October 24, 2020

Volume X, Number 298


October 23, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

October 22, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

October 21, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Looming November 30, 2020 EPA Submission Deadline for Chemical Data Reporting Requires Attention Now

Companies required to report under the Toxic Substances Control Act’s (TSCA) Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) regulations need to consider and address new Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provisions governing reporting of chemical data.

CDR regulations generally require that chemical manufacturers and processors (including importers) report a wide range of chemical production data to EPA every four years. In March 2020, EPA finalized certain amendments to the CDR regulations, which implemented key changes in how this data is reported to EPA. EPA extended the reporting deadline to November 30, 2020, to give companies more time to make submissions under CDR after the agency announced key changes to the CDR regulations. Some of the key changes include: confidential business information (CBI); processing and use codes; byproduct reporting; foreign parent reporting; and small manufacturer/government definitions. These changes require attention now to timely and accurately report chemical information to EPA.

CBI Substantiation

EPA’s amendments confirm that information and data submitted under the CDR may be claimed as CBI in order to ensure confidential information is not released to the public. EPA is requiring upfront substantiation for CBI claims. This change places a higher burden on companies claiming CBI to articulate the harmful effects to its competitive position if such information were to be disclosed publicly. EPA also identified certain data elements that cannot be claimed as CBI.

Processing and Use Codes

EPA also changed certain processing and use codes used for reporting information under the CDR in order to conform with product and use codes used by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The shift to OECD-based codes will be primarily voluntary for most substances for the 2020 submission period (except for high priority TSCA substances), but use of OECD-based codes will be mandatory for all substances for the 2024 submission period.

Byproduct Reporting

EPA added two additional exemptions for byproducts that do not need reporting under CDR. First, byproducts recycled in a site-limited enclosed system are exempt from reporting (Portland Cement Manufacturing and Kraft Pulping Process). Second, byproducts manufactured as part of non-integral pollution control and boiler equipment need not be reported under the CDR.

Foreign Parent Reporting

EPA changed site identification reporting requirements to include the highest-level foreign parent company, if applicable. Sites are still required to report the highest-level U.S. parent company, but if the ultimate parent company is outside of the U.S., the highest-level foreign parent company must be identified.

Small Manufacturer/Government Definitions

EPA changed the definition of a “small manufacturer” in the CDR. EPA also added a definition for “small government.” Manufacturers meeting either of these definitions have no or reduced reporting obligations under the CDR.

© 2020 Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP. All Rights Reserved.National Law Review, Volume X, Number 275



About this Author

Lynn M. Kornfeld Environmental Litigation Attorney Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath Denver, CO

Lynn Kornfeld partners with commercial and industrial clients on environmental transactional and compliance matters as well as corporate and real estate transactions.

Environmental Compliance Advice

Lynn has represented major multinational corporations in resolving compliance and permitting issues arising under the Clean Water Act (CWA), Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), and the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). She defends clients throughout the country in EPA and state...

Judith Praitis Environmental Attorney Faegre Drinker Law Firm

Judith Praitis counsels clients on environmental transactional issues and on air, water and waste management permitting, compliance, release reporting and enforcement issues under California and federal law. With decades of experience in environmental law, Judith is a trusted source of legal and business guidance for clients working to develop and implement environmental management systems, audit compliance protocols, and anticipate and adapt to emerging regulatory environments. Judith has particular experience managing complex environmental matters for distressed entities, or those with material legacy environmental liabilities, to orchestrate a controlled resolution of such obligations. She is particularly adept at crafting novel settlements with governmental regulators and prosecutors.

310 203 4022
Luke Westerman Product Liability Attorney Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath Minneapolis, MN

Luke Westerman advises clients at all levels of the food and agribusiness industry on compliance with the latest legislative and regulatory developments. He also devises comprehensive litigation strategies to help food and agribusiness clients navigate a wide variety of complex litigation matters before state and federal courts.

Luke has represented agricultural retailers, distributors and manufacturers in a broad spectrum of legal challenges, including product liability, Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) compliance, and pesticide drift cases. His practical...