EPA Proposes Reporting Rule for PFAS Compounds
New rule proposed by EPA would subject articles containing PFAS to reporting requirements.
On June 28, 2021, EPA proposed a new reporting and recordkeeping rule for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) pursuant to Section 8(a)(7) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), as amended by the National Defense Authorization Act. The proposed rule applies to manufacturers and importers of PFAS chemicals, including small manufactures and manufacturers who produce PFAS as a byproduct. In addition, the proposal would subject articles containing PFAS to reporting requirements.
If finalized, the rule would require certain persons that manufactured or imported PFAS in any year since January 1, 2011, to report information for each substance and mixture related to chemical identity and molecular structure; categories of use; volumes manufactured and processed; byproducts resulting from the manufacture, processing, use and disposal; environmental and health effects, worker exposure, and method of disposal. Affected entities will have one year from the effective date of the final rule to submit their required disclosures to EPA. In addition to reporting, the proposed rule would require records documenting any information reported to EPA to be retained for a period of five years.
The proposed rule includes several issues of concern that will need to be addressed in comments, including: the fact that ALL PFAS are included, there is no minimum reporting threshold, the scope of the definition of manufacturers and importers, further clarification on which articles containing PFAS would trigger reporting, duplicative reporting requirements, and the reporting period includes a retrospective review of ten years (which is highly unusual and very burdensome).
EPA will accept comments on the proposed rule until August 27, 2021. NASF is working with several industry trade groups in Washington to develop comments and will also submit comments on behalf of NASF to address issues of specific concern to the surface finishing industry. If you have any questions or would like additional information, please contact Jeff Hannapel with NASF at jhannapel@thepolicygroup.com.
This update is courtesy of the National Association for Surface Finishing (NASF). For more information or to become a member, visit nasf.org.
Related Content
-
How to Maximize Nickel Plating Performance
The advantages of boric acid-free nickel plating include allowing manufacturers who utilize nickel plating to keep up the ever-changing regulatory policies and support sustainability efforts.
-
California Looks to Finalize Rule Phasing Out Hexavalent Chromium Plating Processes
California will hold a public hearing January 27, 2023 on its new state rule to phase out hexavalent chromium plating and anodizing.
-
Bryan Leiker, MFACA, Discusses CARB Public Hearing Over Calif. Hex Chrome Ban
Bryan Leiker, executive director, Metal Finishing Association of California, offers a recap of a January 27, 2023, public hearing conducted by the California Air Resources Board prior to an impending ruling on a proposed ban of hexavalent chromium use for finishing operations in the state.
