Je veux savoir à propos de…

61710

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 213 / Monday, November 8, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
EPA has determined that there is good cause for revising these provisions without prior proposal and opportunity for comment, because these revisions simply undertake the ministerial task of implementing the court order vacating an exemption at 40 CFR 713.7b2 and making the necessary amendments to corresponding text in 40 CFR 713.7b.
As a matter of law, the order issued by the Second Circuit on June 5, 2020
vacated the reporting exemption for persons who manufacture including import a mercury-added product where that person is engaged only in the import of a product that contains a component that is a mercury-added product. It is, therefore, unnecessary to provide notice and an opportunity for comment on this action, which merely carries out the courts order.

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1

D. Which regulations is EPA removing and replacing?
EPA is effectuating the Second Circuit vacatur of the exemption for persons who manufacture including import a mercury-added product where that person is engaged only in the import of a product that contains a component that is a mercury-added product.
Therefore, the current text at 40 CFR
713.7b2 will be removed and replaced with appropriate textual and numbering updates with the text currently found at 40 CFR 713.7b3.
E. What are the estimated burdens associated with the removed and replaced regulations?
EPA has prepared an economic analysis of the potential impacts associated with this rulemaking Ref. 3.
This economic analysis estimates and evaluates the total costs and benefits for additional reporters to the mercury inventory reporting rule due to this rulemaking i.e., those that import products that contain a component that is a mercury-added product. EPA is considering an estimate of 756 as the number of sites potentially subject to the amended rule, which, under the revised requirements, is now applicable to imports of products that contain a component that is a mercury-added product. EPA estimates that as many as 657 sites will submit reports due to the revised requirements. This is the incremental difference between the number of actual reporters to the mercury inventory reporting rule during the 2019 submission period, and the expected number of total reporters based on the number of entities that report to the Interstate Mercury Education & Reduction Clearinghouse IMERC or to EPAs Chemical Data Reporting CDR or Toxics Release
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:24 Nov 05, 2021

Jkt 256001

Inventory TRI. More details on the methodology used can be found in the Agencys economic analysis Ref. 3.
The chief benefit of the final rule is the collection of detailed data on mercury, which will serve as a basis to recommend actions to further reduce mercury use in the United States, as required at TSCA section 8b10C.
Another benefit is the use of information collected under the final rule to help the United States implement its obligations under the Minamata Convention, a multilateral environmental agreement that addresses specific human activities that are contributing to widespread mercury pollution. While there are no quantified benefits for the final rule, the statutory mandates at TSCA sections 8b10C
and D 15 U.S.C. 2607b10C and D, specifically call for and authorizes a rule to support an inventory of mercury supply, use, and trade in the United States, to identify any manufacturing processes or products that intentionally add mercury, and to recommend actions to achieve further reductions in mercury use. As described in the Agencys economic analysis, unquantified benefits include providing increased information on mercury and assisting in the reduction of mercury use Ref. 3. To the extent that the information gathered through this rule is used to reduce mercury use, benefits to society will result from a reduction in exposure.
Benefits: The final rule will provide information on mercury and mercuryadded products to which the Agency and the public does not currently have access. To the extent that the information gathered through this final rule is used to reduce mercury use, benefits to society will result from a reduction in risk.
Costs: Total reporter industry costs the first year were estimated in 2020$ at $5.1 million, and $3.6 million in subsequent reporting years.
Annualized over 10 years, the reporter costs are $1.5 million at both 3% and 7% discount rates. Agency costs are $729 per report per year, for an annualized cost of $177,000 and $181,000 at 3% and 7% discount rates, respectively. Therefore, the total annualized costs are expected to be approximately $1.7 million at both 3%
and 7% discount rates. The total burden of the rule is expected to be approximately 212,000 hours over the 10-year analysis period. These estimates include compliance determination, rule familiarization, CBI substantiation, electronic reporting, and recordkeeping, in addition to completing reporting requirements.

PO 00000

Frm 00046

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

Small Entity Impacts: The final rule will impact 203 companies that meet the U.S. Small Business Administration SBA definitions for their respective NAICS classifications. Among the total 657 sites regulated under the rule, EPA
found that the costs of the rule exceed 3 percent of the value of sales for 2
small businesses, and an additional 3
small businesses may incur costs at between 1 and 3 percent of the value of sales. EPA is unable to determine whether these 5 small businesses actually import products that contain a component that is a mercury-added product.
Environmental Justice and Protection of Children: The Agency believes that the information collected under this rule, if finalized, will assist EPA and others in determining the potential hazards and risks associated with elemental mercury and mercury compounds. Although not directly impacting environmental justice-related concerns, this information will enable the Agency to better protect human health and the environment, including in low-income and minority communities. The rule is directed at all mercury-added products that are manufactured or imported into the United States. All consumers of these chemicals and the products made from them and all workers who come into contact with these chemicals could benefit if data regarding the chemicals health and environmental effects were developed. Therefore, it does not appear that the costs and the benefits of the rule will be disproportionately distributed across different geographic regions or among different categories of individuals.
Effects on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Government entities are not expected to be subject to the rules requirements, which apply to entities that manufacture including import mercury or mercury-added products, or otherwise intentionally use mercury in a manufacturing process. The final rule does not have a significant intergovernmental mandate, significant or unique effect on small governments, or have Federalism implications.
II. References The following is a listing of the documents that are specifically referenced in this document. The docket includes these documents and other information considered by EPA, including documents that are referenced within the documents that are included in the docket, even if the referenced document is not physically located in the docket. For assistance in locating these other documents, please consult
E:FRFM08NOR1.SGM

08NOR1