(a) A substantiation submitted under § 350.7 will be determined to be insufficient to support a claim of trade secrecy unless the answers to the questions in the substantiation submitted under § 350.7 support all of the following conclusions. This substantiation must include, where applicable, specific facts.

(1) The submitter has not disclosed the information to any other person, other than a member of a local emergency planning committee, an officer or employee of the United States or a State or local government, an employee of such person, or a person who is bound by a confidentiality agreement, and such person has taken reasonable measures to protect the confidentiality of such information and intends to continue to take such measures. To support this conclusion, the facts asserted must show all of the following:

(i) The submitter has taken reasonable measures to prevent unauthorized disclosure of the specific chemical identity and will continue to take such measures.

(ii) The submitter has not disclosed the specific chemical identity to any person who is not bound by an agreement to refrain from disclosing the information.

(iii) The submitter has not previously disclosed the specific chemical identity to a local, State, or Federal government entity without asserting a confidentiality claim.

(2) The information is not required to be disclosed, or otherwise made available, to the public under any other Federal or State law.

(3) Disclosure of the information is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of such person. To support this conclusion, the facts asserted must show all of the following:

(i) Either: (A) Competitors do not know or the submitter is not aware that competitors know that the chemical whose identity is being claimed trade secret can be used in the fashion that the submitter uses it, and competitors cannot easily duplicate the specific use of this chemical through their own research and development activities; or

(B) Competitors are not aware or the submitter does not know whether competitors are aware that the submitter is using this chemical in this fashion.

(ii) The fact that the submitter manufactures, imports or otherwise uses this chemical in a particular fashion is not contained in any publication or other information source (of which the submitter is aware) available to competitors or the public.

(iii) The non-confidential version of the submission under this title does not contain sufficient information to enable competitors to determine the specific chemical identity withheld therefrom.

(iv) The information referred to in paragraph (a)(3)(i)(A) of this section, is of value to competitors.

(v) Competitors are likely to use this information to the economic detriment of the submitter and are not precluded from doing so by a United States patent.

(vi) The resulting harm to submitter's competitive position would be substantial.

(4) The chemical identity is not readily discoverable through reverse engineering. To support this conclusion, the facts asserted must show that competitors cannot readily discover the specific chemical identity by analysis of the submitter's products or environmental releases.

(b) The sufficiency of the trade secrecy claim shall be decided entirely upon the information submitted under § 350.7, or § 350.11(a)(2)(ii).