Racing to meet an extended June 2020 deadline to complete 10 chemical evaluations under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), EPA has released its latest draft risk analysis -- of a widely used solvent -- though it will almost certainly draw criticisms from peer reviewers who continue to criticize the agency’s risk methods.
November 15, 2026
Maria Hegstad
Maria Hegstad is managing editor of Inside EPA’s Risk Policy Report, where she has been writing about all things chemicals, risk assessment policy and toxicology since 2008. Before joining Inside EPA, Maria reported for local newspapers in Manassas, VA, and D.C., covering courts and local government. Maria is a proud native of the “other” Washington, raised in Tacoma. She earned her BA from the College of William & Mary and her MSJ from Medill.
Archived Articles
EPA’s has released a draft risk evaluation that finds scores of methylene chloride uses can pose unreasonable risks to consumers, workers and bystanders, a finding that opens the door to the agency adopting new toxics rules months after issuing a controversial measure that regulated only consumer uses of paint strippers containing the chemical.
Date:
Experts peer reviewing EPA’s new model for estimating lead concentrations in humans praised the agency’s years-long effort to craft a more-advanced model but urged the agency to clarify its applications and audience, with one peer reviewer noting increasing concerns about exposures given alleged flaws in OSHA’s lead standards.
Date:
EPA is renewing its bid to end environmental and public health groups’ efforts to obtain a court ruling on the merits of their petition asking EPA to ban drinking water fluoridation because of human health risks, in a case testing a little-used section of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) shortly after the court denied EPA’s appeal to delay a trial.
Date:
EPA appears to be advancing a new argument to dismiss part of environmentalists’ suit over the agency’s denial of their petition to require more reporting about the uses of asbestos in the United States that could also provide a defense against a new trial in a second, nearly identical petition case from states.
Date:
A federal judge is asking EPA and environmentalists to respond to a set of questions in a potentially precedent-setting Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) case after an agency lawyer sought to clarify statements she made during recent oral arguments but instead raised new doubts about the agency’s stances on key issues and the suit’s procedural posture.
Date:
Labor and other groups are threatening to sue EPA over allegations that the agency is inadequately releasing information about new chemicals under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), detailing concerns that they will likely urge the agency to address as it prepares to release a new framework for its new chemicals review process.
Date:
A federal judge appeared skeptical of environmentalists’ landmark efforts to pursue claims against EPA under both the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) when the agency denied their TSCA section 21 petition seeking rules requiring additional asbestos reporting.
Date:
Administration efforts to address lead-paint dust in residential settings are facing wide-ranging criticisms, with EPA’s Inspector General (IG) charging the program lacks goals or ways to track progress and the agency’s advisors and environmentalists questioning why the agency has yet to update its lead dust clearance standards for contractors.
Date:
EPA is seeking comment on a pair of chemical industry requests asking the agency to assess the risks of two phthalate chemicals, requests that will pose first-time tests for the agency on whether and how it conducts such analysis under the revised toxics law and whether any negative EPA risk finding preempts existing state and federal requirements.
Date: