SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. General Information

A. Summary of This Final Rule

B. Who does this regulation apply to?

C. What does this regulation require from facilities?

D. Why is the Agency taking this action?

E. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

F. What are the incremental costs and benefits of this action?

II. Background

A. History of EPCRA Hazard Categories

B. Proposed Rule

III. Revisions to 40 CFR Part 370

A. EPCRA Hazard Categories

B. Definitions

C. Other Revisions to 40 CFR Part 370

D. Burdens, Economics, and the Regulatory Process

E. Summary of Revisions to 40 CFR Part 370

IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

B. Executive Order 14192: Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

List of Acronyms

APA Administrative Procedure Act

CBI Confidential Business Information

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CRA Congressional Review Act

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

EPCRA Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act

FR Federal Register

GHS United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals

HCS Hazard Communication Standard

HNOC Hazard Not Otherwise Classified

ICR Information Collection Request

LEPC Local Emergency Planning Committee

NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

MSDS Material Safety Data Sheet

OMB Office of Management and Budget

OSH Act Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 [Public Law 91-596]

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration

PRA Paperwork Reduction Act

RIA Regulatory Impact Assessment

RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act

SARA Title III Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act

SDS Safety Data Sheet

TEPC Tribal Emergency Planning Committee

SERC State Emergency Response Commission

TERC Tribal Emergency Response Commission

UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

U.S.C. United States Code

I. General Information

A. Summary of This Final Rule

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) is promulgating this final action to amend the hazardous chemical inventory reporting regulations at 40 CFR part 370 to conform to OSHA's Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) updates of 2012 and 2024 and to make minor updates for plain language, clarity, and consistency.

In 2012, the OSHA HCS, codified at 29 CFR 1910.1200, was amended to adopt the United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) [77 FR 17574; March 26, 2012]. Among these 2012 OSHA HCS amendments, OSHA replaced the term Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) with the term Safety Data Sheet (SDS) and also stated that these two terms mean the same thing. In alignment, EPA amended its hazardous chemical reporting regulations at 40 CFR part 370 to conform to these changes [81 FR 38104; June 13, 2016, and 81 FR 47311; July 21, 2016]. The EPA 2016 amendments included adding the term SDS to the regulation so that both terms are used together throughout 40 CFR part 370. In this action, EPA is removing use of the term MSDS and revising the definition of safety data sheet to conform to the OSHA HCS and to improve readability of the regulation in the following sections: §§ 370.1, 370.3, 370.10, 370.12, 370.13, 370.14, 370.20, centered heading, 370.30, 370.31, 370.32, 370.33, 370.60, 370.62, 370.63, and 370.64.

In 2024, the OSHA HCS, codified at 29 CFR 1910.1200, was further amended to conform to revisions of the United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals [89 FR 44144; May 20, 2024, and 89 FR 81829; October 9, 2024]. This update improves awareness of chemical hazards by instituting changes as to how chemical hazards are reported on SDSs. Hazards reported on SDSs are used for reporting hazardous chemical inventories under EPCRA sections 311 and 312 [42 U.S.C. 11021 and 11022]. In this action, EPA is amending the EPCRA hazard categories and the definition of hazard category to conform with the 2024 OSHA HCS and make conforming amendments to the following sections: §§ 370.3, 370.30, 370.41, and 370.42. The Agency is also noting that OSHA codified the following definition of combustible dust at 29 CFR 1910.1200(c): “Combustible dust means finely divided solid particulates of a substance or mixture that pose a flash-fire hazard or explosion hazard when dispersed in air or other oxidizing media.” [89 FR 44272-44274; May 20, 2024] This definition is applicable to 40 CFR part 370 by the existing reference to the OSHA HCS within the definition of hazardous chemical at 40 CFR 370.66. EPA is not making amendments to further incorporate this definition.

( printed page 37024)

The Agency is also making minor plain language, clarifying, and consistency updates in the following sections: §§ 370.1, 370.2, 370.3, 370.10, 370.14, 370.30, 370.32, 370.33, 370.40, 370.41, 370.42, 370.43, 370.44, 370.45, 370.60, 370.61, 370.62, 370.64, 370.65, and 370.66. Of note, this includes capitalizing each letter of the term Extremely Hazardous Substance at § 370.66 to differentiate the term from its other uses. Additionally, the Agency is moving the definitions for this part from §§ 370.66 to 370.3, amending the title of § 370.3 to be Definitions, and amending the title of § 370.66 to be [Reserved]. These adjustments add clarity to the regulation by providing definitions of key words prior to the requirements. Further, EPA is removing the historic compliance dates from §§ 370.33 and 370.45, as well as removing the historic clarifications for electronic reporting from §§ 370.41 and 370.42. These removals improve the readability of the regulation by removing irrelevant information.

B. Who does this regulation apply to?

Sections 311 and 312 of the EPCRA statute [42 U.S.C. 11021 and 11022], and its implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 370, apply to the owners and operators of facilities that are required to prepare or have an SDS for any hazardous chemical defined under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act) and its implementing regulations ( i.e., the HCS). EPCRA section 311(e) defines the term hazardous chemical to have the same meaning as in OSHA's regulations found at 29 CFR 1910.1200(c), except for certain substances exempted in EPCRA section 311(e) [42 U.S.C. 11021(e)]. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

C. What does this regulation require from facilities?

The regulations found at 40 CFR part 370 codify the statutory requirements of EPCRA sections 311 and 312. These EPCRA hazardous chemical inventory reporting requirements were first promulgated in 1987 [53 FR 38344; October 15, 1987]. Section 311 requires that facilities submit SDSs of hazardous chemicals or a list of hazardous chemicals grouped into categories of health and physical hazards as defined in OSHA's HCS to the State Emergency Response Commission (SERC), Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC), and local fire department with jurisdiction over the facility. This is a one-time submittal with resubmission requirements if there is significant new information for existing hazardous chemicals, new hazardous chemicals present at the facility, or upon request by the LEPC as required at 40 CFR 307.31. Section 312 requires that facilities submit an emergency and hazardous chemical inventory form to the SERC, LEPC, and local fire department, by March 1st annually. The inventory form provides the health and physical hazards of each hazardous chemical as well as the locations and quantities present at the facility during the previous calendar year. There are two reporting tiers, Tier I and Tier II.

SERCs provide direction for facilities in their states for whether a Tier I or a Tier II form is required to be submitted. Currently, all states require use of the Tier II inventory form, which provides specific information on each hazardous chemical for developing and maintaining local emergency response plans. The Tier I inventory form provides only general information on hazardous chemicals and is currently not accepted by any state for reporting under the EPCRA section 312.

Note that the term SERC includes Tribal Emergency Response Commissions (TERCs) and the term LEPC includes any Tribal Emergency Planning Committees (TEPCs). Facilities on Tribal lands need to verify with their Tribe which SERC or TERC, LEPC or TEPC, and fire department to submit the EPCRA 311 and 312 hazardous chemical inventory reports to. [55 FR 3062; July 26, 1990]

D. Why is the Agency taking this action?

EPA is taking this action to ensure that the hazardous chemical inventory reporting requirements of EPCRA sections 311 and 312 are in conformance with the OSHA HCS SDS requirements, to publish a uniform format for inventory forms using OSHA SDS hazard categories, and to improve plain language use in the regulations. EPA anticipates that coordination with the OSHA HCS and with the GHS will provide greater clarity to the regulated community and facilitate emergency planning.

E. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

• 42 U.S.C. 11021(a)(2)(A)(i) states that the EPCRA section 311 list of hazardous chemicals report shall be grouped into categories of health and physical hazards as set forth under the OSH Act and the OSHA HCS, or in other categories as EPA may prescribe under subparagraph (B).
• 42 U.S.C. 11021(a)(2)(B) states that, for the EPCRA section 311 list of hazardous chemicals report, EPA may modify the categories of health and physical hazards as set forth under the OSH Act and the OSHA HCS by requiring information to be reported in terms of groups of hazardous chemicals which present similar hazards in an emergency.
• 42 U.S.C. 11022(d)(1)(C) states that, for the EPCRA section 312 annual hazardous chemical inventory forms, EPA may modify the OSH Act and OSHA HCS categories of health and physical hazards by requiring information to be reported in terms of groups of hazardous chemicals which present similar hazards in an emergency.
• 42 U.S.C. 11022(g) states that for the EPCRA section 312 annual hazardous chemical inventory forms, EPA shall publish a uniform format for inventory forms.
• 42 U.S.C. 11049(1) states that the term Administrator used throughout the statute means the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.

F. What are the incremental costs and benefits of this action?

This action does not create any additional requirements for affected facilities. EPA also anticipates that this action will improve first responder and community safety; prevent interpretation burdens for facilities, states, local agencies, and fire departments; and improve clarity without increasing the regulatory burden. Incremental cost savings due to the final rule reflect changes in respondent labor burden associated with EPA's regulatory changes conforming to the updated OSHA categorization. EPA estimates the final rule will result in annual cost savings of $12.83 million ($2025) for the approximately 463,000 affected facilities.

II. Background

A. History of EPCRA Hazard Categories

The EPCRA statute specifies that the hazardous chemical inventory reporting under sections 311 and 312 should be based on the health and physical hazard categories established under the OSH Act and the OSHA HCS regulations and that EPA may modify those hazards. Accordingly, in 1987, EPA modified OSHA's 23 health and physical hazards into five hazard categories (two health and three physical hazard categories) for facilities to use for reporting and codified the requirements at 40 CFR part 370. Facilities used the following five ( printed page 37025) categories for EPCRA hazardous chemical inventory reporting from 1987 through 2016: (1) Immediate (acute) health hazard, including highly toxic, toxic, irritant, sensitizer, corrosive, and other hazardous chemicals that cause an adverse effect to a target organ and which effect usually occurs rapidly as a result of short-term exposure and is of short duration; (2) Delayed (chronic) health hazard, including carcinogens and other hazardous chemicals that cause an adverse effect to a target organ and which effect generally occurs as a result of long-term exposure and is of long duration; (3) Fire hazard, including flammable, combustible liquid, pyrophoric, and oxidizer; (4) Sudden release of pressure, including explosive and compressed gas; and (5) Reactive, including unstable reactive, organic peroxide, and water reactive. [53 FR 38344; October 15, 1987].

In 2016, EPA conformed the EPCRA regulations at 40 CFR part 370 with the 2012 OSHA HCS. The 2012 OSHA HCS adopted the GHS to establish consistent and standardized hazard communications and required the development of SDSs with a uniform 16-section format. The EPA's conforming action included replacing the five 1987-2016 EPCRA hazard categories established in 1987 with the 2012 OSHA HCS hazard classes, as listed within the definitions of health hazard and physical hazard, as well as the four hazards that the GHS did not address (simple asphyxiant, combustible dust, pyrophoric gas, and hazard not otherwise classified) but are included in the 2012 OSHA HCS definition of a hazardous chemical. In the 2016 direct final rule preamble, EPA discussed that the 2012 OSHA HCS divides the OSHA hazard classes into categories, stating that the detailed criteria would be valuable for emergency planners and first responders, but did not incorporate the hazard categories into the EPCRA hazardous chemical inventory reports. [81 FR 47311; July 21, 2016] The following table lists the 2017-2026 EPCRA hazard categories, as was published in 40 CFR 370.66 from 2016 until the compliance date of this action (January 1, 2028):

B. Proposed Rule

In 2024, OSHA amended the HCS to conform with the GHS (primarily to GHS Revision 7, published in 2017). The 2024 OSHA HCS modifications that affect EPCRA include revised criteria for the classification of certain physical hazards to better capture and communicate the hazards to downstream users and amended contents for Section 2. Hazard Identification of SDSs. [89 FR 44144; May 20, 2024].

The following is a list of the revised criteria affecting EPCRA: (1) replacement of the hazard class Flammable Aerosols with Aerosols and Chemicals Under Pressure; (2) addition of the hazard class Desensitized Explosives; (3) inclusion of pyrophoric and chemically unstable gases within the definition of Flammable Gases; and (4) removal of pyrophoric gases from the definition of hazardous chemical. These modifications also affect the definitions of health hazards and physical hazards at 40 CFR 370.66, which EPA proposes to move to 40 CFR 370.3 in this action. The following discusses these changes to the OSHA hazard classes and the proposed conforming amendments to the EPCRA regulation at 40 CFR part 370.

The 2024 OSHA HCS replaces the Flammable Aerosols hazard class with two hazard classes: Aerosols and Chemicals Under Pressure. These two hazard classes are both divided into three hazard categories (two for flammables and one for non-flammable) [89 FR 44321-44324; May 20, 2024]. This HCS modification groups substances with different hazards for first responders into the same hazard class. For example, non-refillable fire extinguishers would be classified as Aerosol—Category 3, where highly flammable paints would be Aerosols—Category 1. So, although substances with these hazard classifications are in the same OSHA hazard class ( i.e., Aerosols), they do not present the same hazards in an emergency, as is required by sections 311 and 312 of the EPCRA statute [42 U.S.C. 11021(a)(2)(B) and 11022(d)(1)(C)(i)].

On November 17, 2025, to align with this modification while ensuring the protection of first responders and communities, the EPA published the now withdrawn direct final rule [90 FR 51187] and the parallel proposed rule [90 FR 51266]. On January 9, 2026, due to the receipt of adverse comment regarding the hazard categories, EPA withdrew the direct final rule [91 FR 918]. Because the direct final rule did not become effective, the Agency is proceeding with a final rule based on the parallel proposed rule [90 FR 51266] which was published separately. The Agency considered all comments submitted to the docket [EPA-HQ-OLEM-2025-0299] for both the now withdrawn direct final rule and the parallel proposed rule. Discussions are in section III. of this final rule.

The intent of the proposed rule was to directly incorporate the OSHA hazard categories into the EPCRA regulation, as opposed to the approach EPA adopted in the 2016 final rule [81 FR 38104; June 13, 2016] which included summaries of hazard classes as provided in the OSHA definitions at 29 CFR 1910.1200(c) for hazardous chemical, health hazard, and physical hazard into the EPCRA regulation. This method used for reporting from 2017 through 2026 grouped together similarly named OSHA hazard classes rather than using the OSHA hazard categories. These groupings of multiple OSHA hazard classes were acute toxicity (any route of exposure), flammable (gases, aerosols, liquids, or solids), gas under pressure (compressed gas), oxidizer (liquid, solid or gas), and pyrophoric (liquid or solid), resulting in 24 EPCRA hazard categories. Instead of this grouping approach, the Agency proposed [90 FR 51266; November 17, 2025] to incorporate the OSHA hazard categories as the EPCRA hazard categories. The proposed rule stated that these more detailed hazard categories provide more accurate hazard information. This increased specificity in hazard information is invaluable to emergency planners and responders, while ( printed page 37026) allowing facilities to simply copy the hazard categories from the SDSs to the EPCRA inventory reports. The proposed modification to the EPCRA regulations to use the OSHA hazard categories is in direct alignment with the statutory sections 42 U.S.C. 11021(a)(2)(A)(i) and 11022(d)(1)(A), which state that the EPCRA hazardous chemical inventory reporting should be based on the categories of health and physical hazards as set forth under the OSH Act and its regulations. During the 30-day public comment period for this action, EPA received nine comments on the modification of the hazard categories. The discussion and final hazard categories are in section III.A. below.

EPA also proposed to adjust the definitions for 40 CFR part 370 to amend the definitions of hazard category and safety data sheet and remove the definition of Material Safety Data Sheet. Further, the Agency proposed to move the definitions for 40 CFR part 370 from §§ 370.66 to 370.3 to ensure clarity and consistency within the EPCRA regulations. Additionally, the Agency noted that OSHA codified the following definition of combustible dust at 29 CFR 1910.1200(c): “Combustible dust means finely divided solid particulates of a substance or mixture that pose a flash-fire hazard or explosion hazard when dispersed in air or other oxidizing media.” [89 FR 44272-44274; May 20, 2024] This definition is applicable to 40 CFR part 370 by the existing reference to the OSHA HCS within the definition of hazardous chemical at 40 CFR 370.66. EPA is not making amendments to further incorporate this definition. During the 30-day public comment period for these actions, only supporting comments were received for definition portions of the proposal. The discussions and final definitions are in section III.B. below.

Further, EPA also proposed to make minor plain language, clarifying, and consistency edits in the following sections: §§ 370.1, 370.2, 370.3, 370.10, 370.14, 370.30, 370.32, 370.33, 370.40, 370.41, 370.42, 370.43, 370.44, 370.45, 370.60, 370.61, 370.62, 370.64, 370.65, and 370.66. These proposed changes include capitalizing each letter of the term Extremely Hazardous Substance to add clarity between the distinct set of substances listed in the appendices of 40 CFR part 355 and other uses of the term, removing the historic compliance dates from §§ 370.33 and 370.45, as well as removing the historic clarifications for electronic reporting from §§ 370.41 and 370.42. No comments were received for these edits, during the 30-day public comment period for these actions. The discussion is in section III.C. below.

III. Revisions to 40 CFR Part 370

In this final action, consistent with the proposal, EPA is amending its hazardous chemical inventory reporting regulations at 40 CFR part 370 by directly incorporating the 118 OSHA hazard categories as the EPCRA hazard categories, amending the definitions for hazard category and safety data sheet, removing the use of the term Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS), noting that 2024 OSHA HCS includes a definition for combustible dusts which is applicable to 40 CFR part 370, and making the proposed corrections for plain language, clarity, and consistency. These changes were made to conform with the most recent version of 29 CFR 1910.1200. EPA engaged in discussions with OSHA in finalizing this rule. Additionally, EPA is providing a thirteen-month extension to the proposed rule's compliance date ( i.e., December 1, 2027); the final rule compliance date is January 1, 2028. The rationale for these revisions is discussed below:

A. EPCRA Hazard Categories

As explained above in section II.A. of this final rule, the EPCRA statute specifies that the hazardous chemical inventory reporting under sections 311 and 312 should be the health and physical hazard categories established under the OSH Act and the OSHA HCS regulations, and that EPA may modify those OSHA hazard categories to be reported in groups which present similar hazards in an emergency [42 U.S.C. 11021(a)(2) and 11022(d)]. As the Agency explained in the proposed rule and discussed further below in this section, the updates to the OSHA HCS [89 FR 81829; October 9, 2024] leave the 2017-2026 EPCRA hazard categories out of alignment with the OSHA hazard categories. To remedy this, the EPA published a proposed rule [90 FR 51266; November 17, 2025] to directly incorporate the OSHA hazard classes and their categories as the EPCRA hazard categories, consistent with the statutory provisions that the EPCRA hazard categories are to be the health and physical hazards as set forth under the OSHA HCS [42 U.S.C. 11021(a)(2)(A)(i) and 11021(d)(1)(A)]. In this final action and for the reasons explained below, the Agency is finalizing the direct incorporation of the OSHA hazard classes with their hazard categories as the EPCRA hazard categories.

1. Conformance to OSHA Hazard Categories

EPA received nine comments on the proposal to directly incorporate the OSHA hazard categories into the EPCRA regulation as the EPCRA hazard categories. EPA agrees with commenters who supported the proposed rule's direct incorporation of the OSHA hazard categories as the EPCRA hazard categories for the ability to streamline reporting, reduce the time burden for completing the reports, reduce confusion between Federal and international chemical hazard classifications, and allow direct data transfer from the OSHA HCS required SDSs to the EPCRA hazardous chemical inventory forms. Some commenters criticized the expansion of the 2017-2026 EPCRA hazard categories and were unclear as to how they would be implemented. Some of these commenters were unclear regarding how they would complete the new form with so many options for the hazard categories, some commenters expressed concern regarding whether the hazard categories are comprehensible by small facilities and the public, one commenter stated that the expansion of hazard categories exceeds what is necessary for harmonization and that the revised categories are simply a more granular version of the existing categorizations, and one commenter stated that the OSHA hazard categories create a false sense of accuracy and that the hazard categories give the illusion that a more precise description implies that something is more true. Some of these commenters requested that EPA retain the current 2017-2026 EPCRA hazard categories, while another commenter stated that the EPA's original five 1987-2016 hazard categories should be reinstated. In addition to considering these comments, EPA also evaluated other approaches. The discussions are below in this section.

In response to the commenters who expressed confusion as to how to complete the EPCRA section 312 Tier II forms and, in agreement with supporting commenters, EPA has determined that the updated approach removes the current interpretation burden and simply requires the selection of the hazard category on the Tier II Form that matches the hazard category present on the SDS. The updated approach requires no interpretation burden or chemical hazard expertise, rather it simply requires the facilities use the hazard category from the SDS to report on the Tier II Form. The 1987-2016 and 2017-2026 hazard category methods required ( printed page 37027) that facilities use the OSHA hazard classes and categories to then interpret which EPCRA hazard category was relevant for each. Also, the 2024 OSHA HCS updates created a misalignment for twelve OSHA hazard categories that do not fit into a 2017-2026 EPCRA hazard category or will cause confusion if reported in a 2017-2026 hazard category ( i.e., Aerosols—Categories 1, 2, and 3; Chemicals Under Pressure—Categories 1, 2, and 3; Flammable Gases—Chemically Unstable Category 1A/A and 1A/B; Desensitized Explosives—Categories 1, 2, 3, and 4). Therefore, facilities will now incur a data entry and interpretation burden when completing their 2026 Tier II Form. The timeliness of the rule is to prevent these additional burdens for all facilities (especially small facilities). This final action removes these added burdens for the 2027 and subsequent reporting years. Further, the hazard categories appear individually on the SDS. And, for every hazard category listed on the SDS, the facilities have always been required to select one hazard category on the Tier II Form. Therefore, EPA disagrees that the expansion of the hazard categories will make it more difficult to complete the annual Tier II Form because facilities are still only required to use each hazard category from the SDS to select one hazard category on the Tier II Form. The changes with this final rule remove the burdens for interpreting which EPCRA hazard category to use for each OSHA hazard category, since these two sets of hazard categories are now the same.

EPA understands the importance of using hazard categories that effectively convey the hazard information, as well as the concerns expressed regarding whether small facilities and the public will be able to understand the hazard information affiliated with the expanded hazard categories. In agreement with supporting commenters, the Agency finds that the alignment of EPCRA hazard categories with the OSHA hazard categories, which are in accordance with international standards, will provide one set of chemical hazard information for people to understand and this will inherently increase comprehension while resolving confusion. Note that in the 2012 OSHA HCS [52 FR 38344] which conformed to the GHS, OSHA stated that ensuring comprehensibility of the GHS was a key principle in its development [77 FR 17584; March 26, 2012]. Further, the hazard class information is still included in the EPCRA hazard categories, so the EPCRA section 312 Tier I and Tier II forms will continue to provide people with a basic understanding of the hazard ( e.g., carcinogenicity, serious eye damage, explosives, oxidizing gases, etc.). Importantly, these revisions also allow people the opportunity to more clearly understand the hazards in their communities if they choose to. The Agency finds that it is appropriate to allow people the option to learn and understand, instead of assuming that they are incapable of comprehending the hazard categories. For the reasons stated above, the Agency disagrees that using the OSHA hazard categories will less effectively convey hazard information and instead finds that directly incorporating the OSHA hazard categories as the EPCRA hazard categories will ensure that people are informed of the hazards effecting them, whether they achieve full understanding of the hazard categories or retain only the basic hazard class information.

EPA disagrees with the commenter positing that the expansion of the EPCRA hazard categories exceeds what is necessary for harmonization, that the 2017-2026 EPCRA hazard categories are sufficient, and that the expanded categories are simply a more granular version of the 2017-2026 hazard categories. As was discussed in section IV.B. of the proposed rule, the 2024 OSHA HCS amendments: (1) replaced the hazard class Flammable Aerosols with Aerosols and Chemicals Under Pressure; (2) added the hazard class Desensitized Explosives; (3) includes pyrophoric and chemically unstable gases within the definition of Flammable Gases; and (4) removes pyrophoric gases from the definition of hazardous chemical. In fact, there are now thirteen OSHA hazard categories which appear on the 2024 complaint SDSs which do not appear on the 2012 SDSs. Problematic for facilities in 2026, there will be twelve OSHA hazard categories that do not fit into a 2017-2026 EPCRA hazard category, or will cause confusion for the emergency planners and responders if reported in a 2017-2026 hazard category ( i.e., Aerosols—Categories 1, 2, and 3; Chemicals Under Pressure—Categories 1, 2, and 3; Flammable Gases—Chemically Unstable Category 1A/A and 1A/B; Desensitized Explosives—Categories 1, 2, 3, and 4). EPA also considered the feasibility of modifying the OSHA hazard categories by using the OSHA hazard classes to group hazards, consistent with the Agency's approach for the 2017-2026 hazard categories. However, as was explained in section IV.A. of the proposed rule, EPA has determined that using the OSHA hazard classes as a method of grouping hazards may misstate the hazard information and the related risks for communities, for example the new OSHA hazard class for Aerosols, which clearly groups substances with different hazards for first responders and communities into the same hazard class. For example, non-refillable fire extinguishers would be classified as Aerosol—Category 3, where highly flammable paints would be Aerosols—Category 1. If EPA continues to rely on the OSHA hazard classes for the EPCRA hazard categories, both non-refillable fire extinguishers and highly flammable paints would be reported as the same hazard despite not actually being the same hazard in an emergency. Therefore use of the OSHA hazard classes (or mergers of hazard classes) as the EPCRA hazard categories would be inconsistent with the statutory provision that authorizes EPA to modify the categories of health and physical hazards as set under the OSHA HCS, by requiring that the information be reported in terms of groups of hazardous chemicals which present similar hazards in an emergency [42 U.S.C. 11021(a)(2)(B) and 11022(d)(1)(C)(i)].

EPA disagrees with the commenter who posits that the OSHA hazard categories create a false sense of accuracy and that the hazard categories give the illusion that a more precise description implies that something is truer. OSHA hazard categories use defined criteria to compare the severity of the hazards in each hazard class [29 CFR 1910.1200(c) Hazard category]. While all of the chemicals in an OSHA hazard class have similar properties, the hazard categories provide an increased awareness of what the hazard truly is. For example, the OSHA HCS hazard class Chemicals Under Pressure is divided into categories with different severities: Category 1 is for the more flammable chemicals under pressure which contain ≥85% flammable components (by mass) and have a heat of combustion ≥20 kJ/g, while Category 3 is for less flammable chemicals under pressure which contain ≤1% flammable components (by mass) and has a heat of combustion <20 kJ/g [29 CFR 1910.1200, appendix B.3.2]. Therefore, while these are both Chemicals Under Pressure, Category 1 has more severe hazards than the other categories in this class. The Agency finds that adopting this awareness of hazard severity into the EPCRA regulations is important for communities to better prioritize their emergency planning efforts to first focus on the facilities posing the highest risks.

EPA is unable to accommodate the commenters requesting the continued ( printed page 37028) use of the 2017-2026 EPCRA hazard categories nor is it able to revert back to the 1987-2016 hazard categories for the reasons discussed above in this section. Further, if EPA reinstated the EPCRA categories used from 1987 through 2016, there would be fewer hazard categories, but these categories would not be aligned with the OSHA hazard categories on the SDSs. This misalignment would cause confusion and increase the burden on reporting facilities by requiring mapping of the OSHA hazard categories to the EPCRA hazard categories. Therefore, EPA is adopting the OSHA hazard classes with their categories as the EPCRA hazard categories, consistent with the statutory provisions that the EPCRA hazard categories are to be the health and physical hazards as set forth under the OSHA HCS [42 U.S.C. 11021(a)(2)(A)(i) and 11021(d)(1)(A)].

2. Hazard Awareness

Some commenters supported the action on the basis that incorporation of the OSHA hazard classes with their categories increases hazard awareness for emergency planners, first responders, and communities. One of these commenters said that adopting the more specific OSHA categories allows facilities to provide the most specialized and relevant information to first responders, which is vital to emergency planning. Similarly, another commenter representing state and local entities said that the OSHA hazard categories provide a much more detailed characterization of the threats posed by different hazardous chemicals and this level of detail is often essential for LEPC's planning needs. Other commenters criticized the more granular hazard categories, indicating that the expanded hazard information is of little value to emergency planners and first responders. One of these commenters stated that first responders “are by nature a cautious breed” for requesting the actual hazards presented by chemicals in the EPCRA reports because the prospect of improved precision is attractive to them, but the use of the information by emergency planners and responders is disproportional to the facility reporting burdens. Some adverse commenters also posited that since planners and first responders can already request the SDSs from facilities, and that because the SDS is the first responder's primary resource during incidents, the adoption of the OSHA hazard categories is unjustified.

EPA disagrees that the more granular hazard information is of little value to emergency planners and first responders, and instead agrees with the commenter representing the state and local emergency planners and first responders who posits that the more specific hazard category information will help ensure that our first-line emergency responders are equipped with the information necessary to respond and protect communities. It is correct that the statute provides the authority for the LEPCs to request the SDS from each facility for each chemical, year after year [42 U.S.C. 11021(c)]. However, the commenter representing state and local emergency planners and responders observed that forcing LEPCs to rely on their authority to request such information from the facility delays delivery of the information creates an additional hassle for both facility operators and LEPCs and promotes conflict between them. The Agency agrees with this commenter and anticipates that the SERCs, LEPCs, and fire departments will be able to better prioritize their emergency planning efforts if they have both the OSHA hazard class and category as reported on the SDS. The Agency also anticipates that LEPCs will request fewer SDSs from facilities, since they will now be able to focus their efforts on the hazardous chemicals of concern for their communities by simply reviewing the Tier II Form data.

3. Implementation Timeframe for Hazard Categories

In response to the proposed rule's compliance date of December 1, 2026, some commenters representing industry requested that the rule be phased or delayed to align with the OSHA HCS compliance schedule and to provide additional time for facilities to reclassify their hazards and update their SDS inventory records based on the new definitions.

These extension requests to align with the OSHA HCS ranged from stating that the implementation of the EPCRA hazard categories should be aligned with the phased deadlines for the 2024 OSHA HCS to requesting five years after the final compliance date in the OSHA HCS for effectiveness of this final rule ( i.e., the 2033 report due by March 1, 2034). These commenters posited that the EPCRA compliance date is impossible or would increase compliance risks because it is prior to the final OSHA compliance date for manufacturers and importers to update their SDSs for mixtures, and the compliance date would therefore require facilities to self-classify their chemical hazards. The EPA disagrees because the proposed rule did not and this final rule does not modify the reporting requirements which are set by statute and have been codified as regulation since October 15, 1987 [52 FR 38344], nor do they venture into OSHA's jurisdiction to direct hazard classifications.

The EPCRA hazard category modifications allow facilities that are in possession of a 2024 OSHA HCS compliant SDS to use that SDS for their statute required EPCRA section 312 annual reports. The relevancy of the 2024 OSHA HCS compliance dates to this final rule is that in the year 2026 facilities will have SDSs that will include twelve OSHA hazard categories that are not reportable under a 2017-2026 EPCRA hazard category, as discussed above in section III.A.1. and further below in this section. The statute sets that the EPCRA section 311 reports are triggered by facilities having a new or revised SDS, and that the section 312 report (which requires the hazard categories from the SDSs) is due by March 1st each year for the previous calendar year, this remains unchanged:

• The EPCRA section 311 initial list is to be submitted within three months after the owner or operator of a facility is required to prepare or have available a SDS under the OSHA HCS [42 U.S.C. 11021(d)(1)(B)].
• The EPCRA section 311 updated list is to be submitted within three months following discovery by an owner or operator of significant new information concerning an aspect of a hazardous chemical for which a SDS was previously submitted [42 U.S.C. 11021(d)(2)].
• The EPCRA section 312 annual report shall be submitted on or before March 1st annually, and shall contain data with respect to the preceding calendar year [42 U.S.C. 11022(a)(2)].

Further, EPA realizes that facilities which are also manufacturers, importers, or distributors (who are modifying an SDS) have the OSHA requirement to update the SDS by May 19, 2026, for substances [29 CFR 1910.1200(j)(2)(i)] and November 19, 2027, for mixtures [29 CFR 1910.1200(j)(3)(i)]. The date that these facilities comply with this OSHA requirement is the date that these facilities have the new or revised SDS for EPCRA sections 311 and 312 reporting requirements, discussed immediately above in this section. The Agency finds that the requests for extension to align with the OSHA HCS are unnecessary because the proposed rule and this final rule are inherently aligned with the OSHA HCS compliance dates. However, for another reason the Agency is extending the compliance date of the rule to January 1, 2028 (see section III.A.5.), which is after the 2024 ( printed page 37029) OSHA HCS compliance dates for these facilities to develop the SDSs for substances and mixtures [29 CFR 1910.1200(j)(2)(i) and (j)(3)(i)].

EPA evaluated the feasibility of facilities using the 2024 OSHA hazard categories as the EPCRA hazard categories during the transition period to determine if the EPCRA compliance date is impossible or would increase compliance risks. To start with, it is important to note that there will be 2012 HCS compliant SDSs in use until all products distributed with these SDSs are no longer in circulation, which could be decades in some extreme cases, and that the EPCRA section 311 and 312 relevant 2024 OSHA HCS transition period ranges from May 20, 2024 until May 19, 2028 [29 CFR 1910.1200(j)(4)]. This means that the transition period started May 20, 2024, and could last for many years beyond the 2024 OSHA HCS compliance dates. Therefore, EPA must set the hazard categories to be usable for both the 2012 HCS compliant SDS and the 2024 HCS compliant SDS. Facilities do not need to have a 2024 OSHA HCS compliant SDS to comply with this final rule.

Regarding the feasibility of using the 2024 OSHA hazard categories during the transition period and until the 2012 OSHA HCS compliant SDSs are removed from circulation. Of the 118 categories: 105 remain unchanged as they appear on the SDS, 10 are new and will only appear on the 2024 compliant SDSs, and three were renamed ( i.e., Flammable Aerosols—Category 1 = Aerosols—Category 1; Flammable Aerosols—Category 2 = Aerosols—Category 2; and Pyrophoric Gas = Flammable Gases—Pyrophoric Gas—Category 1A). These three renamed hazards are the only hazards which will appear on the 2012 HCS compliant SDSs that do not also appear on the 2024 compliant SDSs. There are thirteen hazard categories which appear on the 2024 complaint SDSs which do not appear on the 2012 SDSs and twelve of these are not reportable under the current EPCRA hazard categories (based on OSHA classes), as discussed above in section III.A.1. Below is a summary of the evaluation of the reporting requirements for using the 2012 SDSs on the new forms and using the 2024 SDSs on the old forms:

• If a facility is using a 2012 compliant SDSs to report on the revised EPCRA section 312 Tier II Form, the three renamed hazard categories will require that facilities report according to a guidance matrix which the EPA will publish with the final rule.
• If a facility is using a 2024 compliant SDS to report on the 2017-2026 form, thirteen hazard categories (i.e., the ten new hazard categories and the three renamed hazard categories) will require that facilities report these hazards as hazards not otherwise classified due to a lack of other data entry options.

Additionally, one commenter asserted that the EPCRA rule implementation should be delayed and aligned with the OSHA HCS compliance schedule because the 2024 OSHA HCS imposes a new due diligence for SDSs to include the evaluation of reasonably anticipated downstream hazards. The EPA disagrees that this is a new requirement for the OSHA HCS; in fact, the preamble to the OSHA final rule discusses at length that this has been a long-standing requirement for the SDSs to include these reasonably anticipated downstream hazards [89 FR 44278-44281; May 20, 2024]. Further, the contents of these intrinsic properties into downstream hazards are now required to be entered in section 2(c) of the SDS, which separates these intrinsic properties into hazards due to either a chemical reaction or byproduct, and hazards due to changes in physical form [see 29 CFR 1910.1200(d)(1)(i) and (ii) and Appendix D to § 1910.1200 Table D.1—Minimum Information for an SDS]. Therefore, facilities have already been reporting these hazards on the EPCRA reports, if the SDSs were compliant with the OSHA HCS.

In summary, the Agency disagrees with the statements suggesting that facilities should not be required to report using the new hazard categories until after the OSHA HCS transition period or until five years after this rule becomes effective. The Agency finds that the requested extensions to conform to the OSHA compliance dates are unnecessary and would only exacerbate the reporting burdens (particularly for small facilities) which will be increased each year this rule is delayed. Nonetheless, the EPA has considered options to resolve these comments.

4. Alternative Reporting Requests

Some commenters suggested phasing in the use of the updated hazard categories by allowing a dual reporting option, where facilities could choose if they use the legacy or updated hazard categories. EPA disagrees that this is a feasible option because this would require either two sets of forms and therefore two sets of software systems, or modification of the Tier II Form and software systems to allow for the use of both sets of hazard categories. This would complicate reporting and introduce unnecessary costs and delays in implementation. Further, these burdens on the implementing agencies would be required at the onset of the transition period, as well as at the end of the transition period since the implementing agencies would need to modify their custom softwares to allow for the new option and then again to remove it. Therefore, the Agency finds that providing an option to use either set of hazard categories would double to quadruple the costs for states to update their custom software systems and would at least double the implementing agencies' burdens for processing and management of the data. Further, this option would also delay improving hazard awareness while interjecting confusion for all parties involved. Therefore, the Agency is not finalizing an option to allow facilities to choose if they use the legacy or updated hazard categories during a transition period.

In accordance with the intent of this comment, the EPA also considered allowing reporting by only the OSHA hazard class during a transition period and then the full hazard categorization after the final SDS compliance date of the OSHA HCS. However, this option may impose an undue burden for facilities (particularly for small facilities) to re-enter their hazard classifications more times than would be necessary since most of the hazard classifications remain unchanged as they appear on the SDS. Finally, this option would also delay improving hazard awareness. Therefore, the Agency is not finalizing these options.

5. Delay Requests To Update Software, Training, and Guidance

Finally, some commenters requested extensions for the use of the new hazard categories because of the need to update the EPA provided Tier2 Submit software, training, and guidance; for facilities to update their custom software systems; and for states to update their custom software systems, guidance, and training materials. One of these commenters requested that the Agency conduct outreach to the SERCs, LEPCs, software vendors, and facilities no later than the July preceding the affected reporting year. This commenter also stated that the rule must be delayed because the Agency only provided a few weeks for the updates of software systems. Another commenter stated that timely access to the Tier2 Submit specifications and data configurations is needed for facilities to ensure compatibility between their chemical management software systems and the new reporting structure. Another commenter representing industry stated that the rule must be delayed because SERCs cannot update their electronic ( printed page 37030) reporting systems in time and facilities also need time to update their internal electronic reporting systems. The Agency received one comment representing the SERCs and LEPCs; this commenter fully supported the now withdrawn direct final rule [52 FR 38344; November 17, 2025] which provided 54 weeks for the updates to the software systems.

EPA agrees with these commenters that it is necessary to provide adequate time for the update of software systems, guidance, and training materials for the implementation of the new EPCRA hazard categories. The Agency also agrees that timely access to the Tier II Form and its data configurations is important to allow for updates to commercial and private software. Further, the Agency agrees that it should conduct outreach to the SERCs, LEPCs, commercial software companies, and facilities. For compliance assistance, EPA publishes the EPCRA section 312 inventory reporting forms, offers training and educational materials, provides software programs for facilities to report ( i.e., Tier2 Submit) and for implementing agencies to manage their inventory reports ( i.e., CAMEO Data Manager), and posts the National Tier II Data Standard ¹ for use in developing custom software. The Agency has already provided the revised Tier I and Tier II Forms in the docket with this final rule and will also publish these forms on the EPA web page EPCRA Tier II Forms and Instructions.² The Agency is also updating its online training for the implementing agencies, planners, and responders ³ ; guidance for using the 2012 OSHA compliant SDSs for the new EPCRA reports; guidance clarifying the statute's requirements to update the EPCRA section 311 reports and to use the SDS for the section 312 reports as discussed above in this section [42 U.S.C. 11021(d)(1)(B), 11021(d)(2), and 11022(a)(2)]; and the National LEPC-TEPC Handbook,⁴ with the intent of also publishing these updated materials. EPA intends to release the Tier2 Submit and CAMEO Data Manager software programs on the normal schedule ( i.e., November of each year), which has historically been an adequate amount of time to incorporate state specific requirements into the software program and is also in accordance with the time provided in the 2016 direct final rule which conformed the EPCRA hazard categories to the 2012 OSHA HCS [52 FR 38344]. Additionally, to provide access to the Tier2 Submit specifications and data configurations, EPA also intends to post the revised National Tier II Data Standard in a timely manner for states and facilities to use in developing any custom softwares they choose to use. EPA will work to minimize the confusion between the 2026 and 2027 reporting year requirements, while also ensuring that there is adequate time to update the software systems. EPA will publish these updated resources and tools on its website and will distribute the notifications of their release to the SERCs who have provided their contact information to the EPA,⁵ the National Association of SARA Title III Program Officials (NASTTPO), the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), the National Volunteer Fire Association (NVFA), E-Plan, Hazconnect, and VelocityEHS. Anyone else requesting distribution notices may contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

EPA agrees that it is necessary to provide adequate time for the update of software systems. However, the Agency disagrees with the commenter requesting an extension because the Agency only provided a few weeks for the updates of software systems, because the now withdrawn direct final rule [52 FR 38344] would have provided over one year ( i.e., 54 weeks) to make these updates. Based on the comment representing SERCs and LEPCs and the amount of time necessary to update Tier2 Submit and CAMEO Data Manager, one year is an adequate amount of time to update the commercial and custom softwares to include the new hazard categories. However, to ensure that sufficient time is provided, EPA is providing a thirteen-month extension to the proposed rule's compliance date, or seventeen months after publication of the final rule (Proposed—December 1, 2027; Final Rule—January 1, 2028). SERCs who are unable to update their custom software are invited to use the EPA provided software ( i.e., Tier 2 Submit and CAMEO Data Manager).

6. Revised Hazard Categories

In sum, for the reasons laid out above, EPA is finalizing revised hazard categories as proposed, with one exception as detailed below. The following tables detail and compare the legacy 2017-2026 EPCRA hazard categories (adopted in 2016) to the 2024 OSHA HCS hazard classes with their hazard categories that are being adopted in this final rule. This table is amended from the one published in the now withdrawn direct final rule [91 FR 918] and proposed rule [90 FR 51266] to expand the Acute Toxicity, Inhalation hazard category to include specific hazard categories for vapors, gases, and dusts and mists, and to correct that the hazard category Oxidizing Gases is Oxidizing Gases—Category 1. These changes were made to conform with the most recent version of 29 CFR 1910.1200. EPA also engaged in discussions with OSHA in finalizing this rule.

B. Definitions

1. Hazard Category

EPA received one supporting comment regarding the definition for hazard category, including health hazard and physical hazard. In this action, the Agency is finalizing the proposed definition with revisions to add Hazards Not Otherwise Classified within the primary EPCRA definition of Hazard category and within the sub-definitions of Health hazard and Physical hazard to clarify that Hazards Not Otherwise Classified are EPCRA sections 311 and 312 hazard categories and for consistency with the OSHA HCS. This change was made in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.1200 resultant of discussions with OSHA during interagency collaboration for this final rule. The following table compares the definition for Hazard category, including Health hazard and Physical hazard, between the 2016 EPCRA regulation and this final action, with the differences in bold.

2. (Material) Safety Data Sheet

EPA received one comment supporting removal of the term Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS). No other comments were received for this definition. Therefore, the Agency is finalizing the definition as proposed. The following table provides the current and revised definition of Safety Data Sheet, which are being moved from 40 CFR 370.66 to § 370.3 in this final action, with the modified language in bold.

( printed page 37034)

3. Combustible Dust

No comments were received regarding the 2024 OSHA definition of combustible dust at 29 CFR 1910.1200(c): “Combustible dust means finely divided solid particulates of a substance or mixture that pose a flash-fire hazard or explosion hazard when dispersed in air or other oxidizing media.” [89 FR 44272-44274; May 20, 2024] EPA notes that the 2024 OSHA HCS definition of combustible dusts is applicable to 40 CFR part 370 by the existing reference to the OSHA HCS within the definition of hazardous chemical at 40 CFR 370.66. EPA is not making amendments to further incorporate this definition.

4. Location of Definitions in 40 CFR Part 370

No comments were received regarding moving the definitions for this part from §§ 370.66 to 370.3, amending the title of § 370.3 to be Definitions, amending the title of § 370.66 to be [Reserved], or adding a note to § 370.66 that the definitions are now in § 370.3. However, the Federal Register advised EPA that it is unable to add a note to reserved sections. Therefore, the Agency is finalizing these provisions as proposed, except that the note to § 370.66 is being excluded.

C. Other Revisions to 40 CFR Part 370

No comments were received for these proposed provisions. Therefore, the Agency is finalizing these amendments as proposed.

D. Burdens, Economics, and the Regulatory Process

One commenter requested that the rule be delayed until EPA has completed the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) and Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) analyses and OMB review. Specifically, this commenter stated that EPA should update its ICR burden estimate, publish UMRA and RFA analyses assessing these expenditures, and seem E.O. 12866 review. EPA completed the PRA, UMRA, and OMB reviews as required. The ICR burden estimate was sufficient and will be considered as part of the revisions ICR that was submitted for OMB approval. See sections IV.A., C., D., and E. for further information.

A couple of commenters stated that the rule did not address the burden affiliated with updating custom software systems, guidance, and training materials. One of these commenters (representing industry) stated that the rule did not recognize the costs and burdens needed to provide additional time for states to update their custom software, training, and guidance. However, the Agency also received supporting comments from the state and local implementing agencies (via their association) which did not raise concerns about the costs or burdens of the rule. The EPA disagrees that it must include the state and facility costs for updating their custom software or for states to update guidance and training materials. Facilities and implementing agencies that develop custom tools may do so by choice, but this is not an obligation imposed by the rule. For compliance assistance, EPA publishes the EPCRA section 312 inventory reporting forms, offers training and educational materials, and provides software for facilities to report ( i.e., Tier2 Submit) and for implementing agencies to manage their inventory reports ( i.e., CAMEO Data Manager). See section III.A.5. above for further discussion.

E. Summary of revisions to 40 CFR Part 370

On November 17, 2025, EPA published the now withdrawn direct final rule [90 FR 51187] and the parallel proposed rule [90 FR 51266]. On January 9, 2026, due to the receipt of adverse comment, EPA withdrew the direct final rule [91 FR 918]. Because the direct final rule did not become effective, the Agency is proceeding with a final rule based on the proposed rule. The following is a list of amendments being finalized in this action:

IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Reviews

Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders can be found at https://www.epa.gov/​laws-regulations/​laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

This action is not a significant regulatory action and was therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review.

B. Executive Order 14192: Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation

This action is considered an Executive Order 14192 deregulatory action. As described in EPA's Regulatory Impact Analysis for this action, the annualized cost savings of the final rule is estimated to be $12.83 million, expressed in 2025 dollars. For compliance with E.O. 14192, this value is converted into 2024 dollars using the Bureau of Economic Analysis' GDP Price Deflator, resulting in annualized cost savings of $12.47 million expressed in 2024 dollars (annualized using 7% discount rate and end-of-period discounting). Further, in compliance with E.O. 14192, the 2024-denominated annualized cost savings is discounted over a perpetual time horizon relative to a present value year of 2024 at a 7 percent discount rate. For regulatory accounting purposes under E.O. 14192, the estimated present value and annualized value of cost savings of this rule are $155.65 and $10.90 million, respectively (7% discount rate, 2024$, 2024 present value year, perpetuity time horizon). Details on the estimated cost savings of this final rule can be found in EPA's analysis of the potential costs and benefits associated with this action.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

The information collection activities in this rule have been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the PRA. The ICR document that the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR number 1352.20. You can find a copy of the ICR in the docket for this rule and it is briefly summarized here. The information collection requirements are not enforceable until OMB approves them.

This rulemaking action will conform the terminology used, and information that must be reported, on the hazardous chemical inventory forms to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's Hazard Communication Standard amendments of 2012 and 2024. This action is anticipated to result in burden reductions by removing interpretation burdens on facilities using the SDS to complete annual hazardous chemical inventory reports and reducing the burden to read and understand the regulations. Public comments were previously requested in the proposed rule [90 FR 51266; November 17, 2025] for this final action. These comments are addressed above in section III.D.

Respondents/affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this ICR are manufacturers and non-manufacturers required to have available a Safety Data Sheet (SDS) under the OSHA HCS.

Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (sections 311 and 312 of EPCRA).

Estimated number of respondents: 465,692 facilities (total). This figure includes 3,052 LEPCs and SERCs.

Frequency of response: Annual.

Total estimated burden: 6,781,748 hours (per year, including LEPCs and SERCs). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b)

Total estimated cost: $511,621,168 (per year), includes $2,007,713 annualized capital or operation & 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 the EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When OMB approves this ICR, the Agency will announce that approval in the Federal Register and publish a technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 to display the OMB control number for the approved information collection activities contained in this final rule.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In making this determination, the EPA concludes that the impact of concern for this rule is any significant adverse economic impact on small entities and that the agency is certifying that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because the rule relieves regulatory burden on the small entities subject to ( printed page 37036) the rule. This action is modifying the hazard categories used for the existing reporting requirements by directly incorporating the OSHA hazard categories as the EPCRA hazard categories which will streamline reporting, reduce the time burden for completing the reports, reduce confusion between Federal and international chemical hazard classifications, and allow direct data transfer from the OSHA HCS required SDSs to the EPCRA hazardous chemical inventory forms. We have therefore concluded that this action will relieve regulatory burden for all directly regulated small entities.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million (adjusted annually for inflation) or more (in 1995 dollars) as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action implements mandate(s) specifically and explicitly set forth in the EPCRA statute [42 U.S.C. Chapter 116] without the exercise of any policy discretion by the EPA.

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

This action does not have Tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. It will not have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks that EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the definition of “covered regulatory action” in section 2-202 of the Executive Order. Therefore, this action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental health risk or safety risk. Since this action does not concern human health, EPA's Policy on Children's Health also does not apply.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use

This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

This proposed rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

This action is subject to the CRA, 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).

Endnotes

1. National Tier II Data Standard: https://cameo.noaa.gov/​epcra_​tier2/​data_​standard/​v1/​.

2. EPCRA Tier II Forms and Instructions: https://www.epa.gov/​epcra/​tier-ii-forms-and-instructions.

3. Online training for the implementing agencies, planners, and responders: https://www.epa.gov/​epcra/​epcra-non-section-313-online-training-states-tribes-lepcs-local-planners-and-responders.

4. National LEPC-TEPC Handbook: https://www.epa.gov/​epcra/​national-lepc-tepc-handbook.

5. SERC Contact Information: https://www.epa.gov/​epcra/​state-emergency-response-commissions-contacts and https://www.epa.gov/​epcra/​state-tier-ii-reporting-requirements-and-procedures.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the EPA amends Title 40, Chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

91 FR 37022