March 5, 2021

Volume XI, Number 64


March 04, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

March 03, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

March 02, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

EPA Announces 10 Chemicals to Be Evaluated for Risks to Human Health and the Environment

This alert is the fifth in a series that discusses the significant changes instituted by the passage of a new federal Toxic Substances Control Act.  The first alert addressed broadly the law’s myriad of changes and the second alert discussed the significant changes instituted by its passage. The third alert addressed how TSCA, as amended, preempts state regulation of chemicals and preserves certain state laws and regulatory authority. The fourth alert discussed changes to confidential business information disclosure requirements.  A future alert will cover international impacts of the amendments.

On November 29, 2016, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) announced 10 chemicals that it will evaluate for potential risks to human health and the environment pursuant to its new authority under the recently enacted Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (the “Act”), which revised, updated, and replaced the 1976 federal toxic substances statute, known as the Toxic Substances Control Act (“TSCA”).  Many of the 10 targeted chemicals are incorporated into a wide variety of consumer end products, such as appliances, personal care products, and textiles.  The results of these evaluations, therefore, could significantly impact a broad spectrum of manufacturers.

Over the years, TSCA has been subject to criticism in large part due to the requirement that EPA choose the “least burdensome” way of addressing the risks posed by any given chemical.  The Act significantly expands EPA’s authority under TSCA by removing the “least burdensome” standard and eliminating the requirement that EPA undertake formal rulemaking before requiring companies to test chemical substances.  Under the new law, EPA can require toxicity testing through an administrative order, which requires considerably less administration and time.  The Act further modified TSCA such that EPA is now required to evaluate existing chemicals under a new, risk-based safety standard pursuant to clearly defined and enforceable deadline.

Pursuant to those new requirements and deadlines, EPA has announced that it will evaluate the following 10 chemicals:

  • 1,4-Dioxane

  • 1-Bromopropane

  • Asbestos

  • Carbon Tetrachloride

  • Cyclic Aliphatic Bromide Cluster

  • Methylene Chloride

  • N-methylpyrrolidone

  • Pigment Violet 29

  • Trichloroethylene

  • Tetrachloroethylene

EPA previously conducted risk assessments for three of these chemicals (Trichloroethylene, N-methylpyrrolidone, and methylene chloride) under the old TSCA and is currently drafting proposed rules for them that it plans to publish in December 2016.  Those rules, however, cover certain specified uses of the chemicals only, and the new evaluations may result in additional or more comprehensive restrictions.

EPA must complete the 10 risk evaluations within three years to determine whether the chemicals present an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment and must mitigate any such risk within two years.  Given the prevalent use of many of these chemicals, the results of these evaluations could significantly impact several industries, including the pharmaceutical, agrochemical, cosmetics, and adhesives industries, both in terms of manufacturing and finished products.  While the actual extent of that impact is uncertain, companies who manufacture these 10 chemicals or incorporate them into end products should be cognizant that EPA may severely restrict, limit, or modify their use in the foreseeable future.  We will continue to monitor the developments in this area and can provide guidance to companies regarding compliance once those rules are issued.

Copyright 2020 K & L GatesNational Law Review, Volume VI, Number 347



About this Author

B. David Naidu, KL Gates Law Firm, Environmental and Natural Resources Attorney

Mr. Naidu has extensive transactional, litigation and regulatory compliance experience involving a diverse set of environmental areas. He has advised clients in mergers and acquisitions, divestitures, real estate leases and financing. He possesses extensive experience in complex multi-party litigation. His advice to clients has covered a broad range of areas, including CERCLA (Superfund), brownfield redevelopment, eminent domain, natural resource damages, Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, TSCA, OSHA, RCRA, oil spills and nanotechnology.

Tara Pehush, KL Gates Law Firm, Commercial and Toxic Litigation Attorney

Tara Pehush is a partner in the firm’s New York office. She focuses her practice on litigation matters, including commercial, toxic tort, products liability, and insurance. She has done extensive work briefing both appeals and lower court motions on behalf of the firm's toxic tort clients, and has been involved with all phases of the pre-trial and trial processes as well, appearing as trial counsel for cases in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Delaware, Ohio, and Missouri. Ms. Pehush has also represented manufacturers and sellers of commercial equipment...

Michael Schalk, KL Gates Law Firm, Toxic Tort Litigation Attorney

Mr. Schalk is a partner in our Pittsburgh office practicing in the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice group. He focuses his practice primarily in product liability and toxic tort litigation. He has significant experience as trial counsel, appearing in trial courts in Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, New Jersey, New York and Ohio, among other jurisdictions. He is also a member of our Oil & Gas industry group and has represented oil and gas producers and pipeline companies in land use and zoning matters, including environmental, noise, and use approved...

Luke Steinberger, KL Gates Law Firm, Litigation Attorney

Luke Steinberger is an associate in the firm’s New York office practicing in the Commercial Disputes practice group. Mr. Steinberger represents both individuals and corporate clients in an array of matters, including contract disputes, business torts, and pro bono matters. His experience includes intellectual property litigation, maritime law, contract drafting, and antitrust law. His pro bono practice includes assisting prison inmates with Bivens claims and working with the Cyber Civil Rights Legal Project, a global K&L Gates pro bono project that provides...