ACC’s High Phthalates Panel Statement on EPA’s Final Risk Evaluation for DIDP Under TSCA

WASHINGTON (Jan. 10, 2025) - Today, the American Chemistry Council's High Phthalates Panel issued the following statement on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) completion of a final manufacturer-requested risk evaluation for DIDP under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA):

"The ACC High Phthalates Panel recognizes the effort by EPA to generate a comprehensive risk evaluation for DIDP, that was requested in 2019 by the manufacturers of this substance under the 2016 amendments to TSCA.

"While ACC is still reviewing the final document in detail, High Phthalates Panel members welcome EPA's determination that DIDP does not pose unreasonable risk of injury to human health for consumers, the general population or to the environment.

"This conclusion reconfirms DIDP manufacturers' full confidence in the safety of DIDP as currently used.

"In the final risk evaluation, EPA concluded that 43 of the 49 industrial/commercial/consumer uses for DIDP are safe, which is approximately 99% of the produced volume. Uses such as PVC film and sheet, fabrics, textiles, and apparel, building and construction materials (wire or wiring systems, joint treatment, fireproof insulation), non-spray applications of paints and coatings, non-spray applications of adhesives and sealants, and recycling, to name a few, pose no unreasonable risk.

"This assessment of safety is key to manufacturer and consumer confidence: manufacturer-requested risk evaluations are an important tool for transparent, fair, and evidence-based risk evaluations and are the same level of rigor - the requirement to use the best available science and undergo expert peer review - as EPA-initiated risk evaluations.

"The final risk evaluation for DIDP also identified 6 conditions of use that pose unreasonable risk only to female workers of reproductive age. However, these conditions (workers spraying high concentration products at high pressure for 8 hours a day without protective equipment) are not likely to exist in industrial and commercial settings where automation and personal protective equipment is routinely used, and we question the relevance of the acute scenario used as a basis for the conclusions. While only 1% or less of the DIDP production volume in the U.S is in this application type (high-pressure spray), we are committed to continue working with EPA during the risk management process and to supporting all parts of the value chain.

"We look forward to EPA's completion of a final manufacturer-requested risk evaluation for DINP later this month."