Bergeson & Campbell, P.C. (B&C®) is a Washington, D.C. law firm providing chemical and chemical product stakeholders unparalleled experience, judgment, and excellence in matters relating to TSCA, and other global chemical management programs.
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton

As reported in our April 30, 2021, blog item, on April 29, 2021, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the release of a list of 390 chemicals that it states are “expected to lose their confidential status and move to the public portion of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Inventory, furthering the agency’s commitment to data transparency.” EPA announced on May 14, 2021, that it is extending the notification deadline to June 30, 2021. According to EPA, the American Chemistry Council and BASF requested additional time to review the list of 390 chemicals. EPA states that concerns were expressed over the potential that some of the chemicals overlap with those reported under the Active-Inactive rule and the perception that EPA relied only on 2020 Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) rule submissions to identify these chemicals.

According to EPA, in regard to the industry concerns that it relied solely on 2020 CDR submissions, it plans to declassify the specific identities of these chemicals because one or more manufacturers reported the chemicals as non-confidential during the 2012, 2016, and/or 2020 CDR reporting periods -- “meaning that at least one manufacturer did not request that each of the chemical identities be kept confidential, effectively saying it is not a secret that the chemical is in U.S. commerce.” EPA states that additionally, it did an “extensive review” of each individual instance in which confidential status was not requested for these chemical identities to confirm the accuracy of the list.

EPA acknowledges that some of the chemicals may also have been reported or subject to reporting under the Active-Inactive rule, which required companies to identify chemicals manufactured, imported, or processed in the United States during the ten-year time period ending on June 21, 2016. Although EPA is aware that there may have been submitter confusion and questions regarding confidentiality claims during the initial reporting period, it states that for each of the 390 chemicals, “there is also one or more independent CDR-based (and EPA-validated) reasons to consider the chemical identities to be no longer eligible for inclusion on the confidential portion of the Inventory.” EPA intends to update the TSCA Inventory listings for these chemicals to list the specific chemical identities on the public portion of the Inventory during summer 2021.

EPA states that stakeholders with interest, questions, or concerns about this change in confidential status may contact the EPA staff listed on its webpage no later than June 30, 2021. Stakeholders should review the list of substances and ensure that none of those substances is of critical importance to maintain confidential status.


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton

On May 12, 2021, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) began environmental justice consultations regarding the development of risk management actions under Section 6(a) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for Asbestos, Part 1: Chrysotile Asbestos and Pigment Violet 29 (PV29). EPA will hold two identical consultation webinars, on June 1, 2021, and June 9, 2021. EPA states that it is offering these repeated sessions to increase opportunities for participation. Both sessions will provide an overview of the TSCA risk management requirements, the findings from the final risk evaluations, the tools available to manage the unreasonable risks from Asbestos, Part 1: Chrysotile Asbestos and PV29, and an opportunity for input on environmental justice concerns. The consultations are open to the public, and EPA is inviting national, local, and non-governmental organizations, communities, and other interested stakeholders to participate. The environmental justice consultation period end August 13, 2021.

EPA states that in addition to these environmental justice consultations, it is implementing a “robust outreach effort” on risk management that includes consultations with small businesses, state and local governments, and tribes. There will also be an open public comment period on proposed risk management actions. More information on EPA’s final risk evaluation for Asbestos, Part 1: Chrysotile Asbestos is available in our January 4, 2021, memorandum and on EPA’s final risk evaluation for PV29 in our January 25, 2021, memorandum.


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) will hold a virtual public meeting on May 26, 2021, at 1:00 p.m. (EDT). NYSDEC will present topics for discussion related to implementation of the recently enacted law, which created ingredient disclosure requirements for children’s products.  Title 9 of Article 37 of the Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) establishes an ingredient disclosure program and prohibits certain chemicals in children’s products. ECL Article 37 instructs NYSDEC to promulgate lists of chemicals of concern and high-priority chemicals by March 1, 2022. It also prohibits the sale of children’s products containing benzene, asbestos, or tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate effective January 1, 2023. NYSDEC states that it is in the process of developing a rule to implement portions of the law. NYSDEC expects the rule to address the specific product categories that are covered, what chemicals and supporting information must be disclosed, details on how to obtain a waiver from reporting or the sales prohibition, and the fees associated with reporting and applying for a waiver. NYSDEC notes that it will hold a formal public comment period on the proposed rule at a later date. Stakeholders must register to attend the virtual public meeting.


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on May 11, 2021, that it has launched a new application in the Central Data Exchange (CDX), EPA’s electronic reporting site, that will allow users to submit electronically certain communications under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).  According to EPA, the new application provides users with a faster, secure, and more convenient way to comply with TSCA reporting requirements and is “expected to be used for hundreds of individual communications every year.”
 
EPA states that the application is located within the Chemical Safety and Pesticide Programs (CSPP) data flow and supports numerous types of communications, including General Confidential Correspondence, Requests for Chemical Information, Pre-manufacture Notice (PMN) Corrections for Submissions made Prior to 2016, and Copy of Record Requests.  Previously, these types of communications were required to be sent to EPA in hard copy.  EPA will continue to accept paper documents, but recommends submitting TSCA communications electronically when possible “since paper communications could take longer to process.”


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on May 7, 2021, that it is partnering with the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) Science Consortium International, Unilever, and Syngenta on a three-part virtual workshop series on “Using In Silico and In Vitro Approaches for Next Generation Risk Assessment of Potential Respiratory Toxicants.”  EPA states that this webinar series supports its commitment “to collaborate with partners and stakeholders to reduce, refine, or replace vertebrate animal testing, as outlined in the Strategic Plan to Promote the Development and Implementation of Alternative Test Methods within the [Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)] Program.”  The webinars will take place on May 19, May 26, and June 2, 2021, from 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. (EDT).  Each webinar will feature three speakers.  The meeting agenda and registration information are available at www.thepsci.eu/inhalation-webinars.  Attendees must register for each of the three webinars individually.


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works will hold a hearing on May 12, 2021, on several nominations, including that of Michal Freedhoff to be Assistant Administrator for Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).  As reported in our January 22, 2021, blog item, Freedhoff was onboarded in January 2021 as Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator for Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention.  On April 14, 2021, President Joseph Biden nominated Freedhoff for Assistant Administrator for Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention.  According to Biden’s announcement, Freedhoff has more than 20 years of government experience, most recently as the Minority Director of Oversight for the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.  She began her Congressional service in 1996 in then-Representative Ed Markey’s (D-MA) office as a Congressional Science and Engineering fellow after receiving a Ph.D. in physical chemistry at the University of Rochester.  Freedhoff also served on the staffs of the House Science Committee, the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and the House Natural Resources Committee.  The announcement states that Freedhoff’s legislative work includes the 2016 re-authorization of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 2019 legislation to address per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) contamination, the fuel economy provisions in the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act, and a law requiring the creation of an online database of potential consumer product safety defects.
 
The Committee will also consider several other nominations, including that of Radhika Fox to be EPA Assistant Administrator for Water.  Like Freedhoff, she was onboarded at EPA in January 2021.  More information on Fox is available in President Biden’s April 14, 2021, announcement.


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton

On April 29, 2021, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the release of a list of 390 chemicals that it states are “expected to lose their confidential status and move to the public portion of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Inventory, furthering the agency’s commitment to data transparency.”  According to EPA, the specific identities of these chemicals were reported as non-confidential during Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) cycles from the 2012, 2016, and/or 2020 reporting periods.  In accordance with the CDR rule and with TSCA Sections 8 and 14, EPA intends to update the TSCA Inventory listings for these chemicals to list the specific chemical identities on the public portion of the Inventory.  Stakeholders should check the list of substances and ensure that none of those substances is of critical importance to maintain confidential status.  Stakeholders with interest, questions, or concerns about this change in confidential status may contact the listed EPA staff no later than May 14, 2021.  EPA expects to include the specific chemical identities of these 390 chemicals in the next routine publication of the public TSCA Inventory, anticipated in late summer 2021.


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on April 27, 2021, “important policy shifts in its review of new [per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)] before they can enter the market.”  According to EPA, although some new PFAS have been allowed to enter the market through low volume exemptions (LVE), EPA’s New Chemicals Program is implementing a new strategy for reviewing and managing LVE requests for PFAS.  EPA states that due to the scientific complexities associated with assessing PFAS, and the hazard potential associated with various sub-classes of PFAS, “it is challenging to conduct an appropriately robust review of LVE requests for PFAS in the 30 days the regulations allow.”  Under the regulations, EPA can deny LVE requests if it finds the chemical may cause serious human health effects or significant environmental effects or when issues concerning toxicity or exposure require review that cannot be completed in 30 days.  According to EPA, “[g]iven the complexity of PFAS chemistry, potential health effects, and their longevity and persistence in the environment, an LVE submission for a PFAS is unlikely to be eligible for this kind of exemption under the regulations.”  While EPA will consider each LVE application individually, it “generally expects” that it will deny pending and new LVE submissions for PFAS.  This will allow EPA more time to conduct a more thorough review and, as appropriate, “put measures in place to mitigate the potential risk of these chemicals as the agency determines whether to allow them to enter commerce.”  EPA states that in addition, it is “exploring ways to work cooperatively with companies to voluntarily withdraw previously granted LVEs.”  EPA states that this “would build upon a 2016 outreach effort that resulted in companies withdrawing more than half of the 82 long-chain PFAS LVEs that existed at the time.”


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a Federal Register notice on April 28, 2021, announcing a 30-day comment period on the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Interagency Testing Committee’s (ITC) revisions to the Priority Testing List.  86 Fed. Reg. 22414.  In the 74th ITC Report, ITC revised the TSCA Section 4(e) Priority Testing List by adding the following 15 high-priority substances designated pursuant to TSCA Section 6(b) and 24 organohalogen flame retardants:

Chemical Substance Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number
High-Priority Substances
1,3-Butadiene 106-99-0
Butyl benzyl phthalate (BBP) - 1,2-Benzene- dicarboxylic acid, 1- butyl 2(phenylmethyl) ester 85-68-7
Dibutyl phthalate (DBP) (1,2-Benzene- dicarboxylic acid, 1,2- dibutyl ester) 84-74-2
o-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1
p-Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7
trans-1,2- Dichloroethylene 156-60-5
1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5
Dicyclohexyl phthalate 84-61-7
Di-ethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP) - (1,2-Benzene- dicarboxylic acid, 1,2- bis(2- ethylhexyl) ester) 117-81-7
Di-isobutyl phthalate (DIBP) - (1,2-Benzene- dicarboxylic acid, 1,2- bis-(2methylpropyl) ester) 84-69-5
Formaldehyde 50-00-0
1,3,4,6,7,8-Hexahydro-4,6,6,7,8,8-hexamethylcyclopenta [g]-2-benzopyran (HHCB) 1222-05-5
Phthalic anhydride 85-44-9
4,4'-(1-Methylethylidene)bis[2, 6-dibromophenol] (TBBPA) 79-94-7
1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5
Organohalogen Flame Retardants
Bis(hexachlorocyclopentadieno)cyclooctane 13560-89-9
1,2-Bis(2,4,6-tribromophenoxy)ethane 37853-59-1
1,1'-Ethane-1,2-diylbis(pentabromobenzene) 84852-53-9
2-(2-Hydroxyethoxy)ethyl 2-hydroxypropyl 3,4,5,6-tetrabromophthalate 20566-35-2
2,2'-[(1-Methylethylidene)bis[(2,6-dibromo-4,1-
phenylene)oxymethylene]]bis[oxirane]
3072-84-2
Mixture of chlorinated linear alkanes C14-17 with 45-52 % chlorine 85535-85-9
N,N-Ethylene-bis(tetrabromophthalimide) 32588-76-4
Pentabromochlorocyclohexane 87-84-3
(Pentabromophenyl)methyl acrylate 59447-55-1
Pentabromotoluene 87-83-2
Perbromo-1,4-diphenoxybenzene 58965-66-5
Phosphonic acid, (2-chloroethyl)-, bis(2-chloroethyl) ester 6294-34-4
Propanoic acid, 2-bromo-, methyl ester 5445-17-0
Tetrabromobisphenol A-bis(2,3-dibromopropyl ether) 21850-44-2
Tetrabromobisphenol A bis(2-hydroxyethyl) ether 4162-45-2
Tetrabromobisphenol A diallyl ether 25327-89-3
Tetrabromobisphenol A dimethyl ether 37853-61-5
2,4,6-Tribromoaniline 147-82-0
1,3,5-Tribromo-2-(prop-2-en-1-yloxy)benzene 3278-89-5
Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphite 140-08-9
Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl) phosphate 126-72-7
1,3,5-Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)-1,3,5-triazine-2,4,6(1H,3H,5H)-trione 52434-90-9
Tris(tribromoneopentyl)phosphate 19186-97-1
2,4,6-Tris-(2,4,6-tribromophenoxy)-1,3,5-triazine 25713-60-4

ITC requests that EPA add these chemical substances and the other five high-priority substances and six organohalogen flame retardants currently on the Priority Testing List to 40 C.F.R. Section 716.120(a), the list of substances subject to the TSCA Section 8(d) Health and Safety Data Reporting rule (40 C.F.R. Part 716).  The rule requires manufacturers (including importers) of chemical substances and mixtures added to the Health and Safety Data Reporting rule to submit lists and copies of unpublished health and safety studies to EPA.  Comments are due May 28, 2021.
 
EPA notes that in addition to the chemical substances being added to the Priority Testing List in the 74th ITC Report, the Priority Testing List includes two alkylphenols, 45 High Production Volume (HPV) Challenge Program orphan chemicals, cadmium, a category of cadmium compounds, six non-phthalate plasticizers, 25 phosphate ester flame retardants, two other flame retardants, nine chemicals to which children living near hazardous waste sites may be exposed, and 19 diisocyanates and related compounds.


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) announced on April 12, 2021, that it will hold a public webinar on April 28, 2021, to receive information from interested parties about updates CPSC is making to www.SaferProducts.gov/Business for reports filed electronically under Section 15(b) of the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA).  86 Fed. Reg. 18966.  The presentation will focus on Section 15(b) reporting for the purposes of entering the Fast Track Recall Program.  Webinar participants will have an opportunity to see the improvements to www.SaferProducts.gov/Business and provide feedback to CPSC through a moderated discussion.  CPSC states that it would like to hear from manufacturers, distributors, and retailers that have participated in the Fast Track Recall Program, including those who use www.SaferProducts.gov/Business to report potentially defective or hazardous products to CPSC.  The goal of the webinar is to receive feedback on these updates and to assess the impact, if any, that the improvements will have on the website’s utility and usability and the Fast Track Recall Program.

CPSA Section 15(b) requires every manufacturer of a consumer product, or other product or substance over which CPSC has jurisdiction, distributed in commerce, and every distributor or retailer of such product, to report immediately when it obtains certain information.  Such reporting is required when manufacturers, distributors, or retailers obtain information that reasonably supports the conclusion that a product:

  • Fails to comply with an applicable consumer product safety rule or with a voluntary consumer product safety standard that CPSC relied on under CPSA Section 9;
  • Fails to comply with any other rule, regulation, standard, or ban under the CPSA or any other act CPSC enforces;
  • Contains a defect that could create a substantial product hazard (i.e., a product defect that (because of the pattern of defect, the number of defective products distributed in commerce, the severity of the risk, or otherwise) creates a substantial risk of injury to the public); or
  • Creates an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death.

This reporting is required unless the manufacturer, distributor, or retailer has actual knowledge that CPSC has been adequately informed of such defect, such failure to comply, or such risk.  Manufacturers, distributors, and retailers can submit Section 15(b) reports to CPSC at www.SaferProducts.gov/Business.  When submitting a Section 15(b) report through www.SaferProducts.gov/Business, manufacturers, distributors, and retailers may elect to participate in the Fast Track Recall Program, which is an alternative procedure for recalling products reported under CPSA Section 15(b).


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on April 8, 2021, that it is releasing an updated toxicity assessment for perfluorobutane sulfonic acid (PFBS), which is a member of the group of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).  EPA states that this PFBS assessment is part of its commitment to restore scientific integrity to all of the Agency’s actions and increase the amount of research and information available to the public on PFAS.  According to EPA’s announcement, “EPA, federal agencies, states, tribes, and local communities can use the PFBS toxicity assessment, along with specific exposure and other relevant information, to determine if and when it is necessary to take action to address potential health risks associated with human exposures to PFBS under appropriate regulations and statutes.”  EPA notes that the updated assessment “has gone through all appropriate reviews, includes input EPA received from external peer review, upholds the tenants of scientific integrity, was authored by expert career scientists in EPA’s Office of Research and Development, and has not been compromised by political staff -- these were all issues with a version of the assessment that was posted during the previous administration.  The release of today’s PFBS assessment upholds the integrity of EPA’s science, which EPA, states, tribes, and more rely on to make decisions that protect the health of their communities.”
 
According to EPA’s fact sheet on the toxicity assessment, PFBS is a replacement chemical for perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), a PFAS that was voluntarily phased out by the primary U.S. manufacturer by 2002.  PFBS has been identified in the environment and consumer products, including surface water, wastewater, drinking water, dust, carpeting and carpet cleaners, and floor wax.  The fact sheet states that the PFBS toxicity assessment is comparable to assessments developed under EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) and Provisional Peer-Reviewed Toxicity Value (PPRTV) Programs in that it provides hazard identification, dose-response information, and toxicity values.  EPA will continue to work with state, tribal, and local partners to provide technical assistance as they consider the final PFBS toxicity values in relevant exposure scenarios.  The fact sheet notes that at this time, EPA does not plan to issue a regulation for PFBS.


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

On March 31, 2021, the Product Stewardship Society (PSS) presented “Product Stewardship and the Pandemic: Surviving and Thriving in Disruptive Times.” Lynn L. Bergeson, Managing Partner, Bergeson & Campbell, P.C. (B&C®), and PSS President, moderated a lively and informative discussion identifying the broad range of complex, unresolved, and evolving issues product stewards have faced and continue to face because of the pandemic.
 
Presenters included:

  • Al Iannuzzi, Ph.D., Vice President, Sustainability, The Estée Lauder Companies, Inc.;
  • Louise Proud, Vice President, Global Environment, Health & Safety, Pfizer;
  • Tina Armstrong, Ph.D., Principal Scientist and Vice President, Arcadis; and
  • Jon Hellerstein, CIH, CSP, of Global Product Stewardship Solutions.

A recording of the webinar is now available for PSS members and non-members alike to watch on demand via PSS's e-learning portal. The portal also contains a wealth of resources and tools to equip product stewards and enhance the many roles they play in creating successful, sustainable products and solutions.


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link
 
SAVE THE DATE
NEW TSCA AT FIVE
Virtual Conference
June 30, 2021
 
This June marks the fifth anniversary of the enactment of the game-changing Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (Lautenberg) that amended the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). With a new Administration and the relentless pace of regulatory developments related to Lautenberg implementation, there are many issues to consider and problems to solve.

The Environmental Law Institute (ELI), the George Washington University Milken Institute School of Public Health, and Bergeson & Campbell, P.C. (B&C®) are pleased to announce the fifth annual conference providing updates and insights regarding the current state of TSCA implementation, ongoing and emerging issues, and related developments. Topics will include how EPA is implementing Section 6 risk evaluation provisions, changes in new chemical review, existing chemical risk management provisions, and TSCA’s role in achieving environmental justice, among other topics.

As with our previous TSCA anniversary events, a stellar faculty of speakers from government, non-governmental organizations, industry, and academia will convene to inform, analyze, discuss, and debate the most pressing issues related to TSCA with regulatory practitioners and other stakeholder attendees.

Detailed program and registration information to come. SAVE THE DATE!


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on April 1, 2021, that it is extending the public comment period for a manufacturer-requested risk evaluation of octahydro-tetramethyl-naphthalenyl-ethanone (OTNE), a category of chemical substances consisting of four inseparable individual isomers.  As reported in our February 18, 2021, blog item, EPA notes that two chemicals in the OTNE category are considered persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) chemicals under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), “meaning they are toxic, can remain in the environment for long periods of time, and can build up or accumulate in the body.”  EPA “welcomes all public comments,” particularly on the following:

  • Any information not included in the manufacturer request that commenters believe EPA would need to conduct a risk evaluation;
  • Additional conditions of use EPA is proposing to include in the risk evaluation; and
  • Information on conditions of use not included in the manufacturer request or in the additional conditions of use EPA proposes to include in the risk evaluation, specifically the inclusion of any additional conditions of use and potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulations.  EPA states that it “is in the process of broadly re-examining how it intends to implement these and other provisions of the amended [TSCA] including determining how new executive orders will be addressed.  This process would benefit greatly from stakeholder feedback.”

Comments were due April 5, 2021, but EPA is extending the comment period an additional 30 days.  After the comment period closes, EPA will review the comments and either grant or deny the request to conduct a risk evaluation within 60 days.  If EPA grants the request, the manufacturers would be responsible for half the cost of the risk evaluation.  International Flavors and Fragrances, Inc., Privi Organics USA Corporation, and DRT America, Inc. formally requested the risk evaluation through the OTNE Consortium managed by B&C® Consortia Management, L.L.C. (BCCM).


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

This week's All Things Chemical™ Podcast will be of interest to readers of the TSCAblog™. A brief description of the episode written by Lynn L. Bergeson is below.

This week I sat down with Karin Baron, Senior Regulatory Consultant to B&C and our affiliated consultancy, The Acta Group, to discuss the European Union’s (EU) Commission Regulation issued last June relating to the completion of safety data sheets (SDS).  As listeners know, SDSs are critically important commercial documents that describe the hazards identified with a particular chemical product or mixture as it makes  its way in commerce.  While this is an EU rule, Karin explains why the new regulation has important consequences for U.S. businesses.

ALL MATERIALS IN THIS PODCAST ARE PROVIDED SOLELY FOR INFORMATIONAL  AND ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES. THE MATERIALS ARE NOT INTENDED TO CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE OR THE PROVISION OF LEGAL SERVICES. ALL LEGAL QUESTIONS SHOULD BE ANSWERED DIRECTLY BY A LICENSED ATTORNEY PRACTICING IN THE APPLICABLE AREA OF LAW.

©2021 Bergeson & Campbell, P.C.  All Rights Reserved


 
 1 2 3 >  Last ›