**Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act** 

**1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION**  **1(a) Title and Number of the Information Collection** 
**Title: TSCA Section 5(a)(2) Significant New Use Rules for Existing**  **Chemicals**
**EPA ICR No.: 1188.11 OMB Control No.: 2070** 
**- 0038**  **1(b) Short Characterization**  Section 5 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2604 (see Attachment 1), authorizes EPA to determine that a use of a chemical substance is a “significant new use.” EPA must make this determination by rule after considering all relevant factors, including those listed in TSCA section 5(a)(2). Once EPA determines that a use of a chemical substance is a significant new use, TSCA section 5(a)(1)( B) requires persons to submit a notice to EPA at least 90 day s before they

manufacture, import or process the substance for that use. Regulations implementing significant new uses appear at 40 CFR part 721 (see Attachment 2). Once EPA receives a signific ant new use rule (SNUR) notice, EPA may take regulatory action under TSCA sections 5(e), 5(f), 6 or 7 to control the activities for which it has received a SNUR notice. If EPA does not take action, TSCA section 5(g) requires EPA to explain in the Federal Register its reasons for not taking action. Persons who intend to export a substance identified in a proposed or final SNUR are subject to the export notification provisions of TSCA section 12(b). The regulations that interpret TSCA section 12(b) appear at 40 CFR part 707.

**2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION**  **2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection**  TSCA section 5(a)(2) provides the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) with the authority

to monitor and control significant new uses of existi ng chemical substances. The factors considered by the Administrator in determining a significant new use are: 1) The projected volume of manufacturing and processing of a chemical substance; 2) The extent to which a use changes the ty pe or form of exposure of human beings or the environment to a chemical substance; 3) The extent to which a use increases the magnitude and duration of exposure of human beings or the environment to a chemical substance; and4) The reasonabl y anticipated manner and methods of manufacturing, processing, distribution in commerce, and disposal of a chemical substance. Once the Administrator makes such a designation, the Agency proposes a Significant New Use Rule (SNUR). If a final rule is promulgated, a person who intends to en gage in a significant new use of a chemical covered b y a SNUR must notify EPA of his/her intentions. This notification, made via the Significant New Use Notice (SNUN), must occur at least 90 days prior to commencing the new use of the identified substance . The required notice must be submitted on EPA’s Premanufacture Notice (PMN) form. The PMN form provides data on the identity and use of, and possible exposures to, the chemical substance. In addition, the PMN form provides test data plus descriptions o f health and environmental effects data based on the manufacture, processing, use, distribution in commerce, and disposal of the chemical. The Agency

has 90 day s to evaluate a SNUN once it has been received. This evaluation focuses on the health and envi ronmental effects of the substance’s significant new use. Should EPA find cause for concern, the Agency can take regulatory

action as per TSCA sections 5(e) and 5(f) 1 . L ikewise, the Agency may extend the evaluation period by up to 90 day s with good cause . If EPA takes no action at the end of the review period, the submitter can engage in the intended new use without any restrictions. **2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data**  EPA uses this information to evaluate the health and environmental effects of the significant new use. During the evaluation period EPA can take further regulatory action pursuant to TSCA sections 5(e) and 5(f). Under TSCA section 5(e), the Administrator may issue an order to prohibit or limit the manufacture, import, processing, distribution in commerce, use, or disposal of such substance. TSCA section 5(f) allows the Administrator to, among other things, prohibit or limit the manufacture of the chemical substance, if the substance presents or will present an unreasonable risk o f injury to health or the environment. To date EPA has promulgated SNURs on 388 existing chemicals. Presented in Attachment 5 are selected case history abstracts for some of these substances. These abstracts highlight the needs of a particular office an d the facts surrounding a substance. This information when applied to the Regulatory Selection Criteria has resulted in final SNURs.
**3. NON** 
**- DUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS AND OTHER COLLECTION**  **CRITERIA 3(a)**  **Non**
**- Duplication**  EPA is the only

federal agency

that collects information on significant new uses of

1 TSCA section 5(e) allows the Administrator to prohibit or limit the manufacture, import, processing, distribution in commerce, use, or disposal of the substance when the substance may present an unreasonable risk. TSCA section 5(f) allows the Administrat or to use a TSCA section 6 regulation to prohibit or limit the manufacture of the substance when the substance will present an unreasonable risk.chemical substances. A notification of an intent to engage in a significant new use serves two

functions: as a notice, and as a document that contains information about a chemical substance and potential e xposures to that substance. The notification element is unique to SNURs and therefore not obtainable elsewhere. The chemical information aspect will also contain unique information. Only

the person who intends to commence a significant new use of a chem ical substance will know the potential for human and environmental exposures to that substance, the quantity intended to be produced, imported, or processed, and the manner in which the person will engage in the significant new use. A person submitting a significant new use notice is not required to develop test data. However, the person must submit data that are known to or reasonabl y ascertainable b y that person. For published data the submitter need only provide a literature citation (40 CFR 720.50(d) (3)(ii)). For existing chemicals that are related to the chemical substance that is the subject of the SNUR (e.g., impurities, by products), neither the published data nor a literature citation need be submitted. Also, notices need not include information previously submitted to EPA (unless the previously submitted information was claimed confidential, in which case it must be resubmitted). **3(b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB**  Prior to submission to OMB, this I CR will be made availa ble to the public for comment through a Federal Register notice. The public will have 60 day s to provide comments. Any comments received will be given consideration when completing the supporting statement that is submitted to OMB. **3(c) Consultations**  Under 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1) OMB requires agencies to consult with potential I CR respondents and data users about specific aspects of I CRs before submitting an original or renewal I CR to OMB for review and approval. In accordance with this regulation, EPA wil l pursue additional consultations with interested parties during the development of the renewal of this collection. **3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection**  Whenever a person intends to engage in a significant new use, they must notify

EPA. This is an e xplicit requirement of TSCA. TSCA section 5(a)(1)(B) states, “... no person may

... manufacture or process any chemical substance for a use which the Administrator has determined ... is a significant new use ... unless such person submits to the Administr ator ... a notice ...” The consequence of less frequent collection of information (i.e., requiring only the first person who intends to engage in a significant new use to submit notice) is a violation of TSCA and would allow manufacturers, importers and processors to use a substance in a manner that EPA has determined may cause significant adverse exposures to the substance without prior notification to EPA.**3(e) General Guidelines** 

This information collection activity is necessary

to implement the statutory requirements of TSCA section 5(a)(2) and is consistent with the requirements of 5 CFR 1320.6. **3(f) Confidentiality** 
In formation provided in a significant new use notice may receive confidential treatment. TSCA section 14 allows a manufacturer, imp orter or processor to designate submitted information as confidential business information (CBI). The Agency has developed a comprehensive s ys tem to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of CBI. This sy stem includes procedures for logging CBI in and out of designated locked file cabinets, for photocopying and transmitting CBI, and for restricting confidential information only to personnel with CBI security clearance. No one is allowed access to CBI until they have received instructions for handling CBI.
S pecial procedures also restrict access to computerized CBI. These security measures apply to CBI submitted by

manufacturers as well as CBI generated by EPA staff in the course of their review. A wrongful disclosure of CBI may result in either a fine or i mprisonment. **3(g) Sensitive Questions**  This section is not applicable. The information requested is not sensitive in nature.

**4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED**  **4(a) Respondent NAICS Codes**  Respondents affected b y this collection activity are mainly

NAICS categories 325

- Chemicals and Allied Products Manufacturers and 32411

- Petroleum Refining. **4(b) Information Requested**  (i) Data items, including record keeping requirements
In formation submitted under this collection must include, insofar as it is known to or reasonabl y ascertainable by the submitter, information described in TSCA section 8(a)(2) (i.e., chemical identity , use, and exposure data), as well as test data, and descriptions of other data related to the effects on health and the environment of the manufacture, processing, use, distribution in commerce, and disposal of the chemical substance (TSCA section 5(d)). After a notice has been received, EPA has 90 day s (extendable to 180 day s) to evaluate the notice’s content.(ii) Respondent Activities

Only those persons who intend to engage in a significant new use of a chemical substance must submit notice of their intentions to EPA. According to 40 CFR § 721.1(c), persons submitting a SNUN must comply with the same notice requirements and EPA regulatory procedures as persons submitting a PMN, including submission of test data on health and environmental effects as described in § 720.50. SNUNs must be on EPA Form No. 7710

–25, generated using e

- PMN software, an d submitted to the Agency in accordance with the procedures set forth in §§ 721.25 and 720.40. E

- PMN software is available electronically at http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/newchems.

**5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED** 
**- AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION**  **METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 5(a)**  **Agency Activities** A significant new use rule (SNUR) on an existing chemical substance is the product of a process that is designed to develop the appropriate information

- gathering collection for a substance. This process has three major steps: Chemical Referral, Regulatory Selection, and Regulation Development. Step 1. **Chemical Referral:** EPA offices that have identified information

- gathering or follow

- up monitoring needs for a particular chemical may refer the substance to OPPT. A sy stematic process has been developed for receiving and handling chemical referrals. Offices referring substances are asked to prepare concise summaries of relevant data. This information is used to select a regulatory approach and for rulemaking activities. Step 2. **The Regulatory Selection Process**
**- Referral and Review:**  Once an office has detailed its need for information, an information collection approach is determined that best satisfies that office’s needs. The rulemaking options are: a TSCA section 8(a) reporting rule, a TSCA section 8(c) call

- in, a TSCA section 8 (d) health and safety data reporting rule, a TSCA section 5(a)(2) SNUR, or any combination of the above. It may also be determined that an alternative approach is more appropriate (e.g., use of existing data sources, no data

- gathering at the present time, TSCA section 4 or 6 action, or referral to another office for information

gathering under a different statutory authority). Step 3. **Regulatory Development:** Prior to the development of a rule, the recommended rulemaking approach must be reviewed b y the referring office and approved by the Office Director of OPPT. If the recommendation is approved, then the rulemaking process begins. A SNUR is drafted onl y if it is an appropriate approach for a particular substance that has received approval prior to th e development of the rule. The proposal then undergoes intra

agency review, OMB review and public comment. Once a decision has been made to promulgate an information collection rule, the next decision is to determine whether a TSCA section 8(a) rule or a TSCA section 5 SNUR is most appropriate. Attachment 5 identifies theselection criteria that are applied in determining whether a TSCA section 8(a) rule or SNUR is

proposed. **5(b) Collection Methodology and Management**  EPA has not been able to identify a more efficient, less expensive or more flexible means of obtaining the required data and remain within the constraints of TSCA. There is no new technology

applicable to the collection of this information that would minimize the collection burden. To aid persons subject to this information collection, OPPT has set up a TSCA Hotline that provides information regarding TSCA section 5(a)(2) reporting as well as other regulatory information. When Hotline staff are unable to answer questions regarding TSCA se ction 5(a)(2), the questions are referred to the OPPT Chemical Control Division (CCD) staff for resolution. **5(c) Small Entity Flexibility**  All business, regardless of size, must comply with the requirements of TSCA section 5. However, OPPT has taken a number of steps intended to minimize the burden placed on small business. For instance, TSCA section 26(d) established an Assistance Office to provide technical and other nonfinancial assistance to manufacturers, importers and processors of chemical substan ces and mixtures. This office has established a toll

- free hotline, performs on

site field visits and consultations, and has hired a contractor to assist small businesses, free of charge, in complying with TSCA requirements. **5(d) Collection Schedule**  When ever an y person intends to engage in a significant new use of a chemical substance, they are required to submit a notice of their intentions to EPA not less than 90 day s before beginning to manufacture, import or process the substance for the intended use.

**6**

. **ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION** This section presents estimates of the cost and burden associated with the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for significant new use rules for existing chemicals under TSCA section 5(a)(2). Th e methodology used to estimate the recordkeeping costs, reporting costs, and burden for this ICR renewal is largel y based on previous experience with SNURs, and is consistent with the anal ysis presented in the supporting statement prepared for the previous IC R. This I CR is updated from the previous ICR (February , 2009) to account for the changes in burden resulting from Updated assumptions and corrections to prior anal ys es. To comply

with the regulation, manufacturers (including importers) must complete th e activities listed in Table 1. Table 1 also provides a cross

- walk of the related Information Collection that corresponds to each activity

.**Table 1**  **: Cross**
**- Walk between Industry Activities and Related Information Collections** 

**(ICs) Activity**  **Description Related IC(s)**  Chemical verification When a SNUR is published, companies must review

the rule to verify whether a chemical they manufacture or import is subject to the rule Chemical Verification

Rule familiarization Site staff must familiarize themselves with the

requirements of the rule. This entails reading the rule, understanding the various reporting and administrative requirements, and determining the manner in which the reporting requirements will be met. Rule Familiarization

CDX registration, electronic signature agreement, and Pay.gov account set up Before submitting a SNUN, all respondents must

register with CDX. In addition, respondents must complete an Electronic Signature Agreement form, which is signed, dated, and eithe r submitted electronically or mailed back to EPA, and register for a Pay.gov account. CDX Registration Activities

Preparation of reports (form completion and form submission) Site staff must collect all information required for a

SNUN and submit an electronic SNUN form. Firms must also keep records supporting their submissions. Prepare and Submit Report, and Maintain Records

**6(a) Estimating Respondent Burden**  Number Of Sign ificant New Use Notices Projected During the years 2008 through 2011, EPA proposed two existing chemical SNURs under TSCA section 5(a)(2). This activity may increase over the next three

- ye ar period as EPA initiates a comprehensive approach to enhance the Agency ’s existing chemicals management program

. However, EPA cannot estimate future SNUR activity with certainty

. Therefore, based on past ICRs and the best professional judgment of Agency staff, EPA is estimating it will promulgate an average of five existing chemical SNURs per year under TSCA section 5(a)(2) during the time period covered b y this I CR2

. EPA may receive SNUNs as a result of SNURs. EPA’s experience is that in response to promulgation of well over 1,000 SNURs under both its new and exis ting chemicals programs, the Agency

receives on average onl y 7 SNUNs per year, based on fiscal year (FY) 2001

–

2 EPA develops SNURs for a number of reasons, some based on findings from its new chemicals program in order t o bind manufacturers and processors of chemicals revie wed under its Premanufacture Notice (PMN) review process to certain requirements. However, this ICR covers only SNURs that are developed by EPA’s existing chemical program under TSCA section 5(a)(2), an d therefore, only the SNUNs received based on those SNURs are estimated here.FY2011 submissions. Of those SNUNs, only a fraction result from existing chemical SNURs promulgated under section 5(a)(2).
**Table 2 : Anticipated Number of SNURs and SNUNs**  **Year Anticipated Number of SNURs**  **Anticipated Number of SNUNS** First Year 5 7 Second Year 5 7 Third Year 5 7 **Three Year Totals 15**  **21** Using SNUN submission data from the ten ye ar period of FY2001 through FY2011, EPA estimates that the average firm submits 1.65 SNUNs. This may be an overestimate because it was not determined whether the SNUN submissions were in response to new or existing chemical SNURs. The exact number of firms engaging in new uses cannot be estimated, however given the estimated number of SNUNs and firms submitting SNUNs, EPA estimates a total of 4.24 firms will be impacted annuall y (7 SNUNs/1.65 firms). Given the uncertainty in projecting possible new uses for existing chemicals, it is n ot possible to determine whether a large or small number of firms would be affected by an y given SNUR. **6(a) Estimating Respondent Burden**  (i) Alternative Responses The burden associated with a SNUR could involve a number of possible industry responses. That is, when a SNUR is promulgated, a firm seeking to engage in a new use for a subject chemical has five options regarding possible courses of action that may generate burden: 1) The compan y could submit a SNUN. This option would be chosen b y an y compan y not intending to abide b y the provisions of the SNUR. 2) In the event that a significant new use is described as the failure to establish and implement programs for providing for the use of specific measures to control worker exposure to or release of subst ances, a company can request an equivalency

determination. This option would be chosen if a manufacturer/importer had reason to believe that there may be alternative methods not considered by EPA that provide equivalent or superior protection from worker e xposure or environmental release of the subject chemical. 3) The compan y can comply with the SNUR, ensuring that all provisions of the SNUR are implemented in connection with the planned use of the subject chemical. 4) The compan y can request review of the SNUR for possible modification or revocation.5) The compan y may simply decide to forgo the new use, avoiding regulatory compliance activities altogether. Additionally , under current regulations at 40 CFR 721.5(a)(2), all manufacturers, processors, and importers of chemicals subject to SNURs are subject to certain requirements regardless of whether they engage in a significant new use unless certain information can be demonstrated 3 . However, without prior knowledge of chemicals which would be the su bject of future SNURs, estimating the number of potentially affected entities subject to 40 CFR 721.5(a)(2) is not possible. The following section estimates the cost of submitting a SNUN (option 1) and then discusses the other options. (ii) Burden Estimates TSCA section 5(a)(2) imposes two requirements on industry . First, manufacturers, processors, and importers of chemicals must choose among the options mentioned above. This section presents estimates of submitting SNUNs (i.e., the first option) and then bri efl y discusses the other four options. Second, manufacturers, processors, and importers of chemicals covered by SNURs will incur burden and costs to notify customers of the hazards posed by the covered chemical. Therefore, they must first determine if their chemical is subject to the SNUR and then must determine how to notify their customers. Chemical Verification When a SNUR is published, companies must review the rule to verify whether their chemical is subject to the rule. From 2007 to 2011, the majori ty of SNURs promulgated b y the Agency under TSCA section 5(a) applied to new chemicals submitted to the Agency under the Premanufacture Notice Program. Onl y two SNURs applying to existing chemicals were proposed during the same time period but were not fin alized. These SNURs proposed to regulate an average of seven chemicals. The Agency ty pically notifies the manufacturer(s) of chemicals subject to a SNUR prior to its issuance. Therefore it is estimated that no more than 0.167 hours (10 minutes) of technical labor time per chemical is used to verify that a chemical is subject to the rule. This is equivalent to 1.17 hours (0.167 hours/chemical x 7 chemicals/SNUR) per SNUR. Rule Familiarization Staff at firms who are subject to the SNUR must become familiar with the SNUR and its various requirements. In EPA’s best professional judgment, r ule familiarization is estimated to be equivalent to the burden for companies to become familiar with the Prem anufacture Notification Electronic Reporting Rule , which requires the mandatory electronic reporting of

3 Unless manufacturers, processors, and importers of chemicals subject to SNURs have either notified recipients of such chemicals and all significant new uses, verified that kno wledge of the SNUR has been otherwise acquired by recipients, or verified that recipients are unable to engage in significant new uses, manufacturers, processors, and im porters must file a SNUN.SNUNs and other TSCA s ection 5 notices ; 0.55 hours of technical labor and 0.27 hours of

managerial labor, as described in the Economic Analysis of the Premanufacture Notification Electronic Reporting Final Rule (EPA, 2009 a)

. **Table 3: Rule Familiarization Burden for SNUR Submitters Activity**  **Clerical Hours Technical Hours**  **Managerial Hours Total Hours**  Rule familiarization 0.00 0.55 0.27 **0.83** CDX Registration, CDX Electronic Signature, and Pay .gov Account Setup First

- time submitters of any section 5 notice (including Premanufacture Notices ( PMNs), Significant New Use Notices (SNUNs), Test Market Exemption (TME) applications, L ow Volume Exemp tion (LVE) notices, Low Exposure/L ow Release (LoREX) exemption notices, Biotechnology

Notices for geneticall y modified microorganisms, Notices of Commencement of Manufacture or Import (NOCs), and support documents to s ection 5 notices ) are required to register their compan y and key users with the CDX reporting tool, deliver a CDX electronic signature to EPA, and establish and use a Pay .gov E

- pay ment account. These activities are onl y required of first

- time submitters of any s ection 5 notice . It is not known how many submitters of SNUNs from existing chemical SNURs will be first

- time submitters of any section 5 notices, therefore, EPA assumes that all submitters will incur these costs. These activities are estimated to require the following burdens, bas ed on the estimates presented in the Economic Analysis of the Premanufacture Notification Electronic Reporting Final Rule (EPA, 2009 a ):

 CDX registration: EPA estimates that companies will spend approximately 0.18 hours per emplo yee to register with CDX, and that an average of four technical staff members and one manager will need to register for each company , totaling approximately 0.92 hours of burden per company
.  CDX electronic signature: EPA estimates that companies will spend 0.25 hours preparing, submitting, and filing an electronic signature agreement (Authentication of Id entity) form to EPA per employee. This burden will apply to four technical staff members and one manager per company, totaling 1.25 hours of burden per company. In addition, EPA estimates that a manager will spend an additional 0.50 hours accessing, preparing, and submitting verification forms (Verification of Authorization) for all a uthorized submitters to EPA. The total burden incurred by companies submitting and then verifying electronic signature agreements is 1.75 hours. Note that this burden does not include an y additional time required to contact EPA’s CDX help desk to notify a change of submitter status, should one occur.

 Payment via Pay.gov account: EPA estimates that one manager per company will spend approximately

0.13 hours setting up a Pay .gov ID account, logging into the sy stem, finding the appropriate form, and filling i t out. This burden does not include the time required to click ‘submit’ on the form and wait for pay ment processing.**Table 4: CDX Registration, CDX Electronic Signature, and Pay.gov Account Setup Burden**

**for First**
**- Time Submitters**  **Activity Clerical Hours**  **Te chnical Hours**  **Managerial Hours Total Hours**  CDX registration 0.00 0.73 0.18 **0.92** CDX electronic signature 0.00 1.00 0.75 **1.75** E

-payment (Pay.gov ID) 0.00 0.00 0.13 **0.13 Total**  0.00 **1.73 1.07**  **2.80** Submitting a SNUN In submitting a SNUN, individuals at different occupational levels must spend time on the required recordkeeping and reporting activities. SNUN submitters are required to gather and submit information regarding the data elements identified in the applicabl e SNUN reporting form. The methodology

and calculations assume that the employee responsible for collecting, filling out, and submitting the requested information has a reasonable level of familiarity with the compan y and knowledge of operations at the sit e. It is assumed that for most entities these tasks are similar to other employee duties that require familiarity with EPA, state , and other federal agency

requests for chemical information and do not require additional familiarization or training beyond the basic rule familiarization described above. Estimates of the burden of completing a SNUN form are based on the burden of completing a PMN submission, since the data requirements are the same and the same form is used for both. EPA has harmonized estima tes of the reporting and recordkeeping burden related to the submission of both new and existing chemical SNUNs. Under the ICR for PMNs, OMB Control No. 2070

- 0012, EPA used mid

- range burden estimates of 105 hours for reporting and two hours for recordkeeping per response (total 107 hours) for new chemical SNUNs. This approach was also followed in EPA’s April 2010 Request for a Non

- Substantive Change to an Existing Approved In formation Collection for this ICR (OMB Control No. 2070

- 0038). The 105 hour reporting burden estimate originated from EPA’s 1994 Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) of Amendments to Regulations for TSCA Section 5 Premanufacture Notifications (EPA, 1994) 4

. The April 2010 non

- substantive change also reallocated certain paperwork activities or information collections from a rule

- related ICR (OMB Control No. 2070

- 0173) reflecting the burden from the Agency ’s e

- PMN rule (75 FR 773), thereby adjusting reporting and recordkeeping burden for Existing Chemical SNUNs to 92.2 hours reporting burden and 1 hour recordkeeping burden for a total of 93.2 hours as shown in Table 5 below.

4 The 1994 Regulatory Impact Analysis of Amendments to Regula tions for TSCA Section 5 Premanufacture Notifications estimated that SNUN preparation, recordkeeping, and submission required from 95 to 144 hours for an average of 104.5 hours, rounded to 105 hours (EPA, 1994 pg. III

- 12).**Table 5:**  **Reporting and**  **Recordkeeping Burden**  **Hour Program**  **Changes due**  **to e**  **- PMN** 

**Rule (Per Response)**  **as Reported in OMB No. 2070**
**- 0012, EPA ICR No. 0574.14**  **Existing Chemicals SNUN Submission**  **Activity Response Burden** 

**prior to e**
**- PMN**  **1 rule**  **Burden Reduction due to**  **e -**  **PMN rule Response Burden** 

**af ter e** 
**- PMN rule** 
Reporting 105

- 12.8 92.2 Recordkeeping 2

- 1 1 **Total 107**  **13.8 93.2** 

The 93.2 hours for response burden after the e

- PM rule serve as the baseline SNUN reporting and recordkeeping hours for this I CR must be adjusted because recordkeeping burden has been miscalculated. As noted above, the reporting burden of 105 from which the 93.2 hours is ultimately

estimated, is based on a the 1994 Regulatory Impact Analysis of Amendments(RIA) to Regulations for TSCA Section 5 Premanufacture Notifications (EPA, 1994) . The RIA estimates already account ed for recordkeeping because the burden estimates “include the time spent reading and becoming familiar with the form, gathering the required information and preparing the report, producing sanitized responses for items claimed as confidential bu siness information, and **maintaining a file of the submission** ” (emphasis added) (EPA 1994, pg. III

14) . T he 2 hour recordkeeping burden included in the response burden prior to the e

- PMN rule is actuall y based on the recordkeeping burden for poly mer ex empti ons (EPA 1994, pg. III

- 14) and adds to those already included in the 105 reporting burden hours. Therefore this additional 2 hours is actually

double counting the recordkeeping burden. Correcting for this error removes the entire recordkeeping hours from the response burden prior to the e

- PMN rule. Additionally , the 12.8 hours of burden reduction due to the e

- PMN rule is clerical burden and account s for the burden reduction from electronic submission (EPA, 2009a)

. EPA assume s that any reduction in recordkeeping burden was captured in the reduction of the clerical burden, and d oes not consider the one hour recordkeeping burden reduction from the e

- PMN rule in order to avoid double counting. Therefore, the total response burden for SNUN submissions has been adjusted in this ICR to 92.2 hours/SNUN (Table 6). **Table 6**  **: Adjusted**  **Reporting and Recordkeeping Burden Hour s for SNUN Submissions**  **Existing Chemicals SNUN Submission**  **Activity Response Burden**  **prior to e**
**- PMN**  **1 rule**  **Burden Red uction**  **due to e**  **- PMN rule**  **Response Burden**

**af ter e** 
**- PMN rule**  Reporting and recordkeeping 105

- 12.8 92.2
Table 7 shows the adjusted burden hours for filing a SNUN by labor category

.**Table 7: Adjusted Unit Reporting Burden Estimates, Associated with Filing a SNUN by** 

**Labor Category Activity**  **Clerical Hours Technical**  **Hours Managerial** 

**Hours Total Hours**  Burden hours prior to e

PMN rule 1 12 to 14 (Avg. =13) 67 to 80

(Avg.=73.5) 16 to 20

(Avg. = 36) **105 1** 

e - PMN rule change

- 13 .18 **12.8**
Totals 0 67.18 to 80.18 (Avg. = 73.68) 16 to 20

(Avg. = 18) 83.18 to 100.18

(Avg. = 91.68) **92.2 2**  1 Rounded from 104.5. 2 Based on the calculation using the rounded 105 hours

– 12.8 hours = 92.2 hours. Alternative Options Should a company

choose to request an equivalency determination (i.e., the second option), or review for modification/revocation (i.e., the fourth option), EPA estimates that a data collection and preparation effort similar to that of a SNUN would be required, and thus the burden is estimated to range up to 92.2 hours for these alternatives, the same as for submitting a SNUN. In complying with a SNUR, a company would incur costs to ensure all provisions of the SNUR were implemented at the subject facility (i.e., the third option). Since the nature of such provisions will vary

depending on the significant new uses identified in each respective SNUR, estimating burden at this time is not possible. In addition to costs of implementation, firms choosing this option will have minor costs associated with keeping records that document compliance with SNUR conditions for avoiding a Significant New Use. Such recordkeeping requirements may

involve copying and filing relevant records, including those related to: category of use and marketing, and production volume. Re cords would typi call y be required to be maintained for five years from the date of their creation. Previous existing chemical SNUR I CRs have estimated recordkeeping requirements to be five percent of the reporting burden for a certain activity (EPA, 2009b) . Per

- activity burdens are taken from the midpoint estimate burdens of each section of the SNUN form (EPA, 1994). The recordkeeping burdens per significant new use are estimated to range from 0.01 hours (0.25 * 0.05) for keeping records of trade names and chemical sy nony ms to 0.76 hours (15.25 * 0.05) for keeping records of sites controlled by others. The total recordkeeping burden per firm will depend on the significant new use(s) identified. The final alternative for a company considering a significant new use of a chemical which is the subject of a SNUR is to forgo the new use (i.e., the fifth option). In carrying out such a response, the company would incur no direct regulatory burden or costs. Customer Notification Manufacturers, processors, and importers of chemicals subject to SNURs must notify recipients of such chemicals of the SNUR or verify that knowledge of the SNUR has been otherwise acquired b y recipients, or that the recipients are unable to engage in significant newuses. Since it is no t expected that all such entities will have complete knowledge of all uses of

any products subject to a SNUR, and because filing a SNUN could require significantl y more burden, it is assumed that manufacturers, processors, and importers will most often cho ose to notify their customers of SNUR regulatory activities. As this notification may be accomplished by simply annotating an MSDS, EPA estimates the associated burden to be about one hour of a technical emplo ye e's time per manufacturer, processor, or impo rter per chemical. EPA estimates that each SNUR will cover approximately 7 chemicals. Furthermore, EPA assumes that there are two manufacturers, processors, or importers per chemical. 5 Therefore, the burden per SNUR is estimated to be 14 hours per SNUR.
S ummary of Unit Burdens The following table summarizes the burdens for the activities required under a SNUR, under compliance option 1.

**Table 8: Summary of Unit Burdens Collection Activity**  **Estimated Burden Hours** Chemical verification (per SNUR) 1.17 Rule Familiarization (per company) 0.83 CDX registration, electronic signature, and Pay.gov account set

-up (per company) 2.8 SNUN preparation (per report) 92.2 Notifying customers (per SNUR) 14
**6(b) Estimating Respondent**  **Costs** The unit costs of filing a SNUN are estimated b y monetizing the labor time spent preparing the SNUN and then adding any fixed costs associated with filing a SNUN. This section derives these unit costs. (i) Wages EPA multiplied burden estimates by standard wage rates for managerial, technical, and clerical levels developed from information published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BL S) and a method outlined in the document Wage Rates for Economic Analyses of the Toxics Release Inventory Program (EPA, 2002b). Wage data for the three occupational categories were gathered for manufacturing industries from Employer Costs for Employee Compensation Supplementary Tables: Historical Data December 2006

– December 2010 (BL S, 2011a). The cost of fringe benefits, such as health insurance and vacation, is taken for each labor category from the same ECEC series. Following the methodology outlined in EPA 2002b, fringe

5 The assumption that there are two manufacturers, processors, or importers per chemical follows from previous ICRs for these requirements.benefits are calculated as a percentage of total wages for each category . EPA added 17 percent to

the wages in each category to account for overhead, based on information provided by the chemical industry

and chemical industry

trade associations in the Rev ised Economic Analysis for the Amended Inventory Update Rule: Final Report (EPA, 2002a). The wages for each of the three categories were then multiplied by benefits and overhead factors to estimate loaded, annual salaries in year 2010 dollars. Table 9 cont ains the loaded wage rates f or the managerial, technical and clerical occupation categories. **Table 9: Derivation of Loaded Wage Rates for the Private Manufacturing Sector in 2010$**

**Wage 1**  **Fringe**

**Benefits 1**  **Fringes as**

**% of Wage Overhead** 

**% of Wage**  **2 Fringe**  **+**

**Overhead Factor**  **Loaded**

**Wages (a)**  **(b) (c) = (b)/(a)**  **(d) (e)=(1)+(c)+(d)**  **(f) = (a) x (e) Clerical**  $17.36 $8.67 48.37% 17% 1.67 **$28.98 Technical**  $36.93 $18.50 47.58% 17% 1.67 **$61.71 Managerial**  $42.82 $19.64 45.03% 17% 1.63 **$69.74** 1 Employer Costs for Employee Compensation Supplementary Tables: Historical Data December 2006

– December 2010, US Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 2011 (BLS, 2011a). 2 An overhead rate of 17 percent was estimated based on industry data gathered for the Rev ised Economic Analysis for the Amended Inventory Update Rule: Final Report (EPA, 2002a). (ii) Summary

of Unit Costs Costs for Chemical Verification The Agency

estimates that chemical verification will require 1.17 technical hours per SNUR. The total estimated cost per SNUR is estimated to be $72.14 (1.17 hours per SNUR x $61.71) Costs for Rule Familiarization EPA estimates rule familiarization costs will require 0.83 hours per firm and total costs are expected to be $52.54. Costs for CDX Registration, CDX Electronic Signature, and Pay .gov Account Setup First

- time submitters of any section 5 Notice are requi red to register their company and key users with the CDX reporting tool, deliver a CDX electronic signature to EPA, and establish and use a Pay .gov E

- payment account. EPA estimates that companies will spend approximately $58.03 on CDX registration, $114.01 on completing the Electronic Signature Agreements, $2.30 mailing electronic signature agreements, and $9.30 setting up a Pay .gov account. Therefore the total expected costs associated with CDX registration, completing and mailing an electronic signature a greement and setting up a Pay .gov account is approximately $184.**Table 10: CDX Registration, CDX Electronic Signature, and Pay.gov Account Setup Cost**

**for First**
**- Time Submitters**  **Activity Clerical Labor**  **(at $29.98/hour)**  **Technical**

**Labor (at $61.71/hour)**  **Ma nagerial** 

**Labor (at $69.74/hour)**  **Total Labor Cost**

**(2010 dollars)** CDX registration $0.00 $45.25 $12.78 **$58.03** CDX electronic signature $0.00 $61.71 $52.30 **$114.01** Mailing cost **$2.30** E

-payment (Pay.gov ID) $0.00 $0.00 $9.30 **$9.30 Total**  $0.00 **$106.96 $74.38**  **$183.64** Costs for Submitting a SNUN Using these labor wage rates and midpoint burden estimates presented above, EPA estimates that the labor cost associated with filing a SNUN is $5,802. In addition, SNUN filers must pay a $2,500 user fee to EPA. Thus, the total cost of filing a SNUN is approximately $ 8,302

. **Table 11: Unit Reporting Cost Estimates, Associated with Filing a SNUN by Labor Category**  **Activity Clerical Labor**  **(at $29.98/hour)**  **Technical**

**Labor (at $61.71/hour)**  **Managerial**

**Labor (at $69.74/hour)**  **Total Labor Cost**

**(2010 dollars)** SNUN preparation $0.00 $4,546.79 $1,255.32 **$5,802** User fee **$2,500 Total**  **$0.00 $4,546.79**  **$1,255.32 $**  **8,302** Alternative Responses As noted in section 4, five alternative responses to any particular SNUR could be chosen by firms planning to engage in significant new uses of subject chemicals. Although EPA has not projected or quantified how frequently these alternatives might be selected, the unit costs associated with each option are discu ssed briefl y below. The estimated burden of requesting an equivalency determination (the second option) or review for modification/revocation (the fourth option) was judged to be similar to filing the SNUN; thus, total costs including the EPA user fee were estimated to be $8,302. However, the firm may incur additional costs in developing the data necessary to justify the alternative. This option will be preferable to compliance with the SNUR if the total cost of obtaining EPA approval of a request is l ess than the costs of SNUR compliance. Firms choosing to comply with a SNUR (the third option), will incur costs to ensure all provisions of the SNUR were implemented at the subject facility and to implement recordkeeping. The costs of implementing provis ions at a facility were not quantified for this ICR. Recordkeeping is expected to range from 0.01 hours to 0.76 hours for each significant new use. All recordkeeping activities are expected to be conducted b y cl erical staff, therefore recordkeeping costs r ange from $0.36 to $22.10 per significant new use. The total recordkeepingburden per firm will depend on the significant new use(s) identified.

Customer Notification EPA assumes that the customer notification requirement will be handled b y techni cal labor. Section 5 of this analy sis assumed that one hour of labor per chemical would be required to perform the notification, thus the unit cost of notification is estimated to be $61.71 (i.e., the hourly wage for technical labor). EPA estimates that ea ch SNUR will cover approximately 7 chemicals. Furthermore, EPA assumes that there are two manufacturers, processors, or importers per chemical 6 . Therefore, the burden per SNUR is estimated to be 14 hours per SNUR ([7 chemicals per SNUR]*[1 hour per manufac turer, processor, or importer]*[2 manufacturers, processors, or importers per chemical]), and the cost per SNUR is equal to $863.90 [($61.71per hour)*(14 hours per SNUR)]. Summary Table 12 summarizes the unit costs estimated in this section. Reviewing a SNUR to verify that a chemical is included is estimated to cost $419.63 per SNUR and notifying customers is $863.90 per SNUR. The cost of completing and submitting a SNUN is approxim ately

$8,302.11. EPA estimates the costs associated with rule familiarization to be $50.92 per compan y, and CDX registration activities to be $183.64 per company

**Table 12: Summary of Unit Costs Collection Activity**  **Estimated Cost** Chemical verification (per SNUR) $72.14 Rule familiarization (per company) $52.54 CDX registration, electronic signature, and Pay .gov account set

- up (per company) $183.64 SNUN preparation* $8,302.11 Notifying customers (per SNUR) $863.90 * Includes $2,500 user fee per SNUN. (iii) Total Burden and Costs to Industry This section provides estimates of the total burden and costs imposed by the TSCA section 5(a) requirements. These estimates can be divided into five categories: chemical verification, rule familiarization, submitting SNUNs, CDX registration activities, and notifying customers. The total cost and burden imposed on industry by TSCA section 5(a)(2) requirements can be calculated b y multiplying the unit burden and co st estimates by the expected number of SNURs, SNUNs, and firms. As noted above, this anal ys is assumes that EPA will promulgate five SNURs and receive seven SNUNs per ye ar. Table 13 presents the annual burden and cost to the

6 The assumption that there are two manufacturers, processors, or importers per chemical follows from previous ICRs for these requirements.industry . EPA estimates the total annual industry burden of existing chemical SNUR action is 736 hours and $63,799. **Table 13: Estimated Annual Respondent Burden and Cost**
**Information Collection Activity**  **Total**

**Burden per Activity**  **(hours) Total Cost** 

**per Activity**  **(2010$) Total** 

**Number of Units**  **Annually Total** 

**Annual Burden**  **(hours) Total Annual** 

**Cost (2010$)**
Rule familiarization (per firm) 0.83 $53 4.24 Firms **3.52 $225**  Preparation, submission, and recordkeeping for SNUN (per report) 92.2 $8,302 7 SNUNs **645 $58,114**  CDX registration, electronic signature, Pay.gov set

-up (per firm) 2.8 $184 4.24 Firms **11.88 $781** 

Chemical verification (per SNUR) 1.17 $72 5 SNURs **5.85 $360**  Notifying customers (per SNUR) 14 $864 5 SNURs **70.00 $4,320**  **Total Industry Burden and Cost 736**  **$63,799** Some burden estimate totals may not calculate due to rounding of unit burden estimates Table 14 presents the total burden and cost to the industry over the three

- year ICR period. EPA estimates the total annual industry burden of existing chemical SNUR action is 2,208 hours and $191,398.**Table 14: Estimated Total Respondent Burden and Cost, Three Year Totals**

**Information Collection Activity**  **Total**

**Burden per Activity**  **(hours) Total** 

**Cost per Activity**  **(2010$) Total** 

**Number of**  **Units Total** 

**Annual Burden**  **(hour s)**  **Total Annual**

**Cost (2010$)** Rule familiarization (per firm) 0.83 $53 12.72 Firms 10.56 $675 Preparation, submission, and recordkeeping for SNUN (per report) 92.2 $8,302 21 SNUNs 1,936 $174,342 CDX registration. electronic signature, Pay.gov set

-up (per firm) 2.8 $184 12.72 Firms 35.64 $2,342 Chemical verification (per SNUR) 1.17 $72 15 SNURs 18 $1,080 Notifying customers (per SNUR) 14 $864 15 SNURs 210 $12,960 **Total Industry Burden and Cost 2,210**  **$191,398** Some burden estimate totals may not calculate due to rounding of unit burden estimates Table 15 presents the annual burden b y collection activity. Chemical verification is expected to have a total burden of 5.85 hours annually . Notifying consumers is expected to have burden of 70 hours annually . Companies are expected to incur a total of 3.52 hours for rule familiarization, 11.88 hours for CDX registration activities and a total of 645 hours for SNUN completion, each ye ar.**Table 15: Annual Informatio n Collection Tally for ICR Reporting Period (2012** 
**- 2015)** 

**Information Collection**  **No. of**

**Respondents No. of** 

**Responses / Respondent**  **Responses**

**Subtotal Annual** 

**Burden Hours per**  **Response Annual** 

**Burden Hours per**  **Activity Per Firm Activities**  Rule familiarization 4.24 1 4.24 0.83 **3.52** CDX registration activities 4.24 1 4.24 2.80 **11.88**

 CDX registration 4.24 1 4.24 0.92 **3.89**

 ESA 4.24 1 4.24 1.75 **7.42**

 Pay.gov account 4.24 1 4.24 0.13 **0.57** Preparation, submission, and recordkeeping for SNUN 4.24 1.65 7 92.2 **645**

**Per SNUR Activities** Chemical verification 5 1 5 1.17 **5.85** Notifying customers (per SNUR) 35 2 70 1 **70.00** Some burden estimate subtotals may not calculate due to rounding of unit burden estimates Table 16 presents the total burden hours for the ICR period (2012

–2015), organized by information collection. Chemical verification is expected to have burden of 17.55 hours over the three ye ar period. Notifying consumers is expected to have burden of 210 hours over the three ye ar period. Companies are expected to incur at total of 10.56 hours for rule familiarization, 35.64 hours for CDX registration activities and a total of 1,936 hours for SNUN completion, submission and recordkeeping over the three ye ar period.**Table 16: Total Information Collect ion Tally for ICR Reporting Period (2012** 
**- 2015)** 

**Information Collection**  **No. of**

**Respondents No. of** 

**Responses / Respondent**  **Responses**

**Subtotal Total Burden** 

**Hours per Response**  **Total Burden**

**Hours Subtotal**  **Per Firm Activities** Rule familiarization 12.72 1 13 0.83 **10.56** CDX registration activities 12.72 1 13 2.80 **35.64**

 CDX registration 12.72 1 13 0.92 **11.67**

 ESA 12.72 1 13 1.75 **22.27**

 Pay.gov account 12.72 1 13 0.13 **1.70** Preparation, submission, and recordkeeping for SNUN 12.72 1.65 21 92.2 **1,936**

**Per SNUR Activities** Chemical verification 15 1 15 1.17 **17.55** Notifying customers (per SNUR) 105 2 210 1 **210** Some burden estimate subtotals may not calculate due to rounding of unit burden estimates **6(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost**  (i) SNUN Processing EPA’s costs to review and process SNUNs are assumed to be the same as EPA costs to review PMNs. The list of review steps, estimates of extramural costs, and the percent of chemicals requiring a particular review step are derived from the costs for processing PMN submissions in Table VII

- 1 of EPA’s Regulatory Impact Analysis of Amendments to Regulations for TSCA Section 5 Premanufacture Notifications (EPA, 1994). The Agency burden associated with processing a PMN has been adjusted to reflect burd en reductions resulting from the ePMN rule that requires the electronic submission of all TSCA section 5 notices. Electronic submission of SNUN forms is expected to reduce Agency burden by

16.5 percent (EPA, 2009a, p.28). The Extramural Cost column shows c osts for contractor support and other outside purchases for chemicals requiring the selected review step, and is inflated from 1993 prices using the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Employ ment Cost Index (ECI) data (BLS, 2011b). T he not seasonall y adjusted E CI for total compensation of private industry professional and related workers (Series ID CIU2010000120000I ) is used because it is the only series with continuous data since 1985, and that includes professional and technical labor, which perform the majo rity of Agency extramural activities. Table 17 contains the derivation of inflation factors for Agency extramural costs.**Table 17: Derivation of Inflation Factors for Agency Extramural Costs**

**Item Inflation index source**  1 **Starting year**  **Index for**

**starting year**  (a) **Index**

**for 2010** (b) **Inflation**

**factor** (b)/(a) 2 Agency extramural costs White collar labor; equipment;

supplies BLS ECI, NSA, Total comp, Private industry, **Professional and related** , 4 th Q [BLS 2011 b] 1993 67.0 113.5 1.694

**Notes:**

1 In 2006, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Employment Cost Index (ECI) series “were rebased to December 2005 = 100 from June 1989 = 100.” The change is reflected in the indices in this table and explained on the BLS website, Employment Cost Index News Rel ease Text: Employment Cost Index, March 2006 (BLS, 2006). The “Starting year” ECI index is SIC

- OCS based: ECS11102I for private industry White Collar Workers. The index is Seasonally Adjusted (SA). The year 2010 ECI index is NAICS

- SOC based: CIU20100001 20000I (B) for private industry White Collar Workers. The index is Seasonally Adjusted (SA). 2 Inflation factors are rounded to three decimal places in this table, but calculations in this report use the unrounded valu es. BLS CPI values were published with one decimal place through 2006 and with three decimal places after that. Agency labor costs are calculated based on annual f ederal salaries for the Washington

Baltimore area published by the Office of Personnel Management effective January 2010 (OPM, 2010). EPA assumes that, on average, a federal GS

- 13, Step 5 full

- time equivalent (FTE) will conduct its collection and administrative activities 7

. The average salary for a GS

- 13 Step 5 employee was $100,904 in 2010 without fringe benefits and over head costs. In order to derive the fully loaded salary , EPA multiplied the annual salary by an assumed loading factor of 1.6 to reflect federal fringe benefits and overhead, which results in a fully loaded annual salary

of $161,446.40 Dividing the fully loaded annual salary

by 2,080 hours (i.e., the number of hours in a work ye ar) yi elds an hourly FTE wage rate of $77.62. Total Agency

costs are expected to be $5,049, per SNUN, for submission review and processing, as shown in Table 1 8

.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 7. The GS

- 13, Step 5 is consistent with ICR OMB Control Number 2070

- 0012, EPA Tracking Number 0574.13, EPA 2007.**Table 18: Agency Costs for SNUN and Other Submission Review and Processing**

**Review Steps**  **EPA staff (FTE) Cost Extram** **ural Cost 2**  **Unw eighted**  **Cost Pct. of** 

**Cases Weighted** 

**Cost 3**  **ePMN**

**Burden Reduction**  **4 Weighted** 

**Cost with ePMN Burden**  **Reduction Weighted** 

**FTE with ePMN**  **Burden Reduction**  **FTE fraction**  **Cost per**

**FTE 1**  **FTE Total**

**($2010) 1993** 

**dollars 2010** 

**dollars** (a) (b) (c)=(a)*(b) (d) (e) (f)=(c)+(e) (g) (h)=(f)*(g) (i) (j)=(h)*(1

- (i)) (k)=(a)*(g)*( 1

- (i )) Pre

- notice consultation 0.0024 $161,446 $387.47 $4.00 $6.78 $394 41% $161.64 0.165 **$135 0.0008**  Administrative prescreen/ notice receipt/user fee 0.0024 $161,446 $387.47 $92.00 $155.85 $543 100% $543.32 0.165 **$454 0.0020**  CRSS (Chemical Review and Search Strategy) 0.0025 $161,446 $403.62 $268.00 $454.00 $858 100% $857.62 0.165 **$716 0.0021**  SAT (Structure Activity Team) 0.0006 $161,446 $96.87 $14.00 $23.72 $121 100% $120.58 0.165 **$101 0.0005**  Engineering/Exposure 0.0015 $161,446 $242.17 $56.00 $94.87 $337 100% $337.04 0.165 **$281 0.0013**  Exposure/Fate 0.0008 $161,446 $129.16 $0.00 $0.00 $129 100% $129.16 0.165 **$108 0.0007**  Focus 0.0009 $161,446 $145.30 $23.00 $38.96 $184 100% $184.26 0.165 **$154 0.0008**  Standard Review Functions 0.0219 $161,446 $3,535.68 $511.00 $865.65 $4,401 29% $1,276.38 0.165 **$1,066 0.0053**  Division Directors Meeting 0.0129 $161,446 $2,082.66 $113.00 $191.43 $2,274 15% $341.11 0.165 **$285 0.0016**  Order Development/Negotiation Review 0.0171 $161,446 $2,760.73 $22.00 $37.27 $2,798 3% $83.94 0.165 **$70 0.0004** 
Post Order Data Review 0.0886 $161,446 $14,304. $0.00 $0.00 $14,304 3% $429.12 0.165 **$358 0.0022**  Order Modification 0.2167 $161,446 $34,985.43 $0.00 $0.00 $34,985 3% $1,049.56 0.165 **$876 0.0054**  New Chemical SNUR Development 0.0277 $161,446 $4,472.07 $85.00 $143.99 $4,616 7% $323.12 0.165 **$270 0.0016**  Notices of Commencement 0.0012 $161,446 $193.74 $40.00 $67.76 $261 31% $81.06 0.165 **$68 0.0003**  FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) Requests 0.0333 $161,446 $5,376.17 $287.00 $486.19 $5,862 1% $58.62 0.165 **$49 0.0003**  CBI (Confidential Business Information) Substantiation 0.0004 $161,446 $64.58 $3.00 $5.08 $70 100% $69.66 0.165 **$58 0.0003**  **TOTAL $6,046**  **0.165 $5,049**  **0.0256 Notes:**  1 GS

- 13 Step 5 salaries loaded with benefits and overhead. 2 Extramural costs consist of contracting support and other purchases directly attributable to the PMN review process inflated from 1993. 3 Weighted costs were calculated using unrounded unit cost estimates, so results may differ from calculations using the rounded values shown in this table. 4 Electronic submission is expected to generate a cost savings of 16.5% to the Agency (EPA 2009a, p. 28). **Sources:** FTEs per review step, 1993 extramural costs , and percents of cases are from EPA, 1994 Table VII

- 1, GS

- 13 salaries are from OPM, 2010

.Using the estimates of annual SNUR promulgation and SNUR notice submissions

presented above, EPA’s estimated costs are presented in Table 19. Processing SNUNs is estimated to cost the Agency $35,343 annuall y. The Agency may also incur a cost for modifying a SNUR if submitted data indicate a need for such an action. Costs to perform such a modification have not been estimated. **Table 19: Annual Agency Costs**
**Activity Total** 

**Burden per Activity**  **(FTE) Total** 

**Burden per Activity**  **(Hours) Total Cost** 

**per Activity (2010$)**  **Total**

**Number of**  **Units Total Annual** 

**Burden (hours)**  **Total**

**Annual Cost**  **(2010$)** SNUN processing 0.0256 $53 $5,049 7 SNUNs **373.07 $35,343**  Some burden estimate subtotals may not calculate due to rounding of unit burden estimates Table 20 presents the total Agency cost for SNUN processing over the three year ICR period, $106,029. **Table 20: Total Agency Costs**
**Activity Total** 

**Burden per Activity**  **(FTE) Total** 

**Burden per Activity**  **(Hours) Total Cost** 

**per Activity (2010$)**  **Total**

**Number of**  **Units Total Annual** 

**Burden (hours)**  **Total**

**Annual Cost**  **(2010$)** SNUN processing 0.0256 $53 $5,049 21 SNUNs **1,119 $106,029**  Some burden estimate subtotals may not calculate due to rounding of unit burden estimates **6(d) Reasons for Change in Burden**  EPA estimates industry

will incur a decrease of 440 hours in annual burden compared to the estimate of 1,176 hours in the information collection inventory most recently

approved b y OMB (Request for a Non

- Substantive Change to an Existing Approved Information Collection submitted April 2010). The change is from 1,176 hours in the currently approved inventory

to 737 hours as estimated in section 6(b) above. Differences in burden and costs are attributed to adjustments. Adjustments capture changes in the baseline burden not included in the currently approved ICR. These changes result from updates to the number of affected sites and responses, and the correction of estimat es in the previous ICR. As shown in Table 21, EPA estimates an annual 440 hour burden decrease as a result of adjustment changes. More details on the adjustments are outlined below.

Adjustment Changes The currently

approved ICR estimated that, on average, 10 SNUNs will be submitted annually . Upon review of past SNUN submissions from FY 2001 through FY 2011, this number was reduced from 10 SNUNs per ye ar to 7 SNUNs per year. The previous ICR also assumed that one compan y will submit a single SNUN. However, reviews of past submissions indicate that the average company will submit 1.65 SNUNs. In addition, a review of SNUNs since 2008 reducedthe number of expected chemicals that are affected from 41 to 7 per SNUR.

The previous ICR used an estimate of 93.3 hours for reporting and recordkeeping for a SNUN. This I CR adjusts that number to 92.2 because the 1 hour of recordkeeping included in the previous I CR is a result of double counting.
**Table 21: Estimate of Changes in Annual Burden Hours from Previous ICR by Activity** 

**Activity Annual Burden Increase Due**  **from Adjustment (to Baseline) for R Addendum** 

**Period Total Burden Increase** 

**from Adjustment (to Baseline) for Addendum**  **Period** Rule familiarization (per firm) 1.03 3 Preparation, submission, and recordkeeping for SNUN (per report) - 286.6

- 860 CDX registration (per firm) 1.9 6 CDX signature 2.02 6 e Pay

- 0.45

- 1 Chemical verification (per SNUR)

- 28.15

- 84 Notifying customers (per SNUR)

- 130

- 390 **Totals**

- 440.24

- 1,321 **6(e) Burden Statement**  The annual public burden for this collection of information, which is approved under OMB Control No. 2070

- 0038, is estimated to be approximately 8.1 hours per response. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act, burden means the total time, effort, or finan cial resources expended b y persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a federal agency. For this collection it includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install and utilize technology and sy stems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with an y previously

applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not requ ired to respond to, a collection of information unless it display s a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control number for this information collection appears above. In addition, the OMB control numbers for EPA’s regulation, after initial display in the final rule, are listed in 40 CFR part 9. The Agency

has established a public docket for this I CR under Docket ID No. EPA

- HQ

OPPT

- 2011

- 0778, which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC). The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is located in the EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday , excluding legal holiday s. The telephone number for the EPA/DC Public Reading Room is (202) 566

- 1744, and the telephone number for the Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket is (202) 566

- 0280. You may submit commentsregarding the Agency' s need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates and an y suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques. Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA

- HQ

- OPPT

- 2011

- 0 778 and OMB Control No. 2070

- 0038, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or b y mail to: Document Control Office (DCO), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency , Mail Code: 7407T, 1200 P ennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20460, and (2) OMB b y m ail to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503.**REFERENCES**

BLS, 2006. U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment Cost Index News Release Text: Employment Cost Index, March 2006 (April 28, 2006), at http://www.bls.gov

. BL S, 2011a. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Employer Costs for Employee Compensation Supplementary

Tables December 2010.” Accessed March 9, 2011. http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ect/sp/ecsuptc17.pdf .
BL S, 2011b. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employ ment Cost Index

– Total Compensation: Professional and Related Private Industry , Not Seasonally Adjusted. (Series ID: CIU2010000120000 I (B)), extracted June 16, 2011. http:/data.bls.gov/cgi

- bin/srgate. EPA, 1994. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics,Regulatory Impacts Branch. Regulatory Impact Analysis of Amendments to Regulations for TSCA Section 5 Premanufacture Notifications . Washington, DC: U.S. EPA/OPPT/EETD/RIB, September 9, 1994. EPA, 2002a. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analysis Branch. Revised Economic Analysis for the Amended Inventory Update Rule: Final Report. Washington, DC. August 2002. EPA, 2002b. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analy sis Branch, Wage Rates for Economic Analysis of the Toxic s Release Inventory Program. Washington, DC: June 10, 2002. EPA, 2007. U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Supporting Statement for Information Collection Request: Pre

-Manufacture Review Reporting and Exemption Requirements for New Chemical Substances and Significant New Use Reporting Requirements for Chemical Substances. OMB Control Number 2070

- 0012, EPA Tracking Number 0574.13, December 11, 2007. EPA, 2009a. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Economic and Policy Analy sis Branch . Economic Analysis of the Premanufacture Notification Electronic Reporting Final Rule

. (EPA

- HQ

- OPPT

- 2008

- 0296) . July 13, 2009 EPA, 2009b. U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics ICR No. 118.09. [Information Collection Request for] TSCA S ection 5(a)(2) Significant New Use Rules for Existing Chemicals (Renewal). Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB Review under the Paperwork Reduction Act , February 6, 2009. Office of Personnel Management (OPM), 2010. Salary Tables 2010

- DCB for the Lo cality Pay Area of Washington

- Baltimore

-Northern Virginia, DC

- MD

- VA

- WV

- PA. http://www.opm.gov/oca/10tables/pdf/DCB.pdf