On October 18, 2018, Inside EPA quoted Richard E. Engler, Ph.D., Director of Chemistry, Bergeson & Campbell, P.C. (B&C^®), regarding the B&C memorandum “EPA Proposes SNURs that Break New Ground under Amended TSCA.”

Industry attorneys are welcoming the agency's approach, suggesting it sets a precedent for future agency action. “The proposed SNUR is interesting, important, and controversial, as this is the first time under the new law for which EPA is proposing to apply SNUR authority to non-[enforcement] order . . . cases,” the Bergeson & Campbell law firm said in an Oct. 16 memo.

[…]

Bergeson & Campbell says it has learned that “since signature” of the notice, EPA has determined that the 13 substances are “not likely” to pose unreasonable risks. “Thus, it appears that EPA believes it has sufficient information to make this determination under the conditions of use,” the memo says.

The firm also backed EPA's approach, arguing in its memo that “based on our experience, there are many PMN chemicals for which some regulatory requirement may be needed to meet the provisions of amended TSCA, but we do not believe that a Section 5(e) order is needed in all such cases.”

“EPA did not need additional information, so there was no need for testing, so EPA did not need a consent order to obligate testing. It only needed to restrict the conditions of use,” Rich Engler, Bergeson & Campbell's director of chemistry, tells Inside EPA. “The effect of the SNUR is to limit conditions of use for all potential manufacturers, importers, and frankly processors. The consent order only applies to the [PMN] submitter.”

See - https://insideepa.com/daily-news/despite-suggestion-epa-floats-first-snurs-using-streamlined-framework (subscription required)