Printing Ink Manufacturing (United States) — NAICS 325910

An investor's primer for both public-market and private investors.

1. Overview

Printing ink manufacturing is the business of turning pigments, resins, solvents, and additives into the liquid and paste inks that printing presses lay onto paper, cardboard, plastic film, metal, and labels. It is a small, mature, business-to-business industrial-chemicals niche — U.S. establishments shipped about $4.56 billion of product in 2022 [2] and the sector employed roughly 9,170 people across 306 establishments in 2023 [1]. Ink is a classic "picks-and-shovels" input: nobody buys ink for its own sake, but almost every packaged good, label, book, and carton carries it.

Why an investor should care: the demand story has flipped over the last two decades. The old core — newspapers, magazines, catalogs, commercial print — is in structural decline as readers and advertisers move online, while packaging ink (food boxes, flexible film, corrugated shipping cartons, labels) and digital/inkjet ink are growing and now drive the industry [10]. So this is not a dying business; it is a shrinking-on-one-end, growing-on-the-other business where the winners have repositioned toward packaging and specialty chemistries.

Ways in differ sharply by investor type. For public-market investors there is essentially no U.S.-listed pure-play ink maker — the largest domestic producers are subsidiaries of foreign-listed Japanese conglomerates or owned by private equity, so public exposure means buying an overseas parent or a diversified chemicals company where ink is a slice (see §4 and §10). For private investors, the field is richer: family-owned and employee-owned independents, private-equity-backed platforms, and roll-up/consolidation plays are the norm.

2. What it is and how it's structured

NAICS (North American Industry Classification System) code 325910 covers establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing printing and inkjet inks — including gravure, flexographic, lithographic (offset), screen, and letterpress inks, plus digital/inkjet inks and filled inkjet ink cartridges [15]. Note that laser toner and toner cartridges are classified elsewhere — a boundary that makes many purported market-size comparisons unreliable.

What it excludes (adjacent codes an investor should not conflate):

• 325510 — Paint and Coating Manufacturing: architectural and industrial paints/coatings. Related chemistry, different product and buyers.
• 325130 — Synthetic Organic Pigment / Dye Manufacturing: makes the colorants that go into ink; this is an upstream supplier, not the ink maker.
• 323111 and other 323xxx — Printing and Related Support Activities: the commercial printers and packaging converters that buy and use ink — the industry's customers, not this industry.
• Dry electrophotographic toner for copiers/laser printers is generally classified elsewhere, not here.

Manufacturing process. At its simplest, ink is a dispersion of pigments or dyes in a "vehicle" comprising binders or resins, oils, solvents or water, plus additives. The EPA's process description identifies vehicle preparation, pigment mixing, milling or grinding, flushing, and final formulation as the main manufacturing steps [16]. Traditional paste inks may involve heated resin-and-oil vehicles; flexographic and gravure inks are typically lower-viscosity systems that dry through solvent or water evaporation.

Service intensity. Commercially, the product is rarely a commodity sold solely by the pound. Formulations must be matched to a specific press, substrate, curing system, and customer color standard. Suppliers perform laboratory matching, press trials, quality control, and troubleshooting; large accounts may have an on-site "ink kitchen" or blending operation. Siegwerk, for example, manufactures standardized bases at centralized facilities and customizes them through local blending centers [17]. Sun Chemical describes press-side technical support, color matching, tailored formulations, and just-in-time delivery as part of the offering [18]. This service component creates switching costs: an ink that is cheaper per pound can be more expensive if it increases press downtime, substrate waste, curing problems, or rejected color.

Ownership mix. The domestic industry is dominated by U.S. operating subsidiaries of large foreign multinationals, alongside private independents:

• Foreign-owned multinationals run the biggest U.S. plants — Sun Chemical (owned by Japan's DIC Corporation) [7], INX International (owned by Japan's Sakata INX) [9], Flint Group (privately held), Siegwerk and hubergroup (German family firms, though hubergroup was acquired in 2024 by MAVCO Investments and funds managed by Avenue Capital [19]).
• Independent, privately held U.S. firms — e.g., employee-owned Wikoff Color and family-run Nazdar — compete in service-intensive niches [13][20].
• Only a handful of small operators fit the U.S. Small Business Administration definition of "small" for this industry, which is set at up to 750 employees [3]; most named players are far larger globally but their U.S. establishments are what the federal data counts.

3. How big it is

Federal ground-truth figures (prefer these over private market-research estimates):

That implies average pay in the low-to-mid $70,000s and revenue per employee near $500,000 — capital-and-materials-intensive, not labor-intensive.

Private market-research houses put the U.S. printing-ink market around $4.7–4.9 billion in 2024–2025, growing at a low single-digit rate (roughly 2–3% a year) toward the mid-$5-billion range by the early 2030s [4][5] — broadly consistent with the federal receipts figure. Globally the market is far larger, estimated in the $18–22 billion range depending on scope [11][14]. Ink World's 2025 international ranking reported global ink-related sales of $3.7 billion for DIC including Sun Chemical, $1.6 billion each for Flint Group and Sakata INX, $1.5 billion for Siegwerk, $1.1 billion for artience (formerly Toyo Ink SC Holdings), and $860 million for hubergroup — useful indicators of global scale, though some groups also sell coatings, adhesives, pigments, and other adjacent products [19].

Undercount / interpretation caveats. Unlike industries dominated by tiny sole proprietors or government, this is a consolidated industrial sector, so the federal establishment count is reasonably representative of domestic activity. Two honest caveats: (1) the Census figures capture U.S. establishments only — the true economic actors are multinationals whose worldwide ink revenue dwarfs their American footprint (DIC group net sales were about $6.9 billion in 2024 [6]); and (2) some ink is made captively inside large packaging or printing companies and may be classified under their industry codes rather than here.

4. The investable universe

There is no U.S.-listed pure-play printing-ink company. The largest domestic producers are either subsidiaries of foreign-listed parents or privately held. Public exposure therefore comes indirectly.

Publicly traded (mostly foreign-listed parents):

Private / privately held (not investable on public exchanges):

• Sun Chemical (Parsippany, NJ) — the largest U.S. producer; wholly owned by DIC [7]. Ink sales ~$2.9B [6].
• Flint Group (Luxembourg HQ, large U.S. operations) — ~$1.6B global ink sales, ~5,000 employees; owned since 2014 by Goldman Sachs' merchant-banking arm and Koch Industries' Koch Equity Development, after a 2023 debt recapitalization [8][19].
• INX International (Schaumburg, IL) — #3 in North America, 25+ plants; a Sakata INX subsidiary [9][23].
• Siegwerk (~$1.5B global ink sales) — German family-owned [17][19].
• hubergroup (~$860M global ink sales) — acquired in 2024 by MAVCO Investments and Avenue Capital funds [19].
• Wikoff Color (Fort Mill, SC) — employee-owned independent, 500–1,000 employees [13]; Nazdar — privately owned screen/digital specialist [20].
• ALTANA (owned by SKion, the Susanne Klatten holding) and SICPA (Swiss, security inks) — private, ink-adjacent.

Takeaway: for a public-market investor, the cleanest ink-heavy exposure is a Japanese-listed parent (DIC, Sakata INX, artience); U.S.-listed names (Ashland, DuPont, Fujifilm) give only diluted exposure. Concentrated ink bets are largely a private-market game.

5. How the money works

Ink is a formulate-blend-and-ship spread business. Owners make money on the gap between the selling price of a formulated ink and the cost of its raw materials — chiefly pigments (color), resins/varnishes (the binder), solvents (water or organic), and functional additives, many of them petroleum- and natural-gas-derived (styrene, benzene, propylene feedstocks), plus titanium dioxide for whites and opacity [12]. White packaging inks can consume significant titanium dioxide; black inks depend heavily on carbon black; many flexible-packaging inks use nitrocellulose or polyurethane chemistry. Raw materials are the dominant cost line.

The economics an investor should watch:

• Gross spread over raw materials, and the speed of price pass-through. When pigment, resin, or oil prices spike, margins compress until the ink maker can raise prices — a lag of one to several quarters. Ink makers buy relatively small volumes versus giant chemical buyers, so they have limited purchasing leverage and are price-takers on inputs. DIC's ink-heavy Packaging & Graphic segment ran an operating margin near 5.7% in fiscal 2025 (operating income ~¥31B on ~¥550B of sales) — a useful proxy for how thin the pure-ink spread is [21]. Several inputs share petrochemical feedstocks, so oil, refinery availability, and chemical-plant outages can affect resins, solvents, and intermediates simultaneously. Flint Group has cited esters, conventional and UV resins, pigments, titanium dioxide, organic chemicals, packaging, and freight as sources of broad ink-cost inflation, and in July 2025 announced another increase specifically for nitrocellulose-containing products [24][25].
• Volume × mix. Commodity publication inks are low-margin and shrinking; packaging, specialty, UV/LED-curable, low-migration, and digital inks carry richer margins and are growing [10]. Mix shift toward specialty is the main margin lever.
• Capacity utilization and logistics. Ink is heavy, sometimes hazardous, and expensive to ship far, so producers run regional plant networks close to converters/printers. High utilization spreads fixed costs; underused capacity is a drag (a reason European margins have historically lagged).
• Technical service and switching costs. Inks are qualified to a specific press, substrate, and (for food) migration spec. That qualification work makes customers sticky and lets service-heavy independents defend share against price competition.
• Cyclicality by end market. Food, beverage, household-product, and pharmaceutical packaging is comparatively defensive. Advertising, commercial print, magazines, and newspapers are exposed to economic activity as well as structural decline. Inventory corrections at converters can amplify short-term movements because ink purchases may fall faster than consumer package volumes when customers destock.

In short: profits come from spread management, specialty mix, and regional scale, not from unit growth. This is a cyclical, input-cost-sensitive, low-to-mid-single-digit-margin manufacturing business — reward comes from operating discipline and premium chemistries, not volume expansion.

6. What drives demand

• Packaging is the growth engine. Packaging already accounts for the majority of ink demand (~55–56% globally) and is the fastest-growing end use (~4% a year), pulled by food/beverage, e-commerce parcels, and flexible film [11][10]. The Flexible Packaging Association reported that U.S. flexible-packaging sales increased from $41.4 billion in 2023 to $42.6 billion in 2024, growth of 2.9% — that is the size of a major customer market, not the printing-ink market itself [26]. As long as physical goods ship and sell, packaging ink demand grows.
• Publication/commercial print is in structural decline. Newspapers, magazines, catalogs, and directories keep losing volume to digital media, steadily shrinking demand for traditional offset and gravure inks [10]. Lithographic (offset) ink is still the single largest U.S. category (~47% of the market) but its base is eroding [4]. HP's fiscal-2025 Supplies revenue declined 3.4%, which it attributed primarily to lower installed-base usage and currency effects, partly offset by pricing — HP is not a proxy for packaging ink, but its filing is evidence of the pressure on home and office print consumption [27].
• Digital and specialty inks are outgrowing the average. Inkjet/digital inks and UV-LED-curable and water-based chemistries are growing high-single-digits, driven by short-run and personalized printing, energy savings, and low-VOC (volatile organic compound) mandates [10][5]. Digital printing substitutes for offset plates and conventional ink in short-run and variable-data work while creating demand for high-value inkjet fluids; the winners may be OEM-qualified digital-ink suppliers rather than incumbent publication-ink plants, because printhead compatibility and equipment certification are important barriers.
• Consumer spending and industrial output. Ink volume tracks packaged-goods consumption and general economic activity — it is cyclical, softening in recessions and destocking cycles.
• Sustainability mandates from brand owners. Consumer-goods companies increasingly require recyclable/compostable packaging and food-safe, low-migration, mineral-oil-free inks, steering demand toward reformulated products [11]. EPA identifies waterborne, UV-cured, and high-solids inks as lower-VOC/HAP alternatives [28]. Recyclability creates both opportunity and risk: ink and coating suppliers can help replace foil, laminates, or multi-material structures, but poorly chosen pigments, binders, or coatings may interfere with recycling or contaminate recovered resin and fiber.

7. Regulation

Printing ink is regulated mainly through product safety, worker safety, and environmental-emissions rules rather than a single industry regulator.

• Food-contact safety (FDA). The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) treats printing inks on food packaging as indirect food additives under 21 CFR Parts 170–189. There is no single ink-specific regulation; inks are judged by the "no migration" principle, the "functional barrier" concept, and the FDA's general safety and good-manufacturing-practice requirements — meaning ink components must not migrate into food above safe limits [11]. Importantly, FDA does not grant a blanket approval to an "FDA-approved ink" — the regulatory status depends on each component reasonably expected to migrate into food, its intended conditions of use, and whether it is covered by a regulation, GRAS status, prior sanction, threshold exemption, or effective Food Contact Notification [29]. FDA has identified more than 5,000 substances and components potentially used in inks on the exterior of U.S. food packaging and is studying possible migration of UV photoinitiators [30]. This has driven the shift to low-migration and mineral-oil-free inks (limiting MOAH/MOSH — mineral-oil aromatic/saturated hydrocarbons) [11].
• Air emissions (EPA and states). Solvent-based inks emit VOCs; the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and state air rules (notably California) push producers and printers toward water-based, UV/LED-cured, and electron-beam inks that cut or eliminate VOC emissions [28]. At the downstream printer, solvent evaporation from ink fountains, presses, dryers, cleaning, and mixing is a major emissions pathway [31].
• Chemical safety (TSCA/OSHA). Ingredients are governed by the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) inventory rules; plants are subject to Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) hazardous-materials and worker-exposure standards, plus hazmat transport rules. EPA's TSCA PFAS rule requires covered manufacturers and importers to report historical uses, volumes, disposal, exposure, and hazard information [32].
• Global spillover. European Union food-contact and packaging rules and brand-owner specifications effectively set global reformulation standards, since multinational customers demand one compliant product line worldwide.

Regulation is a cost and a moat: compliance is expensive, but it favors scaled, technically sophisticated producers and raises the bar for low-cost entrants.

8. Competitive dynamics and consolidation

The U.S. industry is moderately-to-highly concentrated at the top, with a long independent tail. Federal concentration data for 2022 show the top 4 firms held 47.2% of receipts, the top 8 60.4%, the top 20 77.2%, and the top 50 92.3%, with a Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) of 667 [2]. (An HHI below 1,500 is generally considered unconcentrated by antitrust screens, so despite a few dominant names the market is not a tight oligopoly — a large fringe of smaller independents still competes.)

Structure and forces:

• A few global giants set the tone. DIC/Sun Chemical, Flint Group, and Sakata INX/INX International anchor the top of the U.S. market; Siegwerk, artience, and hubergroup add global scale [6][19].
• Decades of consolidation. The industry has consolidated heavily as publication volumes fell — Flint Group itself was assembled from multiple ink businesses and has passed through several private-equity owners (CVC, then Goldman Sachs/Koch) [8]; DIC and Sun Chemical, and Sakata INX and INX, are consolidation stories in their own right, and bolt-on acquisitions of specialty and digital-ink businesses continue [7][9].
• Independents survive on service and niches. Employee- and family-owned firms (Wikoff, Nazdar) compete on custom formulation, speed, and technical service rather than price [13][20].
• Suppliers squeeze the middle. Pigment and resin suppliers (upstream) and large packaging/print buyers (downstream) both have bargaining power, keeping ink-maker margins thin [12].

9. Risks

• Secular decline in publication print. The shrinking newspaper/magazine/catalog base is a permanent headwind for producers not repositioned toward packaging and digital [10].
• Raw-material cost volatility. Pigments, resins, solvents, and titanium dioxide swing with oil, gas, and specialty-chemical markets; margins compress whenever price pass-through lags input spikes [12].
• Supply-chain and tariff exposure. Many organic pigments (e.g., quinacridone, phthalocyanine) are China-centric; 2025 Section 301 tariffs — including a 25% duty on Chinese titanium dioxide — lifted pigment prices roughly 10–15% and are pushing costly supplier diversification and longer qualification lead times [12]. Specialized pigments, photoinitiators, and resins can have few qualified sources; customers may require lengthy qualification before accepting a substitute raw material.
• Cyclicality. Volumes track packaged-goods demand and industrial output and fall in recessions and inventory destocking.
• Regulatory and reformulation cost. Tightening food-contact, VOC, and sustainability rules force continual (expensive) reformulation; falling behind risks losing brand-owner qualification [11]. PFAS, heavy metals, and mineral oils create reformulation, reporting, and legacy-liability exposure [32].
• Thin margins / capital intensity. Low single-digit-to-mid-single-digit operating margins leave little buffer; regional plant networks are costly to run at low utilization [6][21].
• Ownership opacity for public investors. Because the biggest U.S. producers are foreign-owned or PE-owned, public investors get either indirect/diluted exposure or none — and PE-owned platforms carry leverage risk [8].

10. How to invest and the outlook

Public-market routes (indirect). With no U.S.-listed pure play, the ink-heaviest public exposure is via Japanese-listed parents — DIC Corporation (Tokyo: 4631), the world's ink leader and Sun Chemical's owner; Sakata INX (Tokyo: 4633); and artience (Tokyo: 4634) — accessible to U.S. investors through international brokerage or over-the-counter (OTC) tickers, with the usual currency and disclosure caveats [6][7][9][22]. Fujifilm (FUJIY), Ashland (ASH), and DuPont (DD) offer only a thin, diversified sliver of ink/ink-chemistry exposure inside much larger businesses. Reserve any judgments on valuation, dividend yield, or share price for security-specific analysis; at the industry level this is a low-growth, cyclical chemicals space.

Private-market routes (direct). This is where concentrated ink bets actually live: acquiring or backing independent regional producers (custom/specialty ink makers with sticky, service-based customer relationships), private-equity platform and roll-up strategies (the Flint Group template of consolidating fragmented ink and print-consumables assets [8]), and specialty/technology niches — UV-LED-curable, water-based flexo, electron-beam, low-migration food-safe, and digital/inkjet inks — that command premium margins and are growing faster than the commodity core [5][10]. Likely diligence priorities include customer and supplier concentration, formula ownership, change-of-control qualification rights, environmental history, food-contact documentation, obsolete inventory, plant utilization, and how much EBITDA depends on underpriced technical service. The prevalence of family, employee, and sponsor ownership suggests transactions will often be bilateral rather than public auctions.

Near-term drivers to watch: (1) the packaging-vs-publication mix — value accrues to producers levered to packaging and digital, not legacy offset [10]; (2) raw-material and tariff costs — titanium dioxide and organic-pigment prices and supply diversification will drive margins in 2025–2026 [12]; (3) sustainability reformulation — brand-owner demand for recyclable, mineral-oil-free, low-VOC inks favors technically capable, scaled producers [11]; and (4) consolidation — expect continued bolt-on M&A of specialty and digital-ink businesses by the global majors and PE platforms [8].

Forward-looking judgment: the U.S. ink industry is a mature, low-single-digit-growth, cyclical B2B chemicals business whose center of gravity has shifted decisively from publication to packaging and digital. It rewards operators who manage input-cost spreads, run efficient regional networks, and win the specialty/sustainable-chemistry mix — and it offers public investors little direct access, making it primarily a private-market and international-equity story.

---

Sources

1. U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns 2023 (NAICS 325910, Printing Ink Manufacturing), 2023. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/cbp.html
2. U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 Economic Census — Concentration Statistics (NAICS 325910), 2022. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/economic-census.html
3. U.S. Small Business Administration, Table of Small Business Size Standards (NAICS 325910 = 750 employees), 2023. https://www.sba.gov/document/support-table-size-standards
4. Polaris Market Research, U.S. Printing Inks Market Size, Analysis & Forecast 2034, 2025. https://www.polarismarketresearch.com/industry-analysis/us-printing-inks-market
5. Mordor Intelligence, United States Printing Inks Market — Industry Analysis, Size & Growth Trends, 2025. https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/united-states-printing-inks-market
6. Ink World Magazine, DIC Reports 2024 Financial Results and 2024 Top International Ink Companies Report, 2025. https://www.inkworldmagazine.com/breaking-news/dic-reports-2024-financial-results/
7. Sun Chemical, About Us (Sun Chemical, a member of the DIC group since 1986), 2025. https://www.sunchemical.com/about/
8. PI World, Acquisition of Flint Group by Goldman Sachs and Koch Industries Subsidiary Completed, 2014/2023. https://www.piworld.com/article/acquisition-of-flint-group-by-goldman-sachs-koch-industries-subsidiary-completed/
9. INX International Ink Co., Company Overview (part of Sakata INX; #3 producer in North America), 2025. https://www.inxinternational.com/company/overview
10. Smithers, Digital and Packaging to Power Growth in Global Print, 2024. https://www.smithers.com/resources/2024/january/digital-and-packaging-to-power-growth-in-global-pr
11. Steptoe / Food Safety Magazine, FDA Regulation of Printing Inks and The Use of Printing Inks for Food Packaging in the United States, 2021. https://www.food-safety.com/articles/7001-the-use-of-printing-inks-for-food-packaging-in-the-united-states
12. Ink World Magazine, The 2025 Pigment Market (tariffs, titanium dioxide, pigment supply), 2025. https://www.inkworldmagazine.com/the-2025-pigment-market/
13. Wikoff Color Corporation, About Wikoff — Employee-Owned Printing Ink & Coatings Partner, 2025. https://wikoff.com/company/
14. Persistence Market Research, Printing Inks Market Size, Share & Growth Analysis, 2024. https://www.persistencemarketresearch.com/market-research/printing-inks-market.asp
15. U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 NAICS Definition: 325910 Printing Ink Manufacturing, 2022. https://www.census.gov/naics/?details=325&input=325&year=2022
16. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, AP-42 Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors — Printing Ink Manufacturing, 2024. https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-04/ap42_2nded_withsupps1_4_march1975.pdf
17. Siegwerk, Facts & Figures (operating model and blending centers), 2025. https://www.siegwerk.com/en/company/facts-figures.html
18. Sun Chemical, Middle East & Northern Africa — Saudi Arabia (service model description), 2025. https://www.sunchemical.com/regions/middle-east-northern-africa/saudi-arabia/
19. Ink World Magazine, 2025 Top International Ink Companies, 2025. https://www.inkworldmagazine.com/top-companies-reports/top-international-companies/page/2/
20. Nazdar, Company Overview, 2025. https://www.nazdar.com/en-us/RESOURCES-About-Us-Company-Overview
21. DIC Corporation, Notice of Convocation of the 128th Ordinary General Meeting of Shareholders (Fiscal 2025 Results), 2025. https://www.dic-global.com/pdf/ir/stocks/dic_meeting128_notice_en.pdf
22. artience (formerly Toyo Ink SC Holdings), Corporate Profile, 2025. https://www.artiencegroup.com/en/corporate/info/profile.html
23. INX International Ink Co., Company History, 2025. https://www.inxinternational.com/company/history
24. Flint Group, Global Price Increase Announcement — All Product Lines, 2025. https://www.flintgrp.com/news-and-events/news/flint-group-packaging-announces-a-global-price-increase-across-all-product-lines/
25. Flint Group, Price Increase for Nitrocellulose-Containing Products, July 2025. https://www.flintgrp.com/news-and-events/news/flint-group-implements-a-global-price-increase-for-nitrocellulose-containing-products/
26. Flexible Packaging Association, 2025 State of the U.S. Flexible Packaging Industry Report, 2025. https://www.flexpack.org/news/fpa-publishes-2025-state-of-the-us-flexible-packaging-industry-report
27. HP Inc., Form 10-K for Fiscal Year Ended October 31, 2025, 2025. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/47217/000004721725000071/hpq-20251031.htm
28. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Low/No-VOC/HAP Inks and Coatings, 2024. https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-monitoring-knowledge-base/monitoring-control-technique-compliant-lowno-vochap-inks
29. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Determining the Regulatory Status of Components of a Food Contact Material, 2024. https://www.fda.gov/food/packaging-food-contact-substances-fcs/determining-regulatory-status-components-food-contact-material
30. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Hazard Identification of Printing Ink Substances Used on the Exterior of Food Packaging (FDA Science Forum), 2024. https://www.fda.gov/science-research/fda-science-forum/hazard-identification-printing-ink-substances-used-exterior-food-packaging
31. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Monitoring Information — Printing and Publishing Industry, 2024. https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-monitoring-knowledge-base/monitoring-information-industry-printing-and-publishing
32. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS Reporting and Recordkeeping, 2024. https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/tsca-section-8a7-reporting-and-recordkeeping