### Summary of **Regulatory Flexibility Analyses Conducted**  **in Coordination with the Economic Im**  **pacts Assessment for Proposed Revisions to the Export Provisions of the Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Rule** 

**Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery**  **Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response U.S. Environmental Protection Agency** **Regulatory Flexibility Act Requirements** 

The Regulatory

Flexibility

Act of 1980 (RFA), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), requires EPA to prepare a regulatory flexibility anal ys is for any

rule that will have a significant economic impact on a su bstantial number of small entities (i.e., small businesses, small governments, and small non

- profit organizations). However, a regulatory flexibility

analy sis is not required if the Administrator certifies that the rule will not have a significant economi c impact on a substantial number of small entities. SBREFA further requires EPA to provide a statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

**Summary Discuss ion of Analyses and Results** 

The Agency

has examined the final rule's potential effects on small entities as required by the RFA/SBREFA. We have determined that the rule will not result in a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. T his determination was made b y comparing annual compliance costs under the rule to the relative average annual sales of small business es in the industrial sectors most likely to be affected b y the rule. According to the U.S. Small Business Administration's small business size standards, firms in most of these industry sectors are classified as a "small business" if they have fewer than 750 employ ees. However, for purposes of this analy sis, we determined that this threshold may be too high and could mask th e potential effects on the smallest, most vulnerable firms. Therefore, the Agency relied upon a far more conservative approach and selected a threshold for firms with fewer than 20 employ ees instead of the official standard of 750

. As summarized in the Executive Summary of the Economic Impact Assessment conducted in Nov. 2011 for the proposed revisions to the Export Provisions of the Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) Rule, the estimated costs of the rule are very minor. Our analyses found that only approximately

138 CRT Exporters would be affected by the proposed revisions (including roughl y 12 whom export CRTs for recy cling with the remaining 126 exporting CRTs for purposes of reuse). The proposed revisions vary for those exporters that recyc le vs. those that reuse CRTs. Annual compliance costs for all CRTs exporters (including both those that export for purposes of recy cling and/or reuse) ranged from $2,286 to $4,453 in the baseline. Then, there is an additional total annual cost of approxi mately $2,500 for just those 12 firms that export CRTs for recy cling. Lastly , the one

- time cost expected to be incurred by all exporters to familiarize themselves with the rule totals $39,000. When annualized and considered on a per facility basis, the co sts for “CRT Reusers” ranges from $57.54 to $72.51 per facilit y, while that for “CRT Recy clers” ranges from $265.87 to $280.84. A s reflected in Exhibit 1, when considered together this results in costs as low as $57.54 and a s high as $280.84 (depending on the ty pe of exports).

Further display ed in Exhibit 1 are ty pical numbers of facilities in 4 specific industrial sectors viewed to be most representative of CRT Exporters. The numbers shown reflect estimates of the numbers of facilities with less than 20 employ ees, as well as their Annual Sales.As shown in Exhibit 1, for firms with fewer than 20 employ ees, the annual compliance cost as a

percentage of annual sales is less than 0.1 percent. Therefore, the final rule will not have a significant economic impact on these firms. Based on the above, the Agency has determined that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

**Exhibit 1 Evaluation of the Economic Impacts on Small B**  **usinesses**

**Industry Sector NAICS** 

**Code Number of**  **Firms with Fewer**  **than 20 Employees**  **Annual**

**Sales Per Facility**  **(2007$) a**  **Range of Annual** 

**Compliance Cost s**  **for both CRT Recyclers**  **& Reusers**  **($) b**  **Annual**

**C om**  **pliance Cost as a Percentage of**  **Sales**

**CRT Rule** Lo w High Recyclable Material Wholesaler 423930 5133 2,636,310 57.54 2 80.84 0. 002% to 0.0 1 %

Materials Recovery Facilities 562920 621 971,543 57.54 280.84 0.006% to 0.03 %

Recyclable Material Collection Services, Solid Waste Collection 562111 5620 1,014,036 57.54 280.84 0. 006 % to 0.03 %

Other Waste Collection 562119 457 423,059 57.54 280.84 0. 015 % to 0.07 %

a Based on 2002 U.S. Census Bureau data, updated to 2007 dollars using the GDP Implicit Price Deflator (1.15)

. b Based on an annual compliance cost calculated as the aggregate annual costs incurred by all CRT exporters, importers and transporters, divided by the total number of affected entities. First year costs were annualized over 10 years using a discount fact or of seven percent

.