Compliance Just Got Easier: Stay ahead of regulatory changes with instant notifications on updates that matter.

FREE TRIAL UPGRADE!
Thank you for investing in EnvironmentalHazmatHuman ResourcesHuman Resources, Hazmat & Environmental related content. Click 'UPGRADE' to continue.
CANCEL
YOU'RE ALL SET!
Enjoy your limited-time access to the Compliance Network!
A confirmation welcome email has been sent to your email address from ComplianceNetwork@t.jjkellercompliancenetwork.com. Please check your spam/junk folder if you can't find it in your inbox.
YOU'RE ALL SET!
Thank you for your interest in EnvironmentalHazmatHuman ResourcesHuman Resources, Hazmat & Environmental related content.
WHOOPS!
You've reached your limit of free access, if you'd like more info, please contact us at 800-327-6868.
You'll also get exclusive access to:
Already have an account? .

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 9 and 721

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2020-0497; FRL-8215-01-OCSPP]

RIN 2070-AB27

Significant New Use Rules on Certain Chemical Substances (20-10.B)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is issuing significant new use rules (SNURs) under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for chemical substances which were the subject of premanufacture notices (PMNs). This action requires persons to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing manufacture (defined by statute to include import) or processing of any of these chemical substances for an activity that is designated as a significant new use by this rule. This action further requires that persons not commence manufacture or processing for the significant new use until they have submitted a Significant New Use Notice (SNUN), EPA has conducted a review of the notice, made an appropriate determination on the notice, and has taken any risk management actions as are required as a result of that determination.

DATES: This rule is effective on January 14, 2022. For purposes of judicial review, this rule shall be promulgated at 1 p.m. (e.s.t.) on November 29, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For technical information contact: William Wysong, New Chemicals Division (7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (202) 564-4163; email address: wysong.william@epa.gov.

For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202) 554-1404; email address: TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

You may be potentially affected by this action if you manufacture, process, or use the chemical substances contained in this rule. The following list of North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them. Potentially affected entities may include:

  • Manufacturers or processors of one or more subject chemical substances (NAICS codes 325 and 324110), e.g., chemical manufacturing and petroleum refineries.

This action may also affect certain entities through pre-existing import certification and export notification rules under TSCA, which would include the SNUR requirements. Chemical importers are subject to the TSCA section 13 (15 U.S.C. 2612) import provisions. The EPA policy in support of import certification appears at 40 CFR part 707, subpart B. In addition, pursuant to 40 CFR 721.20, any persons who export or intend to export a chemical substance that is the subject of this rule are subject to the export notification provisions of TSCA section 12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611(b)), and must comply with the export notification requirements in 40 CFR part 707, subpart D.

B. How can I access the docket?

The docket includes information considered by the Agency in developing the proposed and final rules. The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2020-0497, is available at https://www.regulations.gov and at the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket (OPPT Docket), Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is (202) 566-0280. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

Due to the public health emergency, the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room is closed to visitors with limited exceptions. The staff continues to provide remote customer service via email, phone, and webform. For the latest status information on EPA/DC services and docket access, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Background

A. What action is the Agency taking?

EPA is finalizing SNURs under TSCA section 5(a)(2) for chemical substances which were the subject of PMNs P-18-289, P-18-330, P-18-334, P-18-335, and P-18-337. These SNURs require persons who intend to manufacture or process any of these chemical substances for an activity that is designated as a significant new use to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing that activity.

Previously, in the Federal Register of October 20, 2020 (85 FR 66506) (FRL-10015-28), EPA proposed SNURs for these chemical substances. More information on the specific chemical substances subject to this final rule can be found in the Federal Register document proposing the SNURs. The docket includes information considered by the Agency in developing the proposed and final rules, including public comments and EPA's responses to the public comments received on the proposed rules, as described in Unit IV.

B. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

TSCA section 5(a)(2) (15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(2)) authorizes EPA to determine that a use of a chemical substance is a “significant new use.” EPA must make this determination by rule after considering all relevant factors, including the four TSCA section 5(a)(2) factors listed in Unit III.

C. Do the SNUR general provisions apply?

General provisions for SNURs appear in 40 CFR part 721, subpart A. These provisions describe persons subject to the rule, recordkeeping requirements, exemptions to reporting requirements, and applicability of the rule to uses occurring before the effective date of the rule. Provisions relating to user fees appear at 40 CFR part 700. Pursuant to 40 CFR 721.1(c), persons subject to these SNURs must comply with the same SNUN requirements and EPA regulatory procedures as submitters of PMNs under TSCA section 5(a)(1)(A). In particular, these requirements include the information submission requirements of TSCA sections 5(b) and 5(d)(1), the exemptions authorized by TSCA sections 5(h)(1), 5(h)(2), 5(h)(3), and 5(h)(5) and the regulations at 40 CFR part 720. Once EPA receives a SNUN, EPA must either determine that the significant new use is not likely to present an unreasonable risk of injury or take such regulatory action as is associated with an alternative determination before manufacture or processing for the significant new use can commence. If EPA determines that the significant new use is not likely to present an unreasonable risk, EPA is required under TSCA section 5(g) to make public, and submit for publication in the Federal Register , a statement of EPA's findings.

III. Significant New Use Determination

A. Determination Factors

TSCA section 5(a)(2) states that EPA's determination that a use of a chemical substance is a significant new use must be made after consideration of all relevant factors, including:

  • The projected volume of manufacturing and processing of a chemical substance.
  • The extent to which a use changes the type or form of exposure of human beings or the environment to a chemical substance.
  • The extent to which a use increases the magnitude and duration of exposure of human beings or the environment to a chemical substance.
  • The reasonably anticipated manner and methods of manufacturing, processing, distribution in commerce, and disposal of a chemical substance.

In determining what would constitute a significant new use for the chemical substances that are the subject of these SNURs, EPA considered relevant information about the toxicity of the chemical substances, and potential human exposures and environmental releases that may be associated with the substances, in the context of the four bulleted TSCA section 5(a)(2) factors listed in this unit. During its review of these chemicals, EPA identified certain conditions of use that are not intended by the submitters, but reasonably foreseen to occur. EPA is designating those reasonably foreseen conditions of use as well as certain other circumstances of use as significant new uses.

B. Procedures for Significant New Uses Claimed as Confidential Business Information (CBI)

By this rule, EPA is establishing certain significant new uses which have been claimed as CBI subject to Agency confidentiality regulations at 40 CFR part 2 and 40 CFR part 720, subpart E. Absent a final determination or other disposition of the confidentiality claim under 40 CFR part 2 procedures, EPA is required to keep this information confidential. EPA promulgated a procedure to deal with the situation where a specific significant new use is CBI, at 40 CFR 721.1725(b)(1) and has referenced it to apply to other SNURs.

Under these procedures a manufacturer or processor may request EPA to determine whether a specific use would be a significant new use under the rule. The manufacturer or processor must show that it has a bona fide intent to manufacture or process the chemical substance and must identify the specific use for which it intends to manufacture or process the chemical substance. If EPA concludes that the person has shown a bona fide intent to manufacture or process the chemical substance, EPA will tell the person whether the use identified in the bona fide submission would be a significant new use under the rule. Since most of the chemical identities of the chemical substances subject to these SNURs are also CBI, manufacturers and processors can combine the bona fide submission under the procedure in 40 CFR 721.1725(b)(1) with that under 40 CFR 721.11 into a single step.

If EPA determines that the use identified in the bona fide submission would not be a significant new use, i.e., the use does not meet the criteria specified in the rule for a significant new use, that person can manufacture or process the chemical substance so long as the significant new use trigger is not met. In the case of a production volume trigger, this means that the annual production volume limit is not exceeded by the amount identified in the bona fide submission to EPA. Because of confidentiality concerns, EPA does not typically disclose the actual production volume that constitutes the use trigger. Thus, if the person later intends to exceed that volume, a new bona fide submission would be necessary to determine whether that higher volume would be a significant new use.

IV. Public Comments

EPA received a public comment from one identifying entity on the proposed rule. The Agency's response is described in a separate Response to Public Comments document that is available in the public docket for this rulemaking. In addition, EPA received three anonymous comments. They were either general in nature and did not pertain to the proposed rule or were broadly supportive of the rule and requested no changes to the rule itself; therefore, no response is required. EPA made no changes to the final rule based on these comments.

V. Substances Subject to This Rule

EPA is establishing significant new use and recordkeeping requirements for chemical substances in 40 CFR part 721, subpart E. In Unit IV. of the proposed SNUR, EPA provided the following information for each chemical substance:

  • PMN number.
  • Chemical name (generic name, if the specific name is claimed as CBI).
  • Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) Registry number (if assigned for non-confidential chemical identities).
  • Basis for the SNUR.
  • Potentially useful information.
  • CFR citation assigned in the regulatory text section of this final rule.

The regulatory text section of these rules specifies the activities designated as significant new uses. Certain new uses, including production volume limits and other uses designated in the rules, may be claimed as CBI.

VI. Rationale and Objectives of the Rule

A. Rationale

During review of the PMNs submitted for the chemical substances that are the subject of these SNURs and as further discussed in Unit IV. of the proposed rule, EPA identified certain other reasonably foreseen conditions of use in addition to those conditions of use intended by the submitter. EPA has determined that the chemical under the intended conditions of use is not likely to present an unreasonable risk. However, EPA has not assessed risks associated with the reasonably foreseen conditions of use. EPA is designating these conditions of use as well as certain other circumstances of use as significant new uses. As a result, those significant new uses cannot occur without going through a separate, subsequent EPA review and determination process associated with a SNUN.

B. Objectives

EPA is issuing these SNURs because the Agency wants:

  • To have an opportunity to review and evaluate data submitted in a SNUN before the notice submitter begins manufacturing or processing a listed chemical substance for the described significant new use.
  • To be obligated to make a determination under TSCA section 5(a)(3) regarding the use described in the SNUN, under the conditions of use. The Agency will either determine under section 5(a)(3)(C) that the significant new use is not likely to present an unreasonable risk, including an unreasonable risk to a potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation identified as relevant by the Administrator under the conditions of use, or make a determination under TSCA section 5(a)(3)(A) or (B) and take the required regulatory action associated with the determination, before manufacture or processing for the significant new use of the chemical substance can occur.
  • To be able to complete its review and determination on each of the PMN substances, while deferring analysis on the significant new uses proposed in these rules unless and until the Agency receives a SNUN.

Issuance of a SNUR for a chemical substance does not signify that the chemical substance is listed on the TSCA Inventory. Guidance on how to determine if a chemical substance is on the TSCA Inventory is available on the internet at https://www.epa.gov/tsca-inventory.

VII. Applicability of the Rules to Uses Occurring Before the Effective Date of the Final Rule

To establish a significant new use, EPA must determine that the use is not ongoing. The chemical substances subject to this rule were undergoing premanufacture review at the time of signature of the proposed rule and were not on the TSCA inventory. In cases where EPA has not received a notice of commencement (NOC) and the chemical substance has not been added to the TSCA Inventory, no person may commence such activities without first submitting a PMN. Therefore, for the chemical substances subject to these SNURs, EPA concluded at the time of signature of the proposed rule that the designated significant new uses were not ongoing.

EPA designated October 7, 2020 (the date of web posting of the proposed rule) as the cutoff date for determining whether the new use is ongoing. The objective of EPA's approach is to ensure that a person cannot defeat a SNUR by initiating a significant new use before the effective date of the final rule.

Persons who began commercial manufacture or processing of the chemical substances for a significant new use identified on or after that date will have to cease any such activity upon the effective date of the final rule. To resume their activities, these persons would have to first comply with all applicable SNUR notification requirements and EPA would have to take action under TSCA section 5 allowing manufacture or processing to proceed.

VIII. Development and Submission of Information

EPA recognizes that TSCA section 5 does not require development of any particular new information (e.g., generating test data) before submission of a SNUN. There is an exception: If a person is required to submit information for a chemical substance pursuant to a rule, Order or consent agreement under TSCA section 4, then TSCA section 5(b)(1)(A) requires such information to be submitted to EPA at the time of submission of the SNUN.

In the absence of a rule, Order, or consent agreement under TSCA section 4 covering the chemical substance, persons are required only to submit information in their possession or control and to describe any other information known to or reasonably ascertainable by them (see 40 CFR 720.50). However, upon review of PMNs and SNUNs, the Agency has the authority to require appropriate testing. Unit IV. of the proposed rule lists potentially useful information for all SNURs listed here. Descriptions are provided for informational purposes. The potentially useful information identified in Unit IV. of the proposed rule will be useful to EPA's evaluation in the event that someone submits a SNUN for the significant new use. Companies who are considering submitting a SNUN are encouraged, but not required, to develop the information on the substance, which may assist with EPA's analysis of the SNUN.

EPA strongly encourages persons, before performing any testing, to consult with the Agency pertaining to protocol election. Furthermore, pursuant to TSCA section 4(h), which pertains to reduction of testing in vertebrate animals, EPA encourages consultation with the Agency on the use of alternative test methods and strategies (also called New Approach Methodologies, or NAMs), if available, to generate the recommended test data. EPA encourages dialog with Agency representatives to help determine how best the submitter can meet both the data needs and the objective of TSCA section 4(h). For more information on alternative test methods and strategies to reduce vertebrate animal testing, visit https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/alternative-test-methods-and-strategies-reduce.

The potentially useful information described in Unit IV. of the proposed rule may not be the only means of providing information to evaluate the chemical substance associated with the significant new uses. However, submitting a SNUN without any test data may increase the likelihood that EPA will take action under TSCA sections 5(e) or 5(f). EPA recommends that potential SNUN submitters contact EPA early enough so that they will be able to conduct the appropriate tests.

SNUN submitters should be aware that EPA will be better able to evaluate SNUNs which provide detailed information on the following:

  • Human exposure and environmental release that may result from the significant new use of the chemical substances.

IX. SNUN Submissions

According to 40 CFR 721.1(c), persons submitting a SNUN must comply with the same notification requirements and EPA regulatory procedures as persons submitting a PMN, including submission of test data on health and environmental effects as described in 40 CFR 720.50. SNUNs must be submitted on EPA Form No. 7710-25, generated using e-PMN software, and submitted to the Agency in accordance with the procedures set forth in 40 CFR 720.40 and 721.25. E-PMN software is available electronically at https://www.epa.gov/reviewing-new-chemicals-under-toxic-substances-control-act-tsca.

X. Economic Analysis

EPA has evaluated the potential costs of establishing SNUN requirements for potential manufacturers and processors of the chemical substances subject to this rule. EPA's complete economic analysis is available in the docket for this rulemaking.

XI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Additional information about these statutes and executive orders can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulations and Regulatory Review

This action establishes SNURs for new chemical substances that were the subject of PMNs. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

According to PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information that requires OMB approval under PRA, unless it has been approved by OMB and displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and included on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable.

The information collection requirements related to this action have already been approved by OMB pursuant to PRA under OMB control number 2070-0012 (EPA ICR No. 574). This action does not impose any burden requiring additional OMB approval. If an entity were to submit a SNUN to the Agency, the annual burden is estimated to average between 30 and 170 hours per response. This burden estimate includes the time needed to review instructions, search existing data sources, gather and maintain the data needed, and complete, review, and submit the required SNUN.

The listing of the OMB control numbers of the collection instruments and their subsequent codification in the table in 40 CFR 9.1 satisfies the display requirements of the PRA and OMB's implementing regulations at 5 CFR part 1320. Since this ICR was previously subject to public notice and comment prior to OMB approval, and given the technical nature of the table in 40 CFR part 9, EPA finds that further notice and comment to amend it is unnecessary. As a result, EPA finds that there is “good cause” under section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B)) to amend this table in 40 CFR 9.1 without further notice and comment.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

Pursuant to RFA section 605(b), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., I hereby certify that promulgation of this SNUR would not have a significant adverse economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The requirement to submit a SNUN applies to any person (including small or large entities) who intends to engage in any activity described in the final rule as a “significant new use.” Because these uses are “new,” based on all information currently available to EPA, it appears that no small or large entities presently engage in such activities. A SNUR requires that any person who intends to engage in such activity in the future must first notify EPA by submitting a SNUN. Although some small entities may decide to pursue a significant new use in the future, EPA cannot presently determine how many, if any, there may be. However, EPA's experience to date is that, in response to the promulgation of SNURs covering over 1,000 chemicals, the Agency receives only a small number of notices per year. For example, the number of SNUNs received was seven in Federal fiscal year (FY) 2013, 13 in FY2014, six in FY2015, 12 in FY2016, 13 in FY2017, and 11 in FY2018. Only a fraction of these were from small businesses. In addition, the Agency currently offers relief to qualifying small businesses by reducing the SNUN submission fee from $16,000 to $2,800. This lower fee reduces the total reporting and recordkeeping of cost of submitting a SNUN to about $10,116 for qualifying small firms. Therefore, the potential economic impacts of complying with this SNUR are not expected to be significant or adversely impact a substantial number of small entities. In a SNUR that published in the Federal Register of June 2, 1997 (62 FR 29684) (FRL-5597-1), the Agency presented its general determination that final SNURs are not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, which was provided to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

Based on EPA's experience with proposing and finalizing SNURs, State, local, and Tribal governments have not been impacted by these rulemakings, and EPA does not have any reasons to believe that any State, local, or Tribal government will be impacted by this action. As such, EPA has determined that this action does not impose any enforceable duty, contain any unfunded mandate, or otherwise have any effect on small governments subject to the requirements of UMRA sections 202, 203, 204, or 205 (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq. ).

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

This action will not have federalism implications because it is not expected to have a substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

This action will not have Tribal implications because it is not expected to have substantial direct effects on Indian Tribes, significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian Tribal governments and does not involve or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the requirements of Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), do not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks

This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because this is not an economically significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866, and this action does not address environmental health or safety risks disproportionately affecting children.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because this action is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

In addition, since this action does not involve any technical standards, NTTAA section 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272 note, does not apply to this action.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

This action does not entail special considerations of environmental justice related issues as delineated by Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

This action is subject to the CRA, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., and EPA will submit a rule report containing this rule and other required information to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 9

Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 721

Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: October 26, 2021.

Tala Henry,

Deputy Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.

Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA is amending 40 CFR chapter I as follows:

PART 9—OMB APPROVALS UNDER THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT

1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:

Authority:

7 U.S.C. 135 et seq., 136-136y; 15 U.S.C. 2001, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2601-2671; 21 U.S.C. 331j, 346a; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., 1311, 1313d, 1314, 1318, 1321, 1326, 1330, 1342, 1344, 1345 (d) and (e), 1361; E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR, 1971-1975 Comp. p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241, 242b, 243, 246, 300f, 300g, 300g-1, 300g-2, 300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-5, 300g-6, 300j-1, 300j-2, 300j-3, 300j-4, 300j-9, 1857 et seq., 6901-6992k, 7401-7671q, 7542, 9601-9657, 11023, 11048.

2. In §9.1, amend the table by adding entries for §§721.11561 through 721.11565 in numerical order under the undesignated center heading “Significant New Uses of Chemical Substances” to read as follows:

§9.1

OMB approvals under the Paperwork Reduction Act.

* * * * *

40 CFR citationOMB control No.
* * * * *
Significant New Uses of Chemical Substances
* * * * *
721.115612070-0012
721.115622070-0012
721.115632070-0012
721.115642070-0012
721.115652070-0012
* * * * *

* * * * *

PART 721—SIGNIFICANT NEW USES OF CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES

3. The authority citation for part 721 continues to read as follows:

Authority:

15 U.S.C. 2604, 2607, and 2625(c).

4. Add §§721.11561 through 721.11565 to subpart E to read as follows:

Subpart E—Significant New Uses for Specific Chemical Substances

Sec.

* * * * *

§721.11561 2-[2-(methylcarboxymonocyclic)amino)ethoxy]alcohol (generic).

§721.11562 Formaldehyde, polymer with alkyl aryl ketone (generic).

§721.11563 Propanedioic acid, 1,3-dihexyl ester.

§721.11564 Propanedioic acid, 1,3-dicyclohexyl ester.

§721.11565Propanedioic acid, 2,2-bis(hydroxymethyl)-, 1,3-dicyclohexyl ester.

* * * * *

§721.11561 2-[2-(methylcarboxymonocyclic)amino)ethoxy]alcohol (generic).

(a) Chemical substance and significant new uses subject to reporting. (1) The chemical substance identified generically as 2-[2-(methylcarboxymonocyclic)amino)ethoxy]alcohol (generic).(PMN P-18-289) is subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.

(2) The significant new uses are:

(i) Industrial, commercial, and consumer activities. Requirements as specified in §721.80(j) and (s). For purposes of §721.80(s), the annual manufacture and importation volume is 80,000 kilograms.

(ii) [Reserved]

(b) Specific requirements. The provisions of subpart A of this part apply to this section except as modified by this paragraph (b).

(1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping requirements as specified in §721.125(a) through (c) and (i) are applicable to manufacturers and processors of this substance.

(2) Limitation or revocation of certain notification requirements. The provisions of §721.185 apply to this section.

(3) Determining whether a specific use is subject to this section. The provisions of §721.1725(b)(1) apply to paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section.

§721.11562 Formaldehyde, polymer with alkyl aryl ketone (generic).

(a) Chemical substance and significant new uses subject to reporting. (1) The chemical substance identified generically as formaldehyde, polymer with alkyl aryl ketone (PMN P-18-330) is subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.

(2) The significant new uses are:

(i) Industrial, commercial, and consumer activities. Requirements as specified in §721.80(o).

(ii) Release to water. Requirements as specified in §721.90(a)(4), (b)(4), and (c)(4), where N=770.

(b) Specific requirements. The provisions of subpart A of this part apply to this section except as modified by this paragraph (b).

(1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping requirements as specified in §721.125(a) through (c), (i) and (k) are applicable to manufacturers and processors of this substance.

(2) Limitation or revocation of certain notification requirements. The provisions of §721.185 apply to this section.

§721.11563 Propanedioic acid, 1,3-dihexyl ester.

(a) Chemical substance and significant new uses subject to reporting. (1) The chemical substance identified as propanedioic acid, 1,3-dihexyl ester (PMN P-18-334; CAS No. 1431-37-4) is subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.

(2) The significant new uses are:

(i) Industrial, commercial, and consumer activities. Requirements as specified in §721.80(g).

(ii) Release to water. Requirements as specified in §721.90(a)(4), (b)(4), and (c)(4), where N=3.

(b) Specific requirements. The provisions of subpart A of this part apply to this section except as modified by this paragraph (b).

(1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping requirements as specified in §721.125(a) through (c), (i) and (k) are applicable to manufacturers and processors of this substance.

(2) Limitation or revocation of certain notification requirements. The provisions of §721.185 apply to this section.

§721.11564 Propanedioic acid, 1,3-dicyclohexyl ester.

(a) Chemical substance and significant new uses subject to reporting. (1) The chemical substance identified as propanedioic acid, 1,3-dicyclohexyl ester (PMN P-18-335; CAS No. 1152-57-4) is subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.

(2) The significant new uses are:

(i) Industrial, commercial, and consumer activities. Requirements as specified in §721.80(g).

(ii) Release to water. Requirements as specified in §721.90(a)(4), (b)(4), and (c)(4), where N=6.

(b) Specific requirements. The provisions of subpart A of this part apply to this section except as modified by this paragraph (b).

(1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping requirements as specified in §721.125(a) through (c), (i) and (k) are applicable to manufacturers and processors of this substance.

(2) Limitation or revocation of certain notification requirements. The provisions of §721.185 apply to this section.

§721.11565Propanedioic acid, 2,2-bis(hydroxymethyl)-, 1,3-dicyclohexyl ester.

(a) Chemical substance and significant new uses subject to reporting. (1) The chemical substance identified as propanedioic acid, 2,2- bis(hydroxymethyl)-, 1,3-dicyclohexyl ester (PMN P-18-337; CAS No. 2222732-46-7) is subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.

(2) The significant new uses are:

(i) Release to water. Requirements as specified in §721.90(a)(4), (b)(4), and (c)(4), where N=95.

(ii) [Reserved]

(b) Specific requirements. The provisions of subpart A of this part apply to this section except as modified by this paragraph (b).

(1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping requirements as specified in §721.125(a) through (c) and (k) are applicable to manufacturers and processors of this substance.

(2) Limitation or revocation of certain notification requirements. The provisions of §721.185 apply to this section.

[FR Doc. 2021-24789 Filed 11-12-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

Specialized Industries

Go beyond the regulations! Visit the Institute for in-depth guidance on a wide range of compliance subjects in safety and health, transportation, environment, and human resources.

J. J. Keller® COMPLIANCE NETWORK is a premier online safety and compliance community, offering members exclusive access to timely regulatory content in workplace safety (OSHA), transportation (DOT), environment (EPA), and human resources (DOL).

Interact With Our Compliance Experts

Puzzled by a regulatory question or issue? Let our renowned experts provide the answers and get your business on track to full compliance!

Upcoming Events

Reference the Compliance Network Safety Calendar to keep track of upcoming safety and compliance events. Browse by industry or search by keyword to see relevant dates and observances, including national safety months, compliance deadlines, and more.

SAFETY & COMPLIANCE NEWS

Keep up with the latest regulatory developments from OSHA, DOT, EPA, DOL, and more.

REGSENSE® REGULATORY REFERENCE

Explore a comprehensive database of word-for-word regulations on a wide range of compliance topics, with simplified explanations and best practices advice from our experts.

THE J. J. KELLER INSTITUTE

The Institute is your destination for in-depth content on 120+ compliance subjects. Discover articles, videos, and interactive exercises that will strengthen your understanding of regulatory concepts relevant to your business.

ADD HAZMAT, ENVIRONMENTAL, & HR RESOURCES

Unlock exclusive content offering expert insights into hazmat, environmental, and human resources compliance with a COMPLIANCE NETWORK EDGE membership.

DIRECT ACCESS TO COMPLIANCE EXPERTS

Struggling with a compliance challenge? Get the solution from our in-house team of experts! You can submit a question to our experts by email, set up a phone or video call, or request a detailed research report.

EVENTS

Register to attend live online events hosted by our experts. These webcasts and virtual conferences feature engaging discussions on important compliance topics in a casual, knowledge-sharing environment.

Most Recent Highlights In Environmental

EHS Monthly Round Up - October 2026

EHS Monthly Round Up - October 2026

In this October 2026 roundup video, we'll review the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news.

Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news. Let’s take a look at what happened over the past month.

A Department of Labor Office of Inspector General investigation found that OSHA may have conducted certain small employer inspections in low-hazard industries that did not comply with its appropriations acts. The investigation stemmed from a September 2025 hotline complaint. OSHA disputes the findings, and its review of the cases and the Inspector General’s recommendations is ongoing.

OSHA issued guidance to help employers respond to opioid emergencies. The factsheet provides employers with practical information on recognizing the signs of an overdose and responding immediately.

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health published toolbox talks addressing workplace fire hazards and lockout/tagout. The talks highlight the importance of fire prevention programs and following lockout/tagout procedures.

Turning to environmental news, EPA proposes to reallocate the excess 2025 small refinery exemption volumes to the 2026 and 2027 compliance years. The proposed rule would adjust the renewable volume and percentage standards for biomass-based diesel, advanced biofuel, and total renewable fuel. The deadline for public comments is December 4.

EPA further extended the submission deadline for the reporting year 2025 annual greenhouse gas report from October 30, 2026, to March 10, 2027. This applies to facilities subject to the greenhouse gas reporting program.

EPA proposes to extend additional compliance dates for the trichloroethylene risk management rule finalized in 2024. If finalized, the rule would delay compliance deadlines for certain chemical processors and refrigerant manufacturers.

And finally, EPA extended the compliance date to submit Facility Response Plans for worst-case discharges of Clean Water Act hazardous substances by 3 years, to June 1, 2030. Effective December 14, the final rule also removes provisions related to climate change and environmental justice.

Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!

EHS Monthly Round Up - January 2023

EHS Monthly Round Up - January 2023

In this monthly roundup video, we’ll review the most impactful environmental, safety, and health news.

Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental, safety, and health news. First, let’s take a look at what’s happening in safety and health.

If you haven’t already done so, now is the time to post your OSHA 300A Summary. Employers are required to post the Summary in a conspicuous place from February 1st through April 30th.

As required by law, OSHA increased its penalties for inflation in mid-January. Penalties went up 7.7 percent, effective January 17th.

Also in January, OSHA released its long-awaited Fall 2022 regulatory agenda. Along with numerous proposed rules in the works, three major final rules are slated for 2023 – COVID-19 in healthcare, Injury and Illness tracking, and an update to the hazard communication standard.

OSHA recently released two new letters of interpretation, which address exit signs and lockout/tagout. Specifically, OSHA states that the International Standards Organization emergency exit symbol can be located beside the mandatory EXIT text on an existing sign.

The second letter addresses the applicability of lockout/tagout and the maintenance and operations of cathodic protection rectifiers when working on pipelines.

New York’s Warehouse Worker Protection Act was signed into law in December and takes effect in late February. It protects warehouse distribution workers from undisclosed or unlawful work speed quotas and includes protections for workers who fail to meet these quotas.

In 2021, a worker died every 101 minutes from a work-related injury, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. A total of 5,190 fatal work injuries was recorded in the U.S. in 2021, an 8.9 percent increase over 2020.

Turning to environmental news, EPA automatically added nine per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, to the Toxics Release Inventory, or TRI, list. Four PFAS were added since they are no longer claimed as confidential business information.

EPA released its Fall 2022 regulatory agenda in early January. Included are major regulations impacting the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, waters of the United States, and modifications to the Risk Management Program under the Clean Air Act.

There are also a number of rules related to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants in various rule stages.

And finally, beginning with model year 2027, heavy-duty trucks will be required to meet clean air standards that are 80 percent more stringent than current requirements.

EPA says this final rule is aimed at reducing smog- and soot-forming emissions, increasing the life of governed vehicles by up to 250 percent, and increasing emissions warranty periods up to 450 percent.

Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup!

2026-11-02T06:00:00Z

Tennessee establishes waste tire hauler registration program

Effective date: January 18, 2027

This applies to: Waste tire generators, commercial waste tire haulers, and permitted waste tire management facilities

Description of change: The Tennessee Underground Storage Tanks and Solid Waste Disposal Control Board approved regulations establishing a waste tire hauler registration program that tracks and regulates the transportation of waste tires from the point of generation to the delivery for permitted storage, processing, or disposal.

The regulations include:

  • Administrative requirements for registration;
  • Decal requirements for vehicles that commercially haul waste tires;
  • An annual registration fee for registered waste tire hauler vehicles;
  • Terms and conditions for registered waste tire haulers;
  • Manifest requirements for all waste tire generators, transporters, and permitted waste tire management facilities; and
  • Financial assurance requirements for registered waste tire haulers.
2026-11-02T06:00:00Z

California adopts regulations for initial corporate GHG report

Effective date: October 12, 2026

This applies to: U.S.-based companies that do business in California with total annual revenues above $1 billion (reporting entities) and with total annual revenues above $500 million (covered entities)

Description of change: The California Office of Administrative Law (OAL) approved the California Corporate Greenhouse Gas Reporting and Climate-Related Financial Risk Disclosure Initial Regulation, which was approved by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) in February 2026.

The adopted regulations help implement the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act and the Climate-Related Financial Risk Reporting Act, which require U.S.-based companies operating in California to report greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and climate-related financial risks.

The regulation:

  • Establishes annual fee calculations and procedures,
  • Specifies definitions to help entities determine applicability (whether the rule applies and if they must comply with both emissions reporting and fee requirements), and
  • Sets the first-year reporting deadline of November 10, 2026, for reporting Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions.

Annual report

CARB has sent a reminder letter to organizations potentially required to sumbit the inital report by November 10, 2026.

Entities that weren’t collecting data or weren’t planning to collect data when CARB issued its December 2024 Enforcement Notice aren’t expected to submit Scope 1 and 2 reporting data for this first reporting cycle in 2026 only.

Starting in 2027, reporting entities must annually disclose Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 GHG emissions for the previous fiscal year. CARB is developing reporting regulations for 2027 and later.

Annual fee

Reporting entities and covered entities must pay the applicable annual implementation fee within 60 calendar days of receiving a fee determination notice from CARB.

Federal environmental reporting: 5 annual reports due in 2027
2026-11-02T06:00:00Z

Federal environmental reporting: 5 annual reports due in 2027

With the new year quickly approaching, many businesses take time to reflect on the previous year to evaluate their performance. For numerous facilities subject to federal environmental regulations, this isn’t just a good practice; it’s mandated through annual reporting requirements.

Mark your compliance calendars for these common federal environmental annual reports due in 2027.

Multi-Sector General Permit (MSGP) annual report

Due: January 30, 2027

EPA issues industrial stormwater MSGPs in areas where it serves as the permitting authority. Examples include Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico, and the District of Columbia.

Facilities with MSGPs must submit the Annual Report for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity Under the NPDES MSGP (NPDES Form 6100-28) electronically via the NPDES Electronic Reporting Tool (NeT). The report covers information from calendar year 2026.

Take note! EPA has administratively continued the 2021 MSGP for facilities covered under the permit before it expired in February 2026.

New facilities must comply with the requirements in EPA’s No Action Assurance for New Industrial Facilities Needing Stormwater Permit Coverage under EPA’s Multi-Sector General Permit memorandum (issued February 27, 2026) until the agency issues a new MSGP. The memorandum mandates that facilities provide the electronically reported information required by the 2021 MSGP (including the annual report) if EPA requests it.

Emergency and Hazardous Chemical Inventory (Tier II Inventory Report)

Due: March 1, 2027

Section 312 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) requires covered facilities to submit the Tier II Inventory Report (or a state-equivalent form) to the State Emergency Response Commission, Local Emergency Planning Committee, and local fire department. Reporting applies to facilities:

  • That are required by OSHA’s Hazard Communication standard (29 CFR 1910.1200) to prepare or have available Safety Data Sheets (SDSs), and
  • That have on-site at any one time emergency hazardous substances (EHSs) or non-EHS hazardous chemicals at or above certain thresholds (40 CFR Part 370 Subpart B).

The report provides information on the covered hazardous chemicals used or stored at the facility in 2026, including locations, amounts, and potential hazards.

Take note! Facilities should check state regulations to:

  • Confirm Tier II reporting thresholds, as they may be more stringent;
  • Determine whether any additional chemicals are covered; and
  • Verify how the report must be submitted, including whether Tier2 Submit files are accepted.

Hazardous Waste Export Annual Report

Due: March 1, 2027

The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) requires exporters of regulated hazardous waste to submit an annual report electronically through the RCRA Information (RCRAInfo) Waste Import and Export Tracking System (WIETS). The report lists the types, quantities, shipment frequency, and ultimate destination of all hazardous waste exported in 2026.

Take note! If an exporter doesn’t ship any hazardous waste after obtaining consent to export certain hazardous wastes, the exporter must still submit an annual report that lists the quantity shipped under the issued consent as 0.

2025 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Annual Report

Due: March 10, 2027

The GHG Reporting Program (GHGRP) requires large industrial sources of GHG emissions, fuel and industrial gas suppliers, and carbon dioxide injection facilities to report GHG emissions from 2025 for all applicable source categories. Facilities submit reports through EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Reporting Tool (e-GGRT).

Take note! Annual GHG reports for the previous calendar year are usually due by March 31 of the next calendar year. However, EPA issued an interim final rule (effective October 14, 2026) extending the submission deadline for Reporting Year 2025 GHG reports to March 10, 2027.

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) Report

Due: July 1, 2027

Section 313 of EPCRA requires facilities in specific industry sectors to submit a TRI Form R for each TRI-listed chemical (372.65) manufactured, processed, or otherwise used above threshold levels (listed at 372.25, 372.27, and 372.28) in the previous calendar year. The report, submitted through TRI-MEweb, covers waste management activities and any actions taken to reduce or prevent chemical waste during 2026.

Take note! TRI reports must be submitted to both EPA and the state. If your facility’s state participates in the TRI Data Exchange (TDX), TRI-MEweb will automatically send your report to the state. If your facility’s state doesn’t participate in TRI TDX, check the state’s TRI submission requirements to determine how to submit the required state copy.

Key to remember: The new year is quickly approaching, and the annual reporting compliance deadlines for many federal environmental programs are following closely behind.

See More

Most Recent Highlights In Transportation

EPA proposes major changes to oil, gas emission rules
2026-10-29T05:00:00Z

EPA proposes major changes to oil, gas emission rules

On October 29, 2026, EPA published a proposed rule to amend certain emission standards that were established by a rule finalized in 2024 (2024 Final Rule) for new and existing crude oil and natural gas facilities

Who’s impacted?

The proposed rule primarily applies to:

  • New, modified, and reconstructed crude oil and natural gas facilities subject to the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) at 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart OOOOb; and
  • Existing crude oil and natural gas facilities subject to the emissions guidelines (EGs) at Part 60 Subpart OOOOc.

Collectively, these standards are known as the OOOOb/c rule.

What are the proposed changes?

EPA’s rule proposes revisions to a range of regulations established by the 2024 Final Rule.

Well site categories

The agency co-proposes two options for creating distinct categories of well sites, either:

  • By production level as marginal or non-marginal (with reduced requirements for marginal wells), or
  • By resource type as conventional or unconventional (with reduced requirements for conventional wells).

EPA also proposes an alternative approach to the marginal or non-marginal option, adding further sub-categories of marginal wells based on production levels.

Covers and closed vent systems (CVSs)

EPA proposes to divide the No Identifiable Emissions (NIE) standard into:

  • Design requirements, and
  • Operational requirements.

Additionally, the operational requirements would allow for repairs so that emissions that are fixed within a limited timeframe wouldn’t be a deviation.

Associated gas

EPA proposes to modify the best system of emission reduction (BSER) for associated gas from oil wells, including an approach that would allow routing associated gas to a control device or flare meeting specific emission-reduction requirements.

Control devices

The agency proposes to change control device requirements related to:

  • Continuous burning pilot flames,
  • Flame monitoring data deviations,
  • Control device alerts,
  • Visible emissions test conditions for fugitive emissions,
  • Temporary or backup control devices,
  • Temporary process controllers, and
  • Control device categories.

Other requirements

EPA addresses other aspects of the 2024 Final Rule, proposing to revise requirements for:

  • Liquids unloading,
  • Process controllers,
  • Pumps,
  • Fugitive emissions,
  • Storage vessels,
  • Covers and CVSs, and
  • Equipment leaks at gas plants.

Further, the proposed rule would allow gas processing facilities subject to the NSPS at Part 60 Subparts OOOO, OOOOa, and KKK to conduct optical gas imaging surveys according to Appendix K.

Super Emitter Program

EPA plans to rescind the Super Emitter Program that requires regulated sources to be monitored for methane leaks and releases above a specific threshold by certified third parties using remote-sensing technology. If the threshold is exceeded, it’s known as a “super-emitter event.” The third party notifies EPA, which then notifies a source that a super-emitter event has occurred at its facility. The source must find the leak or release, report its investigation results to EPA, and take corrective action if needed.

Note that the Super Emitter Program isn’t in effect. EPA’s July 2025 interim final rule delayed the program start date to January 22, 2027.

Key to remember: EPA proposes significant changes to emission standards for new and existing oil and natural gas facilities.

2026-10-29T05:00:00Z

Virginia establishes emission limits for data center generators

Effective date: November 4, 2026

This applies to: Data centers that apply for an air permit on or after July 1, 2026

Description of change: The Virginia State Air Pollution Control Board established new emission regulations for engine-generator sets (gen-sets) at data centers. A gen-set refers to an electrical generator and engine mounted together that form one piece of equipment.

The new regulation requires each gen-set covered in the air permit to emit no more than the emissions achieved by a Tier 4 equivalent gen-set. It also grants the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality the authority to require stricter emission limits.

Related state info: Clean air operating permits state comparison

2026-10-29T05:00:00Z

Kansas adds TSDF permit application review fees

Effective date: October 16, 2026

This applies to: Hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs)

Description of change: The Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) approved a new regulation establishing review fees for new and renewal permit applications from TSDFs. Facility permits must be renewed every 10 years.

The review fee is $20,000 for a permit renewal or an application from a TSDF that has a permit, order, agreement, post-closure plan, or other regulatory mechanism issued or approved by EPA or the KDHE.

The review fee is $50,000 for an application from a TSDF that doesn’t have a permit, order, agreement, post-closure plan, or other regulatory mechanism issued or approved by EPA or the KDHE.

2026-10-29T05:00:00Z

Kansas extends duration of state non-discharging water pollution permit

Effective date: October 30, 2026

This applies to: State-issued non-discharging water pollution control permit holders

Description of change: The Kansas Department of Health and Environment adopted amendments to extend the maximum duration of state-issued non-discharging water pollution control permits from 5 to 10 years.

Related state info: Industrial water permitting state comparison

2026-10-29T05:00:00Z

Wyoming updates noncoal surface mining regulations

Effective date: August 21, 2026

This applies to: Noncoal surface mining operations

Description of change: The Wyoming Land Quality Division (LQD) adopted a new chapter and amended three related chapters governing noncoal surface mining operation regulations.

The LQD added Noncoal Chapter 14 to set blasting requirements for noncoal surface mining operations, including requirements for blasting plans for operations that anticipate using explosives.

It also revised Noncoal Chapters 2, 9, and 10 to establish that other types of operations are subject to some or all of the blasting regulations established by Noncoal Chapter 14. For example, the following types of operations must develop blasting plans if the operations are expected to use blasting as part of the mining:

  • Regular noncoal mine permit applicants,
  • Small mining operations, and
  • Limited mining operations on 15 acres or less of affected land.
See More

Most Recent Highlights In Safety & Health

EPA updates formaldehyde testing standards for composite wood products
2026-10-29T05:00:00Z

EPA updates formaldehyde testing standards for composite wood products

EPA published a final rule on October 28, 2026, updating the formaldehyde emission standards for composite wood products under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The rule provides a new quality control test method option and updates specific voluntary consensus standards incorporated by reference.

Who’s impacted?

The formaldehyde emission standards apply to entities that manufacture (including import), sell, supply, offer for sale, or certify certain composite wood products that use formaldehyde, including:

  • Hardwood plywood,
  • Medium-density fiberboard,
  • Particleboard, and
  • Products containing these composite wood materials.

It may also apply to entities that test these materials or work with certification firms that certify them.

Regulated entities use approved voluntary consensus standards to comply with the formaldehyde emission standards (40 CFR Part 770).

What are the changes?

EPA’s final rule updates six voluntary consensus standards incorporated by reference to the most current standards issued by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Regulated entities must comply with the updated versions of these standards.

The final rule also adds an allowable quality control testing method. ISO 12460-2:2024(en), “Wood-based panels — Determination of Formaldehyde Release — Part 2: Small-scale Chamber Method,” is a small-scale chamber test method for measuring formaldehyde emissions from wood products. The new standard contains a wider range of analytical methods that entities can use (e.g., laser absorption spectroscopy).

Finally, the rule removes the British Standards Institute BS EN ISO 12460-3:2020 standard from the allowable quality control methods since ISO 12460-3:2023(E), one of the existing standards that’s being updated by the final rule, is identical.

The final rule takes effect November 27, 2026.

Key to remember: EPA updated the formaldehyde testing standards for composite wood products, adding a quality control test method and updating multiple voluntary consensus standards.

Looking beyond PFAS: Emerging contaminants draw EPA's attention
2026-10-23T05:00:00Z

Looking beyond PFAS: Emerging contaminants draw EPA's attention

For years, conversations about emerging contaminants have focused on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). While PFAS remain a major regulatory and public concern, they represent only one part of a much larger picture. Regulators and researchers are increasingly evaluating a broader range of chemicals that may be present in drinking water and the environment.

A recent EPA research initiative highlights this shift. In September 2026, EPA announced a scientific study that will use non-targeted analysis (NTA) to improve the agency's understanding of emerging contaminants in drinking water. Unlike traditional analytical methods that look for a limited list of chemicals, NTA allows researchers to screen for thousands of potential contaminants and identify previously unknown substances.

Emerging contaminants continue to evolve

There's no single regulatory definition of "emerging contaminant." Generally, the term refers to chemicals that have been detected in the environment and may present risks to human health or ecosystems but aren't yet fully understood, routinely monitored, or regulated.

Many emerging contaminants are not new chemicals. In many cases, they've been used for decades. What's changed is the ability to detect them at very low concentrations and to better understand where they occur, how they move through the environment, and what impacts they may have.

PFAS are a prime example. Once largely unknown outside technical circles, they're now the subject of drinking water standards, reporting requirements, cleanup efforts, and litigation. Other contaminant groups may follow a similar path as research continues.

EPA is expanding its view beyond PFAS

As part of its study, EPA developed a screening library containing more than 1,400 emerging contaminants. According to EPA, the library includes more than 1,000 pesticides and pesticide metabolites, more than 250 pharmaceuticals and personal care products, more than 70 PFAS, and other emerging contaminants.

While PFAS remain the most recognized emerging contaminant family, EPA's screening efforts extend far beyond fluorinated chemicals. The pharmaceutical and personal care product category includes compounds such as antibiotics, hormones, and other medicinal ingredients that can enter the environment through wastewater systems and other pathways. The pesticide category encompasses herbicide, insecticide, fungicide, and pesticide degradation products that may persist in soil, groundwater, or surface water.

EPA states that the study will help identify contaminants that may warrant additional investigation in the future.

Why this matters now

Most facilities aren't currently required to monitor for hundreds or thousands of emerging contaminants. However, today's research efforts often become tomorrow's regulatory priorities.

Historically, contaminants often attract scientific attention long before regulatory requirements follow. As occurrence data grows and analytical methods improve, regulators gain a better understanding of where contaminants are found and whether additional action is needed.

Facilities that manufacture, process, use, discharge, or dispose of chemicals should understand which substances are present in their operations and waste streams. This includes evaluating raw materials, wastewater discharges, byproducts, and residual wastes. Facilities may also want to monitor supplier communications and regulatory developments related to chemicals used in their operations.

Organizations with strong chemical inventory management and environmental review processes are often better positioned to adapt when new contaminants attract regulatory attention.

Preparing for what comes next

Organizations don't need to become experts on every emerging contaminant. However, focusing solely on PFAS could cause them to overlook broader trends developing across the environmental landscape.

EPA's latest drinking water study demonstrates that regulators are increasingly using advanced analytical tools to evaluate a much wider universe of chemicals. Whether the next major concern involves pharmaceuticals, pesticide metabolites, or another group of contaminants, facilities that stay informed about emerging issues will be better positioned to anticipate and respond to future compliance challenges.

Key to remember: PFAS may be the most visible emerging contaminant today, but they're unlikely to be the last. EPA's recent drinking water study shows that regulators are evaluating a much broader range of contaminants, making it important for facilities to stay informed about emerging chemical concerns before they become regulatory requirements.

2026-10-20T05:00:00Z

Hawaii overhauls solid waste landfill regulations

Effective date: September 25, 2026

This applies to: Facilities that manage solid waste

Description of change: The State of Hawaii Department of Health made the first major update to the solid waste management control regulations in decades. The amended regulations:

  • Increase flexibility for small municipal solid waste landfills (MSWLFs),
  • Revise siting restrictions for MSWLFs,
  • Add requirements for construction and demolition landfills and special waste landfills,
  • Add leachate control and closure requirements for all solid waste management facilities,
  • Require auto processing and salvaging on an impervious surface, and
  • Update the solid waste permitting program.

Examples of significant changes include:

  • Adding requirements for facilities that manage solid waste (except landfills), such as leachate control for all facilities and use of impervious working surfaces for solid waste salvage facilities;
  • Updating MSWLF requirements (such as requiring compliance with the federal maximum contaminant level or state level (whichever is lower) for groundwater contaminants); and
  • Adding new requirements for construction and demolition landfills.

Related state info: Non-hazardous solid waste and recycling state comparison

2026-10-20T05:00:00Z

North Dakota adopts permanent septic system rules

Effective date: October 1, 2026

This applies to: The licensing, permitting, and installation of on-site wastewater treatment systems (septic systems)

Description of change: The North Dakota Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) finalized permanent rules for on-site wastewater treatment systems (septic systems). The final rule establishes statewide licensing requirements, a common technical code, and a process for variances from the code.

Senate Bill 2267 shifted responsibility for regulating septic systems to the DEQ. The department issued an emergency rule in 2025 to continue existing licenses. This rulemaking finalizes:

  • Licensing requirements for septic system installers,
  • Training requirements for licensed septic system installers,
  • Permit requirements (permits will continue to be issued by the local permitting authority), and
  • Technical requirements (which closely align with the existing voluntary common code previously developed).
2026-10-20T05:00:00Z

Ohio establishes CCR regulations

Effective date: October 1, 2026

This applies to: Owners and operators of coal combustion residuals (CCR) landfills and surface impoundments

Description of change: The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) adopted regulations for CCR generated by electric utilities and disposed of in dedicated landfills and surface impoundments. The new rules partially implement the federal CCR regulations (40 CFR Part 257 Subpart D). They also contain state-specific provisions (OAC Chapter 3745-525) for requirements related to CCR permits to install and financial assurance for landfills previously regulated by OAC Chapter 3745-30.

The Ohio EPA plans to apply for partial approval to implement the CCR program in place of EPA.

See More

Most Recent Highlights In Human Resources

2026-10-20T05:00:00Z

Texas adopts financial assurance rules for recycling facilities

Effective date: October 1, 2026

This applies to: Recycling facilities that accept, process, and repurpose renewable energy components

Description of change: The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)’s final rule adds 30 TAC Chapter 376 (and amends Chapter 328 accordingly) to establish new requirements for recycling facilities that accept, process, and repurpose renewable energy components for recovering valuable materials from:

  • Wind turbine generators,
  • Solar energy devices, and
  • Battery energy storage systems.

The new rule adds reporting, financial assurance, and penalty requirements. For example, the regulation requires recycling facilities to submit annual reports by January 15 that include:

  • An inventory of unrecycled renewable energy components,
  • An estimated timeline to recycle them,
  • A cost estimate for recycling or disposing of the materials prepared by a third-party Texas-licensed professional engineer, and
  • Evidence of financial assurance for the cost estimate.

Related state info: Non-hazardous solid waste and recycling state comparison

2026-10-20T05:00:00Z

California amends vehicle regulations

Effective date: September 10, 2026

This applies to: Public agency utilities, high-priority fleets, and drayer trucks subject to the Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF) regulation and hydrogen refueling stations subject to the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) regulation

Description of change: The California Air Resources Board (CARB) amended the ACF’s state and local government requirements. CARB’s final rule:

  • Extends the 50 percent zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) purchase requirement to January 1, 2030;
  • Modifies the Daily Usage Exemption and the ZEV Purchase Exemption to allow all vehicles of all model years to be eligible for consideration;
  • Adds an exemption under the ZEV Milestones Option for captive waste and wastewater fleets that produce biomethane on-site;
  • Expands the ZEV Purchase Exemption availability criteria to ensure minimum ZEV warranty requirements and manufacturer experience or reliability and streamlines the exemption process;
  • Modifies the Fleet Resiliency Exemption by lowering the ZEV penetration threshold from 25 to 5 percent of the fleet where it stays and expands eligibility to all vehicle types; and
  • Repeals sections of the ACF regulation for high-priority fleets and drayer trucks (these regulations were never implemented because CARB didn’t have a federal preemption waiver to enforce them).

CARB also amended the LCFS regulation, modifying the derating factors for light- and medium-duty hydrogen refueling infrastructure (LMD-HRI) crediting. CARB reduced the derating factor so that LMD-HRI stations may receive HRI credits for the full nameplate capacity for public stations and 50 percent of the nameplate capacity for private stations.

EPA proposes reallocating excess 2025 SREs to 2026, 2027
2026-10-20T05:00:00Z

EPA proposes reallocating excess 2025 SREs to 2026, 2027

On October 16, 2026, EPA published a rule proposing to revise the Small Refinery Exemption (SRE) reallocation volumes for compliance years 2026 and 2027 under the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program.

Who’s impacted?

The RFS program applies to obligated parties, including:

  • Refiners of gasoline or diesel fuel (i.e., transportation fuel); and
  • Importers of transportation fuel.

EPA sets annual renewable fuel volume and percentage standards for each compliance year. Obligated parties must calculate their individual renewable volume obligations (RVOs), measured in Renewable Identification Numbers (RINs), and obtain and retire enough RINs to meet their RVOs for each compliance year.

What’s the issue?

In April 2026, EPA established the annual volume and percentage standards for the 2026 and 2027 compliance years (Set 2 Rule), including reallocating part of the SREs granted and expected to be granted for the 2023–2025 compliance years.

However, EPA granted a higher volume of SREs for the 2025 compliance year than expected, exempting 770 million more RINs than the Set 2 Rule projected for the 2026 and 2027 compliance years. The agency plans to revise the Set 2 Rule to account for the additional SRE reallocation volume.

What’s the proposed solution?

EPA proposes reallocating 100 percent of the additional 770 million RINs by reallocating the additional 2025 exempted RVO either:

  • Equally between the 2026 and 2027 compliance years, or
  • Fully to the 2027 compliance year.

The proposed rule would adjust the renewable volume and percentage standards for biomass-based diesel, advanced biofuel, and total renewable fuel. The Set 2 Rule didn’t establish SRE reallocation volumes for cellulosic biofuel.

Additionally, the proposed rule may extend the current 2026 compliance reporting deadline of March 31, 2027.

EPA will host a virtual public hearing for the proposed rule on November 4, 2026. Public comments on the rule are due by December 4, 2026 (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0505).

Key to remember: EPA proposes to reallocate the excess 2025 small refinery exemption volumes to the 2026 and 2027 compliance years.

When one activity triggers multiple environmental obligations
2026-10-16T05:00:00Z

When one activity triggers multiple environmental obligations

Environmental compliance programs are often managed separately. Air permitting, hazardous waste, stormwater, emergency planning, and chemical reporting frequently involve different personnel, regulations, and procedures.

The challenge is that facilities don't operate that way. They operate processes, and those processes rarely fit neatly within a single regulatory category.

A company rarely decides to implement an "air program change" or a "hazardous waste change." Instead, it purchases a new solvent, installs a fuel tank, modifies a manufacturing process, or adds new equipment. A single operational decision can affect multiple environmental compliance programs at the same time. When organizations evaluate changes through only one regulatory lens, they risk overlooking obligations that arise elsewhere.

The following examples illustrate how one product, process, or activity can trigger requirements across several environmental programs.

Switching to a new paint or solvent

A facility may decide to replace an existing paint, coating, or solvent to improve product quality, address supply chain challenges, or reduce costs. Before making the switch, environmental professionals should consider how the change could affect multiple compliance obligations.

A new paint or solvent may contain a different concentration of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), affecting air emission calculations, permit applicability, or recordkeeping requirements. Spent materials, contaminated wipes, absorbents, and cleanup residues may require a new hazardous waste determination. Depending on the chemical composition and quantities involved, the material could also affect Tier II inventory reporting or Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) reporting obligations.

What appears to be a straightforward purchasing decision can ultimately affect air compliance, waste management, and chemical reporting programs.

Installing a diesel fuel storage tank

Organizations often add fuel storage to support emergency generators, fleet operations, or business continuity initiatives. While the project may be viewed primarily as an operational improvement, it can create environmental obligations in several areas.

The tank may count toward Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) applicability thresholds. Fuel storage can also increase stormwater pollution risks, requiring updates to inspection procedures, pollution prevention controls, or employee training. Secondary containment requirements, spill response procedures, and release reporting obligations may also need review.

A project initially viewed as a facilities improvement may affect spill prevention, stormwater management, and emergency preparedness responsibilities.

Managing aerosol cans

Aerosol cans are commonly used throughout facilities for maintenance, cleaning, lubrication, painting, and other routine activities. Their widespread use can cause organizations to overlook their broader compliance implications.

Depending on how they're managed, discarded aerosol cans may qualify for the federal universal waste regulations. If cans are punctured and processed for recycling, facilities must also consider hazardous waste management requirements, employee training, and potential air emission concerns associated with puncturing operations. Likewise, storage practices, container management, and recordkeeping procedures should be evaluated.

Because aerosol cans intersect with waste management, recycling, and air concerns, they demonstrate how a routine maintenance activity can involve multiple regulatory programs.

Adding a refrigeration process

Expanding refrigerated storage capacity or installing a new industrial refrigeration process may seem like a project driven by production needs. However, depending on the refrigerant used and the quantity stored on-site, the environmental and safety implications can extend well beyond equipment installation.

Certain refrigerants may be subject to leak management and repair, servicing, recovery, and recordkeeping requirements. Depending on the substance and quantity stored on-site, facilities may also trigger Tier II or TRI reporting obligations.

For facilities using substances such as anhydrous ammonia, increasing refrigerant inventories may have even broader consequences. Exceeding regulatory thresholds could trigger EPA's Risk Management Program (RMP) requirements and OSHA's Process Safety Management (PSM) obligations, adding responsibilities related to process hazard analyses, operating procedures, employee training, emergency planning, mechanical integrity, and management of change.

The project may also require updates to emergency response procedures, hazard communication programs, and chemical inventory management processes. As a result, a decision driven by production or storage needs may affect environmental reporting, accident prevention, emergency preparedness, and process safety requirements across the facility.

Looking beyond program boundaries

Environmental regulations are often organized by media, program, or statute. Facilities, however, operate through products, equipment, and processes. Because of this difference in perspective, a single operational change can have consequences that reach far beyond its original purpose.

Organizations that routinely evaluate projects through multiple compliance lenses are often better positioned to identify environmental obligations before they become compliance issues. Asking how a new product, process, equipment installation, or operational change might affect air, waste, water, chemical reporting, spill prevention, emergency planning, or process safety requirements can help reduce surprises and support more effective compliance management.

Key to remember: Environmental compliance obligations rarely exist in isolation. Before implementing a new product, process, or operational change, consider how it may affect multiple environmental programs, not just the one most directly associated with the project.

Court vacates EPA’s methylene chloride rule: How should facilities respond?
2026-10-16T05:00:00Z

Court vacates EPA’s methylene chloride rule: How should facilities respond?

When a court overturns an environmental regulation, it can be tempting to adopt an “all bets are off” approach and stop efforts to comply with the rule. However, facilities that continue to operate as if the rule still applies are better prepared to meet any future rulemaking that’s likely to occur. On September 15, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated EPA’s methylene chloride risk management rule established under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and remanded it back to the federal agency for further proceedings. EPA must restart the rulemaking process for methylene chloride.

Here’s what you need to know about the ruling and how your facility can respond to “hedge its bets” against future environmental regulations of methylene chloride.

What regulations and facilities are impacted?

The court’s decision in East Fork Enterprises, Inc. v. EPA (Case No. 24-60227) impacts EPA’s methylene chloride risk management rule finalized in May 2024 (2024 final rule). The rule applied to entities that manufacture (including import), process, distribute in commerce, use, or dispose of methylene chloride or methylene chloride-containing products.

Reasons for overturning the methylene chloride rule

The court listed a range of reasons for vacating the 2024 final rule, including the following significant findings.

Whole-chemical approach

EPA used a “whole chemical” approach in its revised 2022 risk determination for methylene chloride (on which the 2024 final rule is based) instead of making individual risk determinations for each condition of use (COU). As a result, EPA recharacterized six COUs (previously found not to present unreasonable risk) as posing unreasonable risk.

Court’s conclusion: TSCA doesn’t permit EPA to issue a whole-chemical risk determination; it requires EPA to evaluate and issue risk determinations for each COU.

Personal protective equipment (PPE) assumption

In its 2022 risk determination, EPA didn’t assume that exposed employees use PPE. However, TSCA requires the agency to account for PPE use if evidence suggests that it’s commonly used.

Court’s conclusion: There was sufficient evidence for EPA to assume PPE use, especially given that OSHA’s methylene chloride standard generally requires the use of PPE when employee exposure warrants it.

Risk analysis methods

EPA’s approach to “unreasonable risk” went beyond the statutory limits, appearing to attempt to eliminate nearly all risks. Further, EPA’s risk analysis didn’t comply with TSCA’s “best available science” standard (producing exposure limits unsupported by substantial evidence), and the agency overlooked relevant evidence.

Court’s conclusion: TSCA requires EPA to identify only unreasonable risk, which allows for some risk; the act isn’t designed to eliminate all risk. Also, TSCA mandates the agency to base its risk evaluations on all acceptable scientific information, including data contrary to its presuppositions.

Regulating to the extent necessary

EPA exceeded its authority by imposing regulations beyond “the extent necessary.” The court ruled that EPA’s basis for requiring a near-complete ban on methylene chloride use was unauthorized because it was based on the agency’s uncertainty as to whether a risk deemed reasonable will stay reasonable.

Court’s conclusion: TSCA permits EPA to eliminate actual, identified unreasonable risk. The agency can’t ban chemicals based on a reasonable risk that may become unreasonable in the future.

What’s next?

The court vacated with remand EPA’s methylene chloride rule and associated risk determination. As a result, EPA’s risk determination for methylene chloride is invalid, and the methylene chloride risk management rule is no longer in effect. Additionally, EPA must develop a new risk management rule that resolves the issues identified in the court’s opinion.

How should regulated entities respond?

EPA’s methylene chloride risk management rule is legally unenforceable, including its bans on uses and the regulatory requirements (such as the Workplace Chemical Protection Program). However, due to the uncertainty of EPA’s response and future rulemaking, companies should respond thoughtfully. Consider these tips:

  • Watch closely for EPA’s response to this litigation.
  • Consider maintaining protective measures and compliance programs that were implemented in response to the 2024 final rule, where possible. Continuing these efforts may ease compliance burdens if EPA issues a revised rule in the future. For example:
    • Continue conducting exposure monitoring and recording the results,
    • Keep searching for possible substitutes, and
    • Maintain workplace protections that are already implemented.
  • Ensure compliance with existing methylene chloride regulations, including:
    • EPA’s March 2019 final rule banning methylene chloride for consumer paint and coating removal, and
    • OSHA’s occupational exposure control requirements for methylene chloride (29 CFR 1910.1052).

Key to remember: A U.S. court vacated EPA’s 2024 methylene chloride risk management rule, but facilities that maintain protections and compliance programs developed under the rule may be better prepared for any future regulations of the chemical.

See More
New Network Poll
What stumps you most about OSHA's Occupational Noise Exposure standard?

What stumps you most about OSHA's Occupational Noise Exposure standard?

No active poll
Please come back soon!
See More
See More
See More
See More
Saved to my EVENT CALENDAR!
View your saved links by clicking the arrow next to your profile picture located in the header. Then, click “My Activity” to view the Event Calendar on your Activity page.