Toxic substances: Significant new uses trimethylbenzoyl phosphine oxide; withdrawn,
[Federal Register: January 29, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 19)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 4605-4607]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr29ja99-29]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 721
[OPPTS-50563A; FRL-6050-7]
RIN 2070-AB27
Diphenyl-2,4,6-Trimethylbenzoyl Phosphine Oxide; Withdrawal of Proposed Significant New Use Rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Withdrawal of proposed rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is withdrawing a proposed significant new use rule (SNUR) for diphenyl-2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyl phosphine oxide based on receipt of new data. Based on the new data the Agency no longer finds that activities not described in the Premanufacture Notice (PMN) for this substance may result in significant changes in human or environmental exposure.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan B. Hazen, Director, Environmental Assistance Division (7408), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. E-531, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460, telephone: (202)
[[Page 4606]]
554-1404, TDD: (202) 554-0551; e-mail: TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Availability: Electronic copies of this document are available from the EPA Home Page at the Federal Register-Environmental Documents entry for this document under ``Laws and Regulations'' (http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/).
In the Federal Register of February 2, l988 (53 FR 2857), EPA proposed a SNUR to be codified at 40 CFR 721.855 establishing significant new uses for diphenyl-2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyl phosphine oxide. Because of additional data EPA has received for this substance, EPA is withdrawing this proposed rule.
-
Background
The Agency proposed the SNUR for diphenyl-2,4,6-trimethylbenzoyl phosphine oxide in the Federal Register of February 2, 1988 (53 FR 2857). The background and reasons for the SNUR are set forth in the preamble of the proposed rule. After the proposed SNUR, EPA received a 90-day oral subchronic study in rats for the substance. The study resulted in a No Observed Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL) of 100 milligrams/kilograms/day (mg/kg/day). There were effects noted in the liver, blood, and testes at 300 and 1000 mg/kg/day but there was no significant evidence of neurotoxic effects at any dose. EPA had expressed concerns for severe neurotoxicity hazard in the proposed SNUR. Based on this data, EPA no longer finds that activities not described in the PMN may result in significant changes in human exposure and is withdrawing the proposed rule.
-
Rationale for Withdrawal of the Proposed Rule
During review of the PMNs submitted for the chemical substance that is the subject of this withdrawal, EPA concluded that regulation was warranted based on available information that indicated activities not described in the PMN might result in significant changes in human exposure. Based on these findings, a SNUR was proposed.
Based on the submitted test data, EPA no longer finds that activities other than those described in the PMN may result in significant changes in human exposure. Therefore, EPA is withdrawing the proposed SNUR for this chemical substance. When this withdrawal is published in the Federal Register, export notification under section 12(b) of TSCA will no longer be required.
-
Public Record
The official record for this proposed rule, as well as the public version, has been established for this proposed rule under docket control number OPPTS-50563A (including comments and data submitted electronically). A public version of this record, including printed, paper versions of electronic comments, which does not include any information claimed as CBI, is available for inspection from 12 noon to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The official record is located in the TSCA Nonconfidential Information Center, Rm. NE-B607, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC.
-
Regulatory Assessment Requirements
-
Certain Acts and Executive Orders
This proposed rule does not impose any requirements. As such, this action does not require review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). For the same reason, it does not require any action under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4) or Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In addition, since this type of action does not require any proposal, no action is needed under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
-
Executive Order 12875
Under Executive Order 12875, entitled Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership (58 FR 58093, October 28, 1993), EPA may not issue a regulation that is not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local, or tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must provide to OMB a description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected State, local, and tribal governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other representatives of State, local, and tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''
Today's proposed rule does not create an unfunded Federal mandate on State, local, or tribal governments. The proposed rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of Executive Order 12875 do not apply to this proposed rule.
-
Executive Order 13084
Under Executive Order 13084, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (63 FR 27655, May 19, 1998), EPA may not issue a regulation that is not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by the tribal governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must provide to OMB, in a separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
Today's proposed rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal governments. This proposed rule does not involve or impose any requirements that affect Indian tribes. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to this proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 721
Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
[[Page 4607]]
Dated: January 19, 1999.
Charles M. Auer,
Director, Chemical Control Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
[FR Doc. 99-2205Filed1-28-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F
-
