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.

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on May 24, 2022, that it is extending the public comment period for the April 12, 2022, proposed rule that would prohibit ongoing uses of chrysotile asbestos to give stakeholders more time to review the proposed regulation and prepare comments. EPA is extending the comment period an additional 30 days, from June 13, 2022, to July 13, 2022.
 
As reported in our April 7, 2022, memorandum, the proposed rule would ban chrysotile asbestos, the only known form of asbestos that is currently imported into the United States and is found in products like asbestos diaphragms used by the chlor-alkali industry, sheet gaskets, brake blocks, aftermarket automotive brakes/linings, other vehicle friction products, and other gaskets also imported into the United States. EPA also proposed targeted disposal and recordkeeping requirements in line with industry standards, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements, and the Asbestos National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP). The proposed disposal and recordkeeping requirements would take effect 180 days after the effective date of the final rule.


 

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed on April 12, 2022, to prohibit ongoing uses of chrysotile asbestos, the only known form of asbestos currently imported into the United States. 87 Fed. Reg. 21706. EPA proposes under Section 6(a) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to prohibit manufacture (including import), processing, distribution in commerce, and commercial use of chrysotile asbestos in bulk or as part of chrysotile asbestos diaphragms used in the chlor-alkali industry and chrysotile asbestos-containing sheet gaskets used in chemical production. EPA proposes that these prohibitions take effect two years after the effective date of the final rule. EPA also proposes to prohibit manufacture (including import), processing, distribution in commerce, and commercial use of chrysotile asbestos-containing brake blocks used in the oil industry, aftermarket automotive chrysotile asbestos-containing brakes/linings, other chrysotile asbestos-containing vehicle friction products (not including the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Super Guppy Turbine aircraft use), and other chrysotile asbestos-containing gaskets. EPA proposes that these prohibitions take effect 180 days after the effective date of the final rule. EPA further proposes to prohibit manufacture (including import), processing, and distribution in commerce of: aftermarket automotive chrysotile asbestos-containing brakes/linings for consumer use, and other chrysotile asbestos-containing gaskets for consumer use. EPA proposes that these prohibitions take effect 180 days after the effective date of the final rule. EPA also proposes disposal and recordkeeping requirements under which regulated parties would document compliance with certain proposed prohibitions. Comments on the proposed rule are due June 13, 2022. A detailed analysis of the proposed rule is available in our April 7, 2022, memorandum.


 

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on February 14, 2022, that it will reopen the comment period for its draft revision to the risk determination for the cyclic aliphatic bromide cluster (HBCD) risk evaluation issued under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). As reported in our December 29, 2021, memorandum, EPA is reconsidering two key aspects of the risk determinations for HBCD. First, EPA proposes that the appropriate approach to these determinations under TSCA and implementing regulations is to make an unreasonable risk determination for HBCD as a whole chemical substance, rather than making unreasonable risk determinations separately on each individual condition of use (COU) evaluated in the risk evaluation. Second, EPA proposes that the risk determination should be explicit that it does not rely on assumptions regarding the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) in making the unreasonable risk determination under TSCA Section 6; rather, the use of PPE would be considered during risk management. EPA “finds that HBCD, as a whole chemical substance, presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health and the environment when evaluated under its conditions of use.” EPA will publish a Federal Register notice on February 17, 2022, to reopen the comment period for 15 days. Comments will be due March 3, 2022.


 

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
On December 16, 2021, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a proposed rule under Section 6(a) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) on asbestos (part 1: chrysotile asbestos). According to an item in the fall 2021 Unified Agenda, the TSCA Section 6(a) rulemaking is needed to address the unreasonable risks of chrysotile asbestos that were identified in a risk evaluation completed under TSCA Section 6(b). EPA reviewed the exposures and hazards of chrysotile asbestos, the magnitude of risk, exposed populations, severity of the hazard, uncertainties, and other factors. As reported in our January 4, 2021, memorandum on the final risk evaluation, EPA found unreasonable risks to human health for the following uses of chrysotile asbestos:

  • Consumers and Bystanders: EPA found unreasonable risks to consumers and bystanders from all consumer uses of chrysotile asbestos. Most consumer products containing chrysotile asbestos have been discontinued. Consumer products still available and for which EPA found unreasonable risk include aftermarket automotive brakes/linings and certain gaskets. Risks to consumers can come from the inhalation of chrysotile asbestos; and
     
  • Workers and Occupational Non-Users (ONU): Commercial chrysotile asbestos uses for which EPA found unreasonable risk to workers include chlor-alkali diaphragms, sheet gaskets, brake blocks, aftermarket automotive brakes/linings, other vehicle friction products, and other gaskets. Additionally, EPA found unreasonable risks to workers nearby but not in direct contact with chrysotile asbestos for the use of chlor-alkali diaphragms, sheet gaskets, brake blocks, and other gaskets. Risks to workers and ONUs can come from the inhalation of chrysotile asbestos.

 

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton

On December 10, 2021, the Biden Administration released its Fall 2021 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) rule list, the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) is working on the following rulemakings under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Rulemakings at the proposed stage include:

  • Tiered Data Reporting to Inform Prioritization, Risk Evaluation, and Risk Management Under TSCA (2070-AK62): EPA is developing this rule to obtain information about potential hazards and exposure pathways related to certain chemicals, particularly occupational, environmental, and consumer exposure information. EPA states that this information is needed to inform prioritization, risk evaluation, and risk management of the chemical substances under TSCA Section 6. EPA intends to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in July 2022 and a final rule in March 2023. More information on the rulemaking is available in our July 29, 2021, memorandum;
     
  • Revisions to the TSCA Fees Rule (2070-AK64): In January 2021, EPA proposed updates and adjustments to the 2018 TSCA Fees Rule. EPA proposed to add three new fee categories: a Bona Fide Intent to Manufacture or Import Notice, a Notice of Commencement of Manufacture or Import, and an additional fee associated with test orders. In addition, EPA proposed exemptions for entities subject to certain fee triggering activities, including: an exemption for research and development activities; an exemption for entities manufacturing less than 2,500 pounds of a chemical subject to an EPA-initiated risk evaluation fee; an exemption for manufacturers of chemical substances produced as a non-isolated intermediate; and exemptions for manufacturers of a chemical substance subject to an EPA-initiated risk evaluation if the chemical substance is imported in an article, produced as a byproduct, or produced or imported as an impurity. EPA proposed a volume-based fee allocation for EPA-initiated risk evaluation fees in any scenario where a consortium is not formed and proposed to require export-only manufacturers to pay fees for EPA-initiated risk evaluations. EPA states that in light of public comments, it has decided to issue a supplemental proposal and seek additional public comment on changes to the January 2021 proposal. EPA intends to issue a supplemental NPRM in February 2022. EPA has not determined when it will issue a final rule. More information on the proposed rule is available in our December 30, 2020, memorandum;
     
  • New Chemicals Procedural Regulations to Reflect Amendments to TSCA (2070-AK65): This rulemaking seeks to revise the new chemicals procedural regulations in 40 C.F.R. Part 720 to improve the efficiency of EPA’s review process and to align its processes and procedures with the new statutory requirements. According to EPA, this rulemaking seeks to increase the quality of information initially submitted in new chemicals notices and improve its processes “to reduce unnecessary rework in the risk assessment and, ultimately, the length of time that new chemicals are under review.” EPA intends to publish an NPRM in September 2022. EPA has not determined when it will issue a final rule;
     
  • Procedures for Submitting Information Subject to Business Confidentiality Claims Under TSCA (2070-AK68): EPA states that it is considering proposing new and amended rules concerning the assertion and maintenance of claims of business confidentiality (i.e., confidential business information (CBI)) under TSCA. The 2016 TSCA amendments included several new provisions concerning the assertion and EPA review and treatment of confidentiality claims. EPA is considering procedures for submitting and supporting such claims in TSCA submissions, including substantiation requirements, exemptions, electronic reporting enhancements, and maintenance or withdrawal of confidentiality claims. EPA is also considering whether the proposed rule should elaborate on EPA’s procedures for reviewing and communicating with TSCA submitters about confidentiality claims. According to EPA, it expects the proposed rule to include new provisions, as well as revisions to existing rules on asserting confidentiality claims to conform to the 2016 amendments. EPA intends to issue an NPRM in April 2022;
     
  • Cyclic Aliphatic Bromide Cluster (HBCD); Rulemaking Under TSCA Section 6(a) (2070-AK71): TSCA Section 6 requires EPA to address unreasonable risks of injury to health or the environment that the Administrator has determined are presented by a chemical substance under the conditions of use. Following a TSCA Section 6 risk evaluation for HBCD, EPA initiated rulemaking to address unreasonable risks of injury to health and the environment identified in the final risk evaluation. EPA intends to publish an NPRM by September 2022 and a final rule by April 2024. More information on the final risk evaluation is available in our September 28, 2020, memorandum;
     
  • 1-Bromopropane; Rulemaking Under TSCA Section 6(a) (2070-AK73): TSCA Section 6 requires EPA to address unreasonable risks of injury to health or the environment that the Administrator has determined are presented by a chemical substance under the conditions of use. Following a TSCA Section 6 risk evaluation for 1-bromopropane, EPA initiated rulemaking to address unreasonable risks of injury to health identified in the final risk evaluation. EPA intends to issue an NPRM in October 2022 and a final rule in May 2024. More information on the final risk evaluation is available in our August 11, 2020, memorandum;
     
  • Carbon Tetrachloride; Rulemaking Under TSCA Section 6(a) (2070-AK82): TSCA Section 6 requires EPA to address unreasonable risks of injury to health or the environment that the Administrator has determined are presented by a chemical substance under the conditions of use. Following a TSCA Section 6 risk evaluation for carbon tetrachloride, EPA initiated rulemaking to address unreasonable risks of injury to health identified in the final risk evaluation. EPA intends to issue an NPRM in October 2022 and a final rule in June 2024. More information on the final risk evaluation is available in our November 4, 2020, memorandum;
     
  • Trichloroethylene (TCE); Rulemaking Under TSCA Section 6(a) (2070-AK83): TSCA Section 6 requires EPA to address unreasonable risks of injury to health or the environment that the Administrator has determined are presented by a chemical substance under the conditions of use. Following a TSCA Section 6 risk evaluation for TCE carried out under the authority of TSCA Section 6, EPA initiated rulemaking to address unreasonable risks of injury to health identified in the final risk evaluation. EPA intends to issue an NPRM in October 2022 and a final rule in June 2024. More information on the final risk evaluation is available in our November 24, 2020, memorandum;
     
  • Asbestos (Part 1: Chrysotile Asbestos); Rulemaking under TSCA Section 6(a) (2070-AK86): TSCA Section 6 requires EPA to address unreasonable risks of injury to health or the environment that the Administrator has determined are presented by a chemical substance under the conditions of use. Following a TSCA Section 6 risk evaluation for chrysotile asbestos, EPA initiated rulemaking to address unreasonable risks of injury to health identified in the final risk evaluation. EPA intends to issue an NPRM by April 2022 and a final rule by November 2023. More information on the final risk evaluation is available in our January 4, 2021, memorandum;
     
  • Reconsideration of Procedures for Chemical Risk Evaluation Under the Amended TSCA (2070-AK90): EPA published a final rule on July 20, 2017, that established a process for conducting risk evaluations to determine whether a chemical substance presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment, without consideration of costs or other non-risk factors, including an unreasonable risk to a potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation, under the conditions of use. This process incorporates the science requirements of the amended statute, including best available science and weight of the scientific evidence. The final rule established the steps of a risk evaluation process, including: scope, hazard assessment, exposure assessment, risk characterization, and risk determination. EPA states that it is now in the process of reconsidering the final rule in keeping with new executive orders (EO) concerning the advancement of racial equity and support for underserved communities through the federal government (EO 13985), the protection of public health and the environment and restoring science to tackle the climate crisis (EO 13990), tackling the climate crisis at home and abroad (EO 14008), and other Administration priorities (such as the Presidential memorandum on restoring trust in government through scientific integrity and evidence-based policymaking). If EPA determines to amend the 2017 final rule based on its reconsideration, it will solicit public comment through an NPRM. EPA intends to publish an NPRM in September 2022;
     
  • Regulation of Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic (PBT) Chemicals Under TSCA Section 6(h); Phenol, Isopropylated Phosphate (3:1) (PIP (3:1)); Further Compliance Date Extension (2070-AK95): EPA proposed in October 2021 to amend the regulations applicable to PIP (3:1) promulgated under TSCA. Specifically, EPA proposes to extend the compliance date applicable to the processing and distribution in commerce of certain PIP (3:1)-containing articles and the PIP (3:1) used to make those articles until October 31, 2024, along with the associated recordkeeping requirements for manufacturers, processors, and distributors of PIP (3:1)-containing articles. EPA notes that the articles covered by the proposed rule include a wide range of key consumer and commercial goods such as cellular telephones, laptop computers, and other electronic and electrical devices and industrial and commercial equipment used in various sectors, including transportation, construction, agriculture, forestry, mining, life sciences, and semiconductor production. The proposed rule follows a recently-issued final rule that extended the compliance date applicable to the processing and distribution in commerce of certain PIP (3:1)-containing articles, and the PIP (3:1) used to make those articles, from March 8, 2021, to March 8, 2022, along with the associated recordkeeping requirements. Comments on the proposed rule are due December 27, 2021. EPA intends to issue a final rule in March 2022. More information on the proposed rule is available in our October 25, 2021, memorandum; and
     
  • TSCA Section 8(a) Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements for Asbestos (2070-AK99): This rulemaking, under the authority of TSCA Section 8(a), would require the maintenance of records and submission to EPA of reports by manufacturers, importers, and processors of asbestos and mixtures and articles containing asbestos (including as an impurity). EPA states that the information sought includes data on the quantities of asbestos used in making products, employee exposure data, and waste disposal data. Reported information would be used by EPA and other federal agencies in considering the regulation of asbestos. EPA intends to issue an NPRM in March 2022 and a final rule in November 2022.

The Unified Agenda lists the following TSCA rulemaking at the final stage:

  • Significant New Uses of Chemical Substances; Updates to the Hazard Communication Program and Regulatory Framework; Minor Amendments to Reporting Requirements for Premanufacture Notices (PMN) (2070-AJ94): EPA proposed amending components of the Significant New Uses of Chemical Substances regulations at 40 C.F.R. Part 721, specifically the “Protection in the Workplace” (40 C.F.R. Section 721.63) and “Hazard Communication Program” (40 C.F.R. Section 721.72). 81 Fed. Reg. 49598. The proposed changes are intended to align, where possible, EPA’s regulations with the revised Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations at 29 C.F.R. Section 1910.1200. OSHA issued a final rule on March 26, 2012, (77 Fed. Reg. 17573) that aligns OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standards with the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS). EPA states that it is reviewing the comments received and is planning to issue a final rule. EPA intends to issue a final rule in September 2022. More information on EPA’s 2016 proposed rule is available in our July 29, 2016, memorandum.

 

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
On October 29, 2021, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced its response to a petition submitted under Section 21 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) seeking a rule requiring cigarette manufacturers to eliminate the hazardous chemicals used and to develop new product designs that eliminate or reduce the cigarette butt disposal risks to the environment. 86 Fed. Reg. 59931. EPA states that TSCA Section 6(a) authorizes it to determine if a chemical substance or mixture in manufacturing, processing, distribution in commerce, use, disposal, or any combination of these activities presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. If EPA determines that there is unreasonable risk to health or the environment, then EPA must, by rule, issue regulations to the extent necessary so that the chemical substance no longer presents such risk. EPA notes that TSCA Section 3(2)(B), which defines “chemical substance,” excludes “tobacco or any tobacco product,” however. Under Section 201(rr) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), “tobacco product” means “any product made or derived from tobacco that is intended for human consumption, including any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product.” EPA states that it finds that the petitioner has not met its burden as defined in TSCA Sections 6(a) and 21(b)(1) “because cigarettes are not a product that can be regulated under TSCA section 6(a).”


 

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
On October 7, 2021, the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) completed its review of a proposed rule on “Regulation of Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic Chemicals Under TSCA Section 6(h); Phenol, Isopropylated Phosphate (3:1); Further Compliance Date Extension.” The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on September 3, 2021, an extension of certain compliance dates for Phenol, Isopropylated Phosphate (3:1) (PIP (3:1)) to March 8, 2022, “to address the hardships inadvertently created by the original applicable compliance dates in the January 2021 final rule to ensure that supply chains are not disrupted for key consumer and commercial goods.” The proposed rule reviewed by OIRA is expected to propose further extensions to certain article-related compliance dates. More information on EPA’s September 3, 2021, announcement is available in our memorandum, “EPA Plans New Rulemaking for PBTs, Extends Compliance Dates for PIP (3:1) Rule.”


 

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
As reported in our January 6, 2021, blog item, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued final rules under Section 6(h) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for five persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) chemicals, including phenol, isopropylated phosphate (3:1) (PIP (3:1)) (86 Fed. Reg. 894). The final rules limit or prohibit the manufacture (including import), processing, and/or distribution in commerce of the five PBTs, with certain exceptions. In accordance with Biden-Harris Administration Executive Orders and directives, as well as “[‌n]ewly-raised compliance issues” associated with the PIP (3:1) rule, EPA announced on March 8, 2021, that it would ask for additional public comment. EPA also issued a temporary 180-day “No Action Assurance” (NAA) indicating that the Agency will exercise its enforcement discretion regarding the prohibitions on processing and distribution of PIP (3:1) for use in articles, and the articles to which PIP (3:1) has been added.
 
Under the final rule, each person who manufactures PIP (3:1) for any use after March 8, 2021, must, prior to or concurrent with the shipment, notify persons to whom PIP (3:1) is shipped, in writing, of the prohibitions on processing, distribution, and releases to water. 40 C.F.R. § 751.407(e)(1). Each person who processes or distributes in commerce PIP (3:1) or PIP (3:1)-containing products for any use after July 6, 2021, must, prior to or concurrent with the shipment, notify persons to whom PIP (3:1) is shipped, in writing, of the prohibitions on processing, distribution, and releases to water. 40 C.F.R. § 751.407(e)(2). The final rule clarifies that the downstream notification requirement applies only to those scenarios where a product has an accompanying safety data sheet (SDS). EPA also included an alternative method of compliance for downstream notification. If a manufacturer, processor, or distributor chooses, they may include specified text on their label, instead of on their SDS.
 
EPA’s NAA applies only to the prohibitions on processing and distribution of PIP (3:1) for use in articles, and the articles to which PIP (3:1) has been added. It does not apply to the downstream notification requirements or to the downstream notification requirements for manufacturers that began March 9, 2021. Processors and distributors should review the regulations now to ensure that they are prepared to begin providing downstream notifications on July 7, 2021. Information regarding Bergeson & Campbell, P.C.’s TSCA services is available on our website.


 

By Christopher R. Blunck, Carla N. Hutton, and Lynn L. Bergeson
 
On June 11, 2021, the Office and Management and Budget released its “Spring 2021 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions” (Regulatory Agenda). It includes an entry for an interim final rule planned by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) entitled “Regulation of Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic Chemicals Under TSCA Section 6(h); Reconsideration and Extension of Certain Compliance Dates.” This action, planned for publication in September 2021, would be in follow-up to EPA’s March 16, 2021, proposed rule that sought additional public comment on final rules published on January 6, 2021, covering five persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) chemicals, i.e., decabromodiphenyl ether; 2,4,6-tris(tert-butyl)phenol; hexachlorobutadiene, pentachlorothiophenol; and phenol, isopropylated phosphate (3:1) (PIP (3:1)).
 
In the March 16, 2021, proposed rule, EPA stated that it sought additional public comment in “accordance with the January 21, 2021, Executive Order entitled “Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis” and other Biden-Harris Administration Executive orders and other direction.” EPA stated also in the proposed rule that it is “aware of and plans to consider revisions in response to implementation issues that have been raised by a range of stakeholders” and that “[‌i]n particular, EPA is seeking comment on newly-raised issues associated with the March 8, 2021, compliance date in the PIP (3:1) rule for certain regulated articles.”
 
Concurrent with EPA’s announcement on March 8, 2021, of the March 16, 2021, proposed rule that opened the PBT rules for comment, EPA issued a temporary 180-day “No Action Assurance” (NAA) indicating that EPA would exercise its enforcement discretion regarding the prohibitions on processing and distribution of PIP (3:1) for use in articles, and the articles to which PIP (3:1) has been added. EPA stated that it “is taking this [NAA] action to ensure that the supply chain of these important articles is not interrupted while EPA continues to collect the information needed to best inform subsequent regulatory efforts and allow for the issuance of a final agency action to extend the March 8, 2021, compliance date as necessary.” EPA stated that the NAA “is to remain in effect until either (1) 11:59 PM ET, September 4, 2021, or (2) the effective date of a final action addressing the compliance date for the prohibition on processing and distributing in commerce of PIP (3:1); including in PIP (3:1)-containing articles, whichever occurs earlier.”
 
The Regulatory Agenda entry for the interim final rule states that EPA intends to address compliance date issues in the action, and that if it “determines to further amend the recent final [PBT] rules, EPA will address those amendments in one or more future Regulatory Agenda entries.”


 

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on May 27, 2021, that it has invited environmental justice communities and stakeholders to participate in environmental justice consultations regarding the development of a proposed risk management action under Section 6(a) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to address unreasonable risks presented by N-methylpyrrolidone (NMP). EPA will hold two identical consultation webinars, one on July 7, 2021, and the other on July 13, 2021. Both sessions will provide an overview of the TSCA risk management requirements, the findings from the final risk evaluation, the tools available to manage the unreasonable risks from NMP, and an opportunity for EPA to obtain 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. Comments are due August 27, 2021.
 
EPA states that in addition to these environmental justice consultations, it is executing a “robust” outreach effort 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 regulations. EPA notes that while outreach and stakeholder engagement on risk management activities for NMP move forward, it is “actively reviewing” the final risk evaluation to ensure it uses the best available science and protects human health and the environment, in accordance with the Executive Orders and other direction provided by the Biden-Harris Administration. EPA will keep stakeholders updated as it makes decisions and determines next steps.
 
More information on EPA’s final risk evaluation of NMP is available in our December 29, 2020, memorandum, “EPA Releases Final Chemical Risk Evaluation for NMP.”


 
 1 2 3 >  Last ›