. 367

368



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

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

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


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

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

### conditioning time and test results; and 4) Th e methods and results for establishing test 374 

### method correlations and equivalence. These records must be maintained for 5 3 years. 375

376



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

### forward copies of the application for re duced testing to EPA within 30 days. 378

379 

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



### other than EPA as follows: 381

382



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

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

385



###  Recognized laboratory accred itation bodies would be requi red, within 15 days of a 386 

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

### forward copies of a third-party certifier’s laboratory applicat ion and accreditation 388 

### documentation to the applicable EPA-r ecognized product accreditation body (if the 389 

### laboratory accreditation body is not also recognized as a pr oduct accreditation body) at 390 

### the address identified by the third-party certifier. 391

392



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

### for accreditation to a recognized laboratory accreditation body and th en to a recognized 394 

### product accreditation body. Th e product accreditation body a nd laboratory accreditation 395 

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

### concurrently. The application to the product a ccreditation would be requ ired to include: 397 

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

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

### States; 3) The type of com posite wood products that the a pplicant intends to certify if 400 

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

### experience or ability in product certificat ion and complying with ISO/IEC Guide 65 402 

### (including associated record keeping requirements); experi ence in the composite wood 403 

### product industry with the specifi c product(s) the app licant intends to cer tify, and ability to 404 

### inspect and properly train a nd supervise inspectors pursuan t to ISO/IEC 17020 (including 405 

### associated record keeping requirements). Th e application to the laboratory accreditation 406 

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

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

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

February 26, 2013 Page 10 of 46 

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

### performing or verifying formaldehyde tes ting on composite wood products, experience 411 

### complying with ISO/IEC 17025 (including associ ated record keeping requirements), and 412 

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



### correlation between test methods. 414

415



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

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

418



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

### accreditation body or bodies (product accredi tation body and laboratory accreditation 420 

### body, if not the same entity) and to EPA on th eir TSCA Title VI accr editation activities. 421 

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

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

### range of formaldehyde emissions by panel produ cer, resin, and product ty pe; 2) A list of 424 

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

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

### proficiency testing for the labor atories used by the certifier. 427

428



###  TSCA Title VI accredited third-party certifi ers would be required to inform their 429 

### accreditation body or bodies (product accredi tation body and laboratory accreditation 430 

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

### procedures, or laboratorie s used by the certifier. 432

433



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


### lose its accreditation, it would be required to notify all panel produ cers that receive its 435 

### TSCA Title VI accreditation services within 3 business days. 436

437



###  Should a recognized accreditati on body be removed or withdraw from the program it 438 

### must notify all third-party certifiers that receive its accreditati on services within 5 439 

### business days. 440

441



###  Third-party certifiers that receive applicati ons from panel producer s for reduced testing 442 

### must act on those applications within 90 days. 443

444 

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

446



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

### compliance with the requirements for systems audits and on-site assessments of third448 

### party certifiers for as long as the third

- party certifier is accredited or for 5 years, 449 

### whichever is longer 3 years

. 450

451



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

### it has certified and their respective produc t types, including resins used, for 5 3 years. 453

454



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

February 26, 2013 Page 11 of 46 

### inspections, audits, and emission tests conduc ted for and linked to each panel producer 456 

### and product type for 5 3 years. 457

458



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

### uses, test methods, including test conditions and conditioning time and test results for 5 3 460



### years. 461

462



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

### results for establishing test met hod correlations and equivalence for 5 3 years. 464

465 

### (ii) Respondent Activities 466

467 

### Typical respondents include accreditation bodies and third-party certif iers that wish to 468



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

### the rule and determine which prov isions would be applicable to their operations; plan and modify 470 

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

### process, compile, and review information for accu racy and appropriateness; and record, disclose, 472 

### and/or report the required information. 473

474

475



### 5. THE INFORMATION CO LLECTION — AGENCY AC TIVITIES, COLLECTION 476 

### METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 477

478 

### 5(a) Agency Activities 479

480



### EPA resources would be devoted to reviewing and analyzi ng data submissions, compiling 481 

### and recording data, maintaining hard

- copy files of submitted data, auditing and inspecting 482 

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

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

### on the internet, including a list of accredited third-pa rty certifiers and re cognized accreditation 485



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

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

488



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

### participate in the program. 490

491



###  Develop and enter into memoranda of understanding recognition agreements with 492 

### qualified accreditation bodies. 493

494



###  Supply a point of contact for each memorandum of understanding recognition 495



### agreement for accreditation bodies to consu lt with on implementation of the 496 

### memorandum of understanding recognition agreement

. 497

498



###  Maintain a current and pub lically available list of recognized accreditation bodies 499 

### and accredited third-party certifiers. 500

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

February 26, 2013 Page 12 of 46 

###  Evaluate the annual reports from recogni zed accreditation bodies and TSCA Title 502 

### VI accredited third-party certifiers. 503

504



###  Evaluate all notices received from accreditat ion bodies and third-party certifiers to 505 

### determine whether further ag ency action is warranted. 506

507 

### 5(b) Collection Methodology and Management 508

509 

### While EPA would prepare an application fo rm for accreditation bodies that wish to be 510 

### recognized by EPA, the majority of the other info rmation requirements would not require the use 511 

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

513 

### Annual reports, and notifications trig gered by a specific occurrences would be submitted 514 

### electronically. Records are maintained at EP A by the staff overseeing the TSCA Title VI 515



### program. 516

517 

### The current proposal does not provide a re quired format for reports and notices. 518


### However, EPA is considering an electronic reporting re quirement. If EPA finalizes a mandatory 519


### electronic reporting requir ement all reports and notices covere d by this action would be required 520


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



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


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


### practicable, federal organizations use electron ic forms, electronic filings, and electronic 524


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


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


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



### be satisfied with an electronic submission th at meets certain conditions once the Agency 528


### publishes a notice that electronic document s ubmission is available for that requirement. 529



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

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

### Agreement and the Verification of Company Aut horizing Official form. Registration enables 532 

### CDX to perform two important functions: auth entication of identity and verification of 533 

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

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


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

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

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

539 

### Most of the information requested in the repo rting requirements of th ese collections is not 540



### of a confidential nature. Nonetheless, the any electronic repo rting application would be designed 541 

### to support TSCA Confidential Business Informa tion needs by providing a secure environment 542



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

### electronic reporting appl ication would use Transportation La yer Security (TLS) with 256-bit 544 

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

February 26, 2013 Page 13 of 46 

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

### LAN, and all encryption modules would be Fede ral Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 547 

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

### password combination) to access the applicati on, and they would be required to know the 549 

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



### to the EPA. 551

552 

### While EPA is not currently proposing an el ectronic reporting requi rement, EPA believes 553 

### the adoption of electronic communications ma y reduce the reporting burden on industry by 554 

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

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

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

### provided by the submitter. With electronic reporti ng, this could be done automatically during the 558 

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

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

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

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

563 

### The Agency would also benefit from receiv ing electronic submissions. Data systems 564 

### would be populated electronicall y, as oppose to manual data en try, reducing the potential for 565 

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

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

568

569 

### 5(c) Small Entity Flexibility 570

571 

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

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

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

### by all participating accreditati on bodies and third-party certif iers because the third-party 575 

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



### of TSCA Title VI. 577

578 

### 5(d) Collection Schedule 579

580 

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

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

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 certifie rs’ 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 r esults; 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



### 6. ESTIMATING BURDEN AND CO ST OF THE COLLECTION 586

587



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

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

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

591 

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

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

### electronic reporting requir ement, Appendix A describes the incremental changes in burden and 594 

### cost if EPA finalizes a mandatory electronic repor ting requirement. 595

596 

### 6(a) Estimating Respondent Burden 597

598 

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

### following information collection components of the third party certif ication framework: 600

601



###  Accreditation Bodies: 602



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



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



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

February 26, 2013 Page 17 of 46 

### o Prepare a MOU Recognition Agreement : If the applicati on is approved, enter 606



### into an MOU a recognition agreement with EPA; 607



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

### loss of signatory status; TPC application; TPC accr editation; TPC compliance 609 

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

### affect accreditation program; and provide checklists and other records 611 

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



### o TPC Notification: Provide TPCs with notificati ons if they withdraw or are 613 

### removed from the program; 614



### o Recordkeeping: Maintain records documenting TPC accreditation applications, 615



### and checklists and other records documen ting compliance with systems audits and 616 

### on-site assessments. Applica tions must be retained for a minimum of five 3 years 617



### from the date that the TPC’s accreditation terminates they were submitted ; and 618



### o 

### Reporting: Provide an annual report to EPA wi th the number of TPC applications 619


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


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


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

### inter-laboratory comparisons. 623

624



###  Third Party Certifiers: 625



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



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



### o Obtain Accreditation: initially obtain accredita tion (i.e., to demonstrate 628 

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

### 96 and experience correlati ng between test methods); 630



### o Manufacturer Notifications and Recordkeeping: the annual cost of 631



### manufacturer notification and of maintaining records; and 632



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

### other notifications to the accrediting body. 634

635 

### (i) Number of Respondents 636

637



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

### signatories to the International Accreditation Foru m, Inc. (IAF) or the International Laboratory 639 

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



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

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



### TPCs. Based on the small business determinatio ns for domestic accrediting bodies, it is 643 

### estimated that 9 of the foreign accrediting bodies are small entities

. 644

645


### As shown in Exhibit 6-1, CARB has approved a total of 36 TPCs, nine 9 of which are 646 

### located in the U.S. (although most U.S. TPCs provide services intern ationally). Of the nine 9 647


### U.S. firms, two 2 are classified as “small” based on the U.S. Small Business Administration’s 648


### size standards, two 2 are classified as large, and the small business status could not be determined 649



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

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

### TPCs in the TSCA Title VI program, the same as in the CARB program. 652*** 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-A pproved 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 

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

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 

### (ii) Burden Per Respondent 658

659 

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

### reporting burdens for accreditati on bodies and third party certifi ers, respectively. Exhibit 6-5 661 

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



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



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

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

### detail there. The recordkeep ing and reporting requirements do not differ between TPCs that 666



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

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

### consistently. 669

670 

### Exhibit A-1 and Exhibit A-2 in Appendix A pr esent the incremental changes in burden if 671 

### EPA finalizes a mandatory elec tronic reporting requirement. 672*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***February 26, 2013Page 19 of 46673Exhibit 6-3: Recordkeeping and Reporting Burden for Accreditation Bodies, by ActivityActivity1Per Activity Burden HoursNumber ofAnnualActivities(d)Total Burden(hours)(e) =(d)*{(a)+(b)+(c)}Clerical(a)Technical(b)Managerial(c)1. Rule Familiarization 0.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 10.00002. Application SubmissionCompany Information (Name, Address,Telephone Number, and Email Addressof Primary Contact)20.00 0.04 0.021.000.0600Documentation of IAF MLA, ILAC MRA, or Equivalent Signatory Status20.00 0.04 0.02 1.00 0.0600Description of Any Other QualificationsRelated to Experience in PerformingAccreditation of Conformity Assessment Bodies or Third Party Certifiers30.00 0.83 0.511.001.34003. Recognition agreement41.00 1.00 4.001.006.00004. EPA NotificationLoss of Status as a Signatory to theIAF MLA, ILAC MRA, or EquivalentOrganization50.00 0.08 0.04 0.05 0.0060Third Party Certifier Applications50.00 0.08 0.04 3.00 0.3600Third Party Certifier Accreditation50.00 0.08 0.04 3.00 0.3600Third Party Certifier Compliance Failure50.00 0.08 0.04 0.33 0.0396Third Party Certifier Accreditation Suspension or Revocation (Product ABs) /Accredited Laboratory Compliance Failure (Laboratory ABs)50.00 0.08 0.04 0.33 0.0396Change to Organizational Policy or Management Structure that Could AdverselyAffect Accreditation Program50.00 0.08 0.04 0.20 0.0240Checklists and Other Records Documenting Compliance with the Requirementsfor Systems Audits and On-site Assessment of Third Party Certifiers50.00 0.08 0.04 1.00 0.1200Change in Name or Address of Domestic Agent (Foreign Entities Only)50.00 0.08 0.04 0.50 0.06005. Third Party Certifier NotificationUnique Tracking Number20.00 0.04 0.02 3.00 0.1800Withdraw from or be Removed from Program20.00 0.04 0.02 0.25 0.01506. RecordkeepingAccreditation Applications60.75 1.50 0.75 1.00 3.0000Checklists and Other Records Documenting Compliance with the Requirementsfor Systems Audits and On-site Assessment of Third Party Certifiers60.75 1.50 0.75 1.00 3.00007. Annual Report to EPANumber of Third Party Certifier Applications Received70.25 0.50 0.25 1.00 1.0000Number of Third Party CertifierApplications Approved and Denied70.25 0.50 0.25 1.00 1.0000The Names and Contact Information ofAll Accredited Third Party Certifiers70.25 0.50 0.25 1.00 1.0000Number and Locations of Systems Audits and On-site Assessments70.25 0.50 0.25 1.00 1.0000Results of Accredited Third Party Certifier Laboratory Proficiency Testing orInter-laboratory Comparisons70.25 0.50 0.25 1.00 1.0000*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***February 26, 2013Page 20 of 46Exhibit 6-3: Recordkeeping and Reporting Burden for Accreditation Bodies, by ActivityActivity1Per Activity Burden HoursNumber ofAnnualActivities(d)Total Burden(hours)(e) =(d)*{(a)+(b)+(c)}Clerical(a)Technical(b)Managerial(c)Domestic Total in First Year 29.6042Foreign Total in First Year 29.6642Domestic Total in Non-Reapplication Year (Year 2) 12.1442Foreign Total in Non-Reapplications Year (Year 2) 12.2042Domestic Total in ReapplicationYear (Year 3) 19.6042Foreign Total in Reapplication Year (Year 3) 19.6642Notes: 1. Under the proposed rule, accreditation bodies are required to submit an application to renew their recognition agreement every 3 years. As a result, thisanalysis assumes that accreditationbodies 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 withreporting "company information" (EPA 2011).3. Based on the estimated burden associatedwith answering substantiation questionswhen making plant siteconfidentiality claims (EPA 2011).4. Based on conversationswith accreditation bodies.5. Based on the estimated burden associated with reporting "company information" (EPA 2011). Values have been doubled based onbest professional judgment.6. Based on the estimated burden associated with "recordkeeping" (EPA 2011). The rule requires that records be kept for 3 yearsthat show the production volume, plant site, and site-limited status ofeach 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 Final Rule Addendum toPartial Update of the TSCA Section 8(b) TSCAInventory Data Base, Production and Site Reports.674675*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***February 26, 2013Page 21 of 46Exhibit 6-4: Recordkeeping and Reporting Burden for Third Party Certifiers, by ActivityActivity1Per Activity Burden HoursNumber ofAnnualActivities(d)Total Burden(hours)(e) =(d)*{(a)+(b)+(c)}Clerical(a)Technical(b)Managerial(c)1. Rule Familiarization 0.00 5.00 5.00 1.00 10.002. Product Accreditation Body Application SubmissionCompany Information (Name, Address,Telephone Number, and Email Addressof Primary Contact) and Type of Composite Wood Products Applicant Intendsto Certify20.00 0.04 0.02 1.00 0.06Description of TPC's Experience or Ability in Product Certification andComplying with ISO/IEC Guide 6530.00 0.83 0.51 1.00 1.34Description of TPC's Experience inthe Composite Wood Product Industry withthe Product(s) Intended to be Certified30.00 0.83 0.51 1.00 1.34Description of TPC's Ability to Inspect and Properly Train and SuperviseInspectors Pursuant to ISO/IEC 1702030.00 0.83 0.51 1.00 1.343. Laboratory Accreditation Body Application SubmissionCompany Information (Name, Address,Telephone Number, and Email Addressof Primary Contact; if foreign, name and address of an agent for service locatedin the U.S.)20.00 0.04 0.02 1.00 0.06Description of TPC's Experience inPerforming or Verifying FormaldehydeTesting on Composite Wood Products30.00 0.83 0.51 1.00 1.34Description of TPC's Experience Operating or Using Laboratories that Complywith ISO/IEC 1702530.00 0.83 0.51 1.00 1.34Description of TPC's Experience with Test Method ASTM E-1333-96 (2002)and Experience Evaluating Correlation between Test Methods30.00 0.83 0.51 1.00 1.344. Manufacturer NotificationThird Party Certifier Number20.00 0.04 0.02 1.00 0.06Withdraw from Program or Lose Accreditation20.00 0.04 0.02 0.25 0.0155. RecordkeepingList of Manufacturers and their Product Types (including Resins Used) Certifiedby TPC40.75 1.50 0.75 1.00 3.00Results of Inspections, Audits, and Emission Tests Conducted for EachManufacturer and Product Type40.75 1.50 0.75 1.00 3.00List of the TPC's Laboratories, TestMethods (including Test Conditions andConditioning Time), and Test Results40.75 1.50 0.75 1.00 3.00Methods and Results for Establishing Test Method Correlations andEquivalence40.75 1.50 0.75 1.00 3.00List of Manufacturers and Products Approved for Reduced Testing40.75 1.50 0.75 1.00 3.006. Annual Report to Accreditation BodiesList of Manufacturers and their Products Certified by the TPC during thePrevious Year (including Resins Used, and the Average and Range of0.25 0.50 0.25 1.00 1.00*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***February 26, 2013Page 22 of 46Exhibit 6-4: Recordkeeping and Reporting Burden for Third Party Certifiers, by ActivityActivity1Per Activity Burden HoursNumber ofAnnualActivities(d)Total Burden(hours)(e) =(d)*{(a)+(b)+(c)}Clerical(a)Technical(b)Managerial(c)Formaldehyde Emissions by Manufacturer, Resin, and Product Type)5List of Noncomplying Productsor Events by Manufacturer50.25 0.50 0.25 1.00 1.00List of Laboratories and Test Methods Used by the TPC50.25 0.50 0.25 1.00 1.00Results of Inter-Laboratory Comparison or Proficiency Testing for theLaboratories Used by the TPC40.25 0.50 0.25 1.00 1.007. Accreditation Board NotificationPersonnel Qualification Changes20.00 0.04 0.02 0.50 0.03Procedure Changes20.00 0.04 0.02 0.50 0.03Laboratory Changes20.00 0.04 0.02 0.50 0.038. EPA NotificationChange in Name or Address of Domestic Agent (Foreign TPCs Only)20.00 0.04 0.02 0.500.03Domestic Total in First Year37.325Foreign Total in First Year37.355Domestic Total in Non-Reapplication Year (Years 2 and 3)19.165Foreign Total in Non-Reapplications Year (Years 2 and 3)19.195Domestic Total in Reapplication Year (Year 4)27.325Foreign Total in Reapplication Year (Year 4)27.355Notes: 1.Under the proposed rule, TPCs are required to apply for re-accreditation every three years. Asa result, application and accreditation costs are incurred every third year.2. Based on the estimated burden associated withreporting "company information" (EPA 2011).3. Based on the estimated burden associatedwith answering substantiation questionswhen making plant siteconfidentiality claims (EPA 2011).4. Based on the estimated burden associated with "recordkeeping" (EPA 2011). The rule requires that records be kept for 3 yearsthat show the production volume,plant site, and site-limitedstatus 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: the Final RuleAddendum 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 

### 6(b) Estimating Respondent Costs 678

679 

### Respondent costs are estimated by combining bur den estimates from the previous section 680 

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

682 

### (i) Wage Rates 683

684 

### The fully loaded unit labor cost for managerial, professional/t echnical, and clerical labor 685 

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

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

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

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

### category and presents the results of the analysis. 690 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 

### Labor categories used in the an alysis correspond to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 692 

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

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

### Classification (SIC) System, and the Standard Oc cupational Classification (SOC) system instead 695 

### of the Occupational Classification System (O CS). Exhibit 6-6 summarizes the crosswalk 696 

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

### managerial, professional/technica l, and clerical labor categor ies used in this analysis. 698

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, busine ss, and financial

Professional/Technical Professi onal specialty and technical Professional and related

Clerical Administrative support, including

clerical Office and administrative support

700 

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

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



### December 2006 – March 2011. 1 703

704 

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

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

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

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

### $13.52. 2 

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

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

711 

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

### This approach is used for consistency with O ffice of Pollution Preven tion and Toxics (OPPT) 713 

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

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

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

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

### example, the December 2010 fully loaded wa ge for professional/technical labor is $36. 97 57 × 718 

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

720

1 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2011. Employer Costs for Employee Comp ensation: 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 altern ative. In a phone conver sation (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/t echnical” 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, th e “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 BL S 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 

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



### shown in Exhibit 6-7. 722

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 

### (ii) Costs Per Respondent 725

726 

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



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

### Exhibit 6-3 and Exhibit 6-4 by the loaded wage ra tes presented in Exhibi t 6-7. In addition to 729


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

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

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



### Based on the telephone interviews, the cost of obtaini ng a single accreditation initially is about 733 

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

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

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



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

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

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


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

### associated with obtaining and ma intaining additional accreditations. 741

742 

### In addition to obtaining the initial accredi tation, the TPCs will need to renew their 743 

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

### $15,000 per year associated with main taining certification, such as pa ying audit fees to their AB 745 

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

### the laboratories report ed costs may cover more than the specific formaldehyde testing, and 747 

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

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


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

February 26, 2013 Page 26 of 46 

### Because the audits include tests other than form aldehyde, the analysis uses the low end of the 751 

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



### discussions with the six TPCs th e analysis assumes that two-thir ds of the CARB-certified TPCs 753 

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


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


### an additional accreditation, while two-thirds of TPCs will not incu r any additional costs 756 

### associated with obtaining and main taining additional accreditations. 757

758 

### Exhibit A-1 and Exhibit A-2 in Appendix A pr esent the incremental changes in cost if 759 

### EPA finalizes a mandatory elec tronic reporting requirement. 760*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***February 26, 2013Page 27 of 46Exhibit 6-8: Recordkeeping and Reporting Labor Costs for Accreditation Bodies, by Activity (2010$)ActivityEstimated AnnualFrequency1Clerical Cost2TechnicalCost2Managerial Cost2Total Cost1. Rule Familiarization 1 $0.00 $281.55 $333.90 $6152. Application SubmissionCompany Information (Name, Address, Telephone Number, and EmailAddress of Primary Contact)31 $0.00 $2.25 $1.34 $3.59Documentation of IAF MLA, ILACMRA, or Equivalent SignatoryStatus31 $0.00 $2.25 $1.34 $3.59Description of Any Other Qualifications Related to Experience inPerforming Accreditation of Conformity Assessment Bodies or ThirdParty Certifiers41 $0.00 $46.74 $34.06 $80.80Application Submission Subtotal $883. Recognition agreement51 $25.65 $56.31 $267.12 $3494. EPA NotificationLoss of Status as a Signatory to the IAF MLA, ILAC MRA, orEquivalent Organization60.05 $0.00 $0.23 $0.13 $0.36Third Party Certifier Application63 $0.00 $13.51 $8.01 $21.53Third Party Certifier Accreditation63 $0.00 $13.51 $8.01 $21.53Third Party Certifier Compliance Failure60.33 $0.00 $1.49 $0.88 $2.37Third Party Certifier Accreditation Suspension or Revocation (ProductABs) / Accredited Laboratory Compliance Failure (Laboratory ABs)60.33 $0.00 $1.49 $0.88 $2.37Change to Organizational Policy orManagement Structure that CouldAdversely Affect Accreditation Program60.2 $0.00 $0.90 $0.53 $1.44Checklists and Other Records Documenting Compliance with theRequirements for Systems Audits andOn-site Assessment of Third PartyCertifiers61 $0.00 $4.50 $2.67 $7.18Change in Name or Address of Domestic Agent (Foreign Entities Only)60.5 $0.00 $2.25 $1.34 $3.59EPA Notification Subtotal (Domestic) $57EPA Notification Subtotal (Foreign) $605. Third Party Certifier NotificationUnique Tracking Number33 $0.00 $6.76 $4.01 $10.76Withdraw from or be Removed from Program30.25 $0.00 $0.56 $0.33 $0.90TPC Notification Subtotal $126. RecordkeepingAccreditation Applications71 $19.24 $84.47 $50.09 $153.79Checklists and Other Records Documenting Compliance with theRequirements for Systems Audits andOn-site Assessment of Third PartyCertifiers71 $19.24 $84.47 $50.09 $153.79Recordkeeping Subtotal $3087. Annual Report to EPANumber of Third Party Certifier Applications Received81 $6.41 $28.16 $16.70 $51.26*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***February 26, 2013Page 28 of 46Exhibit 6-8: Recordkeeping and Reporting Labor Costs for Accreditation Bodies, by Activity (2010$)ActivityEstimated AnnualFrequency1Clerical Cost2TechnicalCost2Managerial Cost2Total CostNumber of Third Party CertifierApplications Approved and Denied81 $6.41 $28.16 $16.70 $51.26The Names and Contact Information of All Accredited Third PartyCertifiers81 $6.41 $28.16 $16.70 $51.26Number and Locations of Systems Audits and On-site Assessments81 $6.41 $28.16 $16.70 $51.26Results of Accredited Third Party Certifier Laboratory ProficiencyTesting or Inter-laboratory Comparisons81 $6.41 $28.16 $16.70 $51.26Annual Report Subtotal $256Domestic Total in First Year$1,685Foreign Total in First Year$1,688Domestic Total in Non-Reapplication Year (Year 2) $633Foreign Total in Non-Reapplications Year (Year 2) $636Domestic Total in Reapplication Year (Year 3) $1,070Foreign Total in Reapplication Year (Year 3) $1,073Notes: 1. Based on best professional judgment and rule requirements. Under the proposed rule, accreditation bodies are requiredto submit an application to renew their recognition agreement every 3years. As a result, this analysis assumes that accreditation bodies incur application submission and recognition agreement preparation costs in the first year and subsequently every 3 years thereafter.2. Based on Employer Costs for Employee Compensation wage and benefit data for private professional and business services industries (BLS 2011a). Clerical costs are estimated using data from the"office and administrative support" occupational group; technical costs are estimated using datafrom the "professional and related" occupational group; and managerial costs are estimated using datafrom the "management, business, and financial" occupational group.3. Based on the estimated burden associated withreporting "company information" (EPA 2011a).4. Based on the estimated burden associatedwith answering substantiation questionswhen making plant siteconfidentiality claims (EPA 2011a).5. Based on conversationswith accreditation bodies.6. Based on the estimated burden associated with reporting "company information" (EPA 2011a). Values have been doubled based onbest 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, plant site, and site-limited status ofeach reported substance.8. Estimated as one-third of the burden associated with "recordkeeping" (EPA 2011a). Estimatebased on best professional judgment.Sources: (1) U.S. Bureau of LaborStatistics. 2011. Employer Costs for Employee Compensation: Supplementary Tables: HistoricalData: December 2006 - March 2011, and (2)U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2011.Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act: the Final Rule Addendum to PartialUpdate of the TSCA Section 8(b) TSCA Inventory Data Base, Production and Site Reports.761762*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***February 26, 2013Page 29 of 46Exhibit 6-9: Recordkeeping and Reporting Labor Costs for Third Party Certifiers, by Activity (2010$)ActivityEstimated AnnualFrequency1Clerical Cost2Technical Cost2Managerial Cost2Total Cost1. Rule Familiarization1.00$0.00 $281.55 $333.90 $6152. Product Accreditation Body Application SubmissionCompany Information (Name, Address, Telephone Number, andEmail Address of Primary Contact;if foreign, name and addressof an agent for service located in the U.S.) and Type ofComposite Wood Products Applicant Intends to Certify31.00$0.00 $2.25 $1.34 $3.59Description of TPC's Experience or Ability in ProductCertification and Complying with ISO/IEC Guide 6541.00$0.00 $46.74 $34.06 $80.80Description of TPC's Experience in theComposite WoodProduct Industry with the Product(s) Intended to be Certified41.00$0.00 $46.74 $34.06 $80.80Description of TPC's Ability to Inspect and Properly Train andSupervise Inspectors Pursuant to ISO/IEC 1702041.00$0.00 $46.74 $34.06 $80.80Product Accreditation Subtotal$2463. Laboratory Accreditation Body Application SubmissionCompany Information (Name, Address, Telephone Number, andEmail Address of Primary Contact;if foreign, name and addressof an agent for service located in the U.S.)31.00$0.00 $2.25 $1.34 $3.59Description of TPC's Experiencein Performing or VerifyingFormaldehyde Testing on Composite Wood Products41.00$0.00 $46.74 $34.06 $80.80Description of TPC's Experience Operating or UsingLaboratories that Comply with ISO/IEC 1702541.00$0.00 $46.74 $34.06 $80.80Description of TPC's Experiencewith Test Method ASTM E1333-96 (2002) and Experience Evaluating Correlation betweenTest Methods41.00$0.00 $46.74 $34.06 $80.80Laboratory Accreditation Subtotal$2464. Manufacturer NotificationThird Party Certifier Number31.00$0.00 $2.25 $1.34 $3.59Withdraw from Program or Lose Accreditation30.25$0.00 $0.56 $0.33 $0.90Manufacturer Notification Subtotal$45. RecordkeepingList of Manufacturers and theirProduct Types (including ResinsUsed) Certified by TPC51.00$19.24 $84.47 $50.09 $153.79Results of Inspections, Audits, and Emission Tests Conductedfor Each Manufacturer and Product Type51.00$19.24 $84.47 $50.09 $153.79List of the TPC's Laboratories,Test Methods (including TestConditions and Conditioning Time), and Test Results51.00$19.24 $84.47 $50.09 $153.79Methods and Results for Establishing Test Method Correlationsand Equivalence51.00$19.24 $84.47 $50.09 $153.79List of Manufacturers and Products Approved for Reduced1.00$19.24 $84.47 $50.09 $153.79*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***February 26, 2013Page 30 of 46Exhibit 6-9: Recordkeeping and Reporting Labor Costs for Third Party Certifiers, by Activity (2010$)ActivityEstimated AnnualFrequency1Clerical Cost2Technical Cost2Managerial Cost2Total CostTesting5Recordkeeping Subtotal$7696. Annual Report to Accreditation BodiesList of Manufacturers and their Products Certified by the TPCduring the Previous Year (including Resins Used, and theAverage and Range of Formaldehyde Emissions byManufacturer, Resin, and Product Type)61.00$6.41 $28.16 $16.70 $51.26List of Noncomplying Productsor Events by Manufacturer61.00$6.41 $28.16 $16.70 $51.26List of Laboratories and Test Methods Used by the TPC61.00$6.41 $28.16 $16.70 $51.26Results of Inter-Laboratory Comparison or Proficiency Testingfor the Laboratories Used by the TPC61.00$6.41 $28.16 $16.70 $51.26Annual Report to AB Subtotal$2057. Accreditation Board NotificationPersonnel Qualification Changes30.50$0.00 $1.13 $0.67 $1.79Procedure Changes30.50$0.00 $1.13 $0.67 $1.79Laboratory Changes30.50$0.00 $1.13 $0.67 $1.79Accreditation Board Notification Subtotal$58. EPA NotificationChange in Name or Address of Domestic Agent (ForeignTPCs Only)30.50$0.00 $1.13 $0.67 $2Domestic Total in First Year$2,090Foreign Total in First Year$2,092Domestic Total in Non-Reapplication Year (Years 2 and 3)$983Foreign Total in Non-Reapplications Year (Years 2 and 3)$985Domestic Total in Reapplication Year (Year 4)$1,475Foreign Total in Reapplication Year (Year 4)$1,477Notes: 1. Based on best professional judgment and rule requirements. Under the proposedrule, TPCs are required to apply for re-accreditation every three years. As a result, application andaccreditation 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 estimated using data from the"office and administrative support" occupational group; technical costs are estimated using datafrom the "professional and related" occupational group; and managerial costs are estimated using datafrom the "management, business, and financial" occupational group.3. Based on the estimated burden associated withreporting "company information" (EPA 2011a).4. Based on the estimated burden associatedwith answering substantiation questionswhen making plant siteconfidentiality 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, plant site, and site-limited status ofeach reported substance.6. Estimated as one-third of the burden associated with "recordkeeping" (EPA 2011a). Estimatebased on best professional judgment.Sources: (1) U.S. Bureau of LaborStatistics. 2011. Employer Costs for Employee Compensation: Supplementary Tables: HistoricalData: December 2006 - March 2011, and (2)U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2011.Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act: the Final Rule Addendum to PartialUpdate 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 

### (iii) Total Burden and Costs 763

764 

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

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

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

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 

### 6(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost 772

773



### EPA resources would be devot ed to reviewing and analyzi ng data submissions, compiling 774


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


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


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


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

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


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

781


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


### finalizes a mandatory electr onic reporting requirement. 783

784 

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

786 

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

788

789

Exhibit 6-11: Total Burden and Costs

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Average

N umber 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 

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

### Exhibit A-3 in Appendix A summar izes the incremental changes in bottom line burden and cost 793 

### if EPA finalizes a mandatory el ectronic reporting requirement. 794

795 

### 6(e) Reasons for Changes in Burden 796

797 

### Not applicable. These are new requir ements so there was no previous ICR. 798

799 

### 6(f) Burden Statement 800

801 

### The annual public burden for this collect ion of information, which is approved under 802


### OMB Control No. xxxx-xxxx, is estimated to be 24.08 23.29 hours per response (i.e., 1, 469 421 803 

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


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

### maintain, retain, or disclose or provide inform ation to or for a Fede ral agency. For this 806



### collection it includes such activities as annual fa miliarization with requ irements, recordkeeping, 807 

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

### not required to respond to, a co llection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB 809



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

February 26, 2013 Page 33 of 46 

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



### collection instrument or form, if applicable. 812

813 

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

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

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

### Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPPT- XXXX

- XXXX 2011-0380 . The docket is available for public 817 

### viewing at the Pollution Preventi on and Toxics Docket in the EP A Docket Center (EPA/DC). 818 

### The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is locate d in the EPA West Bu ilding, Room 3334, 1301 819 

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

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

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

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

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

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

### of the contents of the public docket, and to acc ess those documents in the public docket that are 826 

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

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

### Affairs, Office of Management and Budge t, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, 829



### Attention: Desk Office for EPA. Please in clude the EPA Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPPT830



### XXXX

- XXXX 2011-0380 and OMB control number xxxx

- xxxx 2070-NEW in any 831 

### correspondence. 832

833

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

February 26, 2013 Page 34 of 46 

### Appendix A – Incremental Impacts of Mandatory Electronic Reporting 835

836

837 

### EPA is considering requiring mandatory electronic reporting requirement for 838 

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

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

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



### EPA are described below. 842

843 

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

845 

### All respondents spend time in the first y ear to complete a subscriber agreement and 846 

### register with CDX. Some respondents will sp end time in subsequent years due to employee 847 

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

### reporting and recordkeeping burde n due to electronic reporting. 849

850 

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

### or a Support Registrant. 852

853 

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

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

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

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

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

### register with CDX. 859

860 

### Support Registrants : A Support Registrant is a pe rson designated by an AO to submit 861 

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

### created by the AO. Support Registrants are onl y allowed to edit submissions that the AO has 863 

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

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

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

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

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



### EPA. 869

870 

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

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

### members (who will serve as Support Registrants). 873

874



### First Year Burden for Accr editation Bodies and TPCs 875

876 

### Respondents will incur electronic reporting cost s in the first year to submit a subscriber 877 

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

879 

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

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

February 26, 2013 Page 35 of 46 

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

### signature. Users can comply with the subscriber agreemen t provisions in CDX either by 883 

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

### signature agreement. 885

886



### • Paper subscriber agreement. Preparing, submitting, and fili ng a paper subscriber agreement 887 

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

### assumed to be managerial time. 889

890



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

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

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

894 

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

### name and password, providing contact inform ation, and identifying the facility and the 896 

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

### 2011). This results in an estimat e that each respondent will spe nd 10 minutes of managerial time 898



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

900 

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

### Help Desk for technical support (EPA 2011), whic h results in an estima te of 4 minutes of 902 

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

904



### Problem Resolution

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

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

### involving their registrations or agreements (EPA 2011). 907

908 

### Subsequent Year Burden for Accreditation Bodies and TPCs 909

910 

### In subsequent years, respondents may incu r electronic reporting costs due to employee 911 

### turnover and compromised electronic signatures. 912

913 

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

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

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

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

### users (both managerial and techni cal) will spend 10 minutes to re gister with CDX and 4 minutes 918 

### contacting EPA’s CDX Help Desk. 919

920 

### Report Compromised Signature

. Each year 1 percent of re spondents are assumed to report a 921 

### compromised or surrendered electronic signat ure, which requires the submittal of a new 922 

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

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

### CDX Help Desk. 925

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

February 26, 2013 Page 36 of 46 

### Savings for Accreditation Bodies and TPCs 927

928 

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

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

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

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

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


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

935 

### Electronic reporting also re sults in savings for respondents due to the following: 936

937



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

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

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

941



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

### input their information, so the system will fac ilitate easier internal review by the respondent 943 

### prior to submission; 944

945



### • Filling out a form similar to one previously s ubmitted will be faster w ith electronic reporting, 946 

### as the respondent will already ha ve an electronic copy of the earl ier form to edit rather than 947 

### having to fill out a new form; and 948

949



### • All routine correspondence with the Agency (including submissi on of supporting documents) 950


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

952



### EPA has not estimated the value of th ese additional savings to respondents. 953

954 

### Changes in Burden and Costs to Accreditati on Bodies and TPCs due to Electronic Reporting 955

956 

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

### (equivalent to $99 to $177) depending on whether it is the initial ye ar, reapplication year, or non958 

### reapplication year. TPCs would save 7.0 to 8.4 hours per year (equ ivalent to $259 to $337) 959 

### depending on whether it is the in itial year, a reapplic ation year, or non-rea pplication year, as 960



### shown in Exhibit A-2. 961

962 

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

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

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

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

### efficiency and higher data qual ity due to electronic reporting. 967

968

969

970*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***February 26, 2013Page 37 of 46Exhibit A-1: Incremental Cost of Electronic Reporting Requirements: Burden and Cost Per Accrediting BodyActivityPer Activity Burden HoursNumberofAnnualActivities(d)Total Burden(hours)Total CostClerical Technical ManagerialClerical($25.65/hr)Technical($56.31/hr)Managerial($66.78/hr)Total(a) (b) (c)(e) =(d)*{(a)+(b)+(c)}(f) (g) (h) (i)1. CDX Electronic Reporting (First Year)Electronic Subscriber Agreements(domestic firms)- - 0.250 1.00 0.250 - - $16.70 $16.70Paper Subscriber Agreements(foreign firms)- - 0.330 1.00 0.330 - - $22.04 $22.04CDX Registration - 0.670 0.170 1.00 0.840 - $37.73 $11.35 $49.08Help Desk - 0.270 0.0701.00 0.340 - $15.20 $4.67 $19.88Problem Resolution - 1.000 - 0.03 0.030 - $1.69 - $1.69Subtotal (domestic)1.460 $87.00Subtotal (foreign)1.540 $93.002. CDX Electronic Reporting (Subsequent Years)Electronic Subscriber Agreements(domestic firms)- - 0.250 0.10 0.025 - - $1.67 $1.67Paper Subscriber Agreements(foreign firms)- - 0.330 0.10 0.033 - - $2.20 $2.20CDX Registration - 0.670 0.170 0.10 0.084 - $3.77 $1.14 $4.91Help Desk - 0.270 0.0700.10 0.034 - $1.52 $0.47 $1.99Report Compromised Signature0.400 0.01 0.004 - - $0.27 $0.27Subtotal (domestic)0.147 $9.00Subtotal (foreign)0.155 $9.003. Recognition Agreement (1.000)- - 1.000 (1.000) $(25.65) - - ($26.00)4. RecordkeepingAccreditation Applications (0.750) (0.500)(0.250) 1.000 (1.500) ($19.24) ($28.16) ($16.70) ($64.09)Checklists and Other RecordsDocumenting Compliance with theRequirements for Systems Auditsand On-site Assessment of ThirdParty Certifiers(0.750) (0.500) (0.250) 1.000 (1.500) ($19.24) ($28.16) ($16.70) ($64.09)Subtotal(3.000) ($128.00)5. Annual Report to EPANumber of Third Party CertifierApplications Received(0.250) - - 1.000 (0.250) $(6.41) - - $(6.41)Number of Third Party CertifierApplications Approved and Denied(0.250) - - 1.000 (0.250) $(6.41) - - $(6.41)*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***February 26, 2013Page 38 of 46Exhibit A-1: Incremental Cost of Electronic Reporting Requirements: Burden and Cost Per Accrediting BodyActivityPer Activity Burden HoursNumberofAnnualActivities(d)Total Burden(hours)Total CostClerical Technical ManagerialClerical($25.65/hr)Technical($56.31/hr)Managerial($66.78/hr)Total(a) (b) (c)(e) =(d)*{(a)+(b)+(c)}(f) (g) (h) (i)The Names and ContactInformation of All Accredited ThirdParty Certifiers(0.250) - - 1.000 (0.250) $(6.41) - - $(6.41)Number and Locations of SystemsAudits and On-site Assessments(0.250) - - 1.000 (0.250) $(6.41) - - $(6.41)Results of Accredited Third PartyCertifier Laboratory ProficiencyTesting or Inter-laboratoryComparisons(0.250) - - 1.000 (0.250) $(6.41) - - $(6.41)Subtotal(1.250) $(32.00)Domestic Total in First Year (3.790) ($99.00)Foreign Total in First Year (3.710) ($93.00)Domestic Total in Non-ReapplicationYear(4.103) ($151.00)Foreign Total in Non-ReapplicationsYear(4.095) ($151.00)Domestic Total in ReapplicationYear(5.103) ($177.00)Foreign Total in Reapplications Year (5.095) ($177.00)*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***February 26, 2013Page 39 of 46Exhibit A-1: Incremental Cost of Electronic Reporting Requirements: Burden and Cost Per Accrediting BodyActivityPer Activity Burden HoursNumberofAnnualActivities(d)Total Burden(hours)Total CostClerical Technical ManagerialClerical($25.65/hr)Technical($56.31/hr)Managerial($66.78/hr)Total(a) (b) (c)(e) =(d)*{(a)+(b)+(c)}(f) (g) (h) (i)Notes:1.CDX Electronic Reporting (first year):Electronic signature agreement. Preparing,submitting, and filing an electronic signature agreement is estimated to require anaverage of 15 minutes of time per respondent,which is assumed to be managerial time (EPA 2011).Paper subscriber agreement. Preparing, submitting, and filing apaper subscriber agreement is estimated to require an averageof 20 minutes of time per respondent, which isassumed to be managerial time (EPA 2011).CDX Registration. CDX users will need to register with CDX,which involves selecting a username and password, providing contact information, and identifying thefacility 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 that each respondent willspend 10 minutes of managerial time and 40 minutesof 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 results in an estimate of 4minutes of managerial time and 16 minutesof 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 Help Desk to resolveproblems involving their registrations or agreements (EPA 2011).2.CDX Electronic Reporting (subsequent years):Employee Turnover. It is assumed that each year 10 percent ofCDX users will be replaced by new employees, who will have to comply with the subscriber agreementand/or CDX registration requirements (EPA 2011). Thus, in subsequent years 10 percent of CDXusers will spend 15 to 20 minutesof managerial time to complete asubscriber agreement. In addition, 10 percent of all CDX users (both managerial andtechnical) will spend 10 minutes to register with CDX and 4 minutes contacting EPA’sCDX Help Desk.Report Compromised Signature. Each year 1 percent of respondents are assumed to report a compromised or surrendered electronicsignature, which requires the submittalof a new subscriber agreement (EPA 2011).This will entail 15 to 20 minutes (20 assumedhere) of managerial time to prepare, submit, and file a new agreement, and 4minutes of time to contact EPA’s CDX Help Desk.3.Recognition AgreementElectronic reporting is assumed to eliminate the useof 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 LaborStatistics. 2011. Employer Costs for Employee Compensation: Supplementary Tables: HistoricalData: December 2006 - March 2011,(2) EPA 2011971*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***February 26, 2013Page 40 of 46Exhibit A-2: Incremental Cost of Electronic Reporting Requirements: Burden and Cost Per Third Party CertifierActivityPer Activity Burden HoursNumberof AnnualActivities(d)Total Burden(hours)Total CostClerical TechnicalManagerialClerical($25.65/hr)Technical($56.31/hr)Managerial($66.78/hr)Total(a) (b) (c)(e) =(d)*{(a)+(b)+(c)}(f) (g) (h) (i)1. CDX Electronic Reporting (First Year)Electronic SubscriberAgreements (domestic firms)- - 0.250 1.00 0.250 - - $16.70 $16.70Paper Subscriber Agreements(foreign firms)- - 0.330 1.00 0.330 - - $22.04 $22.04CDX Registration - 0.670 0.1701.00 0.840 - $37.73 $11.35 $49.08Help Desk - 0.270 0.070 1.000.340 - $15.20 $4.67 $19.88Problem Resolution - 1.000 -0.03 0.030 - $1.69 $1.69Subtotal (domestic)1.460 $87.00Subtotal (foreign)1.540 $93.002. CDX Electronic Reporting (Subsequent Years)Electronic SubscriberAgreements (domestic firms)- - 0.250 0.10 0.025 $0.00 $0.00 $1.67 $1.67Paper Subscriber Agreements(foreign firms)- - 0.330 0.10 0.033 $0.00 $0.00 $2.20 $2.20CDX Registration - 0.670 0.170 0.10 0.084 $0.00 $3.77 $1.14 $4.91Help Desk - 0.270 0.070 0.100.034 $0.00 $1.52 $0.47 $1.99Report Compromised Signature - - 0.4000.01 0.004 $0.00 $0.00 $0.27 $0.27Subtotal (domestic)0.147 $9.00Subtotal (foreign)0.155 $9.003. Manufacturer Notification and RecordkeepingList of Manufacturers and theirProduct Types (includingResins Used) Certified by TPC(0.750) (0.500) (0.250) 1.00 (1.500)($19.24) ($28.16) ($16.70) ($64.09)Results of Inspections, Audits,and Emission Tests Conductedfor Each Manufacturer andProduct Type(0.750) (0.500) (0.250) 1.00 (1.500)($19.24) ($28.16) ($16.70) ($64.09)List of the TPC's Laboratories,Test Methods (including TestConditions and ConditioningTime), and Test Results(0.750) (0.500) (0.250) 1.00 (1.500)($19.24) ($28.16) ($16.70) ($64.09)Methods and Results forEstablishing Test MethodCorrelations and Equivalence(0.750) (0.500) (0.250) 1.00 (1.500)($19.24) ($28.16) ($16.70) ($64.09)*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***February 26, 2013Page 41 of 46Exhibit A-2: Incremental Cost of Electronic Reporting Requirements: Burden and Cost Per Third Party CertifierActivityPer Activity Burden HoursNumberof AnnualActivities(d)Total Burden(hours)Total CostClerical TechnicalManagerialClerical($25.65/hr)Technical($56.31/hr)Managerial($66.78/hr)Total(a) (b) (c)(e) =(d)*{(a)+(b)+(c)}(f) (g) (h) (i)List of Manufacturers andProducts Approved for ReducedTesting(0.750) (0.500) (0.250) 1.00 (1.500)($19.24) ($28.16) ($16.70) ($64.09)Subtotal(7.500) ($320.00)4. Annual Report and Notificationsof ChangesList of Manufacturers and theirProducts Certified by the TPCduring the Previous Year(including Resins Used, and theAverage and Range ofFormaldehyde Emissions byManufacturer, Resin, andProduct Type)(0.250) - - 1.00 (0.250) $(6.41) - - $(6.41)List of Noncomplying Productsor Events by Manufacturer(0.250) - - 1.00 (0.250) $(6.41) - - $(6.41)List of Laboratories and TestMethods Used by the TPC(0.250) - - 1.00 (0.250) $(6.41) - - $(6.41)Results of Inter-LaboratoryComparison or ProficiencyTesting for the LaboratoriesUsed by the TPC(0.250) - - 1.00 (0.250) $(6.41) - - $(6.41)Subtotal(1.000) $(26.00)Domestic Total in First Year (7.040) ($259.00)Foreign Total in First Year (6.960) ($253.00)Domestic Total in NonReapplication Year(8.353) ($337.00)Foreign Total in NonReapplications Year(8.345) ($337.00)Domestic Total in ReapplicationYear(8.353) ($337.00)Foreign Total in ReapplicationsYear(8.345) ($337.00)*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***February 26, 2013Page 42 of 46Exhibit A-2: Incremental Cost of Electronic Reporting Requirements: Burden and Cost Per Third Party CertifierActivityPer Activity Burden HoursNumberof AnnualActivities(d)Total Burden(hours)Total CostClerical TechnicalManagerialClerical($25.65/hr)Technical($56.31/hr)Managerial($66.78/hr)Total(a) (b) (c)(e) =(d)*{(a)+(b)+(c)}(f) (g) (h) (i)Notes:1.CDX Electronic Reporting (first year):Electronic signature agreement. Preparing,submitting, and filing an electronic signature agreement is estimated to require anaverage of 15 minutes of time per registrant,which is assumed to be managerial time (EPA 2011).Paper subscriber agreement. Preparing, submitting, and filing apaper subscriber agreement is estimated to require an averageof 20 minutes of time per user, which isassumed to be managerial time (EPA 2011).CDX Registration. CDX users will need to register with CDX,which involves selecting a username and password, providing contact information, and identifying thefacility 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 anestimate that eachrespondent will spend 10 minutes of managerial time and 40minutes 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 results in an estimate of4 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 Help Desk toresolve problems involving their registrations or agreements (EPA 2011).2.CDX Electronic Reporting (subsequent years):Employee Turnover. It is assumed that each year 10 percent ofCDX users will be replaced by new employees, who will have to comply with the subscriber agreementand/or CDX registration requirements (EPA 2011). Thus, in subsequent years 10 percent of CDXusers will spend 15 to 20 minutesof managerial time to complete asubscriber agreement. In addition, 10 percent of all registrants will spend 10 minutesto register with CDX and 4 minutes contacting EPA’s CDX Help Desk. Papersubscriber agreement. Preparing, submitting, and filing a paper subscriber agreementis estimated to require an average of 20minutes of time per registrant (EPA 2011).This results in an estimate of 20 minutes of managerialtime per respondent submitting a paper subscriber agreement.Report Compromised Signature. Each year 1 percent of respondents are assumed to report a compromised or surrendered electronicsignature, which requires the submittalof a new subscriber agreement (EPA 2011).This will entail 15 to 20 minutes (20 assumedhere) of managerial time to prepare, submit, and file a new agreement, and 4minutes 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 Help Desk toresolve 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 LaborStatistics. 2011. Employer Costs for Employee Compensation: Supplementary Tables: HistoricalData: December 2006 - March2011, (2) EPA 2011Sources: (1) U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2011.Employer Costs for Employee Compensation: Supplementary Tables: Historical Data: December2006 - March 2011,972973974975*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***February 26, 2013Page 43 of 46976Exhibit A-3: Total Bottom Line Burden and Costs (Foreign and Domestic)Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 AverageCosts without Electronic Reporting RequirementsNumber of Respondents and Responses61 61 61 61Total Burden Hours 2,085.64995.38 1,181.88 1,421Total Cost $417,470 $111,318 $122,243 $217,010Incremental Burden and Costs for Electronic Reporting RequirementsNumber 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 RequirementsNumber of Respondents and Responses 61 61 61 61Total Burden Hours 1,740.97 592.44753.94 1,029Total Cost $405,935 $95,411 $105,686 $202,344977978979980*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During the Review***

February 26, 2013 Page 44 of 46 

### A.2 Costs of Electronic Reporting for EPA 981

982 

### A portion of the cost that EPA incurs to opera te the CDX system can be attributed to the 983 

### TSCA Title VI program. These costs are described below. 984

985



### CDX O&M – The cost of CDX operations and main tenance for TSCA Title VI electronic 986 

### reporting is estimated to be approximately $3,000 per year. 987

988 

### CDX Application Support O&M – The cost of application s upport operations and maintenance 989 

### (for Help Desk support, resolv ing technical problems, software maintenance and upgrades, etc.) 990



### for TSCA Title VI electronic reporting is estimated to be approximately $25,000 per year. 991

992 

### CDX Software Licensing Cost s – EPA’s cost of software licensing attributable to TSCA Title 993 

### VI is estimated to be approximately $6,000 per year. 994

995



### CDX CBI LAN O&M – The cost attributable of opera tions and maintenance of EPA’s 996 

### confidential business administration (CBI) local ar ea network (LAN) attributable to TSCA Title 997 

### VI is estimated to be approximately $15,000 per year. 998

999



### EPA staff – Managing the CDX system related to the TSCA Title VI program is estimated to 1000 

### require approximately 0.1 FTE per year of EP A staff. Based on the 2010 Washington/Baltimore 1001 

### area annual salary rate for a GS-13, Step 5 em ployee ($100,904) and a loading factor of 1.6 for 1002 

### overhead and fringe benefits, the cost of the EPA staff needed to manage the CDX program 1003



### attributable to the TSCA Title VI is estimated to be $16,145 per year. 1004

1005 

### Overall, EPA’s cost for operating the CDX system that can be attributed to the TSCA Title VI 1006 

### program is estimated at $65,145 per year. 1007

1008 

### The use of electronic reporting and CDX also cr eates savings for EPA. It is expected to 1009 

### improve efficiency and lead to higher quality da ta being available more quickly to EPA. EPA 1010 

### typically keys or scans in the data from pa per submissions, which can result in errors. 1011 

### Consequently, EPA must perf orm quality assurance checks on extracted and scanned 1012



### information. When data is submitted electronica lly, the time required fo r EPA staff to review 1013 

### and process the information is reduced because ma nual data entry or processing is eliminated. 1014 

### Electronic reporting also improves data quality because it facilitates data correction and 1015 

### validation by highlighting fields with omitted or inconsistent data prior to submission. EPA has 1016



### not estimated the value of these efficien cies and improvements in data quality. 1017

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 

### Appendix B – Mock-Ups for Potential TSCA Ti tle VI Electronic Reporting Application 1022

1023


### B.1 Summary of the Electronic Repo rting Application Under Consideration 1024

1025


### The current proposed regulation doe s not provide a required form at for reports and notices. 1026 

### However, EPA is considering an electronic repo rting requirement. If the EPA finalizes a 1027 

### mandatory electronic reporting requirement all re ports and notices covered by this action would 1028 

### be required to be submitted via that internet through the EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX). 1029

1030 

### The EPA is requesting comment on a mandato ry electronic reporting requirement for 1031 

### Accrediting Bodies (ABs) and Third-Party Certifiers (TPCs). In order to give regulated entities 1032



### more information on which to base their commen ts, the EPA prepared mock-ups of a potential 1033 

### electronic reporting appli cation. The mock-ups are in draft form and should be considered for 1034 

### illustrative purposes only. They contain two sections, an AB user interface which would be 1035 

### visible to participating laborat ory and product ABs and the TPC user interface which would be 1036



### visible to TSCA Title VI accredited TPCs. 1037

1038 

### These mock-ups are not complete in that they do not address all aspect s of the EPA's proposed 1039 

### implementation of TSCA Title VI. To the exte nt that the EPA’s proposals change, conforming 1040 

### changes would be made to the data elements and other aspects of the electronic reporting 1041 

### application, should the EPA choose to implemen t a mandatory electronic reporting requirement. 1042 

### Should the EPA develop this electronic repor ting application, the EPA would allow regulated 1043 

### entities to participate in testing of the app lication and the EPA would provide training as 1044



### necessary. 1045



### B. Electronic Reporting and Confidential Business Information 1046

1047



### The EPA believes that most of the information that would be collected under TSCA Title VI is 1048



### not confidential in nature . Nonetheless, any electronic reporti ng application would be designed to 1049 

### support TSCA Confidential Business Informa tion (CBI) needs by providing a secure 1050



### environment that meets Federal standards. Users w ould be able to claim CBI for appropriate data 1051



### fields. 1052

1053 

### The draft mock-ups below contain CBI check boxe s that illustrate how reporting entities would 1054 

### submit CBI claims for particular data elements . In the proposal, the EPA is requesting comment 1055



### on whether the data elements in the ABs’ and TPCs’ annual reports, and the required 1056 

### notifications should be reporte d into a publicly viewable da tabase. EPA requests comment on 1057 

### whether such information might contain CBI, and if so, which data elements may be subject to 1058



### CBI claims. EPA believes that data elements relate d to the type or formulation of a resin may be 1059 

### the subject of legitimate TSCA CBI claims. No twithstanding the current placement of the CBI 1060 

### check boxes, the EPA would modify their placemen t to conform with the final rule, should the 1061 

### EPA finalize a mandatory electr onic reporting requirement. 1062

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