Dioxin and Dioxin-like Compounds; Toxic Equivalency Information; Community Right-To-Know Toxic Chemical Release Reporting

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

[Federal Register: May 10, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 90)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 26544-26554]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr10my07-8]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 9 and 372
[EPA-HQ-TRI-2002-0001; FRL-8311-6]
RIN 2025-AA12

Dioxin and Dioxin-like Compounds; Toxic Equivalency Information;
Community Right-To-Know Toxic Chemical Release Reporting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Under section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), EPA is finalizing revisions to the reporting
requirements for the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds category. The
current EPCRA section 313 regulations require facilities to report
dioxin and dioxin-like compounds in units of total grams for the entire
category, and provide a single generic distribution of the individual
dioxin and dioxin-like compounds at the facility. The final rule
requires that, in addition to reporting total gram quantities for the
category, facilities are required to report the mass quantity of each
individual member of the category. The mass quantity data for the
individual members of the category will be used by EPA to perform toxic
equivalency (TEQ) computations which will be made available to the
public. TEQs are a weighted quantity measure based on the toxicity of
each member of the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds category relative
to the most toxic members of the category, i.e., 2,3,7,8-
tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin and 1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin.
The final rule also eliminates the reporting of the single generic
distribution for the members of the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds
category.

DATES: This final rule is effective on July 9, 2007.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-TRI-2002-0001. All documents in the docket are listed on the
http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically through
http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Office of Environmental
Information (OEI) Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The 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 Public Reading Room is (202)
566-1744, and the telephone number for the OEI Docket is (202) 564-2736.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel R. Bushman, Toxics Release
Inventory Program Division, Office of Information Analysis and Access
(2844T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202-566-0743; fax number: 202-
566-0741; e-mail: bushman.daniel@epamail.epa.gov, for specific
information on this final rule, or for more information on EPCRA
section 313, the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) Information Center,
toll free, 1-800-424-9346 or 703-412-9810 in Virginia and Alaska or
toll free, TDD 1-800-553-7672.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does This Final Rule Apply to Me?

You may be potentially affected by this final rule if you
manufacture, process, or otherwise use dioxin and dioxin-like
compounds. Potentially affected categories and entities may include,
but are not limited to:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of potentially affected
Category entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry............................ Facilities included in the
following NAICS manufacturing
codes (corresponding to SIC codes
20 through 39): 311*, 312*, 313*,
314*, 315*, 316, 321, 322, 323*,
324, 325*, 326*, 327, 331, 332,
333, 334*, 335*, 336, 337*, 339*,
111998*, 211112*, 212234*,
212235*, 212393*, 212399*,
488390*, 511110, 511120, 511130,
511140*, 511191, 511199, 511220,
512230*, 516110*, 541710*, or
811490*. *Exceptions and/or
limitations exist for these NAICS
codes.
Facilities included in the
following NAICS codes
(corresponding to SIC codes other
than SIC codes 20 through 39):
212111, 212112, 212113
(correspond to SIC 12, Coal
Mining (except 1241)); or 212221,
212222, 212231, 212234, 212299
(correspond to SIC 10, Metal
Mining (except 1011, 1081, and
1094)); or 221111, 221112,
221113, 221119, 221121, 221122
(Limited to facilities that
combust coal and/or oil for the
purpose of generating power for
distribution in commerce)
(correspond to SIC 4911, 4931,
and 4939, Electric Utilities); or
424690, 425110, 425120 (Limited
to facilities previously
classified in SIC 5169, Chemicals
and Allied Products, Not
Elsewhere Classified); or 424710
(corresponds to SIC 5171,
Petroleum Bulk Terminals and
Plants); or 562112 (Limited to
facilities primarily engaged in
solvent recovery services on a
contract or fee basis (previously
classified under SIC 7389,
Business Services, NEC)); or
562211, 562212, 562213, 562219,
562920 (Limited to facilities
regulated under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act,
subtitle C, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et
seq.) (correspond to SIC 4953,
Refuse Systems).
Federal Government.................. Federal facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Some of the entities listed in the table have exemptions and/or
limitations regarding coverage; other types of entities not listed in
the table could also be affected. To determine whether your facility
would be affected by this action, you should carefully examine the
applicability criteria in part 372 subpart B of Title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations. If you have questions regarding the applicability
of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

[[Page 26545]]

II. What Is EPA's Statutory Authority for Taking These Actions?

These actions are taken under sections 313(g), 313(h), and 328 of
EPCRA, 42 U.S.C. 11023(g), 11023(h), and 11048, and section 6607 of the
Pollution Prevention Act (PPA), 42 U.S.C. 13106.
Section 313 of EPCRA requires certain facilities manufacturing,
processing, or otherwise using a listed toxic chemical in amounts above
threshold reporting levels, to report their environmental releases of
each chemical annually. 42 U.S.C. 11023(a). These reports must be filed
by July 1 of each year for the previous calendar year. Facilities also
must report pollution prevention and recycling data for such chemicals,
pursuant to section 6607 of PPA.
Section 313(g) describes the information that must be submitted
annually to EPA, pursuant to EPCRA section 313. Specifically, section
313(g)(1)(C) requires submission of the following information for each
listed toxic chemical known to be present at the facility: ``(i)
Whether the toxic chemical at the facility is manufactured, processed,
or otherwise used, and the general category or categories of use of the
chemical. (ii) An estimate of the maximum amounts (in ranges) of the
toxic chemical present at the facility at any time during the preceding
calendar year. (iii) For each wastestream, the waste treatment or
disposal methods employed, and an estimate of the treatment efficiency
typically achieved by such methods for that wastestream. (iv) The
annual quantity of the toxic chemical entering each environmental
medium.'' 42 U.S.C. 11023(g)(1).
Section 313(h) provides that the data collected under EPCRA section
313 are intended to inform persons about the releases of toxic
chemicals to the environment; to assist governmental agencies,
researchers, and other persons in the conduct of research and data
gathering; to aid in the development of appropriate regulations,
guidelines, and standards, and for other similar purposes. 42 U.S.C.
11023(h). EPA has long recognized that subsection (h) of section 313
describes the purposes of EPCRA section 313, and has frequently relied
on this provision to guide its implementation. See, H.R. Conf. Rep. 99-
962 at 299. ([Subsection (h)] ``describes the intended uses of the
toxic chemical release forms required to be submitted by this section
and expresses the purposes of this section.''); 62 FR 23834; 23835-836
(May 1, 1997) (facility expansion); 64 FR 58666; 58667; 58687-692
(October 29, 1999) (lowering the reporting thresholds for certain
persistent bioaccumulative toxic chemicals).
Section 6607(a) of the PPA requires all facilities that report
under EPCRA section 313 to also submit ``a toxic chemical source
reduction and recycling report for the preceding calendar year.'' 42
U.S.C. 13106(a). Specifically, section 6607(b) requires submission of
the following information for each listed toxic chemical: (1) the
quantity of the chemical entering any wastestream (or otherwise
released into the environment) prior to recycling, treatment, or
disposal during the calendar year, and the percentage change from the
previous year, excluding any amount reported under paragraph 7; (2) the
amount of the chemical recycled (at the facility or elsewhere) during
the calendar year, the percentage change from the previous year, and
the process of recycling used; (3) the source reduction practices used
during the year; (4) the amount expected to be reported under
paragraphs (1) and (2) for the 2 succeeding calendar years; (5) a ratio
of production in the reporting year to production in the previous year;
(6) the techniques used to identify source reduction opportunities; (7)
the amount of any toxic chemical released into the environment by a
catastrophic event, remedial action or other one-time event, and which
is not associated with production processes during the reporting year;
and (8) the amount of the chemical treated (at the facility or
elsewhere) during the calendar year and the percentage change from the
previous year.
Congress granted EPA broad rulemaking authority. EPCRA section 328
provides that the ``Administrator may prescribe such regulations as may
be necessary to carry out this chapter.'' 28 U.S.C. 11048.

III. What Did EPA Include in the Proposed Rule?

On March 7, 2005, EPA published a proposed rule to expand the
reporting requirements for the EPCRA section 313 dioxin and dioxin-like
compounds category (70 FR 10919). The proposal presented three options
that would allow for TEQ data to be made available to the public. TEQs
are a weighted quantity value based on the toxicity of each member of
the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds category relative to the most
toxic members of the category, i.e., 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin and 1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin. In order to calculate
a TEQ, a toxic equivalent factor (TEF) is assigned to each member of
the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds category. TEFs have been
established through international agreements, and currently range from
1 to 0.0001. A TEQ is calculated by multiplying the actual grams weight
of each dioxin and dioxin-like compound by its corresponding TEF and
then summing the results. The number that results from this calculation
is referred to as grams TEQ.

A. What Options Did EPA Propose for Making TEQ Data Available?

EPA discussed three options for making TEQ data available to the
public for the TRI dioxin and dioxin-like compounds category. Under
Option 1, EPA would require that, in addition to reporting the total
grams of the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds category, if a facility
has information on the distribution of the quantities of the individual
members of the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds, the facility must
report the TEQ calculated from that distribution for the category.
Under Option 2, in addition to reporting the total grams of the dioxin
and dioxin-like compounds category, if a facility has information on
the distribution of the quantities of the individual members of the
dioxin and dioxin-like compounds, the facility must report: (1) The
total grams for each member of the category; and (2) the TEQ calculated
from that distribution for the category. Under Option 3, the only
additional data facilities would need to provide is the individual
grams data for each member of the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds
category; facilities would not have to calculate and report the TEQ
data. Under Option 3, EPA would generate the corresponding TEQ data
from the individual grams data reported by the facility and include
that TEQ data in the TRI database along with all the grams data
reported by the facility. The TEQ data would be provided to the public
along with the facility-reported data and EPA would include TEQ data in
all of EPA's publications that contain TRI data on dioxin and dioxin-
like compounds.

B. What Was EPA's Preferred Option?

EPA stated in the March 7, 2005 notice that Option 3 was the
Agency's preferred option for several reasons. First, facilities would
not have the burden of tracking TEFs and calculating the TEQ data from
the grams data; instead, this burden would be assumed by the Agency.
Second, EPA would not have to incorporate the TEF values into the
regulations, and therefore would not need to go through rulemaking in
order to adopt any internationally accepted revisions. Third, if EPA
does all the TEQ calculations electronically there should be fewer
errors and improved

[[Page 26546]]

data quality, both because there would be fewer opportunities for
computational errors, and because there would be less potential for
confusion about which were the applicable TEFs as these values change
over time. Finally, if EPA calculates the TEQ data rather than having
facilities report the data, EPA can recalculate the TEQ data for all of
the reporting years once new TEF values are available.

C. What TEF Values Did EPA Propose To Use To Calculate TEQ Data?

EPA proposed to use the TEF scheme developed by the World Health
Organization (WHO) in 1998 (Ref. 1). At the time the proposed rule was
published, the WHO 1998 scheme was the most recent internationally
agreed upon TEF scheme. The TEF values for the members of the dioxin
and dioxin-like compounds category under the WHO 1998 scheme are listed
below (presented in the order of Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS)
Registry Number, chemical name, and TEF value). Since publication of
the proposed rule the WHO revised the TEF values in 2005 (Ref. 2). The
new WHO 2005 TEF values include four changes to the WHO 1998 values.
The changes are listed below in parentheses. In computing TEQs, the
agency will use the WHO 2005 TEF values.

01746-01-6, 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, 1.0;
40321-76-4, 1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, 1.0;
39227-28-6, 1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, 0.1;
57653-85-7, 1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, 0.1;
19408-74-3, 1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, 0.1;
35822-46-9, 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, 0.01;
03268-87-9, 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-octachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, 0.0001
(0.0003);
51207-31-9, 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran, 0.1;
57117-41-6, 1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran, 0.05 (0.03);
57117-31-4, 2,3,4,7,8-pentachlorodibenzofuran, 0.5 (0.3);
70648-26-9, 1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran, 0.1;
57117-44-9, 1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran, 0.1;
72918-21-9, 1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachlorodibenzofuran, 0.1;
60851-34-5, 2,3,4,6,7,8-hexachlorodibenzofuran, 0.1;
67562-39-4, 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachlorodibenzofuran, 0.01;
55673-89-7, 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-heptachlorodibenzofuran, 0.01;
39001-02-0, 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-octachlorodibenzofuran, 0.0001 (0.0003).

D. What Other Changes Did EPA Propose?

EPA proposed to collect the additional data for the dioxin and
dioxin-like compounds category on a new Form R-D reporting form
designed specifically for reporting for this category. The new form
would include all the data reported on a Form R plus the additional
data EPA proposed to collect under either Options 1, 2, or 3. EPA also
proposed to require that all reports for the dioxin and dioxin-like
compounds category be filed electronically either through the EPA's
Central Data Exchange (CDX) or on diskette. The only other change EPA
proposed was to eliminate Section 1.4 from the Form R. Section 1.4
requires reporting a generic distribution of the chemicals included in
the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds category, which would no longer be
needed under any of the options discussed in the proposed rule.

IV. What Reporting Requirements Has EPA Included in the Final Rule?

This final rule is based upon the reporting requirements of Option
3 from the proposed rule. The final rule requires the reporting of the
mass quantities for each individual member of the dioxin and dioxin-
like compounds category for each reportable release or waste management
activity. Facilities are not required to report any TEQ data. Rather
than using a new Form R-D, the final rule requires the reporting of
this information on a new four page Form R Schedule 1 (Ref. 3) that is
to be submitted as an adjunct to the existing Form R to report for the
dioxin and dioxin-like compounds category. Facilities that have any of
the information required by this final rule must submit a Form R
Schedule 1 in addition to the Form R. EPA is also modifying the Form R
by eliminating the generic distribution data reported for the dioxin
and dioxin-like compounds category under Section 1.4. EPA is strongly
encouraging, but not requiring, that reports for the dioxin and dioxin-
like compounds category be filed electronically.

V. For Which Reporting Year Do the Requirements of This Final Rule Apply?

The reporting requirements of this final rule apply to the
reporting year beginning January 1, 2008 (for which reports are due
July 1, 2009), and to subsequent reporting years. EPA has delayed the
implementation of the reporting requirements of this final rule in
order to provide sufficient time and resources to make required changes
to the TRI database and the TRI-Made Easy (TRI-ME) reporting software.
In addition, delaying the implementation will allow more time for the
regulated community to become fully aware of the new reporting
requirements. The additional time to prepare for the reporting changes
should also promote more accurate and consistent reporting.

VI. What Comments Did EPA Receive on the Proposed Rule and What Are
EPA's Responses to Those Comments?

EPA received twenty-three comments on the proposed rule. The
comments were split into two basic groups; those that generally agreed
with one or more of EPA's proposed options and those that disagreed
with EPA's proposed options. Of the twenty-three comments received,
eighteen were from specific companies or industry groups, three were
from environmental organizations, one was from a State agency, and one
was from a private citizen. Fifteen of the comments received supported
one or more of EPA's proposed options (either Option 2 or 3) while the
other eight comments either supported some option that EPA did not
propose or did not support any changes to the reporting requirements
for the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds category. The following
sections of this unit summarize and respond to significant comments.
The complete comments and responses can be found in EPA's response to
comments document (Ref. 4).

A. What Comments Did EPA Receive Concerning the Proposed Options?

None of the commenters supported proposed Option 1, which would
have added TEQ data to the reporting requirements for the dioxin and
dioxin-like compounds. The inability to recalculate the TEQ values when
TEF values change was a primary reason cited by commenters for why
Option 1 was not supported. Eight commenters did not support any of
EPA's proposed options, although one of these commenters supported
Option 2 if the reporting were voluntary. These commenters either did
not support the collection of any TEQ data or suggested alternative
ideas for making TEQ data available. A majority of the commenters (15
out of 23) supported either proposed Option 2 or Option 3. EPA believes
that Option 3 provides the same level of data as Option 2 at a lower
cost to industry while providing the flexibility needed to perform new
TEQ calculations if TEF values change in the future. Many of the

[[Page 26547]]

commenters that favored Option 2 over Option 3 cited the ability of the
facility to check the TEQ values and/or having the TEQ values available
with the first public release of the TRI data as reasons they preferred
Option 2 over Option 3. As resources allow, EPA intends to address both
of these concerns by taking the following actions: (1) providing a TEQ
calculator within the Agency's TRI-ME TRI reporting software, so that
facilities will be able to see the TEQ values that EPA will calculate
from the facility's reported grams data; and (2) making the TEQ values
available to the public starting with the first public release of the
data (which is currently the electronic Facility Data Release). EPA
believes that these actions address most of the issues raised by those
commenters that favored Option 2 over Option 3. Some commenters were
also concerned about the TEF values not being included in the
regulatory text and felt they should be included so that there would be
a formal process before EPA could change the TEF values. EPA has not
included the TEF values in the regulatory text since facilities are not
required to report TEQ data under this final rule; the TEF values thus
do not affect TRI reporting obligations. While the TEF values are not
part of the final rule, EPA plans to give public notice of any changes
to the TEF values. There has been a strong consensus from the
commenters that the TEF values developed by the WHO are the best values
to use. The most recent WHO TEF values were developed in 2005 and are
the values that EPA plans to use in calculating TEQ values (Ref. 2).
EPA does not anticipate changing those values unless there is strong
international consensus to do so.

B. What Other Options Were Suggested in the Comments Received?

1. TEQ only reporting. Four commenters stated that EPA should not
collect any grams data at all, but rather should collect only TEQ values.
Agency response: Reporting only TEQ values would not address the
issue of what happens to the TEQ data once the TEF values change. With
TEQ only reporting, once the TEFs change, the previously reported TEQ
values would no longer be valid, and no comparisons could be made. In
addition, if EPA does all the TEQ calculations electronically there
should be fewer errors and improved data quality, both because there
would be fewer opportunities for computational errors, and because
there would be less potential for confusion about which were the
applicable TEFs. The collection of the individual mass data for each
member of the category, rather than just TEQ values, also allows data
users to understand which chemicals are contributing most to the TEQ value.
The October 29, 1999, rulemaking that finalized the addition of the
dioxin and dioxin-like compounds category (64 FR 58666) required
reporting in grams of the total dioxin releases. The rationale for
selection of that reporting format was articulated in the Federal
Register (64 FR 58700-58704).
2. Reporting TEQ values based on Section 1.4 data. Three commenters
proposed alternative options for reporting TEQ values that involved
various methods of utilizing or modifying the generic single
distribution data reported under Section 1.4 of the Form R to calculate
TEQ values. The alternative options proposed by these commenters
included: (1) using the current generic Section 1.4 data to calculate
and report TEQ values in addition to the current total grams data; (2)
using the Section 1.4 data to calculate and report TEQ values rather
than any grams data; and (3) using Section 1.4 to report grams for the
individual members of the category based on the distribution most
representative at the facility (rather than reporting a percentage as
currently required) and then using those data to calculate a total TEQ
value for the facility.
Agency response: EPA does not believe that any of these suggested
alternative options constitute an improvement over the methodology that
EPA is finalizing today. Regarding the use of the current Section 1.4
data, EPA's current method of reporting a generic distribution in
Section 1.4 can already be applied to all the reported release and
waste management data elements to calculate TEQ values for all releases
and waste management quantities. However, many industry groups have
complained that the single generic distribution data from Section 1.4
does not provide an accurate method of calculating or reporting TEQ
values, since the distributions of the individual category compounds
can vary significantly for different types of releases and waste
management activities. That is the reason that EPA has not used the
Section 1.4 data to calculate TEQ values and provide them to the public
and one of the reasons some industry groups requested a change in the
reporting requirements.
If only TEQ values were to be collected, the TEQ values would not
be based on data collected under Section 1.4. Section 1.4 provides a
generic distribution that may be specific to one particular release or
waste management quantity or may be a facility average. If TEQ values
were the only information being collected, they would need to be
specific to each reported release or waste management quantity. In
addition, EPA is concerned that, since many facilities (approximately
25%) were unable to report any distribution data for the dioxin and
dioxin-like compounds category in Section 1.4 of the Form R, those
facilities may not be able to report TEQ values. Therefore, if EPA
could collect only TEQ data, those facilities not currently reporting a
generic distribution would not report anything.
Regarding the proposed alternative to change the Section 1.4 data
from percentages to total gram quantities for each member of the
category, EPA does not understand how the commenter's proposed
alternative method would work. Collecting individual grams data in
Section 1.4 based on some kind of total grams data for the facility
would not provide TEQ values for all of the release and waste
management quantities since those quantities are based on the gram
quantities reported for each data element. The commenter's method would
only provide a total TEQ value for the facility based on the facility's
total grams reported for each dioxin and dioxin-like compound. A
facility total TEQ value combines all releases and waste management
quantities resulting in a TEQ value of limited use since the type of
release or waste management activity can significantly impact potential
exposures. Changing the units of Section 1.4 from a percentage
distribution to an individual grams distribution actually reduces the
utility of the Section 1.4 data, since the data cannot be used to
calculate TEQ values for the individual release and waste management
quantities without conversion back to percentages.

C. What Legal Issues Were Raised by the Commenters?

1. Authority to have more than one reporting form. Two commenters
questioned EPA's authority to have more than one reporting form. The
commenters cited EPCRA section 313(g) which states that ``* * * the
Administrator shall publish a uniform toxic chemical release form for
facilities covered by this section * * *'' The commenters contend that
the Form R-D would be a unique form and thus EPA would not be providing
a ``uniform'' toxic chemical release form for purposes of reporting
under EPCRA section 313.
Agency response: The issue of whether the new form violates the
requirement in Section 313(g) that EPA

[[Page 26548]]

publish a ``uniform toxic chemical release form'' is now moot, because
EPA is not developing a new reporting form but is instead modifying the
existing Form R by adding a schedule that is to be used by those
facilities that report for the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds
category and that have the information required by the final rule. The
pages of the new Form R Schedule 1 are like any other pages of the Form
R in that if a facility has the information required on a certain page
they must fill out that page and if they do not have the necessary
information then the page is left blank.
2. Authority to collect data on individual members of a listed
category on one reporting form. One commenter questioned EPA's
authority for collecting the annual quantity of each compound within a
chemical category being released to each environmental medium on one
reporting form. The commenter stated that this is precedent-setting or
in terms of Executive Order 12866, it raises ``novel legal or policy
issues'' and thus should be subject to OMB review as a significant
regulatory action. The commenter suggested that if EPA wants to collect
extensive data on 17 compounds, then it should go through the
rulemaking process to list each compound separately as a TRI chemical,
and ensure each compound meets the criteria for listing.
Agency response: EPA has broad authority to determine how
information regarding the members of a chemical category shall be
reported (see, e.g., general regulatory authority in EPCRA section
328). Dioxin and dioxin-like compounds occur as a mixture of the
members of the category, they are not manufactured, processed, or
otherwise used as separate compounds (except for laboratory testing
purposes), so the most logical way to report is as a category on one
reporting form. EPA already collects specific information on each
member of the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds category on the current
Form R. This rule only breaks down that information by reportable
release or waste management activity. EPA notes that when the Agency
via rulemaking added the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds category, it
made an express finding that all members of the category met the EPCRA
section 313 listing criteria and specifically listed the 17 members of
the category (62 FR 24887, May 7, 1997; and 64 FR 58695, October 29, 1999).
Nor is additional rulemaking required in order to collect
additional information on one form: The proposed rule and this final
rule constitute the necessary rulemaking to collect additional
information on members of the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds category
on one form.
Regarding Executive Order 12866, OMB has concurred in EPA's
determination that this action is not a ``significant regulatory
action,'' as defined in EO 12866.
3. Authority to collect TEQ data. One commenter does not believe
that EPA has the statutory authority to require the reporting of TEQ
data for the dioxin and dioxin-like compound category. The commenter
stated that the EPCRA section 313 statute and the congressional history
only requires the reporting of releases as quantities or amounts of the
toxic chemical, and that TEQs are not a quantity or release but an
estimate of the risk of dioxin and dioxin-like compounds.
Agency response: EPA disagrees with the commenter's position that
EPA does not have the authority to collect TEQ data. But given that EPA
is finalizing Option 3 of the proposed rule, which does not require the
reporting of TEQ data, the question is moot. Under this option EPA is
not collecting any TEQ data and is collecting only individual grams
data for the members of the dioxin category. EPA notes that TEQ values
alone are not risk data. Rather, TEQ values provide a method to
consider the relative hazards of the different members of the category
to the most toxic members of the category; relative risk would need to
consider exposure.

D. What Other Issues Did the Commenters Raise?

1. Form R-D. Nearly all commenters were opposed to EPA's proposed
10-page Form R-D, including most commenters that supported one or more
of EPA's proposed options for making TEQ values available to the
public. Those commenters that supported one or more of EPA's proposed
options felt that only minor changes to the Form R should be made to
capture the additional data.
Agency response: EPA did consider making changes to the existing
Form R, but there is no way to readily adapt the Form R to capture all
the new data elements. The Form R would need to be expanded
significantly to incorporate the additional data elements, which would
mean that all TRI reporters would have to deal with a longer form just
to capture the additional information for one chemical category.
However, in response to commenters who do not wish to have an entirely
new form for reporting the additional dioxin data, EPA has decided not
to proceed with the Form R-D. Instead, EPA has developed a four-page
schedule called the Form R Schedule 1, which captures all the
additional information required under the final rule. Most commenters
wanted little or no changes to the existing Form R. Since the new data
are collected on a separate schedule rather than on the main part of
the Form R, there will be little change to the main part of the Form R.
Facilities are only required to report additional information on the
Form R Schedule 1 to the extent that they have readily available or can
reasonably estimate the additional information.
2. Electronic reporting. EPA proposed to require that all reports
for dioxin and dioxin-like compounds be filed electronically. EPA
believes that electronic reporting will help reduce the potential for
errors that may occur when EPA contractors enter the grams data for the
individual members of the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds category.
However, nearly all of the commenters objected to EPA requiring that
all reports for dioxin and dioxin-like compounds be filed electronically.
Agency response: While EPA strongly encourages the use of
electronic reporting, the final rule does not require electronic
reporting. EPA notes that hard copy forms significantly slow down data
processing, increase EPA costs, and increase the potential for errors.
EPA strongly encourages those facilities that decide to report using
hard copy to carefully check their electronic Facility Data Profiles
each year to make sure that no errors have occurred during data input.
3. Distribution reporting scheme. Several commenters requested that
EPA modify the proposed Form R-D by reconfiguring the reporting scheme
used in Section 1.4 of Form R to conform to that used in common
analytical reports. Specifically, each dioxin member of the category
should be listed in ascending order of chlorination, followed by each
furan member in ascending order of chlorination.
Agency response: While EPA is not finalizing the Form R-D or
requiring that facilities report TEQ values, EPA will adjust the
numbering scheme for the members of the dioxin and dioxin-like
compounds category to be consistent with typical reporting schemes that
list the members in order of ascending chlorination (see list below).

[[Page 26549]]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number CAS No. Chemical name Abbreviation
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1................... 01746-01-6 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p- 2,3,7,8-TCDD
dioxin.
2................... 40321-76-4 1,2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzo-p- 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD
dioxin.
3................... 39227-28-6 1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzo- 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDD
p-dioxin.
4................... 57653-85-7 1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzo- 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDD
p-dioxin.
5................... 19408-74-3 1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexachlorodibenzo- 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDD
p-dioxin.
6................... 35822-46-9 1,2,3,4,6,7,8- 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDD
Heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin.
7................... 03268-87-9 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9- 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-OCDD
Octachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin.
8................... 51207-31-9 2,3,7,8- 2,3,7,8-TCDF
Tetrachlorodibenzofuran.
9................... 57117-41-6 1,2,3,7,8- 1,2,3,7,8-PeCDF
Pentachlorodibenzofuran.
10.................. 57117-31-4 2,3,4,7,8- 2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF
Pentachlorodibenzofuran.
11.................. 70648-26-9 1,2,3,4,7,8- 1,2,3,4,7,8-HxCDF
Hexachlorodibenzofuran.
12.................. 57117-44-9 1,2,3,6,7,8- 1,2,3,6,7,8-HxCDF
Hexachlorodibenzofuran.
13.................. 72918-21-9 1,2,3,7,8,9- 1,2,3,7,8,9-HxCDF
Hexachlorodibenzofuran.
14.................. 60851-34-5 2,3,4,6,7,8- 2,3,4,6,7,8-HxCDF
Hexachlorodibenzofuran.
15.................. 67562-39-4 1,2,3,4,6,7,8- 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HpCDF
Heptachlorodibenzofuran.
16.................. 55673-89-7 1,2,3,4,7,8,9- 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF
Heptachlorodibenzofuran.
17.................. 39001-02-0 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9- 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9-OCDF
Octachlorodibenzofuran.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This should make it easier for facilities to transfer data from
analytical reports to the new Form R Schedule 1.

4. Economic Costs. One commenter stated that EPA estimates a modest
cost to comply with any of the three options included in the proposed
rule. The commenter noted that the industry costs range from about
$122,000 to about $170,000 for the first year, while EPA estimates that
its own initial cost for implementing the new reporting form would be
approximately $1.15 million. The commenter stated that the EPA cost
estimate for the Agency is therefore nearly an order of magnitude
greater than the estimated total industry cost for the first year.
Considering that EPA estimates over 480 parent companies are to be
impacted by the reporting requirements, it appears to the commenter
that the total industry cost for the first year is substantially
underestimated.
Agency response: EPA believes that its estimate for total industry
first year cost is reasonable, based on the best engineering judgment
used to complete the Form R Schedule 1. The Agency's methodology is
transparent and described in detail in Section 4 of the economic
analysis (Ref. 5). Section 5 of the economics analysis describes in
detail what steps are performed under each of the options and provides
estimates for rule familiarization, form completion and recordkeeping
cost, and burden. Apart from comparing the estimated industry
compliance cost to the administrative cost EPA is estimated to incur,
the commenter does not provide any basis for the assertion that total
industry cost is underestimated. The Agency does not believe that the
proportion of compliance cost to administrative cost is germane to the
reasonableness of the Agency's cost and burden estimate for this
rulemaking.
Two commenters stated that EPA did not consider industry costs for
the reprogramming of their TRI reporting software. One commenter stated
that EPA failed to include in its economic impacts any costs incurred
by the States that maintain electronic databases and which accept TRI
data electronically.
Agency response: The commenters are correct that the Agency did not
quantify costs that industry may incur if they need to reprogram their
own reporting software. EPA believes that overall such costs should be
small since 90 percent of respondents currently use EPA's free TRI-ME
reporting software to submit their Form Rs, and EPA will be providing a
new version of TRI-ME that accommodates the new dioxin reporting
requirements. Similarly, EPA did not quantify any State administrative
cost associated with updating their electronic databases. However, if a
State has its own electronic database and is not able to update it to
accommodate the new format for dioxin data, EPA will work with the
State on a case-by-case basis to try to provide the data to it in a
format it can use. EPA notes that the new format is more useful
(because it includes individual grams data for each dioxin and dioxin-
like compound and will also include EPA's calculated TEQ values) and
hopes that States will find it in their interest and the interest of
their citizens to update their databases to accommodate the new format.
One commenter stated that EPA took comment in March 2005, on a
proposal to revise Form R for the purpose of burden reduction. The
commenter claimed that the increase in burden as per the proposed rule
will totally negate any benefits of the earlier proposal and actually
increase overall burden. The commenter stated that if EPA finalizes the
Form R-D and if the burden reduction changes are eventually made to
Form R, they would expect such changes to also be incorporated into
Form R-D.
Agency response: EPA is not revising the Form R, except to drop
Section 1.4. The Phase I Burden Reduction final rule issued in July
2005, applies to all TRI reporters, not just those that report for
dioxin and dioxin-like compounds, so this final rule does not negate
all the benefits from the Phase I Burden Reduction final rule. The
Agency disagrees with the commenter that the burden increase from this
rulemaking will negate any benefit from the Phase 1 Burden Reduction
rulemaking. The Agency estimated that the Phase 1 Burden Reduction rule
will reduce burden by 52,000 hours whereas the increase in burden from
this final rule is estimated at 3,383 hours. The Phase 2 Burden
Reduction rule (71 FR 76932, December 22, 2006), which expands
eligibility for Form A certification for some chemical reports,
specifically excludes dioxin and dioxin-like compounds, so it does not
affect and is not affected by the changes in today's rule.

VII. What Economic Considerations Are Associated With This Action?

EPA has evaluated the additional burden hours, cost, and potential
benefits associated with the use of Form R Schedule 1, in addition to
the Form R, for EPCRA section 313 reporting on the dioxin and dioxin-
like compounds category. The economic analysis was revised to reflect
the fact that this final rule does not create a new Form R-D for all
facilities reporting for the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds category,
but rather requires reporting of the new information on the four-page
Form R Schedule 1 (Ref. 5). While the incremental costs did not change
significantly, the presentation of the costs was changed to consider
only the incremental costs associated with filling

[[Page 26550]]

a Form R Schedule 1. Only the costs associated with this final rule are
presented below, however, the economic analysis includes the costs for
all three of the options discussed in the proposed rule. This final
rule is based on Option 3 of the proposed rule which is the least
costly of the three options that EPA proposed. This final rule requires
facilities to report the mass in grams of each of the 17 individual
members of the category for sections 5, 6, and 8 (current year only) of
the existing Form R on the new Form R Schedule 1, when such information
is readily available or can be reasonably estimated.
In order to understand the incremental burden calculations below,
it is important to first understand EPA's assumptions about the steps
necessary to complete the current Form R for the dioxin and dioxin-like
compounds category. EPA assumes that most reporting facilities already
have data on the individual compounds that make up this category, since
analytical tests generally report results for each compound. Facilities
that rely on published emissions factors or other similar information
will also often have data on the individual compounds, though in some
cases published emissions factors may provide only a single value for
the dioxin and dioxin-like compound category as a whole. However, in
either case, facilities are required to use only the readily available
data. EPA thus assumes that facilities either already have and are
currently tracking data on the individual compounds contained in their
waste streams (if this is the format of the underlying data on which
their reporting is based), or that such data are not readily available
and will still not be readily available once this final rule takes
effect. EPA also recognizes the possibility that facilities may have a
mix of data, with data for some waste streams including individual
compounds and data for others including only total grams for the
category as a whole. As a result, EPA does not assume any additional
burden for data tracking or for calculation of physical quantities of
dioxin and dioxin-like compounds in individual waste streams.
This final rule requires that, in addition to the activities
already conducted as part of the reporting This final rule requires
that, in addition to the activities already conducted as part of the
reporting process for Form R, a facility filing the Form R Schedule 1
would be required to report the mass in grams of each of the 17
chemicals in sections 5, 6, and 8 of Form R Schedule 1. The facility
would not be required to obtain the TEF values or conduct additional
multiplication and addition to calculate total grams TEQ to submit to
the Agency. For reporting year 2003, there were 1,268 facilities that
filed Form Rs for the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds category. Of
these facilities, 75 percent (956 facilities) completed Section 1.4 of
the Form R, containing generic distribution information on the members
of the category. Since these 956 facilities indicated through their
completion of Section 1.4 that they have information on the
distribution of the quantities of the individual members of the dioxin
and dioxin-like compounds category, EPA expects that these facilities
are most likely to incur additional burden and cost associated with
form completion and record keeping for Form R Schedule 1 in the first
and subsequent reporting years. All 1,268 facilities are expected to
experience additional burden and cost associated with rule
familiarization in the first year of implementation.
In previous Information Collection Requests, EPA has estimated
that, after the first year of reporting, facilities filing Form R
typically spend 4 hours on compliance determination, 47.1 hours on form
completion, and 5 hours on record keeping and report submission (Ref.
6). Because the Form R Schedule 1 would create new reporting
requirements beyond those for the Form R, EPA expects that affected
facilities would experience additional burden and cost. EPA's estimates
for the additional burden associated with rule familiarization, form
completion, and record keeping are shown in the following table (Ref. 5).

Table 1.--Report Mass in Grams of Each Member of the Dioxin and Dioxin-Like Compounds Category in Each Section
of Form R Schedule 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Labor category Number of
Activity --------------------------------------- Total unit facilities/ Total
Managerial Technical Clerical burden reports burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incremental First-Year Burden (hours)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule Familiarization.............. 0.25 1.00 0.00 1.25 1,268 1,585
Form Completion................... 0.11 0.33 0.00 0.44 956 421
Recordkeeping..................... 0.00 0.33 0.17 0.50 956 478
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................... 0.36 1.66 0.17 2.19 ........... 2,484
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incremental Subsequent-Year Burden (hours)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Form Completion................... 0.11 0.33 0.00 0.44 956 421
Recordkeeping..................... 0.00 0.33 0.17 0.50 956 478
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................... 0.11 0.66 0.17 0.94 ........... 899
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Facilities would expend additional time in the first year to become
familiar with the new reporting requirements associated with the Form R
Schedule 1. A major difference between burden in first and subsequent
years is attributable to rule familiarization. Rule familiarization
occurs in the first year of implementation but not in subsequent years.
The rule requires an underlying level of recordkeeping. It is generally
expected that facilities reporting any of the new information requested
on Form R Schedule 1 will be using information already in their
possession. Based on the number of facilities that filed reports on
dioxin and dioxin-like compounds in 2003, the percentage that reported
distribution information and EPA's estimates of incremental burden, the
total incremental burden of this rule would be approximately $114,000
in the first reporting year and approximately $38,000 in subsequent
reporting years.

[[Page 26551]]

More detailed information on the derivation of these burden hour and
cost estimates is available in the public docket for this action (Ref. 5).
The information collected on Form R Schedule 1 will allow EPA to
calculate grams TEQ values and provide that data to the public. The
mass in grams data collected on Form R Schedule 1 will provide
important information on which specific chemicals in the category are
contributing most to the total toxicity as expressed in grams TEQ.
Without these data, EPA and other data users would be unable to
calculate TEQ values or determine to what extent each dioxin and
dioxin-like compound is contributing to the TEQ values. These data will
also allow the creation of valid time-series if TEFs are ever modified
in the future as scientific understanding of the relative toxicity of
the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds changes. In addition, provision of
the mass in grams values will permit error checking of calculations for
total grams TEQ that will enhance data quality.

VIII. References

EPA has established an official public docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-TRI-2002-0001. The public docket includes
information considered by EPA in developing this action, including the
documents listed below, which are electronically or physically located
in the docket. In addition, interested parties should consult documents
that are referenced in the documents that EPA has placed in the docket,
regardless of whether these referenced documents are electronically or
physically located in the docket. For assistance in locating documents
that are referenced in documents that EPA has placed in the docket, but
that are not electronically or physically located in the docket, please
consult the person listed in the above FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
1. Van den Berg, M.; Birnbaum, L.; Bosveld, A.T.C.; Brunstrom, B.;
Cook, P.; Feeley, M.; Giesy, J.P.; Hanberg, A.; Hasegawa, R.; Kennedy,
S.W.; Kubiak, T.; Larsen, J.C.; van Leeuwen, F.X.R.; Liem, A.K.D.;
Nolt, C.; Peterson, R.E.; Poellinger, L.; Safe, S.; Schren, D.;
Tillitt, D.; Tysklind, M.; Younes, M.; Warn, F.; Zacharewski, T. (1998)
Toxic equivalency factors (TEFs) for PCBs, PCDDs, PCDFs for humans and
wildlife. Environmental Health Perspectives. 106:775-792.
2. Martin Van den Berg, Linda S. Birnbaum, Michael Denison, Mike
DeVito, William Farland, Mark Feeley, Heidelore Fiedler, Helen
Hakansson, Annika Hanberg, Laurie Haws, Martin Rose, Stephen Safe,
Dieter Schrenk, Chiharu Tohyama, Angelika Tritscher, Jouko Tuomisto,
Mats Tysklind, Nigel Walker, and Richard E. Peterson (2006), The 2005
World Health Organization Reevaluation of Human and Mammalian Toxic
Equivalency Factors for Dioxins and Dioxin-Like Compounds.
Toxicological Sciences 93(2), 223-24.
3. USEPA/OEI, 2006. Form R Schedule 1, March 2006 Draft.
4. USEPA/OEI, 2006. Response to Comments Received on the March 7,
2005, Proposed Rule (70 FR 10919) to Add Toxic Equivalency (TEQ)
Reporting for The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA) Section 313 Dioxin and Dioxin-like Compounds Category, June 19,
2006.
5. USEPA/OEI, 2006. Analysis of the Estimated Burden and Cost of
Form R Schedule 1 for Dioxin and Dioxin-like Compounds; Toxic
Equivalency Reporting; Community Right to Know Toxic Chemical Release
Reporting, March 1, 2006.
6. USEPA/OEI, 2002. Estimates of Burden Hours for Economic Analyses
of the Toxics Release Inventory, June 10, 2002.

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review

This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
is therefore not subject to review under the EO.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the
information collection requirements contained in this rule under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and
has assigned OMB control number 2025-0007.
EPCRA section 313 (42 U.S.C. 11023) requires owners or operators of
certain facilities manufacturing, processing, or otherwise using any of
over 600 listed toxic chemicals and chemical categories in excess of
the applicable threshold quantities, and meeting certain requirements
(i.e., at least 10 Full Time Employees or the equivalent), to report
certain release and other waste management activities for such
chemicals annually. Under PPA section 6607 (42 U.S.C. 13106),
facilities must also provide information on recycling and other waste
management data and source reduction activities. The regulations
codifying the EPCRA section 313 reporting requirements appear at 40 CFR
part 372. Under the rule, all facilities reporting any of the new data
on dioxin and dioxin-like compounds would have to use the EPA Toxic
Chemical Release Inventory Form R Schedule 1 (tentative EPA Form No.
9350-3).
For Form R Schedule 1, EPA estimates the industry reporting burden
for collecting this information (including recordkeeping) at 2.19 hours
($99) per response in the first reporting year and 0.94 hours ($40) in
subsequent years for facilities with distribution data for the members
of the category. For facilities without distribution data, the burden
associated with rulemaking familiarization is estimated to average 1.25
hours ($59) per response in the first reporting year. Note that these
are total per facility burden and cost estimates for the Form R
Schedule 1 based on Option 3 of the proposed rule. This rule is
estimated to cause 956 facilities to file a Form R Schedule 1. Under
this rule, Form R Schedule 1 reporting is associated with a total
burden of approximately 2,484 hours in the first year, and 899 hours in
subsequent years, at a total estimated industry cost of $114 thousand
in the first year and $38 thousand in subsequent years. 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. This 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 numbers for EPA's
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. In addition, EPA is
amending the table in 40 CFR part 9 of currently approved OMB control
numbers for various regulations to list the regulatory citations for
the information requirements contained in this final rule.

[[Page 26552]]

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.

The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as (1) a business that is classified
as a ``small business'' by the Small Business Administration at 13 CFR
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of
a city, county, town, school district or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant in its field.
This rule is expected to affect the 469 parent companies that own
the 1,268 facilities that report on dioxin and dioxin-like compounds.
Of the affected parent companies, approximately 19 percent, or 90
companies, are small businesses as defined by the Small Business
Administration. No small governments or small organizations are
expected to be affected by this action. Based on the selected Option 3,
each affected facility is expected to expend approximately 2.19 hours
in the first year and 0.94 hours in subsequent years to comply with the
additional reporting requirements. Based on the incremental cost
estimates for these burden hours, the number of facilities owned by
each small business, and the annual revenues of the affected small
businesses, all 90 affected small businesses are expected to experience
incremental cost impacts of less than one percent of annual revenues
(Ref. 5).
After considering the economic impacts of today's rule on small
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. We continue
to be interested in the potential impacts of the final rule on small
entities and welcome comments on issues related to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), P.L.
104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector in any one year. Based on EPA's cost estimate for this action,
it has been determined that this rule is not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' This rule
does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified
in Executive Order 13132. This action relates to toxic chemical
reporting under EPCRA section 313, which primarily affects private
sector facilities. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.

F. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (59 FR 22951, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This final rule does not have
tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. This action
relates to toxic chemical reporting under EPCRA section 313, which
primarily affects private sector facilities. Thus, Executive Order
13175 does not apply to this rule.

G. Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)

This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)) because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

H. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies
to any rule that (1) is determined to be ``economically significant''
as defined under E.O. 12866 and (2) concerns an environmental health or
safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate
effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the
Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the
planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is
preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible
alternatives considered by the Agency.

[[Page 26553]]

This rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is not
economically significant as defined in E.O. 12866, and because the
Agency does not have reason to believe the environmental health or
safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk
to children. This action relates to toxic chemical reporting under
EPCRA section 313, which primarily affects private sector facilities.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

As noted in the proposed rule, section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272
note), directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, etc.) that are developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress,
through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available
and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
The final rulemaking does not require the reporting of TEQ data and
therefore does not involve technical standards.

J. Congressional Review Act

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A Major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2). This rule will be effective July 9, 2007.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 9

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 372

Environmental protection, Community right-to-know, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Toxic chemicals.

Dated: May 3, 2007.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.

. Therefore, Title 40 Chapter 1 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:

PART 9--[AMENDED]

. 1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 135 et seq., 136-136y; 15 U.S.C. 2001, 2003,
2005, 2006, 2601-2671; 21 U.S.C. 331j, 346a, 348; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq., 1311, 1313d, 1314, 1318, 1321, 1326, 1330,
1342, 1344, 1345 (d) and (e), 1361; E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR,
1971-1975 Comp. p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241, 242b, 243, 246, 300f, 300g,
300g-1, 300g-2, 300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-5, 300g-6, 300j-1, 300j-2,
300j-3, 300j-4, 300j-9, 1857 et seq., 6901-6992k, 7401-7671q, 7542,
9601-9657, 11023, 11048.

. 2. In Sec. 9.1 the table is amended by revising the entries under the
heading ``Toxic Chemical Release Reporting: Community Right-to-Know''
to read as follows:

Sec. 9.1 OMB approvals under the Paperwork Reduction Act.

* * * * *

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR citation OMB control No.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Toxic Chemical Release Reporting: Community Right-to-Know
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Part 372, subpart A........................ 2070-0093, 2070-0143, 2025-0007
372.22...................................... 2070-0093, 2070-0143, 2025-0007
372.25...................................... 2070-0093, 2025-0007
372.27...................................... 2070-0143
372.30...................................... 2070-0093, 2070-0143, 2025-0007
372.38...................................... 2070-0093, 2070-0143, 2025-0007
Part 372, subpart C......................... 2070-0093, 2070-0143, 2025-0007
Part 372, subpart D......................... 2070-0093, 2070-0143, 2025-0007
372.85...................................... 2070-0093, 2025-0007
372.95...................................... 2070-0143
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

PART 372--[AMENDED]

. 1. The authority citation for part 372 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 11023 and 11048.

Subpart B--[Amended]

. 2. In Sec. 372.30, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec. 372.30 Reporting requirements and schedule for reporting.

(a) For each toxic chemical known by the owner or operator to be
manufactured (including imported), processed, or otherwise used in
excess of an applicable threshold quantity in Sec. 372.25, Sec.
372.27, or Sec. 372.28 at its covered facility described in Sec.
372.22 for a calendar year, the owner or operator must submit to EPA
and to the State in which the facility is located a completed EPA Form
R (EPA Form 9350-1) and, for the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds
category, EPA Form R Schedule 1 (EPA Form 9350-3) in accordance with
the instructions referred to in subpart E of this part.
* * * * *

Subpart E--[Amended]

. 3. Section 372.85 is amended as follows:
. a. Revise paragraph (a).
. b. Revise paragraph (b) introductory text.
. c. Revise paragraph (b)(14)(ii).
. d. Revise paragraphs (b)(15)(i)(B), and (b)(15)(ii)(B).

[[Page 26554]]

Sec. 372.85 Toxic chemical release reporting form and instructions.

(a) Availability of reporting form and instructions. The most
current version of Form R and Form R Schedule 1 may be found on the
following EPA Program Web site, http://www.epa.gov/tri. Any subsequent
changes to the Form R or Form R Schedule 1 will be posted on this Web
site. Submitters may also contact the TRI Program at (202) 564-9554 to
obtain this information.
(b) Form elements. Information elements reportable on EPA Form R
and Form R Schedule 1, or equivalent magnetic media format include the
following:
* * * * *
(14) * * *
(ii) Additional Reporting for the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds
category.
(A) For reports pertaining to a reporting year ending on or before
December 31, 2007, report a distribution of the chemicals included in
the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds category. Such distribution shall
either represent the distribution of the total quantity of dioxin and
dioxin-like compounds released to all media from the facility; or its
one best media-specific distribution.
(B) For reports pertaining to a reporting year ending after
December 31, 2007, report the quantity of each member of the dioxin and
dioxin-like compounds category in units of grams per year on Form R
Schedule 1.
* * * * *
(15)(i) * * *
(B) An estimate of the amount of the chemical transferred in pounds
(except for dioxin and dioxin-like compounds, which shall be reported
in grams) per year (transfers of less than 1,000 pounds per year may be
indicated as a range, except for chemicals set forth in Sec. 372.28)
and an indication of the basis of the estimate. In addition, for
reports pertaining to a reporting year ending after December 31, 2007,
report the quantity of each member of the dioxin and dioxin-like
compounds category in units of grams per year on Form R Schedule 1.
* * * * *
(15)(ii) * * *
(B) An estimate of the amount of the chemical transferred in pounds
(except for dioxin and dioxin-like compounds, which shall be reported
in grams) per year (transfers of less than 1,000 pounds per year may be
indicated as a range, except for chemicals set forth in Sec. 372.28)
and an indication of the basis of the estimate. In addition, for
reports pertaining to a reporting year ending after December 31, 2007,
report the quantity of each member of the dioxin and dioxin-like
compounds category in units of grams per year on Form R Schedule 1.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E7-9015 Filed 5-9-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

Notices For
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994

Dioxin and Dioxin-like Compounds; Toxic Equivalency Information; Community Right-To-Know Toxic Chemical Release Reporting

Local Navigation