Get complete, dependable coverage of the regulation at every stage in the chemical life cycle, including comprehensive news on REACH, the Toxic Substances Control Act, up-to-date HAZMAT guidance,...
By Pat Rizzuto
Sept. 21 — The Environmental Protection Agency is asking chemical manufacturers to justify confidential business information claims they used to routinely grant, attorneys and other specialists working with manufacturers told Bloomberg BNA.
That shouldn’t be a surprise as attorneys have been advising clients for months to prepare to have confidential business information, or CBI, claims challenged under the amended Toxic Substances Control Act. One of the aims of the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (P. Law No. 114-182), which amended TSCA, was to ensure that EPA wasn’t granting confidentiality assertions without firm evidence they’re justified. Former EPA officials have said the agency reflexively granted CBI claims in the past without asking for detailed rationales, which shielded information from the public arena.
Predictions, however, are one thing; experience is another.
The new chemicals section of both original and amended TSCA give the EPA authority to review new chemicals, new microorganisms and certain new uses of chemicals. The agency must complete those reviews within 90 days. Attorneys and a senior trade association official say EPA is now asking for detailed justifications of confidentiality claims.
The EPA has told Bloomberg BNA that 334 new chemicals were under review at the agency when President Barack Obama signed the Lautenberg Act into law on June 22. There was no transition period built into the act, so the criteria and procedures it required the agency to use as it reviews new chemicals went into effect that same day. Sept. 19 marked 90 days since the Lautenberg Act became law. The agency has posted decisions on 24 new chemicals and new microorganisms online.
“EPA is paying more attention to what constitutes confidential business information. Companies need to be prepared to defend their claims,” Dan Newton, senior government relations manager at the Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affiliates, told Bloomberg BNA. The society represents chemical manufacturers that make small batches of chemicals designed for customers’ special needs. That means the companies frequently submit premanufacture notices, or PMNs, which the EPA requires for its review to determine whether a new chemical can be introduced into the U.S. marketplace.
Martha Marrapese, an attorney with Keller and Heckman LLP, said the agency has required companies to justify CBI claims for PMNs and notices of commencement, which chemical manufacturers file to let the agency know they have started to make or import a new chemical it already reviewed.
It also is asking companies to justify confidentiality claims they make in “bona fide” submissions when they need the EPA to determine whether a chemical they want to make or import already is on the confidential portion of the TSCA Inventory, which lists chemicals that have been made in or imported into the U.S.
The EPA also is requiring substantiation for confidentiality claims made in export notices, or TSCA 12(b) notifications, Marrapese said.
Clients have been asked to respond within 15 working days to a set of 11 questions, said Marrapese and fellow Keller and Heckman attorney Tom Berger.
The time crunch to answer all the questions is a burden, they said.
EPA’s justification requests also imply that “every separate sentence or word requires substantiation,” Marrapese said.
To contact the reporter on this story: Pat Rizzuto in Washington at email@example.com
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Larry Pearl at firstname.lastname@example.org
General guidance the EPA has posted concerning making confidential business information claims under the Lautenberg Act is available at https://www.epa.gov/tsca-cbi. The EPA already has routinely asked companies seeking to make new microbes to substantiate certain confidentiality claims. The agency’s questions are available at http://src.bna.com/iNg.
Copyright © 2016 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
All Bloomberg BNA treatises are available on standing order, which ensures you will always receive the most current edition of the book or supplement of the title you have ordered from Bloomberg BNA’s book division. As soon as a new supplement or edition is published (usually annually) for a title you’ve previously purchased and requested to be placed on standing order, we’ll ship it to you to review for 30 days without any obligation. During this period, you can either (a) honor the invoice and receive a 5% discount (in addition to any other discounts you may qualify for) off the then-current price of the update, plus shipping and handling or (b) return the book(s), in which case, your invoice will be cancelled upon receipt of the book(s). Call us for a prepaid UPS label for your return. It’s as simple and easy as that. Most importantly, standing orders mean you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you’re relying on. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.960.1220 or by sending an email to email@example.com.
Put me on standing order at a 5% discount off list price of all future updates, in addition to any other discounts I may quality for. (Returnable within 30 days.)
Notify me when updates are available (No standing order will be created).
This Bloomberg BNA report is available on standing order, which ensures you will all receive the latest edition. This report is updated annually and we will send you the latest edition once it has been published. By signing up for standing order you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you need. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.372.1033, option 5, or by sending us an email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Put me on standing order
Notify me when new releases are available (no standing order will be created)