CHEMICAL SAFETYNew Approach MethodologiesTSCA Implementation
Environmental Protection Agency

🧬 EPA NAMs Strategy

New Approach Methodologies for Chemical Safety Assessment

Written by J Radler | Patient Analog
Last updated: January 2025

Regulatory Highlights

← Back to Regulatory

💊 Why This Matters

The EPA NAMs strategy represents the most ambitious government commitment to eliminating animal testing for chemical safety. With 40,000+ chemicals in commerce and new substances constantly entering the market, traditional animal testing creates massive bottlenecks—taking years and costing millions per chemical.

🔬 For Scientists: NAMs provide mechanistic insights into human toxicity pathways that animal models cannot deliver. High-throughput screening enables testing at scales impossible with traditional methods.

🧪 For Industry: Faster chemical approvals, reduced testing costs ($50K vs $2M+ per chemical), and elimination of regulatory uncertainty around animal test requirements.

🌍 For Society: Protection from chemical hazards based on human biology, not rodent surrogates. Accelerated evaluation of emerging threats like PFAS "forever chemicals."

📅 Historical Timeline

1976 - TSCA Original Enactment
Toxic Substances Control Act gives EPA authority to regulate chemicals. Animal testing becomes default method for safety assessment.
2007 - NRC Report Published
National Research Council publishes "Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century," calling for paradigm shift to high-throughput, human-relevant methods. Catalyzes federal NAMs development.
2009 - ToxCast Launch
🧫 EPA initiates ToxCast program for high-throughput screening. Partnership with NIH/NIEHS creates Tox21 collaboration. First public release of chemical screening data.
2016 - TSCA Modernization
Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act mandates EPA to "reduce and replace" vertebrate animal testing. First legislative requirement for NAMs adoption.
2019 - NAMs Strategic Plan
🎯 Administrator Wheeler announces historic commitment: Eliminate all mammalian study requests by 2035. Establishes interim reduction targets and dedicated NAMs workplan.
2020 - CompTox Dashboard Expansion
Public database reaches 900,000+ chemicals. Integrates ToxCast data, QSAR models, exposure predictions. Becomes primary resource for regulatory NAMs.
2021 - PFAS NAMs Application
EPA applies NAMs-first approach to PFAS evaluation. Demonstrates feasibility of animal-free chemical assessment for entire substance class.
2023 - IRIS NAMs Integration
Integrated Risk Information System begins incorporating NAMs data into chemical assessments. Establishes precedent for regulatory acceptance.
2025-2035 - Phased Implementation
📊 Reduction Targets: 30% by 2025 | 50% by 2030 | 100% elimination by 2035. Full transition to human-relevant chemical safety assessment.

📋 Key Provisions (Plain English)

🎯 2035 Elimination Goal

What it means: By 2035, EPA will completely stop requiring or conducting mammalian animal tests for chemical safety. All assessments will use NAMs instead.

Impact: Saves millions of animal lives annually while improving human health protection.

📉 Interim Reduction Targets

What it means: EPA must reduce mammalian testing requests by 30% by 2025 and 50% by 2030. Progress tracked and publicly reported.

Impact: Creates accountability and ensures steady progress toward animal-free testing.

🧬 TSCA Integration

What it means: Under Toxic Substances Control Act authority, EPA must use NAMs "to the extent practicable" for all chemical evaluations.

Impact: Legal mandate ensures NAMs become default testing approach, not optional alternative.

🔬 ToxCast/Tox21 Programs

What it means: High-throughput screening programs test thousands of chemicals across hundreds of assays. All data made publicly available for free.

Impact: Creates world's largest chemical toxicity database, enabling rapid hazard screening.

💻 CompTox Dashboard

What it means: Free online database with NAMs data, structure info, and predictions for 900,000+ chemicals. Open access for anyone worldwide.

Impact: Democratizes access to chemical safety data, supporting research and regulation globally.

🫁 PFAS NAMs Application

What it means: NAMs-first approach for "forever chemicals" assessment. Demonstrates feasibility for entire chemical classes, not just individual substances.

Impact: Accelerates evaluation of thousands of PFAS compounds threatening public health.

⚖️ NAMs vs Traditional Animal Testing

Factor Traditional Animal Testing NAMs Approach
⏱️ Time 2-5 years per chemical Days to weeks
💰 Cost $2-5 million per chemical $10,000-50,000 per chemical
🔬 Throughput 10-50 chemicals per year 1,000+ chemicals per year
🧬 Human Relevance Rodent biology (60-70% predictive) Human cells/pathways (85-95% predictive)
📊 Data Richness Limited endpoints (mortality, tumors) Mechanistic pathways, dose-response curves
🐁 Animal Use 500-5,000 animals per chemical Zero animals
🌍 Scalability Limited by animal facilities Highly scalable automation
🔄 Reproducibility Variable (biological variation) High (standardized protocols)

✅ NAMs Implementation Checklist

For Organizations Transitioning to NAMs:

🎯 Real-World Impact Examples

🫁 PFAS "Forever Chemicals" Assessment

Challenge: Thousands of PFAS compounds contaminating water supplies. Traditional testing would take decades and millions of animals.
NAMs Solution: ToxCast screening + QSAR modeling evaluated 5,000+ PFAS in 18 months. Identified priority compounds for regulatory action.
Results:
✓ 98% faster than animal testing
✓ $50M+ in cost savings
✓ Zero animals used
✓ Enabled drinking water standards development

🧪 Industrial Chemical Screening

Challenge: 40,000+ chemicals in commerce with limited safety data. Traditional testing backlog would take centuries.
NAMs Solution: ToxCast high-throughput screening across 700+ assays. Prioritized high-risk chemicals for regulatory review.
Results:
✓ 10,000+ chemicals screened
✓ 1,000x faster than traditional methods
✓ Identified endocrine disruptors, neurotoxins
✓ Public database enables global research

🧬 Pesticide Toxicity Evaluation

Challenge: Evaluate new pesticide formulations for human health impacts without multi-year animal studies.
NAMs Solution: Integrated approach using in vitro assays, computational toxicology, and human cell-based models.
Results:
✓ Assessment time reduced from 5 years to 6 months
✓ Better prediction of human neurotoxicity
✓ Cost reduction: $3M → $200K per chemical
✓ EPA accepted for regulatory decision-making

🩸 Flame Retardant Safety Review

Challenge: Widespread flame retardant exposure but insufficient traditional toxicity data for risk assessment.
NAMs Solution: Combined ToxCast data, read-across approaches, and adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) for chemical class evaluation.
Results:
✓ Evaluated 50+ flame retardants simultaneously
✓ Identified thyroid hormone disruption mechanisms
✓ Informed EPA regulatory restrictions
✓ Avoided estimated 20,000+ animal tests

❓ Frequently Asked Questions

What are New Approach Methodologies (NAMs)?
+
When will EPA eliminate animal testing requirements?
+
What is ToxCast and how does it work?
+
How does TSCA mandate NAMs?
+
What is the CompTox Dashboard?
+
Are NAMs as accurate as animal tests?
+
How much does NAMs testing cost compared to animal studies?
+
What is the Tox21 program?
+
How are PFAS being evaluated with NAMs?
+
What industries are most affected by NAMs transition?
+
How can companies submit NAMs data to EPA?
+
What international collaboration exists for NAMs?
+
How does EPA track progress toward 2035 goal?
+
What training resources are available for NAMs?
+

📚 Official Resources

🔗 EPA NAMs Work Plan (2019)

Administrator Wheeler's strategic vision for eliminating mammalian testing by 2035. Comprehensive roadmap with timelines, milestones, and accountability measures.

→ epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca

🔗 CompTox Chemicals Dashboard

Free public database with NAMs data for 900,000+ chemicals. Search, download, and analyze chemical safety information. Includes ToxCast results, QSAR predictions, and exposure estimates.

→ comptox.epa.gov/dashboard

🔗 ToxCast Data Portal

High-throughput screening results for 10,000+ chemicals across 700+ assays. Download raw data, view interactive visualizations, access API for programmatic queries.

→ epa.gov/chemical-research/toxicity-forecaster-toxcasttm-data

🔗 TSCA Section 4 Guidance

Official EPA guidance on reducing animal testing under TSCA authority. Legal requirements, acceptance criteria, and submission procedures for NAMs data.

→ epa.gov/tsca-section-4

🔗 Tox21 Program Portal

Interagency collaboration (EPA, NIH, FDA) for NAMs development. Access screening data, assay protocols, and validation reports.

→ tox21.gov

🔗 IRIS NAMs Integration

Integrated Risk Information System updates incorporating NAMs data into chemical assessments. Case studies and methodology documentation.

→ epa.gov/iris

🔗 PFAS NAMs Approach

EPA's NAMs-first strategy for PFAS "forever chemicals" assessment. Demonstrates feasibility of animal-free evaluation for entire chemical classes.

→ epa.gov/pfas

🔗 Contact EPA TSCA Hotline

Direct technical assistance for NAMs submissions and TSCA compliance questions.

📧 TSCAHotline@epa.gov
📞 (202) 554-1404
INTERNATIONAL
OECD Guidelines →
Global NAMs harmonization
EUROPE
EMA 3Rs Framework →
European alternative methods
PHARMA
FDA Modernization Act 2.0 →
Drug development NAMs
NIH PROGRAM
NCATS Tissue Chip →
Microphysiological systems
→ Regulatory Hub

Traditional vs. New Approach Methodologies

Aspect Animal Testing Organ-on-Chip / NAMs
Human Relevance Species differences cause 90% failure rate in translating animal results to humans Uses human cells and tissues, directly predicting human responses
Timeline 18-24 months for preclinical animal studies 2-8 weeks for organ chip validation
Cost per Test $10,000-$50,000 per animal study $500-$5,000 per chip experiment
Throughput Limited by animal housing, breeding, and care requirements High-throughput screening of hundreds of compounds simultaneously
Ethical Concerns Involves suffering and sacrifice of millions of animals annually No animal use, aligns with 3Rs principles
Regulatory Status Traditional requirement, but no longer mandatory under FDA Modernization Act 2.0 Increasingly accepted by FDA, EMA, and OECD for regulatory submissions
Personalization Inbred strains, cannot model human genetic diversity Patient-derived cells enable precision medicine approaches
Data Quality Qualitative histology, limited molecular endpoints Real-time biosensors, multi-omics, functional assays

Related Content

⚡

New Approach Methodologies

Explore NAMs technologies replacing animal testing
🔬

Organ-on-Chip Systems

Discover microfluidic platforms for drug testing
💊

Drug Discovery Applications

See how organ chips accelerate development
📋

Regulatory Submission Guide

Learn how to submit NAMs data to agencies

Frequently Asked Questions

What are EPA New Approach Methodologies?

EPA NAMs are alternative testing methods including computational models, in vitro assays, organ-on-chip systems, and high-throughput screening that reduce, refine, or replace animal testing for chemical safety assessment under TSCA and FIFRA.

When did EPA commit to reducing animal testing?

In September 2019, EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler announced the agency would reduce mammal study requests by 30 percent by 2025 and eliminate them entirely by 2035, making EPA the first U.S. regulatory agency with concrete animal reduction goals.

What is the CompTox Chemicals Dashboard?

EPA free online resource providing toxicity data, exposure information, and computational predictions for over 900,000 chemicals. It integrates NAMs data from ToxCast, Tox21, and other programs to support chemical risk assessment without animal testing.

How does EPA validate alternative methods?

EPA works with OECD, NICEATM, and industry to validate NAMs through performance standards, demonstrating predictions match or exceed animal test accuracy for specific regulatory decisions. Validation studies compare NAMs against human health outcomes.

What is ToxCast and how does it work?

ToxCast is EPA high-throughput screening program testing thousands of chemicals across 700 plus biological assays to identify potential health hazards. Data informs prioritization for further testing and development of predictive models.

Can EPA accept organ-on-chip data for pesticide registration?

Yes, EPA has accepted organ-chip and microphysiological system data for specific applications under FIFRA. Companies can submit NAMs data with Scientific Advisory Panel consultation to support safety conclusions for pesticide active ingredients.

What is the Strategic Plan to Reduce Animal Testing?

EPA roadmap outlining specific actions to achieve 2035 goal including expanding high-throughput screening, developing computational toxicology models, validating organ-chip platforms, and training staff in NAMs interpretation and acceptance.

How does EPA Safer Choice program use NAMs?

Safer Choice evaluates cleaning products using NAMs including QSAR models, read-across approaches, and in vitro data rather than requiring new animal testing. This allows faster certification of safer chemical alternatives.

What role does EPA play in OECD test guideline development?

EPA actively participates in OECD working groups developing and validating alternative test guidelines. U.S. contributions include ToxCast data, organ-chip validation studies, and computational model performance assessments.

How can companies engage with EPA on NAMs?

Companies can participate in EPA workshops, join stakeholder meetings, submit data through Office of Pesticide Programs or Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, and request Scientific Advisory Panel review of novel NAMs approaches.