[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 144 (Thursday, July 28, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page ]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-18449]


[Federal Register: July 28, 1994]


_______________________________________________________________________

Part VI





Environmental Protection Agency





_______________________________________________________________________



40 CFR Part 372



Alternate Threshold for Low-Level Releases and Transfers; Toxic 
Chemical Release Reporting; Community Right-to-Know; Proposed Rule
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 372

[OPPTS-400087; FRL-4776-8]
RIN 2070-AC70


Alternate Threshold for Low-Level Releases and Transfers; Toxic 
Chemical Release Reporting; Community Right-to-Know

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Action: Proposed rule.

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

Summary: EPA is proposing to establish an alternate reporting threshold 
for those facilities with low-level releases and transfers that would 
otherwise meet reporting requirements under section 313 of the 
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA). A 
facility that meets the current section 313 reporting thresholds, but 
estimates that the sum of its annual releases on-site and transfers 
off-site (for the purposes of treatment and/or disposal only) of a 
listed chemical is below 100 pounds, may be eligible to take advantage 
of this proposed alternate reporting threshold, for that chemical in 
that year, provided that certain conditions are adhered to. EPA is 
proposing to establish this alternate reporting threshold in response 
to petitions received from the Small Business Administration and the 
American Feed Industry Association.

Dates: Written comments on this proposed rule must be received by 
August 29, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be submitted in triplicate to: OPPT 
Docket Clerk, TSCA Document Receipt Office (7407), Office of Pollution 
Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. NE-B607, 
401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. Comments should include the 
document control number for this proposal, OPPTS-400087.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Crawford, Project Manager, (7408), 
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. 
For specific information on this proposed rule, or for more information 
on EPCRA section 313, the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-
Know Hotline, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 5101, 401 M 
St., SW., Washington, DC 20460, Toll free: 1-800-535-0202, in Virginia 
and Alaska: 703-412-9877 or Toll free TDD: 1-800-553-7672.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

A. Statutory Authority

    This proposed rule is issued under sections 313(f)(2) and 328 of 
the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA), 
42 U.S.C. 11023(f)(2) and 11048. EPCRA is also referred to as Title III 
of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA).
    Section 313 of EPCRA requires certain facilities manufacturing, 
processing, or otherwise using listed toxic chemicals in excess of the 
applicable threshold quantities to report their environmental releases 
of such chemicals annually. Beginning with the 1991 reporting year, 
such facilities began reporting pollution prevention and recycling data 
for listed chemicals, pursuant to section 6607 of the Pollution 
Prevention Act, 42 U.S.C. 13106. This information is submitted on EPA 
form 9350-1 (Form R) an compiled in an annual Toxic Release Inventory 
(TRI). Each covered facility must file a separate Form R for each 
listed chemical manufactured, processed, or otherwise used in excess of 
the reporting thresholds established in section 313(f)(1). EPA has 
authority to revise these threshold amounts pursuant to section 
313(f)(2); however, such revised threshold amounts shall obtain 
reporting on a substantial majority of total releases of the chemical 
at all facilities subject to section 313. A revised threshold may be 
based on classes of chemicals or categories of facilities. Section 328 
provides EPA with general rulemaking authority to develop regulations 
necessary to carry out the purposes of the Act.

B. Background on Petitions

    On August 8, 1991, the Small Business Administration (SBA) 
petitioned EPA to exempt from TRI reporting requirements facilities 
reporting low volumes of chemicals released and transferred. This 
petition states that:

    Currently, EPA's implementation of SARA mandates a collection of 
both significant and insignificant data. It unreasonably includes 
many small facilities whose compliance with present section 313 
regulations is overly burdensome. The TRI database is not 
meaningfully improved by countless entries of zero or de minimis 
release figures, as it now appears with current Congressionally-
specified thresholds. Based on 1988 data, the Office of Advocacy 
estimated that EPA could generally exclude facilities with releases 
and transfers of less than 5,000 pounds annually for the vast 
majority of section 313 chemicals and still satisfy the right to 
know objectives and the statutory requirements. (Ref. 1).

    EPA published this petition in the Federal Register (October 27, 
1992, 57 FR 48706) (SBA Notice), and received a substantial number of 
comments in response to this notice. Copies of these comments are 
available in the TSCA docket, OPPTS docket number 400072. The proposal 
being put forth in this document is EPA's response to the SBA petition.
    EPA received a similar request in a petition from the American Feed 
Industry Association (AFIA) on February 14, 1992. AFIA requested an 
exemption of Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code 2048 from 
TRI reporting. The general basis of this request is that SIC code 2048, 
``Prepared Feeds and Feed Ingredients for Animals and Fowls, Except 
Dogs and Cats,'' has such small releases of chemicals (primarily feed 
additives) that the industry as a whole does not contribute information 
that furthers the purposes of EPCRA and therefore the imposition of TRI 
reporting on the feed industry is unfair. The AFIA petition suggested, 
as an alternative to the requested SIC code deletion, EPA's adoption of 
the approach proposed in the SBA petition.
    EPA published this petition in the Federal Register (April 13, 
1993, 58 FR 19308), and received a substantial number of comments. 
These comments are available in the TSCA docket, OPPTS docket number 
400077.
    At this time, EPA has decided to focus on a revision of current 
reporting requirements that would be applied equally to all industries 
subject to section 313, as opposed to a revision restricted to target 
industrial sectors or SIC codes. EPA believes the proposal put forth in 
this document would effectively address the major points of the AFIA 
petition. Based on the information provided in the AFIA petition and 
results from EPA's analysis, approximately 50 percent of all of the 
facilities reporting under SIC code 2048 will qualify for the threshold 
modification being proposed (Ref. 4). EPA therefore considers the 
proposal put forth in this document as a response to the AFIA petition.

II. Explanation for the Alternate Threshold for Low-Level Releases 
and Transfers

A. General Approach

    Congress intended that the data collected by EPA under EPCRA 
section 313 be used to inform persons about releases of toxic chemicals 
to the environment, assist the government, researchers, and the public 
in the conduct of research and data gathering, to aid in the 
development of appropriate regulations, guidance, and standards, and 
for other similar purposes (EPCRA section 313(h)). Congress directed 
EPA to make this information publicly available on a cost-reimbursable 
basis through a computer data base, which EPA has done using the on-
line TRI system (EPCRA section 313(j)).
    EPCRA section 313 established a list of more than 300 chemicals and 
20 categories for which TRI reporting is required (EPCRA section 
313(c)). Facilities in SIC codes 20-39 which manufacture, process, or 
otherwise use over certain threshold amounts of a listed chemical must 
annually report their releases of such chemicals to EPA and the States. 
However, Congress recognized that this statutory framework need not 
remain immutable should EPA's experience in collecting data under TRI 
indicate that certain revisions to the reporting structure may be 
warranted. In directing and authorizing EPA to maintain and manage the 
TRI program, Congress also provided EPA with authority to revise the 
nature of and manner in which TRI data is reported to and collected by 
the Federal government.
    In particular, Congress provided EPA authority to add or delete SIC 
codes (section 313(b)(1)(B)), apply the reporting requirements to 
additional facilities (section 313(b)(2)), add chemicals to or delete 
chemicals from the TRI list (section 313(d)), revise the reporting 
thresholds (section 313(f)(2)), modify the reporting frequency (section 
313(i)), and prescribe such other regulations as may be necessary to 
carry out the Act (section 328). In providing EPA these authorities, 
Congress also recognized that EPA may see fit to tailor any such 
revisions to specific facility or chemical, a broad category of 
facilities or class of chemicals, to all or only some forms submitted 
to EPA, or to a specific or more general geographic area.
    In the spirit of this broad statutory mandate, and Congressional 
recognition of the need for flexibility given changing national needs 
and priorities, EPA has already announced its intent to significantly 
expand the scope of the TRI program. EPA's proposed rule to add 313 
chemicals and a chemical category to the list of reportable chemicals 
established under EPCRA section 313(c) (January 12, 1994, 59 FR 1788) 
is expected to add an estimated 28,000 new reports to TRI based on the 
current threshold levels. In addition, EPA is in the process of 
identifying and evaluating additional industry sectors for inclusion in 
TRI reporting. The addition of industry sectors beyond the current 
manufacturing sector is expected to substantially increase the level of 
current reporting.
    EPA recognizes that the addition of this new information to TRI is 
expected to carry significant reporting costs to industry, as well as 
Federal and state costs to manage and provide the data to the public. 
Nonetheless, given existing national and local concerns over chemical 
management practices, consistent with its statutory authorities, EPA 
believes that these anticipated expansions, and their attendant costs, 
are necessary to provide the public more complete information on 
significant chemical uses and releases.
    However, EPA also believes that its years of experience with the 
collection of TRI data allow EPA to propose certain changes to the 
nature of the reporting obligations imposed on industry without 
compromising EPA's duty to collect and disseminate relevant information 
to the public on chemical releases. EPA has examined whether some of 
the information currently collected under TRI as presently structured 
may be of lesser ``value'' than some of the new reports expected to be 
received as a result of EPA's efforts to expand TRI. In particular, 
many of the forms currently submitted report volumes of zero for 
releases and transfers. Additionally, there are forms that report zero 
volumes for all elements on the form. EPA believes that the space that 
such reports consume in the data base and the effort necessary to 
submit them would be better applied to those additional reports that 
contain positive values for releases and transfers of toxic chemicals. 
This proposal attempts to balance additional data needs with the burden 
to supply such data. EPA believes that it is possible, and consistent 
with its authorities under EPCRA, to create an alternative reporting 
threshold applicable to those facilities which annually release on 
transfer off-site (for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal) less 
than a specified amount of a listed TRI chemical. EPA further believes 
that this alternative reporting threshold, if implemented as proposed, 
will not result in a significant loss of data on chemical releases.
    By creating such an alternative reporting threshold, the number of 
TRI reports annually submitted to EPA could be reduced by and estimated 
20,500. This would result in a cost savings to both government and 
industry, and would offset some of the expected added costs associated 
with the anticipated expansions of the TRI program. Today's proposal 
attempts to balance the additional data needs represented by EPA's TRI 
expansion efforts with the burden to supply such data.
    The proposed revision of the manufacture, process, and otherwise 
use thresholds described below is based on EPA's analysis and comments 
received during the pre-proposal process. As part of the pre-proposal 
process, which included a consideration of the comments received on the 
SBA Notice, EPA held a public meeting on February 16, 1994, to present 
its analytical findings and open discussions regarding reduced 
reporting for low volume releases and transfers. Comment was taken from 
a variety of positions. Results from EPA's preliminary analysis are 
presented in an issues paper, Toxic Release Inventory--Small Source 
Exemption (January 27, 1994) (Issues paper), and can be obtained in the 
TSCA docket, OPPTS docket number 400087 along with copies of the 
testimony presented at the Public Meeting.
    Based on EPA's analysis and comments received, EPA believes that 
reducing the number of TRI reports by raising reporting thresholds for 
those facilities having low-level amounts released and transferred will 
help EPA, states, and the reporting community to focus their attention 
and resources on reducing chemical uses and releases that are of 
greatest concern. Therefore, EPA is proposing the development of an 
alternative threshold based on a category of facilities that have 
releases and transfers below a specified amount. EPA believes that this 
optional, alternative threshold will help balance costs (current and 
anticipated) that are associated with providing TRI information. This 
analysis is discussed further in part C of this section.

B. Description of Proposal

    EPA is proposing that certain facilities may take advantage of a 
higher reporting threshold than those set out in 40 CFR 372.25 for any 
listed toxic chemical, if the sum of amounts of that chemical released 
and transferred (but only for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal) 
for that facility is below 100 pounds per year.
    The revised thresholds would apply to a category of facilities on a 
per chemical basis for which the sum of the amounts described above is 
below 100 pounds per year. The alternate manufacture, or process, or 
otherwise use thresholds for each of the chemicals meeting the ``low-
level release'' category would be an amount equal to or greater than 1 
million pounds per year. If a facility meets these conditions, then 
that facility would not be required to file a Form R report for the 
reporting year for each chemical for which these conditions are met.
    A facility would make several determinations to ascertain if it 
could take advantage of the higher alternate reporting threshold. The 
facility would first determine if it was a ``covered facility'' 
pursuant to 40 CFR 372.22. Currently, a facility is a ``covered 
facility'' for purposes of EPCRA section 313 reporting if it: (a) Has 
10 or more full-time employees, (b) is in SIC codes 20 through 39, and 
(c) manufactures, processes, or otherwise uses a listed toxic chemical 
in excess of the applicable statutory thresholds. EPA is proposing to 
amend the last condition to include those facilities which elect to 
apply the alternate reporting thresholds under the proposed 40 CFR 
372.27. Therefore, a facility applying the alternate threshold would 
still be considered a ``covered facility'' under 40 CFR 372.22.
    Once a facility makes this determination, it would then estimate 
the sum of its releases and transfers (for purposes of treatment and/or 
disposal) for each listed chemical manufactured, processed, or 
otherwise used at the facility. If this sum is below 100 pounds per 
year, the facility could then apply the higher alternate reporting 
threshold of 1 million pounds to determine its reporting obligation for 
that chemical, provided that it also meets the concomitant 
certification and recordkeeping requirements. A facility eligible for 
and choosing to apply, the alternate revised threshold, would only be 
required to file a certification statement and maintain certain records 
in support of this certification. The facility would not be required to 
file a full Form R report for that chemical.
    To take advantage of the revised thresholds, a facility would be 
required to: (a) Submit in writing an annual certification, indicating 
that the chemical for which the alternate threshold applies was 
released and transferred for the purposes of treatment and/or disposal 
in the sum of an amount less than 100 pounds per year; and (b) maintain 
and make available upon request accurate records substantiating the 
calculations supporting the release and transfer determination.

C. Explanation and Rationale for Proposal

    Current reporting thresholds for manufacture, process, or otherwise 
use of listed section 313 chemicals are set forth in EPCRA section 
313(f)(1). EPCRA section 313 does not provide EPA with direct authority 
to establish a reporting threshold under section 313(f)(1) based solely 
on amounts of estimated chemical releases. EPCRA section 313(f)(2) 
does, however, provide EPA authority to revise the established activity 
threshold amounts in section 313(f)(1).

    The Administrator may establish a threshold amount for a toxic 
chemical different from the amount established by paragraph (1). 
Such revised threshold shall obtain reporting on a substantial 
majority of total releases of the chemical at all facilities subject 
to the requirements of this section. The amounts established under 
this paragraph may, at the Administrator's discretion, be based on 
classes of chemicals or categories of facilities.

    Today, EPA is proposing to define a category of facilities based on 
the volume of chemicals released. By establishing a class of chemicals 
or category of facilities, a threshold modification associated with 
that class or category can be applied selectively. Facilities having 
total releases less than a certain amount for one or more chemicals 
would constitute a category of facilities. This category would then be 
eligible to take advantage of a revised manufacture, process, or 
otherwise use threshold for that specific chemical. In this way, only 
those facilities that fit within the category, and relevant chemicals 
at those facilities, would be affected.
    EPA believes that it is appropriate to base the category 
determination on releases and transfers (for the purpose of treatment 
and/or disposal only). Although other elements on Form R may have 
significant volumes associated with them, EPA believes the combination 
of releases and such transfers on Form R approximate a facility's 
actual and/or potential environmental loadings. EPA believes that the 
proposed aggregate release level of less than 100 pounds represents an 
optimum balance between the need to limit the loss of TRI information 
made available to the public while eliminating reporting of data that 
is of lesser utility to the public. Based on 1991 data, an estimated 
20,500 forms, or approximately one quarter of all Form Rs submitted, 
would qualify for the alternate threshold. As indicated in Table 1 
below, the number of reports affected increase at a relatively 
proportionate rate as the aggregate release level for the category 
increases. However, above the 100 pound category level, the volumes of 
releases and transfers (for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal) 
depict a notable increase from 200,000 to 1,400,000 pounds for the 
respective category levels of 100 and 250 pounds. Results between the 
100 and 250 pound category levels also indicate a significant increase 
in total waste generated, as well as in the number of counties with 
resultant decreases of information. These results indicate a natural 
break in the data indicating a point of balance between the two 
objectives of reducing the reporting burden and continuing to provide 
information of the greatest utility to the public. The selection of the 
alternate threshold for manufacture, process, or otherwise use of 1 
million pounds represents a compromise that seeks to provide those 
facilities with aggregate releases and transfers below 100 pounds per 
chemical with an effective exemption from Form R reporting, while 
recognizing that even the most ``well-controlled'' facilities would 
find it difficult to manage chemicals in amounts of nearly 1 million 
pounds per year and only incur aggregate releases and transfers of 
below 100 pounds per year.
    As noted above, EPCRA section 313(f)(2) requires that any revision 
to the current reporting thresholds continue to capture a substantial 
majority of total releases of the chemical. EPA believes this 
requirement should be interpreted as applying to each listed chemical 
or category, and not to total releases for all chemicals nationally. 
EPA believes such an interpretation is consistent with the intent of 
Congress.

    The Administrator may modify these threshold amounts for a 
particular chemical, provided the revised threshold results in 
reporting on a substantial majority of the aggregate releases of the 
chemical at facilities subject to this section, but it would not 
necessarily require reporting from each facility (Ref. 2).

    The analysis described in the Impact on Reporting discussion below 
indicates that there would be an almost complete loss of reports on a 
very limited number of chemicals with very low volumes of releases and 
transfers based on an alternate reporting threshold below the 100 pound 
release level. This is confirmed by similar results conducted on the 
1992 data set which is also provided in the Impact on Reporting 
discussion. However, EPA believes that the proposed annual 
certification requirement, if implemented as proposed, would serve to 
maintain reporting on a substantial majority of releases of all 
chemicals that may be affected by the proposed alternate reporting 
threshold, including those discussed below in the unit titled Impact on 
Reporting.
    Annual Certification. EPA is proposing that each qualifying 
facility which chooses to apply the revised manufacture, process, or 
otherwise use thresholds must file an annual certification statement in 
lieu of a full Form R report. The proposed annual certification would 
provide an indication that the sum of amounts released and transferred 
for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal for each listed chemical 
for which the alternate threshold is being applied did not exceed 100 
pounds. This information can be made available in the same manner that 
the information reported on Form R is made available. Currently, 
facilities releasing less than 100 pounds may indicate on Form R that 
they released from 1 to 10 pounds and 11 to 499 pounds. This is known 
as a ``range report.'' The certification statement would act as the 
functional equivalent of a range report of zero to 99 pounds for 
combined releases and transfers for treatment and/or disposal. In this 
way, information on a substantial majority of both releases and 
transfers for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal would be 
maintained, which would satisfy the statutory intent of EPCRA section 
313(f)(2). EPA also believes that this approach would address several 
of the concerns addressed by comments during the pre-proposal process.
    During the development of this proposal and at the February 16, 
1994 Public Meeting, EPA received a number of comments regarding a 
certification requirement. Some of the commenters favor a one-time 
certification by a facility that releases and transfers are within the 
limits established for the alternate threshold. The facility and 
chemical information would be recorded, and if there are changes in 
amounts released or transferred which would no longer allow the 
application of the alternative threshold, then full reporting would be 
reinstated.
    Other commenters support an annual certification. These commenters 
contend that an annual certification has the effect of continued 
verification that releases and transfers are below the level 
established for a facility category. These commenters believe that 
without an annually submitted certification statement, reports for 
prior years would have to be compared with each consecutive reporting 
year to identify a potential non-reporter. Any attempt to verify if 
non-reporting may have occurred would require a follow up activity. 
Comments also assert that an annual statement helps to ensure that 
operators are aware of specific chemical uses and releases, thereby 
promoting good housekeeping practices. Additional comment in support of 
an annual certification statement described some state programs that 
currently survey facilities that reported in prior years but did not 
submit reports for the year under review.
    After considering these comments, and the language of section 
313(f)(2), EPA believes that an annual certification statement best 
addresses the statutory mandates and the public's right-to-know. EPA 
believes that the proposed annual certification will provide 
information relating to the location of facilities manufacturing, 
processing, or otherwise using these chemicals, that the chemicals are 
being manufactured, processed or otherwise used at current reporting 
thresholds, and that chemical releases and transfers for the purpose of 
treatment and/or disposal are below 100 pounds per year (i.e., within a 
range of zero to 99 pounds per year). This provides a sufficient 
indication of the potential volume of releases and such data can be 
made available to the public in the same manner as current Form R data. 
An annual statement will assist users of TRI data in distinguishing 
facilities which changed their chemical uses, and therefore were no 
longer required to report, from those that were required to, but did 
not report. An annual certification would assist those states that do 
not have the resources to survey facilities operating in their state as 
well as the public that use the data.
    Finally, EPA believes the proposed annual certification 
requirements would foster continued attention to chemical management 
practices and provide a locational tool vital to any compliance program 
or other interested party. EPA believes it necessary to receive some 
type of specific indication that a facility was taking advantage of the 
alternate threshold annually to assist in any compliance monitoring and 
enforcement efforts.
    EPA is interested in receiving comment on this approach and on 
alternatives, for example, requiring a certification statement every 3 
or 5 years as opposed to annually. EPA would also like comment on the 
elements contained in the certification statement. In particular, are 
the elements appropriate for such a certification statement, and are 
all such elements necessary and sufficient? The elements EPA is 
proposing can be found in the amendment to the regulatory text of 
Sec. 372.85.
    Recordkeeping. EPA is also proposing that each facility taking 
advantage of the alternate threshold be required to maintain and make 
available upon request records for a period of 3 years from the date of 
the submission of the certification statement. These records would 
provide substantiation that an appropriate threshold determination was 
made and that estimated releases and transfers, for the purpose of 
treatment and/or disposal, were below 100 pounds for that reporting 
year. This documentation is necessary for any compliance effort 
verifying the claims made by a facility taking advantage of the 
alternate threshold.
    Impact on Reporting. In developing this proposal, EPA analyzed TRI 
data to determine the impact of various options on the number of Form R 
reports that would no longer be received by EPA, amount and nature of 
chemical release information that would no longer be available to the 
public, and savings to industry, EPA, and State governments due to the 
reduced reporting and data management costs. EPA's preliminary analysis 
was contained in an Issues Paper made available at the Public Meeting 
held on February 16, 1994 (Ref. 3).
    After the public meeting, EPA conducted additional analysis to 
estimate the impact on reporting of the creation of an alternate 
reporting threshold for a category of facilities for which annual 
releases and transfers off-site for the purpose of treatment and/or 
disposal were reported as below certain threshold levels, ranging from 
zero to below 5,000 pounds.
    The following analytical results are based on 1991 and 1992 TRI 
data. These are the only data sets that contain the information on 
releases and transfers for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal 
plus the elements reported under the Pollution Prevention Act needed to 
calculate the impact of the alternate threshold being proposed by this 
document. A summary of the major findings for the volume-based category 
options considered are provided below: 

                       Table 1.--Summary of Analytical Findings (Alternate Reporting Threshold Based on Releases and Transfers*)                        
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                    No. of Counties with
   Threshold Level       No. of Reports      Volume Release and     Percent of Total     Volume Total Waste                           91-100 % Loss of  
      (pounds)          Affected (1,000)     Transfers* Affected       Release and        Affected (million    Percent Total Waste       Release and    
                                                  (pounds)              Transfer*             pounds)                                  Transfer* Data   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0/NA                  10.2                  0.0                   0.00%                 1,203.7               3.3%                  0                   
10                    16.2                  35,000                0.00%                 1,687.3               4.9%                  36                  
100                   20.5                  200,000               0.01%                 2,260.7               6.3%                  52                  
250                   26.2                  1,400,000             0.03%                 3,059.7               8.5%                  94                  
500                   33.0                  4,000,000             0.1%                  3,864.3               10.7%                 141                 
1,000                 38.9                  8,400,000             0.2%                  5,583.8               15.5%                 177                 
5,000                 50.1                  36,200,000            0.8%                  7,786.7               21.6%                 254                 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Release and transfers for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal. (Data taken from 1991 reporting.)                                                  


    EPA estimates that a total of 20,500 forms reported releases and 
transfers, as defined by this proposal, within the range of zero to 99 
pounds based on both 1991 and 1992 data. For 1991, these forms 
originated from an estimated 10,200 facilities, of which 3,600 
facilities would have met the ``low-level release'' category 
determination for all chemical reports submitted. For 1992 reporting, 
the 20,500 forms affected by the alternate thresholds originated from 
an estimated 10,600 facilities, of which 3,800 facilities would have 
met the ``low-level release'' category determination for all chemical 
reports submitted.
    The amounts reported for releases and transfers as defined by EPA's 
proposal for the 20,500 forms totaled approximately 200,000 pounds for 
1991 reporting and 164,200 pounds for 1992. This represents less than 
1/100th of 1 percent of the total (4.5 billion) pounds reported for 
releases and transfers for treatment and/or disposal for 1991. Results 
for 1992 data are basically the same. Those Form R reports that 
indicated a range code of B, which represents a range between 11 and 
499 pounds in any of the data elements used to make the ``low-level 
release'' category determination, were not counted. For the purpose of 
data management, a midpoint value is assigned in places where a range 
code is reported. The value assigned to range code B is 250 pounds. A 
report that submitted a range code of B in any element used to make the 
``low-level release'' category determination, regardless of the amounts 
submitted in the remaining elements, would appear to be over the 100 
pound category level. Therefore, the following results of EPA's 
analysis could underestimate the number of reports impacted in cases 
where actual amounts released or transferred for the purpose of 
treatment and/or disposal were below 100 pounds and the corresponding 
report indicated a range code of B. Based on 1991 data, approximately 
4,600 Form Rs reported a range code indicating volumes within the range 
of 11-499 pounds for at least one element being used to define the 
category.
    The total wastes volumes (amounts defined by releases and transfers 
for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal plus the Pollution 
Prevention Act reporting elements) associated with the 20,500 forms 
totaled approximately 2,260,700,000 pounds. This represents 
approximately 6.3 percent of the total 36 billion pounds reported by 
all forms for 1991. Total waste volumes associated with the 20,500 
forms estimated to be eligible to apply the alternate threshold for 
1992 was 6,105,300,000 pounds, which represents approximately 16.7 
percent of total waste reported for all forms.
    EPA's analysis found that, based on 1991 data, 15 chemicals would 
no longer be reported on Form R to the Agency. In 1991, these 15 
chemicals were reported on a total of 26 Form Rs. The total amounts 
released and transferred for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal 
from these 26 forms was less than 350 pounds.
    Based on 1991 data, the 15 chemicals for which most or all of the 
information on Form R would no longer be reported are presented below 
with the corresponding number of reports submitted per chemical and the 
total pounds released and transferred for the purpose of treatment and/
or disposal. 

                                                                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Chemical Name          Number of Reports         Total pounds     
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alpha-Naphthylamine        2                       10                   
4-Aminobiphenyl            1                       4                    
C.I. Food Red 15           4                       46                   
C.I. Solvent Yellow 3      2                       15                   
2-Chloroacetophenone       1                       2                    
2,4-Diaminoanisole         1                       85                   
3,3'-Dimethoxybenzidine    2                       4                    
Heptachlor                 1                       5                    
Isosafrole                 1                       10                   
Methyl Hydrazine           2                       1                    
Michler's Ketone           1                       3                    
P-Anisidine                3                       26                   
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol      2                       82                   
2,6-Xylindine              2                       21                   
Zineb                      1                       5                    
                                                                        
Total                      26                      319                  
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    From these numbers, it can be seen that these are chemicals for 
which very low releases and transfers are reported nationally. A 
similar analysis was conducted on 1992 data. Results from the 1992 
data, indicate that 7 chemicals would no longer be reported on Form R 
with a ``low-level release'' category determination of less than 100 
pounds. These 7 chemicals were reported on a total of 14 TRI reporting 
forms, with total amounts released and transferred for the purpose of 
treatment and/or disposal of less than 300 pounds.
    Based on the 1992 data, the 7 chemicals for which Form R would no 
longer be filed are presented below with the corresponding number of 
reports submitted per chemical and the total pounds released and 
transferred for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal for each 
chemical. 

                                                                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Chemical Name          Number of Reports         Total Pounds     
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alpha-Naphthylamine        2                       10                   
4-Aminobiphenyl            1                       3                    
Cupferron                  1                       79                   
3,3'-Dimethoxybenzidine    3                       8                    
p-Anisidine                3                       31                   
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol      1                       87                   
2,6-Xylidine               3                       59                   
                                                                        
Total                      14                      277                  
------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Alternative Options

    The following four options are being presented for comment as 
alternatives to EPA's proposal. The first three options are constructed 
in the same manner as EPA's proposal, except the amount of ``low-level 
releases'' presented by the sums of releases and transfers for the 
purpose of treatment and/or disposal per chemical per year are: (1) 
Less than 500 pounds, (2) less than 10 pounds or, (3) zero (or not 
applicable). The fourth alternative that EPA is considering creates a 
facility category based on amounts reported for total waste generation.
    1. Category: less than 500 pounds per year. This option would allow 
facilities that meet current reporting requirements but that have a 
chemical or chemicals for which the sum of amounts released and 
transferred for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal is below 500 
pounds, to apply a higher reporting threshold to that chemical or 
chemicals. As described in unit B above, the alternate thresholds for 
manufacture, process, or otherwise use would be applied on a per 
chemical basis. The alternative reporting threshold would be equal to 
or greater than 1 million pounds.
    Based on 1991 data, EPA estimates that a total of 33,000 forms 
reported total releases and transfers for the purpose of treatment and/
or disposal of less than 500 pounds. The combined total reported for 
releases and transfers for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal by 
these forms was approximately 4,000,000 pounds. This represents 
approximately 1/10th of 1 percent of the total 4.5 billion pounds 
reported for such releases and transfers for 1991. The total waste 
volumes (sum of amounts released and transferred for the purpose of 
treatment and/or disposal plus the Pollution Prevention Act reporting 
elements) associated with these 33,000 forms totaled approximately 
3,864,300,000 pounds. This represents approximately 10.7 percent of the 
total 36 billion pounds reported by all forms for 1991.
    An alternate threshold applied to a category of less than 500 
pounds is estimated to result in 20 chemicals which would no longer be 
reported on Form R. These 20 chemicals were reported on 37 forms with a 
national total of 1,814 pounds of releases and transfers for treatment 
and/or disposal based on 1991 data. The 20 chemicals for which most or 
all of the information on Form R would no longer be reported are 
presented below with the corresponding number of reports submitted per 
chemical and the total pounds released and transferred for the purpose 
of treatment and/or disposal.

                                                                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Chemical Name          Number of Reports          Total Pounds    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alpha-Naphylamine          2                       10                   
4-Aminobiphenyl            1                       4                    
4-Aminoazobenzene          1                       441                  
p-Anisidine                3                       26                   
2-Chloroacetophenone       1                       2                    
C.I. Food Red 15           4                       46                   
C.I. Solvent Yellow 3      2                       15                   
2,4-Diaminoanisole         1                       85                   
1,2-Dibromo-3-             2                       290                  
 Chloropropane                                                          
Dichlorobromomethane       1                       200                  
3,3'-Dimethoxybenzidine    2                       4                    
p-Dinitrobenzene           1                       164                  
Heptachlor                 1                       5                    
Isosafrole                 1                       10                   
Methyl Hydrazine           2                       1                    
Michler's Ketone           1                       3                    
Propyleneimine             6                       400                  
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol      2                       82                   
2,6-Xylidine               2                       21                   
Zineb                      1                       5                    
Total                      37                      1,814                
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A facility category based on the sum of amounts released and 
transferred for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal of less than 
500 pounds will certainly allow many more facilities to apply for the 
alternate threshold. Based on 1991 reporting, approximately 40 percent 
of those forms submitted would be eligible. However as can be seen from 
referencing Table 1, these additional forms account for a significantly 
larger amount of release, transfer, and total waste generation data 
that would no longer be available.
    2. Category: less than 10 pounds per year. This option would allow 
facilities that meet current reporting requirements but that have a 
chemical or chemicals for which the sum of amounts released and 
transferred for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal is below 10 
pounds, to apply a higher reporting threshold to that chemical or 
chemicals. As described in part B above, the alternate thresholds for 
manufacture, process, or otherwise use would be applied on a per 
chemical basis. The alternative reporting threshold would be equal to 
or greater than 1 million pounds.
    Based on 1991 data, EPA estimates that a total of 16,200 forms 
reported total releases and transfers for the purpose of treatment and/
or disposal of less than 10 pounds. The combined total reported for 
releases and transfers for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal by 
these forms was approximately 35,000 pounds. This represents less than 
1/100th of 1 percent of the total 4.5 billion pounds reported for such 
releases and transfers for 1991. The total waste volumes (sum of 
amounts released and transferred for the purpose of treatment and/or 
disposal plus the Pollution Prevention Act reporting elements) 
associated with these 16,200 forms totaled approximately 1,687,300,000 
pounds. This represents approximately 4.9 percent of the total 36 
billion pounds reported by all forms for 1991.
    An alternate threshold applied to a category of less than 10 pounds 
is estimated to result in 9 chemicals which would no longer be reported 
on Form R. These 9 chemicals were reported on 12 forms with a national 
total of 44 pounds of releases and transfers for treatment and/or 
disposal based on 1991 data. The 9 chemicals for which most or all of 
the information on Form R would no longer be reported are presented 
below with the corresponding number of reports submitted per chemical 
and the total pounds released and transferred for the purpose of 
treatment and/or disposal. 

                                                                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Chemical Name          Number of Reports         Total Pounds     
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alpha-Naphylamine          2                       10                   
4-Aminobiphenyl            1                       4                    
2-Chloroacetophenone       1                       2                    
3,3'-Dimethoxybenzidine    2                       4                    
Heptachlor                 1                       5                    
Isosafrole                 1                       10                   
Methyl Hydrazine           2                       1                    
Michler's Ketone           1                       3                    
Zineb                      1                       5                    
                                                                        
Total                      12                      44                   
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is apparent from these numbers that a facility category of less 
than 10 pounds would impact a subset of the information reported by 
those reports comprising the less than 100 pound category.
    3. Category: zero pounds or not applicable. This option would 
create a category of facilities based on the sum of amounts released 
and transferred for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal of zero 
pounds or not applicable. As described in EPA's proposal, the alternate 
manufacture, process, or otherwise use thresholds would be applied on a 
per chemical basis for those listed chemicals where the sum of amounts 
released and transferred for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal 
from a facility was zero pounds or not applicable. The corresponding 
alternate threshold would be equal to or greater than 1 million pounds.
    A report may indicate not applicable in such cases where a release 
is not associated with a particular medium for a given chemical. An 
example of this could be a constituent that is part of an aqueous waste 
and remains in solution with all releases directed to a receiving 
stream where there are no direct releases to land. In this case, 
elements on the form pertaining to land releases would not apply.
    EPA estimates that a total of 10,200 forms reported releases and 
transfers, for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal, of zero or not 
applicable. These forms originated from an estimated 6,100 facilities, 
of which 1,900 facilities would have met the ``low-level release'' 
category determination for all chemical reports submitted.
    By definition, no amounts were reported for releases and transfers, 
for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal, by the 10,200 forms. 
However, these forms do have total wastes volumes associated with them. 
An estimated total of 1,203,700 pounds were reported by the 10,200 
forms for the Pollution Prevention Act reporting elements for 1991. 
This represents approximately 3.3 percent of the total 36 billion 
pounds reported by all forms.
    Form Rs reporting total releases and transfers for treatment or 
disposal equal to zero pounds or not applicable would by definition not 
impact the continued collection of a substantial majority of releases 
for the chemical reported.
    4. Alternate threshold based on total waste generation. This 
alternative creates a category based on the total of all volumes 
reported. Reporting elements included in the total waste generation 
option include information collected under section 6607 of the 
Pollution Prevention Act such as amounts treated on-site, amounts 
recycled on-site and off-site, and volumes used for energy recovery on-
site and off-site. This information was first publicly made available 
in reports submitted for reporting year 1991. The rationale for using 
this approach is that the data set collected currently is much broader 
than the data set collected under TRI prior to 1991 and provides more 
information on the TRI chemicals being managed by reporting facilities. 
Setting a category designation by only the volume of releases and 
transfers for treatment and/or disposal results in the loss of the more 
detailed waste management and source reduction efforts both current and 
projected. There can be situations in which low volumes of releases in 
any given year are still associated with large volumes of the TRI 
chemicals in waste that are treated, recycled or burned for energy 
recovery. For example, the zero level represented by Alternative 3 
above results in a loss of reporting of over 1 million pounds of waste 
management activity.
    One purpose of the Pollution Prevention Act is to help users of the 
data understand the details of facility waste management and source 
reduction practices. This reporting also encourages facilities to focus 
attention on both the current and future potential for release 
reductions as well as source reduction opportunities.
    Presented below in Table 2 are data taken from 1991 indicating the 
impact of a facility category based on total waste generation at 
various levels.

   Table 2.--Summary of Analytical Findings (Alternative Reporting Threshold Based on Total Waste Generation*)  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                            No. of Counties with
    Category Level         No. of Reports       Volume Total Waste                             91-100% Loss of  
       (pounds)           Affected (1,000)      Affected (million     Percent Total Waste        Total Waste    
                                                     pounds)                                  Generation* Data  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0/NA                   6.3                    0.0                    0.0%                   0                   
10                     10.0                   0.02                   0.0%                   13                  
100                    13.0                   0.15                   0.0%                   24                  
250                    16.7                   0.94                   0.0%                   52                  
500                    21.3                   2.66                   0.01%                  89                  
1,000                  25.7                   5.86                   0.02%                  117                 
5,000                  34.8                   28.81                  0.08%                  171                 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Total waste generation includes releases and transfers plus the Pollution Prevention Act data. (Data taken from
  1991 reporting.)                                                                                              


    Based on these figures, it is evident that a cut-off level for 
defining the category of facilities eligible for the revised threshold 
based on total waste generation would have to be set at a higher level 
than one based only on releases and transfers (for the purpose of 
treatment and/or disposal only) to achieve a similar reduction in the 
number of Form R reports. For example, in order to eliminate the 
submission of an estimated 20,500 reports based on a release and 
transfer category definition, the cut-off level for eligibility would 
be 100 pounds. See Table 1 above. To achieve a similar reduction in 
number of reports, an estimated 21,300 reports, based on a total waste 
category definition, the cut-off level for eligibility would have to be 
set at 500 pounds. See Table 2 above.
    A disadvantage of establishing a category of facilities based on 
total waste generation is that it provides a much higher standard for 
facilities to meet in order to take advantage of an alternate 
threshold. In addition, establishing a category based on total waste 
generation would require the facility to complete all of the 
calculations on Form R for a given chemical. This would further 
diminish the savings in time and resources in preparing these 
calculations which would be provided by this proposed rule. Finally, 
EPA would have to carefully consider whether an alternate manufacture, 
process, or otherwise use threshold of 1 million pounds would be 
sufficient to effectively exempt those Form R submissions.

III. Other Approaches Considered

    EPA requested comment in the SBA notice on alternative approaches 
to the development of a TRI reporting exemption based on releases and 
transfers. Numerous suggestions were submitted, and alternative 
approaches for modifying current reporting were considered. These 
approaches fall within four main categories: (1) Modifications to the 
manufacture, process, or otherwise use thresholds based on classes of 
chemicals or categories of facilities (being proposed in this 
document); (2) general revision to the manufacture, process, or 
otherwise use thresholds; (3) altering the frequency of reporting; and 
(4) other administrative changes, such as a revision of the article 
exemption.
    1. Threshold modifications based on classes of chemicals or 
categories of facilities. The approach put forth in EPA's proposal is a 
threshold modification for a facility category based on amounts 
released and transferred for the purpose of treatment and/or disposal. 
Another option that falls within an approach based on classes of 
chemicals or categories of facilities is that put forth in SBA's 
petition. For the purposes of organizing discussion in this section, 
SBA's approach will be referred to as a List Division.
    List Division. The SBA petition proposed dividing the list of 
section 313 reportable chemicals and applying different exemption 
levels to each set of chemicals. The two primary principles behind a 
list division would be to set a lower reporting threshold for those 
chemicals thought to pose greater potential hazard concerns, and to 
ensure that reporting on a substantial majority of releases would be 
retained for lower volume chemicals. SBA asserts that one benefit of 
such an approach is that it could eliminate a significant number of 
reports on ``high volume'' chemicals while preserving reports on 
``highly toxic'' chemicals released in low volumes. The results of 
EPA's analysis are presented in Appendix B-1 of the Issues paper (Ref. 
3).
    Comment received on the SBA Notice addressed the impact of and 
basis upon which a list division could be created. Some commenters 
suggested that the list division proposed in the SBA petition was 
unfounded, and that adopting the Reportable Quantity (RQ) scheme 
associated with the reporting of extremely hazardous substances (EHS) 
under EPCRA section 304 would be a more supportable approach because 
the methodology that distinguishes among chemicals already exists. The 
classification scheme used to determine reporting obligations under 
EPCRA section 304 divides the list into chemicals having RQs of 1, 10, 
100, 1,000, and 10,000 pounds, depending on the chemical. The 
application of these values to the TRI listed chemicals could create as 
many as five classes of chemicals with each having a different release 
and transfer level. Many of the TRI listed toxic chemicals do not have 
RQ values assigned to them. This approach would add multiple levels of 
complexity to the TRI reports. In addition, EPA has received comment 
regarding the lack of conclusive data supporting a division of the 
currently listed chemicals to adequately address concerns of 
carcinogenicity, teratogenicity, and general hazards that may be posed 
from continued low-level releases that might go unreported if a 
reporting modification is made. In addition, EPA believes that creating 
different categories with varying levels assigned by chemical would 
further complicate an attempt to provide a reduction in burden 
associated with TRI reporting. It is EPA's intent to develop a 
reporting modification that can be implemented as simply as possible, 
while preserving the utility of the TRI data.
    2. Revision of the otherwise use threshold. EPA has authority under 
section 313(f)(2) to revise the manufacture, process, or otherwise use 
threshold amounts. An upward revision of any of these amounts would 
eliminate reports from those facilities that manufacture, process, or 
otherwise use a listed chemical below the revised activity threshold 
level.
    Form R does not request information on amounts manufactured, 
processed, or otherwise used for the chemical being reported. However, 
the amounts of listed chemicals otherwise used by TRI facilities can be 
estimated based on analytically plausible assumptions. For this reason, 
EPA conducted an analysis on an estimated change in the otherwise use 
threshold. The description of this analysis and the associated findings 
can be found in Appendix B-2 of the Issues paper (Ref. 3).
    One benefit of this approach is that it is simpler to implement and 
enforce compared to revisions based on sums of volumes reported on Form 
R, such as that described as an Alternative Threshold Modification. 
Identifying the amounts otherwise used, manufactured, or processed is 
one of the first pieces of information a facility develops as part of 
its compliance determination.
    A disadvantage of this approach is that it is much less selective 
in its ability to equate an effective exemption with a report of 
relatively low volume of releases. For example, raising the otherwise 
use threshold from 10,000 to 25,000 pounds could eliminate an estimated 
18,000 reports. However, the release information contained in any such 
report could range from zero to 25,000 pounds per year because certain 
uses may result in environmental releases of all quantities used.
    3. Altering the reporting frequency. Section 313(i)(A) provides EPA 
authority to modify the current annual reporting frequency. Such a 
modification cannot increase reporting to be more often than on an 
annual basis. Such a modification can be applied either nationally or 
to a specific geographic area, to the following: all toxic chemical 
release forms, a class of chemicals or a category of facilities, a 
specific toxic chemical, and a specific facility. By reducing the 
frequency of reporting, facilities would not be subject to an annual 
reporting requirement, but might be requested to maintain activity 
information for non-reporting years and submit this information during 
a reporting year. For example, a class of facilities may be identified 
as operating in a very similar manner with little chemical use or 
release changes. For these facilities, it may be sufficient to have 
Form R reports submitted less frequently than on an annual basis. It 
could also be possible to define a category of facilities, similar to 
the alternate threshold modification described above, and make their 
reporting frequency ``0'' years, thus effectively exempting these 
facilities from reporting.
    Under section 313(i), to propose a revision of the current 
reporting frequency, EPA must meet certain conditions. One such 
condition requires EPA to notify Congress 1 year prior to initiating 
rulemaking procedures, in addition to making certain findings and 
meeting a substantial evidence standard of review. EPA believes that 
such an approach could unduly lengthen the time required to implement 
the alternative threshold provision.
    4. Revision of the article exemption. Comments on the SBA notice 
included suggestions to revise the article exemption, 40 CFR 372.38(b), 
so that the absence of releases from ``articles'' would no longer be a 
condition for retaining the article status of materials processed or 
used at a facility. Currently, if a toxic chemical is released from the 
normal processing or use of an item at the facility, then that item 
cannot be considered an article, unless all such releases are recycled.
    By eliminating the release condition within the article definition, 
more items could be considered as articles and the listed chemicals 
associated with them would not be counted toward reporting thresholds.
    EPA does not believe that elimination of this release criterion is 
appropriate nor does it provide an effective alternative for 
establishing a specific low volume, released-based approach for 
reducing the current level of reporting burden.

IV. Request for Comment on the Issues Listed Below

    EPA requests comment on any aspect of this proposal. However, EPA 
requests specific comment as detailed in the following paragraphs.
    Should an alternate reporting threshold based on low-levels of 
releases and transfers carry with it a provision that would require 
some period of full Form R reporting prior to taking advantage of the 
alternate reporting threshold? This provision would apply to reporting 
by new facilities added either by a change in chemical activity or 
inclusion of additional industry sectors, or by adding chemicals to the 
section 313(c) TRI list. Such a provision could be useful for 
establishing a ``baseline'' of activity that would provide reporting on 
all of the elements contained on Form R prior to accepting an annual 
certification.
    EPA would like to hear from those states that have adopted EPCRA 
and EPCRA-like laws regarding how adopting an alternate threshold such 
as that being proposed would affect their program.
    Would states find an alternative reporting threshold based on zero 
releases and transfers more difficult to enforce than an alternative 
reporting threshold based on another release level (e.g., 10-500 
pounds)?
    EPA requests comment on the potential loss of Pollution Prevention 
Act data that would result from adopting a facility category approach 
defined by amounts released and transferred for the purpose of 
treatment and/or disposal at any level.
    EPA requests comment on the effectiveness, in terms of providing a 
reduction in the current level of reporting burden with the need to 
continue to collect data on and promote total waste management, of 
establishing a facility category based on amounts reported for total 
waste generation.
    EPA requests comment on any activity that has focused on reports of 
low- level releases, specifically for such reports that would be 
effected by this proposal.

V. Rulemaking Record

    All documents related to this rulemaking (reference docket number 
OPPTS-400087) are available to the public in the TSCA Nonconfidential 
Information Center (NCIC) from noon to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
excluding legal holidays. The NCIC is located at EPA headquarters, Rm. 
NE-B607, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460.

VI. References

    (1) Memo, ``Significance of Small Source Releases in Total Releases 
and Transfers for TRI Chemicals - Preliminary Data Tables - 1988 TRI 
Data,'' Kevin Bromberg to Mary Ellen Weber, Environmental Protection 
Agency, February 28, 1991.
    (2) U.S. Congress, House of Representatives. ``Conference Report 
No. 962,'' 99th Cong., 2nd Session. 296 (1986).
    (3) USEPA/OPPT. Toxic Release Inventory--Small Source Exemption, 
(Issues Paper). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, 
(January 27, 1994).
    (4) SIC Code 2048 Analysis.

VII. Regulatory Assessment Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the 
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' 
and therefore subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) and the requirements of the Executive Order. Under section 3(f), 
the order defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action that 
is likely to result in a rule: (1) Having an annual effect on the 
economy of $100 million or more, or adversely and materially affecting 
a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the 
environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal 
governments or communities (also referred to as ``economically 
significant''); (2) creating serious inconsistency or otherwise 
interfering with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) 
materially altering the budgetary impacts of entitlement, grants, user 
fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or (4) raising novel legal or policy issues arising out of 
legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth 
in this Executive Order.
    EPA's economic analysis estimates that 20,500 reports submitted on 
Form R for the currently listed chemicals would be eligible for the 
certification as a result of the proposed alternative reporting 
threshold outlined in Unit II.B. of this preamble. This would result in 
savings of $26 million per year for affected facilities, and $680,000 
per year for EPA.
    Pursuant to the terms of this Executive Order, EPA has determined 
that this proposed rule is ``significant.''

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, the Agency must 
conduct a small business analysis to determine whether a substantial 
number of small entities would be significantly affected by the 
proposed rule. Because the proposed rule would result in cost savings 
to facilities, EPA certifies that small entities would not be 
significantly affected by the proposed rule.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this proposed rule have 
been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An 
Information Collection Request document has been prepared by EPA (ICR 
No. 1704.01) and a copy may be obtained from Sandy Farmer, Information 
Policy Branch, (Mail Code 2136), EPA, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 
20460 or by calling (202)260-2740.
    This collection of information has an estimated reporting burden 
averaging 27 hours per response and an estimated annual recordkeeping 
burden averaging 4 hours per respondent. These estimates include time 
for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering 
and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the 
collection of information.
    The burden for this reporting activity will be subtracted from the 
Form R information collection when that ICR (No. 1363) is renewed.
    Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of 
this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this 
burden to Chief, Information Policy Branch, (Mail Code 2136), EPA, 401 
M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460; and to the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 
20503, marked ``Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.'' The final rule will 
respond to any OMB or public comments on the information collection 
requirements contained in this proposal.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 372

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

    Dated: July 15, 1994.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.

    Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR part 372 be amended as 
follows:

PART 372--[AMENDED]

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

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

    2. In Sec. 372.10, by adding a new paragraph (d) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 372.10  Recordkeeping.

    *    *    *    *    *
    (d) Each person who determines that they may apply the alternative 
reporting threshold as specified under Sec. 372.27(a) must retain the 
following records for a period of 3 years from the date of the 
submission of the certification as required under Sec. 372.27(b):
    (1) A copy of each certification submitted by the person under 
Sec. 372.27(b).
    (2) All supporting materials and documentation used by the person 
to make the compliance determination that the facility or 
establishments is a covered facility under Secs. 372.22 or 372.45.
    (3) Documentation supporting the certification submitted under 
Sec. 372.27(b) including:
    (i) Data supporting the determination of whether the alternative 
reporting threshold specified under Sec. 372.27(a) applies for each 
toxic chemical.
    (ii) Documentation supporting the calculations of the quantity of 
each toxic chemical released to the environment or transferred to an 
off-site location.
    (iii) Receipt or manifests associated with the transfer of each 
chemical in waste to off-site locations.
    3. In Sec. 372.25, by revising the introductory paragraph to read 
as follows:


Sec. 372.25   Thresholds for reporting.

    Except as provided in Sec. 372.27, the threshold amounts for 
purposes of reporting under Sec. 372.30 for toxic chemicals are as 
follows:
    *    *    *    *    *
    4. By adding a new Sec. 372.27 to read as follows:


Sec. 372.27   Alternate threshold and certification.

    (a) With respect to manufacture, process, or otherwise use of a 
toxic chemical, a covered facility may apply an alternative reporting 
threshold of 1 million pounds per year if the facility calculates that 
it would have reported releases of less than 100 pounds per year of the 
toxic chemical, as a combined total of the following:
    (1) Releases pursuant to Sec. 372.85(b)(15), and
    (2) Transfers, but only for the purpose of treatment and/or 
disposal, pursuant to Sec. 372.85(b)(16).
    (b) If the facility determines that it may apply the alternative 
reporting threshold specified in paragraph (a) of this section for a 
specific toxic chemical, the facility is not required to submit a 
report for that chemical under Sec. 372.30, but must submit a 
certification statement including the information required under 
Sec. 372.85(c). The facility must also keep records as specified in 
Sec. 372.10(d).
    (c) Each certification statement under this section for activities 
involving a toxic chemical that occurred during a calendar year at a 
covered facility must be submitted on or before July 1 of the next 
year.
    5. In Sec. 372.85, by adding a new paragraph (c) to read as follow:


Sec. 372.85   Toxic chemical release reporting form and instructions.

    *    *    *    *    *
    (c) Alternative threshold certification statement elements. The 
following information must be reported on an alternative threshold 
certification statement pursuant to Sec. 372.27(b):
    (1) Reporting year.
    (2) An indication of whether the chemical identified is being 
claimed as trade secret.
    (3) Chemical name and CAS number (if applicable) of the chemical, 
or the category name.
    (4) Signature of a senior management official certifying the 
following:

    I hereby certify that for each toxic chemical listed in this 
report, the combined releases and transfers (for the purpose of 
treatment and/or disposal only) were less than 100 pounds for this 
reporting year and that the chemical was not manufactured, 
processed, or otherwise used in amounts equal to or greater than 1 
million pounds during this reporting year.

    (5) Date signed.
    (6) Facility name and address.
    (7) Mailing address of the facility if different than paragraph 
(c)(6) of this section.
    (8) Toxic chemical release inventory facility identification number 
if known.
    (9) Name and telephone number of a Technical Contact.
    (10) SIC code(s).
    (11) Latitude and longitude.
    (12) Dun and Bradstreet Number.
    (13) EPA Identification Number(s) (RCRA I.D. Number(s).
    (14) Facility NPDES Permit Number(s).
    (15) Underground Injection Well Code (UIC) I.D. Number(s).
    (16) Name of parent company.
    (17) Parent company's Dun and Bradstreet Number.

[FR Doc. 94-18449 Filed 7-27-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F