04/04/2025

Reducing TSCA New Chemicals Backlog a ‘Top Priority’, US EPA Says

Chemical Watch | Terry Hyland | April 2, 2025

Reducing TSCA New Chemicals Backlog a ‘Top Priority’, US EPA Says

The US EPA has said it is considering revamping its chemicals office staff, while also reviewing IT needs and scientific tools, in an effort to improve its TSCA new chemicals reviews.

"One of our top priorities is decreasing the backlog of new chemicals and pesticides under review and reviewing new submissions in a more timely and efficient way that supports innovation and protects human health and the environment," the agency told Chemical Watch News & Insight.

According to the EPA, the number of new chemical cases under review grew to more than 550 under the Biden administration, leading to backlogs and delays for companies and consumers that were "unacceptable".

"The previous administration was well aware of the problems with IT systems related to new chemicals and even publicly acknowledged that systems were either not functioning or, at times, completely shut down, which paralysed the agency’s ability to review these important submissions," the EPA said. "In fact, earlier this month we experienced a shut-down of the IT system that lasted for ten days."

"That’s why we’re analysing these processes," the agency said, "to identify opportunities for improvement."

In its recent budget legislation, Congress allocated $17m to the EPA to help the agency update its technology systems to improve chemical reviews.

Recent reports, meanwhile, indicate that the EPA plans to shut down its science office, terminate most of those workers and relocate remaining staff to other parts of the agency as part of its reorganisation plans.

Shutting ORD ‘reckless’

Environmental organisations voiced concern that the EPA’s focus on the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) would come at the expense of other agency initiatives.

Moving scientists from the Office of Research and Development (ORD) to the TSCA programme "is not the most efficient way to address the length of the new chemical reviews or the added burden that rework puts on the new chemicals programme", according to Maria Doa, senior director of chemical policy for the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF).

Such a move "diverts these scientists from ORD’s work on developing improved methods, models and other tools to support the new chemicals programme and other EPA regulatory programmes", she said.

Meanwhile, Sarah Vogel, EDF’s senior vice president of healthy communities, called the planned cuts to ORD "reckless and dangerous".

The ORD employes independent toxicologists, biologists and other scientists, she said. It is the "science-backed protections" developed by these experts that are essential to keep Americans safe, she said.

Could see impacts ‘pretty quickly’

Industry groups representing both large and speciality chemical manufacturers generally welcomed the plans to provide resources for the EPA’s OCSPP and to improve technology systems.

Robert Helminiak, vice president of legal and government affairs at SOCMA, said his organisation was "very pleased" to see the agency’s comments about dedicating resources for new chemical reviews and tackling the backlog of submissions, as well as plans for additional funding for the agency’s IT infrastructure.

Those improvements could lead to changes "pretty quickly", Helminiak said. He noted that the previous administration often said they did not have sufficient resources for new chemical reviews, particularly the needed human health risk assessors and industrial hygienists.

The EPA is also "in desperate need of a modernised IT framework as a whole", he said.

SOCMA encouraged the EPA to address those issues in a letter sent to administrator Lee Zeldin in March. The speciality chemicals group called on the agency to prioritise staffing and funding for the OCSPP, including providing sufficient toxicologists and industrial hygienists for the new chemicals review programme.

"We’ve seen the EPA staff up quickly" in the past, Helminiak said. While training will be necessary, some of the skills of ORD scientists are transferrable to the needs of the new chemicals office, he said.

The American Chemistry Council (ACC) also said it supports the EPA’s efforts "to ensure taxpayer dollars are being used efficiently and effectively", including by shifting resources toprogrammes such as OCSPP, if necessary.

"EPA’s central data exchange (CDX), the computer system all companies must use to submit their applications to OCSPP, remains woefully out of date and consistently unstable and unreliable," the ACC said. The recent request for additional resources for this system "will help with the critical functions OCSPP provide".