Last week, Taylor Research Group (TRG) attended the Environmental Law Institute’s (ELI) monthly PFAS webinar briefing for a timely discussion on the EPA’s one-time Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) data-collecting rule for PFAS. More specifically, by May 2025, any entity that has manufactured or imported PFAS or PFAS-containing articles since January 1, 2011 must electronically report its PFAS usage, production volumes, disposal, exposures, and hazards. In what has become a common theme in presentations regarding PFAS regulation, TRG’s main takeaway is that manufacturers must diligently make a plan for record keeping and recording if they hope to avoid stiff penalties.
Perhaps the most striking aspect of the conversation was that, unlike other TSCA scenarios, this rule not only covers domestic products that contain PFAS, but also imported products that use certain PFAS chemicals for surface coatings. This would include a growing list of entities that have come under increasing scrutiny: manufacturers of consumer goods who use PFAS in their products for waterproofing or nonstick surfacing, among other uses, or within the industrial machinery used during production. This means that a much broader group of manufacturers, some of whom may be uninitiated with the requirements of TSCA, face the challenge of reporting and keeping records of their usage and importation of these chemicals. The webinar speakers urged all manufacturers to carefully evaluate and create a thoughtful strategy for data collecting and reporting.
Manufacturers of PFAS/PFOA containing material, such as Teflon, must comply with the EPA's one-time data-collecting rule by May 2025. (Image: EPA.gov)
Manufacturers will face unique challenges as they develop strategies for reporting and record keeping, largely depending on how, when, and in what quantities they utilized and/or imported PFAS. The rule covers approximately 1,400 PFAS chemicals, of which different entities may only have used a few. Additionally, while some companies have diligently saved the required reporting data, many have not. While sometimes this may be due to negligence, there are many other instances in which the broader coverage of this TSCA rule could lead to some companies being unaware of the requirement. Regardless, the question of how to fill data gaps inevitably emerges. While the EPA may require companies to reach out to third parties (upstream suppliers and other contractors), even this may not address all of the holes.
When other strategies fail, historical research may serve as the best solution for filling data gaps. TRG is well versed in assisting corporations and attorneys gather volumetric data for the usage and disposal of a wide range of hazardous materials. More often than not, an electronic or tangible paper trail exists that can help address the crucial information that fulfills manufacturers’ needs, and TRG researchers are experienced and capable of uncovering this crucial evidence.