[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 206 (Thursday, October 23, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 63297-63328]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-25037]



[[Page 63297]]

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

Part IV





Department of Agriculture





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



 Office of Energy Policy and New Uses



7 CFR Part 2902



 Designation of Biobased Items for Federal Procurement; Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 206 / Thursday, October 23, 2008 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 63298]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Office of Energy Policy and New Uses

7 CFR Part 2902

RIN 0503-AA33


Designation of Biobased Items for Federal Procurement

AGENCY: Departmental Administration, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is proposing to 
amend the Guidelines for Designating Biobased Products for Federal 
Procurement, by adding nine sections to designate the following nine 
items within which biobased products would be afforded Federal 
procurement preference: Chain and cable lubricants; corrosion 
preventatives; food cleaners; forming lubricants; gear lubricants; 
general purpose household cleaners; industrial cleaners; multipurpose 
cleaners; and parts wash solutions. USDA also is proposing minimum 
biobased content for each of these items.

DATES: USDA will accept public comments on this proposed rule until 
December 22, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods. All 
submissions received must include the agency name and Regulatory 
Information Number (RIN). The RIN for this rulemaking is 0503-AA33. 
Also, please identify submittals as pertaining to the ``Proposed 
Designation of Items.''
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: [email protected]. Include RIN number 0503-
AA33 and ``Proposed Designation of Items'' on the subject line. Please 
include your name and address in your message.
     Mail/commercial/hand delivery: Mail or deliver your 
comments to: Shana Love, USDA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for 
Administration, Room 209A, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, 
SW., Washington, DC 20250-0103.
     Persons with disabilities who require alternative means 
for communication for regulatory information (Braille, large print, 
audiotape, etc.) should contact the USDA TARGET Center at (202) 720-
2600 (voice) and (202) 401-4133 (TDD).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shana Love, USDA, Office of the 
Assistant Secretary for Administration, Room 209A, Whitten Building, 
1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-0103; e-mail: 
[email protected]; phone (202) 205-4008. Information regarding the 
Federal Procurement of Biobased Products (one part of the BioPreferred 
Program) is available on the Internet at http://www.biopreferred.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information presented in this preamble 
is organized as follows:

I. Authority
II. Background
III. Summary of Today's Proposed Rule
IV. Designation of Items, Minimum Biobased Contents, and Time Frame
    A. Background
    B. Items Proposed for Designation
    C. Minimum Biobased Contents
    D. Compliance Date for Procurement Preference and Incorporation 
Into Specifications
V. Where Can Agencies Get More Information on These USDA-Designated 
Items?
VI. Regulatory Information
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    C. Executive Order 12630: Governmental Actions and Interference 
With Constitutionally Protected Property Rights
    D. Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    G. Executive Order 12372: Intergovernmental Review of Federal 
Programs
    H. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    I. Paperwork Reduction Act
    J. Government Paperwork Elimination Act Compliance

I. Authority

    The designation of these items is proposed under the authority of 
section 9002 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 
(FSRIA), as amended by the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 
(FCEA), 7 U.S.C. 8102 (referred to in this document as ``section 
9002'').

II. Background

    Section 9002, as amended by the FCEA of 2008, provides for the 
preferred procurement of biobased products by Federal procuring 
agencies (referred to hereafter in this FR notice as the ``preferred 
procurement program''). The definition of ``procuring agency'' in 
section 9002, as amended by the FCEA of 2008, includes both Federal 
agencies and ``a person that is a party to a contract with any Federal 
agency, with respect to work performed under such a contract.'' Thus, 
Federal contractors, as well as Federal agencies, are expressly subject 
to the procurement preference provisions of section 9002.
    Once USDA designates an item, procuring agencies are required 
generally to purchase biobased products within these designated items 
where the purchase price of the procurement item exceeds $10,000 or 
where the quantity of such items or the functionally equivalent items 
purchased over the preceding fiscal year equaled $10,000 or more. 
Procuring agencies must procure biobased products within each 
designated item unless they determine that products within a designated 
item are not reasonably available within a reasonable period of time, 
fail to meet the reasonable performance standards of the procuring 
agencies, or are available only at an unreasonable price. As stated in 
the Guidelines, biobased products that are merely incidental to Federal 
funding are excluded from the preferred procurement program; that is, 
the requirements to purchase biobased products do not apply to such 
purchases if they are unrelated to or incidental to the purpose of the 
Federal contract. To illustrate, you are awarded a Federal contract to 
construct a Federal office building with elevators. The elevators 
require hydraulic fluid to operate. Because stationary equipment 
hydraulic fluids are an item that has been designated for preferred 
procurement, the hydraulic fluid purchased for use in the elevators 
would be subject to the requirements of section 9002. In order to 
install these elevators, cranes may be used. These cranes require 
hydraulic fluid to operate. The hydraulic fluid purchased for the 
maintenance of these cranes used in the performance of that contract, 
however, is considered to be incidental to the purpose of the Federal 
contract. Because it is incidental, it would not be subject to the 
requirements of section 9002, even though some of the monies received 
under the contract might be used to purchase the hydraulic fluid used 
in the cranes.
    In implementing the preferred procurement program for biobased 
products, procuring agencies should follow their procurement rules and 
Office of Federal Procurement Policy guidance on buying non-biobased 
products when biobased products exist and should document exceptions 
taken for price, performance, and availability.
    USDA recognizes that the performance needs for a given application 
are important criteria in making procurement decisions. USDA is not 
requiring procuring agencies to limit their choices to biobased 
products that fall under the items for designation in this proposed 
rule. Rather, the effect of the designation of the items is to require 
procuring agencies to determine their

[[Page 63299]]

performance needs, determine whether there are qualified biobased 
products that fall under the designated items that meet the reasonable 
performance standards for those needs, and purchase such qualified 
biobased products to the maximum extent practicable as required by 
section 9002.
    Section 9002(a)(3)(B), as amended by the FCEA of 2008, requires 
USDA to provide information to procuring agencies on the availability, 
relative price, performance, and environmental and public health 
benefits of such items and to recommend where appropriate the minimum 
level of biobased content to be contained in the procured products.
    It is the responsibility of the manufacturers to ``self-certify'' 
that each product being offered as a biobased product for preferred 
procurement contains qualifying feedstock. USDA will develop a 
monitoring process for these self-certifications to ensure 
manufacturers are using qualifying feedstocks. If misrepresentations 
are found, USDA will remove the subject biobased product from the 
preferred procurement program and may take further actions as deemed 
appropriate.
    Subcategorization. Most of the items USDA is considering for 
designation for preferred procurement cover a wide range of products. 
For some items, there are groups of products within the item that meet 
different markets and uses and/or different performance specifications. 
For example, within the designated item ``hand cleaners and 
sanitizers,'' some products are required to meet performance 
specifications for sanitizing, while other products do not need to meet 
these specifications. Where such subgroups exist, USDA intends to 
create subcategories. For example, for the item ``hand cleaners and 
sanitizers,'' USDA has determined it is reasonable to create a ``hand 
cleaner'' subcategory and a ``hand sanitizer'' subcategory. Sanitizing 
specifications would be applicable to the latter subcategory, but not 
the former. In sum, USDA looks at the products within each item to 
evaluate whether there are groups of products within the item that meet 
different performance specifications and, where USDA finds this type of 
difference, it intends to create subcategories.
    For some items, however, USDA may not have sufficient information 
at the time of proposal to create subcategories within an item. For 
example, USDA may know that there are different performance 
specifications that deicing products are required to meet, but it has 
only information on one type of deicing product. In such instances, 
USDA may either designate the item without creating subcategories 
(i.e., defer the creation of subcategories) or designate one 
subcategory and defer designation of other subcategories within the 
item until additional information is obtained.
    Within today's proposed rule, USDA is not proposing subcategories 
for any of the nine items being proposed for designation, but is 
requesting specific comments on the appropriateness of creating 
subcategories within several items.
    Minimum Biobased Contents. The minimum biobased contents being 
proposed with today's rule are based on products for which USDA has 
biobased content test data. In addition to considering the biobased 
content test data for each item, USDA also considers other factors 
including product performance information and the range, groupings, and 
breaks in the biobased content test data array. Consideration of this 
information allows USDA to establish minimum biobased contents on a 
broad set of factors to assist the Federal procurement community in its 
decisions to purchase biobased products.
    USDA makes every effort to obtain biobased content test data on 
multiple products within each item. For most designated items, USDA has 
biobased content test data on more than one product within a designated 
item. However, USDA must rely on biobased product manufacturers to 
voluntarily submit product information and, in some cases, USDA has 
been able to obtain biobased content data for only a single product 
within a designated item. As USDA obtains additional data on the 
biobased contents for products within these designated items, USDA will 
evaluate whether the minimum biobased content for a designated item 
will be revised.
    USDA anticipates that the minimum biobased content of an item that 
is based on a single product is more likely to change as additional 
products within that item are identified and tested. In today's 
proposed rule, none of the minimum biobased contents for the designated 
items are based on a single tested product.
    Where USDA receives additional information on biobased content for 
products within these proposed items during the public comment period, 
USDA will take that information into consideration when establishing 
the minimum biobased content when the items are designated in the final 
rulemaking.
    Overlap with EPA's Comprehensive Procurement Guideline program for 
recovered content products under the Resource Conservation and Recovery 
Act (RCRA) Section 6002. Some of the products that are biobased items 
designated for preferred procurement under the preferred procurement 
program may also be items the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has 
designated under the EPA's Comprehensive Procurement Guideline (CPG) 
for Products Containing Recovered Materials. Where that occurs, an EPA-
designated recovered content product (also known as ``recycled content 
products'' or ``EPA-designated products'') has priority in Federal 
procurement over the qualifying biobased product as identified in 7 CFR 
Sec.  2902.2. In situations where it believes there may be an overlap, 
USDA is asking manufacturers of qualifying biobased products to provide 
additional product and performance information to Federal agencies to 
assist them in determining whether the biobased products in question 
are, or are not, the same products for the same uses as the recovered 
content products. As this information becomes available, USDA will 
place it on the BioPreferred Web site with its catalog of qualifying 
biobased products.
    In cases where USDA believes an overlap with EPA-designated 
recovered content products may occur, manufacturers are being asked to 
indicate the various suggested uses of their product and the 
performance standards against which a particular product has been 
tested. In addition, depending on the type of biobased product, 
manufacturers are being asked to provide other types of information, 
such as whether the product contains fossil energy-based components 
(including petroleum, coal, and natural gas) and whether the product 
contains recovered materials. Federal agencies may also ask 
manufacturers for information on a product's biobased content and its 
profile against environmental and health measures and life-cycle costs 
(the Building for Environmental and Economic Sustainability (BEES) 
analysis or ASTM Standard D7075,''Standard Practice for Evaluating and 
Reporting Environmental Performance of Biobased Products,'' for 
evaluating and reporting on environmental performance of biobased 
products). Such information will permit agencies to determine whether 
or not an overlap occurs. Detailed information on the BEES analytical 
tool can be found on the Web site http://www.bfrl.nist.gov/oae/software/bees.html. Summary information on ASTM Standard D7075, and 
other ASTM standards, can be

[[Page 63300]]

found on ASTM's Web site at http://www.astm.org.
    Section 6002 of RCRA requires a procuring agency procuring an item 
designated by EPA generally to procure such items composed of the 
highest percentage of recovered materials content practicable. However, 
a procuring agency may decide not to procure such an item based on a 
determination that the item fails to meet the reasonable performance 
standards or specifications of the procuring agency. An item with 
recovered materials content may not meet reasonable performance 
standards or specifications, for example, if the use of the item with 
recovered materials content would jeopardize the intended end use of 
the item.
    Where a biobased item is used for the same purposes and to meet the 
same Federal agency performance requirements as an EPA-designated 
recovered content product, the Federal agency must purchase the 
recovered content product. For example, if a biobased hydraulic fluid 
is to be used as a fluid in hydraulic systems and because ``lubricating 
oils containing re-refined oil'' has already been designated by EPA for 
that purpose, then the Federal agency must purchase the EPA-designated 
recovered content product, ``lubricating oils containing re-refined 
oil.'' If, on the other hand, that biobased hydraulic fluid is to be 
used to address a Federal agency's certain environmental or health 
performance requirements that the EPA-designated recovered content 
product would not meet, then the biobased product should be given 
preference, subject to cost, availability, and performance.
    This proposed rule designates one item for preferred procurement 
for which there may be overlap with an EPA-designated recovered content 
product. This item is ``gear lubricants,'' which, depending on how they 
are used, may overlap with the EPA-designated recovered content product 
``Re-refined Lubricating Oils.'' EPA provides recovered materials 
content recommendations for this recovered content product in a 
Recovered Materials Advisory Notice (RMAN I). The RMAN recommendations 
for this CPG product can be found by accessing EPA's Web site http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/procure/products.htm and then clicking on 
the appropriate product name.
    Federal Government Purchase of ``Green'' Products. Three components 
of the Federal government's green purchasing program are the Biobased 
Products Preferred Purchasing Program, the Environmental Protection 
Agency's Comprehensive Procurement Guideline for Products Containing 
Recovered Materials, and the Environmentally Preferable Products 
Program. The Office of the Federal Environmental Executive (OFEE) and 
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) encourage agencies to 
implement these components comprehensively when purchasing products and 
services.
    Procuring agencies should note that not all biobased products are 
``environmentally preferable.'' For example, unless cleaning products 
contain no or reduced levels of metals and toxic and hazardous 
constituents, they can be harmful to aquatic life, the environment, 
and/or workers. Household cleaning products that are formulated to be 
disinfectants are required, under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide 
and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), to be registered with EPA and must meet 
specific labeling requirements warning of the potential risks 
associated with misuse of such products. When purchasing 
environmentally preferable cleaning products, many Federal agencies 
specify that products must meet Green Seal standards \1\ for 
institutional cleaning products or that products must have been 
reformulated in accordance with recommendations from the U.S. EPA's 
Design for the Environment (DfE) program. Both the Green Seal standards 
and the DfE program identify chemicals of concern in cleaning products. 
These include zinc and other metals, formaldehyde, ammonia, alkyl 
phenol ethoxylates, ethylene glycol ethers, and volatile organic 
compounds. In addition, both require that cleaning products have 
neutral or less caustic pH.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Reference to these standards does not represent or imply any 
endorsement by USDA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On the other hand, some biobased products may be better for the 
environment than some products that meet Green Seal standards for 
institutional cleaning products or that have been reformulated in 
accordance with EPA's DfE program. To fully compare products, one must 
look at the ``cradle-to-grave'' impacts of the manufacture, use, and 
disposal of products. Biobased products that will be available for 
preferred procurement under this program have been assessed as to their 
``cradle-to-grave'' impacts.
    One consideration of a product's impact on the environment is 
whether (and to what degree) it introduces new, fossil carbon into the 
atmosphere. Qualifying biobased products offer the user the opportunity 
to manage the carbon cycle and limit the introduction of new, fossil 
carbon into the atmosphere, whereas non-biobased products derived from 
fossil fuels add new, fossil carbon to the atmosphere.
    Manufacturers of qualifying biobased products under the preferred 
procurement program will be able to provide, at the request of Federal 
agencies, factual information on environmental and human health effects 
of their products, including the results of the BEES analysis, which 
examines 11 different environmental parameters, including human health, 
or the comparable ASTM D7075. Therefore, USDA encourages Federal 
procurement agencies to examine all available information on the 
environmental and human health effects of products when making their 
purchasing decisions.
    Other Preferred Procurement Programs. Federal procurement officials 
should also note that biobased products may be available for purchase 
by Federal agencies through the AbilityOne Program (formerly known as 
the Javits-Wagner-O'Day (JWOD) program). Under this program, members of 
organizations including the National Industries for the Blind (NIB) and 
the National Institute for the Severely Handicapped (NISH) offer 
products and services for preferred procurement by Federal agencies. A 
search of the AbilityOne Program's JWOD online catalog (http://www.jwodcatalog.com) indicated that three of the items being proposed 
today (``general purpose household cleaners'', ``industrial cleaners'', 
and ``multipurpose cleaners'') are available through the AbilityOne 
Program. While none of the specific products within these items are 
identified in the JWOD online catalog as being biobased products, there 
currently are biobased cleaning products available from at least one 
NIB affiliate. Also, because additional categories of products are 
frequently added to the AbilityOne Program, it is possible that 
biobased products within other items being proposed for designation 
today may be available through the AbilityOne Program in the future. 
Procurement of biobased products through the AbilityOne Program would 
further the objectives of both the AbilityOne Program and the preferred 
procurement program.
    Interagency Council. USDA has created, and is chairing, an 
``interagency council'' with membership selected from among Federal 
stakeholders to the preferred procurement program. To augment its own 
research, USDA consults with this council in identifying the order of 
item designation, manufacturers producing and marketing products that 
fall within an item proposed for designation, performance

[[Page 63301]]

standards used by Federal agencies evaluating products to be procured, 
and warranty information used by manufacturers of end user equipment 
and other products with regard to biobased products.
    Future Designations. In making future designations, USDA will 
continue to conduct market searches to identify manufacturers of 
biobased products within items. USDA will then contact the identified 
manufacturers to solicit samples of their products for voluntary 
submission for biobased content testing and for the BEES analytical 
tool. Based on these results, USDA will then propose new items for 
designation for preferred procurement.
    As stated in the preamble to the first six items designated for 
preferred procurement (71 FR 13686, March 16, 2006), USDA plans to 
identify approximately 10 items in each future rulemaking. USDA has 
developed a preliminary list of items for future designation. This list 
is available on the BioPreferred Web site. While this list presents an 
initial prioritization of items for designation, USDA cannot identify 
with certainty which items will be presented in each of the future 
rulemakings. Items may be added or dropped and the information 
necessary to designate an item may take more time to obtain than an 
item lower on the prioritization list.

III. Summary of Today's Proposed Rule

    USDA is proposing to designate the following nine items for 
preferred procurement: Chain and cable lubricants; corrosion 
preventatives; food cleaners; forming lubricants; gear lubricants; 
general purpose household cleaners; industrial cleaners; multipurpose 
cleaners; and parts wash solutions. USDA is also proposing minimum 
biobased content for each of these items (see Section IV.C). Lastly, 
USDA is proposing a date by which Federal agencies must incorporate 
designated items into their procurement specifications (see Section 
IV.D).
    In today's proposed rule, USDA is providing information on its 
findings as to the availability, economic and technical feasibility, 
environmental and public health benefits, and life-cycle costs for each 
of the designated items. Information on the availability, relative 
price, performance, and environmental and public health benefits of 
individual products within each of these items is not presented in this 
notice. Further, USDA has reached an agreement with manufacturers not 
to publish their names in the Federal Register when designating items. 
This agreement was reached to encourage manufacturers to submit 
products for testing to support the designation of an item. Once an 
item has been designated, USDA will encourage the manufacturers of 
products within the designated item to voluntarily make their names and 
other contact information available for the BioPreferred Web site.
    Warranties. Some of the items, including subcategories, being 
proposed for designation today may affect maintenance warranties. As 
time and resources allow, USDA will work with original equipment 
manufacturers (OEMs) on addressing any effect the use of biobased 
products may have on their maintenance warranties. At this time, 
however, USDA does not have information available as to whether or not 
OEMs will state that the use of these products will void their 
maintenance warranties. This does not mean that use of biobased 
products will void warranties, only that USDA does not currently have 
such information. USDA encourages manufacturers of biobased products to 
test their products against all relevant standards, including those 
that affect warranties, and to work with OEMs to ensure that biobased 
products will not void maintenance warranties when used. Whenever 
manufacturers of biobased products find that existing performance 
standards for maintenance warranties are not relevant or appropriate 
for biobased products, USDA is willing to assist them in working with 
the appropriate OEMs to develop tests that are relevant and appropriate 
for the end uses in which biobased products are intended. If, in spite 
of these efforts, there is insufficient information regarding the use 
of a biobased product and its effect of maintenance warranties, USDA 
notes that the procurement agent would not be required to buy such a 
product. As information is available on warranties, USDA will make such 
information available on the BioPreferred Web site.
    Additional Information. USDA is working with manufacturers and 
vendors to make all relevant product and manufacturer contact 
information available on the BioPreferred Web site before a procuring 
agency asks for it, in order to make the preferred program more 
efficient. Steps USDA has implemented, or will implement, include: 
Making direct contact with submitting companies through e-mail and 
phone conversations to encourage completion of product listing; 
coordinating outreach efforts with intermediate material producers to 
encourage participation of their customer base; conducting targeted 
outreach with industry and commodity groups to educate stakeholders on 
the importance of providing complete product information; participating 
in industry conferences and meetings to educate companies on program 
benefits and requirements; and communicating the potential for expanded 
markets beyond the Federal government, to include State and local 
governments, as well as the general public markets. Section V provides 
instructions to agencies on how to obtain this information on products 
within these items through the following Web site: http://www.biopreferred.gov.
    Comments. USDA invites comment on the proposed designation of these 
items, including the definition, proposed minimum biobased content, and 
any of the relevant analyses performed during the selection of these 
items. In addition, USDA invites comments and information in the 
following areas:
    1. One item, ``gear lubricants,'' may overlap with one of the 
products designated under EPA's Comprehensive Procurement Guideline for 
Products Containing Recovered Material. To help procuring agencies in 
making their purchasing decisions between biobased products within the 
proposed designated items that overlap with products containing 
recovered material, USDA is requesting product specific information on 
unique performance attributes, environmental and human health effects, 
disposal costs, and other attributes that would distinguish biobased 
products from products containing recovered material as well as non-
biobased products.
    2. We have attempted to identify relevant and appropriate 
performance standards and other relevant measures of performance for 
each of the proposed items. If you know of other such standards or 
relevant measures of performance for any of the proposed items, USDA 
requests that you submit information identifying such standards and 
measures, including their name (and other identifying information as 
necessary), identifying who is using the standard/measure, and 
describing the circumstances under which the product is being used.
    3. Many biobased products within the items being proposed for 
designation will have positive environmental and human health 
attributes. USDA is seeking comments on such attributes in order to 
provide additional information on the BioPreferred Web site. This 
information will then be available to Federal procuring agencies and 
will assist them in making ``best value'' purchase decisions. When 
possible, please provide appropriate documentation to support the

[[Page 63302]]

environmental and human health attributes you describe.
    4. Several items (i.e., ``corrosion preventatives,'' ``industrial 
cleaners,'' and ``multipurpose cleaners'') have wide ranges of tested 
biobased contents. For the reasons discussed later in this preamble, 
USDA is proposing minimum biobased content levels for these items that 
would allow a high percentage of the tested products to be eligible for 
preferred procurement. USDA welcomes comments on the appropriateness of 
the proposed minimum biobased contents for these items and whether 
there are potential subcategories within the items that should be 
considered.
    5. USDA considered combining the proposed items ``gear 
lubricants,'' ``chain and cable lubricants,'' and ``forming 
lubricants'' into a single designated item with multiple subcategories. 
The decision to propose the items separately was based largely on the 
differences in functional performance between the items. While the 
basic purpose of products within each of these items is to provide 
lubrication, the applications and the conditions under which they 
perform are very different. USDA requests comments from procuring 
agencies and manufacturers of products within these items specifically 
addressing the advantages and disadvantages of these items being 
designated separately versus combined into a single item with 
subcategories.
    All comments should be submitted as directed in the ADDRESSES 
section above.
    To assist you in developing your comments, the background 
information used in proposing these items for designation has been 
assembled in a technical support document, ``Technical Support for 
Proposed Rule--Round 5 Designated Items,'' which is available on the 
BioPreferred Web site. The technical support document can be located by 
clicking on the Proposed and Final Regulations link on the left side of 
the BioPreferred Web site's home page (http://www.biopreferred.gov). At 
the BioPreferred Web site, click on the Proposed and Final Regulations 
link on the left side of the page. At the next screen, click on the 
Supporting Documentation link under Round 5 Designated Items under the 
Proposed Regulations section. This will bring you to the link to the 
technical support document.

IV. Designation of Items, Minimum Biobased Contents, and Time Frame

A. Background

    In order to designate items (generic groupings of specific products 
such as crankcase oils or products that contain qualifying biobased 
fibers) for preferred procurement, section 9002 requires USDA to 
consider: (1) The availability of items and (2) the economic and 
technological feasibility of using the items, including the life-cycle 
costs of the items.
    In considering an item's availability, USDA uses several sources of 
information. USDA performs Internet searches, contacts trade 
associations (such as the Bio organization) and commodity groups, 
searches the Thomas Register (a database, used as a resource for 
finding companies and products manufactured in North America, 
containing over 173,000 entries), and contacts individual manufacturers 
and vendors to identify those manufacturers and vendors with biobased 
products within items being considered for designation. USDA uses the 
results of these same searches to determine if an item is generally 
available.
    In considering an item's economic and technological feasibility, 
USDA examines evidence pointing to the general commercial use of an 
item and its cost and performance characteristics. This information is 
obtained from the sources used to assess an item's availability. 
Commercial use, in turn, is evidenced by any manufacturer and vendor 
information on the availability, relative prices, and performance of 
their products as well as by evidence of an item being purchased by a 
procuring agency or other entity, where available. In sum, USDA 
considers an item economically and technologically feasible for 
purposes of designation if products within that item are being offered 
and used in the marketplace.
    In considering the life-cycle costs of items proposed for 
designation, USDA uses the BEES analytical tool to test individual 
products within each proposed item. The BEES analytical tool measures 
the environmental performance and the economic performance of a 
product.
    Environmental performance is measured in the BEES analytical tool 
using the internationally-standardized and science-based, life-cycle 
assessment approach specified in the International Organization for 
Standardization (ISO) 14000 standards. The BEES environmental 
performance analysis, which includes human health as one of its 
components, is a ``cradle-to-grave'' assessment of a product. In it, 
all stages in the life of a product are analyzed: Raw material 
production; manufacture; transportation; installation; use; and 
recycling and waste management. The time period over which 
environmental performance is measured begins with raw material 
production and ends with disposal (waste management). The BEES 
environmental performance analysis also addresses products made from 
biobased feedstocks.
    Economic performance in the BEES analysis is measured using the 
ASTM Standard E917, ``Standard Practice for Measuring Life-Cycle Costs 
of Buildings and Building Systems,'' which covers the costs of initial 
investment, replacement, operation, maintenance and repair, and 
disposal. The time frame for economic performance extends from the 
purchase of the product to final disposal. USDA then utilizes the BEES 
results of individual products within a designated item in its 
consideration of the life-cycle costs at the item level.
    The environmental performance results are reported as both an 
impact value and as an environmental performance score for 12 different 
environmental impact areas:
     Acidification,
     Criteria pollutants,
     Ecological toxicity,
     Eutrophication,
     Fossil fuel depletion,
     Global warming,
     Habitat alteration,
     Human health,
     Indoor air quality,
     Ozone depletion,
     Smog, and
     Water intake.
    For each environmental impact area, BEES estimates the impact a 
product has in an area using certain units to standardize impacts. For 
example, acidification is measured as ``millimoles of hydrogen 
equivalents,'' while eutrophication is measured as ``grams of nitrogen 
equivalents.'' Thus, for acidification, BEES estimates how many 
millimoles of hydrogen equivalents and how many grams of nitrogen 
equivalents a product generates as the result of its production and 
use. These values are referred to as ``impact values'' and are 
calculated on a per functional unit basis. For example, the impact 
value for eutrophication for a chain and cable lubricant product was 
estimated to be 105 grams of nitrogen equivalents for one gallon of 
product (the functional unit).
    The impact values for a product are then used to determine the 
environmental performance scores of a product within each of the 12 
environmental impact areas. The

[[Page 63303]]

environmental performance score is a measure of the share a product 
contributes towards the annual per capita U.S. environmental impact in 
one of the 12 environmental impact areas. For example, the global 
warming impact value of a chain and cable lubricant product was 
estimated to be 9,710 grams of carbon dioxide equivalents. The total 
amount of carbon dioxide equivalents emitted in the United States in 
one year is divided by the U.S. population to yield a ``global warming 
per person'' value. The product's global warming impact value is then 
divided by the ``global warming per person'' value to derive the 
product's share of global warming. Specifically, for this example, the 
global warming environmental performance score is estimated to be 
0.0061. That is, every one gallon of this chain and cable lubricant is 
estimated to contribute 0.0061 percent to the global warming per person 
value.
    For both the impact values and the environmental performance 
scores, the BEES analysis uses a single unit of comparison associated 
with each designated item. The basis for the unit of comparison is the 
``functional unit,'' defined so that the products compared within an 
item are true substitutes for one another. If significant differences 
have been identified in the useful lives of alternative products within 
a designated item (e.g., if one product lasts twice as long as 
another), the functional unit includes reference to a time dimension to 
account for the frequency of product replacement. The functional unit 
also accounts for products used in different amounts for equivalent 
service. For example, one surface coating product may be 
environmentally and economically preferable to another on a pound-for-
pound basis, but may require twice the mass to cover one square foot of 
surface, and last half as long, as the other product. To account for 
these performance differences, the functional unit for the surface 
coating item could be ``one square foot of application for 20 years'' 
instead of ``one pound of surface coating product.'' The functional 
unit provides the critical reference point to which all BEES results 
for products within an item are scaled. Because functional units vary 
from item to item, performance comparisons are valid only among 
products within a designated item.
    The complete results of the BEES analysis, extrapolated to the item 
level, for each item proposed for designation in today's proposed rule 
can be found in the technical support document for this proposed rule.
    As discussed above, the BEES analysis includes information on the 
environmental performance, human health impacts, and economic 
performance. In addition, ASTM Standard D7075, which manufacturers may 
use in lieu of the BEES analytical tool, provides similar information. 
USDA is working with manufacturers and vendors to make this information 
available on the BioPreferred Web site in order to make the preferred 
procurement program more efficient.
    As discussed earlier, USDA has also implemented, or will implement, 
several other steps intended to educate the manufacturers and other 
stakeholders on the benefits of this program and the need to make this 
information, including manufacturer contact information, available on 
the BioPreferred Web site in order to then make it available to 
procurement officials. Additional information on specific products 
within the items proposed for designation may also be obtained directly 
from the manufacturers of the products. USDA has also provided a link 
on the BioPreferred Web site to the Defense Standardization Program and 
to General Services Administration (GSA)-related standards lists used 
as guidance when procuring products. These lists can be accessed 
through the ``Selling to the Federal Government'' link on the 
BioPreferred Web site.
    USDA recognizes that information related to the functional 
performance of biobased products is a primary factor in making the 
decision to purchase these products. USDA is gathering information on 
industry standard test methods and performance standards that 
manufacturers are using to evaluate the functional performance of their 
products. (Test methods are procedures used to provide information on a 
certain attribute of a product. For example, a test method might 
determine how many bacteria are killed. Performance standards identify 
the level at which a product must perform in order for it to be 
``acceptable'' to the entity that set the performance standard. For 
example, a performance standard might require that a certain percentage 
(e.g., 95 percent) of the bacteria must be killed through the use of 
the product.) The primary source of information on these test methods 
and performance standards are manufacturers of biobased products within 
these items. Additional test methods and performance standards are also 
identified during meetings of the Interagency council and during the 
review process for each proposed rule. We have listed, under the 
detailed discussion of each item proposed for designation (presented in 
Section IV.B), the functional performance test methods, performance 
standards, product certifications, and other measures of performance 
associated with the functional aspects of products identified during 
the development of this Federal Register notice for these items.
    While this process identifies many of the relevant test methods and 
standards, USDA recognizes that those identified herein do not 
represent all of the methods and standards that may be applicable for a 
designated item or for any individual product within the designated 
item. As noted earlier in this preamble, USDA is requesting 
identification of any other relevant performance standards and measures 
of performance. As the program becomes fully implemented, these and 
other additional relevant performance standards will be available on 
the BioPreferred Web site.
    In gathering information relevant to the analyses discussed above 
for this proposed rule, USDA has made extensive efforts to contact and 
request information and product samples within the items proposed for 
designation. For product information, USDA has attempted to contact 
representatives of the manufacturers of biobased products identified by 
the preferred procurement program. For product samples on which to 
conduct biobased content tests and BEES analysis, USDA has attempted to 
obtain samples and BEES input information for at least five different 
suppliers of products within each item in today's proposed rule. 
However, because the submission of information and samples is on a 
strictly voluntary basis, USDA was able to obtain information and 
samples only from those manufacturers who were willing voluntarily to 
invest the resources required to gather and submit the information and 
samples. The data presented are all the data that were submitted in 
response to USDA requests for information from manufacturers of the 
products within the items proposed for designation. While USDA would 
prefer to have complete data on the full range of products within each 
item, the data that were submitted are sufficient to support 
designation of the items in today's proposed rule.
    To propose an item for designation, USDA must have sufficient 
information on a sufficient number of products within an item to be 
able to assess its availability and its economic and technological 
feasibility, including its life-cycle costs. For some items, there may 
be numerous products available. For other items, there may be very few

[[Page 63304]]

products currently available. Given the infancy of the market for some 
items, it is not unexpected that even single-product items will be 
identified. Further, given that the intent of section 9002 is largely 
to stimulate the production of new biobased products and to energize 
emerging markets for those products, USDA has determined it is 
appropriate to designate an item or subcategory for preferred 
procurement even when there is only a single product with a single 
supplier. However, USDA has also determined that in such situations it 
is appropriate to defer the effective preferred procurement date until 
such time that more than one supplier is identified in order to provide 
choice to procuring agencies. Similarly, the documented availability, 
benefits, and life-cycle costs of even a very small percentage of all 
products that may exist within an item are also considered sufficient 
to support designation.

B. Items Proposed for Designation

    USDA uses a model (as summarized below) to identify and prioritize 
items for designation. Through this model, USDA has identified over 100 
items for potential designation under the preferred procurement 
program. A list of these items and information on the model can be 
accessed on the BioPreferred Web site at http://www.biopreferred.gov.
    In general, items are developed and prioritized for designation by 
evaluating them against program criteria established by USDA and by 
gathering information from other government agencies, private industry 
groups, and manufacturers. These evaluations begin by look at the cost, 
performance, and availability of products within each item. USDA then 
considers the following points:
     Are there manufacturers interested in providing the 
necessary test information on products within a particular item?
     Are there a number of manufacturers producing biobased 
products in this item?
     Are there products available in this item?
     What level of difficulty is expected when designating this 
item?
     Is there Federal demand for the product?
     Are Federal procurement personnel looking for biobased 
products?
     Will an item create a high demand for biobased feed stock?
     Does manufacturing of products within this item increase 
potential for rural development?
    After completing this evaluation, USDA prioritizes the list of 
items for designation. USDA then gathers information on products within 
the highest priority items and, as sufficient information becomes 
available for groups of approximately 10 items, a new rulemaking 
package is developed to designate the items within that group. USDA 
points out that the list of items may change, with items being added or 
dropped, and that the order in which items are proposed for designation 
is likely to change because the information necessary to designate an 
item may take more time to obtain than an item lower on the list.
    In today's proposed rule, USDA is proposing to designate the 
following items for the preferred procurement program: Chain and cable 
lubricants; corrosion preventatives; food cleaners; forming lubricants; 
gear lubricants; general purpose household cleaners; industrial 
cleaners; multipurpose cleaners; and parts wash solutions. USDA has 
determined that each of these proposed items meets the necessary 
statutory requirements--namely, that they are being produced with 
biobased products and that their procurement by procuring agencies will 
carry out the following objectives of section 9002:
     To increase demand for biobased products, which would in 
turn increase demand for agricultural commodities that can serve as 
feedstocks for the production of biobased products;
     To spur development of the industrial base through value-
added agricultural processing and manufacturing in rural communities; 
and
     To enhance the Nation's energy security by substituting 
biobased products for products derived from imported oil and natural 
gas.
    Further, USDA has sufficient information on the items to determine 
their availability and to conduct the requisite analyses to determine 
their biobased content and their economic and technological 
feasibility, including life-cycle costs.
    Overlap with EPA's Comprehensive Procurement Guideline program for 
recovered content products. In today's proposed rule, one item may 
overlap with the EPA-designated recovered content product ``Re-refined 
Lubricating Oils.'' This item is ``gear lubricants.'' For this item, 
USDA is requesting that information on the qualifying biobased ``gear 
lubricants'' be made available by their manufacturers to assist Federal 
agencies in determining if an overlap exists between ``gear 
lubricants'' and ``Re-refined Lubricating Oils'' (the applicable EPA-
designated recovered content product).
    As noted earlier in this preamble, USDA is requesting information 
on overlap situations to further help procuring agencies make informed 
decisions when faced with purchasing a recovered content material 
product or a biobased product. As this information is developed, USDA 
will make it available on the BioPreferred Web site.
    Exemptions. As explained in the May 14, 2008 Federal Register 
notice (73 FR 27928) promulgating the Round 2 designated items, the 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Department 
of Defense (DoD) are exempt from the procurement preference 
requirements that would be afforded to the items contained in today's 
proposed rule with respect to products used in space applications and 
combat and combat-related applications, respectively. In other words, 
they would apply to operations underlying NASA's and DoD's mission, 
such as janitorial services contracts, but not to uses on the space 
shuttle and military equipment. These ``blanket'' exemptions are 
contained in subpart A of part 2902. Therefore, today's proposed rule 
would not apply to NASA and DoD, as provided in subpart A of part 2902.
    Although each item in today's proposed rule would be exempt from 
the procurement preference requirement, this exemption does not extend 
to contractors performing work for NASA or DoD other than direct 
maintenance and support of the space shuttle and combat equipment. For 
example, if a contractor is producing a part for use on the space 
shuttle, the metalworking fluid the contractor uses to produce the part 
should be biobased (provided it meets the specifications for 
metalworking). The exemption does apply, however, if the product being 
purchased by the contractor is for use in combat or combat-related 
missions or for use in space applications. For example, if the part 
being produced by the contractor would actually be part of the space 
shuttle, then the exemption applies.
    USDA points out that it is not the intent of these exemptions to 
imply that biobased products are inferior to non-biobased products. If 
manufacturers of biobased products can meet the concerns of these two 
agencies, USDA is willing to reconsider such exemptions on an item-by-
item basis.
    Each of the proposed designated items are discussed in the 
following sections.
1. Chain and Cable Lubricants
    Chain and cable lubricants are products designed to provide 
lubrication for such applications as bar and roller chains, sprockets, 
and wire

[[Page 63305]]

ropes and cables. The products may also be designed to prevent rust and 
corrosion in these applications.
    USDA identified 20 different manufacturers producing 37 individual 
biobased chain and cable lubricant products. These 20 manufacturers do 
not necessarily include all manufacturers of biobased chain and cable 
lubricants, merely those identified during USDA information gathering 
activities. Information supplied by these manufacturers indicates that 
these products are being used commercially. In addition, manufacturers 
and stakeholders identified two test methods (as shown below) used in 
evaluating products within this item. While there may be additional 
test methods, as well as performance standards, product certifications, 
and other measures of performance, applicable to products within this 
item, the two test methods identified by manufacturers of products 
within this item are:
Test Methods
     Shake Flask Test (CG-2000) used by the lubricant industry 
to evaluate biodegradability (Environmental Protection Agency 
560/6-82-003); and
     Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and 
Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms (Environmental 
Protection Agency 600/4-90-027).
    USDA contacted procurement officials with various procuring 
agencies including the GSA, several offices within the Defense 
Logistics Agency, the OFEE, USDA Departmental Administration, the 
National Park Service, EPA, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and OMB in 
an effort to gather information on the purchases of chain and cable 
lubricants and products within the other eight items proposed for 
designation today. Communications with these officials led to the 
conclusion that obtaining credible current usage statistics and 
specific potential markets within the Federal government for biobased 
products within the proposed designated items is not possible at this 
time.
    Most of the contacted officials reported that procurement data are 
reported in higher level groupings of materials and supplies than the 
proposed designated items. Using terms that best match the items in 
today's proposed rule, USDA queried the GSA database for Federal 
purchases of products within today's proposed items. The results 
indicate purchases of products within items in today's proposed rule. 
The results of this inquiry can be found in the technical support 
document for this proposed rule. Also, the purchasing of such materials 
as part of contracted services and with individual purchase cards used 
to purchase products locally further obscures credible data on 
purchases of specific products.
    USDA also investigated the Web site FEDBIZOPPS.gov, a site which 
lists Federal contract purchase opportunities greater than $25,000. The 
information provided on this Web site, however, is for broad categories 
of products rather than the specific types of products that are 
included in today's proposed rule. Therefore, USDA has been unable to 
obtain data on the amount of chain and cable lubricants purchased by 
procuring agencies. However, Federal agencies perform, or procure 
contract services to perform, activities, such as maintenance, clean-
up, and tree removal, in which chain and cable lubricants are used. For 
example, although quantities were not obtained, the National Park 
Service is known to be using biobased chain and cable lubricants at 
some of its parks. Thus, there is a need for chain and cable 
lubricants. Designation of ``chain and cable lubricants'' will promote 
the use of biobased products, furthering the objectives of this 
program.
    An analysis of the environmental and human health benefits and the 
life-cycle costs of biobased chain and cable lubricants was performed 
for three of the products using the BEES analytical tool. The impact 
values for these three lubricants are presented in Table 1a. The 
environmental performance scores are presented in Table 1b and in 
Figure 1.

                             Table 1a--Impact Values for Chain and Cable Lubricants
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Environmental impact area                  Units                Sample A        Sample B        Sample C
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acidification......................  millimoles of hydrogen ion            7,210           6,470           5,130
                                      equivalents.
Criteria Air Pollutants............  micro Disability-Adjusted             0.532           0.467           0.840
                                      Life Years.
Ecological Toxicity................  grams of 2,4-dichloro-                 77.1            69.7           1,950
                                      phenoxy-acetic acid.
Eutrophication.....................  grams of nitrogen                       105            94.6             246
                                      equivalent.
Fossil Fuel Depletion..............  megajoules of surplus                  43.6            39.9            83.6
                                      energy.
Global Warming.....................  grams of carbon dioxide               9,710           8,660          29,500
                                      equivalents.
Habitat Alteration.................  threatened and endangered                 0               0               0
                                      species count.
Human Health.......................  grams of toluene equivalent          61,500          54,800         316,000
Indoor Air.........................  grams of total volatile                   0               0               0
                                      organic compounds.
Ozone Depletion....................  grams of chloroflouro-             1.15E-07        9.69E-08        1.30E-04
                                      carbon-11 equivalents.
Smog...............................  grams of nitrogen oxide                 124             112            95.9
                                      equivalents.
Water Intake.......................  liters of water............           1,430           1,290           6,530
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Functional Unit...............................................1 gallon.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                    Table 1b--Environmental Performance Scores for Chain and Cable Lubricants
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Environmental impact area                        Sample A        Sample B        Sample C
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Environmental Performance Score \1\.......................          0.0674          0.0606          0.4202
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Acidification (5%)..........................................          0.0000          0.0000          0.0000
    Criteria Air Pollutants (6%)................................          0.0002          0.0001          0.0003
    Ecological Toxicity (11%)...................................          0.0104          0.0094          0.2630
    Eutrophication (5%).........................................          0.0272          0.0246          0.0640
    Fossil Fuel Depletion (5%)..................................          0.0062          0.0056          0.0118
    Global Warming (16%)........................................          0.0061          0.0054          0.0184
    Habitat Alteration (16%)....................................          0.0000          0.0000          0.0000
    Human Health (11%)..........................................          0.0043          0.0038          0.0219

[[Page 63306]]

 
    Indoor Air (11%)............................................          0.0000          0.0000          0.0000
    Ozone Depletion (5%)........................................          0.0000          0.0000          0.0000
    Smog (6%)...................................................          0.0049          0.0044          0.0038
    Water Intake (3%)...........................................          0.0081          0.0073          0.0370
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Economic Performance (Life-cycle Costs ($)) \2\.................         10.17           13.78           20.20
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    First Cost..................................................         10.17           13.78           20.20
    Future Cost (3.9%)..........................................      (\3\)           (\3\)           (\3\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Functional Unit.................................................                     1 gallon.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Numbers in parentheses indicate weighting factor.
\2\ Costs are per functional unit.
\3\ For this item, no significant/quantifiable performance or durability differences were identified among
  competing alternative products. Therefore, future costs were not calculated.

  [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP23OC08.000
  
    As seen in Table 1b, for the analyzed chain and cable lubricants, 
the total environmental performance score ranges from 0.0606 to 0.4202 
points per gallon of product and the life-cycle costs range from $10.17 
to $20.20 (present value dollars) per gallon of product.
    When evaluating the environmental performance scores presented in 
Table 1b, as well as in the subsequent tables presented in this 
preamble, it should be noted that comparisons of the environmental 
performance scores are valid only among products within a designated 
item. Thus, comparisons of the scores presented in Table 1b and the 
scores presented in tables for other proposed designated items are not 
meaningful. On the other hand, one can compare the impact values 
reported in Table 1a with those in the other, corresponding impact 
value tables. But such a comparison would only be useful if the 
compared products would be used as substitutes for each other.
    The numbers in parentheses following each of the 12 environmental 
impacts listed in the tables presenting the environmental performance 
scores in this preamble indicate weighting factors. The weighting 
factors represent the relative importance of the 12 environmental 
parameters, including human health impacts, which contribute to the 
BEES environmental performance score. They are derived from lists of 
the relative importance of these parameters developed by the EPA

[[Page 63307]]

Science Advisory Board for the purpose of advising EPA as to how best 
to allocate its limited resources among environmental impact areas. 
Note that a lower environmental performance score is better than a 
higher score.
    Life-cycle costs presented in the tables in this preamble are per 
the appropriate functional unit for the proposed designated item. 
Future costs are discounted to present value using the OMB discount 
rate of 3.9 percent.
    Present value dollars presented in this preamble represent the sum 
of all costs associated with a product over a fixed period of time, 
including any applicable costs for purchase, installation, replacement, 
operation, maintenance and repair, and disposal. Present value dollars 
presented in this preamble reflect 2006 dollars. Dollars are expressed 
in present value terms to adjust for the effects of inflation. The 
complete results of the BEES analysis, extrapolated to the item level, 
for each item proposed for designation in today's proposed rule can be 
found at http://www.biopreferred.gov.
2. Corrosion Preventatives
    Corrosion preventatives are products used to prevent the 
deterioration (corrosion) of metals.
    USDA identified 15 different manufacturers producing 97 individual 
biobased corrosion preventatives products. These 15 manufacturers do 
not necessarily include all manufacturers of biobased corrosion 
preventatives, merely those identified during USDA information 
gathering activities. Information supplied by these manufacturers 
indicates that these products are being used commercially. In addition, 
manufacturers and stakeholders identified several test methods and one 
performance standard used in evaluating products within this item. 
While there may be additional test methods, as well as performance 
standards, product certifications, and other measures of performance, 
applicable to products within this item, the test methods and 
performance standard identified by manufacturers of products within 
this item, are:
Test Methods
     ASTM D1735, ``Standard Practice for Testing Water 
Resistance of Coatings Using Water Fog Apparatus;''
     ASTM D1748, ``Standard Test Method for Rust Protection by 
Metal Preservatives in the Humidity Cabinet;''
     ASTM D445, ``Standard Test Method for Kinematic Viscosity 
of Transparent and Opaque Liquids (and the Calculation of Dynamic 
Viscosity);''
     ASTM D92, ``Standard Test Method for Flash and Fire Points 
by Cleveland Open Cup Tester;'' and
     ASTM D97, ``Standard Test Method for Pour Point of 
Petroleum Products.''
Performance Standards
     National Association of Corrosion Engineers 
TM0374-2001, Laboratory Screening Tests to Determine the 
Ability of Scale Inhibitors to Prevent the Precipitation of Calcium 
Sulfate and Calcium Carbonate from Solution (for Oil and Gas Production 
Systems).
    USDA attempted to gather data on the potential market for biobased 
products within the Federal government using the procedure described in 
the section on ``Chain and Cable Lubricants''. These attempts were 
largely unsuccessful. However, various Federal agencies procure 
corrosion preventatives, or procure contract services such as 
maintenance services, that use corrosion preventatives. Thus, they have 
a need for corrosion preventatives. Designation of ``corrosive 
preventatives'' will promote the use of biobased products, furthering 
the objectives of this program.
    An analysis of the environmental and human health benefits and the 
life-cycle costs of corrosion preventatives was performed for two of 
the products using the BEES analytical tool. The impact values for 
these two corrosion preventatives are presented in Table 2a. The 
environmental performance scores are presented in Table 2b and in 
Figure 2.

                               Table 2a--Impact Values for Corrosion Preventatives
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Environmental impact area                          Units                    Sample A        Sample B
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acidification..............................  millimoles of hydrogen ion                   13,300          26,000
                                              equivalents.
Criteria Air Pollutants....................  micro Disability-Adjusted Life                 1.79            2.18
                                              Years.
Ecological Toxicity........................  grams of 2,4-dichloro-phenoxy-                  141             291
                                              acetic acid.
Eutrophication.............................  grams of nitrogen equivalent.......             120             360
Fossil Fuel Depletion......................  megajoules of surplus energy.......             652             301
Global Warming.............................  grams of carbon dioxide equivalents          19,900          37,500
Habitat Alteration.........................  threatened and endangered species                 0               0
                                              count.
Human Health...............................  grams of toluene equivalent........         559,000        2.36E+07
Indoor Air.................................  grams of total volatile organic                   0               0
                                              compounds.
Ozone Depletion............................  grams of chloroflouro-carbon-11            1.98E-06        1.88E-05
                                              equivalents.
Smog.......................................  grams of nitrogen oxide equivalents             245             454
Water Intake...............................  liters of water....................           1,570           4,870
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Functional Unit............................                               5 gallons.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


 Table 2b--Environmental Performance Scores for Corrosion Preventatives
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Environmental impact area            Sample A        Sample B
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Environmental Performance Score             0.2129          0.2684
 \1\....................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Acidification (5%)..................          0               0
    Criteria Air Pollutants (6%)........          0.0006          0.0007
    Ecological Toxicity (11%)...........          0.0190          0.0389
    Eutrophication (5%).................          0.0312          0.0937
    Fossil Fuel Depletion (5%)..........          0.0924          0.0431
    Global Warming (16%)................          0.0124          0.0236
    Habitat Alteration (16%)............          0               0
    Human Health (11%)..................          0.0387          0.0228
    Indoor Air (11%)....................          0               0

[[Page 63308]]

 
    Ozone Depletion (5%)................          0               0
    Smog (6%)...........................          0.0097          0.0180
    Water Intake (3%)...................          0.0089          0.0276
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Economic Performance (Life-cycle Costs          114.75           77.09
 ($)) \2\...............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    First Cost..........................        114.75           77.09
                                         -------------------------------
    Future Cost (3.9%)..................               (\3\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Functional Unit.........................            5 gallons.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Numbers in parentheses indicate weighting factor.
\2\ Costs are per functional unit.
\3\ For this item, no significant/quantifiable performance or durability
  differences were identified among competing alternative products.
  Therefore, future costs were not calculated.

  [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP23OC08.001
  
    As seen in Table 2b, the total environmental performance scores for 
the two corrosion preventatives analyzed are 0.2194 and 0.2684 per five 
gallons of product and the respective life-cycle costs are $114.75 and 
$77.09 (present value dollars) per five gallons of product.
3. Food Cleaners
    Food cleaners are anti-microbial products used to clean the outer 
layer of various food products, such as fruits, vegetables, and meats.
    USDA identified 11 different manufacturers producing 15 individual 
biobased food cleaner products. These 11 manufacturers do not 
necessarily include all manufacturers of biobased food cleaners, merely 
those identified during USDA information gathering activities. 
Information supplied by these manufacturers indicates that these 
products are being used commercially. In addition, manufacturers and 
stakeholders identified several test methods, one performance standard, 
and one other measure of performance used in evaluating products within 
this item. While there may be additional test methods, as well as 
performance standards, product certifications, and other measures of 
performance applicable to products within this item, those identified 
by manufacturers of products within this item are:

[[Page 63309]]

Test Methods
     Federal Test Method Standard 536A, Soap and soap 
products (including synthetic detergents) sampling and testing.
Performance Standards
     Boeing D6-7127, Cleaning Interiors of Commercial 
Transport Aircraft; and
     South Coast Air Quality Management District, certification 
as a Clean Air Solvent.
Product Certifications and Other Measures
     U.S. Navy Navsea 6840--U.S. Navy surface ship 
(non-submarine) authorized chemical cleaning products and dispensing 
systems.
    USDA attempted to gather data on the potential market for biobased 
products within the Federal government using the procedure described in 
the section on ``Chain and Cable Lubricants.'' These attempts were 
largely unsuccessful. However, Federal agencies procure such products 
or contract for food preparation services that use such products. Thus, 
there is a need for food cleaners. Designation of biobased ``food 
cleaners'' will promote the use of biobased products, furthering the 
objectives of this program.
    An analysis of the environmental and human health benefits and the 
life-cycle costs of biobased food cleaners was performed for one of the 
products using the BEES analytical tool. The impact values for this 
food cleaner are presented in Table 3a. The environmental performance 
scores are presented in Table 3b and in Figure 3.

                Table 3a--Impact Values for Food Cleaners
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Environmental impact area              Units              Sample A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acidification..................  millimoles of hydrogen             81.8
                                  ion equivalents.
Criteria Air Pollutants........  micro Disability-                0.0216
                                  Adjusted Life Years.
Ecological Toxicity............  grams of 2,4-dichloro-            0.774
                                  phenoxy-acetic acid.
Eutrophication.................  grams of nitrogen                 0.104
                                  equivalent.
Fossil Fuel Depletion..........  megajoules of surplus              2.43
                                  energy.
Global Warming.................  grams of carbon dioxide             148
                                  equivalents.
Habitat Alteration.............  threatened and                        0
                                  endangered species
                                  count.
Human Health...................  grams of toluene                  2,110
                                  equivalent.
Indoor Air.....................  grams of total volatile               0
                                  organic compounds.
Ozone Depletion................  grams of chloroflouro-         7.98E-08
                                  carbon-11 equivalents.
Smog...........................  grams of nitrogen oxide            1.09
                                  equivalents.
Water Intake...................  liters of water........            4.39
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Functional Unit................  .......................     1 gallon.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


      Table 3b--Environmental Performance Scores for Food Cleaners
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Environmental impact area                    Sample A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Environmental Performance Score \1\...............          0.0006
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Acidification (5%)..................................          0.0000
    Criteria Air Pollutants (6%)........................          0.0000
    Ecological Toxicity (11%)...........................          0.0001
    Eutrophication (5%).................................          0.0000
    Fossil Fuel Depletion (5%)..........................          0.0003
    Global Warming (16%)................................          0.0001
    Habitat Alteration (16%)............................          0.0000
    Human Health (11%)..................................          0.0001
    Indoor Air (11%)....................................          0.0000
    Ozone Depletion (5%)................................          0.0000
    Smog (6%)...........................................          0.0000
    Water Intake (3%)...................................          0.0000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Economic Performance (Life-cycle Costs ($)) \2\.........          4.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    First Cost..........................................          4.00
    Future Cost (3.9%)..................................      (\3\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Functional Unit.........................................  Gallon of food
                                                             cleaner.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Numbers in parentheses indicate weighting factor.
\2\ Costs are per functional unit.
\3\ For this item, no significant/quantifiable performance or durability
  differences were identified among competing alternative products.
  Therefore, future costs were not calculated.


[[Page 63310]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP23OC08.002

    As seen in Table 3b, the total environmental performance score and 
the life-cycle costs of the food cleaner analyzed are, respectively, 
0.0006 points per gallon of product and $4.00 (present value dollars) 
per gallon of product.
4. Forming Lubricants
    Forming lubricants are products designed to provide lubricity 
during metalworking applications that are performed under extreme 
pressure conditions. Such applications include tube bending, stretch 
forming, press braking, and swaging.
    USDA identified three different manufacturers producing 13 
individual biobased forming lubricant products. These three 
manufacturers do not necessarily include all manufacturers of biobased 
forming lubricants, merely those identified during USDA information 
gathering activities. Information supplied by these manufacturers 
indicates that these products are being used commercially. In addition, 
manufacturers and stakeholders identified two test methods (as shown 
below) used in evaluating products within this item. While there may be 
additional test methods, as well as performance standards, product 
certifications, and other measures of performance applicable to 
products within this item, those identified by manufacturers of 
products within this item are:
Test Methods
     Boeing BAC 5001-4 Flareless Tube End Fabrication; 
and
     Testing of chemical substances under the Toxic Substances 
Control Act (EPA 560/6-82-003).
    USDA attempted to gather data on the potential market for biobased 
products within the Federal government using the procedure described in 
the section on ``Chain and Cable Lubricants.'' These attempts were 
largely unsuccessful. However, Federal agencies own and operate 
metalworking machinery that operates under extreme pressure. In 
addition, Federal agencies contract for services involving the use of 
similar equipment. Thus, there is a need for forming lubricants. 
Designation of ``forming lubricants'' will promote the use of biobased 
products, furthering the objectives of this program.
    An analysis of the environmental and human health benefits and the 
life-cycle costs of forming lubricants was performed for one of the 
products using the BEES analytical tool. The impact values for this 
forming lubricant are presented in Table 4a. The environmental 
performance scores are presented in Table 4b and in Figure 4.

             Table 4a--Impact Values for Forming Lubricants
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Environmental impact area              Units              Sample A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acidification..................  millimoles of hydrogen            1,320
                                  ion equivalents.
Criteria Air Pollutants........  micro Disability-                 0.267
                                  Adjusted Life Years.
Ecological Toxicity............  grams of 2,4-dichloro-             32.7
                                  phenoxyacetic acid.
Eutrophication.................  grams of nitrogen                  11.3
                                  equivalent.
Fossil Fuel Depletion..........  megajoules of surplus              76.0
                                  energy.

[[Page 63311]]

 
Global Warming.................  grams of carbon dioxide           4,450
                                  equivalents.
Habitat Alteration.............  threatened and                        0
                                  endangered species
                                  count.
Human Health...................  grams of toluene                 60,000
                                  equivalent.
Indoor Air.....................  grams of total volatile               0
                                  organic compounds.
Ozone Depletion................  grams of chloroflouro-         2.59E-05
                                  carbon-11 equivalents.
Smog...........................  grams of nitrogen oxide            25.6
                                  equivalents.
Water Intake...................  liters of water........             164
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Functional Unit.........................................     1 gallon.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Table 4b--Environmental Performance Scores for Forming Lubricants
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Environmental impact area                    Sample A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Environmental Performance Score \1\...............          0.0271
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Acidification (5%)..................................          0.0000
    Criteria Air Pollutants (6%)........................          0.0001
    Ecological Toxicity (11%)...........................          0.0044
    Eutrophication (5%).................................          0.0029
    Fossil Fuel Depletion (5%)..........................          0.0108
    Global Warming (16%)................................          0.0028
    Habitat Alteration (16%)............................          0.0000
    Human Health (11%)..................................          0.0042
    Indoor Air (11%)....................................          0.0000
    Ozone Depletion (5%)................................          0.0000
    Smog (6%)...........................................          0.0010
    Water Intake (3%)...................................          0.0009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Economic Performance (Life-cycle Costs ($)) \2\.........         18.50
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    First Cost..........................................         18.50
    Future Cost (3.9%)..................................      (\3\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Functional Unit.........................................      (\4\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Numbers in parentheses indicate weighting factor.
\2\ Costs are per functional unit.
\3\ For this item, no significant/quantifiable performance or durability
  differences were identified among competing alternative products.
  Therefore, future costs were not calculated.
\4\ One gallon of forming lubricant.

    As seen in Table 4b, the total environmental performance score and 
the life-cycle cost of the submitted forming lubricant are, 
respectively, 0.0271 points per gallon of product and $18.50 (present 
value dollars) per gallon of product.

[[Page 63312]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP23OC08.003

5. Gear Lubricants
    Gear lubricants are substances, such as greases and oils, which 
reduce friction when applied to a toothed machine part (such as a wheel 
or cylinder) that meshes with another toothed part to transmit motion 
or to change speed or direction. Unlike penetrating lubricants, which 
would be applied to frozen gears to loosen them, gear lubricants are 
designed to be applied to functional gears to reduce friction while in 
operation.
    Qualifying products within this item may overlap with the EPA-
designated recovered content product: ``Re-refined Lubricating Oils''.
    USDA identified nine different manufacturers producing 24 
individual biobased gear lubricant products. These nine manufacturers 
do not necessarily include all manufacturers of biobased gear 
lubricants, merely those identified during USDA information gathering 
activities. Information supplied by these manufacturers indicates that 
these products are being used commercially. In addition, manufacturers 
and stakeholders identified test methods, performance standards, and 
other measures of performance used in evaluating the performance of 
products within this item. While there may be additional test methods, 
as well as performance standards, product certifications, and other 
measures of performance applicable to products within this item, those 
identified by manufacturers of products within this item are:
Test Methods
     ASTM D1404/D1404M, ``Standard Test Method for Estimation 
of Deleterious Particles for Lubricating Grease;''
     ASTM D2270, ``Standard Practice for Calculating Viscosity 
Index from Kinematic Viscosity at 40 and 100 [deg]C;''
     ASTM D2619, ``Standard Test Method for Hydrolytic 
Stability of Hydraulic Fluids (Beverage Bottle Method);''
     ASTM D2711, ``Standard Test Method for Demulsibility 
Characteristics of Lubricating Oils;''
     ASTM D445, ``Standard Test Method for Kinematic Viscosity 
of Transparent and Opaque Liquids (and the Calculation of Dynamic 
Viscosity);''
     ASTM D5864, ``Standard Test Method for Determining Aerobic 
Aquatic Biodegradation of Lubricants or Their Components;''
     ASTM D665, ``Standard Test Method for Rust-Preventing 
Characteristics of Inhibited Mineral Oil in the Presence of Water;''
     ASTM D892, ``Standard Test Method for Foaming 
Characteristics of Lubricating Oils;''
     ASTM D92, ``Standard Test Method for Flash and Fire Points 
by Cleveland Open Cup Tester;''
     ASTM D97, ``Standard Test Method for Pour Point of 
Petroleum Products;''
     ASTM D974, ``Standard Test Method for Acid and Base Number 
by Color-Indicator Titration;''
     ASTM D2266, ``Standard Test Method for Wear Preventive 
Characteristics of Lubricating Grease (Four-Ball Method);''
     Testing of chemical substances under the Toxic Substances 
Control Act (EPA 560/6-82-003);
     International Organization for Standardization 
ISO 150--Specifies the requirements and the corresponding 
methods of test for raw, refined, and boiled linseed oils for paints 
and varnishes;
     DIN 51517--Lubricants--Lubricating oils--Part 1: 
Lubricating oils C Requirements;
     FGZ (DIN51354), Gear wheel twisting/tension testing 
machine for lubricants;
     ISO 46--oil viscosity grade;
     SAE 30--viscosity grade;

[[Page 63313]]

     SAE GearGrade 80W90--viscosity grade; and
     ISO 90--oil viscosity grade.
Performance Standards
     American Petroleum Institute API GL-3--Lubricant 
with light EP effect for transmissions and non-hypoid gear drives;
     American Petroleum Institute API GL-4--Generally 
equivalent to military specification MIL-L-2105 for manual 
transmissions and spiral bevel gears engaged in moderate service (API 
GL-4 rates a gears lubricant's performance);
     AGMA 2-8A, R&O and EP gear lubes grades;
     ANSI/AGMA 9005-E02, Industrial Gear Lubricant; and
     DB s1.53.101, Meets or exceeds requirements of David Brown 
performance requirement.
Product Certifications and Other Measures
     American Petroleum Institute API GL-1--Designates 
the type of service characteristics of automotive spiral-bevel and worm 
gear axles as well as some manually-operated transmissions operating 
under such mild conditions of low unit pressures and sliding velocities 
that straight mineral oil can be used satisfactorily; and
     American Petroleum Institute API GL-2--Designates 
the type of service characteristics of automotive type worm gear axles 
operating under such conditions of load, temperature, and sliding 
velocities that lubricants satisfactory for API GL-1 service will not 
suffice (obsolete).
    USDA attempted to gather data on the potential market for biobased 
products within the Federal government using the procedure described in 
the section on ``Chain and Cable Lubricants.'' These attempts were 
largely unsuccessful. However, many Federal agencies own or operate 
machinery, or procure contract services that require the use of 
machinery, that require gear lubricants. When EPA researched its 
designation of re-refined lubricating oils, including gear oil, the 
Defense Logistic Agency informed EPA that it had specifications for, 
and sold, gear oils. Thus, there is a need for gear lubricants. 
Designation of biobased ``gear lubricants'' will promote the use of 
biobased products, furthering the objectives of this program.
    An analysis of the environmental and human health benefits and the 
life-cycle costs of biobased gear lubricants was performed for two of 
the products using the BEES analytical tool. The impact values for 
these two gear lubricants are presented in Table 5a. The environmental 
performance scores are presented in Table 5b and in Figure 5.

                                   Table 5a--Impact Values for Gear Lubricants
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Environmental  impact area                         Units                    Sample A        Sample B
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acidification..............................  millimoles of hydrogen ion                   25,000          10,200
                                              equivalents.
Criteria Air Pollutants....................  micro Disability-Adjusted Life                 2.79            2.96
                                              Years.
Ecological Toxicity........................  grams of 2,4-dichloro-phenoxy-                  242             287
                                              acetic acid.
Eutrophication.............................  grams of nitrogen equivalent.......             308            47.0
Fossil Fuel Depletion......................  megajoules of surplus energy.......             479             453
Global Warming.............................  grams of carbon dioxide equivalents          35,800          34,200
Habitat Alteration.........................  threatened and endangered species                 0               0
                                              count.
Human Health...............................  grams of toluene equivalent........       1,250,000         553,000
Indoor Air.................................  grams of total volatile organic                   0               0
                                              compounds.
Ozone Depletion............................  grams of chlorofluoro-carbon-11            1.35E-06        1.04E-05
                                              equivalents.
Smog.......................................  grams of nitrogen oxide equivalents             413             163
Water Intake...............................  liters of water....................           5,900             633
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Functional Unit...................................................5 gallons.....
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


     Table 5b--Environmental Performance Scores for Gear Lubricants
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Environmental impact area            Sample A        Sample B
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Environmental Performance Score             0.3405          0.1856
 \1\....................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Acidification (5%)..................          0.0000          0.0000
    Criteria Air Pollutants (6%)........          0.0009          0.0009
    Ecological Toxicity (11%)...........          0.0326          0.0387
    Eutrophication (5%).................          0.0802          0.0122
    Fossil Fuel Depletion (5%)..........          0.0679          0.0641
    Global Warming (16%)................          0.0224          0.0214
    Habitat Alteration (16%)............          0.0000          0.0000
    Human Health (11%)..................          0.0867          0.0383
    Indoor Air (11%)....................          0.0000          0.0000
    Ozone Depletion (5%)................          0.0000          0.0000
    Smog (6%)...........................          0.0164          0.0064
    Water Intake (3%)...................          0.0334          0.0036
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Economic Performance (Life-cycle Costs           63.08           87.50
 ($)) \2\...............................
                                         -------------------------------
    First Cost..........................         63.08           87.50
    Future Cost (3.9%)..................      (\3\)           (\3\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Functional Unit.........................   5 gallons of gear lubricant.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Numbers in parentheses indicate weighting factor.
\2\ Costs are per functional unit.
\3\ For this item, no significant/quantifiable performance or durability
  differences were identified among competing alternative products.
  Therefore, future costs were not calculated.


[[Page 63314]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP23OC08.004

    As seen in Table 5b, the total environmental performance scores are 
0.1856 and 0.3405 points per five gallons of product. The life-cycle 
costs of the submitted biobased gear lubricants are $63.08 to $87.50 
(present value dollars) per five gallons of product.
6. General Purpose Household Cleaners
    General purpose household cleaners are substances used to clean 
common household surfaces found in the living spaces and on the 
possessions located in households or similar settings. Household 
cleaner products included in this item are those general purpose 
household cleaners specifically marketed as suitable for cleaning 
common household surfaces. In today's proposed rule, the definition of 
general purpose household cleaners excludes products that are 
formulated for use as disinfectants. Other products not included in 
this item are task-specific household cleaners, such as scouring 
cleaners, toilet bowl cleaners, upholstery cleaners, laundry and 
dishwashing detergents, spot/stain removers, oven cleaners, and drain 
cleaners.
    Procuring agencies should note that, as discussed in Section II of 
this preamble, not all biobased cleaning products are ``environmentally 
preferable'' to non-biobased products. Unless cleaning products have 
been formulated to contain no (or reduced levels of) metals and toxic 
and hazardous constituents, they can be harmful to aquatic life, the 
environment, and/or workers. When purchasing environmentally preferable 
cleaning products, Federal agencies should compare the ``cradle-to-
grave'' impacts of the manufacture, use, and disposal of both biobased 
and non-biobased products in order to determine which product is 
environmentally preferable.
    USDA identified 16 different manufacturers producing 24 individual 
biobased general purpose household cleaner products. These 16 
manufacturers do not necessarily include all manufacturers of biobased 
general purpose household cleaners, merely those identified during USDA 
information gathering activities. Information supplied by these 
manufacturers indicates that these products are being used 
commercially. In addition, manufacturers and stakeholders identified 
several test methods, a performance standard, and one other measure of 
performance (as shown below) used in evaluating products within this 
item. While there may be additional test methods, as well as 
performance standards, product certifications, and other measures of 
performance applicable to products within this item, those identified 
by manufacturers of products within this item are:
Test Methods
     Boeing D6-7127, Cleaning Interiors of Commercial 
Transport Aircraft;
     ASTM D1308, ``Standard Test Method for Effect of Household 
Chemicals on Clear and Pigmented Organic Finishes'';
     Federal Test Method Standard 536A, Soap and Soap 
Products (Including Synthetic Detergents) sampling and testing; and

[[Page 63315]]

     South Coast Air Quality Management District, certification 
as a ``Clean Air Solvent.''
Performance Standards
     Green Seal 8 (GS-8), Green Seal Environmental 
Standard for Household Cleaners; and
     Boeing D6-7127, Cleaning Interiors of Commercial 
Transport Aircraft. Product Certifications and Other Measures
     United States Navy Navsea 6840--Surface ship 
(non-submarine) authorized chemical cleaning products and dispensing 
systems; and
     Green Seal 8 (GS-8), Green Seal Environmental 
Standard for Household Cleaners.
    USDA attempted to gather data on the potential market for biobased 
products within the Federal government using the procedure described in 
the section on ``Chain and Cable Lubricants.'' These attempts were 
largely unsuccessful. However, Federal agencies routinely perform 
cleaning and maintenance activities, or procure cleaning and 
maintenance services, that use these materials. Thus, they have a need 
for general purpose household cleaners and for services that require 
the use of household cleaners. Designation of ``general purpose 
household cleaners'' will promote the use of biobased products, 
furthering the objectives of this program.
    An analysis of the environmental and human health benefits and the 
life-cycle costs of biobased general purpose household cleaners was 
performed for two of the products using the BEES analytical tool. The 
impact values for these two general purpose household cleaners are 
presented in Table 6a. The environmental performance scores are 
presented in Table 6b and in Figure 6.

                         Table 6a--Impact Values for General Purpose Household Cleaners
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Environmental  impact area                         Units                    Sample A        Sample B
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acidification..............................  millimoles of hydrogen ion                    4,080           1,510
                                              equivalents.
Criteria Air Pollutants....................  micro Disability-Adjusted Life                 1.03           0.657
                                              Years.
Ecological Toxicity........................  grams of 2,4-dichloro-phenoxy-                  351            8.76
                                              acetic acid.
Eutrophication.............................  grams of nitrogen equivalent.......            27.8            3.24
Fossil Fuel Depletion......................  megajoules of surplus energy.......             175            38.8
Global Warming.............................  grams of carbon dioxide equivalents          13,600           3,000
Habitat Alteration.........................  threatened and endangered species                 0               0
                                              count.
Human Health...............................  grams of toluene equivalent........         109,000          30,600
Indoor Air.................................  grams of total volatile organic                   0               0
                                              compounds.
Ozone Depletion............................  grams of chloroflouro-carbon-11            1.95E-04        2.28E-06
                                              equivalents.
Smog.......................................  grams of nitrogen oxide equivalents            69.3            23.6
Water Intake...............................  liters of water....................             389            20.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Functional Unit...................................................5 gallons.....
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Table 6b--Environmental Performance Scores for General Purpose Household
                                Cleaners
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Environmental impact area            Sample A        Sample B
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Environmental Performance Score             0.1005          0.0127
 \1\....................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Acidification (5%)..................          0.0000          0.0000
    Criteria Air Pollutants (6%)........          0.0003          0.0002
    Ecological Toxicity (11%)...........          0.0473          0.0012
    Eutrophication (5%).................          0.0072          0.0008
    Fossil Fuel Depletion (5%)..........          0.0247          0.0055
    Global Warming (16%)................          0.0085          0.0019
    Habitat Alteration (16%)............          0.0000          0.0000
    Human Health (11%)..................          0.0076          0.0021
    Indoor Air (11%)....................          0.0000          0.0000
    Ozone Depletion (5%)................          0.0000          0.0000
    Smog (6%)...........................          0.0027          0.0009
    Water Intake (3%)...................          0.0022          0.0001
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Economic Performance (Life-cycle Costs           65.63           27.50
 ($)) \2\...............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    First Cost..........................         65.63           27.50
    Future Cost (3.9%)..................      (\3\)           (\3\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Functional Unit.........................            5 gallons.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Numbers in parentheses indicate weighting factor.
\2\ Costs are per functional unit.
\3\ For this item, no significant/quantifiable performance or durability
  differences were identified among competing alternative products.
  Therefore, future costs were not calculated.

    As seen in Table 6b, the total environmental performance scores are 
0.0127 and 0.1005 points per five gallons of product. The life-cycle 
costs of the submitted household cleaners are $27.50 and $65.63 
(present value dollars) per five gallons of product.

[[Page 63316]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP23OC08.005

7. Industrial Cleaners
    Industrial cleaners are products used to remove contaminants, such 
as adhesives, inks, paint, dirt, soil, and grease, from parts, 
products, tools, machinery, equipment, vessels, floors, walls, and 
other production-related work areas. Cleaning operations are performed 
for a variety of reasons, such as safety and operability, and to avoid 
contamination of the products being manufactured or repaired at the 
facility. The cleaning products within this item are usually solvents, 
but may take other forms. They may be used in either straight solution 
or diluted with water in pressure washers, or in hand wiping 
applications in industrial or manufacturing settings, such as inside 
vessels.
    Cleaners within this item are used in industrial settings in which 
production processes take place. This distinguishes these types of 
cleaners from institutional cleaners, which are used in settings where 
production processes do not take place.
    Procuring agencies should note that, as discussed in Section II of 
this preamble, not all biobased cleaning products are ``environmentally 
preferable'' to non-biobased products. Unless cleaning products have 
been formulated to contain no (or reduced levels of) metals and toxic 
and hazardous constituents, they can be harmful to aquatic life, the 
environment, and/or workers. When purchasing environmentally preferable 
cleaning products, Federal agencies should compare the ``cradle-to-
grave'' impacts of the manufacture, use, and disposal of both biobased 
and non-biobased products in order to determine which product is 
environmentally preferable.
    USDA identified 59 different manufacturers producing 122 individual 
biobased industrial cleaner and/or solvent products. The 59 
manufacturers do not necessarily include all manufacturers of biobased 
industrial cleaners, merely those identified during USDA information 
gathering activities. Information supplied by these manufacturers 
indicates that these products are being used commercially. In addition, 
manufacturers and stakeholders identified test methods, performance 
standards, and other measures of performance used in evaluating 
products within this item. While there may be additional test methods, 
as well as performance standards, product certifications, and other 
measures of performance applicable to products within this item, those 
identified by manufacturers of products within this item are:
Test Methods
     ASTM D445, ``Standard Test Method for Kinematic Viscosity 
of Transparent and Opaque Liquids (and the Calculation of Dynamic 
Viscosity);''
     ASTM D92, ``Standard Test Method for Flash and Fire Points 
by Cleveland Open Cup Tester;''
     ASTM D1364, ``Standard Test Method for Water in Volatile 
Solvents (Karl Fischer Reagent Titration Method);'' and
     Environmental Protection Agency Method 24--
Determination of Volatile Matter Content, Water Content, Density, 
Volume Solids, and Weight Solids of Surface Coating.
Performance Standards
     ASTM D446, ``Standard Specifications and Operating 
Instructions for Glass Capillary Kinematic Viscometers;''
     ASTM D13, ``Standard Specification for Spirits of 
Turpentine;''
     ASTM D1836, ``Standard Specification for Commercial 
Hexanes;''

[[Page 63317]]

     ASTM D235, ``Standard Specification for Mineral Spirits 
(Petroleum Spirits) (Hydrocarbon Dry Cleaning Spirits);''
     ASTM D3278, ``Standard Specification for 2-Ethoxyethyl 
Acetate (99% Grade);''
     Green Seal GS-37, Green Seal Environmental 
Standard for General-Purpose, Bathroom, Glass, and Carpet Cleaners Used 
for Industrial and Institutional Purposes; and
     Boeing BAC 5750, Solvent Cleaning.
Product Certifications and Other Measures
     Section 612 of EPA's Significant New Alternatives Policy 
(SNAP);
     Green Seal GS-37, Green Seal Environmental 
Standard for General-Purpose, Bathroom, Glass, and Carpet Cleaners Used 
for Industrial and Institutional Purposes; and
     EPA's National Contingency Plan.
    USDA attempted to gather data on the potential market for biobased 
products within the Federal government using the procedure described in 
the section on ``Chain and Cable Lubricants.'' These attempts were 
largely unsuccessful. However, Federal agencies routinely use, or 
procure contract services, such as cleaning and maintenance services, 
that use industrial cleaners. Thus, there is a need for industrial 
cleaners. Designation of ``industrial cleaners'' will promote the use 
of biobased products, furthering the objectives of this program.
    An analysis of the environmental and human health benefits and the 
life-cycle costs of biobased industrial cleaners was performed for 
three of the products using the BEES analytical tool. The impact values 
for these three products are presented in Table 7a. The environmental 
performance scores are presented in Table 7b and in Figure 7.

                                 Table 7a--Impact Values for Industrial Cleaners
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Environmental impact area                  Units                Sample A        Sample B        Sample C
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acidification......................  millimoles of hydrogen ion              433          11,100          34,000
                                      equivalents.
Criteria Air Pollutants............  micro Disability-Adjusted             0.134            3.56            16.2
                                      Life Years.
Ecological Toxicity................  grams of 2,4-dichloro-                 79.5             234            76.5
                                      phenoxy-acetic acid.
Eutrophication.....................  grams of nitrogen                     0.971            58.7            45.2
                                      equivalent.
Fossil Fuel Depletion..............  megajoules of surplus                  16.7             470             133
                                      energy.
Global Warming.....................  grams of carbon dioxide                 953          32,600         158,000
                                      equivalents.
Habitat Alteration.................  threatened and endangered                 0               0               0
                                      species count.
Human Health.......................  grams of toluene equivalent           4,940         291,000         103,000
Indoor Air.........................  grams of total volatile                   0               0               0
                                      organic compounds.
Ozone Depletion....................  grams of chloroflouro-             1.66E-08        2.21E-04        5.19E-06
                                      carbon-11 equivalents.
Smog...............................  grams of nitrogen oxide                15.5             139             198
                                      equivalents.
Water Intake.......................  liters of water............            48.7             623             287
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Functional Unit.........................................5 gallons of product.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                       Table 7b--Environmental Performance Scores for Industrial Cleaners
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Environmental impact area                        Sample A        Sample B        Sample C
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Environmental Performance Score \1\.......................          0.0152          0.1641          0.1615
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Acidification (5%)..........................................          0.0000          0.0000          0.0000
    Criteria Air Pollutants (6%)................................          0.0000          0.0011          0.0051
    Ecological Toxicity (11%)...................................          0.0107          0.0316          0.0103
    Eutrophication (5%).........................................          0.0003          0.0153          0.0118
    Fossil Fuel Depletion (5%)..................................          0.0024          0.0665          0.0189
    Global Warming (16%)........................................          0.0006          0.0204          0.0989
    Habitat Alteration (16%)....................................          0.0000          0.0000          0.0000
    Human Health (11%)..........................................          0.0003          0.0202          0.0071
    Indoor Air (11%)............................................          0.0000          0.0000          0.0000
    Ozone Depletion (5%)........................................          0.0000          0.0000          0.0000
    Smog (6%)...................................................          0.0006          0.0055          0.0078
    Water Intake (3%)...........................................          0.0003          0.0035          0.0016
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Economic Performance (Life-cycle Costs ($)) \2\.................            8.85           82.00           84.95
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    First Cost..................................................            8.85           82.00           84.95
    Future Cost (3.9%)..........................................           (\3\)           (\3\)           (\3\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Functional Unit.................................................             Five gallons of product.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Numbers in parentheses indicate weighting factor.
\2\ Costs are per functional unit.
\3\ For this item, no significant/quantifiable performance or durability differences were identified among
  competing alternative products. Therefore, future costs were not calculated.


[[Page 63318]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP23OC08.006

    As seen in Table 7b, the total environmental performance scores 
range from 0.0152 to 0.1641 per five gallons of product. The life-cycle 
costs of the submitted industrial cleaners range from $8.85 to $84.95 
(present value dollars) per five gallons of product.
8. Multipurpose Cleaners
    Multipurpose cleaners are used to clean dirt, grease, and grime 
from a variety of items and are used in both industrial and domestic 
settings. Multipurpose cleaners are intended for broader applications 
than those cleaners designated as general purpose household cleaners, 
task-specific cleaners (e.g., bathroom and spa cleaners), and 
industrial cleaners. In today's proposed rule, the definition of 
multipurpose cleaners excludes products that are formulated for use as 
disinfectants.
    Procuring agencies should note that, as discussed in Section II of 
this preamble, not all biobased cleaning products are ``environmentally 
preferable'' to non-biobased products. Unless cleaning products have 
been formulated to contain no (or reduced levels of) metals and toxic 
and hazardous constituents, they can be harmful to aquatic life, the 
environment, and/or workers. When purchasing environmentally preferable 
cleaning products, Federal agencies should compare the ``cradle-to-
grave'' impacts of the manufacture, use, and disposal of both biobased 
and non-biobased products in order to determine which product is 
environmentally preferable.
    USDA identified 39 different manufacturers producing 61 individual 
biobased multipurpose cleaner products. These 39 manufacturers do not 
necessarily include all manufacturers of biobased multipurpose 
cleaners, merely those identified during USDA information gathering 
activities. Information supplied by these manufacturers indicates that 
these products are being used commercially. In addition, manufacturers 
and stakeholders identified several test methods and other measures of 
performance and one performance standard used in evaluating products 
within this item. While there may be additional test methods, as well 
as performance standards, product certifications, and other measures of 
performance applicable to products within this item, those identified 
by manufacturers of products within this item are:
Test Methods
     ASTM D1298, ``Standard Test Method for Density, Relative 
Density (Specific Gravity), or API Gravity of Crude Petroleum and 
Liquid Petroleum Products by Hydrometer Method'';
     ASTM D130, ``Standard Test Method for Corrosiveness to 
Copper from Petroleum Products by Copper Strip Test'';
     ASTM D2500, ``Standard Test Method for Cloud Point of 
Petroleum Products'';
     ASTM D86, ``Standard Test Method for Distillation of 
Petroleum Products at Atmospheric Pressure'';
     Environmental Protection Agency Method 601, 
Purgeable Halocarbons;
     Environmental Protection Agency Method 602, 
Purgeable Aromatics;
     Environmental Protection Agency Method 608, 
Organochlorine Pesticides and PCBs;
     Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development 
OECD 301B--CO2 Evolution Test for Biodegradation;
     Society of Automotive Engineers APR 1755B--Effect 
of Cleaning Agents on Aircraft Engine Materials, Stock Loss Test 
Method;
     Green Seal GS-37, Green Seal Environmental 
Standard for General-

[[Page 63319]]

Purpose, Bathroom, Glass, and Carpet Cleaners Used for Industrial and 
Institutional Purposes; and
     Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and 
Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms (EPA 600/
4-90-027F).
Performance Standards
     Green Seal GS-34--Standard Establishing 
Environmental Requirements for Cleaning/Degreasing Agents.
Product Certifications and Other Measures
     Choice Eco Logo (Canada);
     Acute Dermal Toxicity; and
     Acute Oral Toxicity.
    USDA attempted to gather data on the potential market for biobased 
products within the Federal government using the procedure described in 
the section on ``Chain and Cable Lubricants.'' These attempts were 
largely unsuccessful. However, Federal agencies routinely use, or 
procure contract services that use, multipurpose cleaners in a variety 
of cleaning and maintenance activities. Thus, there is a need for 
multipurpose cleaners. Designation of ``multipurpose cleaners'' will 
promote the use of biobased products, furthering the objectives of this 
program.
    An analysis of the environmental and human health benefits and the 
life-cycle costs of biobased multipurpose cleaners was performed for 
one of the products using the BEES analytical tool. The impact values 
for this multipurpose cleaner are presented in Table 8a. The 
environmental performance scores are presented in Table 8b and in 
Figure 8.

   Table 8a--Summary of BEES Results for Multipurpose Cleaners--Impact
                                 Values
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Environmental impact area              Units              Sample A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acidification..................  millimoles of hydrogen            2,910
                                  ion equivalents.
Criteria Air Pollutants........  micro Disability-                  1.19
                                  Adjusted Life Years.
Ecological Toxicity............  grams of 2,4-dichloro-              158
                                  phenoxy-acetic acid.
Eutrophication.................  grams of nitrogen                  17.5
                                  equivalent.
Fossil Fuel Depletion..........  megajoules of surplus              5.12
                                  energy.
Global Warming.................  grams of carbon dioxide           4,680
                                  equivalents.
Habitat Alteration.............  threatened and                        0
                                  endangered species
                                  count.
Human Health...................  grams of toluene                 47,100
                                  equivalent.
Indoor Air.....................  grams of total volatile               0
                                  organic compounds.
Ozone Depletion................  grams of chloroflouro-         4.53E-06
                                  carbon-11 equivalents.
Smog...........................  grams of nitrogen oxide            65.1
                                  equivalents.
Water Intake...................  liters of water........           4,000
Functional Unit.........................................             (1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 1,000 gallons of diluted and ready to use multipurpose cleaner.


  Table 8b--Environmental Performance Scores for Multipurpose Cleaners
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Environmental impact area                    Sample A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BEES Environmental Performance--Total Score \1\.........          0.0649
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Acidification (5%)..................................          0.0000
    Criteria Air Pollutants (6%)........................          0.0004
    Ecological Toxicity (11%)...........................          0.0213
    Eutrophication (5%).................................          0.0046
    Fossil Fuel Depletion (5%)..........................          0.0072
    Global Warming (16%)................................          0.0029
    Habitat Alteration (16%)............................          0.0000
    Human Health (11%)..................................          0.0033
    Indoor Air (11%)....................................          0.0000
    Ozone Depletion (5%)................................          0.0000
    Smog (6%)...........................................          0.0026
    Water Intake (3%)...................................          0.0226
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Economic Performance (Life-cycle Costs ($)) \2\.........      5,950.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    First Cost..........................................      5,950.00
    Future Cost (3.9%)..................................      (\3\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Functional Unit.........................................      (\4\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Numbers in parentheses indicate weighting factor.
\2\ Costs are per functional unit.
\3\ For this item, no significant/quantifiable performance or durability
  differences were identified among competing alternative products.
  Therefore, future costs were not calculated.
\4\ 1,000 gallons of diluted and ready to use multipurpose cleaner.


[[Page 63320]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP23OC08.007

    As seen in Table 8b, the total environmental performance score and 
the life-cycle cost for the submitted multipurpose cleaner are, 
respectively, 0.0649 points per 1,000 gallons of diluted and ready to 
use product and $5,950.00 per 1,000 gallons of diluted and ready to use 
product.
9. Parts Wash Solutions
    Parts wash solutions are products used in cleaning and machining 
parts to remove dirt and grease buildup on used parts. The products are 
intended to be used in manual or automatic cleaning systems including, 
but not limited to, soak vats and tanks, ultrasonic cleaners, and 
cabinet washers.
    USDA identified 16 different manufacturers producing 22 individual 
biobased parts wash solution products. These 16 manufacturers do not 
necessarily include all manufacturers of biobased parts wash solutions, 
merely those identified during USDA information gathering activities. 
Information supplied by these manufacturers indicates that these 
products are being used commercially. In addition, manufacturers and 
stakeholders identified four test methods used in evaluating products 
within this item. While there may be additional test methods, as well 
as performance standards, product certifications, and other measures of 
performance applicable to products within this item, those identified 
by manufacturers of products within this item are:
Test Methods
     ASTM D445, ``Standard Test Method for Kinematic Viscosity 
of Transparent and Opaque Liquids (and the Calculation of Dynamic 
Viscosity)'';
     ASTM D446, ``Standard Specifications and Operating 
Instructions for Glass Capillary Kinematic Viscometers'';
     ASTM D877, ``Standard Test Method for Dielectric Breakdown 
Voltage of Insulating Liquids Using Disk Electrodes''; and
     ASTM D92, ``Standard Test Method for Flash and Fire Points 
by Cleveland Open Cup Tester''.
    USDA attempted to gather data on the potential market for biobased 
products within the Federal government using the procedure described in 
the section on ``Chain and Cable Lubricants.'' These attempts were 
largely unsuccessful. USDA is aware of biobased parts wash solutions 
being used by at least one U.S. Air Force base that overhauls aircraft 
parts. However, Federal agencies or their services contractors 
routinely perform, and procure services that perform, the types of 
cleaning and maintenance activities that utilize parts wash solutions. 
Thus, there is a need for parts wash solutions. Designation of ``parts 
wash solutions'' will promote the use of biobased products, furthering 
the objectives of this program.
    An analysis of the environmental and human health benefits and the 
life-cycle costs of biobased parts wash solutions was performed for two 
of the products using the BEES analytical tool. The impact values for 
these two parts wash solutions are presented in Table 9a. The 
environmental performance scores are presented in Table 9b and in 
Figure 9.

[[Page 63321]]



                                Table 9a--Impact Values for Parts Wash Solutions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Environmental impact area                      Units                     Sample A            Sample B
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acidification..........................  millimoles of hydrogen ion                     2,870              1,960
                                          equivalents.
Criteria Air Pollutants................  micro Disability-Adjusted Life                  1.12              0.594
                                          Years.
Ecological Toxicity....................  grams of 2,4-dichloro-phenoxy-                  71.4               40.1
                                          acetic acid.
Eutrophication.........................  grams of nitrogen equivalent...                 8.83               10.7
Fossil Fuel Depletion..................  megajoules of surplus energy...                  130               76.4
Global Warming.........................  grams of carbon dioxide                        7,560              5,100
                                          equivalents.
Habitat Alteration.....................  threatened and endangered                          0                  0
                                          species count.
Human Health...........................  grams of toluene equivalent....               75,400             55,200
Indoor Air.............................  grams of total volatile organic                    0                  0
                                          compounds.
Ozone Depletion........................  grams of chloroflouro-carbon-11             1.10E-05           2.03E-06
                                          equivalents.
Smog...................................  grams of nitrogen oxide                         30.3               21.5
                                          equivalents.
Water Intake...........................  liters of water................                 92.6                117
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Functional Unit................................................1 gallon.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


      Table 9b--Summary of BEES Results for Parts Wash Solutions--
                    Environmental Performance Scores
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Environmental impact area            Sample A        Sample B
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Environmental Performance Score             0.0421          0.0278
 \1\....................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Acidification (5%)..................          0.0000          0.0000
    Criteria Air Pollutants (6%)........          0.0003          0.0002
    Ecological Toxicity (11%)...........          0.0096          0.005
    Eutrophication (5%).................          0.0023          0.0028
    Fossil Fuel Depletion (5%)..........          0.0183          0.0108
    Global Warming (16%)................          0.0047          0.0032
    Habitat Alteration (16%)............          0.0000          0.0000
    Human Health (11%)..................          0.0052          0.0038
    Indoor Air (11%)....................          0.0000          0.0000
    Ozone Depletion (5%)................          0.0000          0.0000
    Smog (6%)...........................          0.0012          0.0009
    Water Intake (3%)...................          0.0005          0.0007
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Economic Performance (Life-cycle Costs           10.43           16.99
 ($)) \2\...............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    First Cost..........................         10.43           16.99
    Future Cost (3.9%)..................      (\3\)           (\3\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Functional Unit.........................   gallon of parts wash solution
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Numbers in parentheses indicate weighting factor.
\2\ Costs are per functional unit.
\3\ For this item, no significant/quantifiable performance or durability
  differences were identified among competing alternative products.
  Therefore, future costs were not calculated.


[[Page 63322]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP23OC08.008

    As seen in Table 9b, the total environmental performance scores are 
0.0278 and 0.0421 points per gallon of product. The life-cycle costs of 
the submitted parts wash solutions are $10.43 and $16.99 (present value 
dollars) per gallon of product.

C. Minimum Biobased Contents

    USDA has determined that setting a minimum biobased content for 
designated items is appropriate. Establishing a minimum biobased 
content will encourage competition among manufacturers to develop 
products with higher biobased contents and will prevent products with 
de minimus biobased content from being purchased as a means of 
satisfying the requirements of section 9002. USDA believes that it is 
in the best interest of the preferred procurement program for minimum 
biobased contents to be set at levels that will realistically allow 
products to possess the necessary performance attributes and allow them 
to compete with non-biobased products in performance and economics. 
Setting the minimum biobased content for an item at a level met by 
several of the tested products will provide more products from which 
procurement officials may choose, will encourage the most widespread 
usage of biobased products by procuring agencies, and is expected to 
accomplish the objectives of section 9002.
    As discussed in Section IV.A of this preamble, USDA relied entirely 
on manufacturers' voluntary submission of samples to support the 
proposed designation of these items. The data presented in the 
following paragraphs are the test results from all of the product 
samples that were submitted for analysis.
    As a result of public comments received on the first designated 
items rulemaking proposal, USDA decided to account for the slight 
imprecision in the analytical method used to determine biobased content 
of products when establishing the minimum biobased content. Thus, 
rather than establishing the minimum biobased content for an item at 
the tested biobased content of the product selected as the basis for 
the minimum value, USDA is establishing the minimum biobased content at 
a level three (3) percentage points less than the tested value. USDA 
believes that this adjustment is appropriate to account for the 
expected variations in analytical results.
    USDA encourages procuring agencies to seek products with the 
highest biobased content that is practicable in all of the proposed 
designated items. To assist the procuring agencies in determining which 
products have the highest biobased content, USDA will update the 
information in the biobased products catalog to include the biobased 
content of each product. Those products within each designated item 
that have the highest biobased content will be listed first and others 
will be listed in descending order. USDA is specifically requesting 
comments on the proposed minimum biobased contents of designated items 
and also requests additional data that can be used to re-evaluate the 
appropriateness of the proposed minimum biobased contents. As the 
market for biobased products develops and USDA obtains additional 
biobased content data, it will re-evaluate the established minimum 
biobased contents of designated items and consider raising them 
whenever justified.
    The following paragraphs summarize the information that USDA used 
to propose minimum biobased contents within each proposed designated 
item.
1. Chain and Cable Lubricants
    Nine of the 37 biobased chain and cable lubricants identified have 
been

[[Page 63323]]

tested for biobased content using ASTM D6866.\2\ The biobased contents 
of these nine biobased chain and cable lubricants ranged from 80 
percent to 100 percent, as follows: 80, 81, 86, 89, 96, 99, 100, 100, 
and 100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ASTM D6866, ``Standard Test Methods for Determining the 
Biobased Content of Natural Range Materials Using Radiocarbon and 
Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometry Analysis,'' is used to distinguish 
between carbon from fossil resources (non-biobased carbon) and 
carbon from renewable sources (biobased carbon). The biobased 
content is expressed as the percentage of total carbon that is 
biobased carbon.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The biobased contents for the tested products fall within a fairly 
narrow range with no significant breaks or gaps in the data. Therefore, 
USDA is proposing to set the minimum biobased content for this item at 
77 percent, based on the product with a tested biobased content of 80 
percent. The tested 80 percent value is adjusted to 77 percent to 
account for possible variability in the results of ASTM D6866, as 
discussed earlier.
2. Corrosion Preventatives
    Ten of the 97 available biobased corrosion preventatives have been 
tested for biobased content using ASTM D6866. The biobased contents of 
these ten biobased corrosion preventatives ranged from 26 percent to 94 
percent as follows: 26, 26, 56, 59, 61, 74, 85, 91, 92, and 94.
    As seen, the tested biobased contents cover a wide range, from 26 
percent to 94 percent, with a significant gap in the range between the 
26 and 56 percent products and another between the 61 and 74 percent 
products. USDA reviewed the product information for the two products 
with 26 percent biobased content to determine if there was any 
justification for creating a subcategory within the item or for 
considering these products when setting the proposed minimum biobased 
content. USDA did not identify any performance or applicability 
features of these products that justified creating a subcategory or 
setting the minimum biobased content at a level that would include 
them. USDA next evaluated the available information for the group of 
products with biobased contents between 56 and 61 percent. USDA found 
that the manufacturer of the product with a biobased content of 61 
percent indicates that their product meets the ASTM D665 Turbine Oil 
Rust Test. The manufacturers of the products with higher biobased 
contents have not indicated that their products meet this performance 
level. USDA does not have sufficient information to otherwise 
distinguish among the products in the group of products whose biobased 
contents range from 56 to 61 percent. For these reasons, USDA is 
proposing to set the minimum biobased content for this item at 53 
percent, based on the product with the lowest biobased content in the 
group of products with tested biobased contents of 56 to 61 percent.
3. Food Cleaners
    Five of the 15 biobased food cleaners identified have been tested 
for biobased content using ASTM D6866. The biobased contents of these 
five biobased food cleaners ranged from 56 percent to 98 percent as 
follows: 56, 61, 65, 76, and 98.
    While this is a fairly wide range of biobased contents between the 
lowest biobased content and the highest biobased content among the 
tested products, the only significant gap in the data is between the 76 
and the 98 percent products. Because most of the biobased contents are 
grouped towards the lower end of the range, USDA evaluated the 
available information for these products to determine if there was 
justification for creating separate subcategories for these products 
and for the one product with 98 percent biobased content. USDA found 
that there was not sufficient information on performance or 
applicability of the products to support the creation of subcategories. 
Therefore, USDA is proposing to set the minimum biobased content for 
this item at 53 percent, based on the product with the lowest biobased 
content in the group of products with tested biobased contents ranging 
from 56 to 65 percent.
4. Forming Lubricants
    Five of the 13 biobased forming lubricants identified have been 
tested for biobased content using ASTM D6866. The biobased contents of 
these five biobased forming lubricants ranged from 38 percent to 99 
percent as follows: 38, 71, 85, 85, and 99.
    Considering that there is a significant gap in the data points 
between the 38 and 71 percent biobased products, USDA evaluated the 
information available on these products to determine if there was 
justification for creating subcategories. USDA found that there was not 
sufficient information to create subcategories or to include the 38 
percent biobased product when setting the minimum biobased content for 
the item. USDA found that the product with 71 percent biobased content 
was product claimed by its manufacturer to be biodegradable, while the 
manufacturers of the 85 and 99 percent biobased products did not make 
such claims for their products. Because biodegradability is a desired 
feature, USDA is proposing to set the minimum biobased content for this 
item at 68 percent, based on the product with a tested biobased content 
of 71 percent.
5. Gear Lubricants
    Eight of the 24 biobased gear lubricants identified have been 
tested for biobased content using ASTM D6866. The biobased contents of 
these eight biobased gear lubricants ranged from 4 percent to 100 
percent as follows: 4, 61, 69, 81, 87, 89, 97, and 100.
    Because there is a significant gap in biobased content between the 
products with 4 and 61 percent biobased content, USDA evaluated the 4 
percent biobased product to determine if it possessed performance or 
applicability features that the other products did not. USDA found no 
performance or applicability characteristics that set this product 
apart from other products in this item. Therefore, UDSA dropped this 
product from consideration in setting the minimum biobased content for 
this item.
    The tested biobased content of the remaining six products, as shown 
above, ranged from 61 percent to 100 percent. USDA found that the 
manufacturers of the products with 61 and 69 percent biobased content 
have tested their products against numerous performance standards and 
that the remaining manufacturers do not claim to have done so. To 
ensure that products are available within this item that meet a range 
of performance standards, USDA is proposing to set the minimum biobased 
content for this item at 58 percent, based on the product with a tested 
biobased content of 61 percent.
6. General Purpose Household Cleaners
    Nine of the 24 biobased general purpose household cleaners 
identified have been tested for biobased content using ASTM D6866. The 
biobased contents of these nine biobased general purpose household 
cleaners ranged from 10 percent to 95 percent as follows: 10, 42, 54, 
61, 72, 81, 82, 91, and 95.
    The biobased content of the 10 percent product is substantially 
below the next lowest tested product (42 percent) and USDA found no 
performance or applicability characteristics that set the 10 percent 
product apart from other products in this item. Therefore, UDSA dropped 
this product from consideration in setting the minimum biobased content 
for this item.

[[Page 63324]]

    The tested biobased contents of the remaining eight products, as 
shown above, ranged from 42 percent to 95 percent. Because this is a 
wide range of values, USDA considered the possibility of creating 
subcategories within this item. However, USDA does not have sufficient 
data on the performance and applicability of products within this item 
to support the creation of subcategories. USDA will continue to request 
product performance data and, if sufficient supporting data can be 
obtained, will consider creating subcategories within this item in the 
final rule. Because of the lack of supporting data for 
subcategorization and because there are no significant gaps in the 
biobased content of the eight products being considered, USDA is 
proposing to set the minimum biobased content for general purpose 
household cleaners at 39 percent, based on the product with a tested 
biobased content of 42 percent.
7. Industrial Cleaners
    Thirty-two of the 121 biobased industrial cleaners identified have 
been tested for biobased content using ASTM D6866. The tested biobased 
contents for these 32 biobased industrial cleaners ranged from 2 
percent to 100 percent, as follows: 2, 18, 18, 44, 49, 52, 61, 69, 73, 
74, 77, 79, 80, 80, 82, 85, 91, 92, 92, 94, 95, 95, 96, 96, 97, 97, 98, 
and 100 (five products).
    Because there is a significant gap between the 18 and the 44 
percent biobased content products, USDA reviewed the information on the 
three products with tested biobased contents of 2 percent and 18 
percent to determine if subcategorization was justified. USDA found no 
performance or applicability characteristics that set these products 
apart from other products in this item and, thus, they were eliminated 
from consideration for establishing the minimum biobased content.
    The tested biobased contents of the remaining 26 products, as shown 
above, ranged from 44 percent to 100 percent. Because of the 
variability of the substrates to be cleaned and of the contaminants 
that are encountered on those substrates, USDA considered 
subcategorizing this item. However, at the present time USDA does not 
have sufficient data to segregate the various products into 
subcategories based on formulation or performance. As a result, USDA is 
proposing to maintain industrial cleaners as a single item. Because 
there are no significant gaps in the 26 biobased content data points 
being considered, USDA proposes to set the minimum biobased content for 
this item at 41 percent, based on the product with a tested biobased 
content of 44 percent. If sufficient data become available after 
proposal, USDA will re-evaluate the possibility of subcategorizing this 
item.
8. Multipurpose Cleaners
    Eighteen of the 62 biobased multipurpose cleaners identified have 
been tested for biobased content using ASTM D6866. The biobased 
contents of these 18 biobased multipurpose cleaners ranged from 11 
percent to 96 percent as follows: 11, 15, 25, 28, 31, 37, 45, 49, 59, 
65, 69, 72, 78, 79, 84, 88, 96, and 96.
    As with the industrial cleaners item, USDA considered 
subcategorizing this item based on factors such as product 
formulations, the variability of the substrates to be cleaned, and the 
contaminants that are encountered. However, at the present time USDA 
does not have sufficient data to segregate the various products into 
subcategories based on formulation or performance. As a result, USDA is 
proposing to maintain multipurpose cleaners as a single item. Although 
there are no large gaps in the range of biobased content data points, 
USDA considered the 10-point gap between the 49 and the 59 percent 
biobased content products to be sufficient for creating two groups of 
products; one with biobased contents of 49 percent and lower and one 
with biobased contents of 59 percent and higher. USDA evaluated the 
product information available for each product within the two product 
groups and was unable to identify performance or applicability features 
in the 49 percent and lower group that were not available in the 59 
percent and higher group. Thus, USDA proposes to set the minimum 
biobased content for this item at 56 percent, based on the 59 percent 
biobased product from the group of products with the higher biobased 
contents. If sufficient data become available after proposal, USDA will 
re-evaluate the possibility of subcategorizing this item.
9. Parts Wash Solutions
    Seven of the 22 biobased parts wash solutions identified have been 
tested for biobased content using ASTM D6866. The biobased contents of 
these seven biobased parts wash solutions ranged from 12 percent to 96 
percent as follows: 12, 13, 68, 83, 89, 94, and 96.
    Because there is a significant gap between the 13 and the 68 
percent biobased content products, USDA reviewed the information on the 
products with tested biobased contents of 12 percent and 13 percent to 
determine if subcategorization was justified. USDA found no performance 
or applicability characteristics that set these products apart from 
other products in this item and, thus, they were eliminated from 
consideration for establishing the minimum biobased content.
    Because the overall range of the five remaining data points is 
fairly narrow, and the available product information does not support 
any subcategorization of this item, USDA is proposing to set the 
minimum biobased content for parts wash solutions at 65 percent, based 
on the product with a tested biobased content of 68 percent.

D. Compliance Date for Procurement Preference and Incorporation Into 
Specifications

    USDA intends for the final rule to take effect thirty (30) days 
after publication of the final rule. However, as proposed, procuring 
agencies would have a one-year transition period, starting from the 
date of publication of the final rule, before the procurement 
preference for biobased products within a designated item would take 
effect.
    USDA is proposing a one-year period before the procurement 
preferences would take effect based on recognizing that Federal 
agencies will need time to incorporate the preferences into procurement 
documents and to revise existing standardized specifications. Section 
9002(a)(3), as amended by the FCEA of 2008, and section 2902(c) of 7 
CFR part 2902 explicitly acknowledge the latter need for Federal 
agencies to have sufficient time to revise the affected specifications 
to give preference to biobased products when purchasing the designated 
items. Procuring agencies will need time to evaluate the economic and 
technological feasibility of the available biobased products for their 
agency-specific uses and for compliance with agency-specific 
requirements, including manufacturers' warranties for machinery in 
which the biobased products would be used.
    By the time these items are promulgated for designation, Federal 
agencies will have had a minimum of 18 months (from the date of this 
Federal Register notice), and much longer considering when the 
Guidelines were first proposed and these requirements were first laid 
out, to implement these requirements.
    For these reasons, USDA proposes that the mandatory preference for 
biobased products under the designated items take effect one year after 
promulgation of the final rule. The one-year period provides these 
agencies with ample time to evaluate the economic and technological 
feasibility of biobased products for a specific use

[[Page 63325]]

and to revise the specifications accordingly. However, some agencies 
may be able to complete these processes more expeditiously, and not all 
uses will require extensive analysis or revision of existing 
specifications. Although it is allowing up to one year, USDA encourages 
procuring agencies to implement the procurement preferences as early as 
practicable for procurement actions involving any of the designated 
items.

V. Where Can Agencies Get More Information on These USDA-Designated 
Items?

    Information used to develop this proposed rule can be found in the 
technical support document, which can be accessed on the BioPreferred 
Web site, which is located at: http://www.biopreferred.gov. At the 
BioPreferred Web site, click on the Proposed and Final Regulations link 
on the left side of the page. At the next screen, click on the 
Supporting Documentation link under Round 5 Designated Items under the 
Proposed Regulations section.
    Further, once the item designations in today's proposal become 
final, manufacturers and vendors voluntarily may make available 
information on specific products, including product and contact 
information, for posting by USDA on the BioPreferred Web site. USDA 
will periodically audit the information displayed on the BioPreferred 
Web site and, where questions arise, contact the manufacturer or vendor 
to verify, correct, or remove incorrect or out-of-date information. 
Procuring agencies should contact the manufacturers and vendors 
directly to discuss specific needs and to obtain detailed information 
on the availability and prices of biobased products meeting those 
needs.
    By accessing the BioPreferred Web site, agencies will also be able 
to obtain the voluntarily posted information on each product 
concerning: Relative price; life-cycle costs; hot links directly to a 
manufacturer's or vendor's Web site (if available); performance 
standards (industry, government, military, ASTM/ISO) that the product 
has been tested against; and environmental and public health 
information from the BEES analysis or the alternative analysis embedded 
in ASTM Standard D7075, ``Standard Practice for Evaluating and 
Reporting Environmental Performance of Biobased Products.''
    USDA has linked the BioPreferred Web site to DoD's list of 
specifications and standards, which can be used as guidance when 
procuring products. To access this list, go to the BioPreferred Web 
site and click on the ``Selling to Federal Government'' tab and look 
for the DoD Specifications link.

VI. Regulatory Information

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Order 12866 requires agencies to determine whether a 
regulatory action is ``significant.'' The Order defines a ``significant 
regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a rule that may: 
``(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
adversely affect, in a material way, the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or 
communities; (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere 
with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) Materially alter 
the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan 
programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) 
Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the 
President's priorities, or the principles set forth in this Executive 
Order.''
    Today's proposed rule has been determined significant for purposes 
of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has been reviewed by the 
Office of Management and Budget. We are not able to quantify the annual 
economic effect associated with today's proposed rule. As discussed 
earlier in this preamble, USDA made extensive efforts to obtain 
information on the Federal agencies' usage within today's designated 
items, including their subcategories. These efforts were largely 
unsuccessful. Therefore, attempts to quantify the economic impact of 
today's proposed rule would require estimation of the anticipated 
market penetration of biobased products based upon many assumptions. In 
addition, because agencies have the option of not purchasing designated 
items if costs are ``unreasonable,'' the product is not readily 
available, or the product does not demonstrate necessary performance 
characteristics, certain assumptions may not be valid. While facing 
these quantitative challenges, USDA relied upon a qualitative 
assessment to determine the impacts of today's proposed rule. This 
assessment was based primarily on the offsetting nature of the program 
(an increase in biobased products purchased with a corresponding 
decrease in fossil energy-based products (including petroleum, coal and 
natural gas) purchased). Consideration was also given to the fact that 
agencies may choose not to procure designated items due to unreasonable 
costs.
1. Summary of Impacts
    Today's proposed rule is expected to have both positive and 
negative impacts on individual businesses, including small businesses. 
USDA anticipates that the biobased preferred procurement program will 
provide additional opportunities for businesses and manufacturers to 
begin supplying products under the proposed designated biobased items 
to Federal agencies and their contractors. However, other businesses 
and manufacturers that supply only non-qualifying products and do not 
offer biobased alternatives may experience a decrease in demand from 
Federal agencies and their contractors. USDA is unable to determine the 
number of businesses, including small businesses, which may be 
adversely affected by today's proposed rule. The proposed rule, 
however, will not affect existing purchase orders, nor will it preclude 
businesses from modifying their product lines to meet new requirements 
for designated biobased products. Because the extent to which procuring 
agencies will find the performance and costs of biobased products 
acceptable is unknown, it is impossible to quantify the actual economic 
effect of the rule.
2. Benefits of the Proposed Rule
    The designation of these items provides the benefits outlined in 
the objectives of section 9002: To increase domestic demand for many 
agricultural commodities that can serve as feedstocks for production of 
biobased products; to spur development of the industrial base through 
value-added agricultural processing and manufacturing in rural 
communities; to enhance the Nation's energy security by substituting 
biobased products for products derived from imported oil and natural 
gas; and to substitute products with a possibly more benign or 
beneficial environmental impact, as compared to the use of fossil 
energy-based products. On a national and regional level, today's 
proposed rule can result in expanding and strengthening markets for 
biobased materials used in these items.
3. Costs of the Proposed Rule
    Like the benefits, the costs of today's proposed rule have not been 
quantified. Two types of costs are involved: Costs to producers of 
products that will compete with the preferred products and costs to 
Federal agencies to provide

[[Page 63326]]

procurement preference for the preferred products. Producers of 
competing products may face a decrease in demand for their products to 
the extent Federal agencies refrain from purchasing their products. 
However, it is not known to what extent this may occur. Procurement 
costs for Federal agencies may rise as they evaluate the availability 
and relative cost of preferred products before making a purchase.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    The RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601-602, 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.
    USDA evaluated the potential impacts of its proposed designation of 
these items to determine whether its actions would have a significant 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Because the preferred 
procurement program established under section 9002, as amended by the 
FCEA of 2008, applies only to Federal agencies and their contractors, 
small governmental (city, county, etc.) agencies are not affected. 
Thus, the proposal, if promulgated, will not have a significant 
economic impact on small governmental jurisdictions. USDA anticipates 
that this program will affect entities, both large and small, that 
manufacture or sell biobased products. For example, the designation of 
items for preferred procurement will provide additional opportunities 
for businesses to manufacture and sell biobased products to Federal 
agencies and their contractors. Similar opportunities will be provided 
for entities that supply biobased materials to manufacturers. 
Conversely, the biobased procurement program may decrease opportunities 
for businesses that manufacture or sell non-biobased products or 
provide components for the manufacturing of such products. However, the 
proposed rule will not affect existing purchase orders and it will not 
preclude procuring agencies from continuing to purchase non-biobased 
items under certain conditions relating to the availability, 
performance, or cost of biobased items. Today's proposed rule will also 
not preclude businesses from modifying their product lines to meet new 
specifications or solicitation requirements for these products 
containing biobased materials. Thus, the economic impacts of today's 
proposed rule are not expected to be significant.
    The intent of section 9002 is largely to stimulate the production 
of new biobased products and to energize emerging markets for those 
products. Because the program is still in its infancy, however, it is 
unknown how many businesses will ultimately be affected. While USDA has 
no data on the number of small businesses that may choose to develop 
and market products within the items proposed for designation by 
today's proposed rule, the number is expected to be small. Because 
biobased products represent an emerging market, only a small percentage 
of all manufacturers, large or small, are expected to develop and 
market biobased products. Thus, the number of small businesses affected 
by today's proposed rule is not expected to be substantial.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed rule on 
small entities, USDA certifies that this action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Today's proposed rule, therefore, does not require a regulatory 
flexibility analysis.
    While not a factor relevant to determining whether the proposed 
rule will have a significant impact for RFA purposes, USDA has 
concluded that the effect of today's proposed rule would be to provide 
positive opportunities to businesses engaged in the manufacture of 
these biobased products. Purchase and use of these biobased products by 
procuring agencies may increase demand for these products and result in 
private sector development of new technologies, creating business and 
employment opportunities that enhance local, regional, and national 
economies. Technological innovation associated with the use of biobased 
materials can translate into economic growth and increased industry 
competitiveness worldwide, thereby, creating opportunities for small 
entities.

C. Executive Order 12630: Governmental Actions and Interference With 
Constitutionally Protected Property Rights

    This proposed rule has been reviewed in accordance with Executive 
Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with 
Constitutionally Protected Property Rights, and does not contain 
policies that would have implications for these rights.

D. Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule has been reviewed in accordance with Executive 
Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This proposed rule does not preempt 
State or local laws, is not intended to have retroactive effect, and 
does not involve administrative appeals.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This proposed rule does not have sufficient federalism implications 
to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. Provisions of 
this proposed rule will not have a substantial direct effect on States 
or their political subdivisions or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various government levels.

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This proposed rule contains no Federal mandates under the 
regulatory provisions of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, for State, local, and tribal 
governments, or the private sector. Therefore, a statement under 
section 202 of UMRA is not required.

G. Executive Order 12372: Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs

    For the reasons set forth in the Final Rule Related Notice for 7 
CFR part 3015, subpart V (48 FR 29115, June 24, 1983), this program is 
excluded from the scope of Executive Order 12372, which requires 
intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials. This 
program does not directly affect State and local governments.

H. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Today's proposed rule does not significantly or uniquely affect 
``one or more Indian tribes, * * * the relationship between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, or * * * the distribution of power and 
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.'' 
Thus, no further action is required under Executive Order 13175.

I. Paperwork Reduction Act

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 
3501 through 3520), the information collection under this proposed rule 
is currently approved under OMB control number 0503-0011.

[[Page 63327]]

J. Government Paperwork Elimination Act Compliance

    USDA is committed to compliance with the Government Paperwork 
Elimination Act (GPEA) (44 U.S.C. 3504 note), which requires Government 
agencies in general to provide the public the option of submitting 
information or transacting business electronically to the maximum 
extent possible. USDA is implementing an electronic information system 
for posting information voluntarily submitted by manufacturers or 
vendors on the products they intend to offer for preferred procurement 
under each designated item. For information pertinent to GPEA 
compliance related to this rule, please contact Shana Love at (202) 
205-4008.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 2902

    Biobased products, Procurement.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of 
Agriculture proposes to amend 7 CFR chapter XXIX as follows:

CHAPTER XXIX--OFFICE OF ENERGY POLICY AND NEW USES

PART 2902--GUIDELINES FOR DESIGNATING BIOBASED PRODUCTS FOR FEDERAL 
PROCUREMENT

    1. The authority citation for part 2902 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8102.

Subpart B

    2. Add Sec. Sec.  2902.43 through 2902.51 to subpart B to read as 
follows:

Sec.
2902.43 Chain and cable lubricants.
2902.44 Corrosion preventatives.
2902.45 Food cleaners.
2902.46 Foaming lubricants.
2902.47 Gear lubricants.
2902.48 General purpose household cleaners.
2902.49 Industrial cleaners.
2902.50 Multipurpose cleaners.
2902.51 Parts wash solutions.


Sec.  2902.43  Chain and cable lubricants.

    (a) Definition. Products designed to provide lubrication in such 
applications as bar and roller chains, sprockets, and wire ropes and 
cables. Products may also prevent rust and corrosion in these 
applications.
    (b) Minimum biobased content. The preferred procurement product 
must have a minimum biobased content of at least 77 percent, which 
shall be based on the amount of qualifying biobased carbon in the 
product as a percent of the weight (mass) of the total organic carbon 
in the finished product.
    (c) Preference compliance date. No later than [date one year after 
the date of publication of the final rule], procuring agencies, in 
accordance with this part, will give a procurement preference for 
qualifying biobased chain and cable lubricants. By that date, Federal 
agencies that have the responsibility for drafting or reviewing 
specifications for items to be procured shall ensure that the relevant 
specifications require the use of biobased chain and cable lubricants.


Sec.  2902.44  Corrosion preventatives.

    (a) Definition. Products designed to prevent the deterioration 
(corrosion) of metals.
    (b) Minimum biobased content. The preferred procurement product 
must have a minimum biobased content of at least 53 percent, which 
shall be based on the amount of qualifying biobased carbon in the 
product as a percent of the weight (mass) of the total organic carbon 
in the finished product.
    (c) Preference compliance date. No later than [date one year after 
the date of publication of the final rule], procuring agencies, in 
accordance with this part, will give a procurement preference for 
qualifying biobased corrosion preventatives. By that date, Federal 
agencies that have the responsibility for drafting or reviewing 
specifications for items to be procured shall ensure that the relevant 
specifications require the use of biobased corrosion preventatives.


Sec.  2902.45  Food cleaners.

    (a) Definition. Anti-microbial products designed to clean the outer 
layer of various food products, such as fruit, vegetables, and meats.
    (b) Minimum biobased content. The preferred procurement product 
must have a minimum biobased content of at least 53 percent, which 
shall be based on the amount of qualifying biobased carbon in the 
product as a percent of the weight (mass) of the total organic carbon 
in the finished product.
    (c) Preference compliance date. No later than [date one year after 
the date of publication of the final rule], procuring agencies, in 
accordance with this part, will give a procurement preference for 
qualifying biobased food cleaners. By that date, Federal agencies that 
have the responsibility for drafting or reviewing specifications for 
items to be procured shall ensure that the relevant specifications 
require the use of biobased food cleaners.


Sec.  2902.46  Forming lubricants.

    (a) Definition. Products designed to provide lubrication during 
metalworking applications that are performed under extreme pressure. 
Such metalworking applications include tube bending, stretch forming, 
press braking, and swaging.
    (b) Minimum biobased content. The preferred procurement product 
must have a minimum biobased content of at least 68 percent, which 
shall be based on the amount of qualifying biobased carbon in the 
product as a percent of the weight (mass) of the total organic carbon 
in the finished product.
    (c) Preference compliance date. No later than [date one year after 
the date of publication of the final rule], procuring agencies, in 
accordance with this part, will give a procurement preference for 
qualifying biobased forming lubricants. By that date, Federal agencies 
that have the responsibility for drafting or reviewing specifications 
for items to be procured shall ensure that the relevant specifications 
require the use of biobased forming lubricants.


Sec.  2902.47  Gear lubricants.

    (a) Definition. Products, such as greases or oils, that are 
designed to reduce friction when applied to a toothed machine part 
(such as a wheel or cylinder) that meshes with another toothed part to 
transmit motion or to change speed or direction.
    (b) Minimum biobased content. The preferred procurement product 
must have a minimum biobased content of at least 58 percent, which 
shall be based on the amount of qualifying biobased carbon in the 
product as a percent of the weight (mass) of the total organic carbon 
in the finished product.
    (c) Preference compliance date. No later than [date one year after 
the date of publication of the final rule], procuring agencies, in 
accordance with this part, will give a procurement preference for 
qualifying biobased gear lubricants. By that date, Federal agencies 
that have the responsibility for drafting or reviewing specifications 
for items to be procured shall ensure that the relevant specifications 
require the use of gear lubricants.
    (d) Determining overlap with an EPA-designated recovered content 
product. Qualifying biobased products that fall under this item may, in 
some cases, overlap with the following EPA-designated recovered content 
product: Re-refined lubricating oils. USDA is requesting that 
manufacturers of these qualifying biobased products provide information 
for the BioPreferred Web site of qualifying biobased products about the 
intended uses of the product, information on whether or not the product 
contains any recovered material, in addition to biobased

[[Page 63328]]

ingredients, and performance standards against which the product has 
been tested. This information will assist Federal agencies in 
determining whether or not a qualifying biobased product overlaps with 
EPA-designated re-refined lubricating oils and which product should be 
afforded the preference in purchasing.

    Note to paragraph (d): Biobased gear lubricant products within 
this designated item can compete with similar gear lubricant 
products with recycled content. Under the Resource Conservation and 
Recovery Act of 1976, section 6002, the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency designated re-refined lubricating oils containing 
recovered materials as items for which Federal agencies must give 
preference in their purchasing programs. The designation can be 
found in the Comprehensive Procurement Guideline, 40 CFR 247.11.

Sec.  2902.48  General purpose household cleaners.

    (a) Definition. Products designed to clean multiple common 
household surfaces. This designated item does not include products that 
are formulated for use as disinfectants. Task-specific cleaning 
products, such as spot and stain removers, upholstery cleaners, 
bathroom cleaners, glass cleaners, etc., are not included in this item.
    (b) Minimum biobased content. The preferred procurement product 
must have a minimum biobased content of at least 39 percent, which 
shall be based on the amount of qualifying biobased carbon in the 
product as a percent of the weight (mass) of the total organic carbon 
in the finished product.
    (c) Preference compliance date. No later than [date one year after 
the date of publication of the final rule], procuring agencies, in 
accordance with this part, will give a procurement preference for 
qualifying biobased general purpose household cleaners. By that date, 
Federal agencies that have the responsibility for drafting or reviewing 
specifications for items to be procured shall ensure that the relevant 
specifications require the use of biobased general purpose household 
cleaners.


Sec.  2902.49  Industrial cleaners.

    (a) Definition. Products used to remove contaminants, such as 
adhesives, inks, paint, dirt, soil, and grease, from parts, products, 
tools, machinery, equipment, vessels, floors, walls, and other 
production-related work areas. The cleaning products within this item 
are usually solvents, but may take other forms. They may be used in 
either straight solution or diluted with water in pressure washers, or 
in hand wiping applications in industrial or manufacturing settings, 
such as inside vessels. Task-specific cleaners used in industrial 
settings, such as parts wash solutions, are not included in this 
definition.
    (b) Minimum biobased content. The preferred procurement product 
must have a minimum biobased content of at least 41 percent, which 
shall be based on the amount of qualifying biobased carbon in the 
product as a percent of the weight (mass) of the total organic carbon 
in the finished product.
    (c) Preference compliance date. No later than [date one year after 
the date of publication of the final rule], procuring agencies, in 
accordance with this part, will give a procurement preference for 
qualifying biobased industrial cleaners. By that date, Federal agencies 
that have the responsibility for drafting or reviewing specifications 
for items to be procured shall ensure that the relevant specifications 
require the use of biobased industrial cleaners.


Sec.  2902.50  Multipurpose cleaners.

    (a) Definition. Products used to clean dirt, grease, and grime from 
a variety of items in both industrial and domestic settings. This 
designated item does not include products that are formulated for use 
as disinfectants.
    (b) Minimum biobased content. The preferred procurement product 
must have a minimum biobased content of at least 56 percent, which 
shall be based on the amount of qualifying biobased carbon in the 
product as a percent of the weight (mass) of the total organic carbon 
in the finished product.
    (c) Preference compliance date. No later than [date one year after 
the date of publication of the final rule], procuring agencies, in 
accordance with this part, will give a procurement preference for 
qualifying biobased multipurpose cleaners. By that date, Federal 
agencies that have the responsibility for drafting or reviewing 
specifications for items to be procured shall ensure that the relevant 
specifications require the use of biobased multipurpose cleaners.


Sec.  2902.51  Parts wash solutions.

    (a) Definition. Products that are designed to clean parts in manual 
or automatic cleaning systems. Such systems include, but are not 
limited to, soak vats and tanks, cabinet washers, and ultrasonic 
cleaners.
    (b) Minimum biobased content. The preferred procurement product 
must have a minimum biobased content of at least 65 percent, which 
shall be based on the amount of qualifying biobased carbon in the 
product as a percent of the weight (mass) of the total organic carbon 
in the finished product.
    (c) Preference compliance date. No later than [date one year after 
the date of publication of the final rule], procuring agencies, in 
accordance with this part, will give a procurement preference for 
qualifying biobased parts wash solutions. By that date, Federal 
agencies that have the responsibility for drafting or reviewing 
specifications for items to be procured shall ensure that the relevant 
specifications require the use of biobased parts wash solutions.

    Dated: October 16, 2008.
Boyd Rutherford,
Assistant Secretary for Administration, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
[FR Doc. E8-25037 Filed 10-22-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-GL-P