Appellate Court Vacates EPA’s Methylene Chloride Exposure Rule
The Fifth Circuit vacated EPA’s 2024 methylene chloride exposure and risk rule.
Why it matters: Environmental and regulatory compliance teams must reevaluate safety counsel and litigation risks amid this major regulatory rollback.
- On September 15, 2026, the Fifth Circuit vacated EPA's 2024 methylene chloride risk management rule and risk determination.
- EPA’s rule had prohibited 40 of 53 methylene chloride use conditions and required a protection program for 13 uses.
- The court ruled EPA’s 'whole chemical' risk approach unlawful under TSCA’s Lautenberg Act, requiring condition-specific risk determinations.
- The court found EPA’s exposure limits unsupported by best science and excessive given economic and feasibility factors.
On September 15, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated the EPA's 2024 rule regulating methylene chloride under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The rule had prohibited 40 out of 53 evaluated use conditions for the solvent and imposed a Workplace Chemical Protection Program on 13 ongoing industrial and commercial uses.
The court found EPA's approach unlawful, holding that its "whole chemical" risk assessment conflicted with the Lautenberg Act's requirement to evaluate risks for each "condition of use." In its opinion, the court stated EPA "impermissibly shifted the burden on regulated entities to prove compliance" and failed to adequately weigh economic consequences and feasibility of alternatives.
Specifically, the court concluded that EPA’s occupational exposure limits were not based on the best available science. It ruled the agency exceeded its authority by regulating beyond addressing "unreasonable risk"—a standard that, under the Lautenberg amendments, demands balancing risks against economic and technical feasibility rather than pursuing zero risk or a precautionary framework.
This ruling represents a significant rollback of federal exposure limits for methylene chloride—a solvent used in paint stripping and manufacturing fields—and will require legal and compliance teams to reassess workplace safety policies and potential litigation exposure.
For more on the impact and analysis, see the court opinion and industry perspectives from Holland & Knight, Sidley Austin, and ArentFox Schiff.
By the numbers:
- 53 — conditions of methylene chloride use evaluated by EPA
- 40 — conditions prohibited under EPA's 2024 rule
- 13 — uses subject to Workplace Chemical Protection Program
What's next: EPA’s plans for revising methylene chloride regulation are not yet detailed, pending potential new rulemaking processes.