Input Stories

Revisions recently proposed by the EPA to the PFAS reporting and recordkeeping requirements under the Toxic Substances Control Act would ease an “excessively burdensome” final rule from the previous administration, the NAM told the agency recently. The NAM has long advocated  for a commonsense reporting rule that reflects the best reading of the TSCA statute.

What’s going on: In November, the agency published possible changes to the 2023 final rule, which “requires manufacturers (including importers) of [perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances] in any year between 2011–2022 to report certain data to the EPA related to exposure and environmental and health effects.”

• The proposed changes would “incorporate certain exemptions and other modifications to the scope of the reporting regulation.”

Why it’s important: “Ensuring the Reporting Rule is workable and aligned with statutory and practical constraints is essential to enabling the meaningful collection of information without overwhelming reporting entities,” the NAM told the agency.

What can be done: The proposed revisions could be strengthened even further, the NAM continued. The NAM’s suggested changes include the following:

• Extending the submission period for public comments on the revised Reporting Rule: The EPA’s proposal would shorten the comment period from six months to three months. Reinstituting a six-month time frame and giving more time than 60 days from rule finalization to the opening of the submission window “would promote reliable compliance, ensure system readiness and support the EPA’s objective of collecting meaningful, high-quality information.”
• Including all proposed exemptions in the final rule: “The NAM supports inclusion of all proposed exemptions and advises against partial adoption,” the NAM said. “For example, if the EPA finalized only the de minimis exemption but not the imported articles exemption, regulated entities would still need to determine whether they imported articles, investigate supply chains to determine potential PFAS presence and determine concentration levels to assess whether the article qualifies as de minimis.”
• Adopting a 1.0% de minimis threshold for PFAS not classified as health hazards: Increasing this threshold would better align with federal regulatory frameworks, give greater clarity to regulated entities “and ensure that the reporting obligations are reasonably administrable for manufacturers.”
• Providing maximum certainty on the scope of substances subject to reporting: The EPA should publish a “definitive list” of reportable PFAS substances.