Publications

What the Toxic Substances Control Act Overhaul Means to Manufacturers

12/18/2015 Articles

The U.S. Senate passed the long-pending bill (S. 697) to overhaul the Toxic Substances Control Act, which will bolster the government’s power to regulate a wide variety of chemicals. The practical effect of the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act will be to shift the burden and cost of evaluating and regulating chemicals to manufacturers, along with imposing new user fees, while also allowing U.S. EPA to consider—without regard to cost—the health and safety impact of chemicals. The bill will now need to be reconciled with the U.S. House of Representatives’ bill passed in June (the Toxic Substances Control Act Modernization Act).

The bill would amend the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for the first time in forty years, to ensure that only human and environmental health are considered in assessing the safety of chemicals, and replace TSCA’s current standard which requires a cost-benefit balancing during safety review. EPA’s oversight of chemicals manufactured, sold or distributed in the U.S. would be greatly expanded, as would the processes by which chemicals may be approved. As some examples, the modernized version of TSCA would allow EPA to:

  • Identify individuals and groups relevant to assessing the safety of a chemical, including risks to relevant populations and ensuring their protection.
  • Review the safety of all chemicals in active commerce, as compared to the grandfathering-in of chemicals in use without also conducting a safety review.
  • Establish a priority ranking of all active chemicals, with high-priority chemicals undergoing full safety assessment and safety determinations. For any chemical that does not meet the safety standard, EPA must impose restrictions sufficient for the chemical to meet the safety standard; where restrictions cannot ensure the safety standard will be met, the EPA must ban or phase out the chemical. To the extent sufficient information exists, EPA may conclude a chemical is likely to meet the safety standard, and is therefore a “low priority” chemical.
  • In identifying high priority chemicals, give preference to chemicals that are persistent and bioaccumulative, and those that are known human carcinogens and have high acute and chronic toxicity. EPA’s criteria must account for recommendations of the Governor of a State, hazard and exposure potential, and storage near a significant source of drinking water.

Notably, the bill would allow EPA to issue an order requiring testing, rather than having to promulgate a rule, where rulemaking was often a multi-year process. Testing authority applies to both new and existing chemicals, and in limited instances may also be applicable to the prioritization process.

The revisions will place substantial new burdens on manufacturers, including requirements that they:

  • Identify all chemicals they are currently manufacturing or processing.
  • Pay fees to fund the review of new and existing chemicals to defray a portion of the costs of implementation of the program (fees are capped at 25% of relevant EPA program costs, with companies to pay 100% of the costs of safety assessments they request).

Several provisions of the bill would also alter the process for review of new chemicals and the handling of Confidential Business Information in ways that will impact manufacturers as well. When reviewing new chemicals, EPA would now be required to make an affirmative safety finding that a chemical is likely to meet the safety standard as a condition of market entry. But the amendments maintain TSCA’s current 90-day review period for new chemicals and shortens that period when EPA makes a positive safety determination. The amendments would also require EPA to review past CBI claims for active chemicals on the TSCA Inventory, and that certain CBI claims be substantiated when made. For the first time, CBI is to be shared with state governments, health and environmental professionals and first responders, subject to adequate protections and nondisclosure agreements.

Full TSCA modernization will certainly take place in 2016. In the meantime, we will watch carefully and await the results of the House and Senate bill reconciliation process.

    Firm Highlights

    News

    Scraping Battles: Meta Loses Legal Effort to Halt Harvesting of Personal Profiles

    Alex Reese spoke to Matt Fleischer-Black of  Cybersecurity Law Report about the Meta v. Bright Data decision and its impact on U.S. scraping case law. Read the article here (paywall or trial).

    Read More
    Publication

    Employment Law Update for Nonprofits With Holly Sutton

    Welcome to  EO Radio Show - Your Nonprofit Legal Resource . Charities, foundations, and their founders often request help addressing employment practices and compliance questions. In this episode, host Cynthia Rowland is joined by Holly...

    Read More
    News

    JPMorgan Chase Accuses TransUnion of Stealing 'Trade Secrets'

    Intellectual property practice chair Eugene Mar provided expert commentary to American Banker for the article "JPMorgan Chase Accuses TransUnion of Stealing 'Trade Secrets'." In the article, he said: "By filing this as a trade...

    Read More
    News

    Farella Announces 2024 Leadership Council on Legal Diversity Pathfinders: Taylor Rottjakob and John Ugai

    Farella Braun + Martel is proud to announce that senior associates  Taylor E. Rottjakob and John M. Ugai have been named 2024 Leadership Council on Legal Diversity (LCLD) Pathfinders. Pathfinders have been identified as...

    Read More
    News

    Farella Braun + Martel Earns San Francisco Green Business Recertification

    Read More
    Publication

    Corporate Transparency Act: A Guide on Beneficial Ownership for Nonprofit Executives

    The Corporate Transparency Act, enacted as part of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021, represents a significant shift in regulatory requirements for entities across the United States. This act, set to...

    Read More
    Publication

    Corporate Transparency Act: State of the Law and Beneficial Ownership Reporting Requirements

    Key Points: Despite ongoing legal challenges, the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) generally remains in effect and enforceable. Clients should continue to abide by its regulations. Initial reports for entities formed in 2024 are due within...

    Read More
    Publication

    Nonprofit Quick Tip: State Filings in North Carolina and South Carolina

    Welcome to  EO Radio Show - Your Nonprofit Legal Resource . Episode 75 is the tenth in a series of Quick Tip episodes focusing on the details of state registration of nonprofit corporations. With...

    Read More
    Publication

    Insurance Market Crushes Wineries and Wine Country Homeowners

    We keep hearing about how difficult it is for winery and vineyard owners to get property insurance these days, both for their homes and their wine businesses in California’s wildfire-prone areas. Those who have...

    Read More
    News

    North Coast Industry Insiders Weigh In on Why California Cannabis Tax Revenue Slipped in 2023

    Jeff Hamilton spoke to Susan Wood with the North Bay Business Journal for the article "North Coast Industry Insiders Weigh In on Why California Cannabis Tax Revenue Slipped in 2023." Read the article with Jeff's...

    Read More