For workers and businesses using imported chemicals, the word certification can suggest more protection than the document actually supplies. A U.S. Customs and Border Protection rule published December 27, 2016 concerns what an importer declares under the Toxic Substances Control Act, or TSCA. It does not turn that declaration into an agency finding that a chemical is safe. [2016-31055]

The August 29 proposal makes the distinction unusually clear. A positive certification asserts compliance with applicable TSCA rules and orders; a negative certification asserts that the chemicals are not subject to TSCA. Neither label is a rating of toxicity. The proposal supplies the explanation of those statements, rather than a second, independent assessment of the final rule's effects. [2016-20546][2016-31055]

The final text also limits when a statement is needed. A TSCA-excluded chemical clearly identified as such does not require the negative certification. Chemicals contained in articles require certification only when a TSCA rule or order demands it. Those boundaries matter because absence of a declaration cannot, by itself, tell a downstream user whether a product presents a hazard. [2016-31055]

CBP added an electronic filing option and ended paper blanket certifications, while retaining entry-specific written filing. It set January 26, 2017 for effectiveness. For the people beyond the border transaction, the useful distinction is between a record asserting legal compliance and evidence about exposure. These administrative documents establish the former process; they do not demonstrate that workplaces or households became safer. [2016-31055]

Source documents

  1. Toxic Substance Control Act Chemical Substance Import Certification Process Revisionshttps://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2016-12-27/html/2016-31055.htm
  2. Toxic Substance Control Act Chemical Substance Import Certification Process Revisionshttps://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2016-08-29/html/2016-20546.htm