In an article published on April 26, 2019, non-governmental organization Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) reported on a ruling by the U.S Court of Appeals that finds the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) failed to request companies to show that their chemicals cannot be identified through reverse engineering when claiming confidentiality under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). EDF brought the EPA to court over the issue in October 2018 with the aim to “ensure that EPA upholds the requirements set forth in the reformed Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to maximize transparency and public knowledge about which chemicals are currently in use.” Based on this ruling, the EPA needs to revise its substantiation process to ensure that requests for confidentiality address reverse engineering.
In a letter dated May 2, 2019, EDF wrote to the EPA in regards to the court’s decision asking the EPA to begin a new consultation on its recently proposed procedural rule on confidential business information (CBI). EDF argues that the proposed rule “expressly incorporates those flawed questions” that the court has ruled against. The current ongoing consultation of the EPA’s proposed rule is set to end on June 24, 2019.
Richard Denison (April 26, 2019). “D.C. Circuit Affirms Public’s Right to Know about Chemicals in Use under Reformed Law.” Environmental Defense Fund
Richard Denison (May 3, 2019). “EDF tells EPA it must modify its proposed CBI Claim Review Rule to comply with recent D.C. Circuit decision.” Environmental Defense Fund
Kelly Franklin (April 29, 2019). “Court orders US EPA to revisit CBI substantiation.” Chemical Watch
Kelly Franklin (May 7, 2019). “EPA pressed to revise TSCA CBI procedure proposal.” Chemical Watch
Kelly Franklin (April 11, 2019). “US EPA issues proposal for CBI substantiation.” Chemical Watch