Office of Inspector General

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

At a Glance

22-E-0052
July 7, 2022

Why We Did This Evaluation

The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's Office of
Inspector General conducted this
evaluation to determine the extent
to which the EPA followed
applicable policies, procedures,
and guidance for the changes
made to the Long-Chain
Perfluoroalkyl Carboxylate and
Perfluoroalkyl Sulfonate Chemical
Substances Significant New Use
Rule between the EPA
administrator's signing of the final
rule on June 22, 2020, and the
publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register on July 27, 2020.
We initiated this evaluation based
on a congressional request.

The substances in question are
types of per- and polyfluoroalkyl
substances, which are
manufactured chemicals widely
used in industry and consumer
products. Some of these
substances break down very
slowly; build up in people,
animals, and the environment;
and may lead to adverse health
outcomes. Significant New Use
Rules require that the EPA be
notified before regulated chemical
substances are used in new ways
that might cause environmental or
human health concerns.

This evaluation supports an EPA
mission-related effort:

•	Ensuring the safety of chemicals.

This evaluation addresses a top
EPA management challenge:

•	Ensuring safe use of chemicals.

Address inquiries to our public
affairs office at (202) 566-2391 or
OIG WEBCOMMENTS@epa.gov.

List of OIG reports.

The EPA Was Not Transparent About Changes
Made to a Long-Chain PFAS Rule After
Administrator Signature

What We Found

The EPA did not follow all applicable policies,
procedures, and guidance when making
changes to the Long-Chain Perfluoroalkyl
Carboxylate and Perfluoroalkyl Sulfonate
Chemical Substances, orLCPFAC, Significant
New Use Rule after the administrator signed it
and before it was published in the Federal
Register. Specifically:

Because the EPA did not
follow docketing
procedures, the public was
not notified of the changes
to the final LCPFAC
Significant New Use Rule.

•	Although the Agency identified changes made to the Significant New Use
Rule in a postsignature change memorandum, which was signed by the
administrator, as required by the EPA's Changes to Rule Documents
Prepared for the Administrator's Signature procedures, the EPA did not
docket that memorandum, as stipulated in the EPA's Creating and
Managing Dockets: Frequently Asked Questions for EPA Action
Developers guidance.

•	Because the request for changes was communicated via telephone, we
could not identify the origin of the requested changes and could not
determine whether the EPA complied with the transparency provisions of
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review.

By not following all docketing procedures, the EPA did not meet
transparency expectations and risked compromising the public's trust in the
rulemaking process. However, the Agency followed the Office of the Federal
Register's Document Drafting Handbook guidance for requesting changes to
the final rule.

Recommendations and Planned Agency Corrective Actions

We recommend that the assistant administrator for Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention update the LCPFAC Significant New Use Rule docket by
posting the postsignature change memorandum that outlines the changes
made to the final rule after the administrator signed it but before it was
published in the Federal Register. We also make two recommendations to the
associate administrator for Policy, which include updating the applicable
policies, procedures, and guidance regarding making changes to a regulatory
action after it is submitted to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
for review and before it is published in the Federal Register. The Agency
agreed with our first two recommendations and provided acceptable corrective
actions. The first recommendation is completed, and the second is resolved
with corrective actions pending. The Agency disagreed with our third
recommendation, and it remains unresolved.

-------