EPA Closes Petition on Chemical Risk Evaluation Rules After CEA Withdrawal

What's Happening?

The Center for Environmental Accountability (CEA) had filed a petition under Section 21 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) requesting the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reconsider the 2024 final rule on chemical risk evaluation procedures. CEA argued that the current process led to overly conservative risk conclusions, resulting in unnecessary risk management rules that negatively impacted industry practices. However, on August 12, 2025, CEA withdrew its petition, and the EPA now considers the matter closed. Despite this, the EPA is moving forward with a proposed rule to further reconsider the procedures for chemical risk evaluation under TSCA, which was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review on August 4, 2025.

Why It's Important?

The withdrawal of the petition by CEA and the subsequent closure by the EPA marks a significant moment in the ongoing debate over chemical risk evaluation processes. The EPA's decision to continue with a proposed rule indicates a commitment to revisiting and potentially amending the procedures to ensure they align with legal and policy standards. This development is crucial for industries reliant on chemical products, as it may influence future regulatory frameworks and risk management strategies. Companies in sectors such as manufacturing and agriculture could be affected by changes in chemical evaluation rules, impacting their operational practices and compliance requirements.

What's Next?

The EPA plans to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in July 2025, although it has not been released yet. The agency aims to finalize the rule by April 2026. Stakeholders, including industry leaders and environmental groups, are likely to monitor these developments closely, as any changes could have significant implications for chemical usage and safety standards. The ongoing review process may also prompt further discussions and potential adjustments to the regulatory approach, ensuring it meets both environmental and industry needs.