24862 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 90 / Wednesday, May 10, 1995 / Notices

14 In judicial cases, the Department of Justice

must approve the SEP.

interim milestone activities, and other

complex SEPs may not be appropriate in

those administrative enforcement

actions where EPA lacks injunctive

relief authority or is subject to a penalty

ceiling. Specific guidance on the proper

drafting of SEPs will be provided in a

separate guidance document.

H. Failure of a SEP and Stipulated

Penalties

If a SEP is not completed

satisfactorily, the defendant/respondent

should be required, pursuant to the

terms of the settlement document, to

pay stipulated penalties for its failure.

Stipulated penalty liability should be

established for each of the scenarios set

forth below as appropriate to the

individual case.

1. Except as provided in paragraph 2

immediately below, if the SEP is not

completed satisfactorily, a substantial

stipulated penalty should be required.

Generally, a substantial stipulated

penalty is between 50 and 100 percent

of the amount by which the settlement

penalty was mitigated on account of the

SEP.

2. If the SEP is not completed

satisfactorily, but the defendant/

respondent: (a) made good faith and

timely efforts to complete the project;

and (b) certifies, with supporting

documentation, that at least 90 percent

of the amount of money which was

required to be spent was expended on

the SEP, no stipulated penalty is

necessary.

3. If the SEP is satisfactorily

completed, but the defendant/

respondent spent less than 90 percent of

the amount of money required to be

spent for the project, a small stipulated

penalty should be required. Generally, a

small stipulated penalty is between 10

and 25 percent of the amount by which

the settlement penalty was mitigated on

account of the SEP.

4. If the SEP is satisfactorily

completed, and the defendant/

respondent spent at least 90 percent of

the amount of money required to be

spent for the project, no stipulated

penalty is necessary.

The determinations of whether the

SEP has been satisfactorily completed

(i.e., pursuant to the terms of the

agreement) and whether the defendant/

respondent has made a good faith,

timely effort to implement the SEP is in

the sole discretion of EPA.

I. EPA Procedures

1. Approvals

The authority of a government official

to approve a SEP is included in the

official’s authority to settle an

enforcement case and thus, subject to

the exceptions set forth here, no special

approvals are required. The special

approvals apply to both administrative

and judicial enforcement actions as

follows: 14

a. Regions in which a SEP is proposed

for implementation shall be given the

opportunity to review and comment on

the proposed SEP.

b. In all cases in which a SEP may not

fully comply with the provisions of this

Policy, the SEP must be approved by the

EPA Assistant Administrator for

Enforcement and Compliance

Assurance.

c. In all cases in which a SEP would

involve activities outside the United

States, the SEP must be approved in

advance by the Assistant Administrator

and, for judicial cases only, the

Assistant Attorney General for the

Environment and Natural Resources

Division of the Department of Justice.

d. In all cases in which a SEP

includes an environmental compliance

promotion project, the SEP must be

approved by the Office of Regulatory

Enforcement in OECA. With time, this

approval requirement may be delegated

to Regional officials.

2. Documentation and Confidentiality

In each case in which a SEP is

included as part of a settlement, an

explanation of the SEP with supporting

materials (including the PROJECT

model printout, where applicable) must

be included as part of the case file. The

explanation of the SEP should

demonstrate that the five criteria set

forth in Section A.3 above are met by

the project and include a description of

the expected benefits associated with

the SEP. The explanation must include

a description by the enforcement

attorney of how nexus and the other

legal guidelines are satisfied.

Documentation and explanations of a

particular SEP may constitute

confidential settlement information that

is exempt from disclosure under the

Freedom of Information Act, is outside

the scope of discovery, and is protected

by various privileges, including the

attorney-client privilege and the

attorney work-product privilege. While

individual Agency evaluations of

proposed SEPs are confidential

documents, this Policy is a public

document and may be released to

anyone upon request.

This Policy is primarily for the use of U.S.

EPA enforcement personnel in settling cases.

EPA reserves the right to change this Policy

at any time, without prior notice, or to act at

variance to this Policy. This Policy does not

create any rights, duties, or obligations,

implied or otherwise, in any third parties.

[FR Doc. 95–11501 Filed 5–9–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

[OPPT–59344; FRL–4951–5]

Certain Chemicals; Approval of a Test

Marketing Exemption

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA’s

approval of an application for test

marketing exemption (TME) under

section 5(h)(1) of the Toxic Substances

Control Act (TSCA) and 40 CFR 720.38.

EPA has designated this application as

TME–95–3. The test marketing

conditions are described below.

DATES: This notice becomes effective

April 24, 1995. Written comments will

be received until May 25, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments,

identified by the docket number [OPPT–

59344] and the specific TME number

should be sent to: TSCA noncofidential

center (NCIC), Office of Pollution

Prevention and Toxics, Environmental

Protection Agency, Rm. NEB–607

(7407), 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC

20460, (202) 554–1404, TDD (202) 554–

0551.

Comments and data may also be

submitted electronically by sending

electronic mail (e-mail) to:

ncic@epamail.epa.gov. Electronic

comments must be submitted as an

ASCII file avoiding the use of special

characters and any form of encryption.

Comments and data will also be

accepted on disks in WordPerfect in 5.1

file format or ASCII file format. All

comments and data in electronic form

must be identified by [OPPT–59344]. No

CBI should be submitted through e-mail.

Electronic comments on this notice may

be filed online at many Federal

Depository Libraries. Additional

information on electronic submissions

can be found under SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vera

Stubbs, New Chemicals Branch,

Chemical Control Division (7405),

Office of Pollution Prevention and

Toxics, Environmental Protection

Agency, Rm. E–447, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460, (202) 260–5671.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

5(h)(1) of TSCA authorizes EPA to

exempt persons from premanufacture

notification (PMN) requirements and

permit them to manufacture or import

new chemical substances for test
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 90 / Wednesday, May 10, 1995 / Notices 24863

marketing purposes if the Agency finds

that the manufacture, processing,

distribution in commerce, use and

disposal of the substances for test

marketing purposes will not present an

unreasonable risk of injury to health or

the environment. EPA may impose

restrictions on test marketing activities

and may modify or revoke a test

marketing exemption upon receipt of

new information which casts significant

doubt on its finding that the test

marketing activity will not present an

unreasonable risk of injury.

EPA hereby approves TME–95–3. EPA

had determined that test marketing of

the new chemical substance described

below, under the conditions set out in

the TME application, and for the time

period and restrictions specified below,

will not present an unreasonable risk of

injury to health or the environment.

Production volume, use, and the

number of customers must not exceed

that specified in the application. All

other conditions and restrictions

described in the application and in this

notice must be met.

Inadvertently, notice of receipt of the

application was not published.

Therefore, an opportunity to submit

comments is being offered at this time.

EPA may modify or revoke the test

marketing exemption if comments are

received which cast significant doubt on

its finding that the test marketing

activities will not present an

unreasonable risk of injury.

The following additional restrictions

apply to TME–95–3. A bill of lading

accompanying each shipment must state

that the use of the substance is restricted

to that approved in the TME. In

addition, the Company shall maintain

the following records until five years

after the date they are created, and shall

make them available for inspection or

copying in accordance with section 11

of TSCA:

1. The applicant must maintain

records of the quantity of the TME

substance produced and the date of

manufacture.

2. The applicant must maintain

records of dates of the shipments to

each customer and the quantities

supplied in each shipment.

3. The applicant must maintain

copies of the bill of lading that

accompanies each shipment of the TME

substance.

T–95–3

Date of Receipt: March 27, 1995. The

extended comment period will close

May 25, 1995.

Applicant: Reichhold Chemicals, Inc.

Chemical: Polyurethane adhesives.

Use: Adhesive.

Production Volume: Confidential.

Number of Customers: Confidential.

Test Marketing Period: One year.

Commencing on first day of commercial

manufacture.

Risk Assessment: EPA identified no

significant health or environmental

concerns for the test market substance.

Therefore, the test market activities will

not present any unreasonable risk of

injury to human health and the

environment.

The Agency reserves the right to

rescind approval or modify the

conditions and restrictions of an

exemption should any new information

come to its attention which casts

significant doubt on its finding that the

test marketing activities will not present

an unreasonable risk of injury to health

or the environment.

A record has been established for this

notice under docket number [OPPT–

59344] (including comments and data

submitted electronically as described

above). A public version of this record,

including printed, paper versions of

electronic comments, which does not

include any information claimed as

confidential business information (CBI),

is available for inspection from 12 noon

to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,

excluding legal holidays. The public

record is located in the TSCA

Nonconfidential Information Center,

Rm. NEM–B607, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460.

Electronic comments can be sent

directly to EPA at:

ncic@epamail.epa.gov

Electronic comments must be

submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the

use of special characters and any form

of encryption.

The official record for this notice, as

well as the public version, as described

above will be kept in paper form.

Accordingly, EPA will transfer all

comments received electronically into

printed, paper form as they are received

and will place the paper copies in the

official record which will also include

all comments submitted directly in

writing. The official record is the paper

record maintained at the address in

ADDRESSES at the beginning of this

document.

List of Subjects

Environmental protection, Test

marketing exemptions.

Dated: April 24, 1995.

Paul J. Campanella,

Chief, New Chemicals Branch, Office of

Pollution Prevention and Toxics.

[FR Doc. 95–11499 Filed 5–9–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE U.S.

[Public Notice 24]

Agency Forms Submitted for OMB

Review

AGENCY: Export-Import Bank of the

United States (Ex-Im Bank).

ACTION: In accordance with the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1980, Ex-Im Bank has submitted

a proposed collection of information in

the form of a survey to the Office of

Management and Budget for review.

PURPOSE: The proposed Ex-Im Bank

‘‘Customer Service Satisfaction Survey,’’

to exporters of U.S. goods and services,

is to be completed by U.S. exporters

who have used Ex-Im Bank’s services.

This survey is one of Ex-Im Bank’s tools

of providing an evaluation of the

effectiveness, utility, strengths and

weaknesses of, the relationships

established between Ex-Im Bank and the

exporting community.

The collection of the information will

enable Ex-Im Bank to assess and report

to the Executive Branch and the U.S.

Congress the private sector’s view of its

Customer Service and its

competitiveness, as required by

Executive Order 12862.

SUMMARY: The following summarizes the

information collection proposal

submitted to OMB:

(1) Type of request: new

(2) Number of forms submitted: one

(3) Form Number: EIB 95–7

(4) Title of information collection:

Customer Service Satisfaction Survey

(5) Frequency of use: annual

(6) Respondents: Exporters of U.S. goods

and services

(7) Estimated total number of annual

responses: 1,000

(8) Estimated total number of hours

needed to fill out the form: 333.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR COMMENTS:

Copoies of the proposed application

may be obtained from Tamzen Reitan,

Agency Clearance Officer, (202) 565–

3333. Comments and questions should

be directed to Mr. Jeff Hill Office of

Management and Budget, Information

and Regulatory Affairs, Room 10102,

New Executive Office Building,

Washington, DC 20503, (202) 395–3176.

All comments should be submitted