102568 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 751 

[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0642; FRL–8317–02– 

OCSPP] 

RIN 2070–AK83 

Trichloroethylene (TCE); Regulation 

Under the Toxic Substances Control 

Act (TSCA) 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA or Agency) is finalizing a 

rule to address the unreasonable risk of 

injury to health presented by 

trichloroethylene (TCE) under its 

conditions of use. TSCA requires that 

EPA address by rule any unreasonable 

risk of injury to health or the 

environment identified in a TSCA risk 

evaluation and apply requirements to 

the extent necessary so that the 

chemical no longer presents 

unreasonable risk. EPA’s final rule will, 

among other things, prevent serious 

illness associated with uncontrolled 

exposures to the chemical by preventing 

consumer access to the chemical, 

restricting the industrial and 

commercial use of the chemical while 

also allowing for a reasonable transition 

period with interim worker protections 

in place where an industrial and 

commercial use of the chemical is being 

prohibited, and provide time-limited 

exemptions for critical or essential uses 

of TCE for which no technically and 

economically feasible safer alternatives 

are available. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

January 16, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0642, is 

available online at https://

www.regulations.gov. Additional 

information about dockets generally, 

along with instructions for visiting the 

docket in-person, is available at https:// 

www.epa.gov/dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

For technical information: Gabriela 

Rossner, Existing Chemicals Risk 

Management Division, Office of 

Pollution Prevention and Toxics, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460–0001; telephone number: (202) 

565–2426; email address: TCE.TSCA@

epa.gov. 

For general information: The TSCAHotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422 South 

Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; 

telephone number: (202) 554–1404; 

email address: TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Executive Summary 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

1. General Applicability 

This action applies to you if you 

manufacture, process, distribute in 

commerce, use, or dispose of TCE or 

products containing TCE. TSCA section 

3(9) defines the term ‘‘manufacture’’ to 

mean ‘‘to import into the customs 

territory of the United States (as defined 

in general note 2 of the Harmonized 

Tariff Schedule of the United States), 

produce, or manufacture.’’ Therefore, 

unless expressly stated otherwise, 

importers of TCE are subject to any 

provisions regulating manufacture of 

TCE (see also Unit I.A.2.). The following 

list of North American Industrial 

Classification System (NAICS) codes is 

not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 

provides a guide to help readers 

determine whether this document 

applies to them. Potentially affected 

entities include: 

• Crude Petroleum Extraction (NAICS 

code 211120); 

• Fossil Fuel Electric Power 

Generation (NAICS code 221112); 

• Other Electric Power Generation 

(NAICS code 221118); 

• Broadwoven Fabric Mills (NAICS 

code 313210); 

• Narrow Fabric Mills and Schiffli 

Machine Embroidery (NAICS code 

313220); 

• Nonwoven Fabric Mills (NAICS 

code 313230); 

• Textile and Fabric Finishing Mills 

(NAICS code 313310); 

• Fabric Coating Mills (NAICS code 

313320); 

• Wood Window and Door 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 321911); 

• Prefabricated Wood Building 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 321992); 

• Paper Bag and Coated and Treated 

Paper Manufacturing (NAICS code 

322220); 

• Petroleum Refineries (NAICS code 

324110); 

• All Other Petroleum and Coal 

Products Manufacturing (NAICS code 

324199); 

• Petrochemical Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 325110); 

• Other Basic Inorganic Chemical 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 325180); 

• Ethyl Alcohol Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 325193); 

• All Other Basic Organic Chemical 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 325199); 

• Plastics Material and Resin 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 325211); 

• Medicinal and Botanical 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 325411); 

• Pharmaceutical Preparation 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 325412); 

• Paint and Coating Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 325510); 

• Adhesive Manufacturing (NAICS 

code 325520); 

• Polish and Other Sanitation Good 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 325612); 

• Photographic Film, Paper, Plate and 

Chemical Manufacturing (NAICS code 

325992); 

• All Other Miscellaneous Chemical 

Product and Preparation Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 325998); 

• Polystyrene Foam Product 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 326140); 

• Urethane and Other Foam Product 

(except Polystyrene) Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 326150); 

• Tire Manufacturing (except 

Retreading) (NAICS code 326211); 

• Tire Retreading (NAICS code 

326212); 

• Rubber and Plastics Hoses and 

Belting Manufacturing (NAICS code 

326220); 

• Rubber Product Manufacturing for 

Mechanical Use (NAICS code 326291); 

• All Other Rubber Product 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 326299); 

• Pottery, Ceramics, and Plumbing 

Fixture Manufacturing (NAICS code 

327110); 

• Gypsum Product Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 327420); 

• Iron and Steel Mills and Ferroalloy 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 331110); 

• Iron and Steel Pipe and Tube 

Manufacturing from Purchased Steel 

(NAICS code 331210); 

• Rolled Steel Shape Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 331221); 

• Steel Wire Drawing (NAICS code 

331222); 

• Nonferrous Metal (except 

Aluminum) Smelting and Refining 

(NAICS code 331410); 

• Copper Rolling, Drawing, 

Extruding, and Alloying (NAICS code 

331420); 

• Nonferrous Metal (except Copper 

and Aluminum) Rolling, Drawing and 

Extruding (NAICS code 331491); 

• Secondary Smelting, Refining, and 

Alloying of Nonferrous Metal (except 

Copper and Aluminum) (NAICS code 

331492); 

• Nonferrous Metal Die-Casting 

Foundries (NAICS code 331523); 

• Iron and Steel Forging (NAICS code 

332111); 

• Nonferrous Forging (NAICS code 

332112); 

• Custom Roll Forming (NAICS code 

332114); 

• Powder Metallurgy Part 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 332117); 

• Metal Crown, Closure, and Other 

Metal Stamping (except Automotive) 

(NAICS code 332119); 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102569 

• Metal Kitchen Cookware, Utensil, 

Cutlery, and Flatware (except Precious) 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 332215); 

• Saw Blade and Handtool 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 332216); 

• Metal Window and Door 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 332321); 

• Sheet Metal Work Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 332322); 

• Ornamental and Architectural 

Metal Work Manufacturing (NAICS code 

332323); 

• Power Boiler and Heat Exchanger 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 332410); 

• Metal Tank (Heavy Gauge) 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 332420); 

• Metal Can Manufacturing (NAICS 

code 332431); 

• Other Metal Container 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 332439); 

• Hardware Manufacturing (NAICS 

code 332510); 

• Spring Manufacturing (NAICS code 

332613); 

• Other Fabricated Wire Product 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 332618); 

• Machine Shops (NAICS code 

332710); 

• Precision Turned Product 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 332721); 

• Bolt, Nut, Screw, Rivet and Washer 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 332722); 

• Metal Heat Treating (NAICS code 

332811); 

• Metal Coating, Engraving (except 

Jewelry and Silverware), and Allied 

Services to Manufacturers (NAICS code 

332812); 

• Electroplating, Plating, Polishing, 

Anodizing and Coloring (NAICS code 

332813); 

• Industrial Valve Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 332911); 

• Fluid Power Valve and Hose Fitting 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 332912); 

• Plumbing Fixture Fitting and Trim 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 332913); 

• Other Metal Valve and Pipe Fitting 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 332919); 

• Ball and Roller Bearing 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 332991); 

• Small Arms Ammunition 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 332992); 

• Ammunition (except Small Arms) 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 332993); 

• Small Arms, Ordnance, and 

Ordnance Accessories Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 332994); 

• Fabricated Pipe and Pipe Fitting 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 332996); 

• All Other Miscellaneous Fabricated 

Metal Product Manufacturing (NAICS 

code 332999); 

• Farm Machinery and Equipment 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 333111); 

• Lawn and Garden Tractor and 

Home Lawn and Garden Equipment 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 333112); 

• Construction Machinery 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 333120); 

• Mining Machinery and Equipment 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 333131); 

• Oil and Gas Field Machinery and 

Equipment Manufacturing (NAICS code 

333132); 

• Food Product Machinery 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 333241); 

• Semiconductor Machinery 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 333242); 

• Sawmill, Woodworking, and Paper 

Machinery Manufacturing (NAICS code 

333243); 

• Printing Machinery and Equipment 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 333244); 

• Other Industrial Machinery 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 333249); 

• Optical Instrument and Lens 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 333314); 

• Photographic and Photocopying 

Equipment Manufacturing (NAICS code 

333316); 

• Other Commercial and Service 

Industry Machinery Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 333318); 

• Industrial and Commercial Fan and 

Blower and Air Purification Equipment 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 333413); 

• Heating Equipment (except Warm 

Air Furnaces) Manufacturing (NAICS 

code 333414); 

• Air-Conditioning and Warm Air 

Heating Equipment and Commercial 

and Industrial Refrigeration Equipment 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 333415); 

• Industrial Mold Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 333511); 

• Special Die and Tool, Die Set, Jig 

and Fixture Manufacturing (NAICS code 

333514); 

• Cutting Tool and Machine Tool 

Accessory Manufacturing (NAICS code 

333515); 

• Machine Tool Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 333517); 

• Rolling Mill and Other 

Metalworking Machinery Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 333519); 

• Turbine and Turbine Generator Set 

Unit Manufacturing (NAICS code 

333611); 

• Speed Changer, Industrial HighSpeed Drive and Gear Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 333612); 

• Mechanical Power Transmission 

Equipment Manufacturing (NAICS code 

333613); 

• Other Engine Equipment 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 333618); 

• Air and Gas Compressor 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 333912); 

• Measuring, Dispensing, and Other 

Pumping Equipment Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 333914); 

• Elevator and Moving Stairway 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 333921); 

• Conveyor and Conveying 

Equipment Manufacturing (NAICS code 

333922); 

• Overhead Traveling Crane, Hoist 

and Monorail System Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 333923); 

• Industrial Truck, Tractor, Trailer 

and Stacker Machinery Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 333924); 

• Power-Driven Hand Tool 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 333991); 

• Welding and Soldering Equipment 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 333992); 

• Packaging Machinery 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 333993); 

• Industrial Process Furnace and 

Oven Manufacturing (NAICS code 

333994); 

• Fluid Power Cylinder and Actuator 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 333995); 

• Fluid Power Pump and Motor 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 333996); 

• Scale and Balance Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 333997); 

• All Other Miscellaneous General 

Purpose Machinery Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 333999); 

• Audio and Video Equipment 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 334310); 

• Capacitor, Resistor, Coil, 

Transformer, and Other Inductor 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 334416); 

• Electronic Connector 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 334417); 

• Printed Circuit Assembly 

(Electronic Assembly) Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 334418); 

• Other Electronic Component 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 334419); 

• Search, Detection, Navigation, 

Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical 

System and Instrument Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 334511); 

• Automatic Environmental Control 

Manufacturing for Residential, 

Commercial and Appliance Use (NAICS 

code 334512); 

• Instruments and Related Products 

Manufacturing for Measuring, 

Displaying, and Controlling Industrial 

Process Variables (NAICS code 334513); 

• Instrument Manufacturing for 

Measuring and Testing Electricity and 

Electrical Signals (NAICS code 334515); 

• Electric Lamp Bulb and Part 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 335110); 

• Residential Electric Lighting Fixture 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 335121); 

• Commercial, Industrial and 

Institutional Electric Lighting Fixture 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 335122); 

• Other Lighting Equipment 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 335129); 

• Major Household Appliance 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 335220); 

• Power, Distribution and Specialty 

Transformer Manufacturing (NAICS 

code 335311); 

• Motor and Generator Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 335312); 

• Switchgear and Switchboard 

Apparatus Manufacturing (NAICS code 

335313); 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102570 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

• Relay and Industrial Control 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 335314); 

• Storage Battery Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 335911); 

• Fiber Optic Cable Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 335921); 

• Current-Carrying Wiring Device 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 335931); 

• Carbon and Graphite Product 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 335991); 

• Automobile Manufacturing (NAICS 

code 336111); 

• Light Truck and Utility Vehicle 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 336112); 

• Heavy Duty Truck Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 336120); 

• Motor Vehicle Body Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 336211); 

• Truck Trailer Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 336212); 

• Motor Home Manufacturing (NAICS 

code 336213); 

• Travel Trailer and Camper 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 336214); 

• Motor Vehicle Gasoline Engine and 

Engine Parts Manufacturing (NAICS 

code 336310); 

• Motor Vehicle Electrical and 

Electronic Equipment Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 336320); 

• Motor Vehicle Steering and 

Suspension Components (except Spring) 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 336330); 

• Motor Vehicle Brake System 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 336340); 

• Motor Vehicle Transmission and 

Power Train Parts Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 336350); 

• Motor Vehicle Seating and Interior 

Trim Manufacturing (NAICS code 

336360); 

• Motor Vehicle Metal Stamping 

(NAICS code 336370); 

• Other Motor Vehicle Parts 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 336390); 

• Aircraft Manufacturing (NAICS 

code 336411); 

• Aircraft Engine and Engine Parts 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 336412); 

• Other Aircraft Part and Auxiliary 

Equipment Manufacturing (NAICS code 

336413); 

• Guided Missile and Space Vehicle 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 336414); 

• Guided Missile and Space Vehicle 

Propulsion Unit and Propulsion Unit 

Parts Manufacturing (NAICS code 

336415); 

• Other Guided Missile and Space 

Vehicle Parts and Auxiliary Equipment 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 336419); 

• Railroad Rolling Stock 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 336510); 

• Ship Building and Repairing 

(NAICS code 336611); 

• Boat Building (NAICS code 

336612); 

• Motorcycle, Bicycle and Parts 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 336991); 

• Military Armored Vehicle, Tank 

and Tank Component Manufacturing 

(NAICS code 336992); 

• All Other Transportation 

Equipment Manufacturing (NAICS code 

336999); 

• Wood Kitchen Cabinet and Counter 

Top Manufacturing (NAICS code 

337110); 

• Upholstered Household Furniture 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 337121); 

• Nonupholstered Wood Household 

Furniture Manufacturing (NAICS code 

337122); 

• Metal Household Furniture 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 337124); 

• Institutional Furniture 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 337127); 

• Wood Office Furniture 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 337211); 

• Surgical Appliance and Supplies 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 339113); 

• Dental Equipment and Supplies 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 339114); 

• Jewelry and Silverware 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 339910); 

• Sporting and Athletic Goods 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 339920); 

• Gasket, Packing, and Sealing Device 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 339991); 

• Fastener, Button, Needle and Pin 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 339993); 

• All Other Miscellaneous 

Manufacturing (NAICS code 339999); 

• Metal Service Centers and Other 

Metal Merchant Wholesalers (NAICS 

code 423510); 

• Industrial Supplies Merchant 

Wholesalers (NAICS code 423510); 

• Other Chemical and Allied 

Products Merchant Wholesalers (NAICS 

code 424690); 

• Paint, Varnish, and Supplies 

Merchant Wholesalers (NAICS code 

424950); 

• New Car Dealers (NAICS code 

441110); 

• Used Car Dealers (NAICS code 

441120); 

• Sporting Goods Stores (NAICS code 

451110); 

• Scheduled Passenger Air 

Transportation (NAICS code 481111); 

• Other Support Activities for Air 

Transportation (NAICS code 481111); 

• Other Warehousing and Storage 

(NAICS code 493190); 

• Motion Picture and Video 

Production (NAICS code 512110); 

• Other Financial Vehicles (NAICS 

code 525990); 

• Research and Development in the 

Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences 

(except Nanotechnology and 

Biotechnology) (NAICS code 541715); 

• Research and Development in the 

Social Sciences and Humanities (NAICS 

code 541720); 

• Offices of Other Holding Companies 

(NAICS code 551112); 

• Carpet and Upholstery Cleaning 

Services (NAICS code 561740); 

• Hazardous Waste Treatment and 

Disposal (NAICS code 562211); 

• Solid Waste Landfill (NAICS code 

562212); 

• Materials Recovery Facilities 

(NAICS code 562920); 

• Junior Colleges (NAICS code 

611210); 

• Colleges, Universities and 

Professional Schools (NAICS code 

611310); 

• General Automotive Repair (NAICS 

code 811111); 

• Automotive Exhaust System Repair 

(NAICS code 811112); 

• Automotive Transmission Repair 

(NAICS code 811113); 

• Other Automotive Mechanical and 

Electrical Repair and Maintenance 

(NAICS code 811118); 

• Automotive Body, Paint and 

Interior Repair and Maintenance 

(NAICS code 811121); 

• Automotive Glass Replacement 

Shops (NAICS code 811122); 

• Automotive Oil Change and 

Lubrication Shops (NAICS code 

811191); 

• All Other Automotive Repair and 

Maintenance (NAICS code 811198); 

• Consumer Electronics Repair and 

Maintenance (NAICS code 811211); 

• Computer and Office Machine 

Repair and Maintenance (NAICS code 

811212); 

• Communication Equipment Repair 

and Maintenance (NAICS code 811213); 

• Other Electronic and Precision 

Equipment Repair and Maintenance 

(NAICS code 811219); 

• Commercial and Industrial 

Machinery and Equipment (except 

Automotive and Electronic) Repair and 

Maintenance (NAICS code 811310); 

• Home and Garden Equipment 

Repair and Maintenance (NAICS code 

811411); 

• Other Personal and Household 

Goods Repair and Maintenance (NAICS 

code 811490); 

• Coin-Operated Laundries and 

Drycleaners (NAICS code 812310); 

• Drycleaning and Laundry Services 

(except Coin-Operated) (NAICS code 

812320); and 

• Industrial Launderers (NAICS code 

812332). 

2. Applicability to Importers and 

Exporters 

This action may also affect certain 

entities subject to import certification 

and export notification requirements 

under TSCA (https://www.epa.gov/tscaimport-export-requirements). Persons 

who import any chemical substance in 

bulk form, as part of a mixture, or as 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102571 

part of an article (if required by rule) are 

subject to TSCA section 13 (15 U.S.C. 

2612) import certification requirements 

and the corresponding regulations at 19 

CFR 12.118 through 12.127 (see also 19 

CFR 127.28(i)). Those persons must 

certify that the shipment of the chemical 

substance complies with all applicable 

rules and orders under TSCA (see 19 

CFR 12.121). The EPA policy in support 

of import certification appears at 40 CFR 

part 707, subpart B. 

In addition, any persons who export 

or intend to export a chemical substance 

that is the subject of this final rule are 

subject to the export notification 

provisions of TSCA section 12(b) (15 

U.S.C. 2611(b)) and must comply with 

the export notification requirements in 

40 CFR part 707, subpart D. Any person 

who exports or intends to export TCE 

must comply with the export 

notification requirements in 40 CFR part 

707, subpart D. 

If you have any questions regarding 

the applicability of this action to a 

particular entity, consult the technical 

information contact listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

B. What is the Agency’s authority for 

taking this action? 

Under TSCA section 6(a) (15 U.S.C. 

2605(a)), if the Agency determines 

through a TSCA section 6(b) risk 

evaluation that a chemical substance 

presents an unreasonable risk of injury 

to health or the environment, EPA must 

by rule apply one or more requirements 

listed in TSCA section 6(a) to the extent 

necessary so that the chemical 

substance or mixture no longer presents 

such risk. 

C. What action is the Agency taking? 

Pursuant to TSCA section 6(b), EPA 

determined in 2023 that TCE presents 

an unreasonable risk of injury to health, 

without consideration of costs or other 

non-risk factors, including an 

unreasonable risk to potentially exposed 

or susceptible subpopulations (PESS) 

identified by EPA as relevant to the 

2020 Risk Evaluation for TCE under the 

conditions of use (Refs. 1, 2). A 

description of the conditions of use that 

contribute to EPA’s determination that 

TCE presents an unreasonable risk is in 

III.B.1. of the proposed rule (88 FR 

74712, October 31, 2023 (FRL–8317–01– 

OCSPP), with a summary in Unit II.C.4 

of this final rule. Accordingly, to 

address the unreasonable risk, EPA is 

issuing this final rule to: 

(i) Prohibit the manufacture 

(including import), processing, and 

distribution in commerce of TCE for all 

uses (including all consumer uses (see 

Unit IV.B.2.)), as described in Unit 

IV.B., with longer compliance 

timeframes for manufacture, processing, 

and distribution in commerce related to 

certain industrial and commercial uses; 

(ii) Prohibit the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE, as described in 

Unit IV.B.1., with longer compliance 

timeframes for certain uses; 

(iii) Prohibit the manufacture 

(including import) and processing of 

TCE as an intermediate for the 

manufacturing of hydrofluorocarbon 

134a (HFC–134a), following an 8.5-year 

phase-out, as described in Unit IV.B.3.; 

(iv) Prohibit the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a solvent for 

closed-loop batch vapor degreasing for 

rayon fabric scouring for end use in 

rocket booster nozzle production by 

Federal agencies and their contractors, 

following a 10-year phase-out, outlined 

in Unit IV.B.4.; 

(v) Prohibit the manufacture 

(including import), processing, 

distribution in commerce, and use of 

TCE as a laboratory chemical for asphalt 

testing and recovery, following a 10-year 

phase-out, outlined in Unit IV.B.5.; 

(vi) Prohibit the manufacture 

(including import), processing, 

distribution in commerce, and 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a solvent in batch vapor degreasing for 

essential aerospace parts and 

components and narrow tubing used in 

medical devices, following a 7-year 

TSCA section 6(g) exemption, outlined 

in Unit IV.G.1.; 

(vii) Prohibit the manufacture 

(including import), processing, 

distribution in commerce, and 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a solvent in closed loop vapor 

degreasing necessary for rocket engine 

cleaning by Federal agencies and their 

contractors, following a 7-year TSCA 

section 6(g) exemption, outlined in Unit 

IV.G.2.; 

(viii) For vessels of the Armed Forces 

and their systems, and in the 

maintenance, fabrication, and 

sustainment for and of such vessels and 

systems, prohibit the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as: potting 

compounds for naval electronic systems 

and equipment; sealing compounds for 

high and ultra-high vacuum systems; 

bonding compounds for materials 

testing and maintenance of underwater 

systems and bonding of nonmetallic 

materials; and cleaning agents to satisfy 

cleaning requirements (which includes 

degreasing using wipes, sprays, solvents 

and vapor degreasing) for: materials and 

components required for military 

ordnance testing; temporary resin 

repairs in vessel spaces where welding 

is not authorized; ensuring 

polyurethane adhesion for electronic 

systems and equipment repair and 

installation of elastomeric materials; 

various naval combat systems, radars, 

sensors, equipment; fabrication and 

prototyping processes to remove coolant 

and other residue from machine parts; 

machined part fabrications for naval 

systems; installation of topside rubber 

tile material aboard vessels; and vapor 

degreasing required for substrate surface 

preparation prior to electroplating 

processes, following a 10-year TSCA 

section 6(g) exemption, outlined in Unit 

IV.G.3.; 

(ix) Prohibit the emergency industrial 

and commercial use of TCE in 

furtherance of the NASA mission for 

specific conditions which are critical or 

essential and for which no technically 

and economically feasible safer 

alternative is available, following a 10- 

year TSCA section 6(g) exemption, 

outlined in Unit IV.G.4.; 

(x) Prohibit the manufacture 

(including import), processing, 

distribution in commerce, disposal, and 

use of TCE as a processing aid for 

manufacturing battery separators for 

lead acid batteries, following a 20-year 

TSCA section 6(g) exemption, as 

described in Unit IV.G.5.; 

(xi) Prohibit the manufacture 

(including import), processing, 

distribution in commerce, disposal, and 

use of TCE as a processing aid for 

manufacturing specialty polymeric 

microporous sheet materials following a 

15-year TSCA section 6(g) exemption, as 

described in Unit IV.G.6.; 

(xii) Prohibit the manufacture 

(including import), processing, 

distribution in commerce, and use of 

TCE as a laboratory chemical for 

essential laboratory activities and some 

research and development activities, 

following a 50-year TSCA section 6(g) 

exemption, as described in Unit IV.G.7.; 

(xiii) Require strict workplace 

controls to limit exposure to TCE, 

including compliance with a TCE 

workplace chemical protection program 

(WCPP), which would include 

requirements for an interim existing 

chemical exposure limit (ECEL) revised 

from the proposed rule, as well as 

dermal protection, for conditions of use 

with long term phase-outs or timelimited exemptions under TSCA section 

6(g), as described in Unit IV.C., or 

prescriptive workplace controls, as 

described in Unit IV.D.; 

(xiv) Prohibit the disposal of TCE to 

industrial pre-treatment, industrial 

treatment, or publicly owned treatment 

works, through a phaseout allowing for 

longer timeframes for disposal necessary 

for certain industrial and commercial 

uses as described in Unit IV.B.6., along 

with a 50-year TSCA section 6(g) 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102572 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

exemption for disposal for cleanup 

projects before prohibition, as described 

in Unit IV.G.8., and interim 

requirements for wastewater worker 

protection, as described in Unit IV.E.; 

and 

(xv) Establish recordkeeping and 

downstream notification requirements, 

as described in Unit IV.F. 

EPA notes that all TSCA conditions of 

use of TCE are subject to this final rule. 

‘‘Conditions of use’’ is defined in TSCA 

section 3(4) to mean the circumstances, 

as determined by EPA, under which a 

chemical substance is intended, known, 

or reasonably foreseen to be 

manufactured, processed, distributed in 

commerce, used, or disposed of. 

D. Why is the Agency taking this action? 

Under TSCA section 6(a), ‘‘[i]f the 

Administrator determines in accordance 

with subsection (b)(4)(A) that the 

manufacture, processing, distribution in 

commerce, use or disposal of a chemical 

substance or mixture, or that any 

combination of such activities, presents 

an unreasonable risk of injury to health 

or the environment, the Administrator 

shall by rule . . . apply one or more of 

the [section 6(a)] requirements to such 

substance or mixture to the extent 

necessary so that the chemical 

substance no longer presents such risk.’’ 

TCE was the subject of a risk evaluation 

under TSCA section 6(b)(4)(A) that was 

issued in November 2020 (Ref. 1). In 

addition, EPA issued a revised 

unreasonable risk determination for TCE 

in January 2023 (Ref. 2), determining 

that TCE, as a whole chemical 

substance, presents an unreasonable risk 

of injury to health under the conditions 

of use. On October 31, 2023, EPA issued 

a proposed rule (88 FR 74712) (FRL– 

8317–01–OCSPP) under TSCA section 

6(a) to regulate TCE so that it no longer 

presents unreasonable risk (hereinafter 

‘‘2023 TCE proposed rule’’). The Agency 

received public comment on the 

proposed rule, and with this action, 

EPA is finalizing the 2023 TCE 

proposed rule with modifications so 

that TCE no longer presents an 

unreasonable risk. The conditions of use 

that contribute to the unreasonable risk 

from TCE are described in Unit III.B.1. 

of the 2023 TCE proposed rule. 

EPA emphasizes that while some of 

the adverse effects from TCE exposure 

are experienced following acute single 

exposures, other risks are incurred 

following long-term repeated exposures. 

Risks of non-cancer effects, specifically 

fetal cardiac defects and autoimmunity, 

are the most sensitive adverse effects 

following exposure. In addition, risks of 

other significant adverse outcomes 

associated with TCE exposure include: 

non-cancer effects (liver toxicity, kidney 

toxicity, neurotoxicity, 

immunosuppression, reproductive 

toxicity, and developmental toxicity), as 

well as cancer (liver, kidney, and nonHodgkin’s lymphoma). This final rule 

will eliminate the unreasonable risk to 

human health from TCE, as identified in 

the 2020 Risk Evaluation for TCE (Ref. 

1) and the 2023 Revised Unreasonable 

Risk Determination for TCE (Ref. 2). 

While EPA’s rule will result in a ban 

of TCE, the timeframes for the phaseouts differ across conditions of use and 

are described in fuller detail in Unit 

IV.B. One phase-out is for uses that may 

impact the Agency’s efforts to address 

climate-damaging HFCs (and the 

associated adverse impacts on human 

health and the environment) under the 

American Innovation and 

Manufacturing Act of 2020 (AIM Act) 

(42 U.S.C. 7675). EPA is implementing 

a longer phase-out in tandem with strict 

workplace controls for the 

manufacturing (including import) and 

processing of TCE as an intermediate in 

the generation of HFC–134a, one of the 

regulated substances subject to a 

phasedown under the AIM Act. More 

information on HFC–134a is in Unit 

V.A.1. of the 2023 TCE proposed rule. 

Additionally, the Agency recognizes 

that alternatives to TCE may not be 

readily available for some important 

conditions of use. As an example, EPA 

is finalizing a longer phase-out 

timeframe for industrial and commercial 

use of TCE as a solvent for closed-loop 

batch vapor degreasing for rayon fabric 

scouring for end use in rocket booster 

nozzle production by Federal agencies 

and their contractors. Currently, 

substitutes and alternative processes do 

not meet the technical specifications 

required to clean the rayon fabric in 

order to safely produce rockets. 

Similarly, EPA is finalizing a longer 

phase-out for the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE in laboratory use 

for asphalt testing and recovery, based 

on information provided by state 

departments of transportation and 

regulated entities regarding the 

timeframes needed for revising state 

certifications that currently include this 

use of TCE for, among other activities, 

enabling the recycling of asphalt. 

Additionally, EPA recognizes that 

some conditions of use may be 

important for national security 

applications or for other critical needs. 

For these reasons, this final rule 

includes a 15-year exemption under 

TSCA section 6(g) for industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a processing 

aid for battery separator manufacturing 

in the production of lead-acid battery 

separators, as well as for the 

manufacturing, processing, and 

distribution in commerce of TCE for this 

use. EPA recognizes that battery 

separators are essential components of 

batteries that power vehicles and 

systems in the U.S. supply chain for 

multiple critical infrastructure sectors 

within the national economy. Further, 

there are a number of critical uses 

required for DoD vessels. EPA is 

finalizing a 10-year exemption under 

TSCA section 6(g) for DoD vessel 

requirements for potting, bonding and 

sealing compounds, and bonding and 

cleaning requirements for naval combat 

systems, radars, sensors, equipment, 

and fabrication and prototyping 

processes. Additionally, EPA is 

finalizing a 50-year exemption under 

TSCA section 6(g) for the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE for critical 

laboratory activities; for example, 

laboratory activities associated with 

ongoing environmental cleanup projects 

that fall under the Superfund program 

or other similar EPA authorities, in 

which it is necessary to use TCE as a 

laboratory chemical for the analysis of 

contaminated soil, air, and water 

samples. 

EPA proposed and is finalizing a 

requirement to comply with a WCPP, 

which includes monitoring, adherence 

to industrial hygiene best practices, and 

requirements to meet an interim ECEL 

as a condition for most of the conditions 

of use for which a phase-out or timelimited exemption was provided. For 

the remaining conditions of use for 

which a phase-out or time-limited 

exemption was provided, EPA is 

requiring prescriptive worker controls. 

For many of the conditions of use for 

which EPA is finalizing longer phaseouts or time-limited exemptions under 

the WCPP, data were submitted to 

support many commenters’ position that 

a higher interim ECEL than the limit 

proposed is necessary for successful 

implementation of worker protections 

before those conditions of use are 

prohibited. These comments were 

submitted to inform the risk evaluation, 

Small Business Advocacy Review 

(SBAR) Panel process, the comment 

period following publication of the 2023 

TCE proposed rule, or during 

stakeholder outreach, and are available 

in the corresponding public dockets 

(EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0642; EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2019–0500; EPA–HQ–OPPT– 

2016–0737, respectively). 

E. What are the estimated incremental 

impacts of this action? 

EPA has prepared an Economic 

Analysis of the potential incremental 

impacts associated with this rulemaking 

that can be found in the rulemaking 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102573 

docket (Ref. 3). As described in more 

detail in the Economic Analysis (Ref. 3), 

EPA was unable to quantify all 

incremental costs of this rule. The 

quantifiable cost of the rule is estimated 

to be $64.1 million annualized over 20 

years at a 2% discount rate, $71.3 

million annualized at 3%, and $102.4 

million annualized at a 7% discount 

rate. These costs take into consideration 

costs of compliance with 

implementation of an interim WCPP for 

certain conditions of use, based on an 

interim ECEL of 0.2 ppm (1.07 mg/m3) 

for inhalation exposures as an 8-hour 

time-weighted average (TWA), costs for 

transitioning to alternatives, where 

possible, and reformulation costs of 

numerous products. Estimated costs for 

the interim WCPP include costs for 

monitoring and applicable personal 

protective equipment (PPE). There are a 

number of notable unquantified costs. 

These are described in this Unit and 

more fully in section 7.12 of the 

Economic Analysis. 

Alternative products with similar cost 

and efficacy are available for most of the 

products that are formulated with TCE. 

However, for some applications, there 

may be additional unquantified costs 

associated with the alternatives 

including costs to develop alternatives 

where they are not currently available. 

For instance, in some cases, some effort 

might be required by firms using TCE 

products to identify suitable 

alternatives, test them for their desired 

applications, learn how to use them 

safely and effectively, and implement 

new processes for using the alternative 

products. There may also be some 

safety-critical applications, such as 

energized electrical equipment cleaners 

and adhesives and sealants specifically 

for aerospace applications, where 

alternatives would need to undergo 

extensive safety reviews and testing 

before they could replace the TCE 

products. The information to estimate 

how often these costs might be incurred 

or what the specific costs would be peruser or per-firm when they are incurred 

is not available. Therefore, EPA is 

unable to consider these costs 

quantitatively. 

There also may be some unquantified 

costs associated with the 

implementation of a WCPP. EPA used 

available air monitoring data as well as 

modelled data to estimate a distribution 

of exposure concentrations, but since 

these data were not collected in the 

same way monitoring data under a 

WCPP would be collected, these 

estimated distributions are uncertain 

and therefore, the costs of compliance 

with the WCPP are uncertain. The 

WCPP costs also assume that when the 

exposure levels exceed the interim 

ECEL, compliance is achieved by 

implementing a respirator PPE program. 

However, and consistent with the 

hierarchy of controls, the final rule 

requires implementation of feasible 

engineering and administrative controls 

before using PPE to reduce exposure to 

or below the interim ECEL. These costs 

would be specific to individual firms, 

and EPA does not have sufficient 

information to estimate these costs. 

The costs of alternative identification, 

testing, and potential process changes 

could not be estimated for battery 

separator manufacturers, synthetic 

paper processors, and fluoroelastomer 

producers. It is expected that these 

facilities would need to adopt process 

and/or physical plant changes in order 

to comply with the rule. EPA does not 

have sufficient information to estimate 

the costs of the prohibition to these 

sectors. 

EPA expects the processing of TCE as 

an intermediate for the manufacture of 

HFC–134a to decline over time, in light 

of the AIM Act requirements (Ref. 4). At 

some point, the domestic manufacture 

of HFC–134a may be discontinued. 

While the timing for this 

discontinuation is uncertain, it is 

unclear whether this rule will hasten 

the closure of plants that use TCE to 

produce HFC–134a. There could be 

some unknown cost impacts associated 

with hastening the closure of these two 

plants. 

EPA is finalizing a 10-year phase-out 

for the industrial and commercial use of 

TCE as a solvent for closed-loop batch 

vapor degreasing for rayon fabric 

scouring for end use in rocket booster 

nozzle production by Federal agencies 

and their contractors, conditioned on 

Federal agencies performing within 5 

years a final pre-launch test of rocket 

booster nozzles that have been produced 

without using TCE. EPA does not have 

information to estimate the cost of such 

a test. The prohibition of TCE used in 

vapor degreasing for narrow tubing for 

aerospace and medical devices is 

expected to require testing and 

certification of alternative solvents and/ 

or processes to meet strict safety and 

performance requirements. These costs 

will be specific to a facility’s design, 

selected alternative, and end use of the 

product. EPA does not have information 

to estimate the costs associated with 

meeting these safety and performance 

requirements. 

The disposal of TCE from cleanup 

projects to industrial pre-treatment, 

industrial treatment, or publicly owned 

treatment works is prohibited after the 

TSCA section 6(g) exemption ends, 50 

years after the rule is finalized. If 

cleanup is not finished by the end of 

this time period and the TSCA section 

6(g) exemption has not been extended, 

cleanup sites will need to identify and 

implement alternative disposal or 

treatment methods and will likely also 

need to renegotiate Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 

permits or Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

(CERCLA) agreements to include those 

changes. These approaches could be 

more costly to implement and/or 

increase the duration of cleanups 

allowing any potential environmental or 

human health impacts to continue for a 

longer period of time. The information 

to estimate how often these costs might 

be incurred or what the specific costs 

would be per site when they are 

incurred is not available. 

During the timeframe of the 

exemptions, this rule requires owners 

and operators of cleanup sites with TCE 

exposures to potentially exposed 

persons (e.g., workers or others in the 

workplace, such as persons directly 

handling the chemical or in the area 

where the chemical is being used) as 

well as publicly owned treatment works 

(POTWs) receiving TCE wastes from 

cleanup sites, battery separator 

manufacturers, and specialty polymeric 

microporous sheet material 

manufacturers to comply with the 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration’s (OSHA’s) Hazardous 

Waste Operations and Emergency 

Response (HAZWOPER) requirements 

modified to incorporate the interim 

ECEL (for cleanup sites) and WCPP 

requirements modified to include a 

water screening method (for POTWs). 

EPA does not have sufficient 

information to estimate the number of 

sites and workers that may need to meet 

the requirements to protect potentially 

exposed persons and could not estimate 

the costs for those protections. In 

addition, the economic analysis does 

not estimate costs regarding disposal of 

TCE or TCE-containing products after 

the effective date prohibiting the 

industrial and commercial use and 

disposal of TCE to industrial pretreatment, industrial treatment, or 

publicly owned treatment works. The 

final rule includes a staggered 

compliance timeline throughout the 

supply chain to allow for much of the 

TCE to be used before disposal is 

necessary. However, some unused 

product may need to be disposed of as 

hazardous waste. Since there is no 

reliable way of estimating the volume of 

this waste, the additional disposal costs 

are not quantified in this economic 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102574 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

analysis. Finally, EPA could not 

estimate any potential business closures 

or off-shoring of businesses that might 

result from the rule. Vapor degreasing is 

one use of TCE where switching to a 

suitable alternative may be challenging 

and where closing or off-shoring may be 

a compliance strategy. EPA estimates 

that 366 facilities still use TCE in vapor 

degreasers, a majority of which are 

small businesses. There is no standard 

generally accepted approach for 

estimating the cost impacts of a firm 

closure. Despite information EPA has 

sought from stakeholders and 

commenters, including through a SBAR 

Panel, it is not clear whether or how 

many firms might choose closure as a 

compliance strategy, nor what the costs 

might be. 

Following the mandate of TSCA to 

address unreasonable risk to health as 

well as in alignment with the goals of 

President Biden’s Cancer Moonshot, the 

rule will protect people from cancer and 

other significant adverse health effects 

of TCE by prohibiting the manufacture 

(including import), processing, and 

distribution in commerce of TCE for all 

uses while allowing for a longer 

reasonable transition period or timelimited exemptions for certain uses (Ref. 

5). The actions in this final rule are 

expected to achieve health benefits for 

the American public, some of which can 

be monetized and others that, while 

tangible and significant, cannot be 

monetized due to data and methodology 

limitations. The monetized benefits of 

this rule are approximately $22.9 

million to $ 23.2 million annualized 

over 20 years at a 2% discount rate, 

$18.2 million to $18.3 million 

annualized over 20 years at 3%, and 

$8.7 million to $ 8.9 million annualized 

over 20 years at a 7% discount rate. 

These monetized benefits only include 

potential reductions in risk of liver, 

kidney, and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma 

cancers associated with reducing 

chronic TCE exposure. 

There are a number of non-cancer 

endpoints associated with exposure to 

TCE, including liver toxicity, kidney 

toxicity, reproductive effects, 

neurotoxicity, immunotoxicity effects 

and fetal cardiac defects (Ref. 1). There 

is human evidence for hepatitis 

accompanying immune-related 

generalized skin diseases, jaundice, 

hepatomegaly, hepatosplenomegaly, and 

liver failure in TCE-exposed workers 

and changes in the proximal tubules of 

the kidney following exposure to TCE, 

and occupational studies have shown 

increased levels of kidney damage 

(proximal tubules) and end-stage renal 

disease in TCE-exposed workers. 

Evidence exists to associate TCE with 

reproductive effects. Most human 

studies support an association between 

TCE exposure and alterations in sperm 

density and quality, as well as changes 

in sexual drive or function and serum 

endocrine levels. Fewer epidemiological 

studies exist linking decreased 

incidence of fecundability (time-to 

pregnancy) and menstrual cycle 

disturbances in women with TCE 

exposures. Human studies have 

consistently reported vestibular system 

related symptoms such as headaches, 

dizziness, and nausea following TCE 

exposure. Several newer 

epidemiological studies have found an 

association between TCE exposure and 

neurodegenerative disorders such as 

amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and 

Parkinson’s disease (Ref. 1). EPA does 

not have sufficient information to 

estimate the monetized benefits of the 

rule with respect to these noncancer 

effects, and therefore monetized benefits 

are likely underestimated. 

EPA does estimate that there 67,869 

workers and occupational non-users 

(ONUs, or people who do not directly 

handle the chemical, but are in close 

proximity) exposed to TCE and of those, 

approximately 1,162 pregnant workers 

and ONUs annually that may potentially 

benefit from a reduced risk of fetal 

cardiac defects resulting from reduced 

TCE exposure. Although EPA has not 

developed a complete estimate of the 

monetized benefits associated with 

avoiding fetal cardiac defects, as 

described in the Economic Analysis 

(Ref. 3), Arth, Tinker et al. (Ref. 6) 

estimated a mean annual cost of $41,166 

(2013$) (median $14,552) for each fetal 

cardiac defects-associated 

hospitalization. For critical fetal cardiac 

defects, mean and median costs were 

estimated at $79,011 and $29,886 

(2013$), respectively, for each 

incidence. In addition to hospitalization 

costs, individuals with fetal cardiac 

defects will likely incur healthcare costs 

associated with physician visits and 

outpatient care. They are also more 

likely to require specialized healthcare 

such as medications, physical or speech 

therapy, or treatment for developmental 

or behavioral problems (Ref. 7). 

Additional social costs may include 

caregiver burden and mental health 

services (Ref. 8), as well as non-market 

costs such as pain and suffering and 

fetal cardiac defect-related mortality. 

Because these costs are not accounted 

for, monetized benefits are likely 

underestimated. The severity of specific 

types of fetal cardiac defects and 

associated costs will vary depending on 

the type of heart defect. 

Additionally, to the extent that the 

rule reduces the amount of TCE in 

drinking water systems and thereby 

exposures to populations using those 

drinking water sources, there could be 

potential health-related benefits related 

to improved drinking water quality that 

EPA was unable to quantify. 

II. Background 

A. Overview of TCE 

As described in more detail in the 

2023 TCE proposed rule, TCE is an 

immunotoxicant and developmental 

toxicant and is carcinogenic to humans 

by all routes of exposure. This final rule 

is specifically intended to address the 

unreasonable risk of injury to health 

that EPA has identified in the 2020 Risk 

Evaluation for TCE (Ref. 1) and 2023 

Revised Unreasonable Risk 

Determination (Ref. 2), as described in 

Unit II.D. of the 2023 TCE proposed 

rule. TCE is a volatile organic 

compound (VOC) used in industry as 

well as in commercial and consumer 

products. The total aggregate annual 

production volume ranged from 100 to 

250 million pounds between 2016 and 

2019 according to the most recent (2020) 

Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) data 

(Ref. 9). The majority of TCE is 

processed as an intermediate during the 

manufacture of refrigerants, specifically 

HFC–134a, which accounts for about 

83.6% of TCE’s annual production 

volume (Ref. 1). TCE is also used as a 

solvent, frequently in cleaning and 

degreasing (including spot cleaning, 

vapor degreasing, cold cleaning, and 

aerosol degreasing), which accounts for 

another 14.7% of TCE production 

volume. Other uses account for 

approximately 1.7% of TCE production 

volume. TCE is used as a solvent in a 

variety of commercial and consumer 

applications including in lubricants, 

adhesives and sealants, paints and 

coatings, and other miscellaneous 

products. 

B. Regulatory Actions Pertaining to TCE 

Because of its significant adverse 

health effects, TCE is subject to 

numerous State, Federal, and 

international regulations restricting and 

regulating its use. A summary of EPA 

regulations pertaining to TCE, as well as 

other Federal, State, and international 

regulations, is in the docket (Ref. 10). 

As described in more detail in the 

2023 TCE proposed rule and in the 

Response to Public Comments 

document (Ref. 11), EPA considered the 

adequacy of the current regulation of 

TCE by OSHA for protection of workers. 

EPA notes that the standards for 

chemical hazards that OSHA 

promulgates under the Occupational 

Safety and Health (OSH) Act share a 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102575 

broadly similar purpose with the worker 

protection-related standards that EPA 

promulgates under TSCA section 6(a). 

The control measures OSHA and EPA 

require to satisfy the objectives of their 

respective statutes may also, in many 

circumstances, overlap or coincide. 

However, there are important 

differences between EPA’s and OSHA’s 

regulatory approaches and jurisdiction, 

and EPA considers these differences 

when deciding whether and how to 

account for OSHA requirements when 

evaluating and addressing potential 

unreasonable risk to workers so that 

compliance requirements are clearly 

explained to the regulated community. 

TSCA risk evaluations are subject to 

statutory science standards, an explicit 

requirement to consider risks to 

potentially exposed or susceptible 

subpopulations, and a prohibition on 

considering costs and other non-risk 

factors when determining whether a 

chemical presents an unreasonable risk 

that warrants regulatory actions—all 

requirements that do not apply to 

development of OSHA regulations. As 

such, EPA may find unreasonable risk 

for purposes of TSCA notwithstanding 

OSHA requirements. In addition, health 

standards issued under section 6(b)(5) of 

the OSH Act must reduce significant 

risk only to the extent that it is 

technologically and economically 

feasible. OSHA’s legal requirement to 

demonstrate that its section 6(b)(5) 

standards are technologically and 

economically feasible at the time they 

are promulgated often precludes OSHA 

from imposing exposure control 

requirements sufficient to ensure that 

the chemical substance no longer 

presents a significant risk to workers. 

While it is possible in some cases that 

the OSHA standards for some chemicals 

reviewed under TSCA will eliminate 

unreasonable risk, based on EPA’s 

experience thus far in conducting 

occupational risk assessments under 

TSCA, EPA believes that OSHA 

chemical standards would in general be 

unlikely to address unreasonable risk to 

workers within the meaning of TSCA, 

since TSCA section 6(b) unreasonable 

risk determinations may account for 

unreasonable risk to more sensitive 

endpoints and working populations 

than OSHA’s risk evaluations typically 

contemplate and EPA is obligated to 

apply TSCA section 6(a) risk 

management requirements to the extent 

necessary so that the unreasonable risk 

is no longer presented. Because the 

requirements and application of TSCA 

and OSHA regulatory analyses differ, it 

is necessary for EPA to conduct risk 

evaluations and, where it finds 

unreasonable risk to workers, develop 

risk management requirements for 

chemical substances that OSHA also 

regulates, and it is expected that EPA’s 

findings and requirements may 

sometimes diverge from OSHA’s. 

Additional considerations of OSHA 

standards in the revised unreasonable 

risk determination are discussed further 

in the 2023 Revised Unreasonable Risk 

Determination for TCE (88 FR 1222, 

January 9, 2023 (FRL–9945–02– 

OCSPP)). 

C. Summary of EPA’s Risk Evaluation 

Activities on TCE 

In July 2017, EPA published the scope 

of the TCE risk evaluation (82 FR 31592, 

July 7, 2017 (FRL–9963–57)), and, after 

receiving public comments, published 

the problem formulation in June 2018 

(83 FR 26998, June 11, 2018 (FRL–9978– 

40)). In February 2020, EPA published 

a draft risk evaluation (85 FR 11079, 

February 26, 2020 (FRL–10005–52)), 

and, after public comment and peer 

review by the Science Advisory 

Committee on Chemicals (SACC), EPA 

issued the 2020 Risk Evaluation for TCE 

in November 2020 in accordance with 

TSCA section 6(b) (85 FR 75010, 

November 24, 2020 (FRL–10016–91)). 

EPA subsequently issued a draft revised 

TSCA risk determination for TCE (87 FR 

40520, July 7, 2022 (FRL–9945–01– 

OCSPP)), and, after public notice and 

comment, published a Revised Risk 

Determination for TCE in January 2023 

(88 FR 1222, January 9, 2023 (FRL– 

9945–02–OCSPP)). The 2020 Risk 

Evaluation for TCE and supplemental 

materials are in Docket ID No. EPA– 

HQ–OPPT–2019–0500, and the January 

2023 Revised Unreasonable Risk 

Determination for TCE and additional 

materials supporting the risk evaluation 

process are in Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2016–0737. Both dockets can be 

accessed online through https://

www.regulations.gov. 

1. 2020 Risk Evaluation for TCE 

In the 2020 Risk Evaluation for TCE, 

EPA evaluated risks associated with 54 

conditions of use within the following 

categories: manufacture (including 

import), processing, distribution in 

commerce, industrial and commercial 

use, consumer use, and disposal (Ref. 1). 

Descriptions of these conditions of use 

are in Unit III.B.1. of the 2023 TCE 

proposed rule. The 2020 Risk 

Evaluation for TCE identified significant 

adverse health effects associated with 

short- and long-term exposure to TCE. A 

further discussion of the hazards of TCE 

is presented in Unit III.B.2. of the 2023 

TCE proposed rule. 

2. 2023 Revised Unreasonable Risk 

Determination for TCE 

As described in more detail in EPA’s 

2023 TCE proposed rule, EPA revised 

the original unreasonable risk 

determination based on the 2020 Risk 

Evaluation for TCE and issued a final 

revised unreasonable risk determination 

in January 2023 (Ref. 2). EPA revised the 

risk determination for the 2020 Risk 

Evaluation for TCE pursuant to TSCA 

section 6(b) and consistent with 

Executive Order 13990 (‘‘Protecting 

Public Health and the Environment and 

Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate 

Crisis’’) and other Administration 

priorities. The revisions consisted of 

making the risk determination based on 

the whole chemical substance instead of 

making risk determinations for each 

individual condition of use, which 

resulted in the revised risk 

determination superseding the prior ‘‘no 

unreasonable risk’’ determinations for 

specific conditions of use (Ref. 2), the 

withdrawal of the associated TSCA 

section 6(i)(1) ‘‘no unreasonable risk’’ 

order, and clarification that the risk 

determination does not reflect an 

assumption that all workers are always 

provided and appropriately wear PPE 

(Ref. 2). 

EPA determined that TCE presents an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health and 

did not identify risks of injury to the 

environment that contribute to the 

unreasonable risk determination for 

TCE. The TCE conditions of use that 

contribute to EPA’s determination that 

the chemical substance poses 

unreasonable risk to health are listed in 

the unreasonable risk determination 

(Ref. 2) and the 2023 TCE proposed rule, 

with descriptions to aid chemical 

manufacturers, processors, and users in 

determining how their particular use or 

activity would be addressed under the 

final regulatory action. 

3. Description of Unreasonable Risk 

EPA has determined that TCE 

presents an unreasonable risk of injury 

to human health under the conditions of 

use based on acute and chronic noncancer risks and cancer risks (Ref. 2). As 

described in the TSCA section 6(b) 2020 

Risk Evaluation for TCE, EPA identified 

non-cancer adverse effects from acute 

and chronic inhalation and dermal 

exposures to TCE, and for cancer from 

chronic inhalation and dermal 

exposures to TCE (Ref. 1). In the TCE 

risk characterization, the endpoints 

identified by EPA as the basis for the 

unreasonable risk determination in the 

Risk Conclusions were 

immunosuppression effects for acute 

inhalation and dermal exposures, and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102576 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

autoimmunity effects for chronic 

inhalation and dermal exposures (Ref. 

1). Additional risks associated with 

other non-cancer adverse effects (e.g., 

developmental toxicity, 

immunosuppression, liver toxicity, 

kidney toxicity, neurotoxicity, 

autoimmunity, and reproductive 

toxicity) were identified for acute and 

chronic inhalation and dermal 

exposures. EPA also concluded, based 

on EPA’s Guidelines for Carcinogen 

Risk Assessment (Ref. 12), that TCE is 

carcinogenic by all routes of exposure, 

and identified cancer risk (liver, kidney, 

and non-Hodgkin lymphoma) from 

chronic inhalation and dermal 

exposures (Ref. 2). Unit VII. of the 2023 

TCE proposed rule summarizes the 

health effects and the magnitude of the 

exposures. 

To make the unreasonable risk 

determination for TCE, EPA evaluated 

exposures to PESS including workers, 

ONUs, consumer users, and bystanders 

to consumer use by using reasonably 

available monitoring and modeling data 

for inhalation and dermal exposures 

(Ref. 1). EPA conducted a screeninglevel analysis to assess potential risks 

from the air and water pathways to 

fenceline communities. A discussion of 

EPA’s analysis and the expected effects 

of this rulemaking on fenceline 

communities is in Unit VII.A. of the 

2023 TCE proposed rule. 

For the 2020 Risk Evaluation for TCE, 

and as discussed in Unit II.D.1. and Unit 

III.A.3. of the 2023 TCE proposed rule, 

EPA considered PESS. EPA identified 

the following groups as PESS: workers 

and ONUs, including men and women 

of reproductive age, adolescents, and 

biologically susceptible subpopulations; 

and consumer users and bystanders (of 

any age group, including infants, 

toddlers, children, and elderly), 

including biologically susceptible 

subpopulations. Additionally, older 

pregnant women are identified as 

especially susceptible to cardiac defects 

in their developing fetus based on 

epidemiological data (Ref. 1). All PESS 

are included in the quantitative and 

qualitative analyses described in the 

2020 Risk Evaluation for TCE and were 

considered in the determination of 

unreasonable risk for TCE (Refs. 1, 2). 

4. Conditions of Use Subject to This 

Regulatory Action 

As noted in Unit I.C. of this final rule, 

the term ‘‘conditions of use’’ is defined 

in TSCA section 3(4). Condition of use 

descriptions are provided in Unit III.B.1. 

of the 2023 TCE proposed rule and were 

obtained from EPA sources such as CDR 

use codes, the 2020 Risk Evaluation for 

TCE and related documents, as well as 

the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development harmonized 

use codes, and stakeholder 

engagements. EPA did not receive 

public comments identifying 

inaccuracies or necessitating changes to 

those descriptions; however, EPA 

received some comments requesting 

clarification for particular uses, which 

can be found in the Response to 

Comments document (Ref. 11). 

Additionally, to assist with 

implementation and compliance with 

the final rule, in Units IV.C.1., IV.D.1., 

and IV.E.1. of this final rule, EPA has 

provided a description of the conditions 

of use that are subject to the WCPP or 

other workplace controls during 

phaseout or time-limited exemption 

before prohibition. 

For the purposes of this final rule, 

‘‘occupational conditions of use’’ refers 

to the TSCA conditions of use other 

than consumer use as described in Units 

III.B.1.a., b., c., and e. of the 2023 TCE 

proposed rule. Although EPA identified 

both industrial and commercial uses in 

the 2020 Risk Evaluation for TCE (Ref. 

1) for purposes of distinguishing 

scenarios, the Agency clarified then and 

clarifies now that EPA interprets the 

authority Congress gave to the Agency 

to ‘‘regulat[e] any manner or method of 

commercial use’’ under TSCA section 

6(a)(5) to reach both industrial and 

commercial uses. 

Additionally, as described in the 2023 

TCE proposed rule and in the 2020 Risk 

Evaluation for TCE (Ref. 1), EPA 

identified and assessed all known, 

intended, and reasonably foreseen 

industrial, commercial, and consumer 

uses of TCE. EPA determined that all 

industrial, commercial, and consumer 

uses of TCE evaluated in the 2020 Risk 

Evaluation for TCE contribute to the 

unreasonable risk of injury to health. As 

such, for purposes of this risk 

management rule, ‘‘consumer use’’ 

refers to all known, intended, or 

reasonably foreseen TCE consumer uses. 

Likewise, for the purpose of this risk 

management rule, ‘‘industrial and 

commercial use’’ refers to all known, 

intended, or reasonably foreseen TCE 

industrial and commercial uses. 

EPA further notes that this rule does 

not apply to any substance excluded 

from the definition of ‘‘chemical 

substance’’ under TSCA section 

3(2)(B)(i) through (vi). Those exclusions 

include, but are not limited to, any 

pesticide (as defined by the Federal 

Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide 

Act) when manufactured, processed, or 

distributed in commerce for use as a 

pesticide; and any food, food additive, 

drug, cosmetic, or device, as defined in 

section 201 of the Federal Food, Drug, 

and Cosmetic Act, when manufactured, 

processed, or distributed in commerce 

for use as a food, food additive, drug, 

cosmetic or device. 

D. EPA’s 2023 Proposed Rule for TCE 

1. Description of TSCA Section 6(a) 

Requirements 

Under TSCA section 6(a), if the 

Administrator determines through a 

TSCA section 6(b) risk evaluation that a 

chemical substance presents an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health or 

the environment, without consideration 

of costs or other non-risk factors, 

including an unreasonable risk to a 

PESS identified as relevant to the 

Agency’s risk evaluation, under the 

conditions of use, EPA must by rule 

apply one or more of the section 6(a) 

requirements to the extent necessary so 

that the chemical substance no longer 

presents such risk. 

The TSCA section 6(a) requirements 

can include one or more of the 

following actions alone or in 

combination: 

• Prohibit or otherwise restrict the 

manufacturing (including import), 

processing, or distribution in commerce 

of the substance or mixture, or limit the 

amount of such substance or mixture 

which may be manufactured, processed, 

or distributed in commerce (section 

6(a)(1)). 

• Prohibit or otherwise restrict the 

manufacturing, processing, or 

distribution in commerce of the 

substance or mixture for a particular use 

or above a specific concentration for a 

particular use (section 6(a)(2)). 

• Limit the amount of the substance 

or mixture which may be manufactured, 

processed, or distributed in commerce 

for a particular use or above a specific 

concentration for a particular use 

specified (section 6(a)(2)). 

• Require clear and adequate 

minimum warning and instructions 

with respect to the substance or 

mixture’s use, distribution in commerce, 

or disposal, or any combination of those 

activities, to be marked on or 

accompanying the substance or mixture 

(section 6(a)(3)). 

• Require manufacturers and 

processors of the substance or mixture 

to make and retain certain records or 

conduct certain monitoring or testing 

(section 6(a)(4)). 

• Prohibit or otherwise regulate any 

manner or method of commercial use of 

the substance or mixture (section 

6(a)(5)). 

• Prohibit or otherwise regulate any 

manner or method of disposal of the 

substance or mixture, or any article 

containing such substance or mixture, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102577 

by its manufacturer or processor or by 

any person who uses or disposes of it 

for commercial purposes (section 

6(a)(6)). 

• Direct manufacturers or processors 

of the substance or mixture to give 

notice of the unreasonable risk 

determination to distributors, certain 

other persons, and the public, and to 

replace or repurchase the substance or 

mixture (section 6(a)(7)). 

In the 2023 TCE proposed rule, EPA 

analyzed how the TSCA section 6(a) 

requirements could be applied to 

address the unreasonable risk from TCE 

so that it no longer presents such risk. 

This unit summarizes the TSCA section 

6 considerations for issuing regulations 

under TSCA section 6(a), and Unit IV. 

outlines how EPA applied these 

considerations while managing the 

unreasonable risk from TCE. 

As required, EPA developed a 

proposed regulatory action and one 

primary alternative regulatory action, 

which are described in Units V.A. and 

V.B. of the 2023 TCE the proposed rule, 

respectively. To identify and select a 

regulatory action, EPA considered the 

two routes of exposure driving the 

unreasonable risk, inhalation and 

dermal, and the exposed populations. 

For occupational conditions of use, EPA 

considered how it could directly 

regulate manufacturing (including 

import), processing, distribution in 

commerce, industrial and commercial 

use, or disposal to address the 

unreasonable risk. EPA also considered 

how it could exercise its authority 

under TSCA to regulate the 

manufacturing (including import), 

processing, and/or distribution in 

commerce of TCE at different levels in 

the supply chain to eliminate exposures 

or restrict the availability of TCE and 

TCE-containing products for consumer 

use in order to address the unreasonable 

risk. 

As required by TSCA section 6(c)(2), 

EPA considered several factors, in 

addition to identified unreasonable risk, 

when selecting among possible TSCA 

section 6(a) regulatory requirements for 

the proposed rule. EPA’s considerations 

regarding TSCA section 6(c)(2) for TCE 

are discussed in full in Unit VII. of the 

2023 TCE proposed rule, including the 

statement of effects with respect to the 

section 6(c)(2)(A) considerations. 

As described in more detail in the 

2023 TCE proposed rule, EPA also 

considered regulatory authorities under 

statutes administered by other agencies 

such as the Occupational Safety and 

Health (OSH) Act, the Consumer 

Product Safety Act (CPSA), and the 

Federal Hazardous Substances Act 

(FHSA), as well as other EPAadministered statutes, to examine (1) 

Whether there are opportunities to 

address unreasonable risk under other 

statutes, such that a referral may be 

warranted under TSCA section 9(a) or 

9(b); or (2) Whether TSCA section 6(a) 

regulation could include alignment of 

requirements and definitions in and 

under existing statutes and regulations 

to minimize confusion to the regulated 

entities and the general public. 

Additionally, as described in more 

detail in EPA’s 2023 TCE proposed rule 

in Unit VI.B, EPA considered the 

availability of alternatives when 

finalizing a prohibition or a substantial 

restriction (TSCA section 6(c)(2)(C)), 

and in setting final compliance dates in 

accordance with the requirements in 

TSCA section 6(d)(1). 

To the extent information was 

reasonably available, EPA considered 

pollution prevention strategies and the 

hierarchy of controls adopted by OSHA 

and the National Institute for 

Occupational Safety and Health 

(NIOSH) when developing its proposed 

rule, with the goal of identifying risk 

management control methods that 

would be permanent, feasible, and 

effective. EPA also considered how to 

address the unreasonable risk while 

providing flexibility to the regulated 

community where appropriate and took 

into account the information presented 

in the 2020 Risk Evaluation for TCE 

(Ref. 1), input from stakeholders, insight 

received during consultations, and 

anticipated compliance strategies from 

regulated entities. 

Taken together, these considerations 

led EPA to the proposed regulatory 

action and primary alternative action 

described in this Unit. Additional 

details related to how the requirements 

in this Unit were incorporated into 

development of the proposed rule and 

primary alternative action are in Unit 

VI. of the 2023 TCE proposed rule. 

2. Consultations and Other Engagement 

a. Consultations 

EPA conducted consultations and 

outreach as part of development of the 

2023 TCE proposed rule. The Agency 

held a federalism consultation from July 

22, 2021, until October 22, 2021, as part 

of the rulemaking process and pursuant 

to Executive Order 13132 (Ref. 13). 

EPA also consulted with tribal 

officials during the development of the 

2023 TCE proposed rule. The Agency 

held a tribal consultation from May 17, 

2021, to August 20, 2021, with meetings 

on June 15 and July 8, 2021 (Ref. 14). 

EPA received no written comments as 

part of this consultation. 

EPA’s environmental justice (EJ) 

consultation occurred from June 3, 

2021, through August 20, 2021. On June 

16 and July 6, 2021, EPA held public 

meetings as part of this consultation. 

These meetings were held pursuant to 

Executive Orders 12898 and 14008. EPA 

received three written comments 

following the EJ meetings, in addition to 

oral comments provided during the 

consultations (Refs. 15, 16, 17, 18). A 

brief summary of the comments is in 

Unit III.A.1 of the 2023 TCE proposed 

rule. 

As required by section 609(b) of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), EPA 

convened a SBAR Panel to obtain advice 

and recommendations from Small Entity 

Representatives (SERs) that potentially 

would be subject to the rule’s 

requirements. EPA met with SERs 

before and during Panel proceedings, on 

October 28, 2022, and January 31, 2023. 

Panel recommendations were presented 

in the SBAR Panel report (Ref. 19) and 

were addressed in Unit XI.C. of the 2023 

TCE proposed rule and in the Initial 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) 

(Ref. 20). EPA has also prepared a Final 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) 

(Ref. 21). 

More information about these 

consultations is presented in Units 

III.A.1., XI.C., XI.E., XI.F., and XI.J. of 

the 2023 TCE proposed rule. 

b. Other Stakeholder Consultations 

For development of the proposed rule, 

in addition to the formal consultations 

described in Unit XI. of the 2023 TCE 

proposed rule, EPA provided an 

overview of the TSCA risk management 

process and the risk evaluation findings 

for TCE on December 15, 2020 (Ref. 22). 

EPA also presented on the TSCA risk 

management process and the findings in 

the 2020 Risk Evaluation for TCE at a 

Small Business Administration (SBA) 

Office of Advocacy Environmental 

Roundtable on December 18, 2020 (Ref. 

19). Attendees of these meetings were 

given an opportunity to voice their 

concerns regarding the risk evaluation 

and risk management. 

Furthermore, during development of 

the proposed rule, EPA engaged in 

discussions with representatives from 

different industries, non-governmental 

organizations, technical experts, 

organized labor, and users of TCE. A list 

of external meetings held during the 

development of the 2023 TCE proposed 

rule is in the docket (Ref. 23); meeting 

materials and summaries are also in the 

docket. See Unit III.A.2. of the 2023 TCE 

proposed rule for a summary of the 

topics discussed during the meetings. 

c. Children’s Environmental Health 

The Agency’s 2021 Policy on 

Children’s Health (Ref. 24) requires EPA 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102578 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

to protect children from environmental 

exposures by consistently and explicitly 

considering early life exposures (from 

conception, infancy, and early 

childhood and through adolescence 

until 21 years of age) and lifelong health 

in all human health decisions through 

identifying and integrating children’s 

health data and information when 

conducting risk assessments. TSCA 

section 6(b)(4)(A) also requires EPA to 

conduct risk evaluations ‘‘to determine 

whether a chemical substance presents 

an unreasonable risk of injury to health 

or the environment . . . including an 

unreasonable risk to a PESS identified 

as relevant to the risk evaluation by the 

Administrator, under the conditions of 

use.’’ In addition, TSCA section 6(a) 

requires EPA to apply one or more risk 

management requirements so that TCE 

no longer presents an unreasonable risk 

(which includes unreasonable risk to 

any relevant PESS). Information about 

the health and risk assessments 

supporting this action and how the 

Policy was applied is presented in Unit 

II.C., II.D., and IV.A. of the 2023 TCE 

proposed rule, as well as in the 2020 

Risk Evaluation for TCE, and the 

Economic Analysis for this rule (Refs. 

25, 1, 3). 

3. Proposed Regulatory Action 

EPA’s 2023 TCE proposed rule under 

TSCA section 6(a) to address the 

unreasonable risk presented by TCE 

under its conditions of use included the 

following: 

(i) Prohibition of the manufacture 

(including import), processing, and 

distribution in commerce of TCE for all 

uses (including all consumer uses), with 

longer compliance timeframes for 

manufacture and processing related to 

certain uses; 

(ii) Prohibition of the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE, with longer 

compliance timeframes for certain uses; 

(iii) Prohibition of the manufacture 

(including import) and processing of 

TCE as an intermediate for the 

manufacturing of HFC–134a, following 

an 8.5-year phase-out; 

(iv) Prohibition of the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a solvent for 

closed-loop batch vapor degreasing for 

rayon fabric scouring for end use in 

rocket booster nozzle production by 

Federal agencies and their contractors, 

following a 10-year phase-out; 

(v) For vessels of the Armed Forces 

and their systems, and in the 

maintenance, fabrication, and 

sustainment for and of such vessels and 

systems, prohibition of the industrial 

and commercial use of TCE as: potting 

compounds for naval electronic systems 

and equipment; sealing compounds for 

high and ultra-high vacuum systems; 

bonding compounds for materials 

testing and maintenance of underwater 

systems and bonding of nonmetallic 

materials; and cleaning agents to satisfy 

cleaning requirements (which includes 

degreasing using wipes, sprays, solvents 

and vapor degreasing) for: materials and 

components required for military 

ordinance testing; temporary resin 

repairs in vessel spaces where welding 

is not authorized; ensuring 

polyurethane adhesion for electronic 

systems and equipment repair and 

installation of elastomeric materials; 

various naval combat systems, radars, 

sensors, equipment; fabrication and 

prototyping processes to remove coolant 

and other residue from machine parts; 

machined part fabrications for naval 

systems; installation of topside rubber 

tile material aboard vessels; and vapor 

degreasing required for substrate surface 

preparation prior to electroplating 

processes, following a 10-year TSCA 

section 6(g) exemption; 

(vi) Prohibition of the manufacture 

(including import), processing, 

distribution in commerce, and use of 

TCE as a processing aid for battery 

separator manufacturing, following a 10- 

year TSCA section 6(g) exemption; 

(vii) Prohibition of the manufacture 

(including import), processing, 

distribution in commerce, and use of 

TCE as a laboratory chemical for 

essential laboratory activities and some 

research and development activities, 

following a 50-year TSCA section 6(g) 

exemption; 

(viii) Prohibition of the manufacture 

(including import), processing, 

distribution in commerce, and 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a solvent in closed loop vapor 

degreasing necessary for human-rated 

rocket engine cleaning by NASA and its 

contractors, following a 7-year TSCA 

section 6(g) exemption; 

(ix) Prohibition of the emergency 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

furtherance of the NASA mission for 

specific conditions which are critical or 

essential and for which no technically 

and economically feasible safer 

alternative is available, following a 10- 

year TSCA section 6(g) exemption; 

(x) Requirements for strict workplace 

controls, including compliance with a 

TCE WCPP, which would include 

requirements for an inhalation exposure 

limit and dermal protection to limit 

exposure to TCE, for conditions of use 

with long term phase-outs or timelimited exemptions under TSCA section 

6(g); 

(xi) Prohibition of, due to worker 

risks, the disposal of TCE to industrial 

pre-treatment, industrial treatment, or 

publicly owned treatment works, with a 

50-year TSCA section 6(g) exemption for 

cleanup projects; and 

(xii) Requirements for recordkeeping 

and downstream notification. 

EPA notes that all TSCA conditions of 

use of TCE were subject to the 2023 TCE 

proposed rule and are subject to this 

final rule. 

The proposed rule included 

timeframes for implementation. The 

prohibitions EPA proposed would take 

effect in phases, beginning at the top of 

the supply chain, and coming into full 

effect, for most conditions of use, after 

90 days for manufacturers, in 180 days 

for processors, and in 270 days for most 

industrial and commercial users, with 

different timeframes related to specific 

conditions of use. Specifically, for 

processing TCE as a reactant/ 

intermediate, EPA proposed that the 

compliance dates for the proposed 

prohibitions would come into effect in 

1.5 years for manufacturers and 2 years 

for processors EPA proposed additional 

exceptions from the prohibition for the 

manufacturing and processing 

associated with certain processing and 

industrial and commercial uses, 

including phase-outs (see Units 

V.A.1.b., d., and e., of the 2023 TCE 

proposed rule or time-limited 

exemptions under TSCA section 6(g) 

(see Unit V.A.3.b. of the 2023 TCE 

proposed rule). Likewise, for the WCPP 

that would be required for several 

conditions of use before prohibitions 

went into effect, EPA proposed 

timeframes for phases of compliance, 

beginning with monitoring at 180 days 

and full implementation after 1 year, as 

described in Unit V.A.1. of the 2023 

TCE proposed rule. 

As required under TSCA section 

6(c)(2)(A)(iv)(II) through (III), EPA 

presented its consideration of an 

alternative regulatory action in the Unit 

V.B. of the 2023 TCE proposed rule. 

Similar to the proposed regulatory 

action, the alternative regulatory action 

combined prohibitions with 

requirements for a WCPP for certain 

conditions of use before they would be 

prohibited, to address the unreasonable 

risk from TCE under its conditions of 

use. The primary alternative regulatory 

action described in the proposed rule 

differed from the proposed regulatory 

action by providing longer timeframes 

for prohibitions, and by describing an 

ECEL based on a different health 

endpoint (i.e., immunotoxicity), as part 

of the WCPP that would be required for 

the conditions of use of TCE that would 

be permitted to continue for longer than 

one year after publication of the final 

rule until the prohibition compliance 

dates. The ECEL for the WCPP under the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102579 

proposed rule’s primary alternative 

regulatory action was based on the 

endpoint used for EPA’s unreasonable 

risk determination for TCE under TSCA 

(i.e., immunotoxicity (Ref. 2)). In 

contrast, the ECEL for the WCPP under 

the proposed regulatory action was 

based on the most sensitive health 

endpoint (developmental toxicity). The 

rationale for these differences is 

discussed in Unit V.A, of this rule and 

Unit VI.A.1.a. of the 2023 TCE proposed 

rule. 

For a comprehensive overview of the 

alternative regulatory action, refer to 

Unit V.B. of the 2023 TCE proposed 

rule, with the rationale for the primary 

alternative regulatory action provided in 

Unit VI.B. of the 2023 TCE proposed 

rule. 

4. Public Comments Received 

EPA requested comment on all 

aspects of the 2023 TCE proposed rule. 

During the public comment period, EPA 

held a webinar on November 14, 2023, 

providing an overview of the proposed 

rule and TSCA section 6; during the 

webinar, members of the public had the 

opportunity to share their perspectives 

(Ref. 26). The comment period closed on 

December 15, 2023. EPA received 

almost 30,000 public comments, with a 

vast majority received from individuals 

participating in mass mailer campaigns 

organized by non-governmental 

organizations. The public comments 

also include approximately 200 unique 

comments from industry stakeholders, 

trade associations, environmental 

groups, unions, non-governmental 

health advocacy organizations, 

academics, State and local governments, 

and members of the regulated 

community. A summary of the 

comments, as well as EPA’s responses, 

is in the docket for this rulemaking (Ref. 

11). Additionally, Unit III. contains 

summaries of public comments that 

informed EPA’s regulatory approach in 

this final rule. 

After the close of the public comment 

period for the proposed rule, EPA held 

meetings with stakeholders to receive 

clarifying information on their 

comments, including affected industry 

and interested groups, related to the use 

of TCE. Topics of these meetings 

included exposure controls, process 

descriptions, monitoring data, and 

specific conditions of use. EPA received 

data as part of and following these 

stakeholder meetings and has made the 

information available to the public in 

the rulemaking docket (EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2020–0642) (Ref. 27). 

After review of the public comments 

received from the 2023 TCE proposed 

rule, EPA revised certain preliminary 

considerations that impacted the length 

of time-limited exemptions from 

prohibition under TSCA section 6(g) 

and key provisions of the WCPP 

(including identification of a new, 

interim ECEL), among other changes. 

Similarly, based on public comments 

received, EPA modified for this final 

rule several proposed compliance 

timeframes, with details provided in 

Unit III. of this final rule. 

III. Changes From the Proposed Rule 

This unit summarizes the main 

changes from the 2023 TCE proposed 

rule to the final rule, based on the 

consideration of the public comments. 

A. Changes to the WCPP 

As part of the conditions for 

exemptions under TSCA section 6(g) or 

phase-outs for several conditions of use 

before prohibition, EPA proposed to 

require owners or operators to comply 

with a WCPP to reduce exposures and 

risks to potentially exposed persons. 

Numerous commenters expressed 

concern regarding the requirements of 

the WCPP. While EPA is finalizing as 

proposed many aspects of the WCPP, 

the final rule includes several 

significant changes, based on 

consideration of public comments. The 

details of and rationale for these 

changes are described in this Unit and 

EPA notes that in the event that 

sensitive information relating to 

national security or critical 

infrastructure is submitted to EPA, the 

Agency will protect such information in 

accordance with applicable authorities. 

1. Interim Occupational Exposure Limit 

EPA proposed requirements to 

comply with the TCE WCPP for all 

conditions of use that would continue 

for one year or more before prohibition, 

as an interim measure to reduce 

exposures to TCE in the workplace. As 

part of the TCE WCPP, EPA proposed 

that each owner or operator of a 

workplace subject to the TCE WCPP 

ensure that no person is exposed to 

airborne concentrations above the 

occupational exposure limit to the 

extent possible. EPA proposed an 

existing chemical exposure limit, or 

ECEL, of 0.0011 ppm as an 8-hour TWA. 

In proposing to set this risk-based 

exposure limit, EPA described in Unit 

IV.A. of the 2023 TCE proposed rule 

how the ECEL is based on 

developmental toxicity, the most 

sensitive acute and chronic non-cancer 

health endpoint, specifically calculated 

based on the occupational acute, noncancer human equivalent concentration 

for fetal cardiac defects (Ref. 28). 

EPA also described in Unit V.A.2. of 

the 2023 TCE proposed rule how a 

WCPP provides regulated entities with 

some flexibility in the manner in which 

they implement modifications, within 

certain parameters, or otherwise aim to 

prevent exceedances of inhalation 

exposure limits at their facilities. EPA 

proposed or finalized a WCPP for 

several conditions of use for other 

chemicals regulated under TSCA 

section 6, such as methylene chloride 

(89 FR 39254, May 8, 2024 (FRL–8155– 

01–OCSPP)), perchloroethylene (PCE) 

(88 FR 39652, June 16, 2023 (FRL–8329– 

02–OCSPP)), and carbon tetrachloride 

(88 FR 49180, July 28, 2023) (FRL– 

8206–01–OCSPP)). The proposed TCE 

WCPP differed from those other 

proposals in two key ways. First, EPA 

intended for the TCE WCPP to be in 

place only as an interim measure before 

prohibitions take effect (rather than 

continuing in perpetuity, as was the 

case in the other proposed rules cited 

previously). Second, for the reasons 

described in Unit VI. of the 2023 TCE 

proposed rule, the proposed rule, 

including the challenges of reliably 

reducing exposure below the ECEL and 

being able to monitor at the appropriate 

action level, EPA’s proposed 

requirement for the TCE WCPP was that 

owners or operators ensure that no 

person is exposed to TCE in excess of 

the ECEL of 0.0011 ppm as an 8-hr TWA 

to the extent possible rather than (as has 

been proposed in other rules under 

TSCA section 6) a requirement that 

exposures do not exceed the ECEL. Due 

to these challenges in reducing 

exposure, as well as the severity of the 

hazard from TCE, EPA emphasizes that, 

even with the proposed ECELs, EPA 

cannot ensure that TCE does not present 

unreasonable risk to workers and, 

therefore, it is not a substitute for a ban 

as a long-term risk management 

solution. Thus, prohibition of all 

conditions of use ultimately is necessary 

to address the unreasonable risk. 

In the 2023 TCE proposed rule, EPA 

requested comment on the proposed 

ECEL (including the feasibility of the 

limit, the associated action level of 

0.00055 ppm as an 8-hr TWA, 

monitoring methods, and whether a 

phased approach is desirable). EPA also 

requested comment on the ECEL 

described in the alternative regulatory 

action (0.004 ppm as an 8-hr TWA, 

based on the immunotoxicity endpoint). 

Numerous commenters expressed 

concern that EPA proposed that 

compliance with the WCPP would be 

measured by reaching and documenting 

the lowest exposure level that could be 

achieved, instead of a requirement to 

meet an exposure limit (Refs. 29, 30, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102580 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

and 31). Additional commenters stated 

it would not be technically feasible to 

meet the proposed ECEL (Refs. 32, 33), 

despite what they described as robust 

implementation of engineering and 

administrative controls (Refs. 34, 35). 

These and other commenters described 

how they are not aware of any 

additional feasible engineering or 

administrative controls that would 

enable them to avoid, under the TCE 

WCPP, having employees wear 

supplied-air respirators at all times 

(Refs. 34, 35, 36, 37). Commenters 

expressed several concerns with 

requiring employees to wear suppliedair respirators at all times (Refs. 34, 35). 

Industry commenters requested a higher 

interim occupational exposure limit that 

would not require an unworkably 

burdensome level of PPE; commenters 

provided numerous suggestions for 

alternate ECEL values such as 0.36 ppm, 

5 ppm, or 6 ppm, each expressed as 8- 

hr TWAs (Refs. 38, 39, 40, 41). 

Commenters offered these alternate 

occupational exposure limits based on 

either their current monitoring or on 

regulatory values set in other countries, 

to reduce reliance on extensive 

respiratory PPE. Commenters noted that 

setting an ECEL at the level proposed 

level or at the alternative regulatory 

action ECEL would require potentially 

exposed persons across all industries to 

use high levels of respiratory protection 

that EPA acknowledges can represent an 

occupational hazard on its own. EPA 

recognizes the challenges of respiratory 

PPE. As detailed in the proposed rule in 

Unit VI.A.1.b., and in OSHA’s 1998 

final rule to update its respiratory 

protection standard, which cited 

communication problems, vision 

problems, worker fatigue, and reduced 

work efficiency among such challenges. 

(63 FR 1152, January 8, 1998). As OSHA 

explained, ‘‘improperly selected 

respirators may afford no protection at 

all (for example, use of a dust mask 

against airborne vapors), may be so 

uncomfortable as to be intolerable to the 

wearer, or may hinder vision, 

communication, hearing, or movement 

and thus pose a risk to the wearer’s 

safety or health.’’ (63 FR 1189 through 

1190). 

In addition to describing anticipated 

challenges in meeting the proposed or 

the alternative regulatory action ECEL, 

commenters also described the 

challenges they would expect in 

attempting to monitor indoor air TCE 

concentrations at or below the ECEL and 

ECEL action level of 0.00055 ppm or the 

alternative ECEL and alternative ECEL 

action level of 0.0002 ppm. Specifically, 

several commenters emphasized that 

laboratories would need to transition 

from typical methods that use sorbent 

tubes and sample media solvent 

desorption (OSHA Method 1001) to a 

more sensitive method that may involve 

a completely different approach, such as 

a relevant EPA Compendium Method, 

and that these may still not be sufficient 

due to a level of detection of volatile 

organic compounds above 0.5 parts per 

billion by volume (ppbv), which is 

above the proposed ECEL action level 

(Refs. 38, 39, 42). The commenters also 

discussed the EPA TO–17 Method, 

which uses a sorbent tube/thermal 

desorption/gas chromatographic-based 

monitoring method for VOCs, but 

emphasized the use of thermal 

desorption is not common across the 

industry (Refs. 38, 39). EPA agrees that 

while available monitoring and 

analytical methods for TCE are possible 

in the low parts-per-billion range, 

typical occupational sampling methods 

such as OSHA method 1001 (i.e., 

personal breathing zone monitoring) 

used in industrial hygiene generally 

allow detection in the 10 to 100 ppb 

range (or 0.010 ppm to 0.100 ppm) (Ref. 

38). Widespread adoption of monitoring 

and sampling methods that could meet 

a TCE ECEL in the low parts-per-billion 

range would be difficult, expensive, and 

take at least several years. Public 

commenters specifically requested the 

option to be able to use methods 

common in occupational sampling, both 

for familiarity and from a commercial 

lab capacity perspective, and pointed 

out the proposed ECEL would not 

provide that ability (Ref. 38). 

Additionally, setting a regulatory 

occupational exposure limit at 0.0011 

ppm would be incompatible with the 

NIOSH-recommended best practice of 

monitoring to a fraction (specifically 

10%) of the occupational exposure limit 

in order to quantify results, because 

0.0011ppm is significantly lower than 

the detection limits of available 

monitoring and analytical methods for 

TCE. 

One commenter, a union, stated that 

setting an ECEL at a level that cannot be 

measured would render the rule 

unenforceable and would therefore be 

meaningless for employees continuing 

to work with TCE during the phase-out 

period (Ref. 29). Another commenter, an 

industry trade organization, asserted 

that lowering exposures ‘‘to the extent 

possible’’ is unenforceable (Ref. 43). 

Based on the significant feasibility 

challenges described by commenters; 

the need for a robust, implementable, 

and enforceable WCPP for conditions of 

use that would continue for more than 

a year before prohibition; EPA’s strong 

interest in rapidly putting into place the 

TCE WCPP and resulting exposure 

reductions; and the forthcoming future 

prohibitions that will take effect on 

these conditions of use, EPA is 

finalizing an interim ECEL of 0.2 ppm 

as an 8-hr TWA with an associated 

interim ECEL action level of 0.1 ppm as 

an 8-hr TWA. This occupational 

exposure level is achievable to meet, 

can be reliably and consistently 

monitored, and will provide an interim 

level of protection for conditions of use 

with longer timeframes until 

prohibition. 

Several commenters supported the 

risk-based exposure limit that was 

proposed, and stated that, in their view, 

it is supported by sound scientific 

evidence (Refs. 31, 44, 29, 45). The 

proposed ECEL is based on data 

presented in the risk evaluation, which 

is the best available science. EPA 

emphasizes that modifying the final 

TCE WCPP to include an interim ECEL 

does not diminish the scientific 

rationale for the risk-based exposure 

limit that EPA proposed. EPA’s 

justification for identification of the 

ECEL that would address unreasonable 

risk as 0.0011 ppm as an 8-hr TWA is 

described in detail in the notice of 

proposed rulemaking and highlighted 

section 5 of the Response to Comments 

document (Ref. 11). EPA also 

emphasizes that this interim ECEL is 

specific to TSCA and incorporates 

different considerations than limits or 

levels set for TCE exposures in other 

contexts or inhalation exposures that are 

regulated under other authorities, such 

as RCRA. EPA’s action to finalize an 

interim ECEL for TCE under TSCA is 

based on feasibility considerations 

during ongoing occupational use of TCE 

beyond one year. Specifically, the 

interim ECEL takes into account 

significant challenges potentially 

exposed persons would experience from 

extensive respiratory PPE use in an 

occupational setting. 

EPA is finalizing an interim ECEL of 

0.2 ppm as an 8-hr TWA. This interim 

ECEL takes into account considerations 

raised by the commenters, such as 

feasibility of implementation in several 

critical or essential industries, 

Specifically, EPA expects that the 

various industries subject to the interim 

ECEL can meet the interim ECEL with 

exposure controls that are feasible for 

owners and operators to implement for 

potentially exposed persons over a full 

shift, using engineering controls and, in 

some instances, respiratory PPE. While 

certain supplied air respirators could be 

used to reduce exposures below the 

proposed exposure limit, these 

respirators are burdensome and EPA is 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102581 

not confident that they could be 

effectively and consistently 

implemented on an ongoing basis in a 

way that fully addresses the 

unreasonable risk. EPA views extremely 

high levels of PPE (e.g., assigned 

protection factor (APF) 10,000) as 

unable to consistently and over a long 

timeframe address occupational risk. As 

noted earlier, setting an ECEL at the 

level proposed would require 

potentially exposed persons across all 

industries to use high levels of 

respiratory protection, such as APF 

10,000 supplied air respirators, that EPA 

acknowledges could represent an 

occupational hazard on its own due to 

communication problems, vision 

problems, worker fatigue, and reduced 

work efficiency. The interim ECEL 

allows for more robust use of the 

hierarchy of controls. 

The interim ECEL was also developed 

with consideration for risk reduction 

and health protectiveness. EPA 

estimates that the 0.2 ppm interim ECEL 

would reduce estimated baseline 

chronic workplace exposure by 97% 

(Ref. 28). The reduction in the baseline 

excess cancer risk is estimated to be 

proportional to the reduction in 

exposure. Acute health effects would 

also be reduced to the extent that they 

are proportional to exposure reduction. 

For example, based on EPA’s TSCA TCE 

risk evaluation, the 0.2 ppm interim 

ECEL is protective of the acute 

immunotoxicity endpoint. 

Lastly, the interim ECEL allows for 

occupational monitoring methodologies 

based on validated active, passive, and 

direct-read instrumentation. There are 

several available active sampling 

methods (e.g., OSHA 1001, OSHA 5000) 

that are fully validated methods that 

readily allow for compliance with the 

interim ECEL value of 0.2 ppm for all 

affected industries. As described 

elsewhere in this preamble, this rule is 

also finalizing an interim ECEL action 

level that serves as a trigger for certain 

compliance activities (e.g., periodic 

monitoring). Therefore, it is important 

for regulated entities to be able to 

reliably and accurately measure both the 

interim action level and the interim 

ECEL value. The interim ECEL also 

enables use of the NIOSH 1003 (active 

sampling) method as well as field 

portable instruments that use the 

NIOSH 3701 method for occupational 

monitoring. While real-time monitoring 

with a digital measure device is not 

required for rule compliance, EPA 

understands the practical benefits of 

field portable and/or real-time 

occupational exposure monitoring. In 

the near term, the interim ECEL and the 

associated interim action level aids with 

implementation of the WCPP from the 

perspective of monitoring methodology 

and availability. Setting the interim 

ECEL at a value of 0.2 ppm allows for 

the immediate implementation of the 

WCPP, as monitoring methods are 

currently available and widely 

recognized and used. A lower value 

interim ECEL would pose technical 

challenges (i.e., achievable with only a 

subset of monitoring methods) and be 

less feasible. 

EPA emphasizes that the regulatory 

limit adopted in this final rule (0.2 ppm 

as an 8-hr TWA) will be a significant 

reduction from the current regulatory 

occupational exposure limit (i.e., 500 

times lower than the current OSHA PEL 

of 100 ppm as an 8-hr TWA) as well as 

more than 50 times lower than the 

voluntary standard frequently cited by 

commenters (10 ppm as an 8-hr TWA). 

EPA expects that regulated entities may 

need to make significant, but feasible, 

changes from current practice by 

adopting the WCPP to reduce inhalation 

exposures sufficiently and provide risk 

reduction to potentially exposed 

persons. EPA also recognizes that the 

interim ECEL of 0.2 ppm as an 8-hr 

TWA does not fully address the 

unreasonable risk from TCE, hence, the 

term ‘‘interim.’’ Potentially exposed 

persons may continue to be at risk for 

the developmental and immunotoxicity 

effects that provide the basis for EPA’s 

ultimate prohibition. Given the risk 

profile for TCE, EPA is addressing the 

unreasonable risk through prohibition, 

and acknowledging the critical or 

essential nature of several conditions of 

use affected by providing reasonable 

timeframes and time-limited 

exemptions for a TCE prohibition. A 

WCPP including the interim ECEL will 

be required as an interim measure for 

each of the conditions of use listed in 

Unit IV.C. 

The requirement to meet an interim 

ECEL for the conditions of use for which 

EPA is finalizing exemptions under 

TSCA section 6(g) is supported by TSCA 

section 6(g)(4), which states that ‘‘the 

Administrator may impose conditions 

that are necessary to protect health and 

environment while achieving the 

purposes of the exemption.’’ EPA has 

determined the interim ECEL of 0.2 ppm 

is a condition that, as explained in this 

Unit, allows for implementation and 

monitoring feasibility, thus achieving 

the purposes of the exemption, while 

providing health protectiveness for 

potentially exposed persons during the 

duration of the TSCA section 6(g) 

exemptions. As a condition of the 

exemption, it protects health by 

reducing exposure and thus risk 

significantly: as stated previously, the 

interim ECEL will reduce estimated 

baseline chronic workplace exposure by 

97%. 

For the conditions of use that 

continue for more than one year subject 

to the interim ECEL but for which there 

is no TSCA section 6(g) exemption, EPA 

also finds that the interim ECEL of 0.2 

ppm and interim action level of 0.1 ppm 

are necessary to reduce the risk during 

the TSCA section 6(d) timeframe for 

those conditions of use. Throughout the 

proposed rule and this final rule, EPA 

has emphasized the high risk posed by 

TCE. Due to this risk, the proposed 

health protective air exposure 

concentration (proposed ECEL) was so 

low that facilities would encounter 

significant difficulty mitigating 

occupational exposures to this level. 

Based on information in the 2020 Risk 

Evaluation (Ref. 1) and on the extensive 

public comments, facilities would need 

to augment their existing controls with 

unreasonably extensive use of 

burdensome PPE. EPA determined 

reliance on extreme respiratory 

protection measures is unlikely to 

mitigate the occupational risk of TCE, a 

view corroborated by commenters. In 

particular, commenters noted that air 

supplied respirators would present 

health and safety concerns for workers 

due to their weight, bulk, impairment of 

hearing and vision, and interference 

with use of other safety equipment 

(Refs. 34, 46, 29). Respiratory protection 

is considered a last resort because 

respirators cannot be worn by all 

persons, are not suitable for all 

situations, and due to worker discomfort 

and fatigue, cannot be worn for long 

periods of time. In addition, as 

discussed in this Unit, compliance with 

the WCPP would be challenging; while 

specialized monitoring and analytical 

methods are available for TCE in the 

low parts-per-billion range, typical 

methods allow for detection in the 10 to 

100 ppb (0.01 to 0.1 ppm) range. As a 

result, EPA determined that any 

measures short of prohibition are 

insufficient to address the unreasonable 

risk from TCE. 

2. Worker Protection Measures for 

Workers Disposing of TCE in 

Wastewater to Industrial Pre-Treatment, 

Industrial Treatment, or Publicly 

Owned Treatment Works 

EPA proposed requirements to 

comply with the TCE WCPP for all 

conditions of use that would continue 

for one year or more before prohibition, 

as an interim measure to reduce 

exposures to TCE in the workplace. As 

discussed in Unit III.A.1, numerous 

commenters stated it would not be 

technically feasible to monitor to or 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102582 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

meet the proposed ECEL. Commenters 

emphasized that for wastewater 

disposal, unlike a typical workplace 

where a WCPP could apply, work at a 

cleanup site happens so intermittently 

that a regular monitoring program 

would be extremely difficult to develop, 

requiring owners and operators to 

implement sampling every time they 

were in the field. Additionally, the 

WCPP requires additional monitoring to 

occur after a change in workplace 

conditions as a commenter pointed out, 

which could create a requirement for 

constant monitoring because cleanup 

sites are dynamic systems (Ref. 43). In 

particular regarding the feasibility of 

compliance with the WCPP, 

commenters associated with wastewater 

disposal described that even with the 

maximum available engineering 

controls, workers would have to rely on 

PPE of APF 10,000 to meet the proposed 

ECEL at cleanup sites (Ref. 47). 

As stated in Unit III.A.1, EPA 

recognizes the challenges of high levels 

of respiratory protection which include, 

as described by OSHA, communication 

problems, vision problems, worker 

fatigue, and reduced work efficiency. 

Commenters involved in wastewater 

cleanup operations were among those 

who submitted public comments in 

favor of an interim exposure level that 

could be reliably measured using 

current analytical methods (Ref. 33). 

Additionally, these commenters 

emphasized that existing RCRA permits 

require HAZWOPER training for all 

employees who are exposed or 

potentially exposed to hazardous 

substances at cleanup sites. The 

HAZWOPER standard is a set of 

established policies, practices, and 

procedures found in 29 CFR 1910.120. 

This standard is designed to protect 

workers who may be exposed to 

hazardous substances resulting from 

uncontrolled releases such as natural 

disasters, equipment malfunctions, or 

other emergencies (Ref. 48). Operations 

that fall within the scope of the 

HAZWOPER standard include cleanup 

operations required by a government 

body and corrective actions involving 

hazardous waste and sites covered by 

RCRA. Commenters also provided 

information to EPA on the variety of 

remediation methods used for TCE 

contaminated water and groundwater, 

noting a difference between ex situ 

treatment systems that remove TCEcontaminated groundwater from the 

ground, and in situ treatment systems 

that remediate the groundwater in its 

place (Ref. 35). A commenter requested 

that the HAZWOPER standard, 

currently implemented at thousands of 

clean-up sites, should continue to be 

used instead of EPA’s proposed WCPP 

(Ref. 45). Cleanup sites are dynamic 

systems that often involve multiple 

chemical contaminants, and EPA agrees 

with commenters that the structure and 

procedures under the HAZWOPER 

standard are best suited for the unique 

worker protection scenarios at cleanup 

sites. However, OSHA’s PEL for TCE is 

100 ppm as an 8-hour time-weighted 

average. See 29 CFR 1910.1000, Table 

Z–2. As discussed in the proposed rule, 

the OSHA PEL has not been changed 

since the 1970s (Ref. 49). 

For the purposes of the TSCA section 

6(g) exemption from prohibition for 50 

years for disposal of TCE to industrial 

pre-treatment, industrial treatment, or 

publicly owned treatment works for the 

purposes of facilitating cleanup projects 

of TCE-contaminated water and 

groundwater, based on public comments 

and coordination across Federal 

programs, EPA has determined it is 

appropriate that owners and operators 

of cleanup sites where potentially 

exposed persons are involved in the 

disposal of TCE-contaminated water or 

groundwater for the purposes of cleanup 

projects of TCE-contaminated water and 

groundwater, including industrial pretreatment and industrial treatment 

activities, must ensure that potentially 

exposed persons involved with the 

activity of removing the contaminated 

water or groundwater from the location 

where it was found and treating the 

removed contaminated water or 

groundwater on site continue to comply 

with HAZWOPER requirements but 

with exposures for potentially exposed 

persons limited to the interim ECEL for 

TCE (0.2 ppm as an 8-hr TWA, for 

reasons discussed in Unit III.A.1.). 

Specifically, EPA has determined that at 

cleanup sites, the TCE interim ECEL 

would apply to any potentially exposed 

person involved in the disposal of TCEcontaminated water or groundwater to 

industrial treatment, industrial pretreatment, or POTWs. A potentially 

exposed person most likely includes a 

person who is involved with the activity 

of removing TCE-contaminated water or 

groundwater from the location where it 

was found and the on-site treatment of 

the TCE-contaminated water or 

groundwater. EPA generally considers 

workers in and around those locations 

to be potentially exposed persons as that 

term is defined is 40 CFR 751.5. For 

example, EPA’s requirements would 

apply to protect workers conducting 

remediation through pump and treat 

systems or workers sampling 

groundwater in conjunction with 

extraction or treatment (e.g., 

remediation or cleanup) activities. EPA 

considers treatment activities that are 

performed at the cleanup site on TCEcontaminated wastewater that has been 

removed from the subsurface, surface 

water impoundments, or aquifers, and 

that are recognized as industrial 

treatment, industrial pretreatment, or 

discharge to a POTW to be covered 

under the provisions described in this 

unit. To further clarify, the workplace 

protections for this exemption are not 

intended to cover potentially exposed 

persons who may be exposed to TCE 

from other contaminated media. 

Additionally, the workplace protections 

for this exemption are not intended to 

cover potentially exposed persons who 

are sampling groundwater to monitor 

the presence of a plume, but specifically 

only those sampling wastewater at the 

site of extraction and active treatment 

activities. EPA also notes that while the 

cross-referenced OSHA regulations do 

not require the establishment of 

regulated areas, the OSHA regulations 

do suggest excluding non-essential 

persons during certain operations as a 

feasible work practice control. 

For cleanup sites involved in the 

disposal of TCE-contaminated water or 

groundwater to industrial treatment, 

industrial pre-treatment, or POTWs, 

rather than implementing the 

monitoring, notification, and exposure 

control plan requirements of the WCPP, 

in light of the special circumstances of 

these sites, and the likely presence of 

multiple contaminants, EPA is requiring 

compliance with the current 

requirements in 29 CFR 1910.120 

(HAZWOPER) except that for those 

provisions in 29 CFR 1910.120 that 

reference a PEL, owners and operators 

will instead comply with the TSCA 

interim ECEL. EPA’s requirement for 

cleanup sites to meet specific existing 

OSHA health and safety requirements in 

29 CFR 1910.120 combined with EPA’s 

interim ECEL differs from the 

requirements for the WCPP that will be 

in effect in other workplaces. EPA 

emphasizes that this standard is only for 

cleanup sites involved in the disposal of 

TCE contaminated groundwater and 

wastewater from cleanup sites under the 

applicable condition of use and that no 

other remedial actions at cleanup sites 

will be covered or affected. More 

specifically, EPA notes that this rule 

only includes within its scope 

remediation methods that would be 

considered industrial wastewater 

pretreatment, industrial wastewater 

treatment or discharge to a POTW. As 

such, a remediation method would need 

to be considered one of these three types 

of disposal to fall within this condition 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102583 

of use under TSCA, and if not would 

not be subject to the prohibition or other 

requirements of the rule. 

Similarly, some commenters asked 

EPA to clarify what responsibility the 

receiver of waste, specifically POTWs, 

would have regarding compliance with 

the WCPP and highlighted the 

challenges of the WCPP in the context 

of POTWs, some of which may be 

outdoors and thus unable to demarcate 

a regulated area in a straightforward 

way (Refs. 35, 45). EPA emphasizes that 

disposal of TCE-containing wastewater 

to and from POTWs is within the 

disposal condition of use. As exposures 

to TCE are likely to continue in POTWs 

for the duration of the exemption for 

TCE disposal under TSCA section 6(g) 

for industrial pre-treatment, industrial 

treatment, or POTWs for the purposes of 

cleanup projects of TCE-contaminated 

water and groundwater, and as EPA is 

interested in reducing to the extent 

possible exposures to TCE during the 

time period of this exemption, EPA 

proposed the WCPP as an appropriate 

measure. However, under the proposal, 

the ECEL was so low that, as one 

commenter stated, ‘‘receivers of 

groundwater from cleanup sites would 

be forced to assume that TCE is present, 

since it is not currently possible to 

measure down to the ECEL’’ (Ref. 45). 

Even with a new interim ECEL, based 

on the public comments and 

information reasonably available to the 

agency, EPA recognizes that POTWs 

have more experience in water 

monitoring. As an example, commenters 

described that TCE is measured in 

wastewater at POTWs as water 

concentrations, not ambient air levels. 

Commenters described regular water 

monitoring schedules of the 

concentration of TCE in wastewater at 

the POTWs to which they disposed 

(Refs. 36, 50, and 51). For this reason, 

in the final rule, POTW’s must comply 

with either solely the WCPP, or a water 

monitoring structure already more 

familiar and implementable for POTWs 

as the initial screening before the WCPP 

in the interim until prohibition. 

To ease monitoring implementation, 

EPA has determined that POTWs that 

can reasonably expect TCE to be 

present, because of existing industrial 

users discharging into the POTW, will 

be able to determine the need to comply 

with the WCPP by conducting an initial 

screening of their wastewater. This 

approach follows EPA’s 1992 ‘‘Guidance 

to Protect POTW Workers from Toxic 

and Reactive Gases and Vapors’’ (Ref. 

52) which sets wastewater screening 

levels for toxic chemicals using Henry’s 

Law constants to translate toxicity-based 

air exposure concentrations to 

wastewater concentrations. This 

monitoring approach also is consistent 

with water screenings described by 

several public commenters (Refs. 36, 50, 

51). The methodology assumes that 

wastewater and air are in equilibrium, 

e.g., that the system is closed and water 

agitation is negligible; that temperature 

is defined and constant; and that other 

constituents in the wastewater do not 

affect a chemical’s volatilization to air. 

The water screening requirement that 

EPA is finalizing follows the 

methodology in the 1992 guidance, 

using the Henry’s Law constant for TCE 

(378 (mg/m3)/(mg/L) at 25 °C) to 

calculate a screening level for TCE in 

wastewater, 0.00284 mg/L, that 

corresponds to the interim ECEL (0.2 

ppm). This screening level is a level 

specific to TSCA, to regulate 

unreasonable risk to workers performing 

wastewater disposal that are exposed to 

TCE. This differs from maximum 

contaminant levels (MCLs) which 

regulate public water systems under a 

different federal statute and do not 

address exposures to TCE through 

wastewater. While the screening level is 

lower than the current enforceable MCL 

for TCE (0.005 mg/L), the values are 

within a factor of 2. EPA believes that 

the conservative assumptions used to 

derive 0.00284 mg/L are appropriate 

here because this is a screening 

approach, and the TCE occupational 

exposure profile of wastewater workers 

may be variable. 

If the concentration of TCE in 

wastewater received by a POTW is less 

than or equal to the screening level, the 

POTW can assume that the 

concentration of TCE in air that results 

from TCE volatilization from wastewater 

is equal to or less than the interim 

ECEL. If a POTW’s water screening 

detects TCE in wastewater at a 

concentration greater than 0.00284 mg/ 

L of TCE, then the WCPP is required. 

More information is in Unit IV.E. 

3. Exposure Monitoring Requirements 

As part of the WCPP, EPA proposed 

to require that owners or operators meet 

certain documentation requirements for 

each instance of monitoring of TCE, 

including compliance with the Good 

Laboratory Practice (GLP) Standards in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 792. 

Numerous commenters expressed 

concern regarding the requirement that 

the WCPP include compliance with the 

GLP Standards at 40 CFR part 792. 

Commenters stated that it is atypical to 

use this standard for air sampling of 

TCE for industrial hygiene purposes 

(Refs. 39, 38). According to the 

commenters, it is common practice 

within the industrial hygiene 

community to have analyses performed 

by American Industrial Hygiene 

Association (AIHA) accredited labs 

(Refs. 38, 39). A commenter further 

reasoned that because labs in the United 

States are certified by International 

Organization for Standards (ISO) and 

the International Electrochemical 

Commission (IEC) standard 17025 

(Testing and Calibration Laboratories), a 

standard that differs from the proposed 

GLP, they recommended that provisions 

of monitoring results and recordkeeping 

in the final rule be allowed from any 

accredited laboratory, without regard to 

a specific type (Refs. 38, 39). 

EPA agrees with the commenters that 

the WCPP for TCE is incompletely 

served by solely relying on the GLP 

standard as proposed. EPA has 

considered laboratory capacity concerns 

raised by some commenters (i.e., that 

potential increases in demand for 

professional safety services and 

sampling laboratories may strain the 

broader availability of laboratory service 

and result in sampling limitations (Refs. 

38, 39), and agrees that sufficient 

infrastructure must be in place to ensure 

that the regulated community can 

successfully implement the WCPP while 

TCE use is ongoing. For the final rule, 

EPA is requiring that exposure samples 

be analyzed using an appropriate 

analytical method by a laboratory that 

complies with the GLP Standards in 40 

CFR part 792 or that otherwise 

maintains a relevant third-party 

laboratory accreditation (e.g., under the 

AIHA Laboratory Accreditation 

Programs, LLC Policy Module 2A/B/E of 

Revision 17.3) or other analogous 

industry-recognized programs. The 

laboratory must also retain related 

records. 

Another commenter noted that EPA’s 

proposal did not make clear that 

‘‘personal breathing zone’’ air samples 

to monitor occupational exposures are 

to be taken without regard to respirator 

use. More specifically, the commenter 

pointed to the importance of EPA being 

explicit that occupational monitoring 

only occurs in the absence of respiratory 

protection (Ref. 29). EPA agrees with the 

commenter that exposure monitoring 

should be conducted to reflect ambient 

occupational conditions (i.e., without 

respiratory protection) to best inform 

engineering control options and 

respiratory protection considerations for 

potentially exposed persons. Therefore, 

the final rule now explicitly states that 

occupational air sampling is required to 

measure ambient concentrations for TCE 

without taking respiratory protection 

into account when air sampling is 

performed. This will ensure the highest 

degree of protection to potentially 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102584 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

exposed persons by requiring 

measurement of ambient air 

concentrations of TCE, thus 

empowering owners or operators to 

appropriately consider the hierarchy of 

controls. 

Additionally, as part of the WCPP, 

EPA proposed to require owners and 

operators to re-monitor within 15 

working days after receipt of any 

exposure monitoring if results indicated 

non-detect or air monitoring equipment 

malfunction, unless an Environmental 

Professional, as defined at 40 CFR 

312.10, or a Certified Industrial 

Hygienist reviews the monitoring results 

and determines re-monitoring is not 

necessary. EPA received several 

comments disagreeing with the 

proposed requirement to review nondetect air monitoring samples. The 

commenters stated that the requirement 

is inconsistent with OSHA rules, is an 

unnecessary step that adds no value to 

reduce risk to workers, and could be 

costly, especially for smaller companies 

(Refs. 53, 54, 55, 47, 56, 57, 58). One 

commenter suggested that EPA 

incorporate a six-sample rolling average 

as the statistical evaluation would 

incorporate ongoing validation of 

exposure levels for a particular task and 

thus remove any need for resampling 

based on a non-detect result. 

EPA disagrees with commenters that 

expressed the opinion that re-evaluating 

non-detect results adds no value and is 

inappropriate. A sampling result that is 

non-detectable does not necessarily 

imply negligible occupational exposure 

to the chemical. A non-detect result is 

indicative that the chemical was not 

detected by the particular sampling and 

analytical procedures used at the time of 

sampling. Multiple factors can 

contribute to a non-detect result. For 

example, the chemical may simply not 

be present in appreciable quantities. An 

alternative possibility is that the 

chemical is present at a level below the 

limit of detection for the particular 

sampling and analytical method used. 

Depending on the chemical and ambient 

conditions, interference from another 

chemical during occupational sampling 

sometimes results in an incorrect 

reporting of non-detectable levels. This 

interference may or may not be known 

by the owner or operator at the time of 

sampling, or by the laboratory at the 

time of analysis. It is also possible that 

the owner’s or operator’s sampling 

technique or the laboratory’s analytical 

procedure was not particularly effective, 

or that the chosen sampling and 

analytical method was not very efficient 

or precise for the particular chemical of 

interest. Therefore, re-evaluating nondetectable sampling results is often 

appropriate and desirable. In each of the 

examples described in this paragraph, a 

nondetectable sampling result, along 

with supporting documentation about 

the sampling and analytical method 

used to get that result, is a meaningful 

part of the potentially exposed person’s 

exposure record required under the 

WCPP. Monitoring results from 

malfunctioning air monitoring 

equipment are not valid monitoring and 

require resampling consistent with 

§ 751.315(b)(3)(i)(A) through (D). 

The provisions proposed for the 

WCPP did not require re-monitoring in 

all cases. Re-monitoring may not be 

necessary based on a professional 

evaluation by an Environmental 

Professional as defined at 40 CFR 312.10 

or a Certified Industrial Hygienist. The 

final rule provides flexibility in the 

event of a non-detect by allowing 

owners or operators to either re-monitor 

or seek a determination from a qualified 

professional that re-monitoring is not 

necessary. From an owner and 

operator’s perspective, a non-detect 

sampling result—when effective 

sampling and analysis procedures are 

used—is valuable because it suggests 

effective implementation of exposure 

controls. Potentially exposed persons 

may also use these records in 

discussions with owners and operators, 

in collective bargaining situations, or in 

compliance assistance inquiries to EPA 

or other federal agencies. Exposure 

monitoring results may also improve 

overall workplace health and reduce 

owner and operator liability through 

effective detection, treatment, and 

prevention of occupational disease or 

illness. All of these scenarios are 

valuable for owners and operators, 

potentially exposed persons, and for 

effective mitigation of occupational 

exposures. In consideration of these 

factors, EPA has removed the air 

monitoring equipment malfunction from 

the monitoring activities that do not 

require resampling based on 

professional evaluation by an 

Environmental Professional or Certified 

Industrial Hygienist. While professional 

discretion may be warranted in 

determining whether re-monitoring is 

needed following results that indicate 

non-detect, EPA has determined this 

discretion is not appropriate in the 

event of air monitoring equipment 

malfunction, which warrants remonitoring. This is due to the 

importance of air monitoring in 

ensuring that the requirements of the 

WCPP are met, and the importance of 

the WCPP in reducing risks from 

exposures to TCE in the workplace. 

Monitoring results from malfunctioning 

air monitoring equipment are not valid 

monitoring. 

Additionally, while statistical 

methods may be useful in establishing 

and analyzing an occupational 

monitoring program, EPA determined 

that information presented in support of 

amending the evaluation of remonitoring to rely on six sample rolling 

average of exposure measurements in 

place of the proposal is not persuasive, 

as discussed in detail in section 5.5.3 of 

the Response to Comments document 

(Ref. 11). Occupational monitoring (and 

associated recordkeeping) is a topic on 

which EPA may develop guidance as 

part of final rule implementation efforts. 

Therefore, based on consideration of 

public comment, EPA is finalizing as 

proposed with slight modification the 

requirement to re-monitor within 15 

working days after receipt of any 

exposure monitoring if results indicated 

non-detect, unless an Environmental 

Professional, as defined at 40 CFR 

312.10, or a Certified Industrial 

Hygienist reviews the monitoring results 

and determines re-monitoring is not 

necessary. EPA has modified the remonitoring recordkeeping requirement 

to clarify what would suffice as 

justification for when re-monitoring is 

not necessary, and has therefore 

updated the recordkeeping requirements 

associated with the WCPP exposure 

records required under 40 CFR 

751.319(b)(1). EPA has also removed air 

monitoring equipment malfunction from 

the monitoring activities that do not 

require resampling if determined 

unnecessary by an Environmental 

Professional or Certified Industrial 

Hygienist. 

EPA proposed to require under the 

WCPP that each owner or operator 

conduct additional exposure monitoring 

whenever a change in the production, 

process, control equipment, personnel, 

or work practices may reasonably be 

expected to result in new or additional 

exposures at or above the ECEL action 

level, or when the owner or operator has 

any reason to believe that new or 

additional exposures at or above the 

ECEL action level occurred. In the event 

of start-up, shutdown, spills, leaks, 

ruptures, or other breakdowns that may 

lead to employee exposure, EPA 

proposed to require that each owner or 

operator conduct additional initial 

exposure monitoring to potentially 

exposed persons (using personal 

breathing zone sampling) after the 

cleanup of the spill or repair of the leak, 

rupture, or other breakdown. EPA is 

finalizing that requirement, with a 

compliance timeframe requiring that 

this type of additional exposure 

monitoring must be conducted within 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102585 

30 days (see Unit IV.C.4.d.), which is a 

change from the proposed rule, in 

which a timeframe was not specified. 

4. Designated Representatives 

As part of the WCPP, EPA proposed 

to require that owners and operators 

(i.e., any person who owns, leases, 

operates, controls, or supervises a 

workplace covered by the rule) provide 

potentially exposed persons or their 

designated representatives regular 

access to the exposure control plans, 

exposure monitoring records, and PPE 

program implementation and 

documentation. Additionally, EPA 

proposed to require that owners or 

operators document the notice to and 

ability of any potentially exposed 

person who may reasonably be affected 

by TCE exposure to readily access the 

exposure control plans, facility 

exposure monitoring records, PPE 

program implementation, or any other 

information relevant to TCE inhalation 

exposure in the workplace. 

EPA solicited and received public 

comments on the role of designated 

representatives in the WCPP. One 

commenter, a group of labor unions, 

urged EPA to incorporate requirements 

similar to OSHA’s access standard at 29 

CFR 1910.1020 (entitled, ‘‘Access to 

employee exposure and medical 

records’’) to ensure that exposure 

information is promptly and fully 

shared with both potentially exposed 

persons and their designated 

representatives (Ref. 29). The 

commenter also suggested that EPA 

include a requirement that employers 

provide employees and their designated 

representatives an opportunity to 

observe monitoring events. The 

commenter observed that workers and 

their designated representatives have a 

critical role to play in ensuring effective 

control of toxic substances and further 

noted that, often, unions are the 

organizations with expertise in 

understanding occupational exposure 

information. 

EPA recognizes the importance of 

having the ability for potentially 

exposed persons and their designated 

representative(s), such as labor union 

representatives, to observe exposure 

monitoring and have prompt access to 

exposure records. EPA additionally 

recognizes that, in some instances, 

individual workers may be hesitant to 

ask owners or operators for information 

relating to their chemical exposure or 

may be less familiar with disciplinespecific industrial hygiene practices. 

EPA determined that it is appropriate in 

this final rule to revise, to some extent, 

the requirements regarding designated 

representatives included in the 

proposed rule, consistent with existing 

OSHA precedent in certain 29 CFR part 

1910, subpart Z regulations, to allow 

designated representatives the ability to 

observe occupational exposure 

monitoring and have access to exposure 

monitoring records. The WCPP 

provisions of the final rule include a 

requirement that owners and operators 

provide potentially exposed persons or 

their designated representatives an 

opportunity to observe any exposure 

monitoring that is designed to 

characterize their exposures and is 

conducted under the WCPP. With 

respect to facilities classified in the 

interest of national security, only 

persons authorized to have access to 

such facilities must be allowed to 

observe exposure monitoring. 

The final rule also requires that 

designated representatives have access 

to relevant exposure records, similar to 

provisions in certain OSHA regulations 

under 29 CFR part 1910, subpart Z, such 

as 29 CFR 1910.1020. EPA is requiring 

owners and operators to notify 

potentially exposed persons and their 

designated representatives of the 

availability of the exposure control plan 

and associated records of exposure 

monitoring and PPE program 

implementation within 30 days of the 

date that the exposure control plan is 

completed and at least annually 

thereafter. 

EPA’s definition of ‘‘designated 

representative’’ in 40 CFR 751.5 was 

established in the recently promulgated 

final rule under TSCA section 6(a) that 

addresses the unreasonable risk 

presented by PCE (RIN 2070–AK84). 

This term means any individual or 

organization to whom a potentially 

exposed person gives explicit, written 

authorization to exercise a right of 

access. A recognized or certified 

collective bargaining agent must be 

treated automatically as a designated 

representative without regard to written 

authorization, analogous to OSHA 

requirements set forth in 29 CFR 

1910.1200. Additionally, with respect to 

Federal Government employees, EPA, 

like OSHA at 29 CFR 1960.2(e), will 

interpret these designated representative 

requirements consistent with the 

Federal Service Labor Management 

Relations Statute (5 U.S.C. 71), or 

collective bargaining or other labormanagement arrangements that cover 

the affected employees. 

Should a request be initiated for such 

records by the potentially exposed 

person or their designated 

representative(s), the owner or operator 

will be required to provide the specified 

records at a reasonable time, place, and 

manner, analogous to OSHA 

requirements set forth at 29 CFR 

1910.1020(e)(1)(i). If the owner or 

operator is unable to provide the 

requested records within 15 working 

days, the owner or operator must, 

within those 15 days, inform the 

potentially exposed person or 

designated representative(s) requesting 

the record of the reason for the delay 

and the earliest date when the record 

can be made available. Additionally, in 

the event that a designated 

representative is observing exposure 

monitoring, the owner or operator must 

ensure that designated representatives 

are provided with PPE appropriate for 

the observation of monitoring. Finally, 

this rule requires owners or operators to 

provide notice to potentially exposed 

persons and their designated 

representatives of exposure monitoring 

results and of the availability of the 

exposure control plan and associated 

records. For purposes of this 

requirement, the owner or operator is 

only required to provide notice to those 

designated representatives that the 

owner or operator is aware of, such as 

representatives designated in writing or 

a recognized collective bargaining agent 

for the owner or operator’s own 

employees. 

5. Changes to WCPP Timeframes for 

Federal Agencies 

EPA understands that certain 

departments and agencies of the Federal 

government, as well as Federal 

contractors acting for or on behalf of the 

Federal government, need additional 

time to comply with these timeframes. 

For example, complying with these 

timeframes could impact the ability of 

NASA or the Department of Defense to 

continue to engage in vapor degreasing 

necessary for rockets key to national 

security and critical infrastructure. 

While, for example, 29 CFR part 1960 

sets forth procedures and guidelines for 

ensuring that Federal workers are 

protected in comparable ways to their 

non-Federal counterparts, EPA believes 

that compliance with this final rule will 

require increased and different 

preparations on the part of Federal 

agencies. For example, Federal agencies 

must follow procurement requirements, 

which will likely result in increased 

compliance timelines. In addition, these 

requirements will require support in the 

Federal budget, which, for some 

agencies, is a multi-year process. 

Therefore, EPA is providing additional 

time for agencies of the Federal 

government and their contractors, when 

acting for or on behalf of the Federal 

government, to comply with the WCPP, 

including 915 days for initial 

monitoring, 1,005 days to ensure that no 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102586 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

person is exposed to an airborne 

concentration of TCE that exceeds the 

interim ECEL, and 1,095 days to 

implement an exposure control plan. 

B. Modifications to the TSCA Section 

6(g) Exemptions 

1. Industrial and Commercial Use of 

TCE as a Processing Aid in Battery 

Separator Manufacturing 

EPA proposed a 10-year exemption 

from prohibition under TSCA section 

6(g)(1)(B) for the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a processing 

aid in battery separator manufacturing, 

for lead acid and lithium batteries. EPA 

is finalizing with modifications a timelimited exemption from prohibition for 

this specific condition of use of TCE. 

These modifications, based on 

information provided in public 

comments, include: (1) narrowing the 

exemption to apply only to use of TCE 

as a processing aid in manufacturing 

separators for lead acid batteries; (2) 

extending the time period of the 

exemption for lead acid batteries from 

ten to 20 years; and (3) allowing the 

disposal of wastewater containing TCE 

following lead acid and lithium battery 

separator manufacture under a separate 

TSCA section 6(d) phase-out for 

disposal of TCE to industrial pretreatment, industrial treatment, or 

POTWs (see Unit III.C.4.). Separate from 

the modified 6(g) exemption, EPA is 

finalizing a 5-year phase-out under 

TSCA section 6(d) for use of TCE in 

manufacturing separators for lithium 

batteries. 

As described in the proposed rule, 

based on information provided by 

commenters and other information 

reasonably available to the agency, EPA 

understands that separators are 

fundamental components in batteries 

that provide the necessary separation 

between the internal anode and cathode 

components that make batteries work, 

and that restrictions on the production 

of battery separators could critically 

impact the United States battery 

manufacturing supply chain and 

impede the expansion of domestic 

battery production capacity. EPA 

understands that battery separator 

manufacturing processes are highly 

engineered, and that the separators are 

specialty products designed precisely to 

meet stringent technical specifications 

that are essential in powering vehicles 

and systems in the United States’ 

supply chain for multiple critical 

infrastructure sectors. 

Based on information provided in 

public comments regarding 

specifications around the final battery 

separator product, such as the required 

thickness of the separator itself and the 

feasibility of substitute chemicals for 

TCE, EPA determined that battery 

separators for lead acid and lithium 

batteries should be treated separately. 

Thus, EPA is distinguishing between the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a processing aid in battery separator 

manufacture for each type of battery 

(lead acid or lithium (also referred to in 

comments as lithium-ion batteries)) and 

providing different exemption or phaseout timeframes for each type of battery 

separator manufacturing. More details 

are in this Unit. 

a. Lithium Battery Separator 

Manufacturing 

EPA is finalizing a prohibition on the 

manufacture (including import), 

processing, distribution in commerce, 

and industrial and commercial use of 

TCE as a processing aid for lithium 

battery separator manufacturing, which 

will come into effect 5 years after the 

publication date of this rule. In response 

to EPA’s proposal to establish a 10-year 

TSCA section 6(g) exemption for the use 

of TCE in battery separatory 

manufacturing, EPA received 

substantiative public comments that 

described feasible alternatives to TCE in 

the manufacture of lithium battery 

separators, as well as information on 

why the two types of battery separator 

manufacturing should be treated as 

distinct. 

One company uses TCE in the 

manufacture of lithium battery 

separators (Ref. 46). In their public 

comment, the company described how 

they could transition out of TCE within 

5 years and retracted its request for an 

exemption under TSCA section 6(g) for 

lithium battery separators (Ref. 46). EPA 

is unaware of any other domestic 

manufacturer that uses TCE to produce 

lithium battery separators. In public 

comments on a separate rulemaking for 

methylene chloride under TSCA section 

6, at least five commenters described 

their plans to construct manufacturing 

plants for lithium-ion battery separators, 

specifically for electric vehicles, that 

would use methylene chloride as a 

processing aid (Refs. 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 

64), rather than TCE. (The final rule 

under TSCA section 6(a) to address the 

unreasonable risk for the use of 

methylene chloride as a processing aid 

to continue with the implementation of 

a WCPP (40 CFR 751.109) (89 FR 39254, 

May 8, 2024 (FRL–8155–01–OCSPP)). 

TSCA section 6(d) requires the 

Agency to establish compliance 

deadlines that are as soon as practicable. 

TSCA section 6(g) requires that any 

exemptions be adequately justified. For 

the final rule, the exemption under 

TSCA section 6(g) applies only to lead 

acid battery separator manufacturing, 

and the Agency is prohibiting 

manufacture, processing, and 

commercial use of TCE for the 

manufacture of lithium battery 

separators after the five years specified 

under TSCA section 6(d). During the 

time before prohibition, manufacturers 

and processors of TCE for use in the 

manufacture of lithium battery 

separators and the users of TCE in the 

manufacture of lithium battery 

separators are required to comply with 

the WCPP, as described in Units III.A., 

and IV.C. 

b. Lead Acid Battery Separator 

Manufacturing 

EPA is finalizing a 20-year TSCA 

section 6(g) exemption from prohibition 

for the manufacture (including import), 

processing, distribution in commerce, 

and industrial and commercial use of 

TCE as a processing aid for lead acid 

battery separator manufacturing. While 

EPA proposed a 10-year section 6(g) 

exemption for the use of TCE in battery 

separator manufacturing, in the primary 

alternative regulatory action in the 

proposed rule EPA presented a 15-year 

exemption from the prohibition on TCE 

for the industrial and commercial use of 

TCE as a processing aid for battery 

separator manufacturing. EPA received 

substantiative information in follow up 

meetings based on public comments 

that 20 years would be the minimum 

timeframe needed to transition to an 

alternative for manufacturing separators 

for lead-acid batteries (Refs. 34, 39, 64, 

65). While EPA received comments that 

more than 20 years may be needed, for 

the reasons described in this Unit, EPA 

is finalizing the exemption for use of 

TCE in manufacture of lead acid battery 

separators at 20 years. 

EPA emphasizes that alternatives to 

TCE in lithium battery separator 

manufacturing are not expected to be 

feasible substitutes for TCE in lead-acid 

battery manufacturing due to differences 

in the processes for each separator type. 

This is primarily due to the difference 

in thickness of the battery separators: 

lithium battery separators are typically 

only 9 to 10 microns thick, while leadacid battery separators range from 6 to 

50 times thicker than lithium battery 

separators. Given the chemistry of the 

alternative solvent reacting with the 

mineral oil and metal sheets that 

constitute the process of manufacturing 

a battery separator, it would therefore 

require between 225 to 625 times longer 

to physically extract lead acid 

separators compared to lithium 

separators using an alternative solvent. 

TCE is about 50% to 80% (depending 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102587 

on temperature) more effective at 

extracting process oil during the battery 

separator manufacturing process than 

the alternative product used in the 

manufacturer’s new lithium separator 

process (Ref. 64). Overall, while 

alternatives to TCE are suitable for 

lithium battery separator manufacturing 

and may be feasibly substituted in 

domestic manufacturing within five 

years, these alternatives are not feasible 

for lead acid battery separator 

manufacturing. 

Numerous commenters submitted 

information on the use of TCE as a 

processing aid in lead-acid battery 

manufacturing. Industry commenters 

and trade associations involved in 

battery manufacture agreed that EPA 

correctly categorized battery separator 

manufacturing as critical and essential. 

In public comments, battery separator 

manufacturers described the need for 

the exemption to be extended to 25 

years, citing the lack of a currently 

identified alternative and once 

identified, the time necessary for testing 

and recertification for any alternatives 

to TCE. As described by commenters, 

the steps for such a process include: 

identifying and/or developing an 

alternative chemical as a processing aid, 

sample trials, battery testing, second 

level battery testing, changing battery 

separator production lines, and testing 

and production approval processes from 

battery end users (e.g., automobile 

manufacturers). This step-wise process 

is consistent with EPA’s understanding 

of developing and implementing 

alternatives for other chemicals and 

uses. In follow-up conversations with 

battery separator manufactures, EPA 

gained further clarity that timeframes 

could be expedited somewhat, and on 

an expedited timeline would take 20 

years (Ref. 64). Because TSCA section 

6(g) requires that any exemptions be 

adequately-justified, in consideration of 

public input, and that the period of the 

exemption is reasonable, EPA is 

lengthening the proposed TSCA section 

6(g) exemption from the prohibition for 

manufacture (including import), 

processing, distribution in commerce, 

and use of TCE in manufacturing 

separators for lead acid batteries from 10 

years to 20 years (i.e., to December 18, 

2044.). EPA encourages manufacturers 

of battery separators to identify early in 

their substitution efforts if any further 

time would be needed. 

2. Industrial and Commercial Use of 

TCE as a Processing Aid for Specialty 

Polymeric Microporous Sheet Materials 

EPA is finalizing a 15-year TSCA 

section 6(g) exemption from prohibition 

for the manufacture (including import), 

processing, distribution in commerce, 

and industrial and commercial use of 

TCE as a processing aid for specialty 

polymeric microporous sheet materials. 

While EPA proposed to prohibit 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a processing aid for specialty polymeric 

microporous sheet materials, EPA’s 

primary alternative regulatory action 

described a 15-year TSCA section 

6(g)(1)(A) exemption from prohibition 

for this use. EPA received substantiative 

information in public comments to 

support finalizing this exemption, as 

well as support for 15 years as the 

appropriate timeframe for this 

exemption (Ref. 40). 

As noted in the initial exemption 

request and in the public comments 

submitted to EPA, specialty polymeric 

microporous sheet materials are 

fundamental components in the 

production of critical or essential 

products such as drivers’ licenses, 

passports, and chemical drum labels 

(Refs. 66, 40). EPA agrees that TCE is a 

critical and essential component in the 

manufacturing process for these 

products. EPA also agrees that certain 

applications of these specialty 

polymeric microporous sheet materials 

are critical and essential uses for which 

no technically and economically 

feasible safer alternative is available. In 

public comments, the manufacturer of 

specialty polymeric microporous sheet 

materials disagreed with EPA’s proposal 

to restrict the end uses of the specialty 

polymeric microporous sheet materials 

to critical and essential products, stating 

that all end products of the material use 

the same production line. EPA is 

finalizing with modifications a timelimited exemption from prohibition for 

this specific condition of use of TCE. 

These modifications, based on 

information provided in public 

comments, include: (1) modifying the 

exemption from the proposal to allow 

for this exempted use of TCE as a 

processing aid to apply broadly to any 

end product; (2) allowing the disposal of 

wastewater containing TCE associated 

with manufacture of specialty polymeric 

microporous sheet materials under a 

separate TSCA section 6(d) phase-out 

for disposal of TCE to industrial pretreatment, industrial treatment, or 

POTWs (see Unit III.C.4.); and (3), in an 

effort to minimize worker exposure 

during the period of the exemption, EPA 

is requiring that the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a processing 

aid in the manufacture of specialty 

polymeric microporous sheet materials 

can only continue at existing facilities 

already using TCE to manufacture 

specialty polymeric microporous sheet 

materials. EPA expects that 

development of any new facilities for 

the manufacture of specialty polymeric 

microporous sheet materials could 

innovate new processes that do not 

include use of TCE. 

3. Industrial and Commercial Use of 

TCE in Batch Vapor Degreasing for 

Essential Aerospace Parts and 

Components and Narrow Tubing Used 

in Medical Devices 

EPA is finalizing the proposed 

primary alternative 7-year TSCA section 

6(g)(1)(B) exemption from prohibition 

for industrial and commercial use of 

TCE in batch vapor degreasing for 

essential aerospace parts and 

components and 7-year TSCA section 

6(g)(1)(A) exemption from prohibition 

for industrial and commercial use of 

TCE in batch vapor degreasing for 

narrow tubing used in medical devices. 

EPA received substantiative information 

in public comments to support the need 

for these exemptions. Based on the 

information received, EPA determined it 

is necessary to finalize these 

exemptions. 

Numerous commenters urged EPA to 

finalize the alternative exemptions, 

citing strict safety and performance 

standards that TCE is currently used to 

meet and a recertification process that 

would take a longer timeframe than the 

1 year that was proposed (Refs. 36, 43, 

32, 56, 67, 43, 32, 56). Given that under 

this condition of use TCE is used to 

clean parts for highly specialized end 

uses in the aerospace and medical 

fields, commenters stressed that a 

significant length of time would be 

needed for safety recertification of an 

alternative. These commenters also 

described how all currently known 

potentially effective drop-in substitutes 

to TCE for this highly specialized use 

are also chemicals currently being 

evaluated or regulated by EPA under 

TSCA, and, as such, they do not view 

these substitutes as viable long-term 

alternatives to TCE. In many cases, 

according to commenters, the transition 

to a TCE substitute would require the 

transformation or complete replacement 

of complex equipment. One 

manufacturer indicated in their public 

comments that they had identified an 

alternative that could meet the 

cleanliness required for their end 

products; however, using this substitute 

chemical solvent would also require 

changing to a different machine type 

(i.e., to vacuum vapor degreasers). 

According to that commenter, it would 

take seven years to install vacuum 

degreasers, implement the necessary 

infrastructure upgrades, obtain permits, 

notify customers, and validate existing 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102588 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

contracts (Ref. 36). EPA agrees that the 

significant amount of infrastructure and 

equipment changes needed to transition 

out of TCE for this specific vapor 

degreasing condition of use support 

finalizing a longer timeline until 

prohibition. 

Regarding section 6(g) criteria, 

commenters agreed with EPA’s 

characterization of TCE as being 

essential to meet unique cleanliness 

demands for narrow tubing used in 

medical devices as well as for aerospace 

parts. A public commenter noted the 

intensity of these safety concerns 

particularly in medical tubing, noting 

that in implanted devices 

‘‘manufacturing residues may ‘pose an 

inflammatory or autoimmune trigger 

risk’ that can lead to death’’ (Ref. 36). 

For these reasons, EPA is finalizing a 

time-limited exemption under TSCA 

section 6(g)(1)(A) for seven years for the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

batch vapor degreasing for narrow 

tubing used in medical devices, and a 

time-limited exemption under TSCA 

section 6(g)(1)(B) for seven years for the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

batch vapor degreasing for essential 

aerospace parts. 

4. Industrial and Commercial Use in 

Closed-Loop Batch Vapor Degreasing 

Necessary for Rocket Engine Cleaning 

by Federal Agencies and Their 

Contractors 

EPA proposed a 7-year TSCA section 

6(g)(1)(B) exemption from the 

prohibition on the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a solvent in 

closed-loop vapor degreasing necessary 

for human-rated rocket engine cleaning 

by NASA and its contractors, and the 

manufacture (including import), 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce of TCE for this use. EPA is 

finalizing with modifications the timelimited exemption from prohibition for 

this specific condition of use of TCE. 

EPA received information that this 

exemption should include all Federal 

agencies, rather than just NASA, due to 

Federal agencies having similar critical 

infrastructure and national security 

needs of rocket engines. Due to the 

commonality of the United States’ 

rocket engine industrial base, other 

Federal agencies like NASA use TCE in 

the same condition of use to support 

their rocket engine cleaning. EPA has 

made this change and is finalizing a 

time-limited exemption under TSCA 

section 6(g)(1)(B) for industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a solvent in 

closed-loop batch vapor degreasing 

necessary for rocket engine cleaning by 

Federal agencies and their contractors. 

C. Changes to Compliance Dates for 

Prohibitions Under TSCA Section 6(d) 

EPA proposed a compliance 

timeframe of 1 year for the prohibitions 

on industrial and commercial use of 

TCE and requested public comments on 

the appropriateness of this timeline for 

specific conditions of use. This unit 

describes modifications EPA made to 

proposed timeframes for prohibitions 

under TSCA section 6(d) for the two 

conditions of use for which EPA is 

finalizing different timeframes for 

prohibition. (Changes to timeframes for 

proposed TSCA section 6(g) exemptions 

or modifications of a section 6(g) 

exemption to a section 6(d) timeframe 

are described in Unit III.B.). Given that 

the part of the rule affecting the most 

significant volume of TCE is unchanged 

between proposal and final, the overall 

impact of these changes is expected to 

be minor. 

1. Industrial and Commercial Use of 

TCE in Energized Electrical Cleaner 

As described in this Unit, EPA is 

finalizing a prohibition in three years 

for the industrial and commercial use of 

TCE in energized electrical cleaner 

rather than the prohibition within 1 year 

as proposed for this condition of use. 

EPA notes that energized electrical 

cleaner is a sub-use of the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as solvent for 

aerosol spray degreaser/cleaner. During 

the timeframe before prohibition, EPA is 

finalizing requirements to comply with 

either specific prescriptive controls or 

the WCPP for the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE in energized 

electrical cleaner, which is a sub-use of 

the industrial and commercial use of 

TCE as solvent for aerosol spray 

degreaser/cleaner, as described in Unit 

IV.D.1. 

In the proposed rule, EPA solicited 

comment on whether some activities 

would need longer compliance 

timeframes in order to appropriately 

transition, and specifically mentioned 

uses such as energized electrical 

cleaning, where TCE may be desired 

due to its low flammability. EPA also 

requested comment on the feasibility 

and appropriateness of the WCPP. EPA 

subsequently received several 

comments expressing concern over the 

proposed prohibition on TCE in 

energized electrical cleaner (Refs. 51, 

68). In addition to describing the need 

for additional time to transition to 

alternatives to TCE in energized 

electrical cleaner, commenters 

described the work practices and 

context that support the potential for 

exposure reduction to TCE through 

workplace controls, including, but not 

limited to, the WCPP. For example, one 

commenter described how energized 

electrical cleaners are typically used 

only by professionals for specialized 

uses in which strict workplace controls 

already exist (Ref. 51). As another 

example, in a separate rulemaking 

under TSCA section 6 for PCE (RIN 

2070–AK84), one commenter described 

work practices and controls for use of 

energized electrical cleaners, stating that 

facilities that require cleaning of 

energized equipment rely on skilled 

technicians or other professional users 

who typically have education and 

training that may include two years at 

lineman school, time as an apprentice, 

licensing or certifications, and 

continuing education (Ref. 69). The 

commenter also stated that OSHA 

General Industry and Construction 

standards include requirements specific 

to electrical work under 29 CFR part 

1926, subparts E, K, and V. Commenters 

differed on whether the WCPP or other 

workplace controls would be most 

suitable. Several commenters stated that 

the WCPP would be impractical for use 

of TCE in energized electrical cleaner 

because trained technicians often travel 

to different facilities to conduct work, 

including facilities that may not 

otherwise use a chemical for which the 

WCPP is required, and suggested that 

instead of a WCPP, a training and 

certification program would be 

sufficient to address the unreasonable 

risk (Refs. 51, 68). 

Based on the information submitted to 

EPA as part of the comment period 

regarding this condition of use, 

supported by subsequent discussions for 

clarification, and in consideration of 

existing best practices and regulations 

for work in electrical spaces as well as 

the need for additional time to certify 

and transition to substitutes, EPA is 

finalizing a prohibition on the use of 

TCE in energized electrical cleaner after 

December 18, 2027. In addition, EPA 

has determined that either the WCPP or 

specific prescriptive controls specified 

in the final rule, including dermal PPE 

and respiratory protection, are necessary 

and appropriate for reducing exposures 

to potentially exposed persons until the 

prohibition takes effect. 

EPA notes the importance of existing 

OSHA regulations designed to protect 

workers exposed to dangers such as 

electric shock, electrocution, fires, and 

explosions. Specifically, in addition to 

the requirements for electrical work 

under OSHA General Industry and 

Construction standards at 29 CFR part 

1926, subparts E, K, and V that one 

commenter mentioned in their public 

comment, OSHA regulates electrical 

work under Occupational Safety and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102589 

Health standards at 29 CFR part 1910. 

For example, OSHA requires safetyrelated work practices on electrical 

equipment under the Electrical 

Standard at 29 CFR part 1910, subpart 

S (29 CFR 1910.301 to 1910.399), which 

was significantly updated in 2007 (72 

FR 7136, February 14, 2007). OSHA also 

sets forth requirements for the operation 

and maintenance of electrical power 

generation, control, transformation, 

transmission, and distribution lines and 

equipment under the Electric Power 

Generation, Transmission, and 

Distribution standard at 29 CFR 

1910.269, which was significantly 

updated in 2014 (79 FR 20316, April 11, 

2014). Additionally, OSHA regulates 

electrical protective equipment under 

the Electrical Protective Equipment 

standard at 29 CFR part 1910, subpart I 

(29 CFR 1910.137), which was 

significantly updated in 2014 (79 FR 

20316, April 11, 2014). Other standards 

and best practices apply to electrical 

safety in the workplace, for example the 

National Fire Protection Association 

(NFPA) 70E Standard for Electrical 

Safety in the Workplace (Ref. 70). 

As discussed in the proposed rule, 

given the risk profile of TCE, EPA 

determined that it is necessary to 

require worker protection measures 

such as the WCPP for those conditions 

of use that will continue beyond 1 year. 

In view of the relatively short timeframe 

for transitioning to an alternative, 

combined with the specialized nature of 

this use of TCE and the existing OSHA 

regulations and other best practices for 

performing work on energized 

equipment, EPA recognizes that the 

WCPP may not be the best approach to 

addressing occupational exposures in 

the interim. EPA understands that 

trained technicians performing this 

activity often travel to different facilities 

to conduct their work, including 

facilities that may not otherwise use 

TCE. EPA also determined that owners 

and operators who perform this kind of 

work should focus their efforts on 

transitioning to alternatives, rather than 

setting up comprehensive exposure 

control plans and programs. EPA is 

therefore providing an alternative to the 

WCPP in the form of prescriptive 

controls, including respiratory and 

dermal protection to protect workers in 

the interim. Considering all of these 

factors, as well as the workplace 

requirements for energized electrical 

cleaner in the final regulation of PCE 

under TSCA section 6 (RIN 2070–AK84) 

and the burdens associated with higher 

APF respirators, EPA has determined 

that the use of respirators with an APF 

of 50 or greater and impermeable gloves 

will minimize the exposure to the 

potentially exposed persons engaged in 

this use of TCE during the interim 

period before the prohibition takes 

effect, as further described in Unit IV.D. 

In addition, requiring PPE similar to 

that required by the PCE regulation is 

expected to ease the transition to PCE, 

which is a possible replacement for TCE 

in these products. The upstream 

manufacturing and processing of TCE 

for the use in energized electrical 

cleaner will be subject to the WCPP as 

described in Unit IV.C. until the use is 

prohibited. 

EPA emphasizes that other industrial 

and commercial use of TCE as a solvent 

for aerosol spray degreasers/cleaners is 

prohibited in the final rule, consistent 

with the proposal for that condition of 

use. 

2. Industrial and Commercial Use in 

Adhesives and Sealants for Aerospace 

Applications 

EPA is finalizing a prohibition in five 

years for the industrial and commercial 

use of TCE in adhesives and sealants for 

aerospace applications. EPA proposed a 

compliance timeframe of 1 year for the 

prohibitions on industrial and 

commercial use, and in public 

comments requested feedback on the 

appropriateness of this timeline for 

specific applications. EPA received 

public comments highlighting that the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

adhesives and sealants specifically for 

aerospace applications has safety 

implications and involves longer 

recertification timelines (Ref. 56). EPA’s 

rationale for the short timeframe until 

prohibition for this condition of use was 

based on the understanding that 

alternative formulations or products 

exist that do not contain TCE. During 

the public comment period, EPA 

received public comments highlighting 

the safety considerations for industrial 

and commercial use of TCE in adhesives 

and sealants specifically for aerospace 

applications and longer recertification 

timelines. A public commenter stated 

that TCE is still critically necessary in 

adhesives and sealants; particularly in 

aircraft pneumatic deicing boots; in 

solvent bonding of plastic components, 

including on Oxygen Container 

Assemblies for Passenger Service Unit 

products used in aircraft; and as an 

adhesive or sealant for flight-critical 

equipment on new and existing aircraft, 

both commercial and military (Ref. 56). 

Regarding compliance timeframes, this 

commenter requested that adhesives 

and sealants for aerospace be allowed to 

continue in perpetuity under a WCPP. 

EPA has determined that prohibition of 

this use is necessary to address the 

unreasonable risk. EPA did consider the 

information raised by this commenter in 

determining an appropriate timeframe 

for the prohibition on use of TCE in 

adhesives and sealants for aerospace 

applications. Specifically, the 

commenter provided information that 

for uses in the aerospace and defense 

sector, changes in response to a 

prohibition on TCE would be a 

multiyear process that requires redesign 

and recertification that a product meets 

performance standards such as 

customers’ technical requirements, UL 

and Conformite ́ Europe ́enne (CE) 

marking requirements, military 

specifications, and specifications from 

other government agencies such as the 

Federal Aviation Administration and 

NASA (Ref. 56). 

EPA recognizes that the recertification 

process for uses in aerospace 

applications is lengthy and agrees that 

one year is not a sufficient timeframe. In 

identifying a reasonable timeframe, EPA 

considered public comments on the 

proposed rulemaking and follow-up 

clarifying conversations with 

commenters, as well as information 

submitted during the public comment 

period on EPA’s proposed rule under 

TSCA section 6 for methylene chloride 

(88 FR 28284, May 3, 2023 (FRL–8155– 

02–OCSPP)) regarding anticipated 

timeframes to recertify adhesives and 

sealants used in the aerospace field. As 

such, EPA has determined that a 5-year 

timeframe until prohibition for the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

adhesives and sealants for aerospace 

applications is appropriate and will be 

sufficient to allow for a reasonable 

transition from TCE. During this time, 

EPA is requiring compliance with the 

WCPP, as detailed in Unit IV.C. The 

issuance of this final rule does not 

preclude these users from presenting 

additional information to EPA on their 

redesign and recertification progress in 

the future. 

3. Industrial and Commercial Use of 

TCE in Laboratory Use for Asphalt 

Testing and Recovery 

EPA is finalizing a phase-out of ten 

years for the industrial and commercial 

use of TCE in laboratory use for asphalt 

testing and recovery, with a prohibition 

on use of TCE in manual centrifuge 

processes at 5 years. In the proposed 

rule, EPA proposed to prohibit the 

laboratory use of TCE (which falls 

within the condition of use ‘‘Industrial 

and commercial use of TCE in hoof 

polish; gun scrubber; pepper spray; and 

other miscellaneous industrial and 

commercial uses’’) within 1 year. EPA 

proposed a TSCA section 6(g)(1)(A) 

exemption from prohibition for the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102590 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

laboratory use for essential laboratory 

activities that are critical (e.g., 

occupational sampling and monitoring, 

the support of environmental cleanup 

activities, wax removal from NASA 

infrared sensors, and equipment 

calibration related to the search for 

chlorinated hydrocarbons on Mars; for a 

full list of critical activities see Unit 

V.A.3.a.iii. of the 2023 TCE proposed 

rule). In the 2023 TCE proposed rule, 

EPA specifically noted that the use of 

TCE in laboratory settings for testing 

asphalt would not be included in the 

TSCA section 6(g) exemption due to 

information available to EPA that 

indicated it was not critical nor 

essential, and because alternative testing 

methods exist, including the Nuclear 

Asphalt Content Gauge and the Ignition 

Method. 

During the public comment period, 

EPA received numerous comments 

providing new information on the 

importance of TCE in asphalt testing 

and recovery as a laboratory use, and 

the challenges of using a substitute that 

had appeared theoretically feasible. 

Many commenters, including several 

state departments of transportation, 

emphasized to EPA that 23 state 

specifications require TCE to be used for 

solvent extraction for asphalt testing 

accuracy (Refs. 55, 57, 58, 71, 72, 73, 74, 

75, 76, 77). Commenters described how 

this use of TCE is critical or essential; 

specifically, numerous commenters 

emphasized that in the current 

landscape for asphalt testing and 

recycling, TCE is widely used at this 

time because it can be easily recovered 

and the asphalt test sample can then be 

reused rather than discarded. Further, as 

commenters described, using TCE in 

laboratory testing allows departments of 

transportation to recycle asphalt paving 

and shingles into new asphalt by 

determining how much asphalt binder 

is present. The ability to determine the 

amount of remaining asphalt binder has 

resulted in, according to commenters, 

asphalt being one of the most recycled 

materials. The Nuclear Asphalt Content 

Gauge that EPA had identified as an 

alternative in the proposed rule does not 

allow for asphalt recycling, as it 

destroys the asphalt sample during the 

test which makes it impossible to test 

the asphalt binder as well. 

In consideration of public comments, 

EPA has determined that a prohibition 

after 1 year is not reasonable. States are 

currently invested heavily in extraction 

equipment that uses TCE and EPA 

agrees with commenters who stated that 

transitioning from TCE would take years 

and incur significant costs as a result of 

equipment changes. Commenters 

expressed an interest in ceasing their 

use of TCE and requested between 5 

years and 20 years until prohibition of 

this use of TCE in order to facilitate a 

transition away from TCE. In 

determining a reasonable timeframe for 

a phase-out, EPA considered significant 

information provided in public 

comments about the potential 

alternatives to TCE in laboratory asphalt 

testing that would allow for testing as 

well as recovery. While alternatives 

have already been identified, fully 

implementing use of those substitutes 

would require the complete retrofit of 

existing laboratory equipment. 

Additionally, numerous state 

departments of transportation standards 

would need to be updated, which would 

take time. 

EPA does not view the 50-year 

timeframe proposed (and finalized) for 

the exemption for laboratory use of TCE 

for essential laboratory uses as 

appropriate for use of TCE in asphalt 

testing and recovery, so is not finalizing 

the laboratory asphalt testing and 

recovery use as part of the TSCA section 

6(g) exemption for essential laboratory 

activities. Based on public comments 

and discussions with the U.S. 

Department of Transportation, EPA has 

determined that 10 years is a reasonable 

timeframe until the prohibition on TCE 

use in laboratory use for asphalt testing 

and recovery and is finalizing an 

extended phase-out of ten years for the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

laboratory use for asphalt testing and 

recovery. Associated with this phaseout, EPA will require the establishment 

of the TCE WCPP, outlined in Unit IV.C. 

within 180 days after publication of the 

final rule, as workplace protections 

during the period of the phase-out. 

Additionally, EPA has identified asphalt 

testing and recovery conducted through 

manual centrifuge methods as specific 

activities that would be prohibited 

within five years as part of the phaseout, due to the higher level of worker 

exposure from this activity and 

information received from commenters 

about automated alternatives. 

In public comments, numerous users 

of TCE for asphalt testing and recovery 

provided information to EPA regarding 

technological advances in this sector— 

namely the transition from manual 

centrifuge methods of testing to 

automated machines (Refs. 71, 72, 57). 

Many laboratories have invested in 

automated extraction machines. These 

machines are expensive and currently 

are calibrated to be chemical-specific, 

with TCE-calibrated machines unable to 

use a different or replacement solvent, 

such as PCE (Refs. 71, 72, 55). EPA’s 

identification of a 10-year timeframe for 

prohibition is partly based on the time 

it would take to replace or retrofit the 

current laboratory practices with nonTCE automatic extraction machines. 

Based on public comments, EPA 

understands that the industry favors 

automated extraction machines due to 

the extremely high worker exposures 

inherent with manual centrifuge 

processes. Commenters describe manual 

centrifuge processes as resulting in 

worker exposure to TCE for the entire 

task duration, with constant handling of 

the solvent by stirring, repouring, 

straining, and vaporizing it at times 

(Ref. 71). EPA agrees with commenters 

on the high risk of asphalt testing and 

recovery using TCE in manual methods. 

As such, as part of the phase-out, any 

lab use of TCE for asphalt testing or 

recovery which uses manual centrifuge 

processes is prohibited in 5 years. 

Between 5 and 10 years, labs must 

either use TCE in automated machines 

only, or use alternative solvents in 

automated machines or manual 

centrifuge processes (such as methylene 

chloride or PCE, for which EPA has 

finalized provisions requiring chemical 

specific WCPPs). Therefore, EPA is 

finalizing an extended phase-out of ten 

years for the industrial and commercial 

use of TCE in laboratory use for asphalt 

testing and recovery, with a prohibition 

on use of TCE in manual centrifuge 

processes at 5 years, rather than the 

prohibition within 1 year as proposed 

for all other industrial and commercial 

uses without extended phase-outs or 

exemptions. 

4. Disposal of TCE to Industrial PreTreatment, Industrial Treatment, and 

POTWs 

For disposal of TCE to industrial pretreatment, industrial treatment, and 

POTWs, EPA is finalizing a phase-out 

over 20 years. In the proposed rule, EPA 

proposed to prohibit the disposal of TCE 

to industrial pre-treatment, industrial 

treatment, and POTWs in 1 year after 

the rule finalization. In the proposal, 

EPA requested comment on whether the 

prohibition timeframes and compliance 

dates were appropriate. In public 

comments, EPA received substantive 

information from several industrial and 

commercial users of TCE as a processing 

aid that wastewater disposal should 

continue on a timeframe to facilitate 

those uses. 

Commenters manufacturing battery 

separators provided details on why the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

battery separator manufacturing 

necessitates the disposal of wastewater 

containing TCE (Refs. 46, 34). As 

described by commenters, in battery 

separator manufacturing, TCE enters the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102591 

wastewater stream following contact 

between cooling tower blowdown, 

processes involving TCE, and water 

generated from the plant’s steam 

distillation process, which is a key 

process step in battery separator 

manufacture. Water used in these 

processes becomes wastewater 

containing TCE. These manufacturers 

perform on-site treatment of this 

wastewater through air stripping and 

carbon absorption. The pre-treated 

water is then either recycled and reused 

in the process or discharged to a POTW. 

Wastewater discharges by battery 

separator manufacturers are regulated 

under existing wastewater discharge 

permits and have limits for volatile 

organic compounds such as TCE. EPA 

agrees with commenters assertions that 

TCE wastewater is inherently leftover as 

part of the process and agrees that no 

other form of disposal is acceptable. 

Given that the generation of wastewater 

containing TCE cannot be avoided as it 

results from an intrinsic component of 

battery separator manufacture, and 

EPA’s determination that use of TCE in 

battery separator manufacture is either a 

critical and essential function for which 

there is no technically or economically 

feasible safer alternative (in the case of 

lead acid batteries) or for which five 

years before prohibition is as soon as 

practicable (in the case of lithium 

batteries), EPA is modifying the 

associated timelines for the prohibition 

on disposal for these uses, with worker 

protections, to continue disposal of 

wastewater containing TCE that is a 

necessary part of this process. 

Based on public comments, EPA also 

finds that disposal of wastewater is a 

necessary part of the use of TCE as a 

processing aid in the manufacture of 

specialty polymeric microporous sheet 

materials. Like the battery separator 

manufacturers, comments submitted 

from the specialty polymeric 

microporous sheet materials 

manufacturer explained that TCE enters 

the facility wastewater that is generated 

in cooling tower blowdown water and 

subsequently discharged to a POTW 

(Ref. 40). Wastewater discharges are 

regulated under existing wastewater 

discharge permits and have limits for 

volatile organic compounds such as 

TCE. Given the determination of the 

critical and essential need for the longer 

timeframes for this industrial and 

commercial use, EPA is modifying the 

TSCA section 6(d) phaseout for disposal 

of TCE for this use to allow disposal of 

wastewater containing TCE that is a 

necessary part of this process. 

As such, the disposal of TCE to 

industrial pre-treatment, industrial 

treatment, and POTWs is prohibited 

with the following phase-out structure. 

For the majority of industrial and 

commercial uses, such disposal is 

prohibited at one year. For industrial 

and commercial users of TCE as a 

processing aid in lithium battery 

separator manufacturing, such disposal 

is prohibited at 5 years. For industrial 

and commercial users of TCE as a 

processing aid in specialty polymeric 

microporous sheet materials 

manufacturing, such disposal is 

prohibited after 15 years. For industrial 

and commercial users of TCE as a 

processing aid in lead-acid battery 

separator manufacturing, such disposal 

is prohibited after 20 years. Industrial 

and commercial users who are allowed 

to continue disposing of TCE to 

wastewater for more than one year must 

follow the WCPP provisions as laid out 

in Unit IV.C, and POTWs receiving 

wastewater must follow the wastewater 

worker protection provisions discussed 

in Unit IV.E.3. 

5. Industrial and Commercial Use of 

TCE for Batch Vapor Degreasing for 

Land-Based DoD Defense Systems by 

Federal Agencies and Their Contractors 

EPA is finalizing a prohibition in five 

years for the industrial and commercial 

use of TCE in batch vapor degreasing for 

land-based DoD defense systems by 

Federal agencies and their contractors. 

EPA proposed a compliance timeframe 

of one year for the prohibitions on 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

vapor degreasing. EPA received 

information indicating that this use 

needs to continue for a longer period of 

time due to the national security 

implications of the end products, and 

the need for a reasonable transition 

period for that use that is as soon as 

practicable but longer than the one year 

proposed. TCE vapor degreasing is 

necessary due to technical challenges 

with other substitute chemicals or 

alternative methods. The cleanliness 

standards of certain parts as required by 

DOD specifications or other 

specifications included in existing 

contracts within the supply chain 

currently require TCE. A reasonable 

transition period for this technically 

challenging use requires substantial 

investment and time to develop viable 

alternatives, because conversion from 

vapor degreasing to other methods of 

cleaning is a capital-intensive 

investment that would require several 

years to plan, permit, construct, and 

install. TCE has been used in vapor 

degreasing to meet required levels of 

cleanliness of certain supplied parts by 

long-standing design specifications that 

are incorporated into contracts of a 

complex supply chain. As such, the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE 

for batch vapor degreasing for landbased DoD defense systems is 

prohibited after 5 years, rather than at 

1 year with vapor degreasing for other 

purposes. 

D. Other Changes 

1. Regulatory Threshold 

In the 2023 TCE proposed rule, EPA 

requested comment on whether the 

Agency should consider a de minimis 

threshold of TCE in formulations when 

finalizing prohibitions, and, if so, what 

threshold should be considered. EPA 

received comments in support of the 

inclusion of a de minimis threshold, as 

well as comments opposing such a 

threshold. Of the supportive 

commenters, many agreed with the EPA 

request for comment on using 0.1% by 

weight as the threshold for the 

applicability of prohibitions and 

restrictions on TCE (Refs. 53, 78, 51), 

which EPA is referring to in this final 

rule as a regulatory threshold. 

Commenters provided a variety of 

reasons in support of a regulatory 

threshold, such as the difficulty of 

proving the absence of a chemical (Refs. 

38, 79) and the importance of providing 

for very small amounts of a chemical 

that cannot be reasonably eliminated 

(Ref. 37). Commenters observed that 

TCE is unintentionally manufactured as 

a byproduct in small amounts in the 

manufacture of chlorinated organics and 

noted that this cannot be prevented in 

the production process (Ref. 39). In 

some cases, commenters noted that a 

0.1% threshold would be consistent 

with the requirements under the OSHA 

Hazard Communication Standard at 29 

CFR 1910.1200 (Refs. 78, 51). One of 

these commenters observed that, 

because levels below 0.1% are not 

required to be reported on Safety Data 

Sheets (SDSs) under the OSHA 

Standard, there is likely to be a lack of 

awareness of products that contain TCE 

below this level. 

To aid the regulated community with 

implementing the prohibitions on TCE 

and to account for TCE as a byproduct 

or impurity in products, EPA is 

establishing a regulatory threshold of 

0.1% for TCE, indicating that TCE at 

concentrations less than 0.1% by weight 

are not subject to the prohibitions and 

restrictions outlined in this rulemaking. 

EPA views the regulatory threshold as 

an appropriate policy approach 

necessary to aid in the rule 

implementation and to clarify which 

products are subject to the final rule. As 

defined in 40 CFR 751.5, ‘‘product’’ 

means ‘‘the chemical substance, a 

mixture containing the chemical 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102592 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

substance, or any object that contains 

the chemical substance or mixture 

containing the chemical substance that 

is not an article.’’ 

This 0.1% regulatory threshold for 

TCE is in alignment with Appendix A 

of 29 CFR 1910.1200 Health Hazard 

Criteria developed by OSHA; OSHA 

described this threshold in the 2012 

modifications to the hazard 

communication standard: ‘‘When data 

on the mixture as a whole are not 

available, the mixture is considered to 

present the same health hazards as any 

ingredients present at a concentration of 

1% or greater, or, in the case of 

carcinogens, concentrations of 0.1% or 

greater. The current HCS [hazard 

communication standard] also 

recognizes that risk may remain at 

concentrations below these cut-offs, and 

where there is evidence that that is the 

case, the mixtures are considered 

hazardous under the standard.’’ (89 FR 

44144, May 20, 2024). Under 29 CFR 

1910.1200, a health hazard is defined as 

‘‘a chemical which is classified as 

posing one of the following hazardous 

effects: acute toxicity (any route of 

exposure); skin corrosion or irritation; 

serious eye damage or eye irritation; 

respiratory or skin sensitization; germ 

cell mutagenicity; carcinogenicity; 

reproductive toxicity; specific target 

organ toxicity (single or repeated 

exposure); or aspiration hazard.’’ The 

criteria for determining whether a 

chemical is classified as a health hazard 

are detailed in Appendix A to 29 CFR 

1910.1200—Health Hazard Criteria. 

Appendix A.6.3.1 and A.7.3.1.1 of 29 

CFR 1910.1200 indicate that a mixture 

must be classified as a carcinogen or a 

reproductive toxicant, respectively, if it 

includes greater than or equal to 0.1% 

of a substance that, like TCE, is 

classified as a carcinogen or a 

reproductive toxicant. Other EPA 

programs, such as the Toxics Release 

Inventory (TRI) program, have adopted 

the OSHA threshold of 0.1% for 

chemicals which are defined as 

carcinogens or as a potential carcinogen 

under the National Toxicology Program, 

International Agency for Research on 

Cancer, or OSHA (see 40 CFR 372.38(a)). 

EPA is finalizing a regulatory 

threshold of 0.1% so that products 

containing TCE at concentrations less 

than 0.1% by weight are not subject to 

the prohibitions and restrictions of this 

final rule. EPA is finalizing this 

threshold for many of the reasons stated 

by commenters, such as the difficulty of 

proving the absence of a chemical (and 

the resulting uncertainty in various 

supply chains), the fact that the 

manufacture of chlorinated organics 

results in the unintentional manufacture 

of small amounts of TCE (and other 

chlorinated compounds) as a byproduct 

that becomes an impurity that is not 

feasible to remove, and the fact that it 

would be consistent with the OSHA 

Hazard Communication Standard and 

other programs to which industry has 

already calibrated its processes. EPA 

believes that adopting a regulatory 

threshold of 0.1% for TCE, which is a 

carcinogen and a reproductive toxicant, 

will increase regulatory certainty and 

ease implementation of the eventual 

prohibition of this chemical. This 

regulatory threshold is well below the 

concentration used for any products that 

contributed to the unreasonable risk. By 

prohibiting TCE concentrations of 0.1% 

or greater in products, EPA prevents any 

functional uses of TCE, which generally 

rely on a higher concentration of the 

chemical in order to make use of TCE’s 

chemical properties. The manufacture 

(including import), processing, and 

distribution in commerce of products 

that contain TCE at concentrations equal 

to or above the regulatory threshold of 

0.1% are still subject to the prohibitions 

and restrictions of this final rule, 

regardless of the concentration of TCE 

in the end product. 

2. Processing of TCE Manufactured as a 

Byproduct 

In the 2023 TCE proposed rule, EPA 

noted that TCE that is manufactured as 

a byproduct (such as during the 

manufacture of other chemicals, e.g., 

1,2-dichloroethane (1,2–DCA)) is not 

considered to be within the condition of 

use of TCE manufacturing. EPA has not 

changed this determination. However, 

in the 2023 TCE proposed rule, EPA did 

consider processing (including reuse) of 

TCE that was manufactured as a 

byproduct to be under the processing as 

a reactant/intermediate condition of use 

of TCE. Specifically, in Unit III.B.1.b.i. 

of the 2023 TCE proposed rule 

(‘‘processing as a reactant/ 

intermediate’’), EPA noted that ‘‘this 

condition of use includes reuse of 

byproduct or residual TCE as a 

reactant.’’ EPA received numerous 

public comments on how the proposed 

rule addressed TCE as a byproduct that 

was then processed, with several 

commenters providing detailed 

information on how TCE is 

unintentionally manufactured as a 

byproduct during complex chemical 

processing streams and then processed 

and re-processed within those streams 

alongside other, similar chemicals (Refs. 

42, 80, 39, 81, and 56). For clarity, EPA 

is using the terms reuse, recycling, and 

re-processing within this section as 

specifically used by commenters to refer 

to actions that occur under the larger 

condition of use of ‘‘processing.’’ One 

commenter pointed out that without 

excluding from the prohibitions any 

subsequent processing of TCE 

manufactured as a byproduct, chemical 

facilities would experience significant 

disruptions when trying to isolate and 

remove the TCE that was 

unintentionally manufactured, and that 

would otherwise be processed and 

consumed (Ref. 43). This commenter 

also emphasized the anticipated 

negative waste and upstream production 

impacts from a prohibition on the reuse 

of TCE manufactured as a byproduct, 

and highlighted how TCE is produced 

in the 1,2–DCA manufacturing process 

and how it is processed and recycled in 

the reactor manufacturing process for 

PCE and carbon tetrachloride (CTC). 

This commenter highlighted that if TCE 

byproduct processing was prohibited, 

this would significantly increase the 

quantity of hazardous waste disposed of 

and increase the use of virgin raw 

material in chemical manufacturing 

(Ref. 43). The commenter also provided 

a description of controls in place at 

chlorinated organic facilities to mitigate 

risk associated with TCE byproduct 

creation and recycling as well as 

citations to communications with EPA 

regarding these processes (Ref. 43). 

As described in more detail in the 

Response to Comments document (Ref. 

11), EPA agrees with commenters that 

TCE manufactured as a byproduct 

should logically be able to be processed, 

including recycled, during or 

concurrent with the processing of the 

intended manufactured chemical 

substance(s) so long as the TCE is 

processed in a site-limited, physically 

enclosed system within the same 

reaction process. EPA also recognizes 

the significant risks to workplace safety 

if all facilities manufacturing TCE as a 

byproduct had to distill, remove, and 

destroy all traces of TCE before further 

chemical processing could commence. 

For this reason, EPA is excluding from 

this rule the processing of TCE as a 

byproduct when that byproduct TCE is 

processed within a site-limited, 

physically enclosed system that is part 

of the same overall manufacturing 

process from which the byproduct 

substance was generated. In this rule, 

EPA is incorporating the definition of 

‘‘site-limited’’ in 40 CFR 711.3 and also 

aligning with the description of sitelimited, physically enclosed systems in 

40 CFR 711.10(d)(1), which identifies 

activities for which reporting on certain 

byproducts is not required under the 

CDR Rule. 

In proposing the CDR definition, EPA 

described enclosed systems for the 

purposes of CDR as system of 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102593 

equipment directly connected to the 

production process that is designed, 

constructed, and operated in a manner 

which prevents emissions, or the release 

of any chemical substance into the 

facility or environment during the 

production process. (84 FR 17692, April 

25, 2019) (FRL–9982–16). Such 

emissions, including fugitive emissions, 

could lead to exposures to workers, the 

public, or the environment. For an 

enclosed system, exposure and release 

could only occur due to loss of integrity 

or failure of the manufacturing process 

equipment or control systems. To meet 

the EPA enclosed system scenario, any 

equipment that the byproduct is present 

in at any point during the process 

sequence, such as tanks, reaction 

vessels, reactors, processing units (e.g., 

a drum filter), and/or connecting lines, 

must: (1) Be of high structural integrity 

and contained on all sides, (2) pose no 

foreseeable potential for escape of 

constituents to the facility or 

environment during normal use, and (3) 

be connected directly by pipeline or 

similarly enclosed device to a 

production process. Also, any transfers 

or holding steps occurring in this 

system must be necessary to the recycle 

process and must take place within 

physically enclosed equipment that 

meet the enclosed system scenario. For 

example, hard piping or completely 

sealed (i.e., welded) equipment would 

meet these criteria if connected directly 

to other enclosed equipment, preventing 

potential releases including fugitive 

emissions. 

EPA is finalizing an exclusion from 

this rule for TCE manufactured and then 

processed as a byproduct in a sitelimited, physically enclosed system that 

is part of the same overall 

manufacturing process from which the 

byproduct TCE was generated. EPA 

plans to interpret the exclusion for 

processing byproduct TCE in this rule in 

a similar way as the exemption for 

certain byproducts from CDR. 

EPA recognizes the concerns that 

other commenters raised regarding 

potential risks from TCE manufactured 

as a byproduct; several commenters 

stated that rather than expand 

exclusions for TCE manufactured as a 

byproduct, EPA should evaluate all 

aspects of manufacture of a chemical 

substance and that byproducts could 

pose a risk to fenceline communities 

(Refs. 44, 30). As described in the 

proposed rule, EPA is including the 

evaluation of TCE manufactured as a 

byproduct during the manufacture of 

1,2–DCA in the risk evaluation for 1,2– 

DCA. Additionally, unless it is for the 

purposes of disposal (see Unit 

IV.C.1.d.), TCE that exits the sitelimited, physically enclosed systems in 

which it was manufactured by removal 

from the system, by relocation, or by 

conclusion of the manufacturing process 

is subject to the restrictions, 

prohibitions, and other provisions of 

this final rule. EPA notes that for the 

manufacturing of two chemicals, PCE 

and CTC, which may produce TCE as a 

byproduct within site-limited, 

physically enclosed systems, EPA is 

requiring a WCPP for PCE or CTC, 

which would provide a level of 

protection from TCE for potentially 

exposed persons while addressing the 

unreasonable risk from PCE or CTC. 

EPA received additional information 

from a chemical manufacturer (Ref. 82) 

that manufactures TCE as a byproduct 

during other processes and then sends 

the TCE offsite for RCRA hazardous 

waste disposal. EPA notes that in the 

Risk Evaluation for TCE, EPA explained 

that it had tailored the scope of the risk 

evaluation to exclude the disposal 

pathway of TCE, except for limited 

disposal of TCE-containing wastewater 

discussed in Unit IV.B.6. Thus, the 

disposal of TCE and the processing and 

distribution in commerce for such 

disposal is out of scope for this rule 

unless otherwise specified. EPA 

understands that some facilities, such as 

those that produce substances critical to 

the battery supply chain, may 

manufacture TCE as a byproduct and 

that TCE is not further processed onsite 

but rather is disposed of offsite. Such 

activity is not covered by this rule. 

3. Industrial and Commercial Use of 

TCE as a Solvent for Closed-Loop Batch 

Vapor Degreasing for Rayon Fabric 

Scouring for Rocket Booster Nozzle 

Production for Federal Agencies and 

Their Contractors 

In the 2023 TCE proposed rule, EPA 

included several longer timeframes for 

TCE uses specifically to foster and 

support Federal Agencies’ missions 

related to national security and critical 

infrastructure. EPA received public 

comment on one of these conditions of 

use and provisions that relate to 

compliance. The comment relates to the 

phase-out of TCE in industrial and 

commercial use as a solvent for closedloop batch vapor degreasing for rayon 

fabric scouring for rocket booster nozzle 

production. EPA proposed that within 5 

years of the publication date of the final 

rule the Federal agency that is the end 

user of the rayon fabric for rocket 

booster nozzle production (e.g., the U.S. 

Department of Defense (DOD) or NASA) 

would need to conduct a final prelaunch test of rocket boosters without 

using TCE. By 10 years from the 

publication date of the final rule, the 

phase-out would be complete and 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a solvent for closed-loop batch vapor 

degreasing would be prohibited. A 

commenter brought to EPA’s attention 

that although EPA proposed to require 

the testing of an alternative process, the 

proposed regulation did not include a 

requirement to switch to an alternative 

once a suitable one was fully validated 

(Ref. 44). As the commenter noted, such 

a requirement is necessary to prompt 

users to discover and implement 

effective and safer alternatives to TCE. 

EPA agrees, as the intention of this 

phase-out and the 5-year testing 

requirement is to incentivize TCE users 

to transition away as fast as practicable. 

Based on this public comment, EPA has 

modified the regulatory text to require 

use of the tested alternative if it proves 

to be an adequate substitute. 

4. Definitions 

EPA proposed to add definitions for 

‘‘Authorized person,’’ ‘‘ECEL,’’ 

‘‘Exposure group,’’ ‘‘Owner or 

operator,’’ ‘‘Potentially exposed 

person,’’ ‘‘Regulated area,’’ and 

‘‘Retailer’’ to 40 CFR part 751, subpart 

A. The final rule under TSCA section 6 

to address the unreasonable risk 

presented by methylene chloride (89 FR 

39254, May 8, 2024 (FRL–8155–01– 

OCSPP)) added the definitions for 

‘‘Authorized person,’’ ‘‘Owner or 

operator,’’ ‘‘Potentially exposed 

person,’’ ‘‘Regulated area,’’ and 

‘‘Retailer’’ to subpart A. The final rule 

under TSCA section 6 to address the 

unreasonable risk presented by PCE 

(RIN 2070–AK84) added the definition 

for ‘‘Exposure group’’ and ‘‘ECEL’’ to 

subpart A. 

In this final rule, EPA is adding a 

definition for ‘‘interim ECEL’’ to subpart 

D to incorporate the interim ECEL value 

discussed in Unit III.A.1. and to make 

it clear that the interim ECEL is only 

applicable during the phaseout and 

TSCA section 6(g) exemption periods. 

EPA has also revised the proposed 

subpart D definition of ‘‘ECEL action 

level’’ to refer to an ‘‘interim ECEL 

action level’’ and to incorporate the 

interim ECEL action level value 

described in Unit III.A.1. 

Lastly, to provide additional clarity, 

EPA has revised its proposed 

descriptions in the preamble of 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

solvent for open-top or closed-loop 

batch vapor degreasing for essential 

aerospace parts and for narrow tubing 

for medical devices. The revised 

descriptions appear in Unit IV.B.1. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102594 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

IV. Provisions of the Final Rule 

EPA intends that each provision of 

this rulemaking be severable. In the 

event of litigation staying, remanding, or 

invalidating EPA’s risk management 

approach for one or more conditions of 

use in this rule, EPA intends to preserve 

the risk management approaches in the 

rule for all other conditions of use to the 

fullest extent possible. The Agency 

evaluated the risk management options 

in TSCA section 6(a)(1) through (7) for 

each condition of use and generally 

EPA’s regulation of one condition of use 

to address its contribution to the 

unreasonable risk from TCE functions 

independently from EPA’s regulation of 

other conditions of use, which may have 

different characteristics leading to EPA’s 

risk management decisions. Further, the 

Agency crafted this rule so that different 

risk management approaches are 

reflected in different provisions or 

elements of the rule that are capable of 

operating independently. Accordingly, 

the Agency has organized the rule so 

that if any provision or element of this 

rule is determined by judicial review or 

operation of law to be invalid, that 

partial invalidation will not render the 

remainder of this rule invalid. 

There are many permutations of this. 

For example, as discussed in Unit IV.B., 

this final rule prohibits industrial and 

commercial use of adhesives and 

sealants that contain TCE (with subsets 

of this use with a delayed compliance 

date as described in Unit IV.B.2. or an 

exemption as described in Unit IV.G.). 

This final rule also prohibits all 

consumer uses of TCE as discussed in 

Unit IV.B.1. To the extent that a court 

were to find that EPA lacked substantial 

evidence to support its prohibition of 

adhesives and sealants or otherwise 

found legal issues with EPA’s approach 

to that condition of use, it would have 

no bearing on other similarly situated 

conditions of use, such as those 

involving consumer use of TCE, unless 

the specific issue also applies to the 

particular facts associated with 

consumer use. This is reflected in the 

structure of the rule, which describes 

the specific prohibitions separately by 

compliance date. EPA also intends all 

TSCA section 6(a) risk management 

elements in this rule to be severable 

from each TSCA section 6(g) exemption. 

EPA has the authority to promulgate 

TSCA section 6(g) exemptions ‘‘as part 

of a rule promulgated under [TSCA 

section 6(a)].’’ However, EPA’s risk 

management decisions under TSCA 

sections 6(a) and 6(c) are independent 

from EPA’s consideration of whether it 

is appropriate, based on the factors in 

TSCA section 6(g), to exempt specific 

conditions of use from the requirements 

of the TSCA section 6(a) risk 

management elements in the rule. In 

other words, EPA first decides whether 

and how to regulate each condition of 

use, per TSCA sections 6(a) through (c), 

and only then determines whether an 

exemption under TSCA section 6(g) is 

appropriate. Accordingly, the 

underlying TSCA section 6(a) risk 

management elements would not be 

impacted if a TSCA section 6(g) 

exemption is determined by judicial 

review or operation of law to be invalid. 

Rather, the exempted condition of use 

would become subject to the underlying 

TSCA section 6(a) risk management 

element(s). 

EPA also notes that there are multiple 

avenues to ask EPA to revisit issues in 

this TSCA section 6(a) rulemaking, both 

before and after the mandatory 

compliance dates are set consistent with 

TSCA section 6(d). EPA has the 

authority under TSCA section 6(g) to 

consider whether an exemption is 

appropriate and, consistent with TSCA 

section 6(g)(1), may propose such 

exemptions independently from this 

rulemaking. Additionally, any person 

could petition EPA to request that EPA 

issue or amend a rule under TSCA 

section 6. 

A. Applicability 

This final rule sets prohibitions and 

restrictions on the manufacture 

(including import), processing, 

distribution in commerce, commercial 

use, and disposal of TCE to prevent 

unreasonable risk of injury to health in 

accordance with TSCA section 6(a), 15 

U.S.C. 2605(a). Additionally, pursuant 

to TSCA section 12(a)(2), this rule 

applies to TCE even if being 

manufactured, processed, or distributed 

in commerce solely for export from the 

United States because EPA has 

determined that TCE presents an 

unreasonable risk to health within the 

United States. 

As discussed in Unit III.D., EPA’s 

final rule is adopting a regulatory 

threshold of 0.1% of TCE (in the 2023 

proposed rule, this was referred to as a 

de minimis threshold). In other words, 

the provisions of this rulemaking only 

apply when TCE is present in a product 

at 0.1% or greater by weight. 

Additionally, the provisions of this final 

rule only apply to chemical substances 

as defined under TSCA section 3. 

Notably, TSCA Section 3(2) excludes 

from the definition of chemical 

substance ‘‘any food, food additive, 

drug, cosmetic, or device (as such terms 

are defined in Section 201 of the Federal 

Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act [21 U.S.C. 

321]) when manufactured, processed, or 

distributed in commerce for use as a 

food, food additive, drug, cosmetic, or 

device’’ and ‘‘any pesticide (as defined 

in the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, 

and Rodenticide Act [7 U.S.C. 136 et 

seq.]) when manufactured, processed, or 

distributed in commerce for use as a 

pesticide.’’ Additional details regarding 

TSCA statutory authorities can be found 

in section 2 of the Response to 

Comments document (Ref. 11). 

As discussed in Unit III.D. of this final 

rule, TCE that is manufactured as a 

byproduct (such as during the 

manufacture of other chemicals) is not 

considered to be within the condition of 

use of TCE manufacturing. Relatedly, 

EPA is excluding from this rule 

processing of byproduct TCE when that 

byproduct TCE is processed within a 

site-limited, physically enclosed system 

that is part of the same overall 

manufacturing process from which the 

byproduct substance was generated. 

Site-limited means a chemical substance 

is manufactured and processed only 

within a site and is not distributed for 

commercial purposes as a chemical 

substance or as part of a mixture or 

product outside the site. In this way, 

EPA is aligning with the definition of 

‘‘site-limited’’ in 40 CFR 711.3 and sitelimited, physically enclosed systems in 

40 CFR 711.10(d)(1). 

Finally, as discussed in the 2023 TCE 

proposed rule, while EPA generally 

views the disposal condition of use 

under TSCA broadly, this rule is 

intended to address identified risks 

resulting from disposal of TCE to 

industrial pre-treatment, industrial 

treatment, or a POTW. Thus, only these 

limited disposal activities, including 

remediation methods that would be 

considered industrial wastewater 

pretreatment, industrial wastewater 

treatment, or discharge to a POTW, are 

included within the disposal condition 

of use in this rule. A remediation 

method would need to be considered 

one of these three types of disposal to 

fall within the condition of use under 

TSCA, and if not, would not be subject 

to the prohibition or other requirements 

of the rule. 

B. Prohibition of Manufacture, 

Processing, Distribution in Commerce, 

Use, and Disposal 

In general, EPA is finalizing the 

prohibitions as proposed with some 

modifications, including for compliance 

timeframes to provide for reasonable 

transitions and based on consideration 

of the public comments, as described in 

Unit III. This unit describes the 

prohibitions and associated compliance 

timeframes EPA is finalizing in this 

rule. As discussed in Unit IV.A. and in 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102595 

the Response to Comments document 

(Ref. 11), the prohibitions do not apply 

to any substance that is excluded from 

the definition of ‘‘chemical substance’’ 

under TSCA section 3(2)(B)(ii) through 

(vi) (Ref. 11). 

1. Prohibition of Manufacture, 

Processing, Distribution, and Industrial 

and Commercial Use of TCE 

The final rule prohibits manufacture, 

processing, distribution in commerce, 

and all industrial and commercial use of 

TCE and TCE-containing products. The 

final regulation will impose 

prohibitions in a staggered timeframe, 

beginning at the top of the supply chain, 

as proposed. EPA is finalizing as 

proposed the timeframes for prohibition 

on manufacturing, processing, 

distribution in commerce, and 

industrial and commercial use of TCE 

unless otherwise specified. These 

timeframes are: a prohibition on 

manufacturing (including importing) 

TCE beginning 90 days from publication 

of this final rule, a prohibition on 

processing TCE beginning 180 days 

from publication of this final rule, a 

prohibition on distribution in commerce 

of TCE or TCE-containing products 

beginning 180 days from publication of 

this final rule, and a prohibition on 

industrial or commercial use of TCE and 

TCE-containing products beginning 270 

days after publication of this final rule. 

For several conditions of use, EPA is 

finalizing prohibitions that would take 

effect over a longer timeframe. After 

consideration of public comments, EPA 

is finalizing timeframes longer than 

proposed for prohibition of 

manufacture, processing, distribution, 

and commercial use of TCE for four 

uses: industrial and commercial use of 

TCE in energized electrical cleaner; 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

adhesives and sealants for aerospace 

applications; laboratory use of TCE in 

asphalt testing and recovery; and 

disposal of TCE to industrial pretreatment, industrial treatment, or 

POTWs. EPA is finalizing a prohibition 

after 5 years, a timeframe shorter than 

proposed, for the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a processing 

aid for lithium battery separator 

manufacturing. The details of these and 

other timeframes for prohibition are 

described in this unit, and the rationale 

for these changes from the proposed 

rule is in Unit III.B.1. and Unit III.C. 

(EPA notes that for several conditions of 

use, in consideration of public 

comments and to provide for reasonable 

transitions, EPA is finalizing phase-outs 

ahead of immediate prohibitions (e.g., 

for the processing of TCE for 

manufacture of HFC–134a), which are 

detailed in Units IV.B.3., 4., 5., and 6., 

or several time limited exemptions 

under TSCA section 6(g) (e.g., for the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE 

for essential laboratory uses), which are 

detailed in Unit IV.G.)). 

For two batch vapor degreasing 

conditions of use (open-top and closedloop), EPA is finalizing as proposed the 

compliance dates for the prohibitions 

described in this unit. With certain 

exceptions, the prohibition on 

manufacturing and processing for this 

use comes into effect in 180 days for 

manufacturers and in 270 days for 

processors, including for processing into 

a formulation and for recycling. After 1 

year, the prohibition on the industrial 

and commercial uses of TCE in open-top 

and closed-loop batch vapor degreasers 

comes into effect (see Unit III.B.1.c.i. 

and ii. of the 2023 TCE proposed rule 

for descriptions of these conditions of 

use and Unit VI.A.1. of the 2023 TCE 

proposed rule for a rationale for the 

slightly longer timeframe). As an 

exception, the use of TCE for batch 

vapor degreasing by Federal agencies 

and their contractors for land-based DoD 

defense systems will be prohibited after 

5 years. (For a sub-set of the open-top 

and closed-loop batch vapor degreasing 

conditions of use, EPA is finalizing a 

phase-out for industrial and commercial 

use of TCE as a solvent for closed-loop 

batch vapor degreasing for rayon fabric 

scouring for end use in rocket booster 

nozzle production for Federal agencies 

and their contractors, as described in 

Unit IV.B.4. EPA is also finalizing 

several exemptions related to vapor 

degreasing, which are described in Unit 

IV.G.). 

Additionally, for uses not separately 

distinguished under longer phase-out or 

exemption timeframes, EPA is finalizing 

as proposed the compliance dates for 

the prohibitions on the commercial use 

of TCE as a processing aid and the 

relevant upstream uses. Specifically, 

aside from several exceptions, the 

prohibitions on manufacturing and 

processing for this use would come into 

effect 540 days months after the date of 

publication for manufacturers and in 2 

years for processors. The prohibition 

would come into effect after 2 years for 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a processing aid for several applications 

(as specified in the condition of use 

name and description, this includes use 

of TCE as a processing aid in battery 

separator manufacturing; process 

solvent used in polymer fiber spinning, 

fluoroelastomer manufacture and 

Alcantara manufacture; extraction 

solvent used in caprolactam 

manufacture; and precipitant used in 

beta-cyclodextrin manufacture) (see 

Unit III.B.1.c.xvi. of the 2023 TCE 

proposed rule for a description of this 

condition of use and Unit V.A.1. of the 

2023 TCE proposed rule for a rationale 

for the different timeframe). For a subset 

of the industrial and commercial use of 

TCE as a processing aid, specifically for 

the use of TCE as a processing aid in 

lithium battery separator manufacture, 

EPA is finalizing a longer timeframe of 

5 years before prohibition. 

EPA is finalizing as proposed the 

prohibition on manufacturing of TCE for 

processing as a reactant/intermediate 

after 540 days and the prohibition for 

processing TCE as a reactant/ 

intermediate after two years, unless 

otherwise noted. EPA is finalizing as 

proposed an extended phase-out for a 

subset of this condition of use, 

specifically processing TCE as a 

reactant/intermediate for the 

manufacture of HFC–134a, which is 

detailed in Unit IV.B.3. 

As described earlier in this unit, for 

three conditions of use, EPA is 

finalizing prohibition timeframes longer 

than proposed. EPA is providing 3 years 

after publication of the final rule (rather 

than within a year, as proposed) for the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

energized electrical cleaner, and the 

manufacture, processing, and 

distribution in commerce for such use. 

Additionally, for the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE in adhesives and 

sealants for aerospace applications, and 

the manufacture, processing, and 

distribution in commerce for such use, 

prohibitions would take effect 5 years 

after publication of the final rule (rather 

than within a year, as proposed). For the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

batch vapor degreasing for land-based 

DoD defense systems by Federal 

agencies and their contractors, and the 

manufacture, processing, and 

distribution in commerce for such use, 

prohibitions would take effect 5 years 

after publication of the final rule. These 

changes are based on consideration of 

the public comments, and the rationale 

is detailed in Unit III.C. and the 

Response to Comments document (Ref. 

11). 

Also in consideration of public 

comment, EPA is changing the 

timeframe for prohibition on the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a processing aid in manufacturing 

lithium battery separators. EPA had 

proposed that industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a processing 

aid for all battery separators would, 

under TSCA section 6(g), be exempt 

from prohibition for 10 years. As 

detailed in Unit III.B.1., EPA has 

modified the exemption to apply only to 

use of TCE for manufacturing lead-acid 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102596 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

battery separators, and for the industrial 

and commercial use of TCE as a 

processing aid in lithium battery 

separator manufacture, and for its 

associated upstream uses and disposal, 

EPA is finalizing a separate prohibition 

that will take effect in five years. 

To aid with implementation of the 

compliance dates for the prohibitions on 

manufacturing, processing, and 

industrial and commercial use of TCE, 

and ensure that those prohibitions 

effectively address the unreasonable risk 

identified, EPA is also finalizing 

prohibitions on distribution in 

commerce of TCE. Generally, for most 

conditions of use EPA is finalizing a 

compliance date for the prohibition on 

distribution in commerce of TCE that 

will come into effect 180 days following 

publication of the final rule. In 

instances where EPA is finalizing a 

prohibition on manufacturing and 

processing TCE for a particular 

industrial and commercial use that is 

later than 180 days after publication of 

the final rule, the compliance date for 

the prohibition on distribution in 

commerce will generally be the same as 

the compliance date of the prohibition 

on manufacturing and processing TCE. 

In consideration of the irreversible 

health effects associated with TCE 

exposure and public comment, EPA is 

finalizing prohibition timeframes that 

allow for successful implementation of 

the prohibitions in a manner that is as 

soon as practicable while providing for 

a reasonable transition period, 

consistent with TSCA section 6(d). EPA 

has no reasonably available information 

indicating that the compliance dates are 

not practicable for the activities that 

would be prohibited, or that additional 

time is needed for products to clear the 

channels of trade. 

2. Prohibition of Manufacture, 

Processing, and Distribution in 

Commerce for Consumer Use of TCE 

The final rule prohibits the 

manufacture, processing, and 

distribution in commerce of TCE and 

TCE-containing products for all 

consumer use. 

EPA emphasizes that the consumer 

uses evaluated in the 2020 Risk 

Evaluation for TCE constitute all 

known, intended, and reasonably 

foreseen consumer uses of TCE. As 

described in this unit, EPA is 

prohibiting all manufacturing (including 

import) and processing of TCE to 

address the unreasonable risk to 

workers and ONUs driven by those 

conditions of use (Ref. 2). EPA 

determined any extended phase-outs or 

6(g) exemptions are unnecessary for 

prohibitions on manufacture (including 

import), processing, or distribution in 

commerce of TCE for consumer use. 

EPA notes that all but one of the 24 

consumer uses of TCE evaluated in the 

2020 Risk Evaluation for TCE 

contributed to the unreasonable risk 

determination for TCE (Refs. 1, 2). 

Additionally, a prohibition on the 

manufacture (including import) and 

processing of TCE for consumer uses 

generally supports reducing risk to 

workers and ONUs from these upstream 

uses, as further discussed in Unit V.A. 

EPA also considered the risk of 

irreversible health effects associated 

with TCE exposure when finalizing 

these compliance dates. For these 

reasons, including the severity of the 

hazards of TCE, EPA is prohibiting the 

manufacturing (including import), 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce of TCE for all uses, which 

includes all consumer uses. 

The compliance dates for the final 

prohibitions described in this unit 

relevant to consumer uses will come 

into effect for manufacturers in 90 days, 

for processors in 180 days, and for 

distributors (including all retailers) 

within 180 days. EPA has no reasonably 

available information indicating these 

compliance dates are not practicable for 

the activities that are prohibited or that 

additional time is needed for products 

to clear the channels of trade. 

EPA emphasizes that retailers are 

prohibited from distributing any TCE or 

TCE-containing products after June 16, 

2025, including those TCE-containing 

products that can continue to be 

distributed or used commercially for a 

longer period of time. EPA is finalizing 

as proposed the prohibition on 

distributing in commerce TCE and all 

TCE-containing products to consumers, 

in order to prevent products intended 

for industrial and commercial use that 

have longer timeframes before 

prohibition from being purchased by 

consumers, and is clarifying that this 

prohibition applies to distribution by 

retailers. A retailer is any person or 

business entity that distributes or makes 

available products to consumers, 

including through e-commerce internet 

sales or distribution. If a person or 

business entity distributes or makes 

available any product to at least one 

consumer, then it is considered a 

retailer (40 CFR 751.5). For a distributor 

not to be considered a retailer, the 

distributor must distribute or make 

available products solely to commercial 

or industrial end-users or businesses. 

Prohibiting manufacturers (including 

importers), processors, and distributors 

from distributing TCE, or any products 

containing TCE, to retailers prevents 

retailers from making these products 

available to consumers, which addresses 

that part of the unreasonable risk from 

TCE contributed by consumer use. 

In consideration of the irreversible 

health effects associated with TCE 

exposure and public comment, in this 

final rule EPA is finalizing prohibition 

timeframes that allow for successful 

implementation of the prohibitions in a 

manner that is as soon as practicable 

while providing for a reasonable 

transition period, consistent with TSCA 

section 6(d). EPA has no reasonably 

available information indicating these 

compliance dates are not practicable for 

the activities that are prohibited or that 

additional time is needed for products 

to clear the channels of trade. 

3. Phase-Out for Processing TCE as an 

Intermediate for the Manufacture of 

HFC–134a 

As described in this unit, EPA is 

finalizing as proposed a longer phaseout timeframe for the manufacturing 

(including import) and processing of 

TCE as an intermediate for the 

manufacture of HFC–134a (1,1,1,2- 

tetrafluroethane; CASRN 811–97–2). 

EPA is finalizing an 8.5-year phase-out 

subject to the requirements discussed in 

this unit. All other processing of TCE as 

a reactant/intermediate will be subject 

to the prohibitions described in Unit 

IV.B.2. EPA will require a phase-out for 

processing of TCE as an intermediate for 

the manufacture of HFC–134a, which 

EPA will begin at the final rule’s 

publication date and end 8.5 years after 

the publication of the final rule. 

Associated with this phase-out, EPA 

will require the establishment of the 

TCE WCPP, outlined in Unit IV.C. 

within 180 days after publication of the 

final rule, as workplace protections 

during the period of the phase-out. To 

set the volume reductions during the 

phase-out, EPA will require any facility 

processing TCE as an intermediate to 

manufacture HFC–134a in the United 

States to establish a baseline of the 

annual quantity of TCE processed by the 

facility as a feedstock to manufacture 

HFC–134a. EPA is requiring that within 

180 days after the publication of the 

final rule the manufacturer could use 

the average of any 12 consecutive 

months in the 3 years preceding the 

publication of the final rule to calculate 

their baseline, based on records that 

demonstrate how the baseline annual 

volume was calculated. Following the 

establishment of a baseline volume, the 

regulated entity will then be required to 

implement a 4-step phase-out process; 

specifically, the phase-out will be a 25 

percent reduction from the baseline 

volume every 2 years as follows: (1) 2.5 

years after the publication of the final 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102597 

rule each manufacturer of HFC–134a 

who processes TCE as an intermediate 

is not permitted to process TCE as an 

intermediate at an annual volume 

greater than 75 percent of the baseline; 

(2) 4.5 years after the publication of the 

final rule each manufacturer of HFC– 

134a who processes TCE as an 

intermediate is not permitted to process 

TCE as an intermediate at an annual 

volume greater than 50 percent of the 

baseline; (3) 6.5 years after the 

publication of the final rule each 

manufacturer of HFC–134a who 

processes TCE as an intermediate is not 

permitted to process TCE as an 

intermediate at an annual volume 

greater than 25 percent of the baseline; 

and (4) 8.5 years after the publication of 

the final rule each manufacturer of 

HFC–134a is prohibited from processing 

TCE as an intermediate. 

EPA notes that the prohibition for 

manufacture (including importing), 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce of TCE for this condition of 

use will occur after 8.5 years to account 

for availability of TCE through the 

supply chain during the period of the 

phase-out of processing of TCE as an 

intermediate for the manufacture of 

HFC–134a. This timeframe will be 

longer than the prohibitions on 

manufacturing and processing TCE 

described in Unit IV.B.1. of this final 

rule. 

EPA is also finalizing the requirement 

that regulated entities keep records of 

the annual quantity of TCE purchased 

and processed from the year 2023 until 

the termination of all processing of TCE 

as an intermediate. These records, along 

with the records demonstrating how the 

baseline annual volume was calculated, 

must be kept until five years after the 

processing of TCE as an intermediate 

ends. 

EPA notes, per TSCA section 

6(c)(2)(C), that although the processing 

of TCE to produce HFC–134a is 

prohibited eventually, processing PCE 

to produce HFC–134a will continue 

under a WCPP (RIN 2070–AK84). 

Although PCE is an alternative 

intermediate for the manufacture of 

HFC–134a, EPA has found that an 8.5- 

year phaseout for TCE is necessary 

because manufacturers who use TCE as 

an intermediate are not able to simply 

retrofit plants to use PCE. Therefore, a 

more immediate prohibition of the use 

of TCE for this condition of use could 

abruptly disrupt the domestic supply of 

HFC–134a and could adversely affect 

the gradual transition to new 

technologies driven by the AIM Act. 

However, EPA believes the transition 

period is reasonable because over the 

time period of the phaseout, EPA 

determined the transition to imported 

HFC–134a or HFC–134a manufactured 

with PCE could be made and, as such, 

the refrigerant would remain available 

while protecting workers. 

4. Phase-Out of Industrial and 

Commercial Use of TCE as a Solvent for 

Closed-Loop Batch Vapor Degreasing for 

Rayon Fabric Scouring for Rocket 

Booster Nozzle Production 

EPA is finalizing as proposed a longer 

phase-out timeframe for industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a solvent for 

closed-loop batch vapor degreasing for 

rayon fabric scouring for end use in 

rocket booster nozzle production by 

Federal agencies and their contractors. 

This is the industrial and commercial 

use of TCE in a closed-loop batch vapor 

degreaser to clean, or ‘scour,’ rayon 

fabric to remove sizing (i.e., protective 

filler or glaze on textiles), oils, and other 

contaminants from the rayon fabric that 

is used to line the inside of rocket 

booster nozzles; the degreasing is 

essential in preparing the rayon fabric 

before a carbonization process ahead of 

being used in the rocket booster nozzles. 

If contaminants are not removed 

properly from the rayon, the result 

could include nozzle failure (Ref. 44). 

More information on this use and the 

rationale for the phase-out are in Unit 

VI.A.1. of the proposed rule. For this 

sub-set of the vapor degreasing 

condition of use, when conducted by 

Federal agencies and their contractors, 

EPA is finalizing a 10-year phase-out 

subject to the requirements discussed in 

this unit. (All other industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a solvent for 

vapor degreasing, including use of TCE 

in closed-loop batch vapor degreasing of 

other parts or materials, will be subject 

to the prohibitions described in Unit 

IV.B.2.). For the phase-out, within 5 

years of the publication date of the final 

rule the Federal agency that is the end 

user of the rayon fabric for rocket 

booster nozzle production (e.g., the DOD 

or NASA) will need to conduct a final 

pre-launch test of rocket boosters 

without using TCE; this test is further 

discussed in Unit VI.A.1.a. of the 2023 

TCE proposed rule. By 10 years from the 

publication date of the final rule, the 

phase-out will be complete and 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a solvent for closed-loop batch vapor 

degreasing, including for rayon fabric 

scouring for end use in rocket booster 

nozzle production by Federal agencies 

and their contractors, is prohibited. As 

part of this phase-out, EPA is requiring 

a TCE WCPP, described in Unit IV.C., 

within 180 days after publication of the 

final rule, as workplace protections 

during the period of the phase-out until 

the full prohibition takes effect. 

Additionally, this phase-out will 

include recordkeeping requirements 

beginning 270 days after publication of 

the final rule related to the rayon fabric 

scouring for end use in rocket booster 

nozzle production. The entity must have 

records from a Federal agency 

indicating that their closed-loop batch 

vapor degreasing with TCE is for rayon 

fabric scouring for end use in rocket 

booster nozzle production for a Federal 

agency or a contractor. Beginning 5 

years after the publication of the final 

rule, to continue to use TCE for closedloop batch vapor degreasing for this 

specific use, the user must have records 

from a Federal agency indicating that a 

final pre-launch test for the rayon fabric 

scouring has been conducted with an 

alternative chemical or process. As a 

condition of this phase-out, entities will 

be required to transition from TCE and 

to switch to use of the tested alternative 

if it proves to be a suitable alternative. 

5. Phase-Out of Laboratory Use of TCE 

in Asphalt Testing And Recovery 

As discussed in more detail in Unit 

III.C.3., EPA is finalizing a longer phaseout timeframe for industrial and 

commercial use of TCE in laboratory 

testing of asphalt. Specifically, EPA is 

finalizing a phase-out of 10 years for the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

asphalt testing and recovery, with a 

prohibition on use of TCE in manual 

centrifuge processes at 5 years. As part 

of this phase-out, EPA is requiring a 

TCE WCPP, described in Unit IV.C., 

within 180 days after publication of the 

final rule, as workplace protections 

during the period of the phase-out until 

the full prohibition takes effect. 

6. Phase-Out of Disposal of TCE to 

Industrial Pre-Treatment, Industrial 

Treatment, or POTWs 

EPA is prohibiting the disposal of 

TCE to industrial pre-treatment, 

industrial treatment, or publicly owned 

treatment works, i.e., wastewater that 

contains TCE that is collected and/or 

treated on site or transported to a third 

party site, and includes the mixing of 

TCE with wastewater and the discharge 

of TCE-contaminated wastewater 

(description of disposal for the purposes 

of this rulemaking is in Units IV.C.1.d. 

and IV.E.1.). TSCA section 6(a) provides 

EPA the authority to prohibit or 

otherwise regulate any manner or 

method of disposal of a chemical 

substance by its manufacturer, 

processor, or any other person who uses 

or disposes of the chemical substance 

for commercial purposes. Facilities 

generating solid waste with TCE 

concentrations at or above the RCRA 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102598 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

regulatory level of 0.5 mg/L using the 

Toxicity Characteristic Leaching 

Procedure (see 40 CFR 261.24) (or solid 

waste that is otherwise hazardous under 

RCRA Subtitle C) will need to manage 

the waste in compliance with all 

applicable RCRA requirements. This 

includes a ban on dilution as a 

substitute for adequate treatment (40 

CFR 268.3). 

The compliance date for the 

prohibition described in this unit will 

be September 15, 2025 for 

manufacturers, processors, distributors, 

and industrial and commercial users 

disposing of TCE to industrial pretreatment, industrial treatment, or 

publicly owned treatment works. EPA 

has no reasonably available information 

indicating that for the majority of users 

the proposed compliance dates would 

not be as soon as practicable and would 

not provide a reasonable transition 

period for converting to an alternative 

disposal method. 

For a small set of uses, EPA has 

determined that wastewater disposal is 

an essential part of the ongoing 

industrial and commercial use, as 

described in Units III.B.1. and III.B.2. 

EPA is therefore finalizing extended 

phase-outs of wastewater disposal for 

certain conditions of use that have 

extended compliance timeframes or an 

exemption under TSCA section 6(g). 

The following conditions of use will be 

able to continue to dispose of TCE to 

industrial pre-treatment, industrial 

treatment, and POTWs: the industrial 

and commercial use of TCE as a 

processing aid in lithium battery 

separator manufacturing will have 5 

years after the publication date of the 

final rule; the industrial and commercial 

use of TCE as a processing aid for 

specialty polymeric microporous sheet 

material manufacturing will have 15 

years; and the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a processing 

aid in lead-acid battery separator 

manufacturing will have 20 years. 

During the time these conditions of use 

are continuing consistent with a TSCA 

section 6(d) phase-out or 6(g) 

exemption, EPA is requiring that the 

industrial pre-treatment and/or 

industrial treatment of wastewater 

containing TCE from these conditions of 

use will also be subject to the WCPP 

described in Unit IV.C. This is distinct 

from conditions for workplace 

requirements for the time-limited 

exemption under TSCA section 6(g) for 

disposal of TCE to industrial pretreatment and/or industrial treatment, to 

support ongoing critical processing aid 

uses and to facilitate cleanup projects of 

TCE-contaminated groundwater and 

other wastewater generated from the 

cleanup of historical waste disposal 

sites, which are described in Unit 

IV.E.2. POTWs receiving TCEcontaining wastewater, regardless of 

source, will be required to meet the 

worker protections described in Unit 

IV.E.3. 

C. WCPP for Certain Conditions of Use 

1. Applicability 

EPA is finalizing a WCPP for those 

conditions of use that will continue 

temporarily for more than 1 year under 

a phase-out or a TSCA section 6(g) 

exemption. The final WCPP differs in 

certain aspects from the WCPP as 

proposed; the rationale for these 

changes are discussed in Unit III.A. EPA 

is finalizing the WCPP for the following 

conditions of use of TCE: domestic 

manufacturing; import; processing as a 

reactant/intermediate; processing into 

formulation, mixture or reaction 

product; processing by repackaging; 

recycling; industrial and commercial 

use as a processing aid in process 

solvent used in battery manufacture; 

process solvent used in polymer fabric 

spinning, fluoroelastomer manufacture 

and Alcantara manufacture; extraction 

solvent used in caprolactam 

manufacture; precipitant used in betacyclodextrin manufacture; industrial 

and commercial use as an adhesive and 

sealant for essential aerospace 

applications; industrial and commercial 

use of in batch vapor degreasing for 

land-based DoD defense systems; 

industrial and commercial use in other 

miscellaneous industrial and 

commercial uses (laboratory use) 

industrial and commercial use as a 

solvent in closed-loop batch vapor 

degreasing for rayon fabric scouring for 

end use in rocket booster nozzle 

production by Federal agencies and 

their contractors; industrial and 

commercial use in closed-loop or opentop batch vapor degreasing for essential 

aerospace parts and narrow tubing used 

for medical devices; industrial and 

commercial use for vessels of the Armed 

Forces and their systems; industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a solvent in 

closed-loop vapor degreasing necessary 

for rocket engine cleaning by Federal 

agencies and their contractors; and 

disposal to industrial pre-treatment, 

industrial treatment, and POTWs. This 

Unit provides a description of those 

uses that will continue for more than 1 

year under the WCPP to assist with 

compliance. In some instances, the 

description is of a subset of a larger 

condition of use assessed in the 2020 

Risk Evaluation for TCE. 

a. Manufacturing (Includes Import) 

i. Domestic Manufacture 

This condition of use refers to the 

making or producing of a chemical 

substance within the United States 

(including manufacturing for export), or 

the extraction of a component chemical 

substance from a previously existing 

chemical substance or a complex 

combination of substances. For 

purposes of this rule, this description 

does not apply to TCE production as a 

byproduct, including during the 

manufacture of 1,2-dichloroethane, 

which EPA intends to consider in the 

risk evaluation for 1,2-dichloroethane 

(Ref. 83). 

ii. Import 

This condition of use refers to the act 

of causing a chemical substance or 

mixture to arrive within the customs 

territory of the United States. 

b. Processing 

i. Processing as a Reactant/Intermediate 

This condition of use refers to 

processing TCE in chemical reactions 

for the manufacturing of another 

chemical substance or product. Through 

processing as a reactant or intermediate, 

TCE serves as a feedstock in the 

production of another chemical product 

via a chemical reaction in which TCE is 

completely consumed. For example, 

TCE is processed as an intermediate in 

the production of 1,1,1,2- 

tetrafluoroethane, an HFC also known as 

HFC–134a, which is used as a 

refrigerant and in fluorocarbon blends 

for refrigerants. This condition of use 

includes reuse of TCE, including TCE 

originally generated as a byproduct or 

residual TCE, as a reactant. 

ii. Processing: Incorporation Into a 

Formulation, Mixture, or Reaction 

Product 

This condition of use refers to when 

TCE is added to a product (or product 

mixture) prior to further distribution of 

the product. Such products include, but 

are not limited to, solvents (for cleaning 

or degreasing), adhesives and sealant 

chemicals, and solvents that become 

part of a product formulation or mixture 

(e.g., lubricants and greases, paints and 

coatings, other uses). 

iii. Processing: Repackaging 

This condition of use refers to the 

preparation of a chemical substance for 

distribution in commerce in a different 

form, state, or quantity. This includes 

but is not limited to transferring the 

chemical from a bulk container into 

smaller containers. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102599 

iv. Processing: Recycling 

This condition of use refers to the 

process of managing used solvents that 

are collected, either on-site or 

transported to a third-party site, for 

commercial purposes other than 

disposal. Spent solvents can be restored 

via solvent reclamation/recycling. Waste 

solvents can be restored to a condition 

that permits reuse via solvent 

reclamation/recycling. The recovery 

process may involve an initial vapor 

recovery or mechanical separation step 

followed by distillation, purification, 

and final packaging. 

c. Industrial and Commercial Use 

i. Industrial and Commercial Use as a 

Processing Aid in: Process Solvent Used 

in Battery Manufacture; Process Solvent 

Used in Polymer Fabric Spinning, 

Fluoroelastomer Manufacture and 

Alcantara Manufacture; Extraction 

Solvent Used in Caprolactam 

Manufacture; and Precipitant Used in 

Beta-Cyclodextrin Manufacture 

This condition of use refers to 

industrial and commercial use of TCE to 

improve the processing characteristics 

or the operation of process equipment 

when added to a process or to a 

substance or mixture to be processed. 

The chemical substance is not intended 

to remain in or to become a part of the 

reaction product nor has function in the 

reaction product. 

ii. Industrial and Commercial Use as an 

Adhesive and Sealant for Essential 

Aerospace Applications 

This condition of use refers to the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

adhesive and sealant products, e.g., in 

products to promote bonding between 

other substances, promote adhesion of 

surfaces, or prevent seepage of moisture 

or air, for essential aerospace 

applications. In particular, this includes 

use of TCE as an adhesive or sealant in 

aircraft pneumatic deicing boots; in 

solvent bonding of plastic components, 

including on Oxygen Container 

Assemblies for Passenger Service Unit 

products used in aircraft; and as an 

adhesive or sealant for flight-critical 

equipment on new and existing aircraft, 

both commercial and military. 

iii. Miscellaneous Industrial and 

Commercial Uses: Laboratory Use 

This condition of use refers to the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

an established laboratory, for example a 

laboratory program accredited by the 

AIHA (e.g., AIHA LAP, LLC Policy 

Module 2A/B/E of Revision 17.3), or 

other analogous industry-recognized 

program for chemical analysis (e.g., to 

test hot mix asphalt binder content, as 

a reference standard, etc.), chemical 

synthesis, extracting and purifying other 

chemicals, dissolving other substances, 

and similar activities. 

iv. Industrial and Commercial Use as 

Solvent for Closed-Loop Batch Vapor 

Degreasing for Rayon Fabric Scouring 

for End Use in Rocket Booster Nozzle 

Production 

This condition of use refers to the 

process of heating TCE to its 

volatilization point and using its vapor 

to remove dirt, oils, greases, and other 

surface contaminants (such as drawing 

compounds, cutting fluids, coolants, 

solder flux, and lubricants) for rayon 

fabric scouring for end use in rocket 

booster nozzle production by Federal 

agencies and their contractors, in 

closed-loop batch vapor degreasers. 

v. Industrial and Commercial Use as 

Solvent for Closed-Loop or Open-Top 

Batch Vapor Degreasing for Essential 

Aerospace Parts and for Narrow Tubing 

for Medical Devices 

This condition of use refers to the 

process of heating TCE to its 

volatilization point and using its vapor 

to remove dirt, oils, greases, and other 

surface contaminants (such as drawing 

compounds, cutting fluids, coolants, 

solder flux, and lubricants) from 

essential aerospace parts and 

components where alternatives present 

technical feasibility or cleaning 

performance challenges in meeting 

Federal agency specifications or longstanding design specifications and from 

narrow tubing intended for use in 

medical devices (e.g., tubing where a 

portion of the outside diameter is 0.625 

inches or less), in open-top batch or 

closed-loop batch vapor degreasers. 

vi. Industrial and Commercial Use for 

Vessels of the Armed Forces and Their 

Systems, and in the Maintenance, 

Fabrication, and Sustainment for and of 

Such Vessels and Systems 

This condition of use refers to the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE 

for vessels of the Armed Forces and 

their systems, and in the maintenance, 

fabrication, and sustainment for and of 

such vessels and systems: as potting 

compounds for naval electronic systems 

and equipment; sealing compounds for 

high and ultra-high vacuum systems; 

bonding compounds for materials 

testing and maintenance of underwater 

systems and bonding of nonmetallic 

materials; and cleaning agents to satisfy 

cleaning requirements (which includes 

degreasing using wipes, sprays, solvents 

and vapor degreasing) for: materials and 

components required for military 

ordnance testing; temporary resin 

repairs in vessel spaces where welding 

is not authorized; ensuring 

polyurethane adhesion for electronic 

systems and equipment repair and 

installation of elastomeric materials; 

various naval combat systems, radars, 

sensors, equipment; fabrication and 

prototyping processes to remove coolant 

and other residue from machine parts; 

machined part fabrications for naval 

systems; installation of topside rubber 

tile material aboard vessels; and vapor 

degreasing required for substrate surface 

preparation prior to electroplating 

processes. 

vii. Industrial and Commercial Use as a 

Solvent for Closed-Loop Batch Vapor 

Degreasing Necessary for Rocket Engine 

Cleaning by Federal Agencies and Their 

Contractors 

This condition of use refers to the 

process of heating TCE to its 

volatilization point and using its vapor 

to remove dirt, oils, greases, and other 

surface contaminants (such as drawing 

compounds, cutting fluids, coolants, 

solder flux, and lubricants), for rocket 

engine cleaning by Federal agencies and 

their contractors. This involves cleaning 

small diameter parts, such as rocket 

engine nozzle coolant tubes, and 

removing the fluids used for 

manufacturing. 

viii. Industrial and Commercial Use of 

TCE for Batch Vapor Degreasing for 

Land-Based DoD Defense Systems by 

Federal Agencies and Their Contractors 

This condition of use refers to the 

process of heating TCE to its 

volatilization point and using its vapor 

to remove dirt, oils, greases, and other 

surface contaminants (such as drawing 

compounds, cutting fluids, coolants, 

solder flux, and lubricants), for landbased DoD defense systems cleaning by 

Federal agencies and their contractors. 

d. Disposal 

This condition of use generally refers 

to the process of disposing of generated 

waste streams that are either collected 

on-site or transported to a third-party 

site and typically includes both 

processing for disposal as well as 

distribution in commerce for disposal. 

For this rule, this includes the mixing 

of TCE with wastewater and the 

discharge of TCE-contaminated 

wastewater pursuant to a National 

Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) permit, and specifically 

includes discharge to industrial pretreatment, industrial treatment, or 

publicly owned treatment works. The 

evaluation of the disposal condition of 

use in the 2020 Risk Evaluation for TCE 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102600 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

(Ref. 1) was limited to the disposal of 

TCE-containing wastewater and did not 

address disposal activities not involving 

TCE in wastewater. Therefore, EPA 

considers disposal activities not 

involving TCE in wastewater to be 

outside of the scope of this rule. This 

means that, for example, a facility that 

generates TCE as a byproduct, isolates 

the TCE from the process for the sole 

purpose of disposal, and sends it off-site 

for disposal to a hazardous waste 

incinerator permitted under RCRA is 

not covered by this final rule. 

2. Overview 

A WCPP encompasses inhalation 

exposure thresholds, includes 

monitoring and recordkeeping 

requirements to verify that those 

thresholds are not exceeded, and may 

include other components, such as 

dermal protection. Under a WCPP, 

owners or operators have some 

flexibility, within the parameters 

outlined in this Unit, regarding how 

they prevent exceedances of the 

identified EPA exposure limit 

thresholds. In the case of TCE, EPA has 

determined that meeting the EPA 

exposure limit thresholds for certain 

occupational conditions of use is 

necessary to protect health from 

inhalation risks during phaseouts and 

while exempted activities are ongoing. 

Implementation of the WCPP would 

have to begin by June 16, 2025 or within 

30 days of introduction of TCE into the 

workplace, whichever is later, at which 

point entities would have to have 

completed their initial monitoring (as 

described in Unit IV.C.4.b.). 

Additionally, EPA requires that each 

owner or operator ensure that the 

airborne concentration of TCE does not 

exceed the interim ECEL for all 

potentially exposed persons no later 

than September 15, 2025, and the 

implementation of any needed exposure 

controls based on initial monitoring and 

development of an exposure control 

plan no later than September 15, 2025 

(as described in Unit IV.C.6.). 

EPA uses the term ‘‘potentially 

exposed person’’ in this Unit and in the 

regulatory text to include workers, 

ONUs, employees, independent 

contractors, employers, and all other 

persons in the work area where TCE is 

present and who may be exposed to TCE 

under the conditions of use for which a 

WCPP or specific prescriptive controls 

would apply. As defined in 40 CFR 

751.5, ‘‘Potentially exposed person 

means any person who may be exposed 

to a chemical substance or mixture in a 

workplace as a result of a condition of 

use of that chemical substance or 

mixture.’’ EPA notes that this definition 

is intended to apply to occupational 

workspaces as part of implementation of 

the WCPP and other restrictions. One 

important reason to define a potentially 

exposed person for the purposes of a 

WCPP as any person who may be 

exposed in the workplace is to 

emphasize the broad scope of exposures 

which must be categorized when 

implementing a WCPP. EPA notes that 

this definition is intended to apply only 

in the context of risk management, and 

specifically in the context of a WCPP 

(e.g., workers directly using the 

chemical, workers in the vicinity of the 

use, students in a laboratory setting). 

The term is not intended as a 

replacement for the term Potentially 

Exposed or Susceptible Subpopulation 

as defined by TSCA section 3(12). EPA 

additionally recognizes that other 

individuals or communities may be 

exposed to TCE as consumers, members 

of fenceline communities, or members 

of the general population, which is 

separate and apart from those 

potentially exposed for the purposes of 

the regulatory requirements of the 

WCPP. In those instances, where 

regulatory requirements address 

exposures unrelated to a WCPP, EPA 

would use distinct terminology to refer 

to those other populations. For 

conditions of use that will continue for 

longer than 1 year, such as those under 

a phaseout or a TSCA section 6(g) 

exemption, EPA requires a 

comprehensive WCPP, prescriptive 

controls, or wastewater worker 

protections to reduce exposures to TCE 

for potentially exposed persons, e.g., 

persons directly handling the chemical 

or in the area where the chemical is 

being used. Similarly, the 2020 Risk 

Evaluation for TCE (Ref. 1) did not 

distinguish between employers, 

contractors, or other legal entities or 

businesses that manufacture, process, 

distribute in commerce, use, or dispose 

of TCE. For this reason, EPA uses the 

term ‘‘owner or operator’’ to describe 

the entity responsible for implementing 

the WCPP, prescriptive controls, or 

wastewater worker protection 

provisions in any workplace where an 

applicable condition of use identified in 

the following paragraph and subject to 

the WCPP or controls is occurring. The 

term includes any person who owns, 

leases, operates, controls, or supervises 

such a workplace. While owners or 

operators remain responsible for 

ensuring compliance with the WCPP 

requirements, prescriptive controls, or 

wastewater worker protections in the 

workplace, they may contract with 

others to provide training or implement 

a respiratory protection program, for 

example. For the provisions in this rule, 

any requirement for an owner or 

operator or an owner and operator is a 

requirement for any individual that is 

either an owner or an operator. 

EPA emphasizes that this approach is 

essential for protecting health from the 

risks presented by TCE during the term 

of a phaseout or exemption, including to 

individuals who may not be covered by 

OSHA requirements, such as volunteers, 

self-employed persons, and state and 

local government workers who are not 

covered by an OSHA-Approved State 

Plan. EPA uses the term ‘‘owner or 

operator’’ in TSCA programs because 

the term is used in other EPA programs 

to describe persons with responsibilities 

for implementing statutory and 

regulatory requirements at particular 

locations. See, for example, section 113 

of the Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 

7412, which defines ‘‘owner or 

operator’’ as a person who owns, leases, 

operates, controls, or supervises a 

stationary source. There is a similar 

definition in section 306 of the Clean 

Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1316. EPA 

understands that the use of this term 

may result in multiple entities bearing 

responsibility for complying with 

provisions of this final rule, including 

the WCPP. However, this is also the case 

for workplaces regulated by OSHA, 

including those regulated under OSHA’s 

general industry standards at 29 CFR 

part 1910. 

OSHA’s 1999 Multi-Employer 

Citation Policy explains which 

employers should be cited for a hazard 

that violates an OSHA standard (Ref. 

84). The Policy describes four different 

roles that employers may fill at a 

workplace and describes who should be 

cited for a violation based on factors 

such as whether the employer created 

the hazard, had the ability to prevent or 

correct the hazard, and knew or should 

have known about the hazard. More 

than one employer may be cited for the 

same hazard. This final rule will have 

similar results, in that more than one 

owner or operator may be responsible 

for compliance. 

The OSHA multi-employer citation 

policy is an example of a guidance 

governing situations where more than 

one regulated entity is present. EPA has 

received several requests for 

clarification of the applicability of the 

term ‘‘owner or operator’’ to sites where 

more than one entity owns, leases, or 

controls a workplace where a TCE 

condition of use is ongoing and where 

implementation of the WCPP is 

required. EPA understands that there 

are a wide variety of situations where 

these questions could arise, and plans to 

issue guidance consistent with TSCA 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102601 

authorities that explains how EPA will 

approach the issue of responsibility for 

implementation of, and compliance 

with, the WCPP requirements in 

practice. 

EPA’s implementation of the interim 

ECEL as part of a WCPP aligns with, to 

the extent possible, certain elements of 

the existing OSHA standards for 

regulating toxic and hazardous 

substances under 29 CFR part 1910, 

subpart Z. However, EPA is finalizing a 

new, lower occupational exposure limit 

for TCE, based on the TSCA 2020 Risk 

Evaluation for TCE, public comments, 

and other information as discussed in 

Unit III.A.1., while aligning with 

existing requirements wherever 

possible. For TCE, the WCPP and other 

workplace controls in this final rule are 

necessary to protect against health risks 

from exposures to TCE while conditions 

of use are being phased out or are 

ongoing during the term of a TSCA 

section 6(g) exemption and provide the 

familiarity of a pre-existing framework 

for the regulated community. 

This Unit includes a summary of the 

WCPP, including a description of the 

finalized exposure limits including an 

interim ECEL and an interim ECEL 

action level; implementation 

requirements including monitoring 

requirements; a description of potential 

exposure controls in accordance with 

the hierarchy of controls, including 

engineering controls, administrative 

controls, and PPE as it relates to dermal 

protection and respirator selection; and 

additional finalized requirements for 

recordkeeping, workplace participation, 

and notification. This Unit also 

describes compliance timeframes 

revised from the proposed rule, changes 

by EPA to certain provisions of the 

WCPP based on public comments, and 

addition of new provisions in the WCPP 

based on public comments used to 

inform this final rule. 

3. Interim Existing Chemical Exposure 

Limit (ECEL), EPA Action Level 

As discussed in Unit III.A.1., EPA is 

finalizing an interim ECEL under TSCA 

section 6(a) of 0.2 ppm as an 8-hour 

TWA based on the health effects of TCE, 

the infeasibility of measuring the 

proposed ECEL of 0.0011 ppm, and 

other factors. By interim ECEL, EPA 

means an ECEL that is in place only for 

the timeframes indicated for each 

condition of use, after which 

prohibitions would take effect. EPA has 

determined that ensuring exposures 

remain at or below the 8-hour TWA 

ECEL of 0.2 ppm is necessary to protect 

health for those conditions of use that 

will continue for more than a year. 

EPA is also finalizing an interim ECEL 

action level at half of the 8-hour interim 

ECEL, or 0.1 ppm as an 8-hour TWA. 

The interim ECEL action level is a 

definitive cut-off point below which 

certain compliance activities, such as 

periodic monitoring, are not required as 

described further in this Unit. In this 

way, EPA’s WCPP for TCE aligns with 

other familiar chemical-specific 

frameworks in the OSHA standards for 

regulating toxic and hazardous 

substances under 29 CFR part 1910, 

subpart Z that establish an action level. 

As explained by OSHA, the decision to 

set the action level at one-half the PEL 

was based on its successful experience 

using this fraction as the action level in 

many standards (e.g., arsenic, ethylene 

oxide, vinyl chloride and benzene); for 

most workplaces, the agency found that 

variability in employee exposures is 

normally such that an action level set at 

one-half the TWA PEL is appropriate 

(Ref. 85). 

In summary, this final rule requires 

owners or operators to ensure the 

airborne concentration of TCE within 

the personal breathing zone of 

potentially exposed persons remains at 

or below 0.2 ppm as an 8-hour TWA 

ECEL after September 15, 2025, or 

beginning 120 days after introduction of 

TCE into the workplace if TCE use 

commences after June 16, 2025. EPA is 

also finalizing an action level of 0.1 

ppm as an 8-hour TWA. For the 

purposes of this rulemaking, EPA will 

interpret personal breathing zone 

consistent with how OSHA defines it, as 

a hemispheric area forward of the 

shoulders within a six-to-nine-inch 

radius of a worker’s nose and mouth 

and requires that exposure monitoring 

air samples be collected from within 

this space (Ref. 86). EPA is finalizing the 

interim ECEL for most of those 

occupational conditions of use that will 

continue for more than a year to ensure 

that no person is exposed to inhalation 

of TCE in excess of these concentrations 

resulting from those conditions of use 

(for a small number of occupational 

conditions of use, EPA is finalizing 

prescriptive controls or other workplace 

requirements, as described in more 

detail in Units IV.D and E). As 

discussed in Unit III.A.1., one of the 

considerations in finalizing this interim 

ECEL is the availability of sampling and 

analytical methods sufficient to 

accurately detect TCE concentrations at 

the proposed ECEL and ECEL action 

level. OSHA, NIOSH, and EPA sampling 

methods (both active and passive) with 

sufficient limits of quantification are 

available to support WCPP 

implementation (Ref. 87). 

4. Monitoring Requirements 

a. In General 

Initial monitoring for TCE is critical 

for establishing a baseline of exposure 

for potentially exposed persons; 

similarly, periodic exposure monitoring 

assures continued compliance over time 

so that potentially exposed persons are 

not exposed to levels above the interim 

ECEL. Exposure monitoring could be 

suspended if certain conditions 

described in this Unit are met. Also, in 

some cases, a change in workplace 

conditions with the potential to impact 

exposure levels would warrant 

additional monitoring, which is also 

described. 

EPA is finalizing with modifications 

from proposal its requirement that 

owners or operators determine each 

potentially exposed person’s exposure 

by either taking a personal breathing 

zone air sample of each potentially 

exposed person’s exposure or by taking 

personal breathing zone air samples that 

are representative of each potentially 

exposed person with a similar exposure 

profile to a chemical substance or 

mixture based on the substantial 

similarity of tasks performed, the 

manner in which the tasks are 

performed, and the materials and 

processes with which they work 

(hereinafter identified as an ‘‘exposure 

group’’). Personal breathing zone air 

samples are representative of the 8-hour 

TWA of all potentially exposed persons 

in an exposure group if the samples are 

of the full shift-exposure of at least one 

person who represents the highest 

potential TCE exposures in that 

exposure group. In addition, the initial 

monitoring will be required when and 

where the operating conditions are best 

representative of each potentially 

exposed person’s work-shift exposures. 

Personal breathing zone air samples 

taken during one work shift may be 

used to represent potentially exposed 

person exposures on other work shifts 

where the owner or operator can 

document that the tasks performed and 

conditions in the workplace are similar 

across shifts. Additionally, air sampling 

is required to measure ambient 

concentrations for TCE without taking 

respiratory protections into account as 

sampling is being performed. For 

purposes of exposure monitoring 

requirements, owners and operators are 

only required to monitor potentially 

exposed persons that are expected to be 

present in the workplace. 

EPA is also finalizing requirements 

that the owner or operator ensure, for 

initial and periodic monitoring, that 

their exposure monitoring methods are 

accurate to a confidence level of 95% 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102602 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

and are within (plus or minus) 25% of 

airborne concentrations of TCE above 

the 8-hour TWA interim ECEL. To 

ensure compliance for monitoring 

activities, EPA is finalizing 

recordkeeping requirements and will 

require that owners or operators 

document their choice of monitoring 

method outlined in this Unit. As 

described in Unit III.A.3., EPA is 

finalizing the requirement that owners 

or operators meet certain documentation 

requirements for each monitoring event 

of TCE, including compliance with GLP 

Standards in accordance with 40 CFR 

part 792 or use of a laboratory 

accredited by the AIHA (e.g., AIHA 

LAP, LLC Policy Module 2A/B/E of 

Revision 17.3), or other analogous 

industry-recognized program. 

Additionally, as described in Unit 

III.A.3., EPA is finalizing the 

requirement that owners or operators 

must re-monitor within 15 working days 

after receipt of any exposure monitoring 

when results indicate non-detect, unless 

an Environmental Professional as 

defined at 40 CFR 312.10 or a Certified 

Industrial Hygienist reviews the 

monitoring results and determines remonitoring is not necessary. 

For each monitoring event of TCE, 

EPA is requiring that the owner or 

operator record relevant information, 

including but not limited to, the 

quantity, location(s), and manner of TCE 

in use at the time of each monitoring 

event; the dates, durations, and results 

of each sample taken; and the name, 

work shift, job classification, work area, 

and type of respiratory protection (if 

any) worn by each monitored person. 

EPA further requires documentation of 

the following whenever monitoring for 

the WCPP is required: 

(i) All measurements that may be 

necessary to determine the conditions 

(e.g., work site temperatures, humidity, 

ventilation rates, monitoring equipment 

type and calibration dates) that may 

affect the monitoring results; 

(ii) Identification of all other 

potentially exposed persons that a 

monitored person is intended to 

represent if using a representative 

sample; 

(iii) Use of appropriate sampling and 

analytical methods; 

(iv) Compliance with the GLP 

Standards at 40 CFR part 792 or any 

accredited lab including AIHA (e.g., 

AIHA LAP, LLC Policy Module 2A/B/E 

of Revision 17.3), or other analogous 

industry-recognized program; 

(v) Information regarding air 

monitoring equipment, including type, 

maintenance, calibrations, performance 

tests, limits of detection, and any 

malfunctions. 

b. Initial Exposure Monitoring 

Under the final rule, each owner or 

operator of a facility engaged in one or 

more of the conditions of use listed 

earlier in Unit IV.C.1., except disposal, 

is required to perform initial exposure 

monitoring by June 16, 2025 or within 

30 days of introduction of TCE into the 

workplace, whichever is later, to 

determine the extent of exposure of 

potentially exposed persons to TCE. 

Initial monitoring will notify owners 

and operators of the magnitude of 

possible exposures to potentially 

exposed persons with respect to their 

work conditions and environments. 

Based on the magnitude of possible 

exposures in the initial exposure 

monitoring, the owner or operator may 

need to increase or decrease the 

frequency of future periodic monitoring, 

adopt new exposure controls (such as 

engineering controls, administrative 

controls, and/or a respiratory protection 

program), or to continue or discontinue 

certain compliance activities such as 

periodic monitoring. In addition, the 

initial monitoring will be required when 

and where the operating conditions are 

best representative of each potentially 

exposed person’s work-shift exposures. 

If the owner or operator chooses to use 

a sample that is representative of 

potentially exposed persons’ work-shift 

exposures (rather than monitor every 

individual), such sampling should be 

representative (i.e., taken from the 

breathing zone of potentially exposed 

persons and reflect duration appropriate 

exposure) of the most highly exposed 

persons in the workplace. Additionally, 

EPA expects that owners and operators 

will conduct initial exposure 

monitoring representative of all tasks 

that potential exposed persons are 

expected to do. EPA understands that 

certain tasks may occur less frequently 

or may reflect accidental exposures (for 

example, due to malfunction). 

EPA also recognizes that some entities 

may already have objective exposure 

monitoring data. If the owner or 

operator has monitoring data conducted 

within five years prior to the 

publication date of the final rule and the 

monitoring satisfies all other 

requirements in Unit IV., including the 

requirement that the data represents the 

highest TCE exposures likely to occur 

under reasonably foreseeable conditions 

of use, the owner or operator may rely 

on such earlier monitoring results for 

the initial baseline monitoring sample. 

Prior monitoring data cannot be used 

where there has been a change in work 

conditions or practices that is expected 

to result in new or additional exposures. 

As described in more detail later in 

this unit, the owner or operator must 

conduct periodic monitoring at least 

once every five years since its last 

monitoring. This periodic monitoring 

must be representative of all the 

potentially exposed persons in the 

workplace and the tasks that they are 

expected to do. 

c. Periodic Exposure Monitoring 

EPA is finalizing as proposed the 

following periodic monitoring for 

owners or operators. These finalized 

requirements are also outlined in Table 

1. 

• If the samples taken during the 

initial exposure monitoring reveal a 

concentration below the interim ECEL 

action level (<0.1 ppm 8-hour TWA), 

ECEL periodic monitoring is required at 

least once every five years, except when 

additional exposure monitoring (Unit 

IV.C.4.d.) measurements require it. 

• If the most recent exposure 

monitoring concentration is at or above 

the interim ECEL action level (≥0.1 ppm 

8-hour TWA) but at or below the interim 

ECEL (≤0.2 ppm 8-hour TWA), the 

owner or operator must repeat the 

periodic exposure monitoring within 

180 days of the most recent exposure 

monitoring. 

• If the most recent exposure 

monitoring concentration is above the 

interim ECEL (>0.2 ppm 8-hour TWA), 

the owner or operator must repeat the 

periodic exposure monitoring within 90 

days of the most recent exposure 

monitoring. 

• If the most recent (non-initial) 

exposure monitoring indicates that 

airborne exposure is below the interim 

ECEL action level, the owners or 

operators must repeat such monitoring 

within 180 days of the most recent 

monitoring until two consecutive 

monitoring measurements, taken at least 

seven days apart, are below the interim 

ECEL action level (<0.1 ppm 8-hour 

TWA), at which time the owner or 

operator must repeat the periodic 

exposure monitoring at least once every 

five years. 

• In instances where an owner or 

operator does not manufacture, process, 

use, or dispose of TCE for a condition 

of use for which the WCPP is required 

over the entirety of time since the last 

required periodic monitoring event, the 

owner or operator is permitted to forgo 

the next periodic monitoring event. 

However, documentation of cessation of 

use of TCE is required and periodic 

monitoring must resume when the 

owner or operator restart any of the 

conditions of use listed in Unit IV.C.1., 

except disposal. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102603 

TABLE 1—PERIODIC MONITORING REQUIREMENTS

Air concentration condition Periodic monitoring requirement 

If the initial exposure monitoring concentration is below the interim 

ECEL action level.

Periodic exposure monitoring at least once every 5 years. 

If the most recent exposure monitoring concentration is at or above the 

interim ECEL action level but at or below the interim ECEL.

Periodic exposure monitoring is required every 180 days of the most 

recent exposure monitoring. 

If the most recent exposure monitoring concentration is above the interim ECEL.Periodic exposure monitoring is required every 90 days of the most recent exposure monitoring. 

If the two most recent (non-initial) exposure monitoring measurements, 

taken at least seven days apart within a 6-month period, indicate that 

airborne exposure is below the interim ECEL action level (<0.1 ppm 

8-hr TWA).

Periodic exposure monitoring is required within five years of the most 

recent exposure monitoring. 

If the owner or operator engages in a condition of use for which WCPP 

is required but does not manufacture, process, use, or dispose of 

TCE in that condition of use over the entirety of time since the last 

required monitoring event.

The owner or operator may forgo the next periodic monitoring event. 

However, documentation of cessation of use of TCE is required and 

periodic monitoring is required when the owner or operator resumes 

the condition of use. 

Note: Additional scenarios in which monitoring may be required are discussed in Unit IV.C.4.d. 

d. Additional Exposure Monitoring 

EPA is finalizing that each owner or 

operator conduct additional exposure 

monitoring within 30 days after there 

has been a change in the production, 

process, control equipment, personnel 

or work practices that may reasonably 

be expected to result in new or 

additional exposures at or above the 

interim ECEL action level, or when the 

owner or operator has any reason to 

believe that new or additional exposures 

at or above the interim ECEL action 

level have occurred, for example if an 

owner or operator receives information 

from potentially exposed person(s) 

suggesting that such new or additional 

exposures may have occurred. Prior 

monitoring data cannot be used to meet 

this requirement. In the event of startup or shutdown, or spills, leaks, 

ruptures or other breakdowns or 

unexpected releases that may lead to 

exposure to potentially exposed 

persons, EPA is finalizing that each 

owner or operator must conduct 

additional exposure monitoring of 

potentially exposed persons (using 

personal breathing zone sampling) 

within 30 days after the conclusion of 

the start-up or shutdown and/or the 

cleanup of the spill or repair of the leak, 

rupture, or other breakdown. Prior 

monitoring data cannot be used to meet 

this requirement. An additional 

exposure monitoring event may result in 

an increased frequency of periodic 

monitoring. For example, if the initial 

monitoring results from a workplace are 

above the interim ECEL action level, but 

below the interim ECEL, periodic 

monitoring is required every 180 days. 

If additional monitoring is performed 

because increased exposures are 

suspected, and the results are above the 

interim ECEL, subsequent periodic 

monitoring would have to be performed 

every 90 days. The required additional 

exposure monitoring should not delay 

implementation of any necessary 

cleanup or other remedial action to 

reduce the exposures to persons in the 

workplace. 

5. Regulated Area 

EPA is finalizing its requirement that 

the owner or operator demarcate any 

area where airborne concentrations of 

TCE exceeds or are reasonably expected 

to exceed the interim ECEL by 

September 15, 2025, or within 90 days 

after receipt of any exposure monitoring 

that indicates exposures exceeding the 

interim ECEL. To provide more clarity 

regarding how regulated areas must be 

demarcated, EPA has incorporated the 

language analogous to OSHA’s regulated 

area requirements under the standards 

for toxic and hazardous substances (29 

CFR part 1910, subpart Z) into this final 

rule. Owners and operators must 

demarcate regulated areas from the rest 

of the workplace in any manner that 

adequately establishes and alerts 

potentially exposed persons to the 

boundaries of the area and minimizes 

the number of authorized persons 

exposed to TCE within the regulated 

area. This can be accomplished using 

administrative controls (e.g., highly 

visible signifiers) in multiple languages 

as appropriate (e.g., whenever 

potentially exposed persons who are 

primarily Spanish-speaking are likely to 

be present, owners and operators should 

post additional highly visible signifiers 

in Spanish), placed in conspicuous 

areas. The owner or operator is required 

to restrict access to the regulated area 

from any potentially exposed person 

who lacks proper training or is 

otherwise unauthorized to enter. 

6. Exposure Control Plan 

EPA is finalizing its requirement that 

owners or operators implementing the 

WCPP use feasible exposure controls, 

including one or a combination of 

elimination, substitution, engineering 

controls, and administrative controls, 

prior to requiring the use of PPE (i.e., 

respirators or gloves) as a means of 

controlling exposures below EPA’s 

interim ECEL and/or prevent direct 

dermal contact with TCE for all 

potentially exposed persons, in 

accordance with the hierarchy of 

controls (Ref. 88). As this rule finalizes 

phaseout or time-limited exemption 

before prohibition, EPA encourages 

owners and operators to thoroughly 

investigate and implement elimination, 

substitution, and available engineering 

controls during the phase-out. If an 

owner or operator chooses to replace 

TCE with a substitute, EPA recommends 

careful review of the available hazard 

and exposure information on the 

potential substitutes to avoid a 

substitute chemical that might later be 

found to present an unreasonable risk of 

injury to health or the environment or 

be subject to regulation (sometimes 

referred to as a ‘‘regrettable 

substitution’’). EPA expects that, for 

conditions of use for which EPA is 

finalizing a WCPP, compliance at most 

workplaces would be part of an 

established industrial hygiene program 

that aligns with the hierarchy of 

controls. 

EPA is finalizing the requirement that 

regulated entities use the hierarchy of 

controls, instituting one or a 

combination of controls to the extent 

feasible, and supplement such 

protections using PPE, where necessary, 

including respirators for potentially 

exposed persons at risk of inhalation 

exposure above the interim ECEL. If 

efforts of elimination, substitution, 

engineering controls, and administrative 

controls are not sufficient to reduce 

exposures to or below the interim ECEL 

for all potentially exposed persons in 

the workplace, EPA requires that the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102604 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

owner or operator use feasible controls 

to reduce TCE concentrations in the 

workplace to the lowest levels 

achievable and supplement these 

controls with respiratory protection and 

PPE as needed to achieve the interim 

ECEL before potentially exposed 

persons enter a regulated area. During 

the phase-out period, EPA encourages 

investment in elimination and 

substitution along with the use of 

readily available engineering controls. 

In cases where respiratory PPE is 

necessary to supplement feasible 

controls, EPA requires that the owner or 

operator provide potentially exposed 

persons reasonably likely to be exposed 

to TCE by inhalation to concentrations 

above the interim ECEL with respirators 

affording sufficient protection against 

inhalation risk and appropriate training 

on the proper use of such respirators, to 

ensure that their exposures do not 

exceed the interim ECEL, as described 

in this Unit. Furthermore, EPA also 

requires that the owner or operator 

document their efforts in using 

elimination, substitution, engineering 

controls, and administrative controls to 

reduce exposure to or below the interim 

ECEL in an exposure control plan. 

EPA is finalizing its requirement that, 

no later than December 18, 2025, the 

owner or operator include and 

document in the exposure control plan 

or through any existing documentation 

of the facility’s safety and health 

program developed as part of meeting 

OSHA requirements or other safety and 

health standards, the following: 

• Identification in the exposure 

control plan of available exposure 

controls and rationale for using or not 

using available exposure controls in the 

following sequence (i.e., elimination 

and substitution, then engineering 

controls and administrative controls) to 

reduce exposures in the workplace to 

either at or below the interim ECEL or 

to the lowest level achievable, and the 

exposure controls selected based on 

feasibility, effectiveness, and other 

relevant considerations; 

• For each exposure control 

considered, exposure controls selected 

based on feasibility, effectiveness, and 

other relevant considerations; 

• A description of actions the owner 

or operator must take to implement 

exposure controls selected, including 

proper installation, regular inspections, 

maintenance, training, or other steps 

taken; 

• A description of each regulated 

area, how they are demarcated, and 

persons authorized to enter the 

regulated areas; 

• A description of activities 

conducted by the owner or operator to 

review and update the exposure control 

plan to ensure effectiveness of the 

exposure controls, identify any 

necessary updates to the exposure 

controls, and confirm that all persons 

are properly implementing the exposure 

controls; and 

• An explanation of the procedures 

for responding to any change that may 

reasonably be expected to introduce 

additional sources of exposure to TCE, 

or otherwise result in increased 

exposure to TCE, including procedures 

for implementing corrective actions to 

mitigate exposure to TCE. 

Under this final rule, owners or 

operators are prohibited from using 

rotating work schedules to comply with 

the interim ECEL 8-hour TWA, in 

alignment with certain elements of 

existing OSHA’s standards for toxic and 

hazardous substances under 29 CFR part 

1910, subpart Z. Owners or operators 

must maintain the effectiveness of any 

engineering controls, administrative 

controls, or work practices instituted as 

part of the exposure control plan. They 

must also review and update the 

exposure control plan as necessary, but 

at least every five years, to reflect any 

significant changes in the status of the 

owner or operator’s approach to 

compliance with the exposure control 

requirements. EPA intends that the 

exposure control plan identify the 

available exposure controls and, for the 

exposure controls not selected, 

document the efforts identifying why 

these are not feasible, not effective, or 

otherwise not implemented. For entities 

for which significant amounts of time 

are needed to verify suitability of 

alternatives or procure funds or 

authorization for additional engineering 

controls, for example, EPA expects that 

as those controls become available the 

exposure control plan would be updated 

accordingly. EPA requires that the 

exposure control plan be revisited under 

certain conditions and encourages 

updates as more sophisticated controls 

are available. 

This final rule requires owners or 

operators to make the exposure control 

plan and associated records, including 

interim ECEL exposure monitoring 

records, interim ECEL compliance 

records, and workplace participation 

records, available to potentially exposed 

persons and their designated 

representatives. Owners or operators 

must notify potentially exposed persons 

and their designated representatives of 

the availability of the exposure control 

plan and associated records within 30 

days of the date that the exposure 

control plan is completed and at least 

annually thereafter. The notice of the 

availability of the plan and associated 

records must be provided in plain 

language writing to each potentially 

exposed person in a language that the 

person understands or posted in an 

appropriate and accessible location 

outside the regulated area with an 

English-language version and a nonEnglish version representing the 

language of the largest group of workers 

who do not read English. This final rule 

also requires the owner or operator to 

provide the exposure control plan and 

associated records at a reasonable time, 

place, and manner to a potentially 

exposed person or their designated 

representative upon request. As 

explained in Unit III.A.4., if the owner 

or operator is unable to provide the 

specified records within 15 working 

days, the owner or operator must inform 

the potentially exposed person or 

designated representative requesting the 

record within 15 working days that 

reason for the delay and the earliest date 

when the record can be made available. 

7. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) 

Where elimination, substitution, 

engineering, and administrative controls 

are not feasible or sufficiently protective 

to reduce the air concentration to or 

below the interim ECEL, EPA is 

finalizing as proposed, with slight 

modifications to improve clarity or for 

greater consistency with OSHA’s 

regulations, to require owners and 

operators to provide PPE, including 

respiratory protection and dermal 

protection selected in accordance with 

the guidelines described in Units 

IV.C.7.a. and b. and to implement a PPE 

program described in this Unit. This 

Unit includes a description of the PPE 

Program, including required PPE as it 

relates to respiratory protection, 

required PPE as it relates to dermal 

protection, and other requirements such 

as additional training for respirators and 

recordkeeping to support 

implementation of a PPE program. 

Compliance with these requirements 

must occur no later than September 15, 

2025, or, for requirements related to 

respiratory protection, within 90 days 

after the receipt of any exposure 

monitoring that indicates exposures 

exceeding the interim ECEL. 

a. Respiratory Protection 

Where elimination, substitution, 

engineering, and administrative controls 

are not feasible or sufficiently protective 

to reduce the air concentration to or 

below the interim ECEL, or if inhalation 

exposure above the interim ECEL is still 

reasonably likely, EPA is finalizing, 

with slight modification from the 

proposed rule, minimum respiratory 

PPE requirements based on an owner or 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102605 

operator’s most recent measured air 

concentration for one or more 

potentially exposed persons and the 

level of PPE needed to reduce exposure 

to or below the interim ECEL. In those 

circumstances, EPA is finalizing 

requirements for a respiratory protection 

PPE program with worksite-specific 

procedures and elements for required 

respirator use. Owners or operators 

must develop and administer a written 

respiratory protection program in 

accordance with OSHA’s respiratory 

protection standard under 29 CFR 

1910.134(c)(1), (c)(3), and (c)(4). EPA is 

finalizing requirements that owners and 

operators provide training to all persons 

required to use respiratory protection 

consistent with 29 CFR 1910.134(k) 

prior to or at the time of initial 

assignment to a job involving potential 

exposure to TCE. Owners and operators 

must retrain all persons required to use 

PPE at least annually, or whenever the 

owner or operator has reason to believe 

that a previously trained person does 

not have the required understanding 

and skill to properly use PPE, or when 

changes in the workplace or in PPE to 

be used render the previous training 

obsolete. 

EPA is finalizing requirements that 

each owner or operator supply a 

respirator, selected in accordance with 

this Unit, to each person who enters a 

regulated area after September 15, 2025, 

or within 90 days after the receipt of any 

exposure monitoring that indicates 

exposures exceeding the interim ECEL, 

and thereafter must ensure that all 

persons within the regulated area are 

using the provided respirators whenever 

TCE exposures exceed or can reasonably 

be expected to exceed the interim ECEL. 

EPA is also finalizing requirements 

that owners or operators who are 

required to administer a respiratory 

protection PPE program must supply a 

respirator selected based on a medical 

evaluation consistent with the 

requirements of 29 CFR 1910.134(e). If 

a potentially exposed person cannot use 

a negative-pressure respirator, then the 

owner or operator must provide that 

person with an alternative respirator. 

The alternative respirator must have less 

breathing resistance than the negativepressure respirator and provide 

equivalent or greater protection. If the 

person is unable to use an alternative 

respirator, then the person must not be 

permitted to enter the regulated area. 

Additionally, EPA is requiring owners 

and operators to select respiratory 

protection that properly fits each 

affected person and communicate 

respirator selections to each affected 

person in accordance with the 

requirements of 29 CFR 1910.134(f). 

Consistent with requirements of 29 CFR 

1910.134(g) through (j), EPA is requiring 

owners and operators to provide, ensure 

use of, and maintain (in a sanitary, 

reliable, and undamaged condition), 

respiratory protection that is of safe 

design and construction. 

EPA is finalizing the requirements to 

establish minimum respiratory 

protection requirements, such that any 

respirator affording a higher degree of 

protection than the following 

requirements may be used. In instances 

where respiratory protection is 

appropriate, NIOSH Approved®

equipment must be used. NIOSH 

Approved is a certification mark of the 

U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services (HHS) registered in the United 

States and several international 

jurisdictions. EPA is finalizing the 

following requirements for respiratory 

protection, based on the most recent 

exposure monitoring concentrations 

results measured as an 8-hour TWA that 

exceed the interim ECEL (0.2 ppm): 

• If the measured exposure 

concentration is at or below 0.2 ppm: no 

respiratory protection is required. 

• If the measured exposure 

concentration is above 0.2 ppm and less 

than or equal to 2 ppm (10 times interim 

ECEL): Any NIOSH Approved airpurifying half mask respirator equipped 

with organic vapor cartridges or 

canisters; or any NIOSH Approved 

Supplied-Air Respirator (SAR) or 

Airline Respirator operated in demand 

mode equipped with a half mask; or any 

NIOSH Approved Self-Contained 

Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) in a 

demand mode equipped with a half 

mask [APF 10]. 

• If the measured exposure 

concentration is above 2 ppm and less 

than or equal to 5 ppm (25 times interim 

ECEL): Any NIOSH Approved Powered 

Air-Purifying Respirator (PAPR) 

equipped with a loose-fitting facepiece 

or hood/helmet equipped with organic 

vapor cartridges or canisters; or any 

NIOSH Approved SAR or Airline 

Respirator in a continuous-flow mode 

equipped with a loose-fitting facepiece 

or helmet/hood [APF 25]. 

• If the measured exposure 

concentration is above 5 ppm and less 

than or equal to 10 ppm (50 times 

interim ECEL): Any NIOSH Approved 

air-purifying full facepiece respirator 

equipped with organic vapor cartridges 

or canisters; any NIOSH Approved 

PAPR with a half mask equipped with 

organic vapor cartridges or canisters; 

any NIOSH Approved SAR or Airline 

Respirator in a continuous flow mode 

equipped with a half mask; any NIOSH 

Approved SAR or Airline Respirator 

operated in a pressure-demand or other 

positive-pressure mode with a half 

mask; or any NIOSH Approved SCBA in 

demand-mode equipped with a full 

facepiece or helmet/hood [APF 50]. 

• If the measured exposure 

concentration is above 10 ppm and less 

than or equal to 200 ppm (1,000 times 

interim ECEL): Any NIOSH Approved 

PAPR equipped with a full facepiece 

equipped with organic vapor cartridges 

or canisters; any NIOSH Approved SAR 

or Airline Respirator in a continuousflow mode equipped with full facepiece; 

any NIOSH Approved SAR or Airline 

Respirator in pressure-demand or other 

positive-pressure mode equipped with a 

full facepiece and an auxiliary selfcontained air supply; or any NIOSH 

Approved SAR or Airline Respirator in 

a continuous-flow mode equipped with 

a helmet or hood and has been tested to 

demonstrate performance at a level of 

protection of APF 1,000 or greater. [APF 

1,000]. 

• If the measured exposure 

concentration is greater than 200 ppm 

(1,000+ times interim ECEL) or the 

concentration is unknown: Any NIOSH 

Approved SAR equipped with a full 

facepiece and operated in a pressure 

demand or other positive pressure mode 

in combination with an auxiliary selfcontained breathing apparatus operated 

in a pressure demand or other positive 

pressure mode [APF 1000+]; or any 

NIOSH Approved SCBA in a pressuredemand or other positive-pressure mode 

equipped with a full facepiece or 

helmet/hood [APF 10,000]. 

• If the exposure concentration is 

unknown: Any NIOSH Approved 

combination supplied air respirator 

equipped with a full facepiece and 

operated in pressure demand or other 

positive pressure mode with an 

auxiliary self-contained air supply; or 

any NIOSH Approved SCBA operated in 

pressure demand or other positive 

pressure mode and equipped with a full 

facepiece or hood/helmet [APF 1000+]. 

Additionally, EPA is finalizing 

requirements that owners or operators 

select and provide respirators in 

accordance with the requirements of 29 

CFR 1910.134(d)(1)(iv) and with 

consideration of workplace and user 

factors that affect respirator performance 

and reliability. EPA is requiring that the 

owner or operator must ensure that all 

filters, cartridges, and canisters used in 

the workplace are labeled and color 

coded per NIOSH requirements and that 

the label is not removed and remains 

legible. Consistent with 29 CFR 

1910.134(d)(3)(iii), EPA is requiring 

either the use of NIOSH Approved 

respirators with an end-of-life service 

indicator for the contaminant, in this 

case TCE, or implementation of a 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102606 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

change schedule for canisters and 

cartridges that ensures that they are 

changed before the end of their service 

life. EPA is also requiring owners and 

operators to ensure that respirators are 

used in compliance with the terms of 

the respirator’s NIOSH approval. 

EPA is finalizing requirements that 

owners and operators must conduct 

regular evaluations of the workplace, 

including consultations with potentially 

exposed persons using respiratory 

protection, consistent with the 

requirements of 29 CFR 1910.134(l), to 

ensure that the provisions of the written 

respiratory protection program 

described in this Unit are being 

effectively implemented. 

EPA is finalizing that owners and 

operators document respiratory 

protection used and PPE program 

implementation. EPA is finalizing 

requirements that owners and operators 

document in the exposure control plan 

or other documentation of the facility’s 

safety and health program information 

relevant to the respiratory program, 

including records on the name, 

workplace address, work shift, job 

classification, work area, and type of 

respirator worn (if any) by each 

potentially exposed person, 

maintenance, and fit-testing, as 

described in 29 CFR 1910.134(f), and 

training in accordance with 29 CFR 

1910.132(f) and 29 CFR 1910.134(k). 

b. Dermal Protection 

This final rule requires owners and 

operators to provide and require the use 

of chemically resistant gloves by 

potentially exposed persons for tasks 

where TCE is present and dermal 

exposure can be expected to occur 

under the conditions of use. Compliance 

with this requirement must occur no 

later than September 15, 2025. Owners 

and operators should also consider 

other glove factors, such as 

compatibility of multiple chemicals 

used simultaneously while wearing 

TCE-resistant gloves or with glove 

liners, permeation, degree of dexterity 

required to perform a task, and 

temperature, as identified in the Hand 

Protection section of OSHA’s Personal 

Protection Equipment Guidance (Ref. 

89), when selecting appropriate PPE. 

Owners and operators can select gloves 

that have been tested in accordance 

with the American Society for Testing 

Material F739 ‘‘Standard Test Method 

for Permeation of Liquids and Gases 

through Protective Clothing Materials 

under Conditions of Continuous 

Contact.’’ 

Owners and operators must provide 

dermal PPE that is of safe design and 

construction for the work to be 

performed and that properly fits each 

potentially exposed person who is 

required to use dermal PPE. Owners and 

operators must also communicate 

dermal PPE selections to each affected 

person and ensure that each potentially 

exposed person who is required by this 

unit to wear PPE uses and maintains 

PPE in a sanitary, reliable, and 

undamaged condition. Activity-specific 

training (e.g., glove selection (type, 

material), expected duration of glove 

effectiveness, actions to take when glove 

integrity is compromised, storage 

requirements, procedure for glove 

removal and disposal, chemical 

hazards) must be provided in 

accordance with 29 CFR 1910.132(f). 

8. Additional Finalized Requirements 

a. Workplace Information and Training 

EPA is also finalizing its requirements 

to implement a training program in 

alignment with the OSHA Hazard 

Communication Standard (29 CFR 

1910.1200) and chemical-specific 

standards, such as the OSHA General 

Industry Standard for Methylene 

Chloride (29 CFR 1910.1052). To ensure 

that potentially exposed persons in the 

workplace are informed of the hazards 

associated with TCE exposure, EPA is 

finalizing as proposed with slight 

modification to require that owners or 

operators of workplaces subject to the 

WCPP institute a training and 

information program by September 15, 

2025 for potentially exposed persons 

and assure their participation in the 

program. For purposes of workplace 

information and training, owners and 

operators are only required to train 

potentially exposed persons that are 

expected to be present in the regulated 

area or to directly handle TCE or handle 

equipment or materials on which TCE 

may present. 

As part of the training requirement, 

the owner or operator is required to 

provide information and comprehensive 

training in an understandable manner 

(i.e., plain language), considering factors 

such as the skills required to perform 

the work activity and the existing skill 

level of the staff performing the work, 

and in multiple languages as 

appropriate (e.g., based on languages 

spoken by potentially exposed persons) 

to potentially exposed persons. This 

training and information must be 

provided prior to or at the time of initial 

assignment to a job involving potential 

exposure to TCE. Owners and operators 

are required to provide information and 

training, as referenced in the OSHA 

Hazard Communication Standard, to all 

potentially exposed persons that 

includes: 

• The requirements of the TCE WCPP 

and how to access or obtain a copy of 

the requirements of the WCPP, 

including but not limited to the 

exposure control plan, monitoring 

requirements, and PPE program; 

• The quantity, location, manner of 

use, release, and storage of TCE and the 

specific operations in the workplace 

that could result in TCE exposure, 

particularly noting where each regulated 

area is located; 

• Principles of safe use and handling 

of TCE in the workplace, including 

specific measures the owner or operator 

has implemented to reduce inhalation 

exposure at or below the interim ECEL 

or prevent dermal contact with TCE, 

such as work practices and PPE used; 

• The methods and observations that 

may be used to detect the presence or 

release of TCE in the workplace (such as 

monitoring conducted by the owner or 

operator, continuous monitoring 

devices, visual appearance, or odor of 

TCE when being released, etc.); and 

• The acute and chronic health 

hazards of TCE as detailed on relevant 

SDSs. 

In addition to providing training at 

the time of initial assignment to a job 

involving potential exposure to TCE, 

owners and operators subject to the TCE 

WCPP are required to re-train each 

potentially exposed person annually to 

ensure they understand the principles of 

safe use and handling of TCE in the 

workplace. EPA is finalizing its 

requirements that owners and update 

the training as necessary whenever there 

are changes in the workplace, such as 

new tasks or modifications of tasks, in 

particular, whenever there are changes 

in the workplace that increase exposure 

to TCE or where potentially exposed 

persons’ exposure to TCE can 

reasonably be expected to exceed the 

action level or increase the potential for 

direct dermal contact with TCE. To 

support compliance, EPA is finalizing as 

proposed that each owner or operator of 

a workplace subject to the WCPP is 

required to provide to the EPA, upon 

request, all available materials related to 

workplace information and training. 

b. Workplace Participation 

EPA encourages owners and operators 

to consult with potentially exposed 

persons and their designated 

representatives on the development and 

implementation of exposure control 

plans and PPE/respirator programs. EPA 

is finalizing the requirement that 

owners and operators provide 

potentially exposed persons and their 

designated representatives regular 

access to the exposure control plans, 

exposure monitoring records, and PPE 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102607 

program implementation. To ensure 

compliance with workplace 

participation, EPA is finalizing its 

requirement that the owner or operator 

document the notice to and ability of 

any potentially exposed person who 

may reasonably be affected by TCE 

exposure to readily access the exposure 

control plans, facility exposure 

monitoring records, PPE program 

implementation, or any other 

information relevant to TCE exposure in 

the workplace. 

c. Notification of Monitoring Results 

EPA is finalizing the requirement that 

the owner or operator must, within 15 

working days after receipt of the results 

of any exposure monitoring, notify each 

person whose exposures are monitored 

or who is part of a monitored exposure 

group and their designated 

representatives in writing, in plain 

language, either individually to each 

potentially exposed person or by 

posting the information in an 

appropriate and accessible location, 

such as public spaces or common areas, 

for potentially exposed persons outside 

of the regulated area. The notice is 

required to identify the exposure 

monitoring results, the interim ECEL 

and interim ECEL action level, 

statement of whether the monitored 

airborne concentration of TCE exceeds 

the interim ECEL and the interim ECEL 

action level, and any corresponding 

respiratory protection required. If the 

interim ECEL is exceeded, the notice 

must also include a description of the 

actions taken by the owner or operator 

to reduce inhalation exposures to or 

below the interim ECEL. The notice 

must also include the quantity, location, 

and manner of TCE use at the time of 

monitoring. The notice must also 

include identified releases of TCE. The 

notice must be provided in multiple 

languages if necessary. Specifically, 

notice must be provided in a language 

that each potentially exposed person 

understands, or posted in a non-English 

language version representing the 

language of the largest group of workers 

who cannot readily comprehend or read 

English). 

d. Recordkeeping 

For owners and operators to 

demonstrate compliance with the WCPP 

provisions, EPA is requiring that owners 

and operators must retain compliance 

records for five years (although this 

requirement does not supplant any 

longer recordkeeping retention time 

periods such as those required under 29 

CFR 1910.1020, or other applicable 

regulations). EPA is requiring the owner 

or operator to retain records of: 

• Exposure control plan; 

• Regulated areas and authorized 

personnel; 

• Facility exposure monitoring 

records; 

• Notifications of exposure 

monitoring results; 

• PPE and respiratory protection used 

and program implementation; and 

• Information and training provided 

by the owner or operator to each 

potentially exposed person prior to or at 

the time of initial assignment to a job 

involving potential exposure to TCE. 

EPA emphasizes that all records 

required to be maintained can be kept 

in the most administratively convenient 

form: electronic record form or paper 

form. The owner or operator is required 

to document training or re-training of 

any potentially exposed person as 

necessary to ensure that, in the event of 

monitoring results that indicate 

exposure or possible exposures above 

the interim ECEL action level, the 

potentially exposed person has 

demonstrated understanding of how to 

use and handle TCE and how to 

appropriately use required PPE. 

D. Prescriptive Controls for Energized 

Electrical Cleaner 

In contrast to the non-prescriptive 

requirements of the WCPP, where 

regulated entities would have flexibility 

to select controls in accordance with the 

hierarchy of controls to comply with the 

parameters outlined in Unit IV.C., EPA 

has found it appropriate for certain 

activities in certain circumstances to 

allow owners and operators the choice 

of either complying with the WCPP or 

require complying with specific 

prescriptive controls for certain 

occupational conditions of use. EPA is 

finalizing specific prescriptive controls 

for the industrial and commercial use of 

TCE in energized electrical cleaner. The 

rationale for these changes, after 

consideration of public comments, is in 

Unit III.C.1. This Unit provides a 

description of the condition of use 

subject to specific prescriptive controls, 

the specific prescriptive control 

requirements, and the compliance 

timeframes for the requirements. 

Considering the time needed to 

transition away from this use of TCE, to 

protect health from inhalation and 

dermal exposures to TCE from the 

industrial and commercial use of TCEcontaining energized electrical cleaners, 

which is a sub-use of the industrial and 

commercial use as an aerosol spray 

degreaser/cleaner, EPA is requiring 

owners and operators to comply with 

either (i) specific prescriptive controls 

outlined in this Unit, including dermal 

PPE and respiratory protection, or (ii) 

implementation of the WCPP outlined 

in Unit IV.C. As described in Unit 

III.C.1., EPA’s workplace requirements 

to reduce exposures to TCE in the 

timeframe before prohibitions for 

energized electrical cleaner are 

consistent to the extent possible with 

existing regulations and best practices 

for work in electrical spaces. EPA 

acknowledges the existing OSHA 

requirements for electrical protective 

equipment under 29 CFR 1910.137 and 

determined the requirements in this 

Unit do not interfere with a potentially 

exposed person’s ability to safely use 

electrical protective equipment, such as 

rubber insulating gloves and rubber 

insulating sleeves, as required under 

OSHA. 

1. Applicability 

The industrial and commercial use of 

TCE in energized electrical cleaner 

refers to the use of TCE in a product to 

clean and/or degrease electrical 

equipment, where cleaning and/or 

degreasing is accomplished when 

electrical current exists, or when there 

is a residual electrical potential from a 

component, such as a capacitor (i.e., 

energized equipment use only). In this 

final rule, energized electrical cleaner 

does not include general purpose 

degreaser, electrical cleaner, or 

electronic cleaner, for example for use 

in motorized vehicle maintenance and 

their parts, which is subject to the 

prohibitions described in Unit IV.B.1. 

2. Workplace Requirements for 

Energized Electrical Cleaner 

EPA is requiring that owners or 

operators must either implement (i) 

specific prescriptive controls that 

provide dermal PPE and respiratory 

protection or (ii) implement the WCPP 

for industrial and commercial use in 

energized electrical cleaner. Owners and 

operators must maintain a statement 

regarding whether the business is 

complying with the specified 

prescriptive controls or with the WCPP. 

a. Prescriptive Controls 

i. Dermal Protection 

This rule requires dermal PPE, 

including impermeable gloves, in 

combination with comprehensive 

training for each potentially exposed 

person who uses TCE in energized 

electrical cleaner. For dermal PPE, EPA 

is requiring that each owner or operator 

comply with the requirements outlined 

in Unit IV.C.7.b. for selection of dermal 

PPE and training for all potentially 

exposed persons. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102608 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

ii. Respiratory Protection 

This final rule requires the use of 

specific respiratory protection, in 

combination with comprehensive 

training, for use of energized electrical 

cleaner containing TCE. Specifically, 

EPA is requiring owners or operators to 

provide to potentially exposed persons, 

and potentially exposed persons to use, 

the following: any NIOSH Approved airpurifying full facepiece respirator 

equipped with organic vapor cartridges 

or canisters; any NIOSH Approved 

PAPR with a half mask equipped with 

organic vapor cartridges or canisters; 

any NIOSH Approved SAR or Airline 

Respirator in a continuous flow mode 

equipped with a half mask; any NIOSH 

Approved SAR or Airline Respirator 

operated in a pressure-demand or other 

positive-pressure mode with a half 

mask; or any NIOSH Approved SCBA in 

demand-mode equipped with a full 

facepiece or helmet/hood [APF 50]; or 

any NIOSH Approved respirator 

affording a higher degree of protection. 

In providing the specified respirators 

and training, EPA is requiring owners or 

operators to administer a PPE program 

with procedures and elements for 

required respirator use as described in 

Unit IV.C.7.a., for proper use, 

maintenance, fit-testing, medical 

evaluation, and training. EPA is 

requiring that the owner or operator 

must ensure that all filters, cartridges, 

and canisters used in the workplace are 

labeled and color coded per NIOSH 

requirements and that the label is not 

removed and remains legible. 

b. WCPP 

EPA understands that there may be 

instances where a performance-based 

standard is more appropriate to reduce 

exposures from the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE in energized 

electrical cleaner, instead of the specific 

prescriptive dermal and respiratory 

protection requirements described in 

this Unit. For example, the WCPP may 

be preferred by owners or operators that 

regularly use TCE to clean energized 

electrical equipment onsite at their 

facility or by owners or operators that 

are implementing the WCPP at their 

facility for another condition of use of 

TCE. In these instances, the final rule 

permits owners or operators to comply 

with the WCPP requirements, including 

the interim ECEL, direct dermal contact 

controls, and ancillary provisions, 

outlined in Unit IV.B, instead of the 

prescriptive controls described in this 

Unit. 

c. Recordkeeping 

Owners and operators subject to the 

energized electrical cleaner 

requirements must maintain a statement 

regarding whether the owner or operator 

is complying with the prescriptive 

control requirements or the WCPP 

requirements. They must also maintain 

records of the dermal and respiratory 

protection used by each potentially 

exposed person and of PPE program 

implementation or the WCPP records 

described in Unit IV.C.8.d. 

Distributors of TCE, including TCE 

containing products, for use in 

energized electrical cleaner must retain 

sale records, including the name of the 

purchaser, sale date, and quantity sold. 

E. Wastewater Worker Protection 

Provisions 

1. Applicability 

The disposal of TCE to wastewater 

refers to the disposal of TCE to 

industrial pre-treatment, industrial 

treatment, or publicly owned treatment 

works, which includes the mixing of 

TCE with wastewater and the discharge 

of TCE-contaminated wastewater 

pursuant to a NPDES permit. EPA is 

finalizing distinct workplace protection 

provisions, separate from the WCPP 

described in Unit IV.C., for owners and 

operators of facilities or sites involved 

in the industrial treatment and pretreatment of TCE wastewater at cleanup 

sites, that fall under the 50-year TSCA 

section 6(g) exemption for disposal of 

TCE for the purposes of facilitating 

cleanup projects of TCE-contaminated 

groundwater and other wastewater. EPA 

is also finalizing distinct workplace 

protection provisions for owners and 

operators of publicly owned treatment 

works who receive wastewater 

associated with TCE disposal for: 

industrial and commercial use as a 

processing aid for lithium battery 

separator manufacturing, industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a processing 

aid for lead-acid battery separator 

manufacturing, industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a processing 

aid for specialty polymeric microporous 

sheet material manufacturing, and 

facilitating cleanup projects of TCEcontaminated groundwater and other 

wastewater. Owners and operators of 

facilities or sites involved in the 

industrial treatment and pre-treatment 

sub-categories of TCE wastewater 

disposal for industrial and commercial 

conditions of use are not included 

within these distinct wastewater 

provisions and are subject to the WCPP 

described in Unit IV.C. For the purposes 

of this rulemaking, EPA does not 

consider wastewater to be a product that 

is eligible for the regulatory threshold 

discussed in Units III.D.1 and IV.A. As 

discussed in Unit III.D.1., EPA finds that 

a regulatory threshold is necessary to 

avoid impacts on numerous supply 

chains, particularly chlorinated organic 

products. These considerations are not 

applicable to wastewater disposal. 

2. Workplace Requirements for 

Facilitating Cleanup Projects of TCEContaminated Groundwater and Other 

Wastewater 

This final rule requires that owners 

and operators of facilities or sites 

involved in disposal of TCE-containing 

wastewater for the purposes of cleanup 

projects of TCE-contaminated water and 

groundwater follow the requirements set 

forth in 29 CFR 1910.120(c)(5) and (h), 

known as the Hazardous Waste 

Operations and Emergency Response 

standard, with notable modifications: 

this rule requires that, for those 

provisions in 29 CFR 1910.120 that 

reference a PEL, owners and operators 

will instead comply with the TSCA 

interim ECEL of 0.2ppm. As explained 

in Unit III.A.2., owners and operators of 

these cleanup sites must ensure that 

potentially exposed persons involved 

with the activity of removing the 

wastewater from the location where it 

was found and treating the removed 

wastewater on-site are protected to the 

interim ECEL level of 0.2 ppm and 

protected from dermal contact with 

TCE-containing wastewater. 

3. Workplace Requirements for Workers 

at Publicly Owned Treatment Works 

To protect workers and facilitate 

successful implementation, EPA is 

finalizing the requirement that POTWs 

must either (i) implement the WCPP or 

(ii) where there is a reasonable 

possibility of the presence of TCE screen 

the wastewater they receive, in a 

manner consistent with the approach 

outlined in EPA’s 1992 ‘‘Guidance to 

Protect POTW Workers from Toxic and 

Reactive Gases and Vapors’’ (Ref. 52). 

Owners and operators must compare the 

concentration of TCE in wastewater to a 

screening level that EPA calculated as 

described in section III.A.2. EPA is 

finalizing a provision that if the 

wastewater concentration is equal to or 

less than 0.00284 mg/L of TCE, the 

POTW where there is a reasonable 

possibility of the presence of TCE can 

assume that the concentration of TCE in 

air that results from TCE volatilization 

from wastewater is equal to or less than 

the interim ECEL. If a POTW’s 

wastewater screening detects TCE at 

concentration greater than 0.00284 mg/ 

L of TCE then EPA is requiring that 

owners and operators comply with the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102609 

WCPP, as described in Unit IV.C., 

except that owners and operators do not 

have to perform initial air monitoring. 

F. Other Requirements 

1. Recordkeeping 

EPA is finalizing as proposed the 

requirement that manufacturers, 

processors, industrial and commercial 

users, and distributors maintain 

ordinary business records, such as 

invoices and bills-of-lading, that 

demonstrate compliance with 

restrictions and other provisions of this 

final regulation; and that they maintain 

such records for a period of five years 

from the date the record is generated. 

This requirement begins on February 18, 

2025. For enforcement purposes, EPA 

will have access to such businesses 

records plus additional records required 

under 40 CFR 751.323. Recordkeeping 

requirements ensure that owners or 

operators can demonstrate compliance 

with the regulations if necessary. 

2. Downstream Notification 

EPA is finalizing as proposed the 

requirements that manufacturers 

(including importers), processors, and 

distributors of TCE and TCE-containing 

products provide downstream 

notification of certain prohibitions 

through SDSs by adding the language 

set forth in § 751.321(c) to sections 1(c) 

and 15 of the SDS. To provide adequate 

time to update the SDS and ensure that 

all products in the supply chain include 

the revised SDS, EPA’s final rule 

requires manufacturers revise their SDS 

within 60 days of publication and 

processors and distributors revise their 

SDS within 180 days of publication of 

the final rule. 

The intention of downstream 

notification is to spread awareness 

throughout the supply chain of the 

restrictions on TCE under TSCA and to 

provide information to commercial endusers about the timeframes for use until 

prohibition. 

G. TSCA Section 6(g) Exemptions 

Under TSCA section 6(g)(1), EPA may 

grant an exemption from a requirement 

of a TSCA section 6(a) rule for a specific 

condition of use of a chemical substance 

or mixture if the Agency makes one of 

three findings. TSCA section 6(g)(1)(A) 

permits such an exemption if the 

specific condition of use is a critical or 

essential use for which no technically 

and economically feasible safer 

alternative is available. Under TSCA 

section 6(g)(1)(B), EPA must find that 

compliance with the requirement would 

significantly disrupt the national 

economy, national security, or critical 

infrastructure to provide an exemption. 

Finally, TSCA section 6(g)(1)(C) allows 

for an exemption based on an EPA 

finding that the specific condition of use 

of the chemical substance or mixture, as 

compared to reasonably available 

alternatives, provides a substantial 

benefit to health, the environment, or 

public safety. This unit presents the 

TSCA section 6(g) exemptions EPA is 

finalizing in this rule. See Units V.A.3. 

and V.B.3. of the 2023 TCE proposed 

rule for an analysis of the need for such 

exemptions pursuant to TSCA section 

6(g)(2). EPA notes that EPA is able to 

extend or modify TSCA section 6(g) 

exemptions by rulemaking as 

appropriate but is unable to incorporate 

automatic extensions to TSCA section 

6(g) exemptions. Given the nature of 

Agency rulemaking, EPA notes that 

such requests to extend or modify a 

TSCA section 6(g) exemption be 

submitted to EPA several years in 

advance of the expiration of the 

exemption. 

Unless otherwise specified, for each 

condition of use subject to a timelimited TSCA section 6(g) exemption in 

this final rule, EPA is requiring owners 

and operators of the location where 

such use occurs to comply with the 

WCPP provisions described in Unit 

IV.C. and the recordkeeping provisions 

described in Unit IV.F. Additionally, for 

each condition of use subject to a timelimited TSCA section 6(g) exemption, 

EPA is requiring manufacturers 

(including importers) and processors of 

TCE for such use to comply with the 

WCPP provisions described in Unit 

IV.C. until the prohibition compliance 

date. The prohibition compliance date 

for the manufacture (including import), 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce for each condition of use 

subject to a time-limited TSCA section 

6(g) exemption, except for disposal, is 

the same as the expiration date of the 

exemption for that use. 

1. 7-Year Exemption for Industrial and 

Commercial Use of TCE in Closed-Loop 

and Open-Top Batch Vapor Degreasing 

for Essential Aerospace Parts and 

Components and Narrow Tubing Used 

in Medical Devices 

EPA is finalizing a seven-year TSCA 

section 6(g)(1)(B) exemption from the 

prohibition for the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE in batch vapor 

degreasing for essential aerospace parts 

and components and a seven-year TSCA 

section 6(g)(1)(A) exemption from the 

prohibition for the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE in batch vapor 

degreasing for narrow tubing used in 

medical devices. As described in Unit 

V.B.3. in the proposed rule, EPA’s 

primary alternative regulatory action 

described 7-year TSCA section 6(g) 

exemptions from prohibition for 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

batch vapor degreasing for essential 

aerospace parts and components and 

narrow tubing used in medical devices. 

EPA is finalizing these exemptions. The 

specific condition for these exemptions 

is that TCE can only be used for batch 

vapor degreasing of: (1) essential 

aerospace parts and components 

(including rayon fabric) where cleaning 

alternatives present technical feasibility 

or performance challenges to meet 

specifications from other Federal 

agencies or other long-standing design 

specifications that are included in 

existing contracts, or (2) narrow tubing 

for medical devices. 

2. 7-Year Exemption for Industrial and 

Commercial Use of TCE as a Solvent in 

Closed-Loop Batch Vapor Degreasing 

Necessary for Rocket Engine Cleaning 

by Federal Agencies and Their 

Contractors 

EPA is finalizing as proposed a 7-year 

TSCA section 6(g)(1)(B) exemption from 

the prohibition on the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a solvent in 

closed-loop vapor degreasing necessary 

for rocket engine cleaning by Federal 

agencies and their contractors, and the 

manufacture (including import), 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce of TCE for this use. 

3. 10-Year Exemption for TCE for 

Certain Industrial and Commercial Uses 

for Vessels of the Armed Forces and 

Their Systems 

EPA is finalizing a 10-year TSCA 

section 6(g)(1)(B) exemption from the 

prohibition on industrial and 

commercial use of TCE for the industrial 

and commercial use of TCE for vessels 

of the Armed Forces and their systems, 

and in the maintenance, fabrication, and 

sustainment for and of such vessels and 

systems: as potting compounds for naval 

electronic systems and equipment; 

sealing compounds for high and ultrahigh vacuum systems; bonding 

compounds for materials testing and 

maintenance of underwater systems and 

bonding of nonmetallic materials; and 

cleaning agents to satisfy cleaning 

requirements (which includes 

degreasing using wipes, sprays, 

solvents, and vapor degreasing) for: 

materials and components required for 

military ordinance testing; temporary 

resin repairs in vessel spaces where 

welding is not authorized; ensuring 

polyurethane adhesion for electronic 

systems and equipment repair and 

installation of elastomeric materials; 

various naval combat systems, radars, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102610 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

sensors, equipment; fabrication and 

prototyping processes to remove coolant 

and other residue from machine parts; 

machined part fabrications for naval 

systems; installation of topside rubber 

tile material aboard vessels; and vapor 

degreasing required for substrate surface 

preparation prior to electroplating 

processes. EPA is finalizing this TSCA 

section 6(g)(1)(B) exemption as 

proposed, with the modification of the 

term ‘‘DoD naval vessels’’ to ‘‘vessels of 

the Armed Forces’’ to make it clear that 

Coast Guard vessels are included in this 

exemption because they serve similar 

national security interests. 

4. 10-Year Exemption for the Emergency 

Use of TCE in Furtherance of NASA’s 

Mission 

For the reasons discussed in Unit 

V.A.3.a.vi. of the proposed rule, EPA is 

finalizing as proposed a 10-year TSCA 

section 6(g)(1)(A) exemption for 

emergency use of TCE in furtherance of 

NASA’s mission for the following 

specific conditions of use: 

(1) Industrial and commercial use as 

solvent for open-top or closed-loop 

batch vapor degreasing; 

(2) Industrial and commercial use as 

a solvent for cold cleaning; 

(3) Industrial and commercial use as 

a solvent for aerosol spray degreaser/ 

cleaner and mold release; 

(4) Industrial and commercial use as 

a lubricant and grease in tap and die 

fluid; 

(5) Industrial and commercial use as 

a lubricant and grease in penetrating 

lubricant; 

(6) Industrial and commercial use as 

an adhesive and sealant in solventbased adhesives and sealants; 

(7) Industrial and commercial use as 

a functional fluid in heat exchange 

fluid; 

(8) Industrial and commercial use in 

corrosion inhibitors and anti-scaling 

agents; 

(9) Industrial and commercial use of 

TCE as a processing aid; and 

(10) Manufacturing (including 

importing) and processing of TCE for 

the industrial and commercial uses 

listed in (1) through (9). 

EPA is also finalizing as proposed the 

inclusion of additional requirements as 

part of the exemption, pursuant to 

TSCA section 6(g)(4), including required 

notification and controls for exposure, 

to the extent feasible: (1) NASA and its 

contractors must provide notice to the 

EPA Administrator of each instance of 

emergency use within 15 days; and (2) 

NASA and its contractors would have to 

comply with the WCPP to the extent 

feasible. 

EPA is finalizing to require that 

NASA notify EPA within 15 days of the 

emergency use. The notification would 

include a description of the specific use 

of TCE in the context of one of the 

conditions of use for which this 

exemption is being finalized, an 

explanation of why the use described 

qualifies as an emergency, and an 

explanation with regard to the lack of 

availability of technically and 

economically feasible alternatives. EPA 

notes that in the event that sensitive 

information relating to national security 

or critical infrastructure is submitted to 

EPA, the Agency will protect such 

information in accordance with 

applicable authorities. 

EPA expects NASA and its 

contractors have the ability to 

implement a WCPP as described in Unit 

IV.C. for the identified uses in the 

context of an emergency. Therefore, 

EPA is finalizing the requirement that 

during emergency use, NASA and its 

contractors must comply with the WCPP 

to the extent technically feasible in light 

of the particular emergency. 

Under the finalized exemption, NASA 

and its contractors will still be subject 

to the general recordkeeping 

requirements discussed in Unit IV.F. 

5. 20-Year Exemption for Industrial and 

Commercial Use of TCE as a Processing 

Aid for Lead-Acid Battery Separator 

Manufacturing 

EPA is finalizing a 20-year TSCA 

section 6(g)(1)(B) exemption from the 

prohibition on the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a processing 

aid, specific to battery separator 

manufacturing for lead-acid batteries. 

The conditions for the exemption are: 

(1) The use of TCE is limited to use as 

a processing aid for lead-acid battery 

separator manufacturing; and (2) This 

specific industrial and commercial use 

of TCE as a processing aid is required 

to be conducted at industrial facilities 

using TCE to manufacture lead acid 

battery separators prior to February 18, 

2025. 

6. 15-Year Exemption for Industrial and 

Commercial Use of TCE as a Processing 

Aid for Specialty Polymeric 

Microporous Sheet Materials 

EPA is finalizing a 15-year TSCA 

section 6(g)(1)(A) exemption from the 

prohibition on TCE for the industrial 

and commercial use of TCE as a 

processing aid for specialty polymeric 

microporous sheet material 

manufacturing. As described in more 

detail in Unit III.B.2., while EPA 

proposed to prohibit industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a processing 

aid for specialty polymeric microporous 

sheet materials, EPA’s primary 

alternative regulatory action described a 

15-year TSCA section 6(g) exemption 

from prohibition for this use. EPA 

received substantiative information in 

public comments to support the 

finalization of this exemption, as well as 

support for 15 years as the appropriate 

timeframe for this exemption. 

The conditions for the exemption are: 

(1) The use of TCE is limited to use as 

a processing aid for the manufacturing 

of specialty polymeric microporous 

sheet materials; (2) This specific 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a processing aid can only be used at 

industrial facilities in which TCE is 

already in use to manufacture specialty 

polymeric microporous sheet materials 

prior to February 18, 2025. 

7. 50-Year Exemption for Laboratory 

Use of TCE for Essential Laboratory 

Uses 

EPA is finalizing a 50-year TSCA 

section 6(g)(1)(A) exemption from the 

prohibition on industrial and 

commercial use of TCE, for industrial 

and commercial use of TCE in 

laboratory use for essential laboratory 

activities, excluding the testing of 

asphalt which is subject to a ten-year 

phase-out as described in Units III.C.3. 

and IV.B.5. The conditions for the 

exemption are: (1) The use of TCE is 

limited to use in an industrial or 

commercial laboratory for essential 

laboratory activities, including chemical 

analysis, chemical synthesis, extracting 

and purifying other chemicals, 

dissolving other substances, and 

research and development for the 

advancement of cleanup activities, and 

analytical methods for monitoring 

related to TCE contamination or 

exposure monitoring, with the exclusion 

of laboratory testing for asphalt; and (2) 

Federal agencies and their contractors 

are permitted to conduct research and 

development activities, test and 

evaluation method activities, and 

similar laboratory activities, provided 

the use is essential to the agency’s 

mission. 

8. 50-Year Exemption for Disposal of 

TCE to Industrial Pre-Treatment, 

Industrial Treatment, or Publicly 

Owned Treatment Works, for the 

Purposes of Facilitating Cleanup 

Projects of TCE-Contaminated Water 

and Groundwater 

EPA is finalizing a 50-year TSCA 

section 6(g)(1)(A) exemption from the 

prohibition on disposal of TCE to 

industrial pre-treatment, industrial 

treatment, or publicly owned treatment 

works for the purposes of cleanup 

projects of TCE-contaminated water and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102611 

groundwater. The conditions for the 

exemption are: (1) The disposal of TCE 

to industrial pre-treatment, industrial 

treatment, or publicly owned treatment 

works must only be for the purposes of 

cleanup projects of TCE-contaminated 

water and groundwater and is limited to 

sites undergoing cleanup under 

CERCLA, RCRA, or other Federal, state, 

and local government laws, regulations 

or requirements; and (2) Owners and 

operators of the cleanup site locations 

where TCE industrial treatment or 

pretreatment occurs are required to 

comply with the wastewater workplace 

protection requirements described in 

Unit IV.E.2., and owners and operators 

of publicly owned treatment works that 

receive TCE wastewater, are required to 

comply with the workplace protection 

requirements described in Unit IV.E.3. 

Owners and operators of either type of 

location must comply with the 

recordkeeping requirements described 

in Unit IV.F.1. until the expiration of 

the exemption and the prohibition 

compliance date. EPA notes that a 

remediation method would need to be 

considered one of the previous types of 

disposal to fall within the condition of 

use, and if not would be out of scope of 

this TSCA rule and not subject to the 

prohibition or other requirements of the 

rule. 

V. TSCA Section 6(c)(2) Considerations 

A. Health Effects and the Magnitude of 

Human Exposure 

EPA’s analysis of the health effects of 

TCE and the magnitude of human 

exposure to TCE are in the 2020 Risk 

Evaluation for TCE and the 2023 

Revised Risk Determination for TCE 

(Refs. 1, 2). A summary is presented 

here. 

As described in Unit IV. of the 2023 

TCE proposed rule, TCE has a large 

database of human health toxicity data. 

The 2020 Risk Evaluation for TCE 

identified several endpoints, such as 

kidney toxicity, immunotoxicity, or 

developmental toxicity, and often a 

single endpoint was examined by 

multiple studies. For acute exposures, 

EPA identified non-cancer effects 

(developmental toxicity and 

immunosuppression). For chronic 

exposures, EPA identified non-cancer 

effects (liver toxicity, kidney toxicity, 

neurotoxicity, autoimmunity, 

reproductive toxicity, and 

developmental toxicity) as well as 

cancer (liver, kidney, and nonHodgkin’s lymphoma), with kidney 

cancer identified as acting through a 

mutagenic mode of action (Ref. 1). The 

2020 Risk Evaluation for TCE contains 

quantitative risk estimates using several 

points of departure (PODs), including 

immunotoxicity endpoints as well as 

the more sensitive developmental 

toxicity endpoints, specifically fetal 

cardiac defects, and both demonstrate 

that TCE presents risk. 

Additionally, in developing the 2020 

Risk Evaluation for TCE, EPA analyzed 

the reasonably available information to 

ascertain whether some human 

subpopulations may have greater 

exposure or greater susceptibility than 

the general population to the hazard 

posed by the chemical substance. 

Factors affecting susceptibility 

examined in the reasonably available 

studies on TCE include lifestage, sex, 

genetic polymorphisms, race/ethnicity, 

preexisting health status, lifestyle 

factors, and nutrition status. Groups of 

individuals for which one or several of 

these factors apply may be considered 

PESS (Ref. 1). 

Because TSCA section 6(c)(2)(B) 

directs EPA to factor in, to the extent 

practicable, the health effects of TCE 

under TSCA section 6(c)(2)(A) when 

selecting among options, TSCA section 

6(c) thereby provides EPA with the 

flexibility to tailor the regulatory 

restrictions to account for particular 

health effects identified in the 

underlying risk evaluation. With this 

consideration, EPA found that, in some 

cases, a regulatory option that could 

reduce exposures such that they would 

achieve the benchmark margin of 

exposure for the most sensitive noncancer endpoint (developmental 

toxicity) would address any risk for 

other non-cancer endpoints. Older 

pregnant workers and ONUs, who may 

be especially susceptible to TCEinduced cardiac defects in their 

developing fetus, are classified as a 

PESS, and the associated POD and risk 

estimates were included in the 2020 

Risk Evaluation in consideration of 

PESS groups. EPA has carefully 

considered the health effects of TCE on 

pregnant workers and ONUs as part of 

the Agency’s requirements and 

prohibitions. In order for this 

rulemaking to appropriately address risk 

to all workers and ONUs exposed to 

TCE through occupational conditions of 

use, EPA has factored in consideration 

of additional health effects applicable to 

PESS, including older pregnant workers 

and ONUs (the group identified as most 

susceptible to fetal cardiac defects) 

pursuant to TSCA section 6(c)(2). 

In the risk characterization section of 

the 2020 Risk Evaluation for TCE, EPA 

acknowledged that fetal cardiac defects 

are an acute, non-cancer endpoint of 

concern, particularly for older pregnant 

women, while also acknowledging 

uncertainty surrounding the use of this 

endpoint to inform the determination of 

whether TCE presents unreasonable risk 

of injury to health for all affected human 

populations. In the 2020 Risk 

Evaluation for TCE, EPA presented the 

Agency’s findings with respect to 

different endpoints and characterized 

the immunotoxicity endpoints as the 

‘‘best overall’’ non-cancer endpoints for 

use in the risk conclusions and risk 

determination. The endpoints were 

characterized in this way precisely 

because of the quantitative uncertainties 

surrounding the use of the fetal cardiac 

defects endpoint and other 

considerations. Further, as noted in Unit 

II.D.1. of the 2023 TCE proposed rule, 

EPA received numerous comments on 

EPA’s 2020 TSCA Risk Evaluation 

policy choice regarding endpoint 

selection that have raised concerns 

pertaining to political interference and 

scientific integrity, among other issues. 

EPA received significant feedback on 

this aspect of the 2020 Risk Evaluation 

for TCE, including focused attention on 

this issue from the SACC and public 

commenters reacting to the draft Risk 

Evaluation for TCE (Ref. 90). Moreover, 

based on the discussion included in the 

peer review report of the 2020 Risk 

Evaluation, EPA also concluded that 

reasonable scientists would not disallow 

the use of the fetal cardiac defects 

studies, and that therefore other EPA 

program reliance on the fetal cardiac 

defects endpoint is scientifically valid 

(e.g., Integrated Risk Information System 

(https://iris.epa.gov)). 

The 2020 Risk Evaluation for TCE 

identified the developmental toxicity 

endpoint of fetal cardiac defects, which 

presents a lower POD than the 

immunotoxicity endpoints. The 

magnitude of the unreasonable risk from 

exposures to TCE would have been 

greater had the Agency relied upon the 

developmental toxicity endpoint (Ref. 

1). Specifically, EPA identified the risk 

of fetal cardiac defects most strongly 

associated with offspring of older 

mothers, and therefore included risk 

estimates for fetal cardiac defects that 

account for susceptible mothers and 

their offspring in addition to PESS 

groups with other susceptibilities (e.g., 

diabetes, infection status, drug 

exposure, stress, and metabolic 

sensitivity due to increased enzymatic 

activity of cytochrome P450 2E1 

(CYP2E1) (Ref. 1). 

EPA recognizes that among the noncancer adverse health effects of TCE, the 

drivers for EPA’s whole chemical 

unreasonable risk determination for TCE 

under TSCA were identified as 

immunotoxicity, namely acute 

immunosuppression and chronic 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102612 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

autoimmunity from inhalation and 

dermal exposures (Ref. 2). 

Regarding the magnitude of human 

exposure, one factor EPA considers for 

the conditions of use that contribute to 

the unreasonable risk is the size of the 

exposed population, which, for TCE, 

EPA estimates is 53,210 workers, 14,659 

ONUs, and 20,600 consumers (Ref. 3). 

In addition to these estimates of 

numbers of workers, ONUs, consumers, 

and bystanders to consumer use directly 

exposed to TCE, EPA recognizes there is 

exposure to the general population from 

air and water pathways for TCE. (While 

bystanders are individuals in proximity 

to a consumer use of TCE, fenceline 

communities are a subset of the general 

population who may be living in 

proximity to a facility where TCE is 

being used in an occupational setting). 

EPA separately conducted a screening 

analysis to assess whether there may be 

risks to the general population from 

these exposure pathways. This analysis 

is summarized in full in the 2023 TCE 

proposed rule, which includes 

information on the SACC peer review of 

the methodology. This Unit addresses 

those areas where some risk was 

indicated with regard to expected 

exposures to fenceline communities that 

are associated with conditions of use for 

which EPA is finalizing longer 

compliance timeframes (including 

under a TSCA section 6(g) time-limited 

exemption). 

EPA’s analysis was presented to the 

SACC peer review panel in March 2022, 

and EPA is including SACC 

recommendations, as appropriate, in 

assessing general population exposures 

in upcoming risk evaluations. Overall, 

EPA’s fenceline analysis for the air and 

water pathways for TCE did not allow 

EPA to rule out unreasonable risk to 

fenceline communities with confidence. 

Additionally, based on the fenceline 

analysis for the ambient air and water 

pathways for TCE, including the 

strengths, limitations, and uncertainties 

associated with the information used to 

inform the analysis, EPA is unable to 

determine with this analysis whether 

those risks drive the unreasonable risk 

of injury to health presented by TCE. 

Although EPA did not make a 

determination of unreasonable risk 

based on the fenceline screening 

analysis, this final regulatory action is 

expected to eliminate the potential risks 

identified in the screening analysis to 

any general population or fenceline 

communities close to facilities engaging 

in TCE manufacturing, processing, or 

use. 

EPA’s fenceline analysis for the water 

pathway for TCE, based on methods 

presented to the SACC, found potential 

risks from several occupational 

exposure scenarios from exposure to 

drinking water or incidental dermal or 

incidental oral exposure to ambient 

waters. The estimated exposure values 

for the screening level assessed water 

pathway resulted in estimated acute 

noncancer, chronic noncancer, or cancer 

risk relative to their respective 

benchmark values for various evaluated 

occupational exposure scenarios (Ref. 

91). As described in more detail in Unit 

VII.A.2. of the 2023 TCE proposed rule, 

EPA identified potential risks that 

exceed the benchmark for non-cancer 

endpoints for several facilities, 

representing benchmark exceedances for 

between 1 and 10 occupational 

exposure scenarios, depending on 

whether the drinking water, incidental 

oral, or incidental dermal exposures are 

considered. In each case for the 

screening level analysis, risks were 

identified only for the maximum risk 

scenarios (or facilities with the highest 

reported results), and for a relatively 

small number of facilities. In instances 

where a facility may be engaging in a 

condition of use with a longer phaseout, 

EPA notes that in no instances did EPA 

identify drinking water intakes within 

10 miles of a discharging facility and 

emphasizes that the scenarios analyzed 

include significant uncertainties and 

assumptions within the high-end risk 

estimates due to reliance on the highestreported results from several facilities 

(Ref. 91). Regarding cancer risks, while 

the analysis identified facilities with 

some indication of releases and 

potential drinking water exposure with 

associated increased cancer risk that 

exceeds more than 1 in 1,000,000, the 

analysis did not identify any facilities 

with a risk exceeding 1 in 10,000; the 

highest potential risk estimate is in the 

1 in 100,000 range (Ref. 91). 

Under the regulatory actions finalized 

in this rule and described in Unit IV., 

all conditions of use will ultimately be 

prohibited and so any potential risk 

indicated by this screening analysis will 

be eliminated. The potential risks to 

fenceline communities from exposure 

through water further strengthen the 

impetus for EPA’s prohibition of TCE. 

EPA therefore does not intend to revisit 

the water pathway for TCE as part of a 

supplemental risk evaluation. 

EPA’s fenceline analysis for the air 

pathway for TCE, using the 

methodology presented to SACC, and 

the multi-year analysis conducted in 

response to SACC feedback indicated 

potential exposure and associated risks 

to select populations within the general 

population at particular facilities (Ref. 

92). As described in the 2023 TCE 

proposed rule, EPA conducted an 

ambient air analysis to assess noncancer and cancer risk for real and 

generic, or modeled, facilities. The three 

components of the ambient air fenceline 

analysis were: (1) A single-year ambient 

air analysis; (2) A multi-year ambient air 

analysis; and (3) A land use analysis. 

After doing an initial screen (the single 

year ambient air screening analysis) that 

did not rule out unreasonable risk, EPA 

conducted additional analyses (the 

multi-year ambient air analysis). The 

single year ambient air screening 

analysis and the multi-year ambient air 

analysis allow EPA to mathematically 

calculate a cancer risk in fenceline 

communities. The Agency then 

conducted a land use analysis as part of 

both the single-year and multi-year 

analyses to determine if EPA could 

reasonably expect an exposure to 

fenceline communities to occur within 

the modeled distances for facilities 

where there was an indication of risk. 

This review consisted of a visual 

analysis using aerial imagery and 

interpreting land/use zoning practices 

around each facility to identify where 

residential, industrial/commercial 

businesses, or other public spaces are 

present within those radial distances 

indicating risk (as opposed to 

uninhabited areas), as well as whether 

the radial distances lie outside the 

boundaries of the facility. 

There are some uncertainties 

associated with the fenceline analysis 

for the air pathway for TCE. The TRI 

dataset used for the single- and the 

multi-year fenceline analysis and land 

use analysis does not include actual 

release point locations, which can affect 

the estimated concentrations at varying 

distances modeled. To identify the 

release location for each facility, EPA 

used a local-coordinate system based on 

latitude/longitude coordinates reported 

in TRI. The latitude/longitude 

coordinates may represent the mailing 

address location of the office building 

associated with a very large facility or 

some other area of the facility rather 

than the actual release location (e.g., a 

specific process stack). This discrepancy 

between the coordinates reported in TRI 

and the actual release point could result 

in an exposure concentration that does 

not represent the actual distance where 

fenceline communities may be exposed. 

The fenceline analysis also evaluated 

the most ‘‘conservative exposure 

scenario’’ that consists of a facility that 

operates year-round (365 days per year, 

24 hours per day, 7 days per week) in 

a South Coastal meteorologic region and 

a rural topography setting (Ref. 92). 

Therefore, the modeled exposures to 

people who live in fenceline 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102613 

communities may be overestimated if 

there are fewer exposure days per year 

or hours per day. 

Additionally, the ambient air 

fenceline analysis (as well as the water 

pathway analysis, described in Unit 

VII.A.2.) organizes facilities and 

associated risks by Occupational 

Exposure Scenario (OES) and generally 

crosswalks each OES with the 

associated condition of use of TCE (Ref. 

92). For some OES, EPA identified the 

associated conditions of use to the 

category level in the November 2020 

Risk Evaluation for TCE, but, for the air 

pathway, was unable to identify the 

conditions of use to the subcategory 

level due to limited information on 

activities and use of TCE reported under 

TRI. Therefore, some OES indicating 

increased risk from ambient air 

exposures to TCE in the air fenceline 

analysis may be associated with one or 

more conditions of use of TCE. See Unit 

VII.A.1. of the 2023 TCE proposed rule 

for additional information on this 

analysis. 

EPA’s analysis included inhalation 

hazard values for cancer and non-cancer 

risk (acute and chronic immunological 

and developmental endpoints). Because 

risk estimates did not exceed the 

benchmarks for any risks of non-cancer 

effects, the results presented focus on 

cancer risks. Standard cancer 

benchmarks used by EPA and other 

regulatory agencies are an increased 

cancer risk above benchmarks ranging 

from 1 in 1,000,000 (one in a million) 

to 1 in 10,000 (i.e., 1×10¥6 to 1×10¥4). 

For example, when setting standards 

under CAA section 112(f)(2), EPA uses 

a two-step process, with ‘‘an analytical 

first step to determine an ‘acceptable 

risk’ that considers all health 

information, including risk estimation 

uncertainty, and includes a presumptive 

limit on maximum individual risk (MIR) 

of approximately 1-in-10 thousand’’ 

(Ref. 93). In this fenceline analysis for 

the ambient air pathway for TCE, 

estimates of risk to fenceline 

communities were calculated using 

1×10¥6 as the benchmark for cancer risk 

in fenceline communities. While EPA is 

unable to determine, based on the 

screening level fenceline analysis, 

whether risks to the general population 

drive the unreasonable risk, as a matter 

of risk management policy EPA 

typically considers the range of 1×10¥6

to 1×10¥4 as the appropriate benchmark 

for increased cancer risk for the general 

population, including fenceline 

communities. The benchmark value is 

not a bright line, and the Agency 

considers a number of factors when 

determining unreasonable risk, such as 

the endpoint under consideration, the 

reversibility of effect, and exposurerelated considerations (e.g., duration, 

magnitude, or frequency of exposure, or 

population exposed). 

The multi-year analysis evaluated 217 

facilities and found risk estimates above 

one in a million for cancer for 133 of 

those facilities at a distance of 100 

meters from the releasing facility. Based 

on the multi-year analysis, 58 of these 

133 facilities either had cancer risks 

above one in a million at distances 

farther than 100 meters when compared 

to the single year analysis or are 

facilities that were not captured in the 

single-year analysis. The analysis did 

not identify any facilities with risk 

exceeding 1 in 10,000 at a distance 

greater than 100 meters; the highest risk 

estimate is in the 1 in 100,000 range 

(Ref. 92).The land use analysis of the 58 

facilities indicating risk in the multiyear fenceline analysis (i.e., facilities 

where cancer risk estimates were above 

one in a million at distances farther out 

when compared to the single-year 

analysis or facilities that were not 

captured in the single year analysis) 

identified a total of 55 facilities with 

expected exposure to fenceline 

communities. Those facilities represent 

10 occupational exposure scenarios and 

include: degreasing (open-top batch 

vapor degreasing; closed-loop batch 

vapor degreasing; conveyorized vapor 

degreasing; web vapor degreasing; cold 

cleaning); formulation of aerosol and 

non-aerosol products; industrial 

processing aid; manufacturing; 

metalworking fluids; other industrial 

uses; process solvent recycling and 

worker handling of wastes; processing 

as a reactant; recycling and disposal; 

and repackaging (Ref. 92). 

Under this regulatory action, each of 

the conditions of use that indicate risk 

relative to the one in a million cancer 

risk benchmark will ultimately be 

prohibited, many of them within one 

year. As a result, exposures to any 

fenceline communities from these 

facilities will be eliminated under the 

prohibitions in this rulemaking. The 

risks to fenceline communities from 

TCE exposure further strengthens the 

impetus for EPA’s prohibition of TCE. 

As described earlier in this Unit, EPA 

notes that TSCA section 6(c)(2) provides 

for the consideration of health effects in 

promulgating a rule under TSCA section 

6(a). 

EPA recognizes that there are some 

facilities for which the screening 

analysis estimates that cancer risks are 

indicated that may exceed one in a 

million and with expected exposure to 

fenceline communities. These facilities 

may be associated with the following 

conditions of use that EPA is 

prohibiting under longer compliance 

timeframes: degreasing (open-top batch 

vapor degreasing; closed-loop batch 

vapor degreasing); industrial processing 

aid; manufacturing; and processing as a 

reactant. For processing as a reactant, 

EPA notes that while the analysis 

identified facilities with some 

indication of releases and potential 

exposure with associated increased 

cancer risk that exceeds one in a million 

at a distance of 100 meters from the 

releasing facility, the analysis did not 

identify any facilities exceeding the 1 in 

10,000 benchmark; the highest risk 

estimate is in the 1 in 100,000 range. For 

this and other conditions of use that 

may be associated with facilities that 

indicate risks with expected exposure to 

fenceline communities, the rule requires 

strict workplace exposure controls via 

implementation of a WCPP as described 

in Unit IV.C., until the prohibition 

compliance date. 

In the instances where efforts to 

reduce exposures in the workplace to 

levels below the interim ECEL could 

lead to adoption of engineering controls 

that ventilate more TCE outside, EPA 

expects that in some situations potential 

exposure may be limited through 

facility compliance with existing 

National Emissions Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) 

that cover TCE or through state-issued 

air permits that limit TCE emissions. 

Potentially applicable NESHAP include: 

40 CFR part 63, subpart F, Synthetic 

Organic Chemical Manufacturing 

Industry; 40 CFR part 63, subpart DD, 

Off-Site Waste and Recovery 

Operations; 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

VVV, Publicly Owned Treatment Works; 

40 CFR part 63, subpart VVVVVV, 

Chemical Manufacturing Area Sources; 

40 CFR part 63, subpart GG, Aerospace 

Manufacturing and Rework Facilities; 

and 40 CFR part 63, subpart T, 

Halogenated Solvent Cleaning. NESHAP 

impose emission standards and/or work 

practice requirements reflecting 

maximum achievable control 

technology or impose emission 

standards and/or work practice 

requirements reflecting generally 

available control technology. The CAA 

requires residual risk reviews for 

standards reflecting maximum 

achievable control technologies, and 

technology reviews are required every 8 

years for all NESHAP. 

In the 2023 TCE proposed rule, EPA 

requested comment on any anticipated 

increases or decreases in future releases 

of TCE, as well as any modifications to 

requirements in the exposure control 

plan to account for air monitoring or 

fenceline impacts. As described in more 

detail in Section 8.1 of the Response to 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102614 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

Comments document (Ref. 11), several 

commenters provided input on EPA’s 

fenceline analysis, with some stating 

their position that the fenceline analysis 

is not suitable for purposes of risk 

determination and should not be used to 

inform risk management (Refs. 35, 81, 

78, 94), while other commenters stated 

that EPA’s fenceline analysis 

insufficiently considered increased 

susceptibility to harm from TCE 

exposures in populations more likely to 

experience adverse health effects (Ref. 

95). Regarding the management of any 

risks to fenceline communities from 

ambient air or water exposures, several 

commenters emphasized the need to 

protect fenceline communities at risk 

from TCE exposure related to conditions 

of use with longer phase-out periods 

(Ref. 45) and described their efforts, as 

a local government agency, to protect 

community members at risk of releases 

of TCE from neighboring businesses 

(Ref. 47). Several commenters stated 

they would support a requirement for 

additional monitoring or attesting in a 

WCPP that controls would not increase 

TCE emissions and impact fenceline 

communities (Refs. 31, 45, 44, 96). 

Industry commenters disagreed, stating 

that attestations or monitoring would be 

burdensome or redundant with 

requirements under NESHAP that 

regulate TCE (Refs. 39, 38, 78). Instead, 

these commenters recommended that 

any necessary release information 

should instead be documented through 

the results of the sampling done when 

processes change. 

As discussed in more detail in the 

Response to Comments document (Ref. 

11), EPA agrees that the screening level 

fenceline analyses for the water 

pathway and ambient air pathway for 

TCE do not allow EPA to conclude 

whether those risks of injury to 

fenceline communities contribute to the 

unreasonable risk because those 

fenceline screening methodologies were 

not developed for that purpose. EPA is 

eventually prohibiting all of the 

conditions of use that are associated 

with facilities that indicate potential 

exposure to fenceline communities, 

which would eventually address such 

exposure. Additionally, EPA 

determined facility resources should be 

focused on transitioning as quickly as 

possible to alternatives for TCE. 

Requiring owners and operators to attest 

to whether and why the exposure 

controls they have selected would not 

result in increased air releases of TCE 

from the workplace could divert 

resources from transitioning to 

alternatives. Therefore, in the WCPP 

requirements in this final rule, EPA is 

not requiring owners and operators to 

attest to whether and why the exposure 

controls they have selected would not 

result in increased air releases of TCE 

from the workplace and keep records of 

that statement as part of the WCPP 

exposure control plan. EPA emphasizes 

that the ultimate prohibition of 

manufacture, processing, distribution in 

commerce, use, and disposal of TCE is 

expected to address the risks identified 

in the screening analysis to any general 

population or fenceline communities 

close to facilities engaging in TCE use. 

EPA therefore does not intend to revisit 

the air pathway for TCE as part of a 

supplemental risk evaluation. 

B. Environmental Effects and the 

Magnitude of Environmental Exposure 

EPA’s analysis of the environmental 

effects of TCE and the magnitude of 

exposure of the environment to TCE are 

in the 2020 Risk Evaluation for TCE 

(Ref. 1). The unreasonable risk 

determination for TCE is based solely on 

risks to human health (Ref. 2); based on 

the TSCA 2020 Risk Evaluation for TCE, 

EPA determined that exposures to the 

environment did not drive the 

unreasonable risk. A summary is 

presented here. 

For all conditions of use, amphibian, 

fish, and aquatic invertebrate acute and 

chronic exposures to TCE do not drive 

the unreasonable risk. To characterize 

the exposure to TCE by aquatic 

organisms, EPA assessed environmental 

exposures derived from predicted and 

measured concentrations of TCE in 

surface water in the United States. 

Specifically, the aquatic exposures 

associated with the industrial and 

commercial conditions of use were 

predicted through modeling, and the 

aquatic exposure assessment also 

includes an analysis of collected 

measured surface water concentrations 

from monitoring data. EPA considered 

the biological relevance of the species to 

determine the concentrations of concern 

for the location of surface water 

concentration data to produce risk 

quotients, as well as frequency and 

duration of the exposure. EPA 

determined that the evaluation does not 

support an unreasonable risk 

determination based on risk to aquatic 

organisms. 

The toxicity of TCE to sedimentdwelling invertebrates is similar to the 

toxicity to aquatic invertebrates. TCE is 

expected to remain in aqueous phases 

and not adsorb to sediment due to its 

water solubility and low partitioning to 

organic matter. TCE has relatively low 

partitioning to organic matter and 

biodegrades slowly, so TCE 

concentrations in sediment pore water 

are expected to be similar to the 

concentrations in the overlying water or 

lower in the deeper part of sediment 

where anaerobic condition prevails. 

Thus, the TCE detected in sediments is 

likely from the pore water. Therefore, 

for sediment-dwelling organisms, the 

risk estimates, based on the highest 

ambient surface water concentration, do 

not support an unreasonable risk 

determination based on risk to 

sediment-dwelling organisms from 

acute or chronic exposures. 

For terrestrial organisms, TCE 

exposure is expected to be low since 

physical-chemical properties do not 

support an exposure pathway through 

water and soil pathways to these 

organisms. Therefore, for terrestrial 

organisms, the risk estimates for acute 

or chronic exposures, based on the EPA 

2003 Guidance for Ecological Soil 

Screening Levels, do not support an 

unreasonable risk determination. 

C. Benefits for Various Uses 

As described in the 2023 TCE 

proposed rule, TCE has a wide range of 

uses, including as an intermediate 

during the manufacture of refrigerants, 

specifically HFC–134a, and is also used 

as a solvent, frequently in cleaning and 

degreasing (including spot cleaning, 

vapor degreasing, cold cleaning, and 

aerosol degreasing). A variety of 

consumer and commercial products use 

TCE as adhesives and sealants, in paints 

and coatings, and in other 

miscellaneous products. TCE is subject 

to Federal and State regulations and 

reporting requirements. 

The largest uses of TCE, by 

production volume, are for processing 

as a reactant/intermediate as well as 

aerosol and vapor degreasing uses. 

Based on the 2020 Risk Evaluation for 

TCE, over 84% of the production 

volume of TCE is processed as a 

reactant/intermediate. The majority of 

the volume is for TCE processed as an 

intermediate in the production of HFC– 

134a, a refrigerant widely used in a 

broad range of applications. The second 

largest use of TCE is in industrial and 

commercial uses for aerosol and vapor 

degreasing. TCE is a relatively 

inexpensive solvent useful for cleaning 

contaminated metal parts and other 

fabricated materials (Ref. 1). 

TCE has many other uses, which, 

based on the 2020 Risk Evaluation for 

TCE, collectively constitute about 1% of 

the production volume (Ref. 1). In 

battery separator manufacturing, TCE is 

used as an extraction solvent to produce 

the desired porosity in lead-acid and 

lithium battery separators, which are 

essential to power vehicles and systems 

in the U.S. supply chain. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102615 

D. Reasonably Ascertainable Economic 

Consequences of the Final Rule 

1. Likely Effect of the Rule on the 

National Economy, Small Business, 

Technological Innovation, the 

Environment, and Public Health 

The reasonably ascertainable 

economic consequences of this rule 

include several components, all of 

which are described in the Economic 

Analysis for this rule (Ref. 3). With 

respect to the anticipated effects of this 

rule on the national economy, EPA 

considered the number of businesses 

and workers that would be affected and 

the costs and benefits to those 

businesses and workers and did not find 

that there would be an impact on the 

national economy (Ref. 3). The 

economic impact of a regulation on the 

national economy becomes measurable 

only if the economic impact of the 

regulation reaches 0.25% to 0.5% of 

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Ref. 3). 

Given the current (real) GDP [of $60.4 

trillion (2022)], this is equivalent to a 

cost of $151 billion to $302 billion. 

Therefore, because EPA has estimated 

that the monetized costs of the rule at 

$64.1 million annualized over 20 years 

at a 2% discount rate, $ 71.2 million 

annualized over 20 years at a 3% 

discount rate, and $102.4 million 

annualized over 20 years at a 7% 

discount rate, EPA has concluded that 

this action is highly unlikely to have 

any measurable effect on the national 

economy (Ref. 3). EPA does not have 

data to quantify employment impacts of 

the final rule. Instead, workers currently 

using TCE are expected to continue 

employment while shifting away from 

TCE use and towards alternatives. 

However, EPA acknowledges that 

transitional employment impacts may 

be experienced by some workers at 

facilities that opt to close or shift 

operations abroad instead of complying 

with requirements at the facilities 

currently using TCE. EPA considered 

the employment impacts of this final 

rule and found that the direction of 

change in employment is uncertain, but 

EPA expects the short-term and longerterm employment effects to be small. 

Of the small businesses potentially 

impacted by this rule, 98.5% are 

expected to have impacts of less than 

1% to their firm revenues, 0% are 

expected to have impacts between 1 and 

3% to their firm revenues, and 1.5% are 

expected to have impacts greater than 

3% to their firm revenues. The largest 

segment of businesses that will be 

affected by this regulation are 

commercial users of liquid and aerosol 

degreasers. Costs of alternatives were 

found to be both higher and lower than 

products containing TCE. For most 

product types, alternatives with similar 

efficacy are available with costs that 

both lower and higher than TCE 

products. However, there may be some 

applications where TCE is more 

effective, reducing labor time and wait 

time, and/or where extensive safety 

testing might be required. EPA was 

unable to quantify these costs. 

With respect to this rule’s effect on 

technological innovation, EPA expects 

this action to spur more innovation than 

it will hinder. A prohibition or 

significant restriction on the 

manufacture, processing, and 

distribution in commerce of TCE for 

uses covered in this final rule may 

increase demand for safer chemical 

substitutes. This rule is not likely to 

have significant effects on the 

environment because TCE does not 

present an unreasonable risk to the 

environment, though this rule does 

present the potential for small 

reductions in air emissions and soil 

contamination associated with improper 

disposal of products containing TCE. 

The effects of this rule on public health 

are estimated to be positive, due to the 

reduced risk of cancer and other noncancer endpoints from exposure to TCE. 

2. Costs and Benefits of the Regulatory 

Action and of the One or More Primary 

Alternative Regulatory Actions 

Considered by the Administrator 

The costs and benefits that can be 

monetized for this rule are described at 

length in in the Economic Analysis (Ref. 

3). The monetized costs for this rule are 

estimated to range from $64.1 million 

annualized over 20 years at a 2% 

discount rate, $71.2 million annualized 

over 20 years at a 3% discount rate, and 

$102.4 million annualized over 20 years 

at a 7% discount rate. The monetized 

benefits are estimated to range from 

$22.9 to $23.2 million annualized over 

20 years at a 2% discount rate, $18.2 to 

$18.3 million annualized over 20 years 

at a 3% discount rate and $8.7 to $8.9 

million annualized over 20 years at a 

7% discount rate. 

EPA considered the estimated costs to 

regulated entities as well as the cost to 

administer and enforce an alternative 

regulatory action. Estimated costs for 

regulatory alternative can be found in 

the Economic Analysis for this final rule 

(Ref. 3). 

This final rule is expected to achieve 

health benefits for the American public, 

some of which can be monetized and 

others that, while tangible and 

significant, cannot be monetized. EPA 

determined that the balance of costs and 

benefits of this rule cannot be fairly 

described without considering the 

additional, non-monetized benefits of 

mitigating the non-cancer adverse 

effects. These effects may include 

neurotoxicity, kidney toxicity, liver 

toxicity, immunological and 

hematological effects, reproductive 

effects, and developmental effects. The 

multitude of adverse effects from TCE 

exposure can profoundly impact an 

individual’s quality of life, as discussed 

in the proposed rule in Unit II.A. 

(overview), in this rule in Unit II.C.3. 

(description of the unreasonable risk), 

Unit V.A. (discussion of the health 

effects), and the 2020 Risk Evaluation 

for TCE. Chronic adverse effects of TCE 

exposure include both cancer and the 

non-cancer effects listed in this 

paragraph. Acute effects of TCE 

exposure could be experienced for a 

shorter portion of life but are 

nevertheless significant in nature. The 

incremental improvements in health 

outcomes achieved by given reductions 

in exposure cannot be quantified for 

non-cancer health effects associated 

with TCE exposure, and therefore 

cannot be converted into monetized 

benefits. The qualitative discussion 

throughout this rulemaking and in the 

Economic Analysis highlights the 

importance of the non-cancer effects. 

The value of reducing these effects 

includes willingness-to-pay to avoid 

illness, which includes cost of illness 

and other personal costs such as pain 

and suffering. Considering only 

monetized benefits underestimates the 

impacts of TCE adverse outcomes and 

therefore underestimates the benefits of 

this rule. 

3. Cost Effectiveness of the Regulatory 

Action and of One or More Primary 

Alternative Regulatory Actions 

Considered by the Administrator 

Cost effectiveness is a method of 

comparing certain actions in terms of 

the expense per item of interest or goal. 

A goal of this regulatory action is to 

prevent unreasonable risk resulting from 

exposure to TCE. The final rule would 

cost $15.4 million per potential 

prevented cancer case while the 

alternative regulatory action would cost 

$18.6 million using annualized costs for 

the 2 percent discount rate and cancer 

cases avoided from one year of reduced 

exposure under the policy options (the 

average across the 20-year analytical 

timeframe). Thus, the final rule has a 

lower cost per cancer case avoided 

compared to the alternative option, 

making it the most cost-effective of the 

two options considered. The primary 

differences between the final and 

alternative option are that the 

alternative includes fewer TSCA section 

6(g) exemptions delaying prohibitions 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102616 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

on some uses which fall under interim 

WCPP in the final rule and a lower 

interim ECEL (0.0011 ppm). EPA 

received multiple public comments 

providing information on the impacts of 

a lower ECEL level and the need for 

longer duration and additional limited 

exemptions. 

VI. TSCA Section 9 Analysis and 

Section 14 and 26 Considerations 

A. TSCA Section 9(a) Analysis 

TSCA section 9(a) provides that, if the 

Administrator determines, in the 

Administrator’s discretion, that an 

unreasonable risk may be prevented or 

reduced to a sufficient extent by an 

action taken under a Federal law not 

administered by EPA, the Administrator 

must submit a report to the agency 

administering that other law that 

describes the risk and the activities that 

present such risk. TSCA section 9(a) 

describes additional procedures and 

requirements to be followed by EPA and 

the other Federal agency after 

submission of the report. As discussed 

in this Unit, the Administrator does not 

determine that unreasonable risk from 

TCE under the conditions of use may be 

prevented or reduced to a sufficient 

extent by an action taken under a 

Federal law not administered by EPA. 

EPA’s section 9(a) analysis can be found 

in full in Unit VIII.A. of the 2023 TCE 

proposed rule, and responses to 

comments on that 9(a) analysis can be 

found in the Response to Comments 

document, section 9.1 (Ref. 11). 

TSCA section 9(d) instructs the 

Administrator to consult and coordinate 

TSCA activities with other Federal 

agencies for the purpose of achieving 

the maximum enforcement of TSCA 

while imposing the least burden of 

duplicative requirements. For this 

rulemaking, EPA has coordinated with 

appropriate Federal executive 

departments and agencies including but 

not limited to OSHA and the Consumer 

Product Safety Commission (CPSC), to, 

among other things, identify their 

respective authorities, jurisdictions, and 

existing laws with regard to the risk 

evaluation and risk management of TCE. 

As discussed in more detail in the 

2023 TCE proposed rule, OSHA requires 

that employers provide safe and 

healthful working conditions by setting 

and enforcing standards and by 

providing training, outreach, education, 

and assistance. OSHA, in 1971, 

established a PEL for TCE of 100 ppm 

of air as an 8-hour TWA with an 

acceptable ceiling concentration of 200 

ppm and an acceptable maximum peak 

above the acceptable ceiling 

concentration for an eight-hour shift of 

300 ppm, with a maximum duration of 

5 minutes in any 2 hours. However, the 

exposure limits established by OSHA 

are higher than the exposure limit that 

EPA determined will be sufficient to 

address the unreasonable risk identified 

under TSCA from occupational 

inhalation exposures associated with 

certain conditions of use. Gaps exist 

between OSHA’s authority to set 

workplace standards under the OSH Act 

and EPA’s obligations under TSCA 

section 6 to eliminate unreasonable risk 

presented by chemical substances under 

the conditions of use. The U.S. CPSC, 

under authority provided to it by 

Congress in the CPSA, protects the 

public from unreasonable risk of injury 

or death associated with consumer 

products. Under the CPSA, CPSC has 

the authority to regulate TCE in 

consumer products, but not in other 

sectors such as automobiles, some 

industrial and commercial products, or 

aircraft for example. 

EPA therefore concludes that TSCA is 

the only regulatory authority able to 

prevent or reduce unreasonable risk of 

TCE to a sufficient extent across the 

range of conditions of use, exposures, 

and populations of concern. An action 

under TSCA is also able to address 

occupational unreasonable risk and 

would reach entities that are not subject 

to OSHA. Moreover, the timeframe and 

any exposure reduction as a result of 

updating OSHA or CPSC regulations for 

TCE cannot be estimated, while TSCA 

imposes a much more accelerated twoyear statutory timeframe for proposing 

and finalizing requirements to address 

unreasonable risk. Regulating TCE’s 

unreasonable risk utilizing TSCA 

authority will also avoid the situation 

where a patchwork of regulations among 

several Agencies using multiple laws 

and differing legal standards would 

occur and is therefore a more efficient 

and effective means of addressing the 

unreasonable risk of TCE. Finally, as 

discussed in greater detail in the 2023 

TCE proposed rule, the 2016 

amendments to TSCA altered both the 

manner of identifying unreasonable risk 

and EPA’s authority to address 

unreasonable risk, such that risk 

management is increasingly distinct 

from provisions of the CPSA, FHSA, or 

OSH Act. For these reasons, in the 

Administrator’s discretion, the 

Administrator has analyzed this issue 

and does not determine that 

unreasonable risk from TCE may be 

prevented or reduced to a sufficient 

extent by an action taken under a 

Federal law not administered by EPA. 

B. TSCA Section 9(b) Analysis 

If EPA determines that actions under 

other Federal laws administered in 

whole or in part by EPA could eliminate 

or sufficiently reduce a risk to health or 

the environment, TSCA section 9(b) 

instructs EPA to use these other 

authorities to protect against that risk 

‘‘unless the Administrator determines, 

in the Administrator’s discretion, that it 

is in the public interest to protect 

against such risk’’ under TSCA. In 

making such a public interest finding, 

TSCA section 9(b)(2) states: ‘‘the 

Administrator shall consider, based on 

information reasonably available to the 

Administrator, all relevant aspects of 

the risk . . . and a comparison of the 

estimated costs and efficiencies of the 

action to be taken under this title and 

an action to be taken under such other 

law to protect against such risk.’’ 

Although several EPA statutes have 

been used to limit TCE exposure (Ref. 

10), regulations under those EPA 

statutes largely regulate releases to the 

environment, rather than occupational 

or consumer exposures. While these 

limits on releases to the environment 

are protective in the context of their 

respective statutory authorities, 

regulation under TSCA is also 

appropriate for occupational and 

consumer exposures and in some cases 

can provide upstream protections that 

would prevent the need for release 

restrictions required by other EPA 

statutes (e.g., RCRA, CAA, CWA). 

Updating regulations under other EPA 

statutes would not be sufficient to 

address the unreasonable risk of injury 

to the health of workers, occupational 

non-users, consumers, and bystanders 

who are exposed to TCE under its 

conditions of use. EPA’s section 9(b) 

analysis can be found in full in Unit 

VIII.B. of the 2023 TCE proposed rule, 

and EPA’s responses to comments on 

that section 9(b) analysis can be found 

in the Response to Comments 

document, section 9.2 (Ref. 11). 

For these reasons, the Administrator 

does not determine that unreasonable 

risk from TCE under its conditions of 

use, as evaluated in the 2020 Risk 

Evaluation for TCE (Ref. 1), could be 

eliminated or reduced to a sufficient 

extent by actions taken under other 

Federal laws administered in whole or 

in part by EPA. 

C. TSCA Section 14 Requirements 

EPA is also providing notice to 

manufacturers, processors, and other 

interested parties about potential 

impacts to CBI. Under TSCA sections 

14(a) and (b)(4), if EPA promulgates a 

rule pursuant to TSCA section 6(a) that 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102617 

establishes a ban or phaseout of a 

chemical substance, the protection from 

disclosure of any CBI regarding that 

chemical substance and submitted 

pursuant to TSCA will be ‘‘presumed to 

no longer apply,’’ subject to the 

limitations identified in TSCA section 

14(b)(4)(B)(i) through (iii). Pursuant to 

TSCA section 14(b)(4)(B)(iii), the 

presumption against protection from 

disclosure will apply only to 

information about the specific 

conditions of use that this rule prohibits 

or phases out. Per TSCA section 

14(b)(4)(B)(i), the presumption against 

protection will not apply to information 

about certain emergency uses that this 

rule exempts from a ban or phaseout 

pursuant to TSCA section 6(g). 

Manufacturers or processors seeking to 

protect such information may submit a 

request for nondisclosure as provided 

by TSCA sections 14(b)(4)(C) and 

14(g)(1)(E). Any request for 

nondisclosure must be submitted within 

30 days after receipt of notice from EPA 

under TSCA section 14(g)(2)(A) stating 

EPA will not protect the information 

from disclosure. EPA anticipates 

providing such notice via the Central 

Data Exchange. 

D. TSCA Section 26 Considerations 

As explained in the 2023 TCE 

proposed rule, EPA fulfilled TSCA 

section 26(h) by using scientific 

information, technical procedures, 

measures, methods, protocols, 

methodologies, and models consistent 

with the best available science. 

Comments received on the proposed 

rule about whether EPA adequately 

assessed reasonably available 

information under TSCA section 26 on 

the risk evaluation, and responses to 

those comments, can be found in the 

Response to Comments document, 

sections 2.1 and 3.1 (Ref. 11). 

VII. References 

The following is a listing of the 

documents that are specifically 

referenced in this document. The docket 

includes these documents and other 

information considered by EPA, 

including documents that are referenced 

within the documents that are included 

in the docket, even if the referenced 

document is not itself physically located 

in the docket. For assistance in locating 

these other documents, please consult 

the person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

1. EPA. Risk Evaluation for 

Trichloroethylene. EPA Publication No. 

740–R18008. November 2020. 

2. EPA. Unreasonable Risk Determination, 

Trichloroethylene. December 2022. 

3. EPA. Economic Analysis of the Final 

Regulation of Trichloroethylene Under 

TSCA Section 6(a). 

4. EPA. Phasedown of Hydrofluorocarbons: 

Establishing the Allowance Allocation 

and Trading Program Under the 

American Innovation and Manufacturing 

Act; Final Rule. October 5, 2021. 

5. President Biden. The President and First 

Lady’s Cancer Moonshot: Ending Cancer 

As We Know It. Accessed February 26, 

2024. https://www.whitehouse.gov/ 

cancermoonshot/. 

6. A. Tinker et al. Inpatient Hospitalization 

Costs Associated with Birth Defects 

Among Persons of All Ages—United 

States, 2013. MMWR. Morbidity and 

mortality weekly report vol. 66,2 41–46. 

January 20, 2017. 

7. M. Chen et al. Children with Heart 

Conditions and Their Special Health 

Care Needs—United States, 2016. 

MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly 

report vol. 67,38 1045–1049. 28. Sept. 

28, 2018. 

8. N. McClung et al. Financial burdens and 

mental health needs in families of 

children with congenital heart disease. 

Congenital heart disease 13.4 (2018): 

554–562. April 6, 2018. 

9. EPA. ChemView: Trichloroethylene (TCE), 

79–01–6. Last updated on June 2, 2023. 

https://chemview.epa.gov/chemview/ 

?tf=0&ch=79-01- 

6&su=256737574985&as=

31098&ac=115166378999&ma=4-11- 

1981377-4_16848473-4_16848474-4_

49007566&gs=&tds=

0&tdl=10&tas1=1&tas2=asc&tas3=

undefined&tss=&modal=

detail&modalId=100616&modalSrc=2-5- 

10-1-6378999-4-11-1981377. 

10. EPA. Appendix: Regulatory Actions 

Pertaining to Trichloroethylene. July 

2023. 

11. EPA. Trichloroethyelene (TCE); 

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA); Final Rule; 

Response to Public Comments. December 

2024. 

12. EPA. Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk 

Assessment. March 2005. 

13. EPA. Notes from Federalism Consultation 

on Forthcoming Proposed Rulemakings 

for Trichloroethylene, 

Perchloroethylene, and nMethylpyrrolidone under TSCA Section 

6(a). July 22, 2021. 

14. EPA. Notes from Tribal Consultations on 

Forthcoming Proposed Rulemakings for 

Trichloroethylene (TCE) and 

Perchloroethylene (PCE). June 15 and 

July 8, 2021. 

15. W. Heiger-Bernays and G. Nielsen. 

Environmental Justice Consultation 

Comment 1 for TCE and PCE. July 5, 

2021. 

16. S. Rayasam. Environmental Justice 

Consultation Comment 2 for TCE and 

PCE. June 16, 2021. 

17. S. Liu. Environmental Justice 

Consultation Comment 3 for TCE and 

PCE. August 20, 2021. 

18. EPA. Notes from Environmental Justice 

Consultations on Forthcoming Proposed 

Rulemakings for Trichloroethylene (TCE) 

and Perchloroethylene (PCE). July 2021. 

19. Small Business Advocacy Review Panel. 

Final Report of the Small Business 

Advocacy Review Panel on EPA’s 

Planned Proposed Rule; Toxic 

Substances Control Act (TSCA) Section 

6(a) for Trichloroethylene (TCE). April 4, 

2023. 

20. EPA. Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis for Trichloroethylene; 

Regulation of Trichloroethylene under 

TSCA section 6(a) Proposed Rule; RIN 

2070–AK83. June 2023. 

21. EPA. Final Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis for Trichloroethylene; 

Regulation under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA); Final Rule; RIN 

2070–AK83. December 2024. 

22. EPA. Public Webinar on 

Trichloroethylene (TCE): Risk Evaluation 

and Risk Management under TSCA 

Section 6. December 15, 2020. 

23. EPA. Stakeholder Meeting List for 

Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene under TSCA Section 

6(a). May 19, 2023. 

24. EPA. 2021 Policy on Children’s Health. 

October 5, 2021. 

25. EPA. Trichloroethylene (TCE); Regulation 

Under the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA); Proposed Rule. Federal 

Register. 88 FR 74712. October 31, 2023 

(FRL–8317–01–OCSPP). 

26. EPA. Public Webinar on 

Trichloroethylene (TCE); Proposed 

Rulemaking under TSCA Section 6(a). 

November 14, 2023. 

27. EPA. Stakeholder Meeting List for 

Proposed and Final Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene under TSCA Section 

6(a). 

28. EPA. Second Existing Chemical Exposure 

Limit (ECEL) (Developmental Toxicity) 

for Occupational Use of 

Trichloroethylene. March 31, 2022. 

29. NABTU AFL–CIO, and USW Comments 

on the Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0642–0286. December 15, 2023. 

30. Earthjustice et al. Comments on the 

Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0642–0321. December 15, 2023. 

31. Environmental Protection Network. 

Comments on the Proposed Rulemaking 

for Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under 

the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA). Document ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2020–0642–0266. December 12, 

2023. 

32. The Boeing Company. Comments on the 

Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0642–0292. December 15, 2023. 

33. Savannah River Nuclear Solutions LLC. 

Comments on the Proposed Rulemaking 

for Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under 

the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA). Document ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2020–0642–0261. December 12, 

2023. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102618 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

34. Microporous LLC. Comments on the 

Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0642–0300. December 15, 2023. 

35. Stoel Rives LLP on behalf of ENTEK. 

Comments on the Proposed Rulemaking 

for Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under 

the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA). Document ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2020–0642–0323. December 15, 

2023. 

36. Viant Collegeville LLC. Comments on the 

Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0642–0303. December 15, 2023. 

37. Keller and Heckman LLP on behalf of 

multiple pesticide registrants. Comments 

on the Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0642–0308. December 15, 2023. 

38. AIHA. Comments on the Proposed 

Rulemaking for Trichloroethylene; 

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). Document ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0642–0244. 

December 5, 2023. 

39. American Chemistry Council. Comments 

on the Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0642–0320. December 15, 2023. 

40. Keller and Heckman LLP on behalf of 

PPG. Comments on the Proposed 

Rulemaking for Trichloroethylene; 

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). Document ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0642–0315. 

December 15, 2023. 

41. SAFECHEM Europe GmbH. Comments on 

the Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0642–0272. December 13, 2024. 

42. Vinyl Institute. Comments on the 

Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0642–0318. December 15, 2023. 

43. American Chemistry Council’s TCE 

Panel. Comments on the Proposed 

Rulemaking for Trichloroethylene; 

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). Document ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0642–0310. 

December 15, 2023. 

44. Environmental Defense Fund. Comments 

on the Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0642–0312. December 15, 2023. 

45. New York State Office of the Attorney 

General et al. Comments on the Proposed 

Rulemaking for Trichloroethylene; 

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). Document ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0642–0311. 

December 15, 2023. 

46. ENTEK. Comments on the Proposed 

Rulemaking for Trichloroethylene; 

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). Document ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0642–0230. 

November 3, 2023. 

47. New York Suffolk County Department of 

Health Services. Comments on the 

Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0642–0275. December 14, 2023. 

48. OSHA. Hazardous Waste Operations and 

Emergency Response (HAZWOPER). 

https://www.osha.gov/emergencypreparedness/hazardous-wasteoperations/standards. 

49. OSHA. Permissible Exposure Limits— 

Annotated Tables. https://

www.osha.gov/annotated-pels. 

50. Skiet. Comments on the Proposed 

Rulemaking for Methylene Chloride; 

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). Document ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0465–0226. June 

30, 2023. 

51. Household and Commercial Products 

Association. Comments on the Proposed 

Rulemaking for Trichloroethylene; 

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). Document ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0642–0306. 

December 15, 2023. 

52. EPA. Guidance To Protect POTW 

Workers From Toxic And Reactive Gases 

And Vapors. June 1992. 

53. The Adhesive and Sealant Council Inc. 

Comments on the Proposed Rulemaking 

for Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under 

the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA). Document ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2020–0642–0277. December 14, 

2023. 

54. GS Yuasa Energy Solutions and Yuasa 

Battery Inc. Comments on the Proposed 

Rulemaking for Trichloroethylene; 

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). Document ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0642–0260. 

December 12, 2023. 

55. Illinois Department of Transportation. 

Comments on the Proposed Rulemaking 

for Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under 

the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA). Document ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2020–0642–0271. December 13, 

2023. 

56. Chemical Users Coalition. Comments on 

the Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0642–0279. December 14, 2023. 

57. The State Asphalt Pavement Associations 

Inc. and The National Asphalt Pavement 

Association. Comments on the Proposed 

Rulemaking for Trichloroethylene; 

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). Document ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0642–0282. 

December 14, 2023. 

58. ASTM International. Comments on the 

Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0642–0291. December 15, 2023. 

59. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. 

Comments on the Proposed Rulemaking 

for Methylene Chloride; Regulation 

Under the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA). Document ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2020–0465–0261. July 3, 2023. 

60. Skon. Comments on the Proposed 

Rulemaking for Methylene Chloride; 

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). Document ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0465–0223. June 

30, 2023. 

61. Polypore. Comments on the Proposed 

Rulemaking for Methylene Chloride; 

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). Document ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0465–0251. July 

3, 2023. 

62. W-Scope. Comments on the Proposed 

Rulemaking for Methylene Chloride; 

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). Document ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0465–0275. July 

4, 2023. 

63. EPA. Methylene Chloride; Regulation 

Under the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA); Response to Public Comments. 

64. EPA. Assistant Administrator Meeting 

with ENTEK on a TSCA Section 6(g) 

Exemption Request in Risk Management 

for Trichloroethylene (TCE). February 

15, 2022. 

65. EPA. Meeting with Microporous on Risk 

Management under TSCA Section 6 for 

Trichloroethylene. February 20, 2024. 

66. PPG. TSCA Section 6(g) Exemption 

Request for use of TCE in the production 

of TESLIN® substrate. June 29, 2022. 

67. Integer. Comments on the Proposed 

Rulemaking for Trichloroethylene; 

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). Document ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0642–0305. 

December 15, 2023. 

68. State Industrial Products. Comments on 

the Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0642–0238. November 22, 2023. 

69. CRC Industries Inc. Comments on the 

Proposed Rulemaking for 

Perchloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0720–0267. August 15, 2023. 

70. National Fire Protection Association 

(NFPA). NFPA 70E Standard for 

Electrical Safety in the Workplace. 

https://www.nfpa.org/codes-andstandards/nfpa-70e-standarddevelopment/70e. 

71. American Association of State Highway 

and Transportation Officials. Comments 

on the Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0642–0270. December 13, 2024. 

72. Illinois Asphalt Pavement Association. 

Comments on the Proposed Rulemaking 

for Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under 

the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA). Document ID No. EPA–HQ– 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102619 

OPPT–2020–0642–0269. December 13, 

2023. 

73. InstroTek Inc. Comments on the Proposed 

Rulemaking for Trichloroethylene; 

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). Document ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0642–0278. 

December 14, 2023. 

74. InfraTest USA Inc et al. Comments on the 

Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0642–0294. December 15, 2023. 

75. The Utah Asphalt Pavement Association. 

Comments on the Proposed Rulemaking 

for Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under 

the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA). Document ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2020–0642–0295. December 15, 

2023. 

76. Texas Department of Transportation. 

Comments on the Proposed Rulemaking 

for Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under 

the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA). Document ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2020–0642–0660. December 7, 

2023. 

77. Indiana Department of Transportation. 

Comments on the Proposed Rulemaking 

for Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under 

the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA). Document ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2020–0642–0661. December 8, 

2023. 

78. US Chamber of Commerce. Comments on 

the Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0642–0290. December 15, 2023. 

79. Alliance for Chemical Distribution. 

Comments on the Proposed Rulemaking 

for Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under 

the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA). Document ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2020–0642–0285. December 15, 

2023. 

80. American Fuel & Petrochemical 

Manufacturers. Comments on the 

Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0642–0319. December 15, 2023. 

81. Halogenated Solvents Industry Alliance 

Inc. Comments on the Proposed 

Rulemaking for Trichloroethylene; 

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). Document ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0642–0296. 

December 15, 2023. 

82. Synesqo. PVDF: Critical uses and 

Relationship to TSCA Section 6 HighPriority Chemicals; Briefing for OIRA. 

August 13, 2024. 

83. NASA. Solid Rocket Motor Nozzles 

Mission Critical Requirement for 

Trichloroethylene. February 1, 2023. 

84. OSHA. Multi-Employer Citation Policy. 

December 10, 1999. https:// 

www.osha.gov/enforcement/directives/ 

cpl-02–00–124. 

85. OSHA. Chemical Hazards and Toxic 

Substances. https://www.osha.gov/ 

chemical-hazards. 

86. OSHA. OSHA Technical Manual (OTM) 

Section II: Chapter 1. Personal Sampling 

for Air Contaminants. Last updated on 

September 14, 2023. https:// 

www.osha.gov/otm/section-2- 

healthhazards/chapter-1. 

87. EPA. Passive Samplers for Investigations 

of Air Quality: Method Description, 

Implementation, and Comparison to 

Alternative Sampling Methods. 

December 2014. 

88. NIOSH. Hierarchy of Controls. Last 

Reviewed January 17, 2023. https://

www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/hierarchy/. 

89. OSHA. Personal Protective Equipment. 

2023. 

90. EPA. Trichloroethylene (TCE); Revision 

to Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) 

Risk Determination; Response to Public 

Comments. December 2022. 

91. EPA. Trichloroethylene: Fenceline 

Technical Support—Water Pathway. 

March 24, 2023. 

92. EPA. Trichloroethylene (TCE): Fenceline 

Technical Support—Ambient Air 

Pathway. March 3, 2022. 

93. EPA. National Emission Standards for 

Benzene Final Rule. 54 FR 38044. 

September 14, 1989. 

94. American Petroleum Institute. Comments 

on the Proposed Rulemaking for 

Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

Document ID No. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020– 

0642–0263. December 12, 2023. 

95. San Francisco Program on Reproductive 

Health and the Environment University 

of California. Comments on the Proposed 

Rulemaking for Trichloroethylene; 

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). Document ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OPPT–2020–0642–0314. 

December 15, 2023. 

96. Anonymous. Comments on the Proposed 

Rulemaking for Trichloroethylene; 

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). EPA–HQ–OPPT– 

2020–0642–0372. November 9, 2023. 

97. EPA. Supporting Statement for an 

Information Collection Request (ICR) 

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(PRA). 2024. 

98. EPA. Second Existing Chemical Exposure 

Limit (ECEL) (Developmental Toxicity) 

for Occupational Use of 

Trichloroethylene; Appendix B. March 

31, 2022. 

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Additional information about these 

statutes and executive orders can be 

found at https://www.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders. 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 14094: Modernizing Regulatory 

Review 

This action is a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ as defined in Executive Order 

12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), 

as amended by Executive Order 14094 

(88 FR 21879, April 11, 2023). 

Accordingly, EPA submitted this action 

to the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for Executive Order 12866 

review. Documentation of any changes 

made in response to Executive Order 

12866 review is available in the docket. 

EPA prepared an analysis of the 

potential costs and benefits associated 

with this action (Ref. 3), which is 

available in the docket and summarized 

in Unit I.E. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

The information collection activities 

in this final rule have been submitted to 

OMB for approval under the PRA, 44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The Information 

Collection Request (ICR) document that 

EPA prepared has been assigned EPA 

ICR No. 2775.02 and OMB Control No. 

2070–0232 (Ref. 97). The ICR is in the 

docket and is briefly summarized here. 

The information collection requirements 

are not enforceable until OMB approves 

them. 

There are two primary provisions of 

the rule that may increase burden under 

the PRA. The first is downstream 

notification, which is required to be 

carried out by updates to the relevant 

SDS and required for manufacturers, 

processors, and distributors in 

commerce of TCE, who would provide 

notice to companies downstream upon 

shipment of TCE about the prohibitions. 

The information submitted to 

downstream companies through the 

SDS would provide knowledge and 

awareness of the restrictions to these 

companies. The second primary 

provision of the rule that may increase 

burden under the PRA is WCPP-related 

information generation, recordkeeping, 

and notification requirements 

(including development of exposure 

control plans; exposure level monitoring 

and related recordkeeping; development 

of documentation for a PPE program and 

related recordkeeping; development of 

documentation for a respiratory 

protection program and related 

recordkeeping; development and 

notification to potentially exposed 

persons (employees and others in the 

workplace) about how they can access 

the exposure control plans, exposure 

monitoring records, PPE program 

implementation documentation, and 

respirator program documentation; and 

development of documentation 

demonstrating eligibility for an 

exemption from the prohibitions, and 

related recordkeeping). 

Respondents/affected entities: 

Persons that manufacture (including 

import), process, distribute in 

commerce, use, or dispose of TCE or 

products containing TCE. See also Unit 

I.A. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102620 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

Respondent’s obligation to respond: 

Mandatory (TSCA section 6(a) and 40 

CFR part 751). 

Estimated number of respondents: 

23,070. 

Frequency of response: On occasion. 

Total estimated burden: 38,625 hours 

(per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 

1320.3(b). 

Total estimated cost: $7,953,367 (per 

year), includes $5,351,750 annualized 

capital or operation and maintenance 

costs. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. The OMB control 

numbers for EPA regulations in 40 CFR 

are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When OMB 

approves this ICR, the OMB control 

number will be included on the 

approved collection instruments and 

added to 40 CFR part 9 to display the 

valid OMB control number assigned to 

the approved information collection 

activities contained in this final rule. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

Pursuant to sections 603 and 609(b) of 

the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., EPA 

prepared an IRFA for the 2023 TCE 

proposed rule (Ref. 20) and convened a 

SBAR Panel to obtain advice and 

recommendations from SERs that 

potentially would be subject to the 

rule’s requirements. Summaries of the 

IRFA and Panel recommendations are 

presented in the 2023 TCE proposed 

rule, and copies of the related 

documents are in the docket. 

As required by section 604 of the 

RFA, EPA prepared a FRFA for this 

action (Ref. 21). The FRFA addresses the 

issues raised by public comments on the 

IRFA for the proposed rule. The 

complete FRFA is available in the 

docket and is summarized here. 

1. Statement of Need and Rule 

Objectives 

Under TSCA section 6(a) (15 U.S.C. 

2605(a)), if EPA determines after a 

TSCA section 6(b) risk evaluation that a 

chemical substance presents an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health or 

the environment, without consideration 

of costs or other non-risk factors, 

including an unreasonable risk to a 

PESS identified as relevant to the risk 

evaluation, under the conditions of use, 

EPA must by rule apply one or more 

requirements listed in TSCA section 6(a) 

to the extent necessary so that the 

chemical substance or mixture no longer 

presents such risk. TCE was the subject 

of a risk evaluation under TSCA section 

6(b)(4)(A) that was issued in November 

2020. In addition, in January 2023, EPA 

issued a revised unreasonable risk 

determination that TCE as a whole 

chemical substance presents an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health 

under the conditions of use. As a result, 

EPA is taking action to the extent 

necessary so that TCE no longer 

presents such risk. 

EPA developed this final rule after 

considering EPA’s unreasonable risk 

determination for TCE, information 

provided in public comments on the 

proposed rule, findings from and 

comments on the SBAR Panel, other 

required consultations, and additional 

public outreach. More information on 

the 2023 TCE proposed rule, SBAR 

Panel, and outreach efforts for this 

action, is available in the docket for this 

rulemaking. 

To address the identified 

unreasonable risk, this rule (1) prohibits 

the manufacture (including import), 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce of TCE for all uses (including 

all consumer uses), with longer 

timeframes for manufacture and 

processing related to certain uses and 

time-limited TSCA 6(g) exemptions for 

certain conditions of use; (2) requires 

strict workplace controls, including a 

TCE WCPP, which would include 

requirements for an inhalation exposure 

limit and glove requirements to limit 

dermal exposure to TCE, for conditions 

of use with long term phase-outs or 

time-limited exemptions under TSCA 

section 6(g); (3) establishes 

recordkeeping and downstream 

notification requirements; and (4) 

provides certain time-limited 

exemptions from requirements for 

conditions of use of TCE that are critical 

and essential, for which no technically 

and economically feasible, safer 

alternative is available, or where 

compliance with the requirement would 

significantly disrupt the national 

economy, national security, or critical 

infrastructure. 

2. Significant Issues Raised by the 

Public Comments in Response to the 

IRFA and EPA Response 

A summary of significant issues 

raised by comments about the IRFA 

(Ref. 20) and EPA’s response is in the 

Response to Comments document (Ref 

11), section 10.2. 

3. SBA Office of Advocacy Comments 

and EPA Response 

SBA Office of Advocacy provided 

comments on the proposed rule (EPA– 

HQ–OPPT–2020–0624). A summary of 

these comments and EPA’s response is 

in section 3 of the FRFA (Ref. 21). 

4. Estimate of the Number of Small 

Entities to Which the Final Rule Applies 

This final rule potentially affects 

small manufacturers (including 

importers), processors, distributors, 

retailers, users of TCE or of products 

containing TCE, and entities engaging in 

disposal. EPA estimates that the rule 

would affect approximately 21,599 

overall firms, of which 98.5% small 

entities have estimated impacts of less 

than 1% of revenues. End users with 

economically and technologically 

feasible alternatives are estimated to 

only incur costs associated with rule 

familiarization. For a full description of 

the estimated number of small entities 

affected by this rule, see the FRFA (Ref. 

21). 

5. Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, 

and Other Compliance Requirements of 

the Final Rule 

a. Compliance Requirements 

EPA is prohibiting all conditions of 

use of TCE. As described in the final 

rule, EPA is prohibiting all 

manufacturing (including import), 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce of TCE for all uses (including 

all consumer uses), as described in Unit 

IV.B.2. with longer compliance 

timeframes for manufacture and 

processing related to certain uses and 

TSCA section 6(g) exemptions for 

certain conditions of use. EPA is also 

requiring strict workplace controls, 

including compliance with a TCE 

WCPP, which would include 

requirements for an interim ECEL, as 

well as dermal protection, to limit 

exposure to TCE, for conditions of use 

with long term phase-outs or timelimited exemptions under TSCA section 

6(g), as described in Units IV.B., IV.E., 

and IV.G. After December 17, 2024, 

prohibitions on manufacturing, 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce of TCE for consumer use will 

occur in 90 days for manufacturers (i.e., 

on March 17, 2025), 180 days for 

processors and distributors (i.e., on June 

16, 2025), and 270 days for industrial 

and commercial users and disposal (i.e., 

on September 15, 2025), except as 

specified in paragraphs (b)(4) through 

(25) of section 751.305. 

An interim WCPP encompasses 

inhalation exposure thresholds, 

includes monitoring and recordkeeping 

requirements to verify that those 

thresholds are not exceeded, and other 

components, such as dermal protection, 

while EPA determined that prohibition 

of all conditions of use is ultimately 

necessary to address the unreasonable 

risk. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102621 

b. Classes of Small Entities Subject to 

the Compliance Requirements 

The small entities that would be 

potentially directly regulated by this 

rule are small businesses that 

manufacture (including import), 

process, distribute in commerce, use, or 

dispose of TCE, including retailers of 

TCE for end-consumer uses. 

c. Professional Skills Needed To 

Comply 

Entities subject to this rule that 

manufacture (including import), 

process, or distribute TCE in commerce 

will be required to cease such activity. 

The entity will be required to modify 

their SDS or develop another way to 

inform their customers of the 

prohibition on manufacture, processing, 

and distribution of TCE. They are also 

required to maintain ordinary business 

records, such as invoices and bills-oflading, that demonstrate compliance 

with the prohibitions, restrictions, and 

other provisions of this regulation. 

These are all routine business tasks that 

do not require specialized skills or 

training. 

Entities that use TCE in any industrial 

and commercial capacity will be 

required to cease, with some timeframes 

for prohibitions longer than others. 

Restriction or prohibition of these uses 

would likely require the 

implementation of an alternative 

chemical or the cessation of use of TCE 

in a process or equipment that may 

require persons with specialized skills, 

such as engineers or other technical 

experts. Instead of developing an 

alternative method themselves, 

commercial users of TCE may choose to 

contract with another entity to do so. 

Entities that are permitted, on a timelimited basis until prohibition, to 

continue to manufacture, process, 

distribute, or use TCE are required to 

implement a WCPP for continued use of 

TCE. A transition to a WCPP may 

require persons with specialized skills 

such as an engineer or health and safety 

professional. Instead of implementing 

the WCPP, entities that use TCE may 

choose to contract with another entity to 

do so. Records have to be maintained for 

compliance with a WCPP, as applicable. 

While this recording activity itself may 

not require a special skill, the 

information to be measured and 

recorded may require persons with 

specialized skills such as an industrial 

hygienist. 

6. Steps Taken To Minimize Economic 

Impact to Small Entities 

a. SBAR Panel 

As required by section 609(b) of the 

RFA, EPA conducted outreach to small 

entities and convened a SBAR Panel to 

obtain advice and recommendations of 

representatives of the small entities that 

potentially would be subject to the 

rule’s requirements. The Panel solicited 

input on all aspects of these proposed 

regulations. Six potentially impacted 

small entities served as small-entity 

representatives (SERs) to the Panel, 

representing a broad range of small 

entities from diverse geographic 

locations. The Panel Report was signed 

on April 4, 2023 (Ref. 19). 

Consistent with the RFA 

requirements, the Panel evaluated the 

assembled materials and small-entity 

comments on issues related to elements 

of the regulatory flexibility analysis. It is 

important to note that the Panel’s 

findings and discussion were based on 

the information available at the time the 

final report was prepared. For the full 

list of Panel recommendations, see 

Section 8.A. of the FRFA (Ref. 21). 

EPA detailed the SBAR Panel’s 

request for comment on these specific 

topics in the IRFA and proposed rule 

and solicited comment from the public. 

During the comment period, the public 

provided comment on some of these 

areas. Those comments and others 

received on the proposed rule and 

EPA’s responses are in the Response to 

Comments document (Ref. 11). 

b. Alternatives Considered 

EPA analyzed alternative regulatory 

approaches to identify which would be 

feasible, reduce burden to small 

businesses, and achieve the objective of 

the statute (i.e., applying one or more 

requirements listed in TSCA section 6(a) 

to the extent necessary so that the 

chemical substance or mixture no longer 

presents an unreasonable risk). As 

described in more detail in Unit VI. of 

the proposed rule, and Unit II.D. of the 

final rule, EPA considered several 

factors, in addition to identified 

unreasonable risk, when selecting 

among possible TSCA section 6(a) 

requirements. To the extent practicable, 

EPA factored into its decisions: the 

effects of TCE on health and the 

environment, the magnitude of exposure 

to TCE of human beings and the 

environment, the benefits of TCE for 

various uses, and the reasonably 

ascertainable economic consequences of 

the rule. As part of this analysis, EPA 

considered—in addition to the 

prohibitions described in Unit IV.—a 

wide variety of control measures to 

address the unreasonable risk from TCE 

such as a WCPP, weight fractions, a 

certification and limited access 

program, and prescriptive controls. 

EPA’s analysis of these risk management 

approaches is detailed in Unit VI.A.3. of 

the proposed rule. 

Based on consideration of public 

comments received on the proposed 

rule, EPA has made some changes from 

the proposed rule to the final rule. 

These changes include aspects of the 

WCPP, longer compliance timeframes 

for certain uses, and TSCA section 6(g) 

exemptions for certain conditions of 

use. EPA is also requiring strict 

workplace controls, including 

compliance with a TCE WCPP, which 

would include requirements for an 

interim ECEL, as well as dermal 

protection, to limit exposure to TCE, for 

conditions of use with long term phaseouts or time-limited exemptions. 

Additional changes to the rule based on 

consideration of public comments are 

detailed in Unit III. of the final rule and 

include identification of a regulatory 

threshold for TCE. For additional 

information and rationale towards 

alternative actions, see Unit III.D. of this 

final rule and Section 8.B. of the FRFA 

(Ref. 21). 

In addition, EPA is preparing a Small 

Entity Compliance Guide to help small 

entities comply with this rule. EPA 

expects that this guide will be made 

available on the EPA website prior to 

the effective date of this final rule. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain an 

unfunded mandate of $100 million (in 

1995 dollars and adjusted annually for 

inflation) or more as described in 

UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. The action will affect 

entities that use TCE. It is not expected 

to affect State, local, or Tribal 

governments because the use of TCE by 

government entities is minimal. The 

costs involved in this action are 

estimated not to exceed $183 million in 

2023$ ($100 million in 1995$ adjusted 

for inflation using the GDP implicit 

price deflator) in any one year for State, 

local, and Tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or for the private sector. 

Accordingly, this action is not subject to 

the requirements of sections 202, 203, or 

205 of UMRA. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

EPA has concluded that this action 

has federalism implications, as specified 

in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999), because regulation 

under TSCA section 6(a) may preempt 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102622 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

state law. EPA provides the following 

federalism summary impact statement. 

The Agency consulted with state and 

local officials early in the process of 

developing the proposed action to 

permit them to have meaningful and 

timely input into its development. This 

included a consultation meeting on July 

22, 2021, and a background presentation 

on September 9, 2020. EPA invited the 

following national organizations 

representing State and local elected 

officials to these meetings: Association 

of State Drinking Water Administrators, 

National Association of Clean Water 

Agencies, Western States Water Council, 

National Water Resources Association, 

American Water Works Association, 

Association of Metropolitan Water 

Agencies, Association of Clean Water 

Administrators, Environmental Council 

of the States, National Association of 

Counties, National League of Cities, 

County Executives of America, U.S. 

Conference of Mayors, and National 

Association of Attorneys General. A 

summary of the meeting with these 

organizations, including the views that 

they expressed, is available in the 

docket (Ref. 13). EPA provided an 

opportunity for these organizations to 

provide follow-up comments in writing 

but did not receive any such comments. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have Tribal 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000) because it will not have 

substantial direct effects on Tribal 

governments, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

the Indian Tribes, or on the distribution 

of power and responsibilities between 

the Federal Government and Indian 

Tribes. TCE is not manufactured, 

processed, or distributed in commerce 

by Tribes and, therefore, this 

rulemaking would not impose 

substantial direct compliance costs on 

Tribal governments. Thus, Executive 

Order 13175 does not apply to this 

action. 

Notwithstanding the lack of Tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175, EPA consulted with Tribal 

officials during the development of this 

action, consistent with the EPA Policy 

on Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribes, which EPA applies more 

broadly than Executive Order 13175. 

The Agency held a Tribal consultation 

from June 3, 2021, to August 20, 2021, 

with meetings on June 16 and July 6, 

2021. Tribal officials were given the 

opportunity to meaningfully interact 

with EPA concerning the current status 

of risk management. During the 

consultation, EPA discussed risk 

management under TSCA section 6(a), 

findings from the 2020 Risk Evaluation 

for TCE, types of information to inform 

risk management, principles for 

transparency during risk management, 

and types of information EPA sought 

from Tribal officials. EPA briefed Tribal 

officials on the Agency’s risk 

management considerations and Tribal 

officials raised no related issues or 

concerns to EPA during or in follow-up 

to those meetings (Ref. 14). EPA 

received no written comments as part of 

this consultation. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997) directs Federal agencies 

to include an evaluation of the health 

and safety effects of the planned 

regulation on children in Federal health 

and safety standards and explain why 

the regulation is preferable to 

potentially effective and reasonably 

feasible alternatives. While the 

environmental health or safety risks 

addressed by this action present a 

disproportionate risk to children due to 

TCE’s developmental toxicity, this 

action is not subject to Executive Order 

13045 because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under section 3(f)(1) of 

Executive Order 12866. However, 

because there is evidence of an 

association between TCE and 

developmental toxicity, the prohibitions 

and restrictions on TCE in this final rule 

are expected to strengthen protection of 

children’s health. In addition, EPA’s 

Policy on Children’s Health applies to 

this action. Information on how the 

policy was applied is available in Unit 

II.D.2.c. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution or Use 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under Executive Order 

13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) 

because it is not likely to have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution or use of energy and has not 

been designated by the Administrator of 

the Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs as a significant energy action. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

Pursuant to the NTTAA section 12(d), 

15 U.S.C. 272, the Agency has 

determined that this rulemaking 

involves environmental monitoring or 

measurement, specifically for 

occupational inhalation exposures to 

TCE. Consistent with the Agency’s 

Performance Based Measurement 

System (PBMS), EPA will not require 

the use of specific, prescribed analytic 

methods. Rather, the Agency will allow 

the use of any method that meets the 

prescribed performance criteria. The 

PBMS approach is intended to be more 

flexible and cost-effective for the 

regulated community; it is also intended 

to encourage innovation in analytical 

technology and improved data quality. 

EPA is not precluding the use of any 

method, whether it constitutes a 

voluntary consensus standard or not, as 

long as it meets the performance criteria 

specified. 

For this rulemaking, the key 

consideration for the PBMS approach is 

the ability to accurately detect and 

measure airborne concentrations of TCE 

at the interim ECEL and the interim 

ECEL action level. Some examples of 

methods which meet the criteria are 

included in appendix B of the ECEL 

memo (Ref. 98). EPA recognizes that 

there may be voluntary consensus 

standards that meet the criteria (Ref. 98). 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations and Executive 

Order 14096: Revitalizing Our Nation’s 

Commitment to Environmental Justice 

for All 

EPA believes that the human health 

and environmental conditions that exist 

prior to this action result in or have the 

potential to result in disproportionate 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on communities 

with EJ concerns in accordance with 

Executive Order 14096 (88 FR 25251, 

April 26, 2023) (building on and 

supplementing Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). As 

described more fully in the Economic 

Analysis for this rulemaking (Ref. 3), 

EPA conducted an analysis to 

characterize the baseline conditions 

faced by communities and workers 

affected by the regulation to identify the 

potential for disproportionate impacts 

on communities with environmental 

justice concerns using information 

about the facilities, workforce, and 

communities potentially affected by the 

regulatory options under current 

conditions, before the regulation would 

go into effect. The analysis drew on 

publicly available data provided by EPA 

and the U.S. Census Bureau, including 

data from the Toxics Release Inventory 

(TRI), Chemical Data Reporting (CDR), 

National Emissions Inventory (NEI), the 

American Community Survey (ACS), 

and the Quarterly Workforce Indicators 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102623 

(QWI). The baseline characterization 

suggests that workers in affected 

industries and regions, as well as 

residents of nearby communities, are 

more likely to be people of color than 

the general population in affected states, 

although this varied by use assessed. 

Based on reasonably available 

information, EPA determined that there 

are potential environmental justice 

concerns in communities surrounding 

facilities subject to this regulation (Ref. 

3). 

EPA believes that this action is likely 

to reduce existing disproportionate and 

adverse effects on communities with 

environmental justice concerns. While 

this regulatory action applies 

requirements to the extent necessary so 

that TCE no longer presents an 

unreasonable risk, EPA is not able to 

quantify the distribution of the change 

in risk for affected populations. EPA is 

also unable to quantify the changes in 

risks for affected populations from nonTCE-using technologies or practices that 

firms may adopt in response to the 

regulation to determine whether any 

such changes could pose environmental 

justice concerns. Data limitations that 

prevent EPA from conducting a more 

comprehensive analysis are summarized 

in the Economic Analysis (Ref. 3). 

EPA additionally identified and 

addressed potential EJ concerns by 

conducting outreach to advocates of 

communities that might be subject to 

disproportionate exposure to TCE. On 

June 16, 2021, and July 6, 2021, EPA 

held public meetings as part of this 

consultation (Ref. 18). See also Unit II.D. 

These meetings were held pursuant to 

Executive Order 12898 and Executive 

Order 14008, Tackling the Climate 

Crisis at Home and Abroad (86 FR 7619, 

February 1, 2021). EPA received three 

written comments following the EJ 

meetings, in addition to oral comments 

provided during the consultations (Refs. 

15, 16, 17). In general, commenters 

supported strong regulation of TCE to 

protect lower-income communities and 

workers. Commenters supported strong 

outreach to affected communities, 

encouraged EPA to follow the hierarchy 

of controls, favored prohibitions, and 

noted the uncertainty, and, in some 

cases, inadequacy, of PPE. 

The information supporting this 

Executive Order review is contained in 

Unit II.D., as well as in the Economic 

Analysis (Ref. 3). EPA’s presentations, a 

summary of EPA’s presentation and 

public comments made, and fact sheets 

for the EJ consultations related to this 

rulemaking are available at https:// 

www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managingchemicals-under-tsca/materials-juneand-july-2021-environmental-justice. 

These materials are also available in the 

docket for this rulemaking. 

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) 

This action is subject to the CRA, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., and the EPA will 

submit a rule report to each House of 

the Congress and to the Comptroller 

General of the United States. This action 

is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 

U.S.C. 804(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 751 

Environmental protection, Chemicals, 

Export notification, Hazardous 

substances, Import certification, 

Reporting and recordkeeping. 

Michael S. Regan, 

Administrator. 

Therefore, for the reasons stated in the 

preamble, 40 CFR chapter I is amended 

to read as follows: 

PART 751—REGULATION OF CERTAIN 

CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES AND 

MIXTURES UNDER SECTION 6 OF THE 

TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 751 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605, 15 U.S.C. 

2625(l)(4). 

■ 2. Add subpart D to read as follows: 

Subpart D—Trichloroethylene (TCE) 

Sec. 

751.301 General. 

751.303 Definitions. 

751.305 Prohibitions of manufacturing, 

processing, distribution in commerce, 

use and disposal. 

751.307 Phase-out of processing 

trichloroethylene to manufacture of 

HFC–134a. 

751.309 Phase-out of trichloroethylene use 

in vapor degreasing for booster rocket 

nozzles. 

751.311 Phase-out of TCE use in the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

laboratory use in asphalt testing and 

recovery. 

751.313 Phase-out of disposal of TCE to 

industrial pre-treatment, treatment, or 

publicly owned treatment works. 

751.315 Workplace chemical protection 

program. 

751.317 Workplace requirements for 

energized electrical cleaner. 

751.319 Workplace requirements for 

wastewater. 

751.321 Downstream notification. 

751.323 Recordkeeping requirements. 

751.325 Exemptions. 

Subpart D—Trichloroethylene (TCE) 

§ 751.301 General. 

(a) Applicability. This subpart sets 

certain restrictions on the manufacture 

(including import), processing, 

distribution in commerce, use, and 

disposal of trichloroethylene (TCE) 

(CASRN 79–01–6) to prevent 

unreasonable risk of injury to health in 

accordance with TSCA section 6(a). 

(b) Regulatory threshold. Unless 

otherwise specified in this subpart, the 

prohibitions and restrictions of this 

subpart do not apply to products 

containing TCE at thresholds less than 

0.1 percent by weight. This threshold 

does not apply to wastewater. 

(c) Byproducts within site-limited, 

physically enclosed systems. Unless 

otherwise specified in this subpart, the 

prohibitions and restrictions of this 

subpart do not apply to TCE processed 

as a byproduct when that byproduct 

TCE is processed within a site-limited, 

physically enclosed system that is part 

of the same overall manufacturing 

process from which the byproduct TCE 

was generated. This exclusion does not 

permit TCE to be present in any product 

that results from such site-limited, 

physically enclosed systems, except as 

permitted by paragraph (b) of this 

section. 

(d) Owner and operator requirements. 

Any requirement for an owner or 

operator or an owner and operator is a 

requirement for any individual that is 

either an owner or an operator. 

§ 751.303 Definitions. 

The definitions in subpart A of this 

part apply to this subpart unless 

otherwise specified in this section. In 

addition, the following definitions 

apply: 

Distribute in commerce has the same 

meaning as in section 3 of the Act, 

except that the term does not include 

retailers for purposes of § 751.321 and 

§ 751.323. 

Interim ECEL means a concentration 

of airborne TCE of 0.2 parts per million 

(ppm) calculated as an eight (8)-hour 

time weighted average (TWA) that will 

be in place only for the timeframes 

indicated for specified conditions of 

use, after which prohibitions would take 

effect. 

Interim ECEL action level means a 

concentration of airborne TCE of 0.1 

parts per million (ppm) calculated as an 

eight (8)-hour time-weighted average 

(TWA). 

Site-limited has the same meaning as 

in 40 CFR 711.3. 

§ 751.305 Prohibitions of manufacturing, 

processing, distribution in commerce, use 

and disposal. 

(a) Applicability. The provisions of 

this section apply to the following: 

(1) Manufacturing (including 

importing and manufacturing for 

export); 

(2) Processing (including processing 

for export); 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102624 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

(3) All industrial and commercial 

uses; 

(4) All consumer uses; 

(5) Distribution in commerce; and 

(6) Disposal of TCE to industrial pretreatment, industrial treatment, or 

publicly owned treatment works. 

(b) Prohibitions. (1) After March 17, 

2025, all persons are prohibited from 

manufacturing (including importing and 

manufacturing for export) TCE, except 

as specified for manufacturing in 

paragraphs (b)(5) through (25) of this 

section. 

(2) After June 16, 2025, all persons are 

prohibited from processing (including 

processing for export) and distributing 

in commerce (including making 

available) TCE, including any TCEcontaining products, except as specified 

for processing or distributing in 

commerce in paragraphs (b)(5) through 

(25) of this section, and all retailers are 

prohibited from distributing in 

commerce (including making available) 

TCE for any use. 

(3) After September 15, 2025, all 

persons are prohibited from industrial 

and commercial use of TCE, including 

any TCE-containing products, except as 

specified for industrial or commercial 

use in paragraphs (b)(5) through (25) of 

this section. 

(4) After September 15, 2025, all 

persons manufacturing (including 

importing), processing, and using TCE 

are prohibited from disposal of TCE to 

industrial pre-treatment, industrial 

treatment, or publicly owned treatment 

works except as specified in paragraphs 

(b)(14), (23) (24), and (26) of this 

section. 

(5) After June 16, 2025, all persons are 

prohibited from manufacturing 

(including importing) TCE for industrial 

and commercial use for batch vapor 

degreasing in open-top and closed-loop 

degreasing equipment, except for the 

use specified in paragraphs (b)(11), (15), 

(16), (17), (20), and (21) of this section. 

(6) After September 15, 2025, all 

persons are prohibited from processing 

TCE for industrial and commercial use 

for batch vapor degreasing in open-top 

and closed-loop degreasing equipment, 

except for the use specified in 

paragraphs (b)(11), (15), (16), (17), (20), 

and (21) of this section. 

(7) After December 18, 2025, all 

persons are prohibited from the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE 

for batch vapor degreasing in open-top 

and closed-loop degreasing equipment, 

except for the use specified in 

paragraphs (b)(11), (15), (16), (17), (20), 

and (21) of this section. 

(8) After June 10, 2026, all persons are 

prohibited from manufacturing 

(including importing) TCE for: (i) 

Processing of TCE as a reactant/ 

intermediate, except for the use as 

specified in paragraph (b)(18) of this 

section; and (ii) Processing TCE for the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a processing aid for: process solvent 

used in battery manufacture; process 

solvent used in polymer fiber spinning, 

fluoroelastomer manufacture and 

Alcantara manufacture; extraction 

solvent used in caprolactam 

manufacture; precipitant used in betacyclodextrin manufacture, except for 

those uses specified in paragraphs 

(b)(14), (23) and (24) of this section. 

(9) After December 18, 2026, all 

persons are prohibited from: (i) 

Processing TCE as a reactant/ 

intermediate, except for the use as 

specified in paragraph (b)(18) of this 

section; and (ii) Processing for and 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a processing aid in: process solvent used 

in battery manufacture; process solvent 

used in polymer fiber spinning, 

fluoroelastomer manufacture and 

Alcantara manufacture; extraction 

solvent used in caprolactam 

manufacture; precipitant used in betacyclodextrin manufacture, except for 

those uses specified in paragraphs 

(b)(14), (23) and (24) of this section. 

(10) After December 18, 2027, all 

persons are prohibited from industrial 

and commercial use of TCE in energized 

electrical cleaners and from the 

manufacturing (including importing), 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce of TCE for such a use. 

(11) After December 18, 2029, all 

persons are prohibited from the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a solvent in closed-loop batch vapor 

degreasing for rayon fabric scouring for 

end use in producing rocket booster 

nozzles for Federal agencies and their 

contractors, and manufacturing 

(including importing), processing, and 

distribution in commerce of TCE for 

such use. If such persons obtain and 

maintain the records required by 

§§ 751.309 and 751.323 demonstrating 

that a final pre-launch test was 

completed using an alternative to TCE 

in the production of the rocket booster 

nozzles, the industrial and commercial 

use of TCE as a solvent in closed-loop 

batch vapor degreasing for rayon fabric 

scouring for end use in producing rocket 

booster nozzles for Federal agencies and 

their contractors, and manufacturing 

(including importing), processing, and 

distribution in commerce of TCE for 

such use may continue beyond 

December 18, 2029. 

(12) After December 18, 2029, all 

persons are prohibited from industrial 

and commercial use of TCE in adhesives 

and sealants for essential aerospace 

applications, and from the 

manufacturing (including importing), 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce of TCE for such uses. 

(13) After December 18, 2029, all 

persons are prohibited from the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a laboratory chemical for asphalt testing 

and recovery using manual centrifuge 

processes, and manufacturing 

(including importing), processing, and 

distribution in commerce of TCE for 

such use, as further detailed in 

§ 751.311. 

(14) After December 18, 2029, all 

persons are prohibited from the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a processing aid for lithium battery 

separator manufacturing, and the 

manufacturing (including importing), 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce of TCE for such use as well 

as the disposal of TCE from such 

industrial or commercial use to 

industrial pre-treatment, industrial 

treatment, or publicly owned treatment 

works. 

(15) After December 18, 2029, all 

persons are prohibited from the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE 

for batch vapor degreasing for landbased DoD defense systems by Federal 

agencies and their contractors, and from 

the manufacturing (including 

importing), processing, and distribution 

in commerce of TCE for such use. 

(16) After December 18, 2031, all 

persons are prohibited from the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a solvent in closed-loop batch vapor 

degreasing necessary for rocket engine 

cleaning by Federal Agencies and their 

contractors as described in 

§ 751.325(b)(1) and the manufacturing 

(including importing), processing, and 

distribution in commerce of TCE for 

such use. 

(17) After December 18, 2031, all 

persons are prohibited from the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a solvent in closed-loop and open-top 

batch vapor degreasing for essential 

aerospace parts and components and 

narrow tubing for medical devices, and 

manufacturing (including importing), 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce of TCE for such use as 

described in § 751.325(b)(2). 

(18) After June 18, 2033, all persons 

are prohibited from the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as an 

intermediate for manufacturing 

hydrofluorocarbon 134-a, also known as 

1,1,1,2-tetrafluroethane (HFC–134a: 

CASRN 811–97–2), and manufacturing 

(including importing), processing, and 

distribution in commerce for such use 

as described in § 751.307. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102625 

(19) After December 18, 2034, all 

persons are prohibited from the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

laboratory use for asphalt testing and 

recovery, and manufacturing (including 

importing), processing, and distribution 

in commerce of TCE for such use, as 

described in § 751.311. 

(20) After December 18, 2034, all 

persons are prohibited from the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a solvent in closed-loop batch vapor 

degreasing for rayon fabric scouring for 

end use in producing rocket booster 

nozzles for Federal agencies and their 

contractors, and manufacturing 

(including importing), processing, and 

distribution in commerce of TCE for 

such use. 

(21) After December 18, 2034, for 

vessels of the Armed Forces and their 

systems, and in the maintenance, 

fabrication, and sustainment for and of 

such vessels and systems, prohibit the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

(and manufacturing (including 

importing), processing, and distribution 

in commerce of TCE for): potting 

compounds for naval electronic systems 

and equipment; sealing compounds for 

high and ultra-high vacuum systems; 

bonding compounds for materials 

testing and maintenance of underwater 

systems and bonding of nonmetallic 

materials; and cleaning agents to satisfy 

cleaning requirements (which includes 

degreasing using wipes, sprays, solvents 

and vapor degreasing) for: materials and 

components required for military 

ordnance testing; temporary resin 

repairs in vessel spaces where welding 

is not authorized; ensuring 

polyurethane adhesion for electronic 

systems and equipment repair and 

installation of elastomeric materials; 

various naval combat systems, radars, 

sensors, equipment; fabrication and 

prototyping processes to remove coolant 

and other residue from machine parts; 

machined part fabrications for naval 

systems; installation of topside rubber 

tile material aboard vessels; and vapor 

degreasing required for substrate surface 

preparation prior to electroplating 

processes. 

(22) After December 18, 2034, all 

persons are prohibited from 

manufacturing (including import), 

processing, distribution in commerce, or 

use of TCE, including any TCE 

containing products, for industrial or 

commercial use in an emergency by 

NASA or its contractors as described in 

§ 751.325(b)(4), and manufacturing 

(including importing), processing, and 

distribution in commerce of TCE for 

such use. 

(23) After December 18, 2044, all 

persons are prohibited from the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a processing aid for lead-acid battery 

separator manufacturing, and the 

manufacturing (including importing), 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce of TCE for such use, as well 

as the disposal of TCE from such 

industrial or commercial use to 

industrial pre-treatment, industrial 

treatment, or publicly owned treatment 

works. 

(24) After December 18, 2039, all 

persons are prohibited from the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a processing aid for specialty polymeric 

microporous sheet materials 

manufacturing, and the manufacturing 

(including importing), processing, and 

distribution in commerce of TCE for 

such use, as well as the disposal of TCE 

from such industrial or commercial use 

to industrial pre-treatment, industrial 

treatment, or publicly owned treatment 

works. 

(25) After December 18, 2074, all 

persons are prohibited from industrial 

and commercial uses of TCE for the 

laboratory uses described in 

§ 751.325(b)(7), and from the 

manufacturing (including importing), 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce of TCE for such uses. 

(26) After December 18, 2074, all 

persons are prohibited from disposal of 

TCE to industrial pre-treatment, 

industrial treatment, or publicly owned 

treatment works for the purposes of 

cleanup projects of TCE-contaminated 

water and groundwater as described in 

§ 751.325(b)(8). 

§ 751.307 Phase-out of processing 

trichloroethylene to manufacture of HFC– 

134a. 

(a) Baseline. Before June 16, 2025, 

each manufacturer of HFC–134a who 

processes TCE as an intermediate must 

establish a baseline annual volume of 

TCE processed as an intermediate. 

(1) The manufacturer must use the 

average annual volume of any 12 

consecutive months in the 3 years 

preceding December 17, 2024 to 

calculate the baseline. 

(2) The manufacturer must retain 

records that demonstrate how the 

baseline annual volume was calculated, 

in accordance with § 751.323(d)(1). 

(b) Phase-out. (1) Beginning June 7, 

2027, each manufacturer of HFC–134a 

who processes TCE as an intermediate 

is not permitted to process TCE as an 

intermediate at an annual volume 

greater than 75 percent of the baseline. 

(2) Beginning June 18, 2029, each 

manufacturer of HFC–134a who 

processes TCE as an intermediate is not 

permitted to process TCE as an 

intermediate at an annual volume 

greater than 50 percent of the baseline. 

(3) Beginning June 18, 2031, each 

manufacturer of HFC–134a who 

processes TCE as an intermediate is not 

permitted to process TCE as an 

intermediate at an annual volume 

greater than 25 percent of the baseline 

so established. 

(4) Beginning June 18, 2033, each 

manufacturer of HFC–134a who 

processes TCE as an intermediate is 

prohibited from processing TCE as an 

intermediate. 

(c) Workplace chemical protection 

program. The owner or operator of the 

location where TCE is processed as an 

intermediate in accordance with this 

section, and manufacturers (including 

importers) and processors of TCE for 

such use, must comply with § 751.315. 

(d) Recordkeeping. The owner or 

operator of the location where TCE is 

processed as an intermediate in 

accordance with this section must 

comply with the recordkeeping 

requirements in § 751.323. 

§ 751.309 Phase-out of trichloroethylene 

use in vapor degreasing for rocket booster 

nozzles. 

(a) In accordance with 

§ 751.305(b)(11), until December 18, 

2029, TCE may be used as a solvent in 

closed-loop batch vapor degreasing for 

rayon fabric scouring for end use in 

producing rocket booster nozzles for 

Federal agencies and their contractors, 

and manufactured (including imported), 

processed, and distributed in commerce 

for such use. 

(b) From December 18, 2029, until 

December 18, 2034, TCE may only be 

used as a solvent in closed-loop batch 

vapor degreasing for rayon fabric 

scouring for end use in producing rocket 

booster nozzles, and manufactured 

(including imported), processed, and 

distributed in commerce for such use, 

by Federal agencies and their 

contractors who maintain records 

demonstrating that a final pre-launch 

test of rocket booster nozzles without 

using TCE was completed. 

(c) If a suitable alternative to TCE is 

identified and validated before the end 

of this phase-out period, Federal 

agencies and their contractors must 

transition to that alternative. 

(d) The owner or operator of the 

location where TCE is used as a solvent 

in closed-loop batch vapor degreasing 

for rayon fabric scouring for end use in 

producing rocket booster nozzles in 

accordance with this section, and 

manufacturers (including importers) 

and processors of TCE for such use, 

must comply with § 751.315. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102626 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

(e) The owner or operator of the 

location where TCE is used as a solvent 

in closed-loop batch vapor degreasing 

for rayon fabric scouring for end use in 

producing rocket booster nozzles in 

accordance with this section must 

comply with the recordkeeping 

requirements in § 751.323. 

§ 751.311 Phase-out of TCE use in the 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

laboratory use for asphalt testing and 

recovery. 

(a) In accordance with 

§ 751.305(b)(18), until December 18, 

2034, TCE may be manufactured 

(including imported), processed, 

distributed in commerce, and used in 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

laboratory use for asphalt testing and 

recovery. 

(b) From December 18, 2029, until 

December 18, 2034, TCE is only 

permitted to be manufactured 

(including imported), processed, 

distributed in commerce, and used in 

industrial and commercial use of TCE in 

laboratory use for asphalt testing and 

recovery for methods that do not 

include manual centrifuge processes. 

(c) The use of TCE as a laboratory 

chemical must be performed on the 

premises of a laboratory. 

(d) The owner or operator of the 

location where such use of TCE as a 

laboratory chemical occurs, and 

manufacturers (including importers) 

and processors of TCE for such use, 

must comply with the Workplace 

Chemical Protection Program provisions 

in § 751.315. 

(e) The owner or operator of the 

location where such use of TCE as a 

laboratory chemical occurs must comply 

with the recordkeeping requirements in 

§ 751.323. 

§ 751.313 Phase-out of disposal of TCE to 

industrial pre-treatment, treatment, or 

publicly owned treatment works. 

(a) After September 15, 2025, all 

persons manufacturing (including 

importing), processing, and using TCE 

are prohibited from disposal of TCE to 

industrial pre-treatment, industrial 

treatment, or publicly owned treatment 

works except as specified in the other 

subsections of this unit. 

(b) After December 18, 2029, all 

industrial and commercial users of TCE 

for lithium battery separator 

manufacturing are prohibited from 

disposal of TCE to industrial pretreatment, industrial treatment, or 

publicly owned treatment works. 

(c) After December 18, 2039, all 

industrial and commercial users of TCE 

for specialty polymeric microporous 

sheet materials manufacturing are 

prohibited from disposal of TCE to 

industrial pre-treatment, industrial 

treatment, or publicly owned treatment 

works. 

(d) After December 18, 2044, all 

industrial and commercial users of TCE 

for lead-acid battery separator 

manufacturing are prohibited from 

disposal of TCE to industrial pretreatment, industrial treatment, or 

publicly owned treatment works. 

(e) The owner or operator of the 

location where disposal of TCE to 

industrial pre-treatment, treatment, or to 

a publicly owned treatment works 

occurs must comply with the Workplace 

Chemical Protection Program provisions 

in § 751.315. 

(f) The owner or operator of the 

publicly owned treatment works where 

disposal of TCE occurs must comply 

with the wastewater workplace 

protections in § 751.319. 

(g) The owner or operator of the 

location where such use of TCE occurs 

must comply with the recordkeeping 

requirements in § 751.323. 

§ 751.315 Workplace chemical protection 

program. 

(a) Applicability. The provisions of 

this section apply to the following 

conditions of use of TCE when 

permitted to continue beyond December 

18, 2025, pursuant to accordance with 

§§ 751.305(b)(8) through (25), 751.307, 

751.309, and 751.311: 

(1) Manufacturing (domestic 

manufacture); 

(2) Manufacturing (import); 

(3) Processing as a reactant/ 

intermediate; 

(4) Processing into formulation, 

mixture, or reaction product; 

(5) Processing (repackaging); 

(6) Processing (recycling); 

(7) Industrial and commercial use of 

TCE as a processing aid in: process 

solvent used in battery manufacture; 

process solvent used in polymer fiber 

spinning, fluoroelastomer manufacture 

and Alcantara manufacture; extraction 

solvent used in caprolactam 

manufacture; precipitant used in betacyclodextrin manufacture; 

(8) Industrial and commercial use of 

TCE as an adhesive and sealant for 

essential aerospace applications; 

(9) Industrial and commercial use of 

TCE in other miscellaneous industrial 

and commercial uses (laboratory use); 

(10) Industrial and commercial use of 

TCE as a solvent in closed-loop batch 

vapor degreasing for rayon fabric 

scouring for end use in rocket booster 

nozzle production by Federal agencies 

and their contractors; 

(11) Industrial and commercial use of 

TCE in closed-loop or open-top batch 

vapor degreasing for essential aerospace 

parts and components and narrow 

tubing used for medical devices; 

(12) Industrial and commercial use of 

TCE for vessels of the Armed Forces and 

their systems, and in the maintenance, 

fabrication, and sustainment for and of 

such vessels and systems; as potting 

compounds for naval electronic systems 

and equipment; sealing compounds for 

high and ultra-high vacuum systems; 

bonding compounds for materials 

testing and maintenance of underwater 

systems and bonding of nonmetallic 

materials; and cleaning agents to satisfy 

cleaning requirements (which includes 

degreasing using wipes, sprays, solvents 

and vapor degreasing) for: materials and 

components required for military 

ordnance testing; temporary resin 

repairs in vessel spaces where welding 

is not authorized; ensuring 

polyurethane adhesion for electronic 

systems and equipment repair and 

installation of elastomeric materials; 

various naval combat systems, radars, 

sensors, equipment; fabrication and 

prototyping processes to remove coolant 

and other residue from machine parts; 

machined part fabrications for naval 

systems; installation of topside rubber 

tile material aboard vessels; and vapor 

degreasing required for substrate surface 

preparation prior to electroplating 

processes; 

(13) Industrial and commercial use of 

TCE as a solvent in closed-loop batch 

vapor degreasing necessary for rocket 

engine cleaning by Federal agencies and 

their contractors; 

(14) Industrial and commercial use of 

TCE in batch vapor degreasing for landbased DoD defense systems by Federal 

agencies and their contractors; and 

(15) Disposal of TCE to industrial pretreatment, industrial treatment, or 

publicly owned treatment works, except 

to the extent that the activity is covered 

by the workplace protections in 

§ 751.319. 

(b) Interim existing chemical exposure 

limit (interim ECEL)—(1) Applicability. 

The provisions of this paragraph (b) 

apply to any workplace engaged in the 

conditions of use listed in paragraphs 

(a)(1) through (15) of this section. 

(2) Interim ECEL. Beginning 

September 20, 2027 for Federal agencies 

and Federal contractors acting for or on 

behalf of the Federal government, or by 

September 15, 2025 for non-Federal 

owners and operators, or beginning 120 

days after introduction of TCE into the 

workplace if TCE use commences after 

June 16, 2025, the owner or operator 

must ensure that no person is exposed 

to an airborne concentration of TCE in 

excess of the interim ECEL, consistent 

with the requirements of paragraph (c) 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102627 

of this section and, if necessary, 

paragraph (e)(1) of this section. 

(3) Exposure monitoring—(i) General. 

(A) Owners or operators must determine 

each potentially exposed person’s 

exposure, without regard to respiratory 

protection, by either: 

(1) Taking a personal breathing zone 

air sample of each potentially exposed 

person’s exposure; or 

(2) Taking personal breathing zone air 

samples that are representative of the 8- 

hour TWA of each exposure group. 

(B) Personal breathing zone air 

samples are representative of the 8-hour 

TWA of all potentially exposed persons 

in an exposure group if the samples are 

of at least one person’s work-shift 

exposure who represents the highest 

potential TCE exposures in that 

exposure group. Personal breathing zone 

air samples taken during one work shift 

may be used to represent potentially 

exposed person exposures on other 

work shifts where the owner or operator 

can document that the tasks performed 

and conditions in the workplace are 

similar across shifts. 

(C) Exposure samples must be 

analyzed using an appropriate analytical 

method by a laboratory that complies 

with the Good Laboratory Practice 

Standards in 40 CFR part 792 or a 

laboratory accredited by the American 

Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) 

or another industry-recognized program. 

(D) Owners or operators must ensure 

that methods used to perform exposure 

monitoring produce results that are 

accurate, to a confidence level of 95 

percent, to within plus or minus 25 

percent for airborne concentrations of 

TCE. 

(E) Owners and operators must remonitor within 15 working days after 

receipt of any exposure monitoring 

when results indicate non-detect unless 

an Environmental Professional as 

defined at 40 CFR 312.10 or a Certified 

Industrial Hygienist reviews the 

monitoring results and determines remonitoring is not necessary. 

(ii) Initial monitoring. By June 21, 

2027 for Federal agencies and Federal 

contractors acting for or on behalf of the 

Federal government, or by June 16, 2025 

for non-Federal owners and operators or 

within 30 days of introduction of TCE 

into the workplace, whichever is later, 

each owner or operator covered by this 

section must perform initial monitoring 

of potentially exposed persons. Where 

the owner or operator has monitoring 

results from monitoring conducted 

within five years prior to February 18, 

2025 and the monitoring satisfies all 

other requirements of this section, the 

owner or operator may rely on such 

earlier monitoring results to satisfy the 

requirements of this paragraph. 

(iii) Periodic monitoring. The owner 

or operator must establish an exposure 

monitoring program for periodic 

monitoring of exposure to TCE in 

accordance with Table 1. 

TABLE 1 TO § 751.311(B)(3)(III)—PERIODIC MONITORING REQUIREMENTS

Air concentration condition Periodic monitoring requirement 

If initial exposure monitoring is below the interim ECEL action level 

(<0.1 ppm 8-hour TWA).

Periodic exposure monitoring is required at least once every five years. 

If the most recent exposure monitoring indicates that airborne exposure 

is at or above the interim ECEL action level but at or below the interim ECEL (≥0.1 ppm 8-hour TWA, ≤0.2 ppm 8-hour TWA).

Periodic exposure monitoring is required within 180 days of the most 

recent exposure monitoring. 

If the most recent exposure monitoring indicates that airborne exposure 

is above the interim ECEL (<0.2 ppm 8-hour TWA).

Periodic exposure monitoring is required within 90 days of the most recent exposure monitoring. 

If the two most recent (non-initial) exposure monitoring measurements, 

taken at least seven days apart within a six-month period, indicate 

that airborne exposure is below the interim ECEL action level (<0.1 

ppm 8-hour TWA).

Periodic exposure monitoring is required within five years of the most 

recent exposure monitoring. 

If the owner or operator engages in a condition of use for which compliance with the WCPP is required but does not manufacture, process, use, or dispose of TCE in that condition of use over the entirety 

of time since the last required monitoring event.

The owner or operator may forgo the next periodic monitoring event. 

However, documentation of cessation of use of TCE is required; and 

periodic monitoring is required when the owner or operator resumes 

the condition of use. 

(iv) Additional monitoring. (A) The 

owner or operator must conduct the 

exposure monitoring required by 

paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section 

within 30 days after there has been a 

change in the production, process, 

control equipment, personnel or work 

practices that may reasonably be 

expected to result in new or additional 

exposures above the interim ECEL 

action level or when the owner or 

operator has any reason to believe that 

new or additional exposures above the 

interim ECEL action level have 

occurred. Prior monitoring data cannot 

be used to meet this requirement. 

(B) Whenever start-ups or shutdown, 

or spills, leaks, ruptures, or other 

breakdowns or unexpected releases 

occur that may lead to exposure to 

potentially exposed persons, the owner 

or operator must conduct the exposure 

monitoring required by paragraph 

(b)(3)(ii) of this section within 30 days 

after the conclusion of the start-up or 

shut down and/or the cleanup of the 

spill or repair of the leak, rupture, or 

other breakdown. Prior monitoring data 

cannot be used to meet this 

requirement. 

(v) Observation of monitoring. (A) 

Owners and operators must provide 

potentially exposed persons or their 

designated representatives an 

opportunity to observe any monitoring 

of occupational exposure to TCE that is 

conducted under this section and 

designed to characterize their exposure. 

(B) When monitoring observation 

requires entry into a regulated area, the 

owner or operator must provide the 

observers with the required PPE. 

(C) Only persons who are authorized 

to have access to facilities classified in 

the interest of national security must be 

permitted to observe exposure 

monitoring conducted in such facilities. 

(vi) Notification of monitoring results. 

(A) The owner or operator must inform 

each person whose exposures are 

monitored or who is part of a monitored 

exposure group, and their designated 

representative, of any monitoring results 

within 15 working days of receipt of 

those monitoring results. 

(B) This notification must include the 

following: 

(1) Exposure monitoring results; 

(2) Identification and explanation of 

the interim ECEL and interim ECEL 

action level; 

(3) Statement of whether the 

monitored airborne concentration of 

TCE exceeds the interim ECEL action 

level or interim ECEL; 

(4) If the interim ECEL is exceeded, 

descriptions of any exposure controls 

implemented by the owner or operator 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102628 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

to reduce exposure to or below the 

interim ECEL; 

(5) Explanation of any respiratory 

protection provided in accordance with 

paragraphs (b)(4) and I of this section; 

(6) Quantity of TCE in use at the time 

of monitoring; 

(7) Location(s) of TCE use at the time 

of monitoring; 

(8) Manner of TCE use at the time of 

monitoring; and 

(9) Identified releases of TCE. 

(C) Notice must be written, in plain 

language, and either provided to each 

potentially exposed person individually 

in a language that the person 

understands, or posted in an 

appropriate and accessible location 

outside the regulated area with an 

English-language version and a nonEnglish language version representing 

the language of the largest group of 

workers who do not read English. 

(4) Regulated areas—(i) 

Establishment. By September 20, 2027 

for Federal agencies and Federal 

contractors acting for or on behalf of the 

Federal government, or by September 

15, 2025 for non-Federal owners and 

operators, or within 90 days after receipt 

of any exposure monitoring that 

indicates exposures exceeding the 

interim ECEL, the owner or operator 

must establish and maintain a regulated 

area wherever airborne concentrations 

of TCE exceed or can reasonably be 

expected to exceed the interim ECEL. 

(ii) Access. The owner or operator 

must limit access to regulated areas to 

authorized persons. 

(iii) Demarcation. The owner or 

operator must demarcate regulated areas 

from the rest of the workplace in a 

manner that adequately establishes and 

alerts persons to the boundaries of the 

area and minimizes the number of 

authorized persons exposed to TCE 

within the regulated area. 

(iv) Provision of respirators. (A) The 

owner or operator must ensure that each 

person who enters a regulated area is 

supplied with a respirator selected in 

accordance with paragraph I(e) of this 

section and must ensure that all persons 

within the regulated area are using the 

provided respirators whenever TCE 

exposures may exceed the interim 

ECEL, except as provided in paragraph 

(B) of this section. 

(B) An owner or operator who has 

implemented all feasible controls as 

required in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this 

section, and who has established a 

regulated area as required by paragraphs 

(b)(4)(i) of this section where TCE 

exposure can be reliably predicted to 

exceed the interim ECEL only on certain 

days (for example, because of work or 

process schedule) must have persons 

use respirators in that regulated area on 

those days. 

(v) Prohibited activities. (A) The 

owner or operator must ensure that, 

within a regulated area, persons do not 

engage in non-work activities which 

may increase TCE exposure. 

(B) The owner or operator must 

ensure that while persons are wearing 

respirators in the regulated area, they do 

not engage in activities which interfere 

with respirator performance. 

(c) Interim ECEL control procedures 

and plan—(1) Methods of compliance. 

(i) By December 17, 2027 for Federal 

agencies and Federal contractors acting 

for or on behalf of the Federal 

government, or by December 18, 2025, 

for non-Federal owners and operators, 

the owner or operator must institute one 

or a combination of elimination, 

substitution, engineering controls or 

administrative controls to reduce 

exposure to or below the interim ECEL 

except to the extent that the owner or 

operator can demonstrate that such 

controls are not feasible as an interim 

measure, in accordance with the 

hierarchy of controls. 

(ii) If the feasible controls required 

under paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section 

that can be instituted do not reduce 

exposures for potentially exposed 

persons to or below the interim ECEL, 

then the owner or operator must use 

such controls to reduce exposure to the 

lowest levels achievable by these 

controls and must supplement those 

controls by the use of respiratory 

protection that complies with the 

requirements of paragraph (e) of this 

section. 

(iii) Where an owner or operator 

cannot demonstrate exposure to TCE 

has been reduced to or below the 

interim ECEL through the use of 

controls required under paragraphs 

(c)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section, and has 

not demonstrated that it has 

appropriately supplemented feasible 

exposure controls with respiratory 

protection that complies with the 

requirements of paragraph (e) of this 

section, this will constitute a failure to 

comply with the interim ECEL. 

(2) Exposure control plan. By 

December 17, 2027 for Federal agencies 

and Federal contractors acting for or on 

behalf of the Federal government, or by 

December 18, 2025, for non-Federal 

owners and operators, each owner and 

operator must establish and implement 

an exposure control plan. 

(i) Exposure control plan contents. 

The exposure control plan must include 

documentation of the following: 

(A) Identification of exposure controls 

that were considered, including those 

that were used or not used to meet the 

requirements of paragraph (c)(1)(i) of 

this section, in the following sequence: 

elimination, substitution, engineering 

controls and administrative controls; 

(B) For each exposure control 

considered, a rationale for why the 

exposure control was selected or not 

selected based on feasibility, 

effectiveness, and other relevant 

considerations; 

(C) A description of actions the owner 

or operator must take to implement 

exposure controls selected, including 

proper installation, regular inspections, 

maintenance, training, or other actions; 

(D) A description of each regulated 

area, how they are demarcated, and 

persons authorized to enter the 

regulated areas; 

(E) Description of activities conducted 

by the owner or operator to review and 

update the exposure control plan to 

ensure effectiveness of the exposure 

controls, identify any necessary updates 

to the exposure controls, and confirm 

that all persons are properly 

implementing the exposure controls; 

(F) An explanation of the procedures 

for responding to any change that may 

reasonably be expected to introduce 

additional sources of exposure to TCE, 

or otherwise result in increased 

exposure to TCE, including procedures 

for implementing corrective actions to 

mitigate exposure to TCE. 

(ii) Exposure control plan 

requirements. (A) The owner or operator 

must not implement a schedule of 

personnel rotation as a means of 

compliance with the interim ECEL. 

(B) The owner or operator must 

maintain the effectiveness of any 

controls instituted under this paragraph 

(c). 

(C) The exposure control plan must be 

reviewed and updated as necessary, but 

at least every 5 years, to reflect any 

significant changes in the status of the 

owner or operator’s approach to 

compliance with paragraphs (b) and (c) 

of this section. 

(iii) Availability of exposure control 

plan. (A) Owners or operators must 

make the exposure control plan and 

associated records, including interim 

ECEL exposure monitoring records, 

interim ECEL compliance records, and 

workplace participation records 

available to potentially exposed persons 

and their designated representative. 

(B) Owners or operators must notify 

potentially exposed persons and their 

designated representatives of the 

availability of the exposure control plan 

and associated records within 30 days of 

the date that the exposure control plan 

is completed and at least annually 

thereafter. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102629 

(C) Notice of the availability of the 

exposure control plan and associated 

records must be provided in plain 

language writing to each potentially 

exposed person in a language that the 

person understands or posted in an 

appropriate and accessible location 

outside the regulated area with an 

English-language version and a nonEnglish language version representing 

the language of the largest group of 

workers who do not read English. 

(D) Upon request by the potentially 

exposed person or their designated 

representative(s), the owner or operator 

must provide the specified records at a 

reasonable time, place, and manner. If 

the owner or operator is unable to 

provide the requested records within 15 

working days, the owner or operator 

must, within those 15 working days, 

inform the potentially exposed person 

or designated representative(s) 

requesting the record(s) of the reason for 

the delay and the earliest date when the 

record will be made available. 

(d) Workplace information and 

training. (1) By September 20, 2027 for 

Federal agencies and Federal 

contractors acting for or on behalf of the 

Federal government, or by September 

15, 2025 for non-Federal owners and 

operators, the owner or operator must 

institute a training program and ensure 

that persons potentially exposed to TCE 

participate in the program according to 

the requirements of this paragraph (d). 

(2) The owner or operator must ensure 

that each potentially exposed person is 

trained prior to or at the time of initial 

assignment to a job involving potential 

exposure to TCE. 

(3) The owner or operator must ensure 

that information and training is 

presented in a manner that is 

understandable to each person required 

to be trained. 

(4) The following information and 

training must be provided to all persons 

potentially exposed to TCE: 

(i) The requirements of this section, as 

well as how to access or obtain a copy 

of these requirements in the workplace; 

(ii) The quantity, location, manner of 

use, release, and storage of TCE and the 

specific operations in the workplace 

that could result in exposure to TCE, 

particularly noting where each regulated 

area is located; 

(iii) Methods and observations that 

may be used to detect the presence or 

release of TCE in the workplace (such as 

monitoring conducted by the owner or 

operator, continuous monitoring 

devices, visual appearance, or odor of 

TCE when being released); 

(iv) The acute and chronic health 

hazards of TCE as detailed on relevant 

Safety Data Sheets; and 

(v) The principles of safe use and 

handling of TCE and measures 

potentially exposed persons can take to 

protect themselves from TCE, including 

specific procedures the owner or 

operator has implemented to protect 

potentially exposed persons from 

exposure to TCE, such as appropriate 

work practices, emergency procedures, 

and personal protective equipment to be 

used. 

(5) The owner or operator must retrain each potentially exposed person 

annually to ensure that each such 

person maintains the requisite 

understanding of the principles of safe 

use and handling of TCE in the 

workplace. 

(6) Whenever there are workplace 

changes, such as modifications of tasks 

or procedures or the institution of new 

tasks or procedures, that increase 

exposure, and where those exposures 

exceed or can reasonably be expected to 

exceed the interim ECEL action level, 

the owner or operator must update the 

training and ensure that each potentially 

exposed person is re-trained. 

(e) Personal protective equipment 

(PPE)—(1) Respiratory protection. (i) By 

September 20, 2027 for Federal agencies 

and Federal contractors acting for or on 

behalf of the Federal government, or by 

September 15, 2025 for non-Federal 

owners and operators, or within 90 days 

after receipt of any exposure monitoring 

that indicates exposures exceeding the 

interim ECEL, or, if an owner or 

operator is required to provide 

respiratory protection pursuant to 

paragraphs (b)(4)(iv) and (c)(1)(ii) of this 

section, the owner or operator must 

ensure that each potentially exposed 

person is provided with a respirator 

according to the requirements of this 

section. 

(ii) For purposes of this paragraph 

(e)(1) of this section, cross-referenced 

provisions in 29 CFR 1910.134 applying 

to an ‘‘employee’’ apply equally to 

potentially exposed persons and crossreferenced provisions applying to an 

‘‘employer’’ also apply equally to 

owners or operators. Other terms in 

cross-referenced provisions in 29 CFR 

1910.134 that are defined in 29 CFR 

1910.134(b) have the meaning assigned 

to them in that paragraph. 

(iii) By September 20, 2027 for 

Federal agencies and Federal 

contractors acting for or on behalf of the 

Federal government, or by September 

15, 2025 for non-Federal owners and 

operators, or within 90 days after receipt 

of any exposure monitoring that 

indicates exposures exceeding the 

interim ECEL, if an owner or operator is 

required to provide respiratory 

protection pursuant to paragraph 

(b)(4)(iv) or (c)(1)(ii), the owner or 

operator must develop and administer a 

written respiratory protection program 

consistent with the requirements of 29 

CFR 1910.134(c)(1), (c)(3) and (c)(4). 

(iv) Owners and operators must select 

respiratory protection based on a 

medical evaluation consistent with the 

requirements of 29 CFR 1910.134(e). If 

a potentially exposed person cannot use 

a negative-pressure respirator that 

would otherwise be required, then the 

owner or operator must provide that 

person with an alternative respirator. 

The alternative respirator must have less 

breathing resistance than the negativepressure respirator and provide 

equivalent or greater protection. If the 

person is unable to use an alternative 

respirator, then the person must not be 

permitted to enter the regulated area. 

(v) Owners and operators must select 

respiratory protection that properly fits 

each affected person and communicate 

respirator selections to each affected 

person consistent with the requirements 

of 29 CFR 1910.134(f). 

(vi) Owners and operators must 

provide, ensure use of, and maintain (in 

a sanitary, reliable, and undamaged 

condition) respiratory protection that is 

of safe design and construction for the 

applicable condition of use consistent 

with the requirements of 29 CFR 

1910.134(g) through (j). 

(vii) Prior to or at the time of initial 

assignment to a job involving potential 

exposure to TCE, owners and operators 

must provide training to all persons 

required to use respiratory protection 

consistent with 29 CFR 1910.134(k). 

(viii) Owners and operators must 

retrain all persons required to use PPE 

at least annually, or whenever the 

owner or operator has reason to believe 

that a previously trained person does 

not have the required understanding 

and skill to properly use PPE, or when 

changes in the workplace or in PPE to 

be used render the previous training 

obsolete. 

(ix) Owners or operators must select 

and provide to persons appropriate 

respirators as indicated by the most 

recent monitoring results as follows: 

(A) If the measured exposure 

concentration is at or below 0.2 ppm 

(200 ppb): no respiratory protection is 

required. 

(B) If the measured exposure 

concentration is above 0.2 ppm (200 

ppb) and less than or equal to 2 ppm 

(2,000 ppb) (10 times interim ECEL): 

Any National Institute for Occupational 

Safety and Health (NIOSH) Approved 

air-purifying half mask respirator 

equipped with organic vapor cartridges 

or canisters; or any NIOSH Approved 

Supplied-Air Respirator (SAR) or 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102630 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

Airline Respirator operated in demand 

mode equipped with a half mask; or any 

NIOSH Approved Self-Contained 

Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) in a 

demand mode equipped with a half 

mask [APF 10]. 

(C) If the measured exposure 

concentration is above 2 ppm and less 

than or equal to 5 ppm (25 times interim 

ECEL): Any NIOSH Approved Powered 

Air-Purifying Respirator (PAPR) 

equipped with a loose-fitting facepiece 

or hood/helmet equipped with organic 

vapor cartridges or canisters; or any 

NIOSH Approved SAR or Airline 

Respirator in a continuous-flow mode 

equipped with a loose-fitting facepiece 

or helmet/hood [APF 25]. 

(D) If the measured exposure 

concentration is above 5 ppm and less 

than or equal to 10 ppm (50 times 

interim ECEL): Any NIOSH Approved 

air-purifying full facepiece respirator 

equipped with organic vapor cartridges 

or canisters; any NIOSH Approved 

PAPR with a half mask equipped with 

organic vapor cartridges or canisters; 

any NIOSH Approved SAR or Airline 

Respirator in a continuous flow mode 

equipped with a half mask; any NIOSH 

Approved SAR or Airline Respirator 

operated in a pressure-demand or other 

positive-pressure mode with a half 

mask; or any NIOSH Approved SCBA in 

demand-mode equipped with a full 

facepiece or helmet/hood [APF 50]. 

(E) If the measured exposure 

concentration is above 10 ppm and less 

than or equal to 200 ppm (1,000 times 

interim ECEL): Any NIOSH Approved 

PAPR equipped with a full facepiece 

equipped with organic vapor cartridges 

or canisters; any NIOSH Approved SAR 

or Airline Respirator in a continuousflow mode equipped with full facepiece; 

any NIOSH Approved SAR or Airline 

Respirator in pressure-demand or other 

positive-pressure mode equipped with a 

full facepiece and an auxiliary selfcontained air supply; or any NIOSH 

Approved SAR or Airline Respirator in 

a continuous-flow mode equipped with 

a helmet or hood and that has been 

tested to demonstrated performance at a 

level of a protection of APF 1,000 or 

greater [APF 1000]. 

(F) If the measured exposure 

concentration is greater than 200 ppm 

(1,000+ times interim ECEL): Any 

NIOSH Approved SCBA equipped with 

a full facepiece or hood/helmet and 

operated in a pressure demand or other 

positive pressure mode; air supply [APF 

10,000+]. 

(G) If the exposure concentration is 

unknown: Any NIOSH Approved 

combination SAR equipped with a full 

facepiece and operated in pressure 

demand or other positive pressure mode 

with an auxiliary self-contained air 

supply; or any NIOSH Approved SCBA 

operated in pressure demand or other 

positive pressure mode and equipped 

with a full facepiece or hood/helmet 

[APF 1000+]. 

(x) Owners and operators must select 

and provide respirators consistent with 

the requirements of 29 CFR 

1910.134(d)(1)(iv), and with 

consideration of workplace and user 

factors that affect respirator performance 

and reliability. 

(xi) Owners and operators who select 

air-purifying respirators must either: 

(A) Select NIOSH Approved 

respirators that have an end-of-servicelife indicator (ESLI) appropriate for 

TCE; or 

(B) Implement a change schedule for 

canisters and cartridges based on 

objective information or data that 

ensures that canisters and cartridges are 

changed before the end of their service 

life. The written respiratory protection 

program required by paragraph (e)(1)(iii) 

of this section must include a 

description of the information and data 

relied upon, the basis for reliance on the 

information and data, and the basis for 

the canister and cartridge change 

schedule. 

(xii) Owners and operators must, 

consistent with 29 CFR 1910.134(j), 

ensure that all respirator filters, 

cartridges, and canisters used in the 

workplace are labeled and color coded 

per NIOSH requirements and that the 

label is not removed and remains 

legible. 

(xiii) Owners and operators must 

ensure that respirators are used in 

compliance with the terms of the 

respirator’s NIOSH approval. 

(xiv) Owners and operators must 

conduct regular evaluations of the 

workplace, including consultations with 

potentially exposed persons using 

respiratory protection, consistent with 

the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.134(l), 

to ensure that the provisions of the 

written respiratory protection program 

required under paragraph (e)(1)(iii) of 

this section are being effectively 

implemented. 

(xv) The respiratory protection 

requirements in this paragraph 

represent the minimum respiratory 

protection requirements, such that any 

respirator affording a higher degree of 

protection than the required respirator 

may be used. 

(2) Dermal protection. (i) By 

September 20, 2027 for Federal agencies 

and Federal contractors acting for or on 

behalf of the Federal government, or by 

September 15, 2025 for non-Federal 

owners and operators, owners and 

operators must supply and require the 

donning of gloves by potentially 

exposed persons that are chemically 

resistant to TCE where dermal exposure 

to TCE can be expected to occur, after 

application of the requirements in 

paragraph (c) of this section, in 

accordance with the hierarchy of 

controls. 

(ii) Owners and operators must 

provide gloves that are of safe design 

and construction for the work to be 

performed and that properly fit each 

person who is required to use gloves. 

(iii) Owners and operators must 

communicate glove selections to each 

affected person and ensure that each 

person who is required to wear gloves 

uses and maintains them in a sanitary, 

reliable, and undamaged condition. 

(iv) Owners and operators must 

provide activity-specific dermal PPE 

training in accordance with 29 CFR 

1910.132(f) to all persons required to 

use gloves prior to or at the time of 

initial assignment to a job involving 

potential dermal exposure to TCE. For 

the purposes of this paragraph (e)(4)(iv), 

provisions in 29 CFR 1910.132(f) 

applying to an ‘‘employee’’ also apply 

equally to potentially exposed persons, 

and provisions applying to an 

‘‘employer’’ also apply equally to 

owners or operators. 

(v) Owners and operators must retrain 

each person required to use gloves 

annually or whenever the owner or 

operator has reason to believe that a 

previously trained person does not have 

the required understanding and skill to 

properly use the gloves, or when 

changes in the workplace or in PPE to 

be used render the previous training 

obsolete. 

§ 751.317 Workplace requirements for 

energized electrical cleaner. 

(a) Applicability. The provisions of 

this section apply to the industrial and 

commercial use of TCE in energized 

electrical cleaner. 

(b) Energized electrical cleaner 

requirements—(1) Personal Protective 

Equipment (PPE). (i) The provisions of 

this paragraph (b) apply after September 

15, 2025. 

(ii) Owners or operators must ensure 

that all potentially exposed persons 

using TCE, including any TCEcontaining products, are provided with 

dermal PPE and training on proper use 

of PPE as outlined in § 751.315(e)(2). 

(iii) Owners or operators must ensure 

that all persons using TCE, including 

any TCE containing products, are 

provided with respiratory PPE and 

training on proper use of PPE in 

accordance with § 751.315(e)(1), except 

that instead of selecting appropriate 

respirators based on monitoring results 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102631 

pursuant to paragraph (e)(1)(ix), owners 

or operators must select from and 

provide the following types of 

respirators: any NIOSH Approved airpurifying full facepiece respirator 

equipped with organic vapor cartridges 

or canisters; any NIOSH Approved 

Powered Air-Purifying Respirator 

(PAPR) with a half mask equipped with 

organic vapor cartridges or canisters; 

any NIOSH Approved Supplied-Air 

Respirator (SAR) or Airline Respirator 

in a continuous flow mode equipped 

with a half mask; any NIOSH Approved 

Supplied-Air Respirator (SAR) or 

Airline Respirator operated in a 

pressure-demand or other positivepressure mode with a half mask; any 

NIOSH Approved SCBA in demandmode equipped with a full facepiece or 

helmet/hood [APF 50]; or any respirator 

affording a higher degree of protection. 

(2) Alternative to PPE Requirements. 

(i) As an alternative to the requirements 

in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the 

owner or operator may choose to follow 

the Workplace Chemical Protection 

Program (WCPP) provisions in 

§ 751.315. 

(ii) Owners or operators who choose 

to follow the WCPP as an alternative to 

the requirements in paragraph (b)(1) of 

this section must: 

(A) Document and maintain a 

statement that they are electing to 

comply with the WCPP. 

(B) Comply with the WCPP provisions 

in § 751.315 and document compliance 

in accordance with § 751.323(b). 

§ 751.319 Workplace requirements for 

wastewater. 

(a) Applicability. The provisions of 

this section apply to the following 

disposal sub-conditions of use for their 

respective phaseouts, in accordance 

with § 751.305 (b) (14), (23), (24), and 

(26): 

(1) Cleanup of sites with TCE water 

contamination; and, 

(2) Publicly owned treatment works. 

(b) Cleanup sites. Beginning 

September 15, 2025 the owner or 

operator of the location where 

potentially exposed persons are 

involved in the disposal of TCE to 

industrial pre-treatment, industrial 

treatment, or publicly owned treatment 

works for the purposes of facilitating 

cleanup projects of TCE-contaminated 

water and groundwater must ensure that 

potentially exposed persons involved 

with the activity of removing the TCEcontaminated water and groundwater 

from the location where it was located 

and treating the removed TCEcontaminated water and groundwater on 

site are protected to the interim ECEL 

level of 0.2 ppm and protected from 

dermal contact with TCE-containing 

wastewater in accordance with the 

following requirements. For the 

purposes of this paragraph (b) of this 

section, cross-referenced provisions in 

29 CFR 1910.120 applying to an 

‘‘employee’’ apply equally to potentially 

exposed persons and cross-referenced 

provisions applying to an ‘‘employer’’ 

also apply equally to owners or 

operators. 

(1) Written site-specific safety and 

health plan. Owners and operators must 

have a site-specific safety and health 

plan that addresses the health hazards 

presented by TCE to potentially exposed 

persons involved in the disposal of TCEcontaining wastewater and that contains 

elements consistent with 29 CFR 

1910.120(b)(4)(ii)(A), (B), (C), (E) and 

(F). 

(2) Training. Owners and operators 

must provide training consistent with 

§ 751.315(d) to potentially exposed 

persons prior to or at the time of initial 

assignment to a cleanup site job that 

involves the disposal of TCE-containing 

wastewater. 

(3) Engineering controls, work 

practices and PPE. Engineering controls, 

work practices, and, if necessary, PPE 

must be implemented and provided in 

compliance with 40 CFR 751.315(c)(1) 

and (e). 

(4) Exposure monitoring. (i) By 

September 15, 2025 or upon initial entry 

to a cleanup site, whichever is later, 

owners and operators must perform 

representative air monitoring consistent 

with 29 CFR 1910.120(h)(2) to identify 

any exposures to airborne TCE above 

the interim ECEL. 

(ii) Owners and operators must 

perform periodic air monitoring 

consistent with 29 CFR 1910.120(h)(3) 

when there is any indication that 

exposures may have exceeded the 

interim ECEL since prior monitoring. 

(iii) Owners and operators must 

monitor the exposures of those persons 

likely to have the highest exposures to 

airborne TCE above the interim ECEL by 

using personal air sampling frequently 

enough to characterize their exposures 

consistent with 29 CFR 1910.120(h)(4). 

(iv) Owners and operators must 

perform exposure monitoring at least 

once every five years. 

(c) Publicly owned treatment works. 

By September 15, 2025 owners or 

operators of publicly owned treatment 

works, where there is a reasonable 

possibility of the presence of TCE, must 

comply with one of the following: 

(1) Water screening level. (i) Screen 

industrial wastewater discharge 

received at publicly owned treatment 

works by sampling and analyzing for a 

water concentration of TCE. 

(ii) If the TCE concentration in 

wastewater exceeds 0.00284 mg/L of 

TCE, owners or operators must comply 

with the Workplace Chemical Protection 

Program provisions in § 751.315, except 

for the initial monitoring requirements 

in paragraph § 751.315(b)(3)(ii). 

(2) Alternative to water screening 

level. (i) As an alternative to the 

requirements in paragraph (1) of this 

section, the owner or operator may 

choose to follow the Workplace 

Chemical Protection Program (WCPP) 

provisions in § 751.315. 

(ii) Owners or operators who choose 

to follow the WCPP as an alternative to 

the requirements in paragraph (1) of this 

section must comply with the WCPP 

provisions in § 751.315 and document 

compliance in accordance with 

§ 751.323(b). 

§ 751.321 Downstream notification. 

(a) Beginning on February 18, 2025, 

each person who manufactures 

(including imports) TCE for any use 

must, prior to or concurrent with the 

shipment, notify companies to whom 

TCE is shipped, in writing, of the 

restrictions described in this subpart in 

accordance with paragraph (c) of this 

section. 

(b) Beginning on June 16, 2025, each 

person who processes or distributes in 

commerce TCE or any TCE-containing 

products for any use must, prior to or 

concurrent with the shipment, notify 

companies to whom TCE is shipped, in 

writing, of the restrictions described in 

this subpart in accordance with 

paragraph (c) of this section. 

(c) The notification required under 

paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section 

must occur by inserting the following 

text in section 1(c) and 15 of the Safety 

Data Sheet (SDS) provided with the TCE 

or with any TCE-containing product: 

After June 16, 2025, this chemical/product 

is and can only be domestically 

manufactured, imported, processed, or 

distributed in commerce for the following 

purposes until the following prohibitions 

take effect: (1) Processing as an intermediate 

a) for the manufacture of HFC–134a until 

June 18, 2033, and b) for all other processing 

as a reactant/intermediate until December 18, 

2026; (2) Industrial and commercial use as a 

solvent for open-top batch vapor degreasing 

until December 18, 2025; (3) Industrial and 

commercial use as a solvent for closed-loop 

batch vapor degreasing until December 18, 

2025, except for industrial and commercial 

use in batch vapor degreasing for land-based 

DoD defense systems by Federal agencies and 

their contractors until December 18, 2029, 

and except for industrial and commercial use 

as a solvent for closed-loop batch vapor 

degreasing necessary for rocket engine 

cleaning by Federal agencies and their 

contractors until December 18, 2031, and 

except for industrial and commercial use of 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102632 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

TCE in closed-loop and open-top batch vapor 

degreasing for essential aerospace parts and 

components and narrow tubing used in 

medical devices until December 18, 2031, 

and except for industrial and commercial use 

as a solvent for closed-loop batch vapor 

degreasing for rayon fabric scouring for end 

use in rocket booster nozzle production by 

Federal agencies and their contractors until 

December 18, 2034; (4) Industrial and 

commercial use in processing aid (a) for 

lithium battery separator manufacturing until 

December 18, 2029, and (b) for lead-acid 

battery separator manufacturing until 

December 18, 2044, and (c) for specialty 

polymeric microporous sheet material 

manufacturing until December 18, 2039, and 

(d) in process solvent used in battery 

manufacture; in process solvent used in 

polymer fiber spinning, fluoroelastomer 

manufacture and Alcantara manufacture; in 

extraction solvent used in caprolactam 

manufacture; and in precipitant used in betacyclodextrin manufacture until December 18, 

2026; (5) Industrial and commercial uses for 

vessels of the Armed Forces and their 

systems, and in the maintenance, fabrication, 

and sustainment for and of such vessels and 

systems until December 18, 2034; and (6) 

Industrial and commercial use for laboratory 

use (a) for essential laboratory activities until 

December 18, 2074 and (b) for asphalt testing 

and recovery using manual centrifuge 

processes until December 18, 2029 and for 

asphalt testing and recovery until December 

18, 2034. 

§ 751.323 Recordkeeping requirements. 

(a) General records. After February 18, 

2025, all persons who manufacture, 

process, distribute in commerce, or 

engage in industrial or commercial use 

of TCE or TCE-containing products must 

maintain ordinary business records, 

such as invoices and bills-of-lading 

related to compliance with the 

prohibitions, restrictions, and other 

provisions of this subpart. 

(b) Workplace chemical protection 

program compliance. (1) Interim ECEL 

exposure monitoring. For each 

monitoring event, owners or operators 

subject to the interim ECEL described in 

§ 751.315(b) must document the 

following: 

(i) Dates, duration, and results of each 

sample taken; 

(ii) The quantity, location(s), and 

manner of TCE in use at the time of each 

monitoring event; 

(iii) All measurements that may be 

necessary to determine the conditions 

that may affect the monitoring results; 

(iv) Name, workplace address, work 

shift, job classification, work area, and 

type of respiratory protection (if any) by 

each monitored person; 

(v) Identification of all potentially 

exposed persons that a monitored 

person is intended to represent if using 

a representative sample, consistent with 

§ 751.315(b)(3)(i)(A) and (B); 

(vi) Sampling and analytical methods 

used as described in 

§ 751.315(b)(3)(i)(D); 

(vii) Compliance with the Good 

Laboratory Practice Standards in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 792, or use 

of a laboratory accredited by the AIHA 

or another industry-recognized program 

as required by § 751.315(b)(3)(i)(C); 

(viii) Information regarding air 

monitoring equipment, including: type, 

maintenance, calibrations, performance 

tests, limits of detection, and any 

malfunctions; 

(ix) Re-monitoring determinations 

conducted by an Environmental 

Professional as defined at 40 CFR 312.10 

or a Certified Industrial Hygienist, if 

results indicated non-detect; and 

(x) Notification of exposure 

monitoring results in accordance with 

§ 751.315(b)(3)(vi). 

(2) Interim ECEL compliance. Owners 

or operators subject to the interim ECEL 

described in § 751.315(b) must retain 

records of: 

(i) Exposure control plan as described 

in § 751.315(c)(2). 

(ii) Implementation of the exposure 

control plan described in 

§ 751.315(c)(2), including: 

(A) Any regular inspections, 

evaluations, and updating of the 

exposure controls to maintain 

effectiveness; 

(B) Confirmation that all persons are 

implementing the exposure controls; 

and 

(C) Each occurrence and duration of 

any start-up, shutdown, or malfunction 

of the facility that causes an exceedance 

of the interim ECEL and any subsequent 

corrective actions taken by the owner or 

operator during the start-up, shutdown, 

or malfunctions to mitigate exposures to 

TCE. 

(iii) Respiratory protection used by 

each potentially exposed person and 

PPE program implementation as 

described in § 751.315(e), including: 

(A) The name, workplace address, 

work shift, job classification, and work 

area of each potentially exposed person, 

and the type of respiratory protection 

provided to each potentially exposed 

person; 

(B) The basis for the specific PPE 

selection in accordance with 

§ 751.315(e); and 

(C) Fit testing and training in 

accordance with § 751.315(e). 

(iv) Information and training provided 

as required in § 751.315(d). 

(3) Workplace participation. Owners 

or operators must document the notice 

to and ability of any potentially exposed 

person who may reasonably be affected 

by TCE inhalation exposure and their 

designated representative to readily 

access the exposure control plans, 

facility exposure monitoring records, 

PPE program implementation records, 

or any other information relevant to TCE 

exposure in the workplace. 

(c) Records related to exemptions. To 

maintain eligibility for an exemption 

described in § 751.325, owners or 

operators must maintain records related 

to, and demonstrating compliance with, 

the specific conditions of the 

exemption. 

(d) Records related to phase-outs. (1) 

Beginning February 18, 2025, each 

manufacturer of HFC–134a who uses 

TCE as an intermediate under § 751.307 

must maintain records of the annual 

quantity of TCE purchased and 

processed until the termination of all 

processing of TCE as an intermediate 

and, beginning June 16, 2025, must 

maintain records that demonstrate how 

the baseline annual volume was 

calculated, in accordance with 

§ 751.307(a)(1). 

(2) Beginning September 15, 2025, 

each person using TCE under § 751.309 

for industrial and commercial use as a 

solvent for closed-loop batch vapor 

degreasing for rayon fabric scouring for 

end use in rocket booster nozzle 

production by Federal agencies and 

their contractors must maintain records 

demonstrating that the end use is in 

rocket booster nozzle production for 

Federal agencies and their contractors. 

(3) Beginning September 15, 2025, 

each person using TCE under § 751.311 

for industrial and commercial use in 

laboratory use for asphalt testing and 

recovery must maintain records 

demonstrating compliance with the use 

of TCE as specified in § 751.311. 

(4) After December 18, 2029, each 

person using TCE under § 751.311 for 

industrial and commercial use in 

laboratory use for asphalt testing and 

recovery must maintain records 

demonstrating compliance with the 

provision in § 751.311 that the use of 

TCE in laboratory use for asphalt testing 

and recovery be in methods that do not 

include manual centrifuge processes. 

(5) After December 18, 2029, each 

person using TCE under § 751.309 for 

industrial and commercial use as a 

solvent for closed-loop batch vapor 

degreasing, specifically for rayon fabric 

scouring, must maintain records that 

demonstrate that a final pre-launch test 

of rocket booster nozzles without using 

TCE was completed. 

(e) Records related to workplace 

requirements for energized electrical 

cleaner. (1) Owners and operators 

subject to the energized electrical 

cleaner requirements described in 

§ 751.317 must retain records of: 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102633 

(i) Statement regarding whether the 

owner or operator is complying with the 

prescriptive PPE requirements described 

in § 751.317(b)(1) or with the WCPP 

described in § 751.317(b)(2). 

(ii) Dermal and respiratory protection 

used by each potentially exposed person 

and program implementation as 

described in § 751.317(b)(1) or WCPP 

records described in § 751.323(b). 

(2) Distributors of TCE, including TCE 

containing products, for use in 

energized electrical cleaning must retain 

sale records, including: 

(i) Name of purchaser; 

(ii) Date of sale; and 

(iii) Quantity of TCE or TCE 

containing products sold. 

(f) Records related to wastewater 

workplace protection requirements. (1) 

Owners and operators subject to the 

wastewater workplace protection 

requirements for cleanup sites described 

in § 751.319 must retain records related 

to and demonstrating compliance with 

the provisions of § 751.319 and 29 CFR 

1910.120 that are applicable to the 

particular site and records related to and 

demonstrating compliance with the 

interim ECEL. 

(2) Publicly owned treatment works 

must retain records related to and 

demonstrating compliance with the 

wastewater screening and other 

requirements described in § 751.319, 

and if applicable must retain records for 

the WCPP as described in § 751.323(b). 

(g) Minimum record retention 

periods. The records required under this 

section must be retained for at least 5 

years from the date that such records 

were generated, except for the records 

required under paragraph (d)(1), which 

must be retained for at least 5 years after 

the use of TCE covered by the records 

has ceased. 

§ 751.325 Exemptions. 

(a) In general. (1) The time-limited 

exemptions described in this section are 

established in accordance with 15 

U.S.C. 2605(g). 

(2) In order to be eligible for the 

exemptions described in this section, 

regulated parties must comply with all 

conditions established for such 

exemptions in this section. 

(b) Exemptions—(1) Closed-loop 

batch vapor degreasing necessary for 

rocket engine cleaning by Federal 

agencies and their contractors until 

December 18, 2031. The following are 

specific conditions of the exemption for 

industrial and commercial use of TCE as 

a solvent for closed-loop vapor 

degreasing necessary for rocket engine 

cleaning by Federal agencies and their 

contractors described in 

§ 751.305(b)(15): 

(i) The use of TCE in industrial and 

commercial as a solvent for closed-loop 

vapor degreasing is limited to the 

closed-loop batch vapor degreasing 

necessary for rocket engine cleaning by 

Federal agencies and their contractors. 

(ii) The owner or operator of the 

location where such use occurs, and 

manufacturers (including importers) 

and processors of TCE for such use, 

must comply with the Workplace 

Chemical Protection Program provisions 

in § 751.315. 

(iii) The owner or operator of the 

location where such use of TCE occurs, 

and manufacturers (including 

importers) and processors of TCE for 

such use, must comply with the 

recordkeeping requirements in 

§ 751.323. 

(2) Closed-loop and Open-top batch 

vapor degreasing for essential aerospace 

parts and components and narrow 

tubing for medical devices until 

December 18, 2031. The following are 

specific conditions of the exemption for 

vapor degreasing described in 

§ 751.305(b)(16): 

(i) The use of TCE for closed-loop and 

open-top batch vapor degreasing is 

limited to the cleaning of: 

(A) Essential aerospace parts and 

components where cleaning alternatives 

present technical feasibility or 

performance challenges to meet 

specifications from Federal agencies or 

other long-standing design 

specifications included in existing 

contracts; and 

(B) Narrow tubing for medical 

devices. 

(ii) The owner or operator of the 

location where such use of TCE occurs, 

and manufacturers (including 

importers) and processors of TCE for 

such use, must comply with the 

Workplace Chemical Protection Program 

provisions in § 751.315. 

(iii) The owner or operator of the 

location where such use of TCE occurs 

must comply with the recordkeeping 

requirements in § 751.323. 

(3) Certain industrial and commercial 

uses of TCE for vessels of the Armed 

Forces and their systems, and in the 

maintenance, fabrication, and 

sustainment for and of such vessels and 

systems until December 18, 2034. The 

following are specific conditions of the 

exemption for industrial and 

commercial uses of TCE for vessels of 

the Armed Forces and their systems, 

and in the maintenance, fabrication, and 

sustainment for and of such vessels and 

systems described in § 751.305(b)(20): 

(i) The industrial and commercial use 

of TCE must be limited for vessels of the 

Armed Forces and their systems, and in 

the maintenance, fabrication, and 

sustainment for and of such vessels and 

systems: as potting compounds for naval 

electronic systems and equipment; 

sealing compounds for high and ultrahigh vacuum systems; bonding 

compounds for materials testing and 

maintenance of underwater systems and 

bonding of nonmetallic materials; and 

cleaning agents to satisfy cleaning 

requirements (which includes 

degreasing using wipes, sprays, solvents 

and vapor degreasing) for: materials and 

components required for military 

ordnance testing; temporary resin 

repairs in vessel spaces where welding 

is not authorized; ensuring 

polyurethane adhesion for electronic 

systems and equipment repair and 

installation of elastomeric materials; 

various naval combat systems, radars, 

sensors, equipment; fabrication and 

prototyping processes to remove coolant 

and other residue from machine parts; 

machined part fabrications for naval 

systems; installation of topside rubber 

tile material aboard vessels; and vapor 

degreasing required for substrate surface 

preparation prior to electroplating 

processes. 

(ii) The owner or operator of the 

location where such use occurs, and 

manufacturers (including importers) 

and processors of TCE for such use, 

must comply with the Workplace 

Chemical Protection Program provisions 

in § 751.315. 

(iii) The owner or operator of the 

location where such use of TCE occurs 

must comply with the recordkeeping 

requirements in § 751.323. 

(4) Use of TCE or TCE-containing 

products in an emergency by the 

National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration and its contractors 

operating within the scope of their 

contracted work until December 18, 

2034—(i) Applicability. This exemption 

shall apply to the following specific 

conditions of use: 

(A) Industrial and commercial use as 

solvent for open-top or closed-loop 

batch vapor degreasing. 

(B) Industrial and commercial use as 

solvent for cold cleaning. 

(C) Industrial and commercial use as 

a solvent for aerosol spray degreaser/ 

cleaner and mold release. 

(D) Industrial and commercial use as 

a lubricant and grease in tap and die 

fluid. 

(E) Industrial and commercial use as 

a lubricant and grease in penetrating 

lubricant. 

(F) Industrial and commercial use as 

an adhesive and sealant in solventbased adhesives. and sealants. 

(G) Industrial and commercial as a 

functional fluid in heat exchange fluid. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
102634 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

(H) Industrial and commercial use in 

corrosion inhibitors and anti-scaling 

agents. 

(I) Industrial and commercial use of 

TCE as a processing aid. 

(J) Manufacturing (including 

importing) and processing of TCE for 

the industrial and commercial uses 

listed in paragraphs (b)(4)(i)(A) through 

(I) of this section. 

(ii) Emergency use. (A) In general. An 

emergency is a serious and sudden 

situation requiring immediate action, 

within 15 days or less, necessary to 

protect: 

(1) Safety of NASA’s or their 

contractors’ personnel; 

(2) NASA’s missions; 

(3) Human health, safety, or property, 

including that of adjacent communities; 

or 

(4) The environment. 

(B) Duration. Each emergency is a 

separate situation; if use of TCE exceeds 

15 days, then justification must be 

documented. 

(iii) Eligibility. To be eligible for the 

exemption, the NASA and its 

contractors must: 

(A) Select TCE because there are no 

technically and economically feasible 

safer alternatives available during the 

emergency. 

(B) Perform the emergency use of TCE 

at locations controlled by NASA or its 

contractors. 

(C) Comply with the following 

conditions: 

(1) Notification. Within 15 working 

days of the emergency use by NASA and 

its contractors, NASA must provide 

notice to the EPA Assistant 

Administrators of both the Office of 

Enforcement and Compliance Assurance 

and the Office of Chemical Safety and 

Pollution Prevention that includes the 

following: 

(i) Identification of the conditions of 

use detailed in paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this 

section that the emergency use fell 

under; 

(ii) An explanation for why the 

emergency use met the definition of 

emergency in paragraph (b)(4)(i)(B) of 

this section; and 

(iii) An explanation of why TCE was 

selected, including why there were no 

technically and economically feasible 

safer alternatives available in the 

particular emergency. 

(2) Exposure control. The owner or 

operator must comply with the 

Workplace Chemical Protection Program 

provisions in § 751.315, to the extent 

technically feasible in light of the 

particular emergency. 

(3) Recordkeeping. The owner or 

operator of the location where the use 

takes place must comply with the 

recordkeeping requirements in 

§ 751.323. 

(5) Lead-acid battery separator 

manufacturing until December 18, 2044. 

The following are specific conditions of 

the exemption for use as a processing 

aid in the manufacturing of lead-acid 

battery separators described in 

§ 751.305(b)(22): 

(i) The use of TCE as a processing aid 

for battery separator manufacturing 

must be limited to lead acid battery 

separator manufacturing. 

(ii) This specific industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a processing 

aid can only be used at industrial 

facilities in which TCE is in use for the 

manufacture of lead acid battery 

separators prior to February 18, 2025. 

(iii) The owner or operator of the 

location where such use occurs, and 

manufacturers (including importers) 

and processors of TCE for such use, 

must comply with the Workplace 

Chemical Protection Program provisions 

in § 751.315. 

(iv) The owner or operator of the 

location where such use of TCE occurs 

must comply with the recordkeeping 

requirements in § 751.323. 

(6) Industrial and commercial use of 

TCE as a processing aid for specialty 

polymeric microporous sheet materials 

manufacturing until December 18, 2039. 

The following are specific conditions of 

the exemption for industrial and 

commercial use as a processing aid at 

§ 751.305(b)(23): 

(i) The use of TCE as a processing aid 

must be limited to specialty polymeric 

microporous sheet materials 

manufacturing. 

(ii) This specific industrial and 

commercial use of TCE as a processing 

aid can only be used at industrial 

facilities in which TCE is in use for the 

manufacture of specialty polymeric 

microporous sheet materials prior to 

February 18, 2025. 

(iii) The owner or operator of the 

location where such use occurs, and 

manufacturers (including importers) 

and processors of TCE for such use, 

must comply with the Workplace 

Chemical Protection Program provisions 

in § 751.315. 

(iv) The owner or operator of the 

location where such use of TCE occurs 

must comply with the recordkeeping 

requirements in § 751.323. 

(7) Laboratory use for essential 

laboratory activities until December 18, 

2074. The following are specific 

conditions of the exemption for 

laboratory use at § 751.305(b)(24): 

(i) The industrial and commercial use 

of TCE as a laboratory chemical must 

only be for essential laboratory 

activities. Essential laboratory activities 

are: 

(A) Laboratory activities associated 

with cleanup and exposure monitoring 

activities, including chemical analysis, 

chemical synthesis, extracting or 

purifying other chemicals, dissolving 

other substances, research and 

development for the advancement of 

cleanup activities, and as an analytical 

standard for monitoring related to TCE 

contamination or exposure monitoring. 

(B) Laboratory activities conducted by 

Federal agencies and their contractors, 

other than those described in paragraph 

(b)(7)(i)(A) of this section, and similar 

laboratory activities, provided the use is 

essential to the agency’s mission. 

(ii) The use of TCE as a laboratory 

chemical for testing asphalt is regulated 

under § 751.311, and is not considered 

an essential laboratory activity. 

(iii) The use of TCE as a laboratory 

chemical must be performed on the 

premises of a laboratory. 

(iv) The owner or operator of the 

location where such use of TCE occurs, 

and manufacturers (including 

importers) and processors of TCE for 

such use, must comply with the 

Workplace Chemical Protection Program 

provisions in § 751.315. 

(v) The owner or operator of the 

location where such use of TCE occurs 

must comply with the recordkeeping 

requirements in § 751.323. 

(8) Disposal of TCE to industrial pretreatment, industrial treatment, or 

publicly owned treatment works for the 

purposes of cleanup projects of TCEcontaminated water and groundwater 

until December 18, 2074. The following 

are specific conditions of the exemption 

for disposal at § 751.305(b)(25): 

(i) The disposal of TCE to industrial 

pre-treatment, industrial treatment, or 

publicly owned treatment works must 

only be for the purposes of cleanup 

projects of TCE-contaminated water and 

groundwater, and is limited to sites 

undergoing cleanup under CERCLA, 

RCRA, or other Federal, state, and local 

government laws, regulations, or 

requirements. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 17, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 102635 

(ii) The owner or operator of the 

cleanup site location where TCE 

industrial treatment or pretreatment 

occurs must comply with the 

wastewater worker protection 

requirements in § 751.319. 

(iii) The owner or operator of publicly 

owned treatment works that receive TCE 

wastewater must comply with the 

worker protection requirements in 

§ 751.319. 

(iv) The owner or operator of the 

location where such disposal of TCE 

occurs must comply with the 

recordkeeping requirements in 

§ 751.323. 

[FR Doc. 2024–29274 Filed 12–16–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES8