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
 
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released on February 20, 2020, a proposed supplemental significant new use rule (SNUR) issued under Section 5(a)(2) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for long-chain perfluoroalkyl carboxylate (LCPFAC) chemical substances to make inapplicable the exemption for persons who import a subset of LCPFAC chemical substances as part of surface coatings on articles.  Under the proposed supplemental SNUR, this subset of LCPFAC chemical substances also includes the salts and precursors of these perfluorinated carboxylates.  The supplemental proposal would require importers to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing the import of these chemical substances in certain articles for the significant new use described in the proposed SNUR.  The required significant new use notification would initiate EPA’s evaluation of the conditions of use associated with the intended significant new use.  Manufacturing (including import) or processing for the significant new use would be prohibited from commencing until EPA has conducted a review of the notice, made an appropriate determination on the notice, and taken such actions as are required in association with that determination.  EPA posted a pre-publication version of the proposed supplemental SNUR on its website.  Once EPA publishes the proposed supplemental SNUR in the Federal Register, a 45-day comment period will begin.
 
In a January 21, 2015, proposed LCPFAC SNUR, EPA proposed to require notification of significant new uses from persons who import a subset of LCPFAC chemical substances as part of all articles.  The supplemental proposal narrows the category of articles to which the proposed LCPFAC SNUR would apply to those where the subset of LCPFAC chemicals are part of a surface coating.  EPA states that it is proposing this action to be responsive to the article consideration provision at Section 5(a)(5), added with the passage of the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, which states that articles can be subject to notification requirements as a significant new use provided that EPA makes an affirmative finding in a rule that the reasonable potential for exposure to a chemical from an article or category of articles justifies notification.
 
More information on the supplemental proposal will be available in a forthcoming memorandum that will be posted on our website.

 

Try our new TSCA Tutor™ online e-training platform, offering expert, efficient, essential TSCA training.


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton

On February 20, 2020, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a list of 20 chemical substances identified as low-priority for risk evaluation under the amended Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), completing another TSCA requirement.  EPA notes that a final designation as “low-priority” means that risk evaluations are not warranted at this time.  EPA states that it considered reasonably available information for each chemical substance under its conditions of use as specified in TSCA.  Additionally, according to EPA, these 20 low-priority chemicals are on its Safer Chemical Ingredients List, which includes chemicals that meet strict criteria for both human health and the environment.  The 20 chemicals are

  1. 1-Butanol, 3-methoxy-, 1-acetate;
  2. D-gluco-Heptonic acid, sodium salt (1:1), (2.xi.)-;
  3. D-Gluconic acid;
  4. D-Gluconic acid, calcium salt (2:1);
  5. D-Gluconic acid, .delta.-lactone;
  6. D-Gluconic acid, potassium salt (1:1);
  7. D-Gluconic acid, sodium salt (1:1);
  8. Decanedioic acid, 1,10-dibutyl ester;
  9. 1-Docosanol;
  10. 1-Eicosanol;
  11. 1,2-Hexanediol;
  12. 1-Octadecanol;
  13. Propanol, [2-(2-butoxymethylethoxy)methylethoxy]-;
  14. Propanedioic acid, 1,3-diethyl ester;
  15. Propanedioic acid, 1,3-dimethyl ester;
  16. Propanol, 1(or 2)-(2-methoxymethylethoxy)-, acetate;
  17. Propanol, [(1-methyl-1,2-ethanediyl)bis(oxy)]bis-;
  18. 2-Propanol, 1,1'-oxybis-;
  19. Propanol, oxybis-; and
  20. Tetracosane, 2,6,10,15,19,23-hexamethyl-.

EPA has posted a pre-publication version of the Federal Register notice announcing the final designation of low-priority substances.  As reported in our December 20, 2019, blog item, in December 2019, EPA designated 20 chemicals as high-priority under TSCA, and those chemicals are now in the risk evaluation process.  More information on the final list of low-priority chemicals will be available in a forthcoming memorandum that will be posted on our website


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released on February 19, 2020, a final rule concerning the process companies must follow to make certain confidential business information (CBI) claims and EPA’s plan for reviewing those claims.  EPA describes its final rule as creating “an efficient process” for fulfilling the CBI requirements under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and providing clarity for affected stakeholders.  Following the procedures set forth in the final rule, EPA states that it will review CBI claims made for chemical substance identity for chemicals on the “active” portion of the TSCA Inventory.  These procedures and requirements are intended to help ensure that when a company claims the identity of a chemical as CBI, that claim meets the criteria laid out in TSCA.
 
The final rule is a follow-on to EPA’s 2017 TSCA Inventory Notification (Active-Inactive) Rule and amends certain substantiation provisions of that rule in response to a recent federal court decision.  The final rule applies to manufacturers and processors who made CBI claims for specific chemical identities for chemicals reported as “active” in response to the TSCA Inventory (Active-Inactive) Notification Rule.  The final rule describes the procedures and deadlines for substantiating these CBI claims, including provisions for supplementing certain previously filed substantiations.
 
The final rule also describes EPA’s plan to review these CBI claims for “active” chemicals, including procedures for its publication of annual review goals and results.  Manufacturers that amend, update, or file new CBI substantiations consistent with the new requirements must do so electronically via EPA’s Central Data Exchange.  According to EPA, providing this information electronically supports more efficient data transmittal, improves data quality, and minimizes respondent burden and EPA administrative costs associated with information submission and recordkeeping.
 
More information on the final rule will be available in a forthcoming memorandum that will be posted on our website.  Information on EPA’s 2017 TSCA Inventory Notification (Active-Inactive) Rule is available in our June 26, 2017, memorandum, “EPA Issues Final TSCA Framework Rules.”

 

Try our new TSCA Tutor™ online e-training platform, offering expert, efficient, essential TSCA training.

Tags: CBI, Inventory

 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
As reported in our October 1, 2019, blog item, on September 25, 2019, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) submitted a proposed significant new use rule (SNUR) on long-chain perfluoroalkyl carboxylate (LCPFAC) and perfluoroalkyl sulfonate (PFAS) chemical substances to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review.  According to OMB’s website, OMB completed its review on February 14, 2020.  EPA has not yet publicly released the proposed rule.
 
According to the item on the rulemaking in EPA’s fall 2019 Unified Agenda, EPA is developing a supplemental proposal to its 2015 proposed LCPFAC SNUR amendments.  EPA states that the supplemental proposal would make inapplicable the exemption for persons who import a subset of LCPFAC chemical substances as part of certain articles.  According to EPA, this supplemental proposal is necessary to be responsive to the article consideration provision in Section 5(a)(5) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) that was added with the 2016 amendments to TSCA.  Under the provision, articles can be subject to notification requirements as a significant new use provided that EPA makes an affirmative finding in a rule that the reasonable potential for exposure to a chemical from an article or category of articles justifies notification.  Insofar as this new provision has not been used previously for chemical substances with a history of prior import in articles, EPA’s approach to and its arguments in making this required affirmative finding will be important for all stakeholders to consider carefully.

 

Try our new TSCA Tutor™ online e-training platform, offering expert, efficient, essential TSCA training.

Tags: OMB, SNUR, PFAS, LCPFAC

 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will host a conference call on February 24, 2020, from 12:30 to 1:00 p.m. (EST) to review certain provisions of the final rule on fees for the administration of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).  In light of the recent publication of the preliminary list of manufacturers/importers subject to risk evaluation fees, as reported in our January 29, 2020, blog item, EPA states that it will give a brief overview of the fees associated with an EPA-initiated risk evaluation, the entities subject to fees, requirements for self-identification, and how fees will be divided among those identified on final lists.  The publication of the lists has inspired considerable confusion and the call is intended to address as many as possible of them.  Questions can be submitted in advance to Ryan Schmit at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).  Additional questions will be answered as time permits.  To attend, call the following number and enter the conference ID:

Call-in Number: (877) 317-0679
Conference ID: 3372249

The preliminary list of manufacturers/importers subject to risk evaluation fees is available in Docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0677.  Reference 9 from the final rule on fees, TSCA Fee Reporting Notice (Sept. 2018), is available in the docket for the final rule at https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0401-0079.  More information about TSCA fees is available on EPA’s website at http://www.epa.gov/TSCA-fees.


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Pollution Prevention (P2) Grant Program has announced the availability of funds to provide technical assistance (e.g., information, training, tools) to businesses to encourage the development and implementation of source reduction practices.  EPA states that source reduction practices can help businesses save money by reducing resource use, expenditures, waste, and liability costs, while at the same time reducing their environmental footprint and helping to protect human health and the environment.  Applications for fiscal years (FY) 2020 and 2021 are due March 31, 2020.
 
EPA states that it anticipates awarding approximately $9.38 million in total federal pollution prevention grant funding over a two-year funding cycle ($4.69 million in FY 2020 funds and approximately $4.69 million in FY 2021 funds).  According to EPA, P2 grants are expected to be awarded in each EPA region and will be funded in the form of grants or cooperative agreements.  EPA provides the following “quick facts” for P2 grants:

  • Eligibility:  State governments, colleges, and universities (recognized as instrumentalities of the state), federally recognized tribes, and intertribal consortia;
  • Match requirement:  50 percent match; for tribal governments that place P2 grant activities into a performance partnership grant (PPG) agreement, the match for the tribe is reduced to five percent;
  • Review of applications:  Along with other requirements that are noted in the Request for Applications (RFA), applications must address one of the following statutory/regulatory criteria to merit further review:
    • Provide technical assistance and/or training to businesses/facilities about source reduction techniques to help them adopt and implement source reduction approaches and to increase the development, adoption, and market penetration of greener products and sustainable manufacturing practices; and
    • Identify, develop, document, and share P2 best management practices and innovations so this information may inform future technical assistance and these P2 approaches and outcomes may be replicated by others;
  • Range of awards:  Individual grant awards may potentially be in the range of $40,000-$500,000 for the two-year funding period (between $20,000 and $250,000 incrementally funded per year).  Some EPA regions may have lower award caps, however; and
  • Average number of grants issued: 40.

 
EPA will hold an informational webinar on February 19, 2020, from 2:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. (EST).


 
  • 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 public meeting on February 24, 2020, at 1 p.m. (EST) in Albany, New York, “to discuss amendments to the household cleansing product rules that are being considered for adoption.”  According to NYSDEC, amendments include specifying what information must be reported about covered products and their ingredients, how information should be shared with NYSDEC for the public record, the type of studies that must be reported, and how confidential business information (CBI) should be handled.  NYSDEC states that during the meeting, it “is looking for input on disclosure of nonfunctional ingredients, issues around confidential information, and how to disclose when a product’s formulation temporarily changes, as well as other regulatory concerns.”  Registration is required to attend the meeting.  NYSDEC notes that it “will hold a formal public comment period at a later date once it officially proposes the regulations.”
 
As reported in our September 4, 2019, blog item, on August 27, 2019, the State of New York Supreme Court invalidated the Household Cleansing Product Information Disclosure Program (Disclosure Program).  Information related to NYSDEC’s prior delay of its enforcement of its Disclosure Program is available here, and general information regarding the Program and its extensive requirements for manufacturers of certain consumer cleaning products to disclose information regarding the ingredients in those products is available here.  The court found that the Disclosure Program was established in violation of the State Administrative Procedure Act (SAPA) and the New York State Constitution.  In making this finding, the court held that the Program was a “rule” as argued by Petitioners and not “guidance” for which adherence to SAPA was not required, as argued by NYSDEC.  A more detailed analysis and commentary are available in our August 30, 2019, memorandum, “NY Department of Environmental Conservation Household Cleansing Product Information Disclosure Program Ruled ‘Null and Void.’


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
On January 24, 2020, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released the draft risk evaluation of carbon tetrachloride, “a solvent primarily used in the manufacturing of chlorinated compounds and petrochemicals.”  Carbon tetrachloride is the seventh of the first ten chemicals to undergo risk evaluation under the amended Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).  EPA published a Federal Register notice on January 27, 2020, announcing the availability of the draft risk evaluation and beginning a 60-day comment period.  85 Fed. Reg. 4658.  The TSCA Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals (SACC) will hold a preparatory virtual meeting on February 4, 2020, to consider the scope and clarity of the draft charge questions for the peer review.  On February 25-26, 2020, SACC will hold an in-person public meeting to consider and review the draft risk evaluation.  EPA will provide comments submitted on the draft risk evaluation on or before February 19, 2020, to SACC for their consideration before the meeting.  Comments received after February 19, 2020, and prior to the oral public comment period during the meeting will be available to the SACC for their consideration during the meeting.  Comments on the draft risk evaluation are due March 27, 2020.
 
EPA states that it “reviewed 15 potential uses, all of which are associated with industrial and commercial work and are primarily associated with the manufacturing process of other chemicals.”  According to EPA, there are no consumer uses of carbon tetrachloride.  EPA made the following initial determinations on risk:

  • EPA did not find risk to the environment or workers.  For all the conditions of use included in the draft risk evaluation, EPA states that it has preliminarily found no unreasonable risks to the environment under any of the conditions of use or to workers when appropriate personal protective equipment is used; and
     
  • EPA’s draft risk evaluation preliminarily found unreasonable risks associated with chronic inhalation exposure for occupational non-users (ONU).  EPA found that ONUs -- those workers in the vicinity of carbon tetrachloride’s use but not directly working with the chemical -- could be adversely affected by carbon tetrachloride under certain conditions of use.

More information, including an insightful commentary, is available in our January 27, 2020, memorandum, “EPA Releases Draft Risk Evaluation of Carbon Tetrachloride.”


 
  • 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 January 27, 2020, identifying the preliminary lists of manufacturers (including importers) of the 20 chemical substances that EPA designated as high-priority substances for risk evaluation and for which fees will be charged.  85 Fed. Reg. 4661.  During the comment period, manufacturers (including importers) are required to self-identify as manufacturers of a high-priority substance irrespective of whether they are included on the preliminary lists identified by EPA.  EPA states that where appropriate, entities may also avoid or reduce fee obligations by making certain certifications consistent with the final rule on fees for the administration of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).  The comment period also provides the public an opportunity to correct errors or provide comments on the preliminary lists.  According to the notice, EPA expects to publish final lists of manufacturers (including importers) subject to fees no later than concurrently with the publication of the final scope document for risk evaluations of the 20 high-priority substances.  Manufacturers (including importers) identified on the final lists will be subject to applicable fees.
 
The preliminary lists are available in Docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0677 and on EPA’s website at http://www.epa.gov/TSCA-fees.  EPA states that it developed each preliminary list “using the most up-to-date information available, including information submitted to the Agency (e.g., information submitted under TSCA section 8(a) (including the Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) Rule) and section 8(b), and to the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)).”  According to the notice, EPA considered using other sources of information, such as publicly available information or information submitted to other agencies to which EPA has access, but EPA “concluded that data quality limitations would create more false positives than appropriate additions to the lists.”  Additionally, EPA notes that it believes the Self-Identification process, established by 40 C.F.R. Section 700.45(b)(5), will be sufficient to identify additional manufacturers (including importers), as appropriate.  To include the two most recent CDR reporting cycle data (collected every four years) and to account for annual or other typical fluctuations in manufacturing (including import), EPA states that it used six years of data submitted or available to it under CDR and TRI to create the preliminary lists (2012-2018).
 
More information on the 20 substances designated as high-priority substances is available in our December 20, 2019, memorandum, “Final List of High-Priority Chemicals Will Be Next to Undergo Risk Evaluation under TSCA.”  More information on the final TSCA fees rule is available in our September 28, 2018, memorandum, “EPA Issues Final TSCA Fees Rule.”


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is scheduled to publish a Federal Register notice on January 27, 2020, identifying the preliminary lists of manufacturers (including importers) of the 20 chemical substances that EPA designated as high-priority substances for risk evaluation and for which fees will be charged.  Publication of the Federal Register notice will begin a 60-day comment period during which manufacturers (including importers) will be required to self-identify as a manufacturer of a high-priority substance irrespective of whether they are included on the preliminary lists identified by EPA.  EPA states that where appropriate, entities may also avoid or reduce fee obligations by making certain certifications consistent with the final rule on fees for the administration of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).  During the 60-day comment period, the public will have the opportunity to correct errors or provide comments on the preliminary lists.  According to the notice, EPA expects to publish final lists of manufacturers (including importers) subject to fees no later than concurrently with the publication of the final scope document for risk evaluations of the 20 high-priority substances.  Manufacturers (including importers) identified on the final lists will be subject to applicable fees.

Once the Federal Register notice is published, the preliminary lists will be available in docket number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0677 at http://www.regulations.gov and on EPA’s website at http://www.epa.gov/TSCA-fees.  EPA states that it developed each preliminary list “using the most up-to-date information available, including information submitted to the Agency (e.g., information submitted under TSCA section 8(a) (including the Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) Rule) and section 8(b), and to the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)).”  According to the notice, EPA considered using other sources of information, such as publicly available information or information submitted to other agencies to which EPA has access, but EPA “concluded that data quality limitations would create more false positives than appropriate additions to the lists.”  Additionally, EPA notes that it believes the Self-Identification process, established by 40 C.F.R. Section 700.45(b)(5), will be sufficient to identify additional manufacturers (including importers), as appropriate.  To include the two most recent CDR reporting cycle data (collected every four years) and to account for annual or other typical fluctuations in manufacturing (including import), EPA states that it used six years of data submitted or available to it under CDR and TRI to create the preliminary lists (2012-2018).

More information on the 20 substances designated as high-priority substances is available in our December 20, 2019, memorandum, “Final List of High-Priority Chemicals Will Be Next to Undergo Risk Evaluation under TSCA.”  More information on the final TSCA fees rule is available in our September 28, 2018, memorandum, “EPA Issues Final TSCA Fees Rule.”

See Also: "Are You Potentially Responsible for TSCA Fees? EPA Issues Preliminary Lists of Companies Responsible for TSCA Risk Evaluation Fees" episode of All Things Chemical™ podcast


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

Bergeson & Campbell, P.C. (B&C®) is pleased to announce the release of the complete suite of TSCA Tutor™ regulatory training courses online and on-demand at www.TSCAtutor.com.  Professionals seeking expert, efficient, essential training can preview and enroll in on-demand classes to complete at their own pace and timing.  In addition to the newly released online e-learning courses, B&C’s TSCA Tutor™ training platform offers live in-person training at a company’s site and customized live webinar training, so companies can mix and match training modules and training approaches to provide the most suitable combination for their work needs.
 
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) awareness is a critically important element in the 21st century work environment for any business that involves industrial chemicals.  The new normal requires awareness of TSCA’s application to a company’s operations to ensure consistent compliance with TSCA regulations and, importantly, to understand and anticipate how the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) ongoing implementation of new TSCA will impact a company’s industrial chemical selection and use processes.
 
TSCA Tutor™ online training courses include:

  • Video lessons.
  • Detailed hand-out materials, including copies of all presentations and relevant course materials from EPA and other sources.
  • Customizable, yet detailed and ready-to-use Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for the regulatory topic covered in the session.
 
The courses were developed and are presented by members of B&C’s renowned TSCA practice group, which includes five former senior EPA officials; an extensive scientific staff, including seven Ph.D.s; and a robust and highly experienced team of lawyers and non-lawyer professionals extremely well versed in all aspects of TSCA law, regulation, policy, compliance, and litigation.
 
Online courses are offered at $100 for one-hour modules and $200 for 2-hour modules, or $1,400 for the full 12-module training.  Courses can be completed at the learner’s own pace, and enrollment is valid for one full year.  Interested professionals should visit www.TSCAtutor.com to view sample course segments and purchase modules.  Volume discounts are available for companies wishing to purchase courses for multiple employees.  Companies interested in live in-person or customized live webinar training should contact .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) to schedule.
 
For more information about TSCA Tutor™, contact Heidi Lewis at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address), or read our full course descriptions here.
 
TSCA Tutor -- Curriculum


ONE-HOUR SESSIONS:

  • An Overview of TSCA (Course number T101)
  • New TSCA at a Glance (Course number T102)
  • Import Requirements, TSCA Section 13 (Course number T103)
  • Export Requirements, TSCA Section 12 (Course number T104)
  • Confidential Business Information (CBI) (Course number T105)
  • Reporting and Retention of Information, TSCA Section 8 (Course number T106)

TWO-HOUR SESSIONS:

  • Inspections and Audits (Course number T201)
    • Preparing for a TSCA Audit
    • TSCA Penalties/Overview of Self-Confession Policy
  • TSCA Section 5, Part 1:  TSCA Chemical Inventory, Exemptions (Course number T202)
    • TSCA Inventory
    • Exemptions
  • TSCA Section 5, Part 2:  New Chemicals/New Use (Course number T203)
    • New Chemicals/New Use
    • SNURs
  • Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) (Course number T204)
    • CDR Overview
    • Byproduct Reporting under CDR
  • Chemical Testing (Regulatory)/Animal Welfare, TSCA Section 4 (Course number T205):
    • Chemical Testing
    • How to Prepare/Engage If a Chemical of Interest Is Listed under TSCA Section 4
  • Prioritization and Risk Evaluation, TSCA Section 6 (Course number T206)
    • Overview of Section 6 Risk Framework -- Prioritization, Evaluation, and Management
    • How to Prepare/Engage If a Chemical of Interest Is Listed under Section 6

Bergeson & Campbell, P.C. is a Washington, D.C., law firm focusing on conventional, biobased, and nanoscale industrial, agricultural, and specialty chemical product approval and regulation, and associated business issues.  B&C represents clients in many businesses, including basic, specialty, and agricultural and antimicrobial chemicals; biotechnology, nanotechnology, and emerging transformative technologies; paints and coatings; plastic products; and chemical manufacturing, formulation, distribution, and consumer product sectors.  Visit www.lawbc.com for more information.


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will hold its next Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO) webinar on February 18, 2020, at 1:30-2:30 PM (EST).  The webinar will provide an overview of the data in ECHO and guide users through using the site to answer environmental compliance and enforcement questions.  EPA states that the focus of this session will be a collection of short, step-by-step demonstrations geared toward new and infrequent users.  EPA will demonstrate the capabilities of the ECHO Facility Search to answer questions such as:

  • How to search for a specific facility;
  • How to search for facilities in a community; and
  • How to search for facilities releasing a pollutant.

Registration is now open.  ECHO video tutorials and recorded webinars are available at any time.

Tags: ECHO, Webinar

 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on January 15, 2020, that it is partnering with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and Physicians for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) to host public webinars on various topics related to reducing, refining, or replacing vertebrate animal testing.  A webinar will be held on January 22, 2020, covering the use and application of the Collaborative Acute Toxicity Modeling Suite (CATMoS), a free resource for screening organic chemicals for acute oral toxicity.  Drs. Nicole Kleinstreuer and Kamel Mansouri will discuss the development of and demonstrate CATMoS, which was developed during a project in which the National Toxicology Program (NTP) Interagency Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods (NICEATM) and the EPA National Center for Computational Toxicology (NCCT) collected a large body of rat oral acute toxicity data and made these data available to project participants.  Participants built several models that were then used to generate consensus predictions for the acute oral toxicity endpoints of interest to regulatory agencies.  The webinar will offer a walk-through of how to use the modeling suite to generate acute oral toxicity predictions for chemicals of interest.  EPA notes that it “does not necessarily endorse the views of the speakers.”


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated a final rule on January 13, 2020, to adjust the level of the maximum (and minimum) statutory civil monetary penalty amounts under the statutes it administers, including the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).  85 Fed. Reg. 1751.  EPA states that this action is mandated by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, as amended through the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015 (the 2015 Act).  The 2015 Act prescribes a formula for annually adjusting the statutory maximum (and minimum) amount of civil penalties to reflect inflation, maintain the deterrent effect of statutory civil penalties, and promote compliance with the law.  EPA notes that the rule does not necessarily revise the penalty amounts that it chooses to seek pursuant to its civil penalty policies in a particular case.  EPA’s civil penalty policies, which guide enforcement personnel on how to exercise EPA’s statutory penalty authorities, take into account a number of fact-specific considerations, e.g., the seriousness of the violation, the violator’s good faith efforts to comply, any economic benefit gained by the violator as a result of its noncompliance, and a violator’s ability to pay.  The final rule was effective January 13, 2020.


 
  • Email This
  • Print
  • Share Link

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton

Bergeson & Campbell, P.C. (B&C®) and its consulting affiliate The Acta Group (Acta®) published on January 9, 2020, our “Forecast for U.S. Federal and International Chemical Regulatory Policy 2020.”  In this richly detailed and comprehensive document, the legal, scientific, and regulatory professionals of B&C and Acta distill key trends in U.S. and global chemical law and policy, and provide our best informed judgment as to the shape of key developments we are likely to see in the New Year.  The document includes a list of B&C speeches and writings, as well as a list of B&C webinars and podcasts available on demand.


 
 1 2 3 >  Last ›