Trump exempts more chemical companies from emissions rules
A silicon wafer used in semiconductor manufacturing. On Monday, President Donald J. Trump exempted a number of additional facilities, including those that produce chemicals for semiconductors, from certain requirements under the Clean Air Act. Credit:
Shutterstock
President Donald J. Trump issued a proclamation on Monday that gives some chemical manufacturers an additional 2 years to comply with certain emissions rules under the Clean Air Act.
According to the proclamation, the Hazardous Organic National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (HON) rule “imposes substantial burdens on chemical manufacturers already operating under stringent regulations.” The HON rule regulates emissions of hazardous air pollutants by the synthetic organic chemical manufacturing industry. It was finalized in May 2024 during the Joe Biden administration.
The list of 20 exempted companies and facilities (PDF) produce vinyl, methanol, epoxy resins, elastomers, and other chemicals. It includes facilities in areas that have higher lifetime risk of cancer than the acceptable risk, including the Shintech complex in Plaquemine, Louisiana, and Westlake Vinyls in Calvert City, Kentucky.
According to a White House fact sheet on the proclamation, the companies make chemicals for semiconductors, medical device sterilization, advanced manufacturing, and national defense systems. It says that in the required equipment to comply with the HON rule is not commercially available, and that the industries are essential to the US’s national interests.
The companies and facilities given an extension in this proclamation are in addition to the more than 50 provided a 2-year extension by Trump on July 17 last year.
—Leigh Krietsch Boerner
New NSF policy would ban collaboration with many Chinese universities
The US National Science Foundation (NSF) is planning to introduce a new policy in October that would prohibit NSF-funded scientists from collaborating with entities flagged as national security risks by the US government. The policy would also ban senior and key personnel working on the funded projects from holding appointments with or receiving funding from these entities.
The restricted entities include hundreds of major Chinese companies and universities.
“The U.S. government has determined that the behavior of these entities warrants restrictions based on national security and other foreign policy interests,” the NSF says in its July 8 letter announcing the policy. “Therefore, NSF has determined research security risk mitigation for NSF-funded projects involving these restricted entities is not sufficient.”
In 2024, the NSF introduced a risk-mitigation framework called the Trusted Research Using Safeguards and Transparency (TRUST) to assess grant proposals on a case-by-case basis for potential national security risks. The goal of the framework, according to the NSF Office of the Chief of Research Security Strategy and Policy, was to “identify minimally disruptive risk mitigation measures, wherever possible” that would allow researchers “to continue to do their work and continue to collaborate internationally.”
When asked by C&EN, the NSF did not comment on whether this new policy would completely replace TRUST, which the agency began rolling out in November 2024. A spokesperson from the agency says in an email that the new restrictions are in alignment with the Department of Defense, which updated its research security initiatives earlier this year.
John Moolenaar, chairman of the House of Representatives Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party, called the agency’s new policy “commendable” and recommended that all federal agencies follow suit. In May, Moolenaar introduced legislation that would codify similar collaboration bans—like the one the NSF is proposing—across the federal government.
Once the policy goes into effect, institutions submitting proposals will have to certify that they’re in compliance. The NSF says any questions about the policy can be directed to [email protected].
—Krystal Vasquez
FDA urges formula industry to improve protections against contaminants
The US Food and Drug Administration issued a letter this week to the infant formula industry calling for increased vigilance against contaminants in formula products.
The letter comes on the heels of two multistate infant botulism outbreaks tied to infant formula contaminated with Clostridium botulinum. In November 2025, the FDA and US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention began investigating an outbreak of infant botulism tied to ByHeart powdered infant formula. Nearly 50 infants with confirmed or suspected cases who consumed the formula were hospitalized, and FDA inspections found the disease-causing bacteria in whole milk powder produced by Organic West Milk, a ByHeart supplier. On June 13, the FDA announced a second investigation into an outbreak tied to formula produced by Nara Organics, which also used whole milk powder from Organic West Milk.
Furthermore, nearly 150 cases of cereulide intoxication—a form of food poisoning caused by a toxin produced by Bacillus cereus—were reported between December 2025 and February 2026 across 10 countries; investigations have identified a contaminated formula ingredient as the source. Nestlé, one of the companies whose formula was affected, said it traced the issue to contaminated arachidonic acid oil, a finding that has been backed by other investigations.
In the letter, the FDA exhorts formula manufacturers to “know your suppliers.” According to federal regulations, manufacturers are required to implement food safety plans with their supply chain partners, the letter notes. “FDA expects manufacturers to exercise substantive oversight of their suppliers, including understanding where their ingredients come from, how they are produced, what risks they may carry, and whether those risks are being effectively controlled,” it states.
The FDA acknowledges “challenges” in managing infant formula contamination risks and emphasizes its commitment to working with industry in this area, including through its support of the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene, which is overseen by the Food and Agriculture Organization together with the World Health Organization.
The FDA did not respond to a request for comment.
—Yaakov Zinberg, special to C&EN
