No Summer Slowdown: EPA Releases Draft TSCA Risk Evaluations for Seven Chemicals

Since June, EPA has released draft Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) risk evaluations for seven chemicals, covering everything from aviation fuel additives and industrial solvents to flame retardants and chemical intermediates. While the chemicals themselves vary, the outcome did not: EPA preliminarily concluded that each presents an unreasonable risk to human health under at least some conditions of use (COU).

The evaluations mark another significant step in EPA’s implementation of amended TSCA and provide an early look at where future risk management efforts may be headed. Across the seven evaluations, EPA continues to focus heavily on workplace inhalation exposures, cancer risk remains an important driver in several assessments, and downstream users may face consequences even where EPA identified no consumer or environmental risk.

The Draft Risk Evaluations

The seven chemicals addressed in these draft evaluations are:

• Ethylene dibromide (EDB): Used primarily as a lead scavenger in leaded aviation fuel.
• Ortho-Dichlorobenzene (o-DCB): Solvent, intermediate, and cleaning product ingredient.
• Para-Dichlorobenzene (p-DCB): Used in air fresheners, solvents, and laboratory chemicals.
• Trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene (t-DCE): Solvent used in cleaning, degreasing, adhesives, and semiconductor manufacturing.
• Tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA): Flame retardant widely used in electronics, plastics, and construction materials.
• 1,1,2-Trichloroethane (1,1,2-TCA): Solvent used in cleaning, degreasing, and adhesives.
• 1,2-Dichloropropane (1,2-DCP): Solvent used as a chemical intermediate, processing aid, and in stone cleaning products.

Six of the seven chemicals are solvents or used in solvent-related applications; TBBPA is the sole non-solvent, serving as a flame retardant. All seven chemicals received a preliminary determination that they present unreasonable risk to human health. Notably, TBBPA is the only chemical of the seven for which EPA also identified unreasonable risk to the environment, and three chemicals — EDB, 1,1,2-TCA, and 1,2-DCP — received findings that cancer risk drives the unreasonable risk determination. 1,2-DCP is also notable for having the broadest consumer risk finding in the group: all three consumer COUs, each involving cleaning and furnishing care products, contributed to the preliminary determination of unreasonable risk.

Two of the chemicals’ hazard assessments (o-DCB and p-DCB) were peer reviewed by the Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals (SACC) at a meeting in June, TBBPA was reviewed at the July SACC meeting, and the remaining chemicals (t-DCE, 1,1,2-TCA, and 1,2-DCP) were reviewed at the August SACC meeting. Each of the seven draft evaluations is now subject to a public comment period, after which EPA will issue final risk evaluations. If unreasonable risk is confirmed in the final evaluation, EPA is required by statute to initiate risk management rulemaking under TSCA Section 6(a).

Although the chemicals vary considerably in their uses and risk profiles, several important distinctions emerge from EPA’s preliminary findings, as summarized below.

Taken together, the evaluations reveal several themes. EPA continues to focus heavily on workplace inhalation exposures, particularly for solvent uses. Cancer risk remains a significant driver for several evaluations, while consumer and environmental concerns play a more limited role in most cases. Notably, TBBPA stands alone as the only chemical for which EPA identified an unreasonable risk to the environment, while EDB, 1,1,2-TCA, and 1,2-DCP all feature cancer findings that materially influence EPA’s conclusions. 

Once the public comment periods close and EPA completes its review process, the Agency will issue final risk evaluations. If EPA reaches the same conclusions in those final evaluations, TSCA requires EPA to move forward with risk management rulemaking, potentially leading to restrictions, prohibitions, workplace controls, or other compliance obligations.

Who Is Most Affected?

While most of the chemicals evaluated this summer (with the notable exception of TBBPA) are solvents or used in solvent-related applications, the industries potentially affected by EPA’s findings are surprisingly broad. Chemical manufacturers and importers are the obvious first stop, but the ripple effects extend much further downstream. Electronics manufacturers, semiconductor companies, plastics and resin producers, aviation fuel stakeholders, laboratories, adhesive formulators, and cleaning product manufacturers all appear somewhere in EPA’s evaluations. 

The key takeaway is that companies should not assume they are outside the scope of these evaluations simply because they are not manufacturing the chemicals themselves. Downstream users, distributors, and companies whose products rely on affected chemical supply chains may ultimately feel the impact as much as the manufacturers.

What Should the Regulated Community Be Doing Now?

These draft evaluations are not the end of the story. In many respects, they mark the beginning of the most consequential phase of the TSCA process. Companies still have a meaningful opportunity to influence the record by providing EPA with real-world information regarding use patterns, workplace practices, exposure data, engineering controls, personal protective equipment, and the practical implications of potential regulation.

• The clock is already running. Although the comment period for TBBPA has already closed, comment opportunities remain open for the remaining evaluations. Current deadlines include September 28 for 1,1,2-TCA; October 9 for both o-DCB and p-DCB; October 19 for EDB; October 26 for t-DCE, and November 3 1,2-DCP.
• Engage while the record is still open. EPA is actively seeking information on workplace exposures, engineering controls, personal protective equipment, monitoring data, and use patterns. Companies that disagree with EPA’s assumptions or possess site-specific information should consider engaging now because, once EPA issues final risk evaluations, the conversation shifts from whether a risk exists to how EPA should regulate it.
• Understand where your operations fit. Companies should review EPA’s identified conditions of use and determine whether any portion of their business falls within the activities driving EPA’s risk determinations. This exercise may reveal exposures or compliance issues that have received little attention internally but could become important if EPA proceeds with risk management requirements.
• Take a fresh look at workplace controls. Across many of these evaluations, inhalation exposures remain EPA’s central concern. Businesses should evaluate existing engineering controls, PPE requirements, monitoring programs, and workplace practices, particularly if they intend to rely on those measures in discussions with EPA.
• Start thinking about risk management now. If EPA confirms its preliminary findings, the Agency will be required to develop risk management rules under TSCA Section 6(a). Those rules could include restrictions on manufacture, processing, distribution, use, disposal, or workplace practices. Companies that begin evaluating alternatives and operational impacts now will be better positioned than those that wait for a proposed rule.
• Watch the supply chain. Even companies with no direct involvement in the manufacture or processing of these chemicals should assess potential downstream impacts. Restrictions affecting key intermediates, solvents, or specialty applications can create sourcing challenges long before regulatory obligations land directly on a company’s doorstep.
• Do not overlook disclosure and business considerations. EPA’s unreasonable-risk findings can raise broader questions regarding business planning, customer communications, ESG disclosures, transactional diligence, and investor scrutiny. Companies should consider those implications alongside the regulatory developments themselves.

The Bottom Line

If EPA’s summer release schedule is any indication, the Agency intends to continue moving aggressively through the TSCA existing-chemicals program. Although these draft evaluations do not impose immediate restrictions, they provide a clear preview of the chemicals, uses, exposures, and industries that are likely to face increased regulatory scrutiny in the coming years. For affected companies, the most important window of opportunity is now. Whether through public comments, internal exposure assessments, supply-chain planning, or evaluation of potential alternatives, businesses that engage early will be better positioned to shape the outcome and prepare for whatever risk-management measures ultimately emerge from EPA’s final evaluations. For many companies, the question is no longer whether TSCA will affect them, but when and how significantly.

Companies evaluating the potential impact of these draft risk evaluations need not navigate the process alone. If you have questions about the evaluations, the comment process, or potential compliance and business implications, please contact a member of ArentFox Schiff’s Environmental team. We stand ready to help companies assess risk, develop regulatory strategies, and engage effectively with EPA.