Document ID: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2006-0853-0002
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2007-02-01T05:00Z

SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 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:	Reporting and Recordkeeping for Asbestos Abatement Worker
Protection

	EPA ICR No.:	1246.10	OMB Control No.:	2070-0072

	1(b)	Short Characterization

	The Asbestos Worker Protection Rule (WPR) (40 CFR 763, Subpart G; see
Attachment C) establishes workplace standards for the protection of
State and local government employees who work with asbestos and who are
not covered by an OSHA-approved State Plan.  Currently, employees in 26
States, the District of Columbia and certain other U.S. territories who
perform construction work, including building construction, renovation,
demolition, and maintenance activities, and employees who perform brake
and clutch repair work are covered by the WPR.  The WPR incorporates, by
reference, the OSHA Construction Industry Standard for Asbestos (29 CFR
1926.1101) and the General Industry Standard for Asbestos (29
CFR1910.1001).  As a result, the WPR requires State and local government
employers to use engineering controls and appropriate work practices to
control the release of asbestos fibers.  Covered employers must also
monitor employee exposure to asbestos and provide employees with
personal protective equipment, training, and medical surveillance to
reduce the risk of asbestos exposure.  Exposure monitoring records must
be maintained for 30 years, medical surveillance records for the
duration of employment of the affected employees plus 30 years, and
training records for the duration of employment plus 1 year.  Employers
must also establish written respiratory protection programs and maintain
procedures and records of respirator fit tests for 1 year.

2.	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

	2(a)	Need/Authority for the Collection

	The records maintained as a result of this information collection will
provide the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with the data
necessary for effective enforcement of the WPR, as authorized under
Sections 6 and 8(a) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) (15
U.S.C. 2605, 2607(a)).  (See Attachments A and B.)

	2(b)	Use/Users of the Data

	The purpose of the WPR is to provide protection from adverse health
effects associated with occupational exposure to asbestos for State and
local government employees who are engaged in asbestos-related
construction, custodial, and brake and clutch repair activities in
States that do not have OSHA-approved State plans.  Like the OSHA
Standards, the rule requires employers (in this case, State and local
governments) to monitor employee exposure to asbestos, to take action to
reduce exposures to levels below the permissible exposure limits (PELs),
to provide employees with personal protective equipment, to monitor
employee health, to train employees about the hazards of asbestos and
how to minimize those hazards, and to provide employees with information
about exposures to asbestos and the associated health effects.

	The recordkeeping provisions contained in the rule are designed to
ensure that employers are complying with applicable standards and that
protection of employees exposed to asbestos is provided to the full
extent required.  EPA’s compliance officers examine the records for
this purpose when conducting inspections.  Additionally, the data
contained in exposure measurements records are useful to employers in
pinpointing areas of their operations that may require additional
efforts to reduce exposure.  If these data were not collected and
maintained, compliance monitoring would be very difficult for EPA, and
failures of asbestos-control measures could easily go undetected by the
employer.

	Records of medical examinations are used by physicians who must
periodically examine employees exposed to asbestos.  Without records of
previous medical examinations, the physician may not be able to
determine whether an employee has suffered an adverse health effect
since his or her last examination.  Furthermore, when symptoms of
organic damage appear, the physician often needs information regarding
the patient’s previous medical condition in order to make an accurate
diagnosis of the new problem, its apparent cause, and the course of
treatment required.

	In addition, the data and information contained in the records required
to be kept and maintained by the WPR may be used by EPA for the
development of asbestos exposure assessments.  Exposure data and medical
surveillance information may be used for epidemiological and diagnostic
investigations to determine, for example, dose-response relationships in
diseases caused by asbestos exposure.

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

	3(a)	Non-Duplication

	EPA is not aware of any other laws or regulations that require the
general compilation, maintenance, or provision of access to occupational
exposure and medical records for State and local government workers in
the 26 States, the District of Columbia and certain other U.S.
territories without an OSHA-approved State plan.  Currently, all private
sector workers, as well as State and local government employees in the
24 States as well as Puerto Rico and the U.S.Virgin Islands that have
OSHA-approved State plans, are protected by the OSHA regulations.  

	The rule uses the Office of Federal Register’s
incorporation-by-reference (IBR) approach to cross-reference the OSHA
regulations in the EPA WPR.  In addition to ensuring that all State and
local government employees and private sector employees receive
identical protection from occupational asbestos exposures under federal
law, the use of IBR also ensures that this identical protection is
maintained in the future.

	This approach eliminates potential confusion by ensuring that the
regulated community only has to learn and comply with the OSHA
standards, and ensures that the same level of protection for all persons
who work with asbestos-containing material (ACM), whether those persons
are employed by the private sector or by a State or local government.

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

	  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Prior to submission to OMB, this ICR will be made
available to the public for comment through a Federal Register notice. 
The public will have 60 days to provide comments.  Any comments received
will be given consideration when completing the supporting statement
that is submitted to OMB.

	3(c)	Consultations

	The data collection contemplated by this request was originally part of
a proposed rule subject to notice and comment procedures.  One of the
eleven comments EPA received during that period on the proposal
suggested that the annual training requirement for custodians, and the
associated recordkeeping, was too burdensome.  However, the respondent
did not dispute EPA’s estimate of the costs associated with this
requirement.

	The identical recordkeeping and reporting requirements as applied to
the private sector and to States with OSHA-approved State plans have
been subject to notice and comment as part of OSHA rulemaking efforts. 
EPA previously consulted with OSHA in August 2003 to discuss whether any
comments had been received or any additional activity had taken place to
determine changes in industry burden after the regulations were
promulgated under 29 CFR 1910.1001 and 1926.1101.  OSHA officials stated
that they had not received additional comments from industry after these
rules were promulgated.

	In May 2004, EPA sent letters to representatives of five randomly
chosen State governments that do not have OSHA-approved State Plans. 
The individuals represented the States of Florida, Idaho, Massachusetts,
Illinois and Wisconsin.  The respondents were presented with the draft
ICR supporting statement and an internet address to access the WPR ICR
Federal Register notice.  The respondents were presented with the five
questions stated below.  Their responses were noted in the previous 2004
WPR ICR Supporting Statement.

1.  Are the data collection and recordkeeping requirements [for the ICR]
clear and concise?

2.  Are you aware of other sources the Agency could use for the
requested data?

3.  Would you make electronic submissions?

4.  Are the estimated burdens and costs accurate?

5.  If we spoke to you before about this ICR, are your positions
accurately reflected?

To provide consultations for the current ICR renewal, in September 2006,
EPA again sent letters to representatives of five randomly chosen State
governments that do not have OSHA-approved State Plans, and therefore
are subject to the EPA Asbestos Worker Protection Rule.  The individuals
represented the States of Montana, Mississippi, North Dakota, Florida,
and Colorado.  Additionally, EPA contacted the American Federation of
State, County, and Municipal Employees, and the National Association of
State Facilities Administrators.  All seven of the individuals contacted
were asked the above mentioned five questions regarding the ICR.  All of
the respondents were presented with the draft ICR supporting statement
which included updated wage rates and burden estimates.  EPA received
five responses from the seven entities contacted. Those responses are
summarized below.

John Podolinsky, Montana Department of Environmental Quality

P.O. Box 200901

Helena, MT 59620

Phone: (406) 444-2690

Fax: (406) 444-1499

Email: jpodolinsky@state.mt.us

Mr. Podolinsky is a state regulator with the Montana Department of
Environmental Quality.  When asked whether the data collection and
recordkeeping requirements for the WPR were clear and concise, he
answered that they appeared to be clear and concise.  Mr. Podolinsky
didn’t discuss other sources where EPA could get the data required
under the WPR, but did mention that his program would be interested in
reviewing such data for compliance purposes if it involves a facility in
Montana.  He went on to answer that he would be interested in electronic
submissions, if applicable.  When asked if he thought the estimated
burdens and costs were accurate he stated that he had not spent enough
time reviewing the estimated burdens and costs to determine accuracy. 
This was the first time that Mr. Podolinsky was asked about the EPA WPR
ICR, so the fifth question regarding whether his positions were
accurately reflected was not applicable.

Mr. Podolinsky also provided additional feedback beyond the five
questions posed to him.  As far as he was aware, State and local public
employees (city and county) in Montana are not allowed to conduct
asbestos abatement activities because their position descriptions do not
allow them to.  He further stated that the State’s Risk Management and
Tort Defense Division does not allow state, county and city employees to
conduct asbestos work.  That said, he went on to discuss that he had in
the past responded to complaints where public employees had
inadvertently conducted asbestos abatement work because of a failure to
inspect for asbestos prior to a renovation or demolition (as EPA, OSHA,
and Montana State regulations require).  He also asked specifically what
purpose the asbestos WPR had if the Federal OSHA regulations are in
place. The State of Montana does not have an OSHA approved Occupational
Safety and Health Plan.   Therefore, although private employees are
covered by the applicable OSHA regulations, State and local employees
are not covered.  The specific purpose of the EPA WPR is to close the
regulatory gap to protect those employees.  No changes to the ICR
supporting statement need to be made based on Mr. Pololinsky’s
responses.

Danny Jackson

Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality

101 W Capitol St

Jackson, MS 39201

Phone: (601) 961-5171

Email: danny_jackson@deq.state.ms.us

Mr. Jackson, a State regulator with the Mississippi DEQ, stated that the
data collection and recordkeeping requirements related to the ICR are
clear and concise. When asked if he was aware of any other sources the
Agency could use for the requested data relating to the ICR, he said no.
 Mr. Jackson stated that he would be interested in electronic
submissions.  When asked if the estimated burdens and costs for the ICR
were accurate, the respondent stated that he was not able to determine
if the estimates were accurate.  This was the first time that Mr.
Jackson was asked about the EPA WPR ICR, so the fifth question regarding
whether his positions were accurately reflected was not applicable. 
Based on Mr. Jackson’s responses, no changes were needed to the ICR
supporting statement.

Robert Johannes 

Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment

4300 Cherry Creek DR S., B-1 

Denver, CO 80246-1530

Phone: (303) 692-3169

E-mail:    HYPERLINK "mailto:robert.johannes@state.co.us" 
robert.johannes@state.co.us 

Mr. Johannes, an Industrial Hygienist for the Air Pollution Control
Division of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment,
stated that the data collection and recordkeeping requirements related
to the ICR are clear and concise.  Mr. Johannes suggested the EPA could
use school districts, especially larger ones, as a source for data
collected under the current ICR. EPA disagrees that school districts are
a source for the information collected under the asbestos WPR ICR.  EPA
believes that Mr. Johannes misunderstood the posed question to mean what
other sources EPA could consult with regarding the burden of the current
ICR, not if another data source was available, making the requirements
of the WPR ICR duplicative.  When asked whether he would be interested
in electronic submissions, he stated yes, but only if such requirements
existed.  Mr. Johannes said his division was unable to adequately
determine if the burdens and costs were accurate. The respondent had not
been consulted with before regarding the WPR ICR.  Based on the
responses from Mr. Johannes, no changes were needed to the ICR
supporting statement.

James August

American Federation of State, 

County, and Municipal Employees

1625 L Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20036-5687

Phone: (202)429-1000

E-mail:   HYPERLINK "mailto:jaugust@afscme.org"  jaugust@afscme.org 

Mr. August of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal
Employees, an established union for State, County, and municipal
employees, found the data collection and recordkeeping requirements
related to the ICR to be clear and concise.  When asked whether he was
aware of other sources the Agency could use for the data requested under
the ICR, he said no.  When asked about whether he would make electronic
submission, he said yes, to the extent possible.  When Mr. August was
asked whether estimated burdens and costs for the ICR were accurate, he
responded the he did not have additional information to improve the
accuracy of the cost estimates provided by EPA in the draft ICR
supporting statement.  Mr. August was not consulted on the previous
version of the ICR.

Mr. August also noted that in the draft ICR supporting statement EPA had
indicated that 27 States are covered by the EPA WPR.  He correctly
clarifies that only 26 States are covered by the WPR since 24 States, a
commonwealth and a territory (Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands)
have federally approved OSHA State plans which cover state and local
employees.  The draft ICR supporting statement was amended to clarify
that 26 states, the District of Columbia and certain other U.S.
territories are currently covered by the EPA WPR.  

Marcia Stone

Association Manager

National Association of State Facilities Administrators (NASFA)

Phone: (859)244-8181

E-mail:   HYPERLINK "mailto:mstone@csg.org"  mstone@csg.org  

Ms. Stone is the Association Manager for the National Association of
State Facilities Administrators.  EPA contacted Ms. Stone’s
organization believing they would be an appropriate entity to contact
regarding the EPA WPR based on the membership of the association. 
However, Ms. Stone’s organization stated it is unable to provide
comment on the ICR based on its unfamiliarity with the WPR.

	3(d)	Effects of Less Frequent Collection

	The information collection frequencies specified by this rule are the
minimum EPA considers necessary to ensure that the health of public
employees engaged in asbestos abatement activities is adequately
monitored.  Initial exposure monitoring must be performed for most
projects covered by this rule, but the employer will be able to rely on
those results for approximately three years when performing similar
projects.  All employees covered by this rule must receive training on
an annual basis.  Most of these employees must also receive annual
medical exams.  These requirements are necessary to ensure that the
employees are being adequately protected from asbestos hazards.

	3(e)	General Guidelines

	Information collected as a result of this request does not violate any
of the guidelines imposed by 5 CFR 1320.6.  The requirement that records
for medical surveillance and exposure monitoring be retained for more
than 3 years is permissible under a provision contained in 5 CFR 1320.6
that expressly exempts the retention of health and medical records from
limitations otherwise imposed by the regulation.

	3(f)	Confidentiality

	The Agency has instituted procedures to avoid the inappropriate release
of confidential information as specified by 5 CFR 1320.8(b)(3)(v).  The
confidentiality of collected information will be maintained pursuant to
the provisions of the Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C.  2613, the
Privacy Act of 1974 and OMB Circular A-108.

	3(g)	Sensitive Questions

	The rule requires employers to allow EPA access to medical records upon
request.  EPA primarily intends to use this information to determine
whether the employer has complied with the medical surveillance
requirements of the rule, although EPA may also use this information in
epidemiological and diagnostic investigations.  EPA will treat this
information as confidential and exempt from disclosure under the Freedom
of Information Act pursuant to 40 CFR 2.119(b).

4.	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION COLLECTED

	4(a)   Respondents/North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) Codes

	Respondents for this information collection include States and local
government employers in the 26 states, the District of Columbia and
certain other U.S. territories that have employees engaged in
asbestos-related construction, custodial, and brake and clutch repair
activities without OSHA-approved State plans.  The following table is
intended to help identify potentially affected categories and entities. 
This listing is not, however, intended to be exhaustive.  The North
American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) applies to certain
entities.  To determine whether a State or local government employer is
subject to the WPR, carefully examine the applicability provisions in
the regulation at 40 CFR 763.121.

Categories	NAICS Codes	Examples of Potentially Affected Entities

Public Administration	92	State or local government employers not subject
to an OSHA-approved State Asbestos Plan or a State Asbestos Worker
Protection Plan that EPA has determined is exempt from the requirements
of the EPA WPR, AND whose employees work with or near
asbestos-containing material.

Educational Services	61	School Districts (subset of local government
employers identified above) whose employees work with or near
asbestos-containing material.

	4(b)	Respondent Activities and Information Requested

	The WPR contains several paperwork related requirements for State and
local government employers in the 26 states, the District of Columbia
and certain other U.S. territories covered by the WPR.  The overall
estimated potential economic impact of this rule is presented in the
document entitled “Final Asbestos Worker Protection Rule Economic
Analysis,” which is available as a part of the public version of the
official record for the rule.  This ICR describes the information
collection activities contained in the rule, along with the estimated
burden and costs related to those information collection requirements.

	This rule requires employers to collect, disseminate, and maintain
information relating to employee asbestos exposures, respiratory
protection, medical surveillance, and training.  The records maintained
as a result of this information collection will provide EPA with the
data necessary for effective enforcement of the WPR, as authorized under
TSCA sections 6 and 8.  These activities are described in more detail in
this section.

	4(b)(i)	Data Items

	This rule requires State and local government employers to develop and
maintain a written respiratory protection program if their employees use
respirators.  Employers must provide information and guidance on the
selection, use, and care of respirators, give annual fit tests, and
maintain records of fit tests for one year.  Fit-testing record
summaries must include the following information:

	•	Name or identification of the employee tested; 

	•	Type of fit test performed; 

	•	Specific make, model, style, and size of respirator tested;

	•	Date of test; and

	•	The test results.

	 The rule requires an exposure assessment to determine accurately the
airborne concentrations of asbestos to which employees are exposed. 
Employers can meet this requirement through objective data that
demonstrate that the product or material containing the asbestos cannot
release airborne fibers in concentrations exceeding the permissible
exposure limits (PELs), historical monitoring data from similar projects
that indicates that the PELs will not be exceeded, or initial monitoring
results that demonstrate that employee exposures are below the PELs. 
However, employers must continue periodic exposure monitoring for
employees who work in areas where exposures exceed or can reasonably be
expected to exceed the PELs.  Employers may forgo periodic monitoring if
affected employees are equipped with supplied-air respirators, and EPA
assumes that employers will choose to provide supplied-air respirators
in these instances.

	Employers who use objective data to demonstrate that the PELs will not
be exceeded are required to maintain records for the duration of the
employer’s reliance upon such data.  The records must include the
following information:

	•	The product qualifying for exemption;

	•	The source of the objective data;

	•	The testing protocol, results of testing, and/or analysis of the
material for asbestos release;

	•	A description of the operation exempted and how the data support
the exemption; and

	•	Other data relevant to the operations, materials, processing or
employee exposures covered by the exemption.

	Employers must notify all affected employees of the monitoring results,
and they must notify individual employees of monitoring results
representing their personal exposures.  For all measurements taken to
monitor employee exposure to asbestos, the employer must maintain
records of each measurement for a period of 30 years.  Exposure
monitoring records must be made available, upon request, to the affected
employees.  The records must include the following information for each
exposure measurement:

	•	The date of measurement;

	•	The operation involving exposure to asbestos that is being
monitored;

	•	Sampling and analytical methods used and evidence of their
accuracy;

	•	Number, duration, and results of samples taken;

	•	Type of protective devices worn, if any; and

	•	Name, social security number, and exposure of the employees whose
exposures are represented.

	 The rule requires employers to institute a medical surveillance
program for all employees who engage in asbestos removal, renovation,
and maintenance projects, or who are exposed at or above a PEL for 30 or
more days each year.  For each employee subject to medical surveillance,
the employer is required to maintain for the duration of employment plus
30 years records that contain the following information:

	•	The name and social security number of the employee;

	•	A copy of the employee’s medical examination results, including
the medical history, questionnaire responses, results of any tests, and
physicians’ recommendations;

	•	Physicians’ written opinions;

	•	Any employee medical complaints related to exposure to asbestos;
and

	•	A copy of the information provided to the physician.

	The employer must provide a copy of the physician’s written opinion
to the employee within 30 days of his/her receipt of the opinion.  In
addition, medical surveillance records must be made available to the
affected employee upon request.

	The rule requires that a training program be instituted for all
employees who are likely to be exposed above the PELs and for those
employees who perform asbestos removal, renovation, maintenance or
construction-related custodial tasks.  Employees must be provided access
to the training materials, including self-help smoking cessation
information.  In addition, each construction project must be supervised
by a competent person, who must have, in most cases, additional
training.  Employers are required to maintain records of training for
one year beyond the last date of the worker’s employment.

	Under, the rule, employers must presume that asbestos is present in
thermal system insulation (TSI) and surfacing material installed in
buildings built prior to 1981.  Employers may rebut this presumption in
two ways, through the results of a building inspection that meets the
requirements of the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA)
regulations at 40 CFR 763.85, or by testing the material.  Such records
must be maintained for as long as they are relied upon to rebut the
presumption.

	Finally, the rule requires specific engineering control and work
practice methods for each type of project.  Employers are permitted to
use alternative control methods if it is determined, in advance, that
the alternative control method is adequate to reduce employee exposures
below the PELs.  For Class I projects, those that involve TSI, or
surfacing material, an appropriately-qualified person must certify that
the alternative control method will reduce employee exposures below the
PELs and that the method will also prevent asbestos contamination beyond
the regulated area where the project will be performed.  For larger
Class I projects, the employer who wishes to use alternative control
methods must provide EPA with a copy of the evaluation and certification
before the alternative control methods are used.  EPA assumes that
employers will choose to use listed control methods rather than
alternatives in these instances.

	4(b)(ii)	Respondent Activities

	This section lists the major activities required of respondents, with
specific steps necessary to fulfill all the conditions of the major
activity.  Respondents must:

	A.	Read and interpret regulations.

	B.	Develop a respirator program.

		•	Provide guidance on selection, use, and care of respirators.

		•	Provide periodic fit tests and maintain records of fit tests for
one year.

	C.	Establish a monitoring program.

		•	Provide objective data showing that the PELs will not be exceeded,
or

			--	Initially monitor employee exposures if objective data are not
provided;

--	Periodically monitor employees whose exposures are expected to exceed
a PEL, unless such employees are provided with supplied-air respirators;

--	Notify workers of the results of employee exposure monitoring; and

--	Maintain records of all exposure measurements for 30 years.

	D.	Communicate hazards to employees.

		•	Have a competent person evaluate risk associated with Class I and
II work;

•	Notify employees engaged in asbestos-related work about the nature
of the work prior to beginning the project; and

•	Notify other employees and building occupants about the occurrence
of the asbestos-related work.

	E.	Institute training programs.

		•	Provide training for all employees engaged in asbestos removal,
renovation, maintenance and construction-related custodial activities,
as well as for all other employees exposed above the PELs;

•	Provide employees with access to information and training materials;

•	Maintain training records for one year.

	F.	Institute a medical surveillance program.

		•	Provide medical examinations for all employees who engage in
asbestos removal, renovation, and maintenance projects, or who are
exposed at or above a PEL for 30 or more days each year;

		•	Provide information to the examining physician;

		•	Obtain a completed medical questionnaire from the affected
employee;

•	Obtain a written opinion from the examining physician; and

•	Maintain records of medical examinations for the duration of
employment plus 30 years.

	G.	Provide access to records at employee and/or EPA request.

	H.	Institute training for competent persons.

•	Provide training for competent persons who will supervise
construction projects.

5.	THE INFORMATION COLLECTED--AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY,
AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

	5(a)	Agency Activities

	In connection with this information request, the Agency may:

	(1)	Perform inspections and respond to inquiries;

	(2)	Investigate complaints and handle legal matters; and

	(3)	Develop asbestos exposure assessments and
epidemiological/diagnostic studies.

	5(b)	Collection Methodology and Management

	Nothing in this information collection is derived from a survey or is
form-related.  EPA does not receive the data; therefore, EPA does not
have any special data collection methodology and management.  All
information subject to this collection request is to be gathered and
retained by the employer.  The regulations specify the methods to be
used for employee exposure monitoring and medical surveillance, as well
as the subjects to be covered in training.  In general, the rule
identifies what data must be collected and maintained without specifying
a particular collection method.  Therefore, industry has the option of
utilizing improved data collection and maintenance technology.

	5(c)	Small Entity Flexibility

	The only small entities potentially impacted by this rule are small
government entities consisting of local governments (e.g., county,
municipal, or towns) and school districts.  The primary function of the
statutory requirements of TSCA Section 6 is the protection of human
health and the environment.  Consequently, no specific provisions exist
for easing the burden on small local government entities.  The records
required are as necessary for the protection of employees of small local
governments as for other affected employees.  However, State and local
governments may use private contractors for the activities covered by
the Asbestos Worker Protection Standard and, thus, avoid the
recordkeeping burden themselves.

	5(d)	Collection Schedule 

	Employers who use their own employees to conduct asbestos construction,
custodial, or brake and clutch repair activities after the effective
date of this rule will be subject to the information collection and
recordkeeping requirements described above.  Depending upon the type of
project, some or all of the information collection and recordkeeping
requirements must be complied with before the project commences.  For
example, in most instances, employers must provide and document training
for their employees before they may participate in the asbestos-related
activities covered by this rule.

6.	ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION

	Section 6(a) discusses respondent burden, and Section 6(b) addresses
respondent costs.  Section 6(c) reports EPA burdens and costs, and
Sections 6(d), 6(e), and 6(f) summarize respondent burdens, discuss
changes in burden estimates, and provide the Federal Register burden
statement, respectively.

	6(a)	Estimating Respondent Burden

	The respondents for this rule are State and local governments in the 26
states, the District of Columbia and certain other U.S. territories that
do not have OSHA-approved State plans.  Tables 1 through 3 document
EPA’s calculations of the respondent burden.  Table 1 provides EPA’s
estimates of the burden per response for each paperwork requirement. 
Table 2 provides EPA’s estimates of the total number of responses for
each requirement.  Finally, Table 3 provides EPA’s estimates of total
respondent burden by multiplying the burden per response (Table 1) and
the total number of responses (Table 2) for each requirement.

	Respondent burden calculations for the previous ICR were based on 27
states.  However, the Economic Analysis for the Worker Protection Rule
originally excluded the District of Columbia and certain other
territories because of a lack of data, and thus underestimated both the
costs and benefits of the rule.  At the time of the Worker Protection
Rule, New Jersey did not yet have an approved OSHA state plan for public
sector employees, and thus 27 states were subject to the Worker
Protection Rule.  New Jersey has since obtained an approved OSHA state
plan for public sector employees.  For this ICR, respondent burden
calculations are still based on 27 entities.  EPA feels that calculating
the burden for 27 entities (26 states, and additional entity to
represent the combined District of Columbia and territories) will
correct the original underestimation for the District of Columbia and
territories without state plans as well as compensate for the loss of
one state subject to the WPR.  The Economic Analysis noted that the
District of Columbia and territories probably account for fewer affected
buildings and workers than any of the other states.  As a result of this
change, the costs and benefits will no longer be underestimated; in
fact, they may be slightly overestimated.  

	Typically, respondents will need three categories of labor to comply
with the ICR requirements: supervisory, employee (e.g., asbestos
abatement worker/custodial worker or brake and clutch repair mechanic),
and clerical.  In addition, exposure monitoring and developing a
respiratory protection plan will require an industrial hygienist’s
time.

	The estimated burden hours and cost estimates for this ICR are based on
data and methods discussed in the Economic Analysis for this rule and on
OSHA ICRs for its Construction and General Industry Standards for
Asbestos (U.S. EPA, 2000; OSHA, 2000a,b).

Table 1.  Burden Per Response

COLLECTION ACTIVITY	BURDEN PER RESPONSE

	Clerical	Employees	Supervisory	Industrial Hygienist

READ AND INTERPRET REGULATION	-	-	3 hours [a]	-

RESPIRATOR PROGRAM

-DEVELOP PROGRAM, Large Gov’ts	-	-	-	4 hours [b]

-FIT TESTING

     -Full-Face Respirators	-	15 minutes	15 minutes	-

     -Half-Mask-Face Respirators	-	10 minutes	10 minutes	-

-MAINTAIN RECORDS FOR FIT TESTS	5 minutes	-	-	-

EXPOSURE MONITORING

-INITIAL EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT

     -Construction	-	-	-	2 hours

     -Brake and Clutch Repair	-	-	-	2 hours

-MAINTAIN RECORDS	5 minutes	-	-	-

-POST MONITORING RESULTS, BRAKE/CLUTCH	5 minutes	-	-	-

HAZARD COMMUNICATION

-EVALUATE RISKINESS	-	-	45 minutes	-

-NOTIFY EMPLOYEES

     -Construction	-	-	5 minutes	-

     -Brake and Clutch Repair	-	-	5 minutes	-

-NOTIFY OTHER EMPLOYEES/ TENANTS	-	-	5 minutes	-

TRAINING

-PROVIDE TRAINING

     -Class II	-	32 hours	-	-

     -Class III	-	16 hours	-	-

     -Class IV	-	2 hours	-	-

-MAINTAIN RECORDS	5 minutes	-	-	-

MEDICAL SURVEILLANCE

-MEDICAL EXAMS	-	45 minutes	45 minutes	-

-INITIAL QUESTIONNAIRE	-	30 minutes	30 minutes	-

-PERIODIC QUESTIONNAIRE	-	10 minutes	10 minutes	-

-INFORMATION TO PHYSICIANS	5 minutes	-	-	-

-PHYSICIAN’S WRITTEN OPINION	5 minutes	-	-	-

-MAINTAIN RECORDS	5 minutes	-	-	-

ACCESS TO RECORDS

-EMPLOYEE ACCESS	5 minutes	-	-	-

-EPA ACCESS

     -Construction	5 minutes	-	5 minutes	-

     -Brake and Clutch Repair	5 minutes	-	5 minutes	-

COMPETENT PERSON

-TRAINING

     -Class I and II	-	-	14 hours [c]	-

     -Class III and IV	-	-	3 hours [c]	-

-MAINTAIN RECORDS	5 minutes	-	-	-

Note: Except where noted, these estimates reflect annual burden estimate
for each response.

[a] This burden was incurred by all supervisors over the three year
period of the initial ICR.  EPA assumes that five percent of the annual
number of respondents from the initial ICR will incur the burden each
year to account for turnover by supervisors.  The number of responses in
Table 2 (422) is five percent of the initial figure (8,437), and
unchanged from the previous ICR.

[b] This burden is only incurred once every five years.  EPA adjusted
the number of responses in Table 2 to annualize total burden estimates
in Table 3.

[c] This is the annualized number of hours for this requirement.  The
Class II and Class IV competent person training occurs once every five
years.

Table 2.  Total Annual Response Estimates

COLLECTION ACTIVITY	TOTAL ANNUALIZED RESPONSES

	Clerical	Employees	Supervisory	Industrial Hygienist	TOTAL

READ AND INTERPRET REGULATION	0	0	422 [a]	0	422

RESPIRATOR PROGRAM

	-DEVELOP PROGRAM, Large Gov’ts	0	0	0	163 [b]	163

-FIT TESTING

	     -Full-Face Respirators	0	40	40	0	80

     -Half-Mask-Face Respirators	0	2,651	2,651	0	5,302

-MAINTAIN RECORDS FOR FIT TESTS	2,691	0	0	0	2,691

EXPOSURE MONITORING

	-INITIAL EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT

	     -Construction	0	0	0	4,240	4,240

     -Brake and Clutch Repair	0	0	0	1,268	1,268

-MAINTAIN RECORDS	13,012	0	0	0	13,012

-POST MONITORING RESULTS, BRAKE/CLUTCH	2,996	0	0	0	2,996

HAZARD COMMUNICATION

	-EVALUATE RISKINESS	0	0	4,507	0	4,507

-NOTIFY EMPLOYEES

	     -Construction	0	0	507,508	0	507,508

     -Brake and Clutch Repair	0	0	11,984	0	11,984

-NOTIFY OTHER EMPLOYEES/ TENANTS	0	0	507,508	0	507,508

TRAINING

	-PROVIDE TRAINING

	     -Class II	0	2,140	0	0	2,140

     -Class III	0	1,000	0	0	1,000

     -Class IV	0	51,905	0	0	51,905

-MAINTAIN RECORDS	55,045	0	0	0	55,045

MEDICAL SURVEILLANCE

	-MEDICAL EXAMS	0	1,915	1,268	0	3,183

-INITIAL QUESTIONNAIRE	0	91	60	0	151

-PERIODIC QUESTIONNAIRE	0	1,824	1,208	0	3,032

-INFORMATION TO PHYSICIANS	3,183	0	0	0	3,183

-PHYSICIAN’S WRITTEN OPINION	3,183	0	0	0	3,183

-MAINTAIN RECORDS	3,183	0	0	0	3,183

ACCESS TO RECORDS

	-EMPLOYEE ACCESS	6,089	0	0	0	6,089

-EPA ACCESS

	     -Construction	5,097	0	5,097	0	10,194

     -Brake and Clutch Repair	30	0	30	0	60

COMPETENT PERSON

	-TRAINING

	     -Class I and II	0	0	704	0	704

     -Class III and IV	0	0	29,343	0	29,343

-MAINTAIN RECORDS	30,047	0	0	0	30,047

TOTALS	124,556	61,566	1,072,330	5,671	1,264,123

[a] EPA assumes that five percent of the annual number of respondents
from the initial ICR will incur the burden each year to account for
turnover by supervisors.  The number of responses in Table 2 (422) is
five percent of the initial  ICR figure (8,437), and unchanged from the
previous ICR.

[b] This is the annualized number of responses.  EPA assumes that
respirator programs will require updating once every five years.  Thus,
this is calculated by dividing the total number of affected respondents
(817 large governments with industrial hygienists on staff) by five.

Table 3.  Total Annual Burden Estimates

COLLECTION ACTIVITY	TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN HOURS

	Clerical	Employees	Supervisory	Industrial Hygienist	TOTAL

READ AND INTERPRET REGULATION	0	0	1,266	0	1,266

RESPIRATOR PROGRAM

	-DEVELOP PROGRAM, Large Gov’ts

652	652

-FIT TESTING

	     -Full-Face Respirators	0	10	10	0	20

     -Half-Mask-Face Respirators	0	442	442	0	884

-MAINTAIN RECORDS FOR FIT TESTS	224	0	0	0	224

EXPOSURE MONITORING

	-INITIAL EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT

	     -Construction	0	0	0	8,480	8,480

     -Brake and Clutch Repair	0	0	0	2,536	2,536

-MAINTAIN RECORDS	1,084	0	0	0	1,084

-POST MONITORING RESULTS, BRAKE/CLUTCH	250	0	0	0	250

HAZARD COMMUNICATION

	-EVALUATE RISKINESS	0	0	3,380	0	3,380

-NOTIFY EMPLOYEES

	     -Construction	0	0	42,292	0	42,292

     -Brake and Clutch Repair	0	0	999	0	999

-NOTIFY OTHER EMPLOYEES/ TENANTS	0	0	42,292	0	42,292

TRAINING

	-PROVIDE TRAINING

	     -Class II	0	68,480	0	0	68,480

     -Class III	0	16,000	0	0	16,000

     -Class IV	0	103,810	0	0	103,810

-MAINTAIN RECORDS	4,587	0	0	0	4,587

MEDICAL SURVEILLANCE

	-MEDICAL EXAMS	0	1,436	951	0	2,387

-INITIAL QUESTIONNAIRE	0	46	30	0	76

-PERIODIC QUESTIONNAIRE	0	304	201	0	505

-INFORMATION TO PHYSICIANS	265	0	0	0	265

-PHYSICIAN’S WRITTEN OPINION	265	0	0	0	265

-MAINTAIN RECORDS	265	0	0	0	265

ACCESS TO RECORDS

	-EMPLOYEE ACCESS	507	0	0	0	507

-EPA ACCESS

	     -Construction	425	0	425	0	850

     -Brake and Clutch Repair	3	0	3	0	6

COMPETENT PERSON

	-TRAINING

	     -Class I and II	0	0	9,856	0	9,856

     -Class III and IV	0	0	89,029	0	89,029

-MAINTAIN RECORDS	2,504	0	0	0	2,504

TOTALS	10,379	190,528	191,176	11,668	403,751

	Reporting requirements vary among the different burden categories. 
Some categories impose annual paperwork burdens at the State or local
government level while others impose paperwork burdens at the project or
employee level1.  EPA estimates that 25,312 State and local governments
will be affected by these information collection activities and that
these are the respondents for the ICR.  However, many of these
respondents will not be affected by all of the information collection
requirements.  Furthermore, the estimates presented here reflect the
incremental hours and costs relative to the asbestos WPR that was in
place prior to this rule.  In the sections that follow, EPA discusses
(a) each burden category, (b) the level at which the burden is applied,
and (c) the data and assumptions used to derive burden estimates.

Activity-by-Activity Burden Estimation Methods

	A.	Reading and interpreting the regulation.

	In the initial ICR, EPA assumed that at least one person at the State
or local government would need to read and interpret the requirements of
the rule.  EPA expected that this person would be a construction
supervisor.  The supervisor would read the relevant sections of the
Federal Register Notice as well as the relevant cross-referenced
sections of OSHA’s Construction and General Industry Standards. 
Approximately half of the regulatory text, however, consists of
technical appendices that will not be of direct importance to the
supervisor.  For example, most projects will not need to employ fit
testing methods, and monitoring methods presumably will be performed by
a contracted specialist.  Given these assumptions, EPA projected that,
on average, the supervisor would need three hours to read and understand
the regulation.  EPA expected that some supervisors would require more
time to read and interpret the regulations while some would require less
time.  Thus, EPA assumed that on average a supervisor in each State or
local government would need to spend three hours on this activity.  This
requirement, however, was assumed to be incurred only in the first year
of the rule.  To provide an annualized estimate of the burden over the
three-year ICR period, EPA divided the total number of respondents
(25,312 State and local governments) by three.  This provided an
annualized estimate of 8,437 responses.  Thus, this activity was assumed
to require 25,312 hours on an annualized basis (8,437 responses × 3
hours).

          Although the initial ICR assumed that this activity would be
undertaken by supervisors only during the first year of the rule, the
ICR still needs to account for turnover by supervisors.  EPA is assuming
that there will be a turnover of five percent of all supervisors
annually and that the new supervisors will need to read and interpret
the regulation.  Thus, for purposes of this analysis, five percent of
the annual respondents cited in the initial ICR (.05 x 8,437 = 422) will
spend three hours reading and interpreting the rule annually.  This
activity is assumed to require 1,266 hours on an annualized basis (422
responses × 3 hours).

	B.	Respirator Program.

	The respiratory protection program under the rule encompasses three
paperwork activities: (a) developing written guidance for implementing
the respirator requirements of the rule, (b) fit testing, and (c)
maintaining records of the fit tests.

	Written standard operating procedures covering the care, use, and
selection of respirators must be established for each workplace in which
respirators are used.  Much of the information needed to develop these
procedures is specified in the OSHA asbestos standard for construction,
as amended by OSHA’s 1998 respiratory protection standard (63 FR 1152;
January 8, 1998).  EPA assumed that large governments would have an
industrial hygienist on staff who would need four hours to comply with
this requirement2.  EPA assumes that small governments, on the other
hand, will not have an industrial hygienist on staff and will instead
contract out this service.  Using the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
definition of small government, 24,495 affected governments (96.77
percent of the 25,312 total) would be classified as small, leaving 817
large governments with an industrial hygienist on staff.  EPA further
assumes that the respirator program will need updating every five years.
 Thus, dividing the total number of large governments by five yields 163
responses annually.  Multiplying by the burden per response (4 hours)
results in an estimated annual burden of 652 hours of industrial
hygienists’ time.

	Fit testing imposes a requirement on both the worker being fit-tested
and the worker’s supervisor who conducts the fit test.  EPA estimates
that fit tests for full-face respirators will require 15 minutes and
half-mask respirators will require a fit test lasting 10 minutes.  EPA
further estimates that 40 full-time equivalents (FTEs) will require
full-face fit tests and 2,651 FTEs will require half-mask fit tests,
annually.  Thus, fit tests for full-face respirators will require 10
hours for both workers and supervisors (0.25 hours per fit test × 40
fit tests) and half-mask respirator fit tests will require 442 hours for
both workers and supervisors (0.1667 hours × 2,651 fit tests).  In
total, workers and supervisors will need to spend 452 hours each on
fit-testing each year.

	Maintaining records of the fit tests is assumed to require five minutes
of clerical time for each fit test.  Thus, a total of 2,691 fit tests
will occur annually (40 for full-face respirators and 2,651 for
half-mask respirators), requiring 224 hours of clerical labor time each
year (0.0833 hours × 2,691 fit tests).

	C.	Exposure Monitoring.

	The exposure monitoring section of the rule requires affected projects
to perform periodic exposure monitoring unless a negative exposure
assessment has been made.  For the construction-related activities, this
will require affected crews (i.e., groups of workers) to have an initial
exposure assessment.  EPA estimates that this will require two hours of
an industrial hygienist’s time every three years.  There are a total
of 30,047 crews that must be evaluated, resulting in an annual average
of 10,016 crews.  As with developing respirator programs, EPA assumes
that only large governments incur this as a paperwork burden3. 
Furthermore, EPA assumes that large governments will incur a
disproportionate amount of the hours associated with this requirement. 
Specifically, EPA assumes that the number of crews employed by large
governments is proportional to the populations of large governments. 
Based on data in the Economic Analysis for this rule, EPA estimates that
57.66 percent of the total population in the 26 affected States, the
District of Columbia and certain other U.S. territories resides in small
local government jurisdictions4.  Thus, EPA assumes that the remainder
(42.34 percent) reside in large government jurisdictions.  This implies
that 4,240 annual responses are generated under this requirement (10,016
crews × 42.34 percent) in the construction sector.  Multiplying by the
burden per response (2 hours) results in an annual burden of 8,480
industrial hygienist hours.

	For brake and clutch repair activities (which are classified as a
general industry activity), this provision will require affected repair
shops to establish an exemption from periodic exposure monitoring.  EPA
estimates that this will require two hours of an industrial
hygienist’s time annually.  As noted above, only large governments
with on-staff industrial hygienists will incur a paperwork burden under
this rule.  As with the number of crews above, EPA assumes that large
governments will operate a disproportionate number of the affected brake
and clutch shops.  Specifically, EPA assumes that the number of affected
brake and clutch shops in large governments is proportional to the
population residing in large governmental jurisdictions.  Thus, EPA
estimates that 42.34 percent of all affected brake and clutch shops are
owned by large State and local governments.  Thus, the annual burden for
this requirement is based on establishing exemptions at 1,268 repair
shops (42.34 percent of the 2,996 affected repair shops) for an annual
burden of 2,536 industrial hygienist hours.

	In addition to performing the initial exposure assessment, the rule
requires that records of the findings from the assessment be kept on
file.  EPA estimates that this activity will require five minutes of
clerical time for each assessment.  Although some of the assessments are
performed by non-staff industrial hygienists (i.e., those for small
local governments), records from all assessments will need to be kept on
file.  Thus, there are a total of 13,012 annual assessments for which
records must be kept (10,016 in the construction sector and 2,996 in the
brake and clutch sector).  Multiplying by the burden per response (five
minutes) yields an estimated annual clerical burden of 1,084 hours.

	As part of the brake and clutch repair assessment, EPA assumes that
some sampling will be performed.  The rule requires that the results of
any exposure monitoring conducted pursuant to the rule be posted for
employees to review.  Following OSHA’s ICRs, EPA assumes that it will
require five minutes of clerical time to post the results.  All 2,996
repair shops will need to have results posted annually (i.e., shops
owned by both small and large governments), resulting in an annual
burden of 250 clerical hours.  

	D.	Hazard Communication - Notification Requirements

	The rule contains three notification requirements that will impose
paperwork burdens: (a) evaluating the risk associated with Class I and
II work, (b) notifying employees engaged in asbestos-related work about
the nature of the work, and (c) notifying other employees (i.e.,
employees not engaged in asbestos-related work) and building occupants
about the occurrence of asbestos-related work.

	The rule requires competent persons to evaluate the risk associated
with asbestos-related construction projects.  EPA assumes that this only
imposes a paperwork burden on Class I and II projects.  EPA assumes that
other covered activities (Class III and IV projects and new construction
activities) can be evaluated without any incremental burden.  Following
OSHA’s Asbestos Construction Standard ICR, EPA assumes that this will
impose a burden of 45 minutes of supervisory time for each Class I and
II project.  A total 4,507 Class I and II projects are covered by the
rule, implying a total annual burden of 3,380 supervisory hours (0.75
hours × 4,507 projects).

	The rule also requires employers to notify employees that will be
performing asbestos-related work prior to beginning the project.  For
construction activities, EPA assumes that this will require 5 minutes of
a construction supervisor’s time for all affected projects.  EPA
excludes Class IV custodial projects from this burden estimate because
custodial activities are assumed to occur continuously over the course
of the year and are not generally divided into discrete “projects.”5
 Based on data in the Economic Analysis, EPA estimates that 507,508
construction projects will require these notifications.  Multiplying the
estimated number of projects by five minutes (0.0833 hours) yields an
estimated 42,292 construction supervisor hours to comply with this
requirement (507,508 projects × 0.0833 hours).

	For brake and clutch repair, EPA assumes that this requirement will be
incurred four times (e.g., quarterly) each year at each brake and clutch
repair shop.  Furthermore, EPA assumes that compliance with this
requirement will impose a five minute burden on brake and clutch repair
supervisors.  There are 2,996 repair shops, so the annual burden for
this requirement among brake and clutch repair shops will be 999 hours
(2,996 shops × 0.0833 hours × 4 times annually).

	Finally, the rule requires employers to notify other employees (i.e.,
those not performing the asbestos-related work) and tenants about the
occurrence of asbestos-related work in the building.  EPA assumes that
this will be incurred only by construction projects and will impose a
burden of five minutes of supervisory time per project.  In the Economic
Analysis for the rule, EPA estimates that 507,508 projects will be
affected by this requirement.  Multiplying by the burden per response
(five minutes) results in an estimated burden of 42,292 hours of
supervisory time annually to comply with this requirement (507,508
projects × 0.0833 hours).

	E.	Training Program.

	The rule requires affected construction workers to be trained based on
the Class of work they perform.  Training requirements for Class I
abatement workers are not incremental to the rule and thus do not impose
an incremental paperwork burden.  The annual training requirements are
32 hours for Class II workers, 16 hours for Class III workers, including
new construction projects, and 2 hours for Class IV workers.  EPA
estimates that training will be required for 2,140 Class II workers,
1,000 Class III workers, and 51,905 Class IV workers.  This implies
annual training requirements of 68,480 hours for Class II workers (32
hours × 2,140 workers), 16,000 hours for Class III workers (16 hours ×
1,000 workers), and 103,810 hours for Class IV workers (2 hours ×
51,905 workers).  The total annual employee hours required for training
is 188,290.

	Records of the training must be kept on file for each worker who is
trained.  EPA assumes that this will require five minutes of clerical
time per worker trained.  A total of 55,045 workers will be trained
annually (2,140 Class II workers + 1,000 Class III workers + 51,905
Class IV workers), requiring 4,587 clerical hours annually to maintain
these records (55,045 × 0.0833 hours).

	The rule also requires employers to maintain training materials on file
for employees to access.  The burden associated with this requirement
has been included in the burden estimate under Employee Access to
Records, below.

	F.	Medical Surveillance.  

	The rule requires a medical exam for Class I, II, or III employees,
including new construction workers, and for workers who are exposed at
or above the PEL for more than 30 days annually.  The medical
surveillance section of the rule will impose five paperwork activities
on affected entities: (1) medical exams, (2) initial and periodic
questionnaires, (3) providing information to physicians, (4) obtaining
the physician’s written opinion, and (5) maintaining records of the
medical exam.  In estimating the paperwork burden for this requirement,
EPA does not include the physician’s time as part of the burden
estimate.  EPA assumes that the physicians performing these activities
are not part of the affected entities’ staff, but provide these
services under contract.

	EPA assumes that all Class II and III construction workers will need to
undergo medical exams each year.  Although Class I workers will also
require medical exams, the 1987 EPA asbestos WPR covers these activities
and thus medical exams are not incremental for Class I workers under the
revised rule.  Based on the Economic Analysis for this rule, EPA
estimates that 3,032 workers will require medical exams.  Of this total,
1,208 are supervisors (one for each crew; 704 Class II crews and 504 in
Class III) and 1,824 are non-supervisory construction workers.  To
account for turnover, EPA inflated each of these estimates by five
percent.  Thus, each year, a total of 3,183 workers, including 1,268
supervisors and 1,915 non-supervisory construction workers, will require
medical exams.  EPA assumes that these exams will require 45 minutes
each, imposing an annual burden of 2,387 hours (1,436 hours for
construction workers and 951 hours for supervisors).

	The rule also requires that workers undergoing medical exams fill out
medical questionnaires designed to assess current and past
asbestos-related risk.  For a first-year worker’s initial exam under
the rule, the worker must fill out an initial medical questionnaire. 
For subsequent exams, the worker fills out an abbreviated form of that
questionnaire (i.e., the periodic questionnaire).  Both of these
questionnaires can be found in OSHA’s Construction Standard (29 CFR
1926.1101, Appendix D).  EPA estimates the annual number of initial
exams given to first-year workers for this three-year ICR period as five
percent of the number of initial exams that took place during the first
three-year period of the ICR.  Thus, 60 supervisors (1,208 × .05) and
91 non-supervisory construction workers (1,824 × .05) will fill out
initial questionnaires annually.  EPA assumes that completing the
initial questionnaire imposes a burden of one half-hour.  Thus,
completing initial questionnaires will impose an annual burden of 30
hours on supervisory construction workers (60 workers x .5 hour) and 46
hours on non-supervisory construction workers (91 workers x .5 hour).

	EPA assumes that all workers who undergo a non-initial exam will be
required to complete a periodic questionnaire each year.  Thus, EPA
estimates that 1,208 supervisors and 1,824 non-supervisory workers will
complete the periodic questionnaire each year.  EPA assumes that the
periodic questionnaire will take 10 minutes to complete.  Thus, this
requirement imposes a burden of 201 hours on supervisors (1,208 workers
× 0.1667 hours) and 304 hours on non-supervisory construction workers
(1,824 workers × 0.1667 hours).

	The rule requires employers to provide examining physicians with a
number of pieces of information, including:

A copy of the OSHA Construction Standard including Appendices D, E, and
I of the Standard;



A description of the employee’s duties;



The employee’s representative exposure level;



A description of any personal protective equipment used by the employee;
and 



Information from previous medical exams that is not otherwise available
to the physician.

EPA assumes that providing this information will impose a five-minute
burden for each annual medical exam and that affected government
entities will use clerical labor to comply with this requirement.  There
are a total of 3,183 medical exams (initial and non-initial) performed
annually (1,268 for supervisory construction workers and 1,824 for
non-supervisory construction workers).  Thus, this requirement will
impose an annual burden of 265 clerical hours.

	The rule requires employers to obtain a written opinion from the
physician for each medical exam.  EPA assumes that obtaining the
physician’s written opinion will impose a five- minute burden for each
annual medical exam and that affected government entities will use
clerical labor to comply with this requirement.  There are a total of
3,183 medical exams performed annually.  Thus, obtaining the
physician’s written opinion will impose an annual burden of 265
clerical hours.

	The rule requires employers to maintain medical records for each
employee.  EPA assumes that maintaining medical records will impose a
five-minute burden for each annual medical exam and that affected
government entities will use clerical labor to comply with this
requirement.  There are a total of 3,183 medical exams performed
annually.  Thus, EPA estimates that maintaining medical records will
impose an annual burden of 265 clerical hours.

	G.	Access to Records.

	The rule requires affected employers (a) to allow employees access to a
variety of records and (b) to allow the EPA to inspect those records.  

	EPA assumes that allowing employees to access their own records will
require five clerical minutes for each occurrence.  EPA estimates that
60,890 employees will be affected by the rule and that 10 percent of
those will access their own records each year.  Thus, employees will
access records 6,089 times annually.  This results in a total annual
burden of 507 clerical hours.

	EPA assumes that its access to employer records will require five
minutes for both a clerical worker and a supervisor for each time the
Agency accesses records.  For the construction sector, EPA assumes that
this will occur in approximately five-percent of Class I projects and
one percent of new construction and Class II, III, and IV projects.  For
brake and clutch work, EPA assumes that one-percent of all brake and
clutch repair shops will be inspected annually.  Based on these
assumptions, EPA will access the records of 5,097 construction projects
each year and the records of 30 brake and clutch repair shops.  Thus EPA
will access records 5,127 times annually.  This results in a total
annual burden of 425 hours of both clerical and supervisory time for
construction-related work and a total annual burden of three hours of
both clerical and supervisory time for brake and clutch repair.



	H.  	Competent Person.

	The rule requires all construction work sites that are covered by the
rule to be supervised by an individual trained as a competent person. 
This will require affected State and local governments to train one
person from each work crew as a competent person.  EPA assumes that
competent person training for Class I crews is not incremental to the
rule.  For Class II work, EPA competent person training will require a
40-hour training course every five years with an eight-hour course in
all other years.  The average annual training hours for Class II
competent persons during the three-year period of the ICR can be
calculated as follows:  8 hours + 32 hours/5 years = 14.4, rounded to 14
hours per year.  The 32 hours is the additional training beyond the 8
hours of training that occurs each year (40 hours – 8 hours = 32
hours) which is annualized over a five-year period (32/5 = 6.4, rounded
to 6), and then added to the annual training requirement of 8 hours, for
a total of 14 hours average training per year.  This can be applied to
the 704 supervisors that must be trained as Class II competent persons,
for an annual burden of 9,856 hours.  

	For Class III and IV workers, including new construction workers, EPA
assumes that competent person training will require a 16-hour training
course once every five years.  Thus, the average annual burden for
training Class III and IV competent persons is 3 hours (16 hours/five
years rounded to 3 hours).  This can be applied to 29,343 supervisors
that must be trained as Class III or IV competent persons, for an annual
burden of 88,029 supervisor hours.

	In addition to training, records must be kept to document that the
persons have been trained.  EPA assumes that for each person trained,
affected State and local governments will incur a burden of five minutes
of clerical time.  Based on the estimates above, a total of 30,047
competent persons will be trained annually (704 under Class II and
29,343 under Class III and IV).  Thus, maintaining records of competent
person training will require 2,503 clerical hours (30,047 competent
persons x (5min./60/min.)) annually.

Summary of Burden Estimates

	Table 3 summarizes the total burdens associated with each of the
categories discussed above.  EPA estimates that the total annual
respondent burden for this ICR will be 403,751 hours.  The ICR affects a
total 25,312 respondents (i.e., all affected State and local
governments).  The total number of annual responses is estimated to be
1,264,123 (see Table 2), unchanged from the previous ICR.  Thus, the
burden per respondent is 15.95 hours ([403,751 burden hours]/[25,312
respondents]) and the average burden per response is 0.32 hours
([403,751 burden hours]/[1,264,123 responses]), a slight decrease from
the previous ICR estimate of .33 hours per response.

The total burden for this ICR (403,751 hours) is 8,492 hours less than
the total burden under the previous ICR (412,243 hours).  The principal
reason for this decrease is the corrected lower training burden for
Class I and Class II competent persons that results from annualizing the
40 hour training over 5 years rather than over a three-year period. 
While some changes were made in the calculations of the numbers of
initial and periodic questionnaires that are completed by construction
employees and supervisors, the net result of those changes has a very
slight impact (a reduction of 337 hours) on the total annual burden hour
estimate. 

	6(b)	Estimating Respondent Costs

	Table 4 provides an estimate of respondent costs, based on the burden
estimates (Table 3) and the following hourly labor cost assumptions:



Clerical labor costs $21.89 per hour,



Construction employee (non-supervisory) labor costs $30.16 per hour,



Brake and clutch repair employee labor costs $27.72 per hour,



Construction supervisor labor costs $43.94 per hour,



Brake and clutch repair supervisor labor costs $42.87 per hour, and



Industrial hygienist labor costs $52.86 per hour.

	These hourly labor costs reflect both wage and non-wage benefits for
these categories of employees in year 2005 dollars.  The derivation of
the labor costs appear in Attachment D to the ICR.  Cost estimates in
Table 4 are derived by multiplying the respondent burden hours for each
requirement by the appropriate hourly labor cost from above.

Table 4.  Total Annual Cost of Respondent Burden Hours

COLLECTION ACTIVITY	TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS

	Clerical	Employees	Supervisory	Industrial Hygienist	TOTAL

READ AND INTERPRET REGULATION	$0	$0	$55,628	$0	$55,628

RESPIRATOR PROGRAM

	-DEVELOP PROGRAM, Large Gov’ts

$34,465	$34,465

-FIT TESTING

	     -Full-Face Respirators	$0	$302	$439	$0	$741

     -Half-Mask-Face Respirators	$0	$13,331	$19,421	$0	$32,752

-MAINTAIN RECORDS FOR FIT TESTS	$4,903	$0	$0	$0	$4,903

EXPOSURE MONITORING

	-INITIAL EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT

	     -Construction	$0	$0	$0	$448,253	$448,253

     -Brake and Clutch Repair	$0	$0	$0	$134,053	$134,053

-MAINTAIN RECORDS	$23,729	$0	$0	$0	$23,729

-POST MONITORING RESULTS, BRAKE/CLUTCH	$5,473	$0	$0	$0	$5,473

HAZARD COMMUNICATION

	-EVALUATE RISKINESS	$0	$0	$148,517	$0	$148,517

-NOTIFY EMPLOYEES

	     -Construction	$0	$0	$1,858,310	$0	$1, 858,310

     -Brake and Clutch Repair	$0	$0	$43,896	$0	$43,896

-NOTIFY OTHER EMPLOYEES/ TENANTS	$0	$0	$1, 858,310	$0	$1, 858,310

TRAINING

	-PROVIDE TRAINING

	     -Class II	$0	$2,065,357	$0	$0	$2,065,357

     -Class III	$0	$482,560	$0	$0	$482,560

     -Class IV	$0	$3,130,910	$0	$0	$3,130,910

-MAINTAIN RECORDS	$100,409	$0	$0	$0	$100,409

MEDICAL SURVEILLANCE

	-MEDICAL EXAMS	$0	$43,310	$41,787	$0	$85,097

-INITIAL QUESTIONNAIRE	$0	$1,387	$1,318	$0	$2,705

-PERIODIC QUESTIONNAIRE	$0	$9,169	$8,832	$0	$18,001

-INFORMATION TO PHYSICIANS	$5,801	$0	$0	$0	$5,801

-PHYSICIAN’S WRITTEN OPINION	$5,801	$0	$0	$0	$5,801

-MAINTAIN RECORDS	$5,801	$0	$0	$0	$5,801

ACCESS TO RECORDS

	-EMPLOYEE ACCESS	$11,098	$0	$0	$0	$11,098

-EPA ACCESS

	     -Construction	$9,303	$0	$18,675	$0	$27,978

     -Brake and Clutch Repair	$66	$0	$132	$0	$198

COMPETENT PERSON

	-TRAINING

	     -Class I and II	$0	$0	$433,073	$0	$433,073

     -Class III and IV	$0	$0	$3,911,934	$0	$3,911,934

-MAINTAIN RECORDS	$58,813	$0	$0	$0	$58,813

TOTALS	$231,197  =SUM   	$5,746,326	$8,400,272	$616,771	$14,994,566

   Note: Some rounding error exists in these estimates.

	Based on the above hourly labor cost data, EPA has calculated the total
respondent cost to be approximately $15 million annually.  This
translates into a per-respondent cost of $592.39 6.  The total
respondent and per respondent costs of the burden have increased because
of labor cost increases since the previous ICR (see Attachment D).  

	6(c)	Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

	Table 5 shows the estimated Agency burden associated with this ICR. 
EPA has determined that only one Agency activity will create a burden
under the rule: inspecting projects.  Projects can be inspected for two
reasons: (a) as part of the neutral administrative inspection program or
(b) in response to a complaint.  In the previous ICR, EPA provided
separate estimates for each category.  However, the data in the Economic
Analysis do not allow EPA to make such a distinction in this ICR because
of the expanded scope of the rule.

	For the construction sector, EPA assumes that five percent of Class I
projects and one percent of new construction and Class II, III, and IV
projects will be inspected annually.  For brake and clutch work, EPA
assumed that one percent of all brake and clutch repair shops will be
inspected annually.  EPA further assumes that inspections of Class I and
Class II construction projects and brake and clutch establishments will
require one hour of an inspector’s time and that inspections of Class
III and IV construction projects (including new construction projects)
will require 15 minutes.  EPA used these assumptions in combination with
estimates of the numbers of projects and brake and clutch establishments
to generate estimates of the time required to comply:

Based on an estimated 554 Class I construction projects, EPA will
inspect 28 Class I projects annually (554 projects × .05 percent)
requiring 28 hours for Class I construction project inspections.

Based on an estimated 3,953 Class II construction projects, EPA will
inspect 40 Class II projects annually (3,953 projects × .01 percent)
requiring 40 hours for Class II construction project inspections.

Based on an estimated 503,000 non-custodial Class III and IV
construction projects, including new construction projects, EPA will
inspect 5,030 non-custodial Class III and IV projects annually (503,000
projects × .01 percent) requiring 1,258 hours for non-custodial Class
III and IV construction project inspections.

Based on an estimated 2,996 brake and clutch repair shops, EPA will
inspect 30 brake and clutch repair shops annually (2,996 shops × .01
percent) requiring 30 hours for brake and clutch repair shop
inspections.

In total, EPA will incur an annual requirement of 1,356 hours associated
with inspections.

	A GS-9, Step 1 base salary of $38,175 was used to calculate costs for
inspections7.  The annual salary was then inflated by a factor of 1.6 to
account for overhead and benefits8.  Thus, the fully loaded annual labor
cost for Federal employees who will conduct the inspections under this
ICR is $61,080.  Based on a 2,080 hour work year, the fully loaded
hourly labor cost is $29.36 for a GS-9 employee.

Table 5.  Annual Agency Burden and Cost Estimate

Activity	Burden Hours	Cost

Inspections (GS-9-Step 1)	1,356	$39,812

Total	1,356	$39,812

	6(d)	Bottom Line Burden Hour and Costs/Master Tables

	The total annual respondent burden hour and cost estimates for this
information collection are as follows:

Respondent Burden Hours:  	 403,751

Respondent Cost:   		$14,994,566

	6(e)	Reasons for Change in Burden

This request reflects a decrease of 8,492 hours (from 412,243 hours to
403,751 hours) in the total estimated respondent burden from that
currently in the OMB inventory.  The principal reason for this decrease
is the corrected lower training burden for Class I and Class II
competent persons that results from correct annualizing the 40 hour
training over 5 years rather than over a three-year period.  While some
changes were made in the calculations of the numbers of initial and
periodic medical questionnaires that are completed by construction
employees and supervisors, the net result of those changes has a very
slight impact (a reduction of 337 hours) on the total annual burden hour
estimate.  The burden per respondent for this ICR (15.95 hours) is
slightly lower than the estimate in the previous ICR (16.29) for the
same reason.

	6(f)	Burden Statement

	The annual public burden for this collection of information, which is
approved under OMB Control No. 2070-0072, is estimated to average 0.32
hours per response.  According to the Paperwork Reduction Act,
“burden” means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by 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 systems 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 any 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
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays 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 regulations, after initial display in the Federal
Register, are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

To comment on the Agency’s need for this information, the accuracy of
the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing
respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques,
EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OPPT-2006-0853.  The docket is available for public 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 holidays.  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.  An
electronic version of the public docket is available through the Federal
Docket Management System (FDMS) at    HYPERLINK
"http://www.regulations.gov"  www.regulations.gov .  Use FDMS to submit
or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the
public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that
are available electronically.  Once in the system, select “search,”
then key in the docket ID number identified above.  Also, you can send
comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503,
Attention: Desk Office for EPA.  Please include the EPA Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OPPT-2006-0853 and OMB control number 2070-0072 in any
correspondence.

References for Section 6

OSHA, 2000a.  Supporting Statement for the Information Collection
Requirements of the Asbestos Standard (Construction), OMB Approval
Number 1218-0134.

OSHA, 2000b.  Supporting Statement for the Information Collection
Requirements of the Asbestos Standard (General Industry), OMB Approval
Number 1218-0133.

U.S.  EPA, 2000.  Final Asbestos Worker Protection Rule Economic
Analysis, Economic and Policy Analysis Branch, Economics, Exposure and
Technology Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
September 25.



Attachment A

Toxic Substances Control Act Section 6

15  U.S.C.  2605

TITLE 15--COMMERCE AND TRADE

 

CHAPTER 53--TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL

 

SUBCHAPTER I--CONTROL OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES

 

Sec. 2605. Regulation of hazardous chemical substances and  mixtures

(a) Scope of regulation

    If the Administrator finds that there is a reasonable basis to
conclude that the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce,
use, or disposal of a chemical substance or mixture, or that any
combination of such activities, presents or will present an unreasonable
risk of injury to health or the environment, the Administrator shall by
rule apply one or more of the following requirements to such substance
or mixture to the extent necessary to protect adequately against such
risk using the least burdensome requirements:

        (1) A requirement (A) prohibiting the manufacturing, processing,
or distribution in 

    commerce of such substance or mixture, or (B) limiting the amount of
such substance or

    mixture which may be manufactured, processed, or distributed in
commerce.

        (2) A requirement--

            (A) prohibiting the manufacture, processing, or distribution
in commerce of such

        substance or mixture for (i) a particular use or (ii) a
particular use in a concentration in

        excess of a level specified by the Administrator in the rule
imposing the requirement, or

            (B) limiting the amount of such substance or mixture which
may be manufactured,

        processed, or distributed in commerce for (i) a particular use
or (ii) a particular use in a

        concentration in excess of a level specified by the
Administrator in the rule 

        imposing the requirement.

        (3) A requirement that such substance or mixture or any article
containing such substance

    or mixture be marked with or accompanied by clear and adequate
warnings and instructions

    with respect to its use, distribution in commerce, or disposal or
with respect to any

    combination of such activities. The form and content of such
warnings and instructions shall

    be prescribed by the Administrator.

        (4) A requirement that manufacturers and processors of such
substance or mixture make

    and retain records of the processes used to manufacture or process
such substance or mixture

    and monitor or conduct tests which are reasonable and necessary to
assure compliance with

    the requirements of any rule applicable under this subsection.

        (5) A requirement prohibiting or otherwise regulating any manner
or method of commercial

    use of such substance or mixture.

        (6)(A) A requirement prohibiting or otherwise regulating any
manner or method of disposal

    of such substance or mixture, or of any article containing such
substance or mixture, by its

    manufacturer or processor or by any other person who uses, or
disposes of, it for commercial

    purposes.

        (B) A requirement under subparagraph (A) may not require any
person to take any action

    which would be in violation of any law or requirement of, or in
effect for, a State or political

    subdivision, and shall require each person subject to it to notify
each State and political

    subdivision in which a required disposal may occur of such disposal.

        (7) A requirement directing manufacturers or processors of such
substance or mixture (A)

    to give notice of such unreasonable risk of injury to distributors
in commerce of such

    substance or mixture and, to the extent reasonably ascertainable, to
other persons in

    possession of such substance or mixture or exposed to such substance
or mixture, (B) to give

    public notice of such risk of injury, and (C) to replace or
repurchase such substance or

    mixture as elected by the person to which the requirement is
directed.

Any requirement (or combination of requirements) imposed under this
subsection may be limited in application to specified geographic areas.

(b) Quality control

    If the Administrator has a reasonable basis to conclude that a
particular manufacturer or processor is manufacturing or processing a
chemical substance or mixture in a manner which unintentionally causes
the chemical substance or mixture to present or which will cause it to 

present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment--

        (1) the Administrator may by order require such manufacturer or
processor to submit a

    description of the relevant quality control procedures followed in
the manufacturing or

    processing of such chemical substance or mixture; and

        (2) if the Administrator determines--

            (A) that such quality control procedures are inadequate to
prevent the chemical

        substance or mixture from presenting such risk of injury, the
Administrator may order the

        manufacturer or processor to revise such quality control
procedures to the extent necessary

        to remedy such inadequacy; or

            (B) that the use of such quality control procedures has
resulted in the distribution in

        commerce of chemical substances or mixtures which present an
unreasonable risk of injury

        to health or the environment, the Administrator may order the
manufacturer or processor

        to (i) give notice of such risk to processors or distributors in
commerce of any such

        substance or mixture, or to both, and, to the extent reasonably
ascertainable, to any other

        person in possession of or exposed to any such substance, (ii)
to give public notice of such

        risk, and (iii) to provide such replacement or repurchase of any
such substance or mixture

        as is necessary to adequately protect health or the environment.

A determination under subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (2) shall be
made on the record after opportunity for hearing in accordance with
section 554 of title 5. Any manufacturer or processor subject to a
requirement to replace or repurchase a chemical substance or mixture may
elect either to replace or repurchase the substance or mixture and shall
take either such action in the manner prescribed by the Administrator.

(c) Promulgation of subsection (a) rules

    (1) In promulgating any rule under subsection (a) of this section
with respect to a chemical

substance or mixture, the Administrator shall consider and publish a
statement with respect to--

        (A) the effects of such substance or mixture on health and the
magnitude of the exposure

    of human beings to such substance or mixture,

        (B) the effects of such substance or mixture on the environment
and the magnitude of the

    exposure of the environment to such substance or mixture,

        (C) the benefits of such substance or mixture for various uses
and the availability of

    substitutes for such uses, and

        (D) the reasonably ascertainable economic consequences of the
rule, after consideration of

    the effect on the national economy, small business, technological
innovation, the environment,

    and public health.

If the Administrator determines that a risk of injury to health or the
environment could be eliminated or reduced to a sufficient extent by
actions taken under another Federal law (or laws) administered in whole
or in part by the Administrator, the Administrator may not promulgate a 

rule under subsection (a) of this section to protect against such risk
of injury unless the Administrator finds, in the Administrator’s
discretion, that it is in the public interest to protect against such
risk under this chapter. In making such a finding the Administrator
shall consider (i) all relevant aspects of the risk, as determined by
the Administrator in the Administrator’s discretion, (ii) a comparison
of the estimated costs of complying with actions taken under this 

chapter and under such law (or laws), and (iii) the relative efficiency
of actions under this chapter and under such law (or laws) to protect
against such risk of injury.

    (2) When prescribing a rule under subsection (a) the Administrator
shall proceed in accordance with section 553 of title 5 (without regard
to any reference in such section to sections 556 and 557 of such title),
and shall also (A) publish a notice of proposed rulemaking stating with
particularity the reason for the proposed rule; (B) allow interested
persons to submit written data, views, and arguments, and make all such
submissions publicly available; (C) provide an opportunity for an
informal hearing in accordance with paragraph (3); (D) promulgate, if
appropriate, a final rule based on the matter in the rulemaking record
(as defined in section 2618(a) of this title), and (E) make and publish
with the rule the finding described in subsection (a) of this section.

    (3) Informal hearings required by paragraph (2)(C) shall be
conducted by the Administrator in accordance with the following
requirements:

        (A) Subject to subparagraph (B), an interested person is
entitled--

            (i) to present such person’s position orally or by
documentary submissions (or both), and

            (ii) if the Administrator determines that there are disputed
issues of material fact it is

        necessary to resolve, to present such rebuttal submissions and
to conduct (or have

        conducted under subparagraph (B)(ii)) such cross-examination of
persons as the 

        the Administrator determines (I) to be appropriate, and (II) to
be required for a full and

        true disclosure with respect to such issues.

        (B) The Administrator may prescribe such rules and make such
rulings concerning

    procedures in such hearings to avoid unnecessary costs or delay.
Such rules or rulings may

    include (i) the imposition of reasonable time limits on each
interested person’s oral 

    presentations, and (ii) requirements that any cross-examination to
which a person may be

    entitled under subparagraph (A) be conducted by the Administrator on
behalf of that person

    in such manner as the Administrator determines (I) to be
appropriate, and (II) to be required

    for a full and true disclosure with respect to disputed issues of
material fact.

        (C)(i) Except as provided in clause (ii), if a group of persons
each of whom under

    subparagraphs (A) and (B) would be entitled to conduct (or have
conducted)

    cross-examination and who are determined by the Administrator to
have the same or similar

    interests in the proceeding cannot agree upon a single
representative of such interests for

    purposes of cross-examination, the Administrator may make rules and
rulings (I) limiting the

    representation of such interest for such purposes, and (II)
governing the manner in which

    such cross-examination shall be limited.

        (ii) When any person who is a member of a group with respect to
which the Administrator

    has made a determination under clause (i) is unable to agree upon
group representation with

    the other members of the group, then such person shall not be denied
under the authority of

    clause (i) the opportunity to conduct (or have conducted)
cross-examination as to issues

    affecting the person’s particular interests if (I) the person
satisfies the Administrator that the

    person has made a reasonable and good faith effort to reach
agreement upon group

    representation with the other members of the group and (II) the
Administrator determines that

    there are substantial and relevant issues which are not adequately
presented by the group 

    representative.

        (D) A verbatim transcript shall be taken of any oral
presentation made, and 

    cross-examination conducted in any informal hearing under this
subsection. Such transcript

    shall be available to the public.

    (4)(A) The Administrator may, pursuant to rules prescribed by the
Administrator, provide compensation for reasonable attorneys’ fees,
expert witness fees, and other costs of participating in a rulemaking
proceeding for the promulgation of a rule under subsection (a) of this
section to any person--

        (i) who represents an interest which would substantially
contribute to a fair determination

    of the issues to be resolved in the proceeding, and

        (ii) if--

            (I) the economic interest of such person is small in
comparison to the costs of effective

        participation in the proceeding by such person, or

            (II) such person demonstrates to the satisfaction of the
Administrator that such person

        does not have sufficient resources adequately to participate in
the proceeding without 

        compensation under this subparagraph.

In determining for purposes of clause (i) if an interest will
substantially contribute to a fair determination of the issues to be
resolved in a proceeding, the Administrator shall take into account the
number and complexity of such issues and the extent to which
representation of such interest will contribute to widespread public
participation in the proceeding and representation of a fair balance of
interests for the resolution of such issues.

    (B) In determining whether compensation should be provided to a
person under subparagraph (A) and the amount of such compensation, the
Administrator shall take into account the financial burden which will be
incurred by such person in participating in the rulemaking proceeding.
The Administrator shall take such action as may be necessary to ensure
that the aggregate amount of compensation paid under this paragraph in
any fiscal year to all persons who, in rulemaking proceedings in which
they receive compensation, are persons who either--

        (i) would be regulated by the proposed rule, or

        (ii) represent persons who would be so regulated,

may not exceed 25 per centum of the aggregate amount paid as
compensation under this paragraph to all persons in such fiscal year.   
(5) Paragraph (1), (2), (3), and (4) of this subsection apply to the
promulgation of a rule repealing, or making a substantive amendment to,
a rule promulgated under subsection (a) of this section.

(d) Effective date

    (1) The Administrator shall specify in any rule under subsection (a)
of this section the date on which it shall take effect, which date shall
be as soon as feasible.

    (2)(A) The Administrator may declare a proposed rule under
subsection (a) of this section to be effective upon its publication in
the Federal Register and until the effective date of final action taken,
in accordance with subparagraph (B), respecting such rule if--

        (i) the Administrator determines that--

            (I) the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce,
use, or disposal of the

        chemical substance or mixture subject to such proposed rule or
any combination of such

        activities is likely to result in an unreasonable risk of
serious or widespread injury to health

        or the environment before such effective date; and

            (II) making such proposed rule so effective is necessary to
protect the public interest;

        and

        (ii) in the case of a proposed rule to prohibit the manufacture,
processing, or distribution of

    a chemical substance or mixture because of the risk determined under
clause (i)(I), a court has

    in an action under section 2606 of this title granted relief with
respect to such risk associated

    with such substance or mixture.

Such a proposed rule which is made so effective shall not, for purposes
of judicial review, be considered final agency action.

    (B) If the Administrator makes a proposed rule effective upon its
publication in the Federal Register, the Administrator shall, as
expeditiously as possible, give interested persons prompt notice of such
action, provide reasonable opportunity, in accordance with paragraphs
(2) and (3) of subsection (c) of this section, for a hearing on such
rule, and either promulgate such rule (as proposed or with
modifications) or revoke it; and if such a hearing is requested, the
Administrator shall commence the hearing within five days from the date
such request is made unless the Administrator and the person making the
request agree upon a later date for the hearing to begin, and after the
hearing is concluded the Administrator shall, within ten days of the
conclusion of the hearing, either promulgate such rule (as proposed or
with modifications) or revoke it.

(e) Polychlorinated biphenyls

    (1) Within six months after January 1, 1977, the Administrator shall
promulgate rules to--

        (A) prescribe methods for the disposal of polychlorinated
biphenyls, and

        (B) require polychlorinated biphenyls to be marked with clear
and adequate warnings, and

    instructions with respect to their processing, distribution in
commerce, use, or disposal or

    with respect to any combination of such activities.

Requirements prescribed by rules under this paragraph shall be
consistent with the requirements of paragraphs (2) and (3).

    (2)(A) Except as provided under subparagraph (B), effective one year
after January 1, 1977, no person may manufacture, process, or distribute
in commerce or use any polychlorinated biphenyl in any manner other than
in a totally enclosed manner.

    (B) The Administrator may by rule authorize the manufacture,
processing, distribution in commerce or use (or any combination of such
activities) of any polychlorinated biphenyl in a manner other than in a
totally enclosed manner if the Administrator finds that such
manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, or use (or
combination of such activities) will not present an unreasonable risk of
injury to health or the environment.

    (C) For the purposes of this paragraph, the term ``totally enclosed
manner’‘ means any manner which will ensure that any exposure of
human beings or the environment to a polychlorinated biphenyl will be
insignificant as determined by the Administrator by rule.

    (3)(A) Except as provided in subparagraphs (B) and (C)--

        (i) no person may manufacture any polychlorinated biphenyl after
two years after January

    1,1977, and

        (ii) no person may process or distribute in commerce any
polychlorinated biphenyl after

    two and one-half years after such date.

    (B) Any person may petition the Administrator for an exemption from
the requirements of subparagraph (A), and the Administrator may grant by
rule such an exemption if the Administrator finds that--

        (i) an unreasonable risk of injury to health or environment
would not result, and

        (ii) good faith efforts have been made to develop a chemical
substance which does not

    present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment
and which may be

    substituted for such polychlorinated biphenyl.

An exemption granted under this subparagraph shall be subject to such
terms and conditions as the Administrator may prescribe and shall be in
effect for such period (but not more than one year from the date it is
granted) as the Administrator may prescribe.

    (C) Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to the distribution in commerce
of any polychlorinated biphenyl if such polychlorinated biphenyl was
sold for purposes other than resale before two and one half years after
October 11, 1976.

    (4) Any rule under paragraph (1), (2)(B), or (3)(B) shall be
promulgated in accordance with paragraphs (2), (3), and (4) of
subsection (c) of this section.

    (5) This subsection does not limit the authority of the
Administrator, under any other provision of this chapter or any other
Federal law, to take action respecting any polychlorinated biphenyl.

(Pub. L. 94-469, title I, Sec. 6, Oct. 11, 1976, 90 Stat. 2020;
renumbered title I, Pub. L. 99-519, Sec. 3(c)(1), Oct. 22, 1986, 100
Stat. 2989.)

                  Section Referred to in Other Sections

    This section is referred to in sections 2603, 2604, 2606 to 2608,
2611, 2612, 2614, 2616 to 2620, 2623, 2630 of this title; title 10
section 2708; title 42 section 6925.



Attachment B

Toxic Substances Control Act Section 8(a)

15  U.S.C.  2607(a)

TITLE 15--COMMERCE AND TRADE

CHAPTER 53--TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL

SUBCHAPTER I--CONTROL OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES

Sec. 2607. Reporting and retention of information

(a) Reports

    (1) The Administrator shall promulgate rules under which--

        (A) each person (other than a small manufacturer or processor)
who manufactures or processes or proposes to

    manufacture or process  a chemical substance (other than a chemical
substance described in subparagraph (B)(ii)) shall

    maintain such records, and shall submit to the Administrator such
reports, as the Administrator may reasonably require,

    and

        (B) each person (other than a small manufacturer or processor)
who manufactures or processes or proposes to

    manufacture or  process--

            (i) a mixture, or

            (ii) a chemical substance in small quantities (as defined by
the Administrator by rule) solely for purposes of

        scientific experimentation or analysis or chemical research on,
or analysis of, such substance or another substance,

        including any such research or analysis for the development of a
product, 

    shall maintain records and submit to the Administrator reports but
only to the extent the Administrator determines the

    maintenance of records or submission of reports, or both, is
necessary for the effective enforcement of this chapter.

The Administrator may not require in a rule promulgated under this
paragraph the maintenance of records or the submission of reports with
respect to changes in the proportions of the components of a mixture
unless the Administrator finds that the maintenance of such records or
the submission of such reports, or both, is necessary for the effective 

enforcement of this chapter. For purposes of the compilation of the list
of chemical substances required under subsection (b) of this section,
the Administrator shall promulgate rules pursuant to this subsection not
later than 180 days after January 1, 1977.

    (2) The Administrator may require under paragraph (1) maintenance of
records and reporting with respect to the following insofar as known to
the person making the report or insofar as reasonably ascertainable:

        (A) The common or trade name, the chemical identity, and the
molecular structure of each chemical substance or

    mixture for which such a report is required.

        (B) The categories or proposed categories of use of each such
substance or mixture.

        (C) The total amount of each such substance and mixture
manufactured or processed, reasonable estimates of the

    total amount to be manufactured or processed, the amount
manufactured or processed for each of its categories of use,

    and reasonable  estimates of the amount to be manufactured or
processed for each of its categories of use or proposed

    categories of use.

        (D) A description of the byproducts resulting from the
manufacture, processing, use, or disposal of each such

    substance or mixture.

        (E) All existing data concerning the environmental and health
effects of such substance or mixture.

        (F) The number of individuals exposed, and reasonable estimates
of the number who will be exposed, to such

    substance or mixture in their places of employment and the duration
of such exposure.

        (G) In the initial report under paragraph (1) on such substance
or mixture, the manner or method of its disposal, and

    in any subsequent report on such substance or mixture, any change in
such manner or method.

To the extent feasible, the Administrator shall not require under
paragraph (1), any reporting which is unnecessary or duplicative.

    (3)(A)(i) The Administrator may by rule require a small manufacturer
or processor of a chemical substance to submit to the Administrator such
information respecting the chemical substance as the Administrator may
require for publication of the first list of chemical substances
required by subsection (b) of this section.

    (ii) The Administrator may by rule require a small manufacturer or
processor of a chemical substance or mixture--

        (I) subject to a rule proposed or promulgated under section
2603, 2604(b)(4), or 2605 of this title, or an order in

    effect under  section 2604(e) of this title, or

        (II) with respect to which relief has been granted pursuant to a
civil action brought under section 2604 or 2606 of

    this title,

to maintain such records on such substance or mixture, and to submit to
the Administrator such reports on such substance or mixture, as the
Administrator may reasonably require. A rule under this clause requiring
reporting may require reporting with respect to the matters referred to
in paragraph (2).

    (B) The Administrator, after consultation with the Administrator of
the Small Business Administration, shall by rule prescribe standards for
determining the manufacturers and processors which qualify as small
manufacturers and processors for purposes of this paragraph and
paragraph (1).



Attachment C

40 CFR 763 Subpart G

TITLE 40--PROTECTION OF ENVIRONMENT

 

CHAPTER I--ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (CONTINUED)

 

PART 763--ASBESTOS

 

Subpart G--Asbestos Worker Protection

763.120  What is the purpose of this subpart?

This subpart protects certain State and local government employees who
are not protected by the Asbestos Standards of the Occupational Safety
and Health Administration (OSHA). This subpart applies the OSHA Asbestos
Standards in 29 CFR 1910.1001 and 29 CFR 1926.1101 to these employees.

763.121  Does this subpart apply to me?

If you are a State or local government employer and you are not subject
to a State asbestos standard that OSHA has approved under section 18 of
the Occupational Safety and Health Act or a State asbestos plan that EPA
has exempted from the requirements of this subpart under section 
763.123, you must follow the requirements of this subpart to protect
your employees from occupational exposure to asbestos.

763.122  What does this subpart require me to do?

If you are a State or local government employer whose employees perform:

	(a) Construction activities identified in 29 CFR 1926.1101(a), you
must:

		(1) Comply with the OSHA standards in 29 CFR 1926.1101.

		(2) Submit notifications required for alternative control methods to
the Director, National Program Chemicals Division (7404), Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.

(b) Custodial activities not associated with the construction activities
identified in 29 CFR 1926.1101(a), you must comply with the OSHA
standards in 29 CFR 1910.1001.

(c) Repair, cleaning, or replacement of asbestos-containing clutch
plates and brake pads, shoes, and linings, or removal of
asbestos-containing residue from brake drums or clutch housings, you
must comply with the OSHA standards in 29 CFR 1910.1001.

763.123  May a State implement its own asbestos worker protection plan?

This section describes the process under which a State may be exempted
from the requirements of this subpart.

(a) States seeking an exemption. If your State wishes to implement its
own asbestos worker protection plan, rather than complying with the
requirements of this subpart, your State must apply for and receive an
exemption from EPA.

(1) What must my State do to apply for an exemption? To apply for an
exemption from the requirements of this subpart, your State must send to
the Director of EPA’s Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT)
a copy of its asbestos worker protection regulations and a detailed
explanation of how your State’s asbestos worker protection plan meets
the requirements of TSCA section 18 (15 U.S.C. 2617).

(2) What action will EPA take on my State’s application for an
exemption? EPA will review your State’s application and make a
preliminary determination whether your State’s asbestos worker
protection plan meets the requirements of TSCA section 18.

(i) If EPA’s preliminary determination is that your State’s plan
does meet the requirements of TSCA section 18, EPA will initiate a
rulemaking, including an opportunity for public comment, to exempt your
State from the requirements of this subpart. After considering any
comments, EPA will issue a final rule granting or denying the exemption.

(ii) If EPA’s preliminary determination is that the State plan does
not meet the requirements of TSCA section 18, EPA will notify your State
in writing and will give your State a reasonable opportunity to respond
to that determination.

(iii) If EPA does not grant your State an exemption, then the State and
local government employers in your State are subject to the requirements
of this subpart.

(b) States that have been granted an exemption. If EPA has exempted your
State from the requirements of this subpart, your State must update its
asbestos worker protection regulations as necessary to implement changes
to meet the requirements of this subpart, and must apply to EPA for an
amendment to its exemption.

(1) What must my State do to apply for an amendment to its exemption? To
apply for an amendment to its exemption, your State must send to the
Director of OPPT a copy of its updated asbestos worker protection
regulations and a detailed explanation of how your State’s updated
asbestos worker protection plan meets the requirements of TSCA section
18. Your State must submit its application for an amendment within 6
months of the effective date of any changes to the requirements of this
subpart, or within a reasonable time agreed upon by your State and OPPT.

(2) What action will EPA take on my State’s application for an
amendment? EPA will review your State’s application for an amendment
and make a preliminary determination whether your State’s updated
asbestos worker protection plan meets the requirements of TSCA section
18.

(i) If EPA determines that the updated State plan does meet the
requirements of TSCA section 18, EPA will issue your State an amended
exemption.

(ii) If EPA determines that the updated State plan does not meet the
requirements of TSCA section 18, EPA will notify your State in writing
and will give your State a reasonable opportunity to respond to that
determination.

(iii) If EPA does not grant your State an amended exemption, or if your
State does not submit a timely request for amended exemption, then the
State and local government employers in your State are subject to the
requirements of this subpart.

ATTACHMENT D

Hourly Labor Costs Used in Estimating Respondent Burden Costs

Worker Category	Raw Hourly 

Wage Rate [a]	Loaded Hourly 

Wage Rate [b]

Construction sector worker	$18.39 [c]	$30.16

Construction supervisor	$26.79 [d]	$43.94

Clerical worker	$13.35 [e]	$21.89

Brake and clutch repair mechanic	$16.90 [f]	$27.72

Brake and clutch repair supervisor	$26.15 [g]	$42.87

Industrial hygienist	$32.33 [h]	$52.86

[a] Source: BLS, 2005.  The Occupational Employment Statistics series no
longer provide wage data for specific occupations at the State and local
government levels, so the wage rates used here are national, and not
specific to State and local government workers.  However, the
occupations are the same as those used in the previous ICR.  The
decrease in the wages for clerical workers and brake and clutch repair
mechanics for 2005 compared to 2003, is possibly attributable to that
change.

[b] EPA calculated the loaded hourly wage rate by inflating the raw
hourly wage rate by 64 percent to account for benefits and overhead
(EPA, 1992).  In contrast to the wage rates, the total benefits figures
provided in BLS, 2006 are for the State and local government sector. 
The data show that for State and local government workers the cost per
hour worked figures for total compensation and wages and salary are
$36.55 and $24.83, respectively.  This would indicate that benefits
represent a 47 percent increase over wages and salary.  EPA has also
used a figure of 17 percent to represent overhead.  Combined, these
result in the 64 percent figure used above.  

[c] This is the mean hourly wage for the “Construction and Extraction
Occupations (Major Group)” category, NAICS 47-0000, in BLS, 2005. 

[d] This is the mean hourly wage for the “First-Line
Supervisors/Managers of Construction Trades and Extraction Workers”
category, NAICS 49-1011, in BLS, 2005.  

[e] This is the mean hourly wage for the “Secretaries, Except Legal,
Medical and Executive” category, NAICS 43-6014, in BLS, 2005.  

[f] This is the mean hourly wage for the “Automotive Service
Technicians and Mechanics” category, NAICS 49-3023, in BLS, 2005.

[g] This is the mean hourly wage for the “First-Line
Supervisors/Managers of Mechanics, Installers, and Repairers”
category, NAICS 49-1011, in BLS, 2005. 

[h] Because there is no industrial hygienist category in BLS, 2005, the
mean hourly wage for the “Health and Safety Engineers, Except Mining
Safety Engineers and Inspectors” category NAICS17-2111, in BLS, 2005
was used.  This category was used based on the similarity of duties as
described in the data. 

References for Attachment D

Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Occupational Employment Statistics
(OES), 2005.  2005 National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment
and Wage Estimates.  Last updated May 2005.

Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), 2006.  Employer Costs for Employee
Compensation.  Qtr4, 2005, All occupations, State and Local Government. 
Series Id’s:  CMU3010000000000D; CMU3020000000000D; CMU3030000000000D.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992.  Office of Policy, Planning
and Evaluation.  Instructions For Preparing Information Collection
Requests (ICRs).  June 1.

	1 Except for brake and clutch repair workers, the estimated numbers of
employees reflect the numbers of full-time equivalents (FTEs). The
estimated numbers of brake and clutch repair employees reflect the
actual numbers of workers.

	2 As defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act, a small government is
any specified government entity, excluding States, with jurisdiction
over a population of less than 50,000. For purposes of this analysis, a
large government would be any government entity not classified as small.

	3 EPA assumes that small local governments hire contractors to perform
industrial hygiene tasks such as this.

	4 See Chapter 6, Table 6-3 of the Economic Analysis.

	5 In providing costs for the Economic Analysis for the rule, EPA did
estimate a number of projects for custodial work. That estimate,
however, was used only to estimate materials usage for some of the
compliance requirements.

	6 This estimate is based on 25,312 affected State and local governments
that comprise the set of respondents. 

	7 Salary figure taken from: U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM),
2006. 2006 General Schedule (Not Including Locality Rates of Pay),
January. Because 26 different states, the District of Columbia and
certain territories are covered by this rule, it is not possible to
include a single locality pay raise adjustment that would apply to all
of them. Therefore, EPA used OPM’s general schedule as an estimate of
the annual salary.

	8 U.S. EPA, 1996. Draft ICR Handbook, EPA’s Guide to Writing
Information Collection Requests Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995, p. A-36  September, 1996.

  PAGE   2 

  PAGE   12 

  PAGE   24 

  PAGE   23 

  PAGE   24 

  PAGE   

  PAGE   25 

  PAGE   26 

  PAGE   

  PAGE   

  PAGE   

  PAGE   

  PAGE   

  PAGE   28 

  PAGE   29