Proposed Reform of the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) in the 113th Congress: S.
1009 Compared with S. 696 and Current Law

Linda-Jo Schierow
Specialist in Environmental Policy
July 8, 2013
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R43136
CRS Report for Congress
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress

Proposed Reform of TSCA in the 113th Congress: S. 1009, S. 696, and Current Law

Summary
Thirty-seven years of experience implementing and enforcing the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) since its enactment have demonstrated the strengths and weaknesses of the law and led
many to propose legislative changes to TSCA’s core provisions. The Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
and the Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S. 1009) introduced in the 113th Congress would
amend TSCA Title I. This CRS report compares key provisions of S. 696 and S. 1009 with
current law (15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.). TSCA as enacted authorizes the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) to require manufacturers to develop data about chemical toxicity and
exposure if EPA determines that a chemical may pose an unreasonable risk, or if chemical
exposure is expected to be substantial. TSCA allows a chemical to enter and remain in commerce
unless EPA can show that it poses “an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment.”
EPA then must regulate to control unreasonable risk, but only to the extent necessary using the
“least burdensome” means of available control. This TSCA standard has been interpreted to
require cost-benefit balancing. The current law preempts state and local laws regarding chemicals
specifically regulated by EPA.
S. 696 would amend TSCA to require chemical manufacturers and processors to submit specified
information about the toxicity and usage of chemicals in commerce to EPA. The information
would be used by EPA to determine whether a chemical would meet the safety standard of “a
reasonable certainty of no harm from aggregate exposure,” given the imposition of any needed
restrictions on manufacture, processing, distribution, use, or disposal. S. 696 would prohibit uses
of evaluated chemical substances unless they were determined by EPA to meet the safety
standard. S. 696 would increase public access to information about EPA’s decisions and to some
information about chemicals that currently is treated as confidential business information. S. 696
would rarely preempt state and local laws.
S. 1009 would authorize EPA to require manufacturers to develop new information if EPA can
show need in the context of an evaluative framework for chemical risk assessment and
management. The bill would require EPA to screen all chemicals in commerce and assign each a
high or low priority for risk assessment or, if necessary, require manufacturers to produce
additional information. S. 1009 would require EPA regulation, by rule or order, ensuring “no
unreasonable risk of harm from exposure” to a chemical under the intended conditions of use. S.
1009 would preempt new state and local laws for chemicals identified as high or low priority.
Both Senate bills would evaluate the existing inventory of chemicals in U.S. commerce since
1976 to allow prioritization of the estimated 9,000 chemicals currently produced and used in the
United States. In addition, both bills would explicitly require manufacturers to substantiate some
requests for protection of confidential business information from public disclosure.
S. 696 (but not S. 1009) also would add a new section to TSCA to allow U.S. implementation of
three international agreements. S. 1009 would amend an existing section of TSCA to allow
implementation of one treaty. Other provisions included in S. 696 would authorize EPA to support
research in “green” engineering and chemistry, promote alternatives to toxicity testing on
animals, encourage research on children’s environmental health, require biomonitoring of
pregnant women and infants, require EPA to identify “hot spots” where residents are exposed
disproportionately to pollution, and direct EPA to develop strategies for reducing their risks.
Key provisions of S. 696 and S. 1009 are compared with current law in Tables 1 through 6 of this
CRS report.
Congressional Research Service

Proposed Reform of TSCA in the 113th Congress: S. 1009, S. 696, and Current Law


Congressional Research Service

Proposed Reform of TSCA in the 113th Congress: S. 1009, S. 696, and Current Law

Contents
Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1
Effects of the Proposed Legislation on Current Law ....................................................................... 1
Data Development Requirements .............................................................................................. 2
Notice Requirements ................................................................................................................. 3
Prioritization for Safety Assessments ........................................................................................ 4
Safety Standards, Restrictions, and Prohibitions ....................................................................... 5
Breadth of and Limits to EPA Authority .................................................................................... 7
State Preemption ........................................................................................................................ 8
Confidential Business Information ............................................................................................ 9
Miscellaneous Provisions ........................................................................................................ 10

Tables
Table 1. Titles and Definitions in Selected Provisions of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.),
the Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696), and the Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S. 1009) ........... 12
Table 2. Testing and Data Evaluation in Selected Provisions of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2601 et
seq.), the Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696), and the Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S.
1009) ........................................................................................................................................... 18
Table 3. Notices and Priorities in Selected Provisions of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.),
the Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696), and the Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S. 1009) ........... 28
Table 4. Safety Standard Determinations and Restrictions in Selected Provisions of TSCA
(15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.), the Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696), and the Chemical Safety
Improvement Act (S. 1009) ........................................................................................................ 42
Table 5. Reporting Requirements in Selected Provisions of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2601 et
seq.), the Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696), and the Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S.
1009) ........................................................................................................................................... 55
Table 6. Other Selected Provisions of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.), the Safe Chemicals
Act (S. 696), and the Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S. 1009) ........................................... 63

Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 85
Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................... 85

Congressional Research Service

Proposed Reform of TSCA in the 113th Congress: S. 1009, S. 696, and Current Law

Introduction
In 1976, President Gerald R. Ford signed the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)1, giving the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) authority to regulate production and use of
industrial chemicals in U.S. commerce in the interest of protecting health and the environment
from unreasonable risks. Thirty-seven years of experience with TSCA implementation and
enforcement have demonstrated the strengths and weaknesses of the law and led many to propose
legislative changes to TSCA’s core provisions in Title I.2 Based on hearing testimony, a diverse
set of stakeholders generally concur that TSCA needs to be updated, although there is
disagreement about the extent and nature of any proposed revisions.3 For a summary of TSCA
provisions and history, see CRS Report RL31905, The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA): A
Summary of the Act and Its Major Requirements
, by Linda-Jo Schierow.
Legislation to amend TSCA Title I was introduced in the 111th and 112th Congresses. The Safe
Chemicals Act (SCA), S. 847, was reported by the Senate Committee on Environment and Public
Works in the 112th Congress. In the 113th Congress, Senator Lautenberg reintroduced the reported
bill as S. 696. A few weeks later, Senator Lautenberg and 14 co-sponsors introduced a second
comprehensive bill, the Chemical Safety Improvement Act (CSIA), S. 1009.
This CRS report compares key provisions of S. 696 and S. 1009 with provisions of TSCA Title I
(15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.) that would be affected if either bill became law. These provisions are
summarized in Tables 1 through 6 of this report.
Effects of the Proposed Legislation on Current Law
Neither S. 1009 nor S. 696 would affect Titles II through VI of TSCA (except that S. 696 would
change the definition of “asbestos” in Title II), nor would they change the basic organization of
TSCA Title I. For example, provisions related to testing would remain in Section 4, requirements
for notifying EPA when a new chemical or new use is proposed would remain in Section 5, and
regulatory authorities would remain in Section 6. Also unaffected would be changes to TSCA
Title I that were enacted during the 110th Congress, such as a provision that bans exports of
elemental mercury.4 However, S. 696 would amend or delete most of the original Title I
provisions and would make substantial additions to current law. S. 1009 also would amend TSCA
Title I provisions significantly but without adding most of the new provisions in S. 696. Some
key differences between current law and the bills are summarized in the following sections.

1 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
2 For more information about issues revolving around TSCA, see CRS Report RL34118, The Toxic Substances Control
Act (TSCA): Implementation and New Challenges
, by Linda-Jo Schierow.
3 U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Environment and Public Works, Subcommittee on Superfund, Toxics and
Environmental Health, Hearing, “Assessing the Effectiveness of U.S. Chemical Safety Laws.” February 3, 2011,
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Hearings.Hearing&Hearing_ID=cd4fd6b9-802a-23ad-4d18-
eac94d1414b3.
Also, see U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce webpage on the hearing held June 13, 2013, “Title I of the
Toxic Substances Control Act: Understanding its history and reviewing its impact” at
http://energycommerce.house.gov/hearing/title-i-toxic-substance-control-act-understanding-its-history-and-reviewing-
its-impact.
4 S. 906, which became P.L. 110-414.
Congressional Research Service
1

Proposed Reform of TSCA in the 113th Congress: S. 1009, S. 696, and Current Law

Data Development Requirements
S. 696, as introduced, would direct the EPA Administrator to establish, by rule, various
“minimum information sets” that would be required for different chemical substances or
categories of substances. The bill would direct EPA to include in each minimum information set
any information that the EPA deems necessary for the conduct of a screening-level risk
assessment, “sufficient for the Administrator to administer this Act” with regard to categorization
of new and existing chemical substances, assignment of priority classes, and safety standard
determinations and redeterminations. S. 696 would require submission to EPA of a minimum
information set by each manufacturer and processor of a new chemical substance or, as specified
by the Administrator, of an existing chemical. The bill would authorize EPA to require, by rule or
order, testing and submission by a specified date of additional results of tests not included in any
applicable minimum information set “as necessary for making any determination or carrying out
any provision” of TSCA. S. 696 would authorize EPA, by order, to take regulatory action if a
manufacturer or processor failed to submit required information. Finally, S. 696 would direct EPA
to accommodate use of testing methods and strategies to generate information quickly, at low
cost, and with reduced use of animal-based testing, to the extent that such methods and strategies
would yield information of equivalent quality and reliability.
Neither S. 1009 nor current law requires development and submission of specified data for either
new or existing chemicals. Instead, S. 1009 would direct the Administrator to develop a general
framework, policies, and procedures for collecting, evaluating and developing data, and would
require integration of relevant information from multiple sources into a tiered testing framework.
The bill would authorize EPA to require manufacturers to develop new data if the agency
promulgates a rule, enters into a testing consent agreement, or issues an order based on a
determination that additional data are needed to:
• perform a safety assessment,
• make a safety determination, or
• meet testing needs of an “implementing authority under another Federal statute.”
S. 1009 would require EPA to publish a statement identifying and explaining the need for data. It
also would require EPA to specify a period for test data submission, “which period must not be of
an unreasonable duration.” Failure to submit any required information is a prohibited act and
subjects the manufacturer or processor to penalties.
Finally, S. 1009 would direct the Administrator to minimize the use of animals in testing of
chemical substances or mixtures through various means. The bill would require the Administrator
to promote the development and timely incorporation of new testing methods that are not
laboratory animal-based. S. 1009 would authorize the Administrator to adapt or waive animal-
testing requirements on request from a manufacturer or processor under specified circumstances.
Under current law, there is no specific framework or minimum information set, but EPA has the
authority to require data submission if it promulgates a rule, including a finding that a chemical
“may present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment,” or is produced in very
large volume and there is a potential for substantial quantity to be released into the environment
or for substantial or significant human exposure. The agency also must demonstrate a need for
data.
Congressional Research Service
2

Proposed Reform of TSCA in the 113th Congress: S. 1009, S. 696, and Current Law

EPA also may promulgate such rules for categories of chemicals, but is prohibited by Section
25(c)(2) from promulgating a rule for a group of chemicals that are grouped together solely on the
basis of their being new chemical substances. Failure to submit any required information is a
prohibited act and subjects the manufacturer or processor to penalties.
Notice Requirements
Under current law, EPA maintains an inventory of all chemicals that have been in U. S. commerce
since 1976. Manufacturers and importers must notify the EPA prior to manufacturing or
importing a chemical not on the EPA inventory (that is, a “new” chemical). Based on information
submitted with that notice (see TSCA 5(d) in Table 3 under the heading “Notice content for new
chemical substances”), EPA has up to 90 days to determine whether a new chemical may present
an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. In addition, under current law EPA
has authority to require notification 90 days prior to a significant new use of a chemical on the
inventory, but the agency first must promulgate a Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) naming the
chemical and defining the uses for which notice is required. Based on information submitted with
that notice (see TSCA 5(d)), EPA must decide whether the new use may present an unreasonable
risk.5
S. 696 and S. 1009 would continue the new chemical pre-manufacture notification requirement.
S. 1009 is similar to current law in that it also would require notice prior to a significant new use
of a chemical, if EPA has issued a SNUR. S. 696 would add a notification requirement for all
chemicals already on the inventory prior to manufacture or processing for any new use or at a
new production volume. For chemicals that had undergone a safety evaluation and determination
by EPA, notice also would be required prior to a change in the manner of production or
processing under S. 696 as introduced.
In response to a pre-manufacture notice from a manufacturer to EPA, both bills would require
EPA to categorize chemicals based on available information within 90 days of receiving a notice
(but the period may be extended). S. 1009 also requires categorization of chemicals with
proposed new uses.
S. 696 would establish the following categories for new chemicals:
• Substances of Very High Concern,
• Substances Unlikely to Meet the Safety Standard,
• Substances with Insufficient Information, and
• Substances Likely to Meet the Safety Standard.
S. 1009 would categorize new substances and uses as:
• Not Likely to Meet the Safety Standard,

5 In response to a notice submitted for a new chemical or a significant new use, current TSCA 5(d) authorizes EPA to
issue an order limiting manufacture and other activities related to the substance, if the agency determines that the
available information is insufficient to make a reasoned determination, and that the chemical may present an
unreasonable risk, or that it will be produced in substantial quantities and either may reasonably be anticipated to enter
the environment in substantial quantities or there is significant or substantial human exposure to the substance.
Congressional Research Service
3

Proposed Reform of TSCA in the 113th Congress: S. 1009, S. 696, and Current Law

• Additional Information Is Needed, or
• Substances Likely to Meet the Safety Standard under Intended Conditions of
Use.
Prioritization for Safety Assessments
Under current law, the Interagency Testing Committee (ITC)6 advises the EPA Administrator
regarding chemicals that should receive priority consideration for promulgation of a test rule. The
ITC reports to EPA biannually, establishes a prioritized list of chemicals, and designates up to 50
chemicals on the list as the highest priority. In selecting chemicals, the committee is authorized to
consider all relevant factors, including “the extent to which the substance or mixture is closely
related to a chemical substance or mixture which is known to present an unreasonable risk of
injury to health or the environment.” Priority attention is to be given to chemicals “known to
cause or contribute to or which are suspected of causing or contributing to cancer, gene
mutations, or birth defects.” The EPA Administrator also is authorized under TSCA 5(b)(4) to
compile and keep current a list of chemical substances that the Agency has determined present or
may present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. This list of chemicals of
concern must be promulgated by notice and comment rulemaking under the Administrative
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) and must provide opportunity for oral and written presentation of
data, views, or arguments. In addition, EPA routinely prioritizes chemicals in commerce using its
knowledge of chemistry and biology.
S. 696 would eliminate the ITC provisions as well as the provision at TSCA 5(b)(4). Instead the
bill would direct the Administrator to establish a system for assigning chemical substances into
batches, categorizing them, and assigning priorities for testing and regulation. The bill would
require the EPA Administrator to screen and prioritize all chemicals on the inventory for the
purposes of risk assessment, safety standard determinations, and risk management. EPA would
initially assign chemicals to batches. The first batch generally would include chemicals currently
in commerce in the United States – that is, chemicals for which manufacturers submitted
information to EPA in response to the most recent Chemical Data Reporting rule (issued under
TSCA 8(a)). The bill then would direct EPA to assign all of the chemicals in the first batch to one
of four categories based on available information:
• Substances of Very High Concern,
• Substances with Insufficient Information,
• Substances of Very Low Concern, and
• Substances to Undergo Safety Standard Determinations.
S. 696 also would direct EPA to add new chemical substances categorized previously by EPA as
Substances Likely to Meet the Safety Standard to the inventory of existing chemicals, assign each
to a batch, and further categorize each as a Substance of Very Low Concern or a Substance to
Undergo a Safety Standard Determination. All chemicals on the inventory categorized as

6 TSCA Interagency Testing Committee,an independent advisory committee that includes representatives of 14 U.S.
Government organizations,http://www.epa.gov/oppt/itc/index.htm.
Congressional Research Service
4

Proposed Reform of TSCA in the 113th Congress: S. 1009, S. 696, and Current Law

Substances to Undergo a Safety Standard Determination would be prioritized further (Priority 1,
Priority 2, or Priority 3) for risk assessment. After the initial categorization and prioritization, S.
696 would direct EPA to review information continually with an eye toward revising chemical
assignments.
S. 1009 retains the ITC but would require it to advise EPA with regard to testing consent
agreements and test orders in addition to test rules. S. 1009 eliminates the chemicals of concern
listing provisions of TSCA 5(b)(4), but would direct the Administrator to establish a risk-based
screening process as well as criteria for identifying whether existing chemical substances are a
high or a low priority for a safety assessment and determination. Priorities would be determined
based on: (1) the ability of EPA to schedule and complete safety assessments and determinations
in a timely manner; and (2) reasonably available data and information concerning the hazard,
exposure, and use characteristics at the time the decision is made. The agency’s proposed
prioritization screening process and criteria would be published for public comment. Using the
screening process, EPA would be required “in a timely manner” to evaluate all existing chemical
substances or categories of substances on the active inventory (created under proposed TSCA
8(b)). Substances would be removed from the list of high-priority substances when a safety
determination is published.
Safety Standards, Restrictions, and Prohibitions
Current law allows chemicals to remain in U.S. commerce until EPA promulgates a rule and
publishes a finding that a chemical presents or will present an “unreasonable risk” to human
health or the environment. If EPA demonstrates that a risk associated with a chemical is
unreasonable (relative to the benefits provided by the chemical and the estimated risks and
benefits of any alternatives), the Agency is required to initiate rulemaking, but only to the extent
necessary to reduce that risk to a reasonable level and using “the least burdensome” restriction.
Under S. 696, as introduced, continued production and use of a chemical would be permitted only
if EPA made, or expected to make, an affirmative safety determination for the chemical. S. 696
would require manufacturers of chemicals to supply scientific data sufficient for EPA to conclude,
based on a risk assessment, that the chemical would meet the safety standard: “there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result to human health or the environment from aggregate
exposure to the chemical substance” under the use conditions evaluated and specified by EPA.
The bill would require EPA to base these safety determinations “solely on considerations of
human health and the environment, including the health of vulnerable populations.” An EPA
determination that a chemical would not meet the safety standard would not require a risk
assessment.
S. 696 would prohibit manufacture, processing, and distribution of a chemical substance7 that
EPA –
• decided did not meet the safety standard;
• assigned to the category Substances of Very High Concern;

7 An exemption from any prohibition on manufacture would be allowed for a particular use only if: it were “in the
paramount interest of national security”; lack of the chemical use “would cause significant disruption in the national
economy”; the use were essential or critical and there were no safer feasible alternative; or the chemical use, relative to
alternatives, provided a benefit to health, the environment, or public safety.
Congressional Research Service
5

Proposed Reform of TSCA in the 113th Congress: S. 1009, S. 696, and Current Law

• assigned to the category Substances Unlikely to Meet the Safety Standard; or
• assigned to the category Substances with Insufficient Information (pending
submission of the applicable minimum information set and re-categorization).
In addition, S. 696 would prohibit manufacture of a chemical for any proposed new use that had
not been considered in the safety determination issued for that chemical.
S. 696 would allow production and use of a chemical –
• determined by EPA to meet the safety standard;
• pending completion of the safety standard determination for a chemical assigned
to the category Substances to Undergo Safety Standard Determinations; or
• assigned to the category Substances of Very Low Concern.
S. 696 would authorize EPA to impose restrictions on the manufacture, processing, use,
distribution in commerce, or disposal of a chemical substance, mixture, or article containing a
chemical substance to ensure that a chemical use would meet the safety standard.
S. 1009 is similar to current law in that it would allow manufacture and processing of, and
commerce in, a chemical until EPA identified it as high priority and determined that it did not
meet the safety standard for the intended conditions of use. EPA would be required to base its
safety determinations on risk-based safety assessments considering hazard, use, and exposure
(including exposure of vulnerable populations) for the chemical substance under the intended
conditions of use. Under S. 1009, the safety standard that each chemical would be required to
meet “ensures that no unreasonable risk of harm to human health or the environment will result
from exposure to the chemical.”
Before conducting the safety assessment, S. 1009 would require that EPA develop a science-based
framework for making decisions, including a methodology for conducting safety assessments that
addresses specified issues and that is subjected to public comment and scientific peer review.
Also included in the framework would be procedural rules for safety determinations.
S. 1009 would direct EPA to impose various restrictions on high-priority chemicals that do not
meet the safety standard for the intended conditions of use. To ban or phase out manufacture,
processing, or use of a chemical substance, EPA would first have to consider and publish a
statement discussing:
• “availability of technically and economically feasible alternatives for the
substance under the intended conditions of use;”
• relative risks posed by those alternatives;
• “economic and social costs and benefits of the proposed regulatory action and
options considered, and of potential alternatives; and”
• “the economic and social benefits and costs of” “the chemical substance,”
“alternatives to the chemical substance,” and “any necessary restrictions on the
chemical substance or alternatives.”
Congressional Research Service
6

Proposed Reform of TSCA in the 113th Congress: S. 1009, S. 696, and Current Law

Breadth of and Limits to EPA Authority
Existing law provides EPA with broad authority, as well as mandates, to require data and to
restrict chemical use to prevent unreasonable risk of injury. In the exercise of this authority,
manufacturers and processors produce and provide data, while EPA bears responsibility for
collecting, analyzing, and evaluating the information and making a case in the public record for
each of its risk management decisions for each chemical substance. Under current law, EPA is
obligated to follow procedures laid out in the Administrative Procedure Act and to provide
opportunities for persons to present data, views, or arguments orally and in written submissions.
The law requires that a transcript be made of oral presentations, and the EPA Administrator must
publish findings. TSCA section 19 [15 U.S.C. 2618 ] authorizes any person to file a petition with
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit or for the circuit in which the
person resides or in which the person's principal place of business is located, for judicial review
of specified TSCA rules within 60 days of issuance. The appropriate circuit court is directed to set
aside specified rules if they are not supported by "substantial evidence in the rulemaking record
… taken as a whole." “Rulemaking record” is defined at length in TSCA 19(a)(3).
S. 696 would expedite regulatory action relative to the process under current law by authorizing
EPA to issue administrative orders with respect to specific chemical substances instead of rules
(which must be promulgated under current law). In addition, S. 696 would exempt certain EPA
decisions from judicial review and remove TSCA rulemaking requirements not specified in the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) for informal notice and comment rulemaking. The
proposed amendments to TSCA also would increase public access to information about EPA’s
decisions and to some information about chemicals that currently is treated as confidential
business information. S. 696 provides for judicial review of safety determinations, in addition to
all rules and orders. In the event that a safety determination is challenged in court, S. 696 would
require that each manufacturer and processor “at all times bear the burden of proof in any legal
proceeding relating to a decision of the Administrator regarding whether the chemical substance
meets the safety standard.” The bill imposes a duty on the manufacturer or processor of a
chemical to provide sufficient information for EPA to determine whether the chemical meets the
safety standard, and imposes a duty on EPA to determine whether a chemical meets the safety
standard.
The scope of EPA oversight also would be expanded by S. 696. As introduced, the bill includes
language that would allow EPA to define various distinct forms of substances that are the same in
terms of molecular identity but differ in structure and function, such as manufactured nanoscale
forms of carbon and silver. S. 696 also might broaden the scope of environmental risks that EPA
is authorized to manage by defining “environment” to include the indoor environment.
S. 696 would authorize EPA activities not currently authorized under TSCA to allow
implementation of three international agreements pertaining to persistent organic pollutants and
other hazardous chemicals. For example, the proposal would authorize EPA to regulate chemicals
manufactured solely for export. The authority provided by the bill would be specific to three
international agreements, rather than more generally authorizing regulatory activity to implement
any ratified international agreement concerning chemicals. The bill would prohibit production
and use of chemicals when it was inconsistent with U.S. obligations under any of the three
international agreements after they had entered into force for the United States.8

8 For more information about these agreements, see CRS Report RS22379, Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs): Fact
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
7

Proposed Reform of TSCA in the 113th Congress: S. 1009, S. 696, and Current Law

S. 1009 is similar to current law, providing EPA with broad authority and mandates to require
data and to restrict chemical use to ensure no unreasonable risk of harm from exposure. In the
exercise of this authority, manufacturers and processors would produce and provide data, while
EPA would bear responsibility for collecting, analyzing, and evaluating the information and
making a case on the public record for each of its risk management decisions for each chemical
substance. S. 1009 would allow EPA to negotiate consent agreements or to issue orders rather
than rules in some cases. EPA uses consent agreements currently. Under S. 1009, EPA would be
required to justify its use of orders. The proposed law would direct EPA to develop and use a
framework for decision making that incorporates most of the analytic, data quality control,
publication, and notice and comment requirements of rulemaking and the Information Quality Act
(Section 515 of P.L. 106-554). Under S. 1009, EPA would still be obligated to follow procedures
laid out in the Administrative Procedure Act when promulgating a rule but TSCA requirements
beyond those in the APA would be eliminated.
Like current law, S. 1009 would authorize any person to file a petition with the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit or for the circuit in which the person resides or in
which the person's principal place of business is located, for judicial review of a Title I rule (not
an order) requiring data development, imposing a restriction or prohibition, including restriction
or prohibition for elemental mercury, or requiring information reporting. Judicial review would
not be authorized for significant new use determinations, rules regarding PCBs, or rules regarding
asbestos or lead-based paint under Titles II and IV, respectively. Proposed TSCA section 19
would retain the current standard of evidence for rules requiring data development or imposing a
restriction or prohibition (including a restriction or prohibition for elemental mercury), but would
define “evidence” to mean any matter in the rulemaking record and would prohibit review of the
contents and adequacy of the statement of basis and purpose, except as part of the rulemaking
record as a whole.
State Preemption
Currently, TSCA Section 18 does not preempt state law regarding chemicals unless they address
chemicals specifically regulated under TSCA. Thus, if EPA requires testing of a chemical under
section 4, no state may require testing of the same substance for similar purposes. Similarly, if
EPA prescribes a rule or order under section 5 or 6, no state or political subdivision may have a
requirement for the same substance to protect against the same risk unless the state or local
requirement is identical to the federal requirement, is adopted under authority of another federal
law, or generally prohibits the use of the substance in the state or political subdivision. TSCA
authorizes states and political subdivisions to petition EPA, and authorizes EPA to grant petitions
by rule to exempt a law in effect in a state or political subdivision under certain circumstances. A
petition may be granted if compliance with the requirement would not cause activities involving
the substance to be in violation of the EPA requirement, and the state or local requirement
provides a significantly higher degree of protection from risk than the EPA requirement does, but
does not “unduly burden interstate commerce.”

(...continued)
Sheet on Three International Agreements, by Linda-Jo Schierow.
Congressional Research Service
8

Proposed Reform of TSCA in the 113th Congress: S. 1009, S. 696, and Current Law

S. 696 would significantly simplify this section of TSCA. As amended, TSCA would not preempt
laws relating to a chemical substance, mixture, or article unless compliance with both federal and
the state or local laws was impossible.
S. 1009 would preempt state laws, new and existing, that: (1) require testing or information
“reasonably likely to produce the same data and information required” by rule, consent
agreement, or order under proposed TSCA section 4, 5, or 6; (2) prohibit or restrict the
manufacturing, processing, distribution in commerce, or use of a chemical after issuance of a
completed safety determination under proposed TSCA section 6; or (3) require notification for a
significant new use of a chemical if EPA requires notification under proposed TSCA section 5.
Proposed TSCA section 18 also would preempt new state prohibitions or restrictions for any high-
priority and low-priority substance. Exceptions to the general preemption provision would
include laws -- adopted under the authority of any other federal law; implementing a reporting or
information collection requirement not redundant of federal law; or adopted pursuant to state
authority related to water quality, air quality, or waste treatment or disposal, as long as it does not
impose a restriction on the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, or use of a
chemical and is not redundant or inconsistent with an EPA action under proposed TSCA section 5
or 6.
Confidential Business Information
TSCA section 14 [15 U.S.C. 2613] protects proprietary confidential information submitted to EPA
about chemicals in commerce. Disclosure by EPA employees of such information generally is not
permitted, except to other federal employees or when relevant in any proceeding under TSCA.
Manufacturers, processors, or distributors in commerce may designate information that they
believe is entitled to confidential treatment. If EPA proposes to release such data to the public (in
the limited cases where it is authorized to do so), then the EPA Administrator must notify the
manufacturer, processor, or distributor who designated the information confidential. Disclosure of
confidential business information (CBI) is required when “necessary to protect health or the
environment against an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment.”
S. 696 would increase public access to information about EPA’s decisions and to some
information about chemicals that currently is treated as CBI. Like current law, S. 696 would
prohibit disclosure of CBI by EPA employees except to other federal agencies and EPA
contractors or if the disclosure is necessary to protect human health or the environment (the
qualifier “against an unreasonable risk” is omitted). Proposed TSCA section 14 also would direct
EPA to disclose information upon request to a state or tribal government for the purpose of
administration or enforcement of a law, if an agreement ensured that appropriate steps would be
taken to maintain the confidentiality of the information. EPA also would be directed to disclose
information to public health or environmental health professionals or medical personnel under
certain conditions. S. 696 would categorize and specify types of CBI as: 1) information always
eligible for protection, 2) information that may be eligible for protection, and 3) information
never eligible for protection. The bill would direct EPA to promulgate rules specifying acceptable
bases on which written requests to maintain confidentiality might be approved and documentation
and justification that must accompany such a request. The Administrator would be required to
review and respond to requests for confidentiality within 90 days of receiving the information. S.
696 would require those designating CBI to justify such claims and to certify that the information
is not otherwise publicly available. If approved, submitted information generally would be
protected from disclosure for up to five years.
Congressional Research Service
9

Proposed Reform of TSCA in the 113th Congress: S. 1009, S. 696, and Current Law

S. 1009 is similar to current law, but the bill would require persons to substantiate any claim that
information qualifies for disclosure protection. As in current law, the proposed requirements of S.
1009 would not apply if the Administrator determined that disclosure was necessary to protect
human health or the environment (the qualifier “against an unreasonable risk” is omitted) nor to
disclosure of information to an officer, employee, contractor or employees of that contractor of
the United States. Information also may be disclosed to a state or political subdivision of a state,
or to a health professional under specified circumstances. Information may be disclosed when
necessary in a proceeding under proposed TSCA or to any duly authorized committee of the
Congress. If enacted, the bill would prohibit the Administrator from disclosing trade secrets and
other information defined as presumed to be protected. Also, S. 1009 would identify information
not protected from disclosure, including:
• identity of a chemical unless the person meets substantiation requirements;
• specified health and safety information and determinations; and
• certain general information.
The bill would require the submitter to justify why information qualifies for confidentiality
protection, and to certify that the information submitted is true and correct. In addition, for claims
related to chemical identity, S. 1009 would require the submitter to provide specified information
demonstrating that confidentiality of the identity has been and is likely to be protected, and
disclosure is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of the person. In such
cases, the submitter would have to identify a time period for which disclosure protection is
necessary and a generic name for the chemical.
S. 1009 would require the Administrator to protect CBI from disclosure for the period of time
requested by the person submitting and justifying the claim, or for such period of time as the
Administrator determines to be reasonable. The Administrator would be authorized to request
“redocumentation” of a claim. S. 1009 would dictate a process for receiving and acting on claims
for protection from information disclosure, and for providing recourse in the event the
Administrator decides to release such data. Finally, S. 1009 would ensure that EPA may not
require substantiation of a confidentiality claim for protection from disclosure of information
submitted to EPA prior to the date of enactment of S. 1009 or to require more substantiation than
proposed TSCA section 14 requires.
Miscellaneous Provisions
Several new provisions would be included in an amended TSCA under S. 696, but not under S.
1009. One provision under S. 696, for example, would require definition and listing of localities
with populations that are “disproportionately exposed” to toxic chemicals. EPA would be directed
to develop an action plan to reduce exposure in such “hot spots.”
S. 696 also would require EPA to establish a program to create market incentives for the
development of safer alternatives to existing chemical substances that reduce or avoid the use and
generation of hazardous substances. The program would be required to expedite review of a new
chemical substance if an alternatives analysis by a manufacturer or processor indicated the
substance was a safer alternative, and to recognize a substance or product determined by EPA to
be a safer alternative.
Congressional Research Service
10

Proposed Reform of TSCA in the 113th Congress: S. 1009, S. 696, and Current Law

Another new provision of S. 696 would direct the EPA Administrator to coordinate with the
Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct a biomonitoring study for any chemical that
research indicated might be present in human tissues and that could have adverse effects on
human development. The study would be designed to determine whether the chemical in fact was
present in pregnant women and infants. If the chemical were found to be present, manufacturers
and processors would have to disclose to EPA, commercial customers, consumers, and the
general public all known uses of the chemical and all articles in which the chemical was expected
to be present.
Children’s environmental health also is addressed by S. 696. It would establish a children’s
environmental health research program at EPA and an advisory committee to provide independent
advice relating to implementation of TSCA and protection of children’s health.
S. 696 also would establish at least four research centers to encourage the development of safer
alternatives to existing hazardous chemical substances. In addition, “green chemistry and
engineering” would be promoted through grants.
In the remainder of this CRS report, Tables 1 through 6 summarize selected provisions of S. 696
and S. 1009, as introduced, and current TSCA.

Congressional Research Service
11


Table 1. Titles and Definitions in Selected Provisions of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.), the Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696), and the
Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S. 1009)
Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Title
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
Safe Chemicals Act of 2013 (SCA)
Chemical Safety Improvement Act of
2013 (CSIA)
Revised definitions
TSCA definitions are in alphabetical
The SCA, section 4 would amend
The CSIA would retain the definitions in
order in section 3 (15 U.S.C. 2602).
definitions in TSCA section 3.
TSCA section 3, but add new definitions.
Chemical substance
“[A]ny organic or inorganic substance of
Proposed TSCA 3(5) is the same as 15
Same as TSCA.
a particular molecular identity, including - U.S.C. 2602(2), but also authorizes EPA
(i) any combination of such substances
to determine that “a variant of a
occurring in whole or in part as a result
chemical substance is a new chemical
of a chemical reaction or occurring in
substance,” notwithstanding molecular
nature and (ii) any element or
identity.
uncombined radical.” The term does not
include any mixture, pesticide, tobacco,
nuclear material, firearms, shells or
cartridges for firearms, food, food
additive, drug, cosmetic, or devices
regulated by other specified federal laws.
[TSCA 3(2)]
Distribute in commerce / Distribution
“[T]o sell, or the sale of the substance,
Proposed TSCA 3(8) amends the TSCA
Same as TSCA.
in commerce
mixture, or article in commerce; to
3(4) definition to include “to export or
introduce or deliver for introduction
offer for export the substance, mixture,
into commerce, or the introduction or
or article.”
delivery for introduction into commerce
of, the substance, mixture, or article; or
to hold, or the holding of, the substance,
mixture, or article after its introduction
into commerce.” [TSCA 3(4)]
Environment
“[I]ncludes water, air, and land and the
Proposed TSCA 3(10) amends the TSCA Same as TSCA.
interrelationship which exists among and
3(5) definition to include “ambient” and
between water, air, and land and all living “indoor air.”
things.” [TSCA 3(5)]
New chemical substance
“[A]ny chemical substance which is not
Proposed TSCA 3(15) revises the
Same as TSCA.
included in the chemical substance list
definition, eliminating reference to listing
compiled and published under section
under 15 U.S.C. 2607(b) and instead
2607(b) of this title, [corresponding to
referring to any chemical substance that
TSCA section 6(b)].” [TSCA 3(9)]
does not have a submitted declaration
under proposed TSCA section 8(a).
CRS-12


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Standards for the development of test
A “prescription of (A) the - (i) health and This definition would be eliminated by
Same as TSCA.
data
environmental effects, and (ii)
the SCA section 4(1).
information relating to toxicity,
persistence, and other characteristics
which affect health and the environment,
for which test data for a chemical
substance or mixture are to be
developed and any analysis that is to be
performed on such data, and (B) to the
extent necessary to assure that data
respecting such effects and
characteristics are reliable and adequate
(i) the manner in which such data are to
be developed, (ii) the specification of any
test protocol or methodology to be
employed in the development of such
data, and (ii ) such other requirements as
are necessary to provide such
assurance.” [TSCA 3(12)]
New definitions



Aggregate exposure
No comparable definition.
Total exposure to a chemical substance
No comparable definition.
regardless of the source of exposure,
including activities involved in the
manufacture, processing, distribution,
use, or disposal of chemicals;
contamination of food, air, water, soil,
and house dust from current or prior
uses or activity; accidental releases;
permitted sources of pol ution; nonpoint
sources of pol ution; documented
background levels from natural and
anthropogenic sources; and a mixture or
article containing that chemical
substance. The term would include
exposure from a chemical substance that
is not considered a chemical substance
under TSCA solely because of its use as,
or in, food, cosmetics, or medical
devices. [Proposed TSCA 3(2)]
Bioaccumulative
No comparable definition.
As determined by the EPA
No comparable definition.
Administrator, the ability to significantly
accumulate in biota, or highly likely to
accumulate in biota. [Proposed TSCA
3(3)]
CRS-13


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Chemical identity
No comparable definition.
Each common and trade name, the most
No comparable definition.
current internationally standardized
name, the Chemical Abstracts Service
registration number, and the molecular
structure of a chemical substance, and
for a mixture, the chemical identities and
proportions of the components.
[Proposed TSCA 3(4)]
Cumulative exposure
No comparable definition.
The sum of aggregate exposure to each
No comparable definition.
chemical substance that is known or
suspected to contribute “appreciably to
the risk of the same or a similar adverse
effect.” [Proposed TSCA 3(7)]
End consumer
No comparable definition.
An “individual or other entity that
No comparable definition.
purchases and uses or consumes a
chemical substance (or mixture or article
containing that chemical substance).”
[Proposed TSCA 3(9)]
Federal agency
No comparable definition.
“[A]ny department, agency, or other
No comparable definition.
independent agency or establishment of
the Federal Government including any
Government corporation, and the
Government Printing Office.” [Proposed
TSCA 3(11)]
Persistent
No comparable definition.
Determined by the EPA Administrator
No comparable definition.
to significantly persist in one or more
environmental media. [Proposed TSCA
3(16)]
Person
No comparable definition.
An “individual, trust, firm, joint stock
No comparable definition.
company, corporation (including a
government corporation), partnership,
association, State, municipality,
commission, political subdivision of a
State, or any interstate body.” Includes
“each Federal agency and any officer,
agent, or employee of a Federal agency.”
[Proposed TSCA 3(17)]
CRS-14


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Special substance characteristics
No comparable definition.
Defines “special substance
No comparable definition.
characteristic” to mean “such physical,
chemical, or biological characteristic,
other than molecular identity, that the
Administrator determines, by order or
rule, may significantly affect the risks
posed by substances exhibiting that
characteristic.” Allows consideration of
size, shape, reactivity, and any other
properties that may significantly affect
risks posed. [Proposed TSCA 3(20)]
Toxic
No comparable definition.
Satisfies one of the following conditions:
No comparable definition.
has a toxicological property meeting
criteria for Category 1 or 2 for any
toxicity endpoint established by the
Globally Harmonized System for the
Classification and Labeling of Hazardous
Substances; “causes an adverse effect
that has been demonstrated in humans
or other exposed organisms”; or “the
weight of evidence … demonstrates the
potential for an adverse effect in humans
or other exposed organisms.” [Proposed
TSCA 3(22)]
Toxicological property
No comparable definition.
“[A]ctual or potential toxicity or other
No comparable definition.
adverse effects of a chemical substance
or mixture, including actual or potential
effects of exposure” on mortality,
morbidity, reproduction, growth and
development, the immune system, the
endocrine system, brain or nervous
system, other organ systems, or “any
other biological functions in humans or
nonhuman organisms.” [Proposed TSCA
3(23)]
CRS-15


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Vulnerable human population
No comparable definition.
A “human population that is subject to a
No comparable definition.
disproportionate exposure to, or the
potential for a disproportionate adverse
effect from exposure to, a chemical
substance or mixture …” and includes
those who work with chemical
substances and mixtures, individuals with
preexisting medical conditions, the
elderly, pregnant women, infants,
children, adolescents, and “members of
any other appropriate population
identified by the Administrator.”
[Proposed TSCA 3(25)]
CRS-16


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Best available science
No comparable definition.
No comparable definition.
“Science that (a) maximizes the quality,
objectivity, and integrity of information,
including statistical information; (b) uses
peer-reviewed and publically available
data; and (c) clearly documents and
communicates risks and uncertainties in
the scientific basis for decisions.”
[Proposed TSCA 3(2)]
Intended conditions of use
No comparable definition.
No comparable definition.
“The circumstances under which a
chemical substance is intended or
reasonably anticipated to be
manufactured, processed, distributed in
commerce, used, and disposed of.”
[Proposed TSCA 3(8)]
Safety assessment
No comparable definition.
No comparable definition.
“A risk-based assessment of the safety of
a chemical substance that (a) integrates
hazard; use; and exposure information
about a chemical substance; and (b)
includes (1) an assessment of exposure
under the intended conditions of use;
and (2) reference parameters that may
be appropriate with regard to a specific
chemical substance (such as a margin of
exposure).” [Proposed TSCA 3(14)]
Safety determination
No comparable definition.
No comparable definition.
“A determination by the Administrator
as to whether a chemical substance
meets the safety standard under the
intended conditions of use.” [Proposed
TSCA 3(15)]
Safety standard
No comparable definition.
No comparable definition.
“A standard that ensures that no
unreasonable risk of harm to human
health or the environment will result
from exposure to a chemical substance.”
[Proposed TSCA 3(16)]
Source: Compiled by the Congressional Research Service from the U.S. Code, S. 696, and S. 1009.
CRS-17


Table 2. Testing and Data Evaluation in Selected Provisions of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.), the Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696),
and the Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S. 1009)
Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S.
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
1009)t
Framework for data
No comparable provision.
No comparable provision, but see proposed
The CSIA section 4 amends TSCA 4.
development and
TSCA 6 (b)(2) under “Prioritizing chemicals
Proposed TSCA 4(a)(1) directs the
evaluation
within categories” below.
Administrator to develop a framework for
evaluating the safety of chemical substances in
commerce.
Framework policies and
No comparable provision.
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 4(a)(2) directs the
procedures
Administrator to “promptly develop
appropriate policies and procedures for
implementing the framework, including
procedures on the collection, evaluation, and
development of data and information.” Also
directs the Administrator to require col ection
of existing data and information, evaluation of
the quality of such information, analysis of the
information, determination of the need for
additional information, and transparency of
“information considered by the Administrator,
including both positive and negative findings”.
Proposed TSCA 4(a)(3) requires the
Administrator to ensure that the safety
evaluation framework is transparent; assures
that information is valid; addresses the
strengths and limitations of the framework
design, reliability of the test methods, and the
quality of the data and information; and
“pursues the goal of maximizing the quality,
objectivity, utility, and integrity of the data and
information.”
CRS-18


Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S.
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
1009)t
Data and information
No comparable provision.
New TSCA 33 would direct EPA by order to
Proposed TSCA 4(b) directs the
quality
establish and implement procedures to ensure
Administrator to establish and publish
data reliability by annual y inspecting
scientifically sound criteria for evaluating all of
laboratories and performing an annual data
the data and information on which the
audit. Requires that EPA establish a registry of
Administrator relies in making any decision
studies. Provides the EPA Administrator with
under the proposed TSCA. Requires
access to all records of health and safety
disclosure of funding sources for those who
studies initiated in response to requirements
submit health and safety studies to EPA, to the
of Title I, and requires each submitter of a
extent reasonably ascertainable. Requires that
research study conducted by a third party to
the Administrator encourage use of good
disclose the sources of any funding used to
laboratory practices, peer review, scientifically
conduct or publish the study.
reliable and relevant test methods,
standardized protocols, and other methods to
ensure scientific quality for all data and
information submitted under TSCA.
EPA is authorized to consider data and
information that do not meet the quality
criteria established by this subsection, but
must identify the data and information on
which EPA relies, describe the quality of such
information and the extent to which it departs
from the criteria, indicate any limitations on its
usefulness, and explain how it was used and
the basis for reliance on the data.
Evaluative framework for
No comparable provision.
No comparable provision, but see proposed
Proposed TSCA 4(b)(5) directs the
decision making
TSCA 6(d) under “Safety standard” and
Administrator to “develop and use a
“General process for safety determinations”
structured evaluative framework consisting of
below
science-based criteria, consistent with the
protection of human health and the
environment, for making any decision” under
TSCA, “and for determining the relevance,
quality, and reliability of data and information.”
Requires the framework to “at a minimum”
use “sound and objective scientific practices in
assessing risks;” “consider the current best
available science;” consider “whether available
data support or do not support the
identification of threshold doses of a chemical
substance;” and “include a description of the
weight of the scientific evidence concerning
risks.”
CRS-19


Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S.
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
1009)t
Data and information
No comparable provision.
No specific comparable provision, but see
Proposed TSCA 4(c) directs the Administrator
sources
proposed TSCA 6 (b)(2) under “Prioritizing
to consider information relevant to the
chemicals within categories” below. In
substance and reasonably available at the time
prioritizing chemicals for evaluation, proposed
a decision is being made under proposed
TSCA 6(b)(2) requires the Administrator to
TSCA 4(e), 5, or 6. Potential information
consider information available at the time
sources include: submissions to EPA by
decisions are made, including information
manufacturers and processors of the
obtained from manufacturers or processors,
substance, the public, a governor of a state or
included in a minimum information set,
state agency with responsibility for protecting
relevant to categorization or prioritization and
health or the environment; if accessible to the
submitted to EPA, or identified by EPA
Administrator, submissions to a governmental
through an active search of information
body in another jurisdiction under a
sources.
governmental requirement relating to the
protection of human health and the
environment; derived through application of
scientifically reliable and relevant methods or
models to estimate effects or exposure
potential; inferred based on the similarity of
structure or properties of a substance to
those of other substances for which reliable
information exists; and identified through an
active search of information sources accessible
to the Administrator.
Transparency
No specific comparable provision, but see
No specific comparable provision, but see
Proposed TSCA 4(d) states that information
TSCA 4(d).
proposed TSCA 4(e) “Public notice of receipt
considered by the Administrator in taking
of data.” Also, proposed TSCA 5(f) directs the
action under TSCA must be available to the
Administrator to post any submitted test data
public, in accord with proposed TSCA 14. In
on a publicly available Internet site. Proposed
addition, the CSIA directs the Administrator
TSCA 6(d)(2) requires that risk assessments
to make available to the public the guidance,
be transparent and understandable to the
procedures and tools used in evaluating
public and to risk managers. Proposed TSCA
information under proposed section 4. Any
8(i) directs EPA to establish an electronic
written guidance prepared under TSCA must
database of information relating to the toxicity
be subject to public notice and an opportunity
and use of, and exposure to, chemical
for comment.
substances. It is required to include
descriptions of “all significant decisions made
by the Administrator” and significant
information submitted under TSCA Title I.
CRS-20


Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S.
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
1009)t
Testing authorities and
TSCA 4(a) [15 U.S.C. 2603(a)] directs the EPA The SCA section 5 amends TSCA 4. Proposed
Proposed TSCA 4(f) authorizes EPA to
requirements
Administrator to promulgate a rule requiring
TSCA 4(a) directs the EPA Administrator
require development of new test data if EPA
that testing be conducted on a substance or
within one year of enactment of the SCA to
determines that information is needed to
mixture to develop health and environmental
promulgate a rule establishing varied or tiered
perform a safety assessment, to make a safety
effects data if: (1) the manufacture, processing,
requirements for “minimum information sets”
determination, or to meet testing needs of an
distribution, use, or disposal of the chemical
for different chemical substances “appropriate
“implementing authority under another
“may present an unreasonable risk of injury to
to evaluate chemical substances under
Federal statute.” EPA may require
health or the environment,” or (2) the
proposed TSCA sections 5 and 6.” The rule
development of test data by promulgating a
chemical is produced in very large volume and
must require information sets “sufficient for
rule, entering into a testing consent
there is a potential for a substantial quantity to the Administrator to administer this Act” with
agreement, or issuing an order. Directs EPA to
be released into the environment or for
regard to categorization of new and existing
require use of an evaluation framework that
substantial or significant human exposure. In
chemical substances, assignment of priority
integrates relevant information from multiple
either case, EPA also must find that (a) existing classes, and safety standard determinations and sources, including toxicity information,
data are insufficient to resolve the question of
redeterminations. Proposed TSCA 4(b)
bioinformatics, computational toxicology, high
safety, and (b) testing is necessary to develop
authorizes EPA to require, by rule or order,
through-put screening methods, and
the data.
testing and submission of test results by a
scientifically reliable and relevant alternatives
specified date in addition to the information
to vertebrate animal tests. Requires tiered
specified in any applicable minimum
testing and EPA to publish an explanation of its
information set “as necessary for making any
tiering decisions.
determination or carrying out any provision”
of TSCA. Authorizes EPA to require
Proposed TSCA 4(h) requires EPA to develop
submission of a sample of any chemical for the
“an evidence-based review system for
purpose of conducting tests and making a
conducting consistent evaluations of the
determination or carrying out any provision of
relevance and reliability of studies” and “a
the act.
structured evaluative framework to provide a
systematic and transparent approach for
Proposed TSCA 4(a) directs EPA to include in
assessing the overall weight of the evidence .”
the minimum information set information that
The framework must have two tiers, a
the EPA anticipates will be necessary for the
screening tier and a tier of more targeted
conduct of a screening-level risk assessment of
tests.
the chemical. Al ows EPA to provide for varied
or tiered testing for different chemicals.
Proposed TSCA 4(i) directs the Administrator
Information sets must accommodate use of
to reduce the use of animals in testing. For
alternative testing methods and strategies to
more on these provisions, see section
generate information quickly, at low cost, and
“Animal-based Testing” below.
with reduced use of animal-based testing, to

the extent that such methods and strategies
would yield information of equivalent quality
and reliability. The rule must specify quality
and reliability requirements for the
information to be submitted.
CRS-21


Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S.
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
1009)t
Deadlines for initial test
TSCA 4(b) requires that EPA specify a period
Proposed TSCA 4(a) requires submission to
Proposed TSCA 4(f) requires EPA to specify a
data submission
within which test data must be submitted for a EPA of the minimum information set for an
period within which test data must be
chemical substance that is not new or for a
existing chemical at the time specified in
submitted, which period must not be of an
mixture. “Such period may not be of
proposed TSCA 6 or otherwise specified by
unreasonable duration. Directs EPA to
unreasonable duration.”
the Administrator in the rule promulgated
consider costs and resources in determining
under this section. For existing chemicals
the period.
categorized as Substances with Insufficient
Information under proposed TSCA 6(b)(3)(iv),
EPA must require submission of the applicable
minimum information set. Information
required for the initial batch of such chemicals
must be submitted within five years of
enactment of the SCA. Submission of the
minimum data set is required for a new
chemical at the time notice is provided to EPA
[under proposed TSCA section 5(b)] that a
new chemical will be manufactured.
Persons required to
TSCA 4(b) [15 U.S.C. 2603(b)] requires
Proposed TSCA 4(c)(4) directs EPA to specify
Proposed TSCA 4(j) is similar to current
submit test data
manufacturers and processors who
in any rule or order persons required to
TSCA 4(b) and the SCA, but omits the
manufacture or process or who “intend to”
conduct tests and submit information, but
statement that the parties remain individually
manufacture or process a chemical substance
allows designation of a single information
liable for testing requirements. The CSIA is
to conduct tests in response to a rule issued
provider, as is allowed under current law. The
more specific than the SCA in that it requires
by EPA, but al ows EPA to permit such
rule must require submission to EPA of such
test data from manufacturers and processors
persons to designate one person or a qualified
information by each manufacturer and
who have manufactured or processed or who
third party to conduct such tests and submit
processor of a new chemical substance or, as
“begin to” manufacture or process a chemical
data on their behalf.
specified by the Administrator, of an existing
substance.
chemical. In the event that a single information
provider is designated, all parties remain
individually liable for testing requirements.
Failure to submit test data No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 4(a)(3) and 4(b)(3) authorize
No comparable provision.
EPA, by order, to take any regulatory action
authorized under section 6(f) if a manufacturer
or processor fails to submit required
information or a required chemical sample.
CRS-22


Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S.
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
1009)t
Data exemption
TSCA 4(c) [15 U.S.C. 2603(c)] al ows
Proposed TSCA 4(d) would have the same
Similar to the SCA but also applies to testing
manufacturers and processors to request an
effect as TSCA 4(c), except exemptions could
consent agreements. If the manufacturers and
exemption, and directs EPA to grant an
apply to orders as well as rules, and the bill
processors cannot agree on a fair and
exemption if data would be duplicative.
does not provide that the EPA Administrator’s
equitable reimbursement, the amount must be
Provides for reimbursement by the exempted
order to reimburse is a final agency action for
determined by arbitration. If no one complies
persons to manufacturers and processors who the purpose of judicial review.
with the test requirement, the exemption will
collected and submitted data. EPA is required
be terminated and EPA will notify each
to order a manufacturer or processor who is
exempted person in writing of the
exempt to reimburse the entity that submitted
termination.
data. Such an order is a final agency action for
the purpose of judicial review.
Cessation of manufacture
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 4(b)(4) explicitly exempts
No comparable provision.
or processing
from testing requirements any manufacturer
or processor who ceases all manufacturing or
processing of a chemical substance pursuant to
its submission of a declaration of cessation of
manufacture or processing of a chemical
substance (under proposed TSCA 8(b)(4)).
Test rule requirements
TSCA 4(b) [15 U.S.C. 2603(b)] requires EPA
Proposed TSCA 4(c) is similar to 15 U.S.C.
Proposed TSCA 4(f) is similar to 15 U.S.C.
in any test rule to identify the chemical
2603(b), but is applicable to EPA orders as
2603(b) but requires specification of reliable
substance or mixture for which testing is
well as rules.
non-animal test procedures. Directs EPA to
required, specify standards for the
consider costs and resources in determining
development of test data, and, for an existing
testing procedures.
chemical, specify the period during which test
results must be submitted.
Judicial review of test
TSCA 19 [15 U.S.C. 2618 ] subjects rules
Proposed TSCA 19 subjects al rules and
Proposed TSCA 19 subjects rules promulgated
rules
promulgated under TSCA 4(f) to judicial
orders issued under TSCA to judicial review.
under proposed TSCA 4(f) to judicial review.
review.
CRS-23


Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S.
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
1009)t
Prescribed data needs
TSCA 4(b) [15 U.S.C. 2603(b)] authorizes EPA Proposed TSCA 4(a) directs EPA to gather
Proposed TSCA 4(g) requires the
to prescribe data development standards for
information on characteristics, toxicological
Administrator to issue a statement identifying
effects which may present an unreasonable
properties, environmental and biological fate
and explaining the need for data and
risk of injury to health or the environment and and behavior, exposure, and use of a chemical
encouraging use of nonanimal test methods.
for characteristics of chemical substances and
substance.
mixtures which may present such a risk, as
Proposed TSCA 4(j)(2) authorizes the
well as for methodologies including
Proposed TSCA 4(c) authorizes EPA to
Administrator to prescribe guidelines for the
epidemiological studies, serial or hierarchical
prescribe information development standards
development of test data and information for
tests, in vitro tests, and whole animal tests.
for health and environmental information,
health and environmental information,
including information pertaining to: any effect
including data related to toxicity “that may be
that may be considered in a safety standard
indicative of an adverse effect,” exposure
determination; exposure, including presence in (including bioaccumulation, persistence, and
human tissues and fluids; and any characteristic presence in human tissue) and aggregate
of a chemical that may present an adverse
exposure, or other effects that may be
effect. Also authorizes EPA to prescribe
considered in a safety assessment. Authorizes
biomonitoring studies, in addition to
EPA to prescribe methodologies in guidelines
methodologies already permitted under 15
for the development of data and information.
U.S.C. 2603(b).
Requires the Administrator to encourage the
use of nonanimal methodologies. Authorizes
the Administrator to develop guidelines for
evaluating data from biomonitoring studies.
Review and revision of
TSCA 4(b) [15 U.S.C. 2603(b)] requires annual Proposed TSCA 4(c)(3)(C) changes the
Proposed TSCA 4(j) requires review and
data needs
review and revision, if necessary, of standards
interval between required reviews and
revision if necessary of the adequacy of the
for the development of data.
revisions, if necessary, from one to three
data development guidelines at least once
years.
every five years.
Rulemaking process
TSCA 4(b) [15 U.S.C. 2603(b)] directs EPA to
Proposed TSCA 4(c) omits current TSCA
Proposed TSCA 4(j) is similar to the SCA but
issue test rules pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553
requirements for rulemaking that go beyond
also authorizes the use of testing consent
(Administrative Procedure Act, procedures for the notice and comment requirements of 5
agreements. Proposed TSCA 4(g)(2) requires
informal notice and comment rulemaking). In
U.S.C. 553. Proposed TSCA 4(b) authorizes
EPA, when it issues a test order, to issue a
addition, persons must be given an
EPA to issue orders in lieu of rules.
statement containing a discussion of the
opportunity for oral presentation of data,
readily accessible data and information.
views, or arguments and to make written
submissions; a transcript must be made of oral
presentations; and the EPA Administrator
must publish findings required by TSCA
4(a)(1)(A) or (B).
Public notice of receipt of
TSCA 4(d) [15 U.S.C. 2603(d)] requires that
Proposed TSCA 4(e) is similar to 15 U.S.C.
Proposed TSCA 4(k) directs EPA to make
data
EPA provide public notice of receipt of data
2603(d) in requiring public notice of the
available to the public all testing consent
and make data available for examination by any receipt of information, but applies also to
agreements and orders and all data and
person (subject to TSCA section 14).
information submitted in accord with an EPA
information submitted under proposed TSCA
order, and requires that information be made
4.
“available on a publicly accessible Internet
site.”
CRS-24


Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S.
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
1009)t
Interagency testing
TSCA 4(e) [15 U.S.C. 2603(e)] establishes the
This provision is eliminated. The Administrator Proposed TSCA 4(l) is the same as current
committee (ITC)
ITC to advise the EPA Administrator regarding is directed by proposed TSCA 6(a) to establish TSCA 4(e) except that the ITC advises EPA
chemicals that should receive priority
a system for assigning chemical substances into with regard to testing consent agreements and
consideration for promulgation of a test rule
batches, categorizing them, and assigning
test orders as well as test rules.
[under subsection (a)].
priorities for testing and regulation.
Committee
TSCA 4(e) [15 U.S.C. 2603(e)] directs the ITC This provision is eliminated, but see proposed
Proposed TSCA 4(l) is the same as current
recommendations for
to establish a prioritized list of chemicals for
TSCA 6 below.
TSCA 4(e).
testing
the EPA Administrator to consider testing and
to designate up to 50 chemicals on the list as
the highest priority. In selecting chemicals, the
committee is authorized to consider all
relevant factors, including “the extent to which
the substance or mixture is closely related to
a chemical substance or mixture which is
known to present an unreasonable risk of
injury to health or the environment.” Priority
attention is to be given to chemicals “known
to cause or contribute to or which are
suspected of causing or contributing to cancer,
gene mutations, or birth defects.”
Required agency actions
TSCA 4(f) [15 U.S.C. 2603(f)] requires the
This provision is eliminated, but see proposed
This provision is eliminated, but see proposed
EPA Administrator to respond within 180 days TSCA 6 below.
TSCA 6 below.
to new information indicating “that there may
be a reasonable basis to conclude that a
chemical substance or mixture presents or will
present a significant risk of serious or
widespread harm to human beings from
cancer, gene mutations, or birth defects.”
Requires EPA to “initiate appropriate action
under section 5, 6, or 7 to prevent or reduce
to a sufficient extent such risk or publish in
the Federal Register a finding that such risk is
not unreasonable.” A finding that a risk is not
unreasonable is a final agency action for
purposes of judicial review.
CRS-25


Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S.
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
1009)t
Requests from other
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 4(f) authorizes any federal
Proposed TSCA 4(f) authorizes EPA to issue
federal agencies
agency to request that EPA seek information
test rules, enter testing consent agreements,
unavailable to that other agency which it has
or to issue orders to meet testing needs of an
determined would assist it in carrying out its
“implementing authority under another
duties or exercising its authority. Requires
Federal statute.”
EPA within 60 days to collect and provide such
information to the requesting agency, collect
information under TSCA 8, issue a rule or
order to develop the data, or publish in the
Federal Register the reason for not taking any of
these actions.
Certification of data
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 4(g) requires that each
No comparable provision.
submitted
person who submits information under a rule
or order accompany that information with a
certification of the accuracy, reliability, and
completeness (to the extent reasonably
ascertainable) of the information provided.
Such certification must be signed by a
responsible official of the manufacturer or
processor.
CRS-26


Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S.
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
1009)t
Scientific standards for
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 6(d)(2)(D) requires the EPA
Proposed TSCA 4(a)(1) directs the
data assessment
Administrator to “use the best available
Administrator to use “the ‘best available
science” in conducting a risk assessment
science’ and risk assessment principles in
considering the recommendations of the
existence at the time the Administrator is
National Academy of Sciences in the report
developing the framework.”
entitled “Science and Decisions.” Every five
years, the EPA Administrator is required to
review the methodology and may revise it “to
reflect new scientific developments or
understandings.”
a. EPA has stated that it “...is committed to examining alternative test methods that reduce the number of animals needed for testing, reduce pain and suffering of test
animals, and whenever possible, replace animals in testing with validated in vitro (non-animal) test systems. EPA has released guidance on this issue …” (U.S. EPA, “Fact
Sheet on Animal Welfare,” April 2001, EPA 745-F-99-003, http://www.epa.gov/HPV/pubs/general/anfacs.pdf).
Source: Compiled by the Congressional Research Service from the U.S. Code, S. 696, and S. 1009.
CRS-27


Table 3. Notices and Priorities in Selected Provisions of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.), the Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696), and the
Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S. 1009)
Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
“Manufacture” and “process”
TSCA 5(i) [15 U.S.C. 2604(i)] defines
The SCA section 6 amends TSCA 5.
The CSIA section 5 amends TSCA 5.
“manufacture” and “process” as used in
Proposed TSCA 5(a) provides the same
Proposed TSCA 5(h) is the same as 15
TSCA section 5 to mean manufacturing and
definition as current TSCA 5(i).
U.S.C. 2604(i).
processing for commercial purposes.
Notices concerning new chemicals or
TSCA 5(a)(1) [15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(1)]
Proposed TSCA 5(b) prohibits
Proposed TSCA 5(a)(1) is the same as
uses
prohibits manufacture of a new chemical and
manufacture of new chemicals and
current TSCA 5(a).
prohibits manufacture or processing of any
processing of a new chemical for an
chemical for a use which is a significant new
exempted use (see proposed TSCA
use unless notice is submitted to EPA 90
6(h)(2)(B)) unless notice is submitted to
days prior to such manufacture or
EPA.
processing.
For an existing chemical for which EPA
has made a safety determination,
proposed TSCA 5(c)(2) requires notice
prior to manufacture or processing for a
new use, at new production volume, or in
a manner other than specified in the
safety determination.
For an existing chemical for which EPA
has not yet made a safety determination,
proposed TSCA (c)(1) requires a notice
prior to manufacture or processing for a
new use or at a significantly increased
production volume.
New use determination
TSCA 5(a)(2) [15 U.S.C. 2604(a)(2)] directs
Prior to a safety standard determination
Proposed TSCA 5(a)(2) is the same as
EPA to designate a significant new use of an
for an existing chemical, proposed TSCA
current TSCA 5(a).
existing chemical by promulgating a rule
5(c) designates a use to be a new use if at
after considering “all relevant factors,
the time of enactment of the Safe
including – (A) the projected volume of
Chemicals Act that use was not ongoing,
manufacturing and processing of a chemical
or if manufacture or processing of the
substance, (B) the extent to which a use
substance would be at a significantly
changes the type or form of exposure of
increased volume. After a safety standard
human beings or the environment to a
determination has been made for an
chemical substance, (C) the extent to which
existing chemical, a new use is any use,
a use increases the magnitude and duration
production volume, or manner other
of exposure of human beings or the
than those the EPA Administrator
environment to a chemical substance, and
specified in the safety standard
(D) the reasonably anticipated manner and
determination.
methods of manufacturing, processing,
distribution in commerce, and disposal of a
CRS-28


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
chemical substance.”
Special substance characteristics
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 5(e) directs the EPA
No comparable provision.
Administrator to determine by order or
rule whether a variant of a chemical
substance exhibiting one or more “special
substance characteristics” [such as size or
reactivity, as defined in proposed TSCA
3(20)] is a new use or a distinct
substance. Manufacturers of substances
determined to be distinct must satisfy the
requirements for new chemicals under
proposed TSCA 5(b).
Notice content for new chemical
TSCA 5(d) [15 U.S.C. 2604(d)] requires that
Proposed TSCA 5(g)(1)(A) requires a
Proposed TSCA 5(b) eliminates the explicit
substances
notices contain: trade name or common
notice for a new chemical substance to
notice requirements in current law, but
name; chemical identity and molecular
include: the chemical identity and any
includes similar requirements by reference
structure; categories of use; amount of each
special substance characteristics; identity
to EPA’s current implementing regulations
chemical manufactured or processed;
and primary business location of the
at 40 CFR 720.45 (information that must
byproducts resulting from such manufacture
manufacturer; a list of health and safety
be included with a notice) and 720.50
or processing; number of individuals
studies with respect to the chemical
(existing test data that must be included
exposed; in the initial report, the manner of
substance; upon request of the
with a notice) and successor regulations.
disposal; any test data related to the effect of Administrator, a copy of each study not
Also requires information about intended
activities with respect to the chemical on
previously submitted; the projected
conditions of use and reasonably
health or the environment; and a description annual manufacturing or processing
anticipated exposure.
of any other data concerning environmental
volume of the chemical substance for
and health effects of such substance, insofar
each of the subsequent three years; the
as reasonably ascertainable.
name and location of each facility to
which the chemical substance is expected
to be sent for subsequent processing,
distribution, or use; and al other existing
information not previously submitted
regarding toxicological properties of the
chemical substance and the uses of, and
exposure and fate information relating to,
the chemical substance; the minimum
information set established under
proposed TSCA 4(a), where applicable;
and a statement that either the chemical
is likely to meet the safety standard under
proposed TSCA 6(d), or the uses
proposed for the new chemical substance
meet the criteria for being exempt (in
proposed TSCA 6(h)(2)(B)).
CRS-29


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Notice content for new uses of existing
TSCA 5(d) [15 U.S.C. 2604(d)] requires that
Proposed TSCA 5(g)(1)(B) requires that a Proposed TSCA 5(b) eliminates the explicit
chemical substances
notices contain: trade name or common
notice for a new use of an existing
notice requirements in current law, but
name; chemical identity and molecular
substance that has not yet been subject
includes similar requirements by reference
structure; categories of use; amount of each
to a safety determination include all
to EPA’s current implementing regulations
chemical manufactured or processed;
updates to the declaration in proposed
at 40 CFR 720.45 and 720.50 and
byproducts resulting from such manufacture
TSCA 8(b)(2) as well as (to the extent it
successor regulations. Also requires
or processing; number of individuals
is relevant to new use, new production
information about intended conditions of
exposed; in the initial report, the manner of
volume, or other new manner of
use and reasonably anticipated exposure.
disposal; any test data related to the effect of manufacturing or processing): a list of
activities with respect to the chemical on
health and safety studies with respect to
health or the environment; and a description the chemical substance; upon request of
of any other data concerning environmental
the Administrator, a copy of each study
and health effects of such substance, insofar
not previously submitted; the projected
as reasonably ascertainable.
annual manufacturing or processing
volume of the chemical substance for
each of the subsequent three years; the
name and location of each facility to
which the chemical substance is expected
to be sent for subsequent processing,
distribution, or use; and al other existing
information not previously submitted
regarding toxicological properties of the
chemical substance and the uses of, and
exposure and fate information relating to,
the chemical substance.
CRS-30


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Notice content for new uses of existing
No comparable provision
Proposed TSCA 5(g)(1)(C) requires that
No comparable provision.
chemical substances that meet the safety
a notice for a new use of an existing
standard
substance that meets the safety standard
include all updates to the declaration in
proposed TSCA 8(b)(2) as well as (to the
extent it is relevant to new use, new
production volume, or other new manner
of manufacturing or processing): a list of
health and safety studies with respect to
the chemical substance; upon request of
the Administrator, a copy of each study
not previously submitted; the projected
annual manufacturing or processing
volume of the chemical substance for
each of the subsequent three years; the
name and location of each facility to
which the chemical substance is expected
to be sent for subsequent processing,
distribution, or use; and al other existing
information not previously submitted
regarding toxicological properties of the
chemical substance and the uses of, and
exposure and fate information relating to,
the chemical substance; all relevant
updates to the minimum information set;
and a statement that the chemical wil
continue to meet the safety standard if
the new use is allowed.
CRS-31


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Notice of commencement
No comparable requirement in the statute,
Proposed TSCA 5(d) requires a
Proposed TSCA 5(c)(2) states that a
but a notice of commencement must be filed manufacturer or processor to notify EPA
chemical substance may be the subject of a
within 30 days of the beginning of
within 30 days of the commencement of
notice of commencement at the end of the
manufacture, according to EPA (“How to
manufacturing or processing of a new
applicable review period unless the
File a Notice of Commencement,”
chemical substance. The notice is
Administrator determines that the
http://www.epa.gov/oppt/newchems/pubs/file
required to include the information
substance is not likely to meet the safety
noc.htm).
required to be in the declaration by
standard.
proposed TSCA 8(b)(5).
Proposed TSCA 5(d) requires a
manufacturer or processor to notify EPA
within 30 days of the commencement of
nonexempt manufacture of a new chemical
substance or nonexempt manufacture or
processing of an existing chemical
substance for a new use. Notice must
contain the name of the manufacturer or
processor and the initial date of
nonexempt commercial manufacture or
processing. Allows withdrawal of such
notice if commercial manufacture or
processing does not commence.
Certification
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 5(i) requires that each
No comparable provision.
submission of information under a rule or
order be accompanied by a certification
of the accuracy, reliability, and
completeness (to the extent reasonably
ascertainable) of the information
provided. Such certification must be
signed by a responsible official of the
manufacturer or processor.
CRS-32


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Submission of test data with notice
TSCA 5(b) [15 U.S.C. 2604(b)] requires
At the time a manufacturer or processor
This provision is eliminated; no data need
persons who propose to manufacture a new
notifies EPA that it plans to manufacture
be developed prior to submitting a notice.
chemical or to manufacture or process a
or process a chemical substance that is
chemical for a significant new use to submit
new or that is not new but for which a
with such notice any test data that are
new use is proposed, proposed TSCA
required by rule under TSCA 4(a). If no test
5(f) requires submission of any data for
data are required under TSCA 4(a), but the
that chemical substance that are required
chemical has been listed under TSCA
by rule or order under section 4(b), 5(b),
5(b)(4), indicating that the EPA
or 5(c). The Administrator may require
Administrator has determined that it
submission of information prior to, or as
“presents or may present an unreasonable
a condition of, categorization,
risk,” manufacturers and processors must
commencement of manufacturing or
submit data showing that manufacture,
processing, or exceeding a specified
processing, distribution in commerce, use,
volume or expanding use of the
and disposal (in the case of a new chemical
substance, unless the substance is in the
or mixture), or the new use (in the case of a
category of substances with insufficient
significant new use), “will not present an
information.
unreasonable risk of injury to health or the
environment.”
CRS-33


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
EPA’s response to notice and
EPA has 90 days to decide whether the
Proposed TSCA 5(b)(2)(C) requires EPA
Proposed TSCA 5(c) directs the
categorization of chemical substances
chemical or chemical use may present an
to categorize new chemicals within 90
Administrator, not later than 90 days after
subject to notice requirements
unreasonable risk of injury to health or the
days of receiving a pre-manufacture
receipt of a notice, to conduct an initial
environment.
notice.
review of the notice, including information
submitted with the notice; develop a
Proposed TSCA 5(c)(2)(C) requires EPA
profile of the substance and the potential
to determine within 180 days after
for exposure; and make any necessary
receiving notice and data regarding a new
determination that –
use of a chemical substance that meets
the safety standard, whether it has been
(1) the chemical substance is not likely to
established that the chemical substance
meet the safety standard;
or mixture would continue to meet the
safety standard under proposed TSCA
(2) the chemical substance is likely to meet
section 6(b).
the safety standard under the intended
conditions of use (in which case the review
Proposed TSCA 5(b)(2) requires the
period shall expire and manufacture may
Administrator to promulgate a rule
commence); or
designating categories and specifying the
process and criteria that will be used to
(3) additional information is necessary in
categorize new chemical substances.
order to make a determination (in which
Requires EPA to categorize al new
case, EPA must provide opportunity for the
chemical substances. The required
submitter of the notice to submit additional
categories include: 1) Substances of Very
information, may extend the review period
High Concern, 2) Substances Unlikely to
for that purpose, on receipt of such
Meet the Safety Standard, 3) Substances
information must promptly make a
with Insufficient Information, and 4)
determination as to whether the substance
Substances Likely to Meet the Safety
or use is likely to meet the safety standard.
Standard. Chemicals in the last category
EPA also is authorized to allow
would be added to the inventory of
manufacture pending submission of
existing chemicals (see proposed TSCA
additional information.)
8(b)), assigned to a batch (see below
proposed TSCA 6(a)), and further
categorized as either Substances of Very
Low Concern or Substances to Undergo
a Safety Standard Determination.
Protection against unreasonable risks
TSCA 5(f) [15 U.S.C. 2604(f)] directs EPA to This provision would be eliminated. S.
If EPA determines that a new chemical or
control an unreasonable risk posed by a new 696 requires risk management prior to
use is unlikely to meet the safety standard,
chemical or a significant new use of a
production and distribution.
proposed TSCA 5(c) directs EPA to, by
chemical in the interim between the
consent agreement or by order, prohibit
expiration of the notification period and the
manufacture of the chemical substance, or
effective date of a rule that is being
manufacture or processing of the chemical
developed to control such risk. EPA is
substance for a significant new use, or
directed to issue a proposed rule or an
prohibit manufacture or processing
order. If the EPA Administrator issues a
without compliance with specified
proposed rule, it is effective on the date it is
restrictions.
CRS-34


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
issued.
Regulation pending development of
TSCA 5(e) [15 U.S.C. 2604(e)] authorizes
This provision would be eliminated.
If the Administrator determines that
information
the EPA Administrator to issue a proposed
Proposed TSCA 5(a) requires submission
additional information is necessary to make
order to prohibit or limit manufacture,
of data and a safety determination prior
a safety determination, proposed TSCA
processing, distribution in commerce, use,
to production and distribution of a new
5(c) authorizes EPA to prohibit
or disposal of a new chemical or significant
chemical or of an existing chemical for a
manufacture of the chemical substance, or
new use in the event that the EPA
new use.
manufacture or processing of the chemical
Administrator determines that: the
substance for a significant new use, or
information available "is insufficient to permit
manufacture or processing of the chemical
a reasoned evaluation of the health and
substance without compliance with
environmental effects" of the chemical; and
specified restrictions pending receipt of
either “in the absence of sufficient
information.
information” the chemical may present an
unreasonable risk, or it will be produced in
substantial quantities and "may reasonably be
anticipated to enter the environment in
substantial quantities or there is or may be
significant or substantial human exposure to
the substance." If EPA makes such a
determination but no order is issued or
objections are filed to the order, then EPA
must apply to the District Court to prohibit
or limit activities with respect to the
chemical, unless EPA finds on the basis of
the objections (and new information) that
the determination cannot be made.
Statement of reasons for not taking
If EPA does not take action with respect to a This provision would be eliminated.
This provision would be eliminated.
action
chemical covered by a test rule [under
TSCA 4(a)], a significant new use rule [under
TSCA 5(a)(1)(B)], or listed under TSCA
5(b)(4), then TSCA 5(g) directs the EPA
Administrator to publish a statement of
reasons for not taking action.
Extension of the notice period
TSCA 5(c) [15 U.S.C. 2604(c)] authorizes
Proposed TSCA 5(c)(2)(C) authorizes
Proposed TSCA 5(c) is the same as current
EPA to extend the period between notice
EPA to extend the determination
TSCA 5(c) .
and manufacture for additional periods of up
deadline for periods not to exceed one
to a total of 90 days “for good cause.”
year in the aggregate.
CRS-35


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Publication of notice
TSCA 5(d)(1) [15 U.S.C. 2604(d)(1)]
Proposed TSCA 5(g) is similar to current
The CSIA eliminates the provision at
requires notice to be available for
law but specifies that EPA must make
current TSCA 5(d)(1). Proposed TSCA 5(f)
examination by interested persons, subject
notices available on a publicly accessible
directs the Administrator to make available
to disclosure restrictions at TSCA 14 [15
Internet site and requires disclosure of
to the public all notices, rules and orders,
U.S.C. 2613]. [See “Disclosure of data”
the availability of the minimum data set
and all data and information submitted or
section below.]
and specification of each chemical
issued under proposed TSCA 5, subject to
category. In addition, requires EPA to
disclosure restrictions at proposed TSCA
TSCA 5(d)(2) directs EPA to publish a notice make available on the Internet monthly a 14.
identifying the chemical, listing the intended
list of chemical substances for which
uses, and describing the nature of tests
notice has been received. [Also, see
Proposed TSCA 5(b)(2) is the same as
performed and data that were developed
“Disclosure of data” section below.]
current TSCA 5(d)(2) except that EPA is
pursuant to a rule.
not required to publish a description of the
nature of tests performed and data that
were developed pursuant to a rule.
Exemptions from notice requirements



General authority
TSCA 5(h)(4) [15 U.S.C. 2604(h)(4)]
Proposed TSCA 5(h)(1) authorizes the
Proposed TSCA 5(g)(3) is similar to
authorizes EPA upon application and by rule
Administrator to order an exemption
current TSCA 5(h)(4) but the EPA
to exempt a manufacturer of a new chemical
from particular notice requirements
Administrator must determine that the
substance from notification and data
when scientific consensus exists that the
substance “is expected to meet the safety
requirements, if the EPA Administrator
intrinsic properties of a new chemical
standard under the intended conditions of
determines it will not “present an
substance are such that it “does not and
use.” Note that the rulemaking provision in
unreasonable risk of injury to health or the
would not pose any risk of injury to
the current version of TSCA is retained,
environment.” Any such rule must be
human health or the environment under
but refers to TSCA 6(c)(2) and (3),
promulgated in accord with TSCA section
any intended or reasonably anticipated
sections which are struck in the CSIA.
6(c)(2) and (3) (see below in Table 4 at
levels of production, patterns of use, or
“Procedure for issuing rules”).
exposures arising at any stage across the
lifecycle of the chemical substance.”
Prohibits EPA from basing its
determination upon a finding or
assumption of low human or
environmental exposure.
CRS-36


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Intermediate production chemicals
TSCA 5(h)(5) [15 U.S.C. 2604(h)(5)]
Proposed TSCA 5(h)(5) is the same as
Proposed TSCA 5(g)(4) is the same as
authorizes exemptions upon application for
current law.
current TSCA 5(h)(5). (The new provision
production-related (temporary, so-called
would exempt persons from notification
“intermediate”) chemicals when no human
requirements, not data requirements
or environmental exposure will occur.
because those latter requirements have
been eliminated).
Test marketing
TSCA 5(h)(1) [15 U.S.C. 2604(h)(1)]
Proposed TSCA 5(h)(2) is similar to
Proposed TSCA 5(g)(1) is the same as
authorizes EPA to exempt any person from
current law but a person must show that
current TSCA 5(h)(1). (The new provision
notification or data requirements so as to
it “wil not endanger human health or the
would exempt persons from notification
permit manufacture or processing for test
environment.”
requirements, not data requirements
marketing purposes, if the person applies for
because those latter requirements have
such exemption and demonstrates the
“Test marketing” is defined in proposed
been eliminated).
chemical will not present an “unreasonable
TSCA 5(a)(2) to exclude provision of a
risk.”
chemical or article containing a chemical
to an end consumer.
Equivalent chemicals and duplicative
TSCA 5(h)(2) [15 U.S.C. 2604(h)(2)] al ows
Proposed TSCA 5(h)(3) allows
This provision is eliminated (because data
data
manufacturers and processors of new
manufacturers and processors of new
requirements have been eliminated).
chemicals or chemicals with significant new
chemicals or chemicals with new uses to
uses that are on the priority list but are not
request, and EPA to grant, full or partial
subject to a TSCA 4(b) data submission
exemption from data submission
requirement to request from EPA an
requirements if the chemical is equivalent
exemption from the TSCA 5(b) requirement
to a chemical substance for which data
that they submit data showing that
have been submitted and submission
manufacture, processing, distribution in
would be duplicative of data previously
commerce, use, and disposal of the chemical
submitted to EPA. Provides for
substance, or the significant new use, will
reimbursement by the exempted persons
not present an unreasonable risk. Directs
to those who col ected and submitted
EPA to grant such exemption if the chemical
data in the same manner as current law.
is equivalent to a substance for which data
has been submitted and data would be
duplicative. Provides for reimbursement by
the exempted persons to manufacturers and
processors who col ected and submitted
data. EPA is required to order a
manufacturer or processor who is exempt
to reimburse the entity that submitted data.
Such an order is a final agency action for the
purpose of judicial review.
Small quantities
TSCA 5(h)(3) [15 U.S.C. 2604(h)(3)]
Proposed TSCA 5(h)(4) is the same as
Proposed TSCA 5(g)(2) is the same as
exempts from notification and data
current law.
current TSCA 5(h)(3). (The new provision
requirements manufacturing and processing
would exempt persons from notification
of small quantities for purposes of scientific
requirements, not data requirements
experimentation or chemical research on, or
because those latter requirements have
analysis of, such substances or another
been eliminated).
CRS-37


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
substance, including product development.
EPA response to exemption requests
TSCA 5(h)(6) [15 U.S.C. 2604(h)(6)]
Proposed TSCA 5(h)(6) is the same as
Proposed TSCA 5(g)(5) is the same as
requires EPA to publish notices of, and
current law.
current TSCA 5(h)(6).
request comments on, requests for
exemptions that the agency receives. EPA
must issue an approval or disapproval within
45 days.
Prioritizing existing chemicals for
TSCA 5(b)(4) [15 U.S.C. 2604(b)(4)]
The SCA would eliminate this provision,
The CSIA also would eliminate this
evaluation and action (Chemicals of
authorizes EPA to “by rule, compile and
but Section 7 of the SCA proposes to
provision, but proposed TSCA 4(e) directs
Concern, Batches, and Priorities)
keep current a list of chemical substances
amend TSCA 6(a) to direct EPA to
the Administrator within one year of
with respect to which the EPA
establish a system for assigning chemical
enactment of the CSIA to establish a risk-
Administrator finds that the manufacture,
substances into batches and prioritizing
based screening process for identifying
processing, distribution in commerce, use,
them for evaluation in accordance with
whether existing chemical substances are a
or disposal, or any combination of such
proposed TSCA 6. Proposed TSCA 6(b)
high or a low priority for a safety
activities, presents or may present an
directs EPA to assign chemical substances
assessment and determination under
unreasonable risk of injury to health or the
on the active portion of the inventory
proposed TSCA 6. Proposed TSCA 4(e)
environment.” In listing decisions the EPA
(see proposed TSCA 8) to batches and to directs the Administrator “in a timely
Administrator is directed to consider “all
publish lists of substances assigned to
manner” to screen existing chemical
relevant factors, including – (I) the effects of
each batch. The initial batch generally
substances or categories of substances on
the chemical substance to health and the
should include chemicals for which
the active inventory created under
magnitude of human exposure to such
reports are submitted to EPA under its
proposed TSCA 8(b). Substances are to be
substance; and (II) the effects of the chemical Chemical Data Reporting rule as of the
removed from the list of high-priority
substance on the environment and the
date of enactment of the SCA, but EPA is
substances when a safety determination is
magnitude of environmental exposure to
allowed to include and exclude particular
published.
such substance.” Any rule listing a chemical
substances if they are used or released
must identify “uses that the Administrator
into the environment in a manner that
Priorities must be determined based on:
determines, by rule under subsection (a)(2),
might warrant, or not warrant, early
the ability of EPA to schedule and complete
would constitute a significant new use of
evaluation. EPA shall assign chemical
safety assessments and determinations
such substance.”
substances to subsequent batches
under proposed TSCA 6 in a timely
reflecting the extent to which each
manner; and reasonably available data and
warrants earlier or later evaluation.
information concerning the hazard,
exposure, and use characteristics at the
Proposed TSCA 6(b) directs EPA to
time the decision is made.
promulgate regulations establishing
categories and specifying the process and
When proposing its process and criteria
criteria for categorizing chemical
for screening, the Administrator must
substances, beginning with substances
include an initial list of chemical substances
assigned to the initial batch. Within 180
and indicate whether each is high or low
days of promulgating regulations under
priority. This list must include substances
this section, EPA is required to publish
prioritized by EPA before the enactment of
lists of chemicals assigned to each
the CSIA and for which an assessment or
category for the initial batch using the
determination has not been completed.
following four categories: Substances of
Proposed TSCA 4(e)(3)(I) authorizes the
Very High Concern, Substances of Very
Administrator to revise the priority
Low Concern, Substances to Undergo
designation of a chemical substance based
CRS-38


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Safety Standard Determinations, and
on information made available after the
Substances with Insufficient Information.
date of the previous designation.
Prioritizing existing chemicals for
(see above)
(see above)
Proposed TSCA 4(e)(4) provides EPA 180
evaluation and action (Chemicals of
days to make a prioritization screening
Concern, Batches, and Priorities)
decision for an active chemical substance
after EPA receives a recommendation and
(cont.)
relevant information from a Governor or
state agency. This decision is not subject to
judicial review.
Proposed TSCA 5(e) authorizes
prioritization screening for a chemical
substance at any time after the
Administrator receives a notice of
commencement under proposed TSCA
5(d) or significant new information
regarding the chemical substance.
Criteria for categorizing existing chemical No comparable provision, but EPA currently
Proposed TSCA 6(b)(3)(i) directs the
Proposed TSCA 4(e)(2)(C) requires the
substances
categorizes some chemicals as persistent,
Administrator to designate chemicals as
criteria for prioritization include: the
bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) or as
Substances of Very High Concern
recommendation of a Governor or state
persistent organic pol utants (POPs)
(SVHC) if there is evidence of widespread agency; hazard and exposure potential;
(http://www.epa.gov/pbt/). Other chemicals
exposure and the chemical substances (1)
intended conditions of use; evidence and
are categorized as hazardous substances
are toxic, persist in the environment, and
indicators of exposure potential to humans;
under other environmental laws. (For
are bioaccumulative or (2) are highly
volume manufactured or processed;
example, see 40 Code of Federal Regulations hazardous. In addition, the category is to
significant changes in production or
(CFR), Part 355, Appendix A for a list of
include chemicals subject to regulation
processing volume; availability of
“extremely hazardous substances” under the under TSCA 6 or 7 (as in effect on the
information needed for conducting a safety
Emergency Planning and Community Right-
day before enactment of the Safe
assessment or determination (with limited
to-Know Act, 42 USC 11011 et seq.)
Chemicals Act) or that are subject to a
availability a factor in designating a
voluntary phase-out, administered by EPA substance as a high priority); and the
that has been completed or is underway
extent of federal or state regulation (with
at the time the category designation is
existing federal or state regulation of any
made.
uses a factor in designating a substance to
be a low priority for a safety assessment
Proposed TSCA 6(b)(3(ii) directs the
and determination.)
Administrator to designate chemicals as
Substances of Very Low Concern (SVLC)
Proposed TSCA 4(e)(3)(E) requires EPA to
if they possess intrinsic low-hazard
identify a substance as high priority if,
properties and require no further action
relative to other substances, it has the
by EPA.
potential for high hazard and high
exposure. Authorizes the Administrator to
Proposed TSCA 6(b)(3)(iv)directs the
identify a substance as high priority if,
Administrator to designate as Substances
relative to other substances, it has the
with Insufficient Information those
potential for high hazard or high exposure.
chemicals for which information is not
Authorizes EPA to identify an inactive
available or not sufficient to allow for an
CRS-39


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
informed categorization decision.
substance (see proposed TSCA 8(b)(7)) as
Criteria for categorizing existing chemical (see above)
Proposed TSCA 6(b)(3)(iii) requires the
high priority if it has not been subject to a
substances
Administrator to designate chemicals to
regulatory action to ban or phase out the
the category of Substances to Undergo
substance, and it demonstrates high hazard
(cont.)
Safety Standard Determinations if, based
and high exposure.
on a screening of available use, hazard,
and exposure information, the chemicals
Proposed TSCA 4(e)(3)(F) directs EPA to
do not meet the criteria for SVLC or
identify a chemical as low priority if it is
SVHC and have sufficiently robust
likely to meet the safety standard under
information to inform prioritization
the intended conditions of use.
decisions. Requires EPA to designate the
process and criteria to prioritize
chemicals within the category for safety
assessments and determinations.
Notice and comment
Rulemaking under TSCA 5(b)(4) [15 U.S.C.
Proposed TSCA 6(b) directs EPA to
Proposed TSCA 4(e) requires EPA to
2604(b)(4)] must be promulgated pursuant
promulgate regulations establishing
publish for public comment a proposed
to the procedures specified in the
categories and specifying the process and
prioritization screening process and to
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) criteria for categorizing chemical
establish criteria for prioritizing substances.
providing for notice and public comment,
substances. EPA also is required to
Proposed TSCA 4(e)(3)(G) subjects
and must provide opportunity for oral and
publish lists of chemicals assigned to each
chemical prioritizations to notice and
written presentation of data, views, or
category.
opportunity for comment. Proposed TSCA
arguments. In addition, a transcript must be
4(e)(3)(J) directs EPA to publish and keep
kept of any oral presentation and the EPA
current a list of high-priority substances
Administrator must make and publish with
and a list of low-priority substances and to
the rule the finding that an activity related to
justify changes to the lists. Requires the
the chemical “presents or may present an
Administrator to publish a list of
unreasonable risk of injury to health or the
substances being screened and to request
environment.”
information on those substances “from
time to time.” Any recommendation from
a Governor or state agency shall be subject
to public notice and comment, and EPA is
required to publish its explanation,
including a description of the information
relied upon, for why it prioritized a
chemical substance as it did.
Prioritizing chemicals within categories
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 6(b)(4) provides that
Proposed TSCA 4(e)(3)(H) authorizes the
within 270 days of promulgating
Administrator to determine and to revise
regulations under this section, EPA must
the order for performing safety
publish priority class assignments (see
assessments on high-priority substances
below) for the initial batch of chemicals
under proposed TSCA 6.
assigned to the category of Substances to
Undergo Safety Standard Determinations.
CRS-40


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Judicial review of EPA priorities
Rules promulgated under TSCA 5(b)(4) are
Proposed TSCA 6(c) prohibits judicial
Proposed TSCA 4(e)(5) prohibits judicial
subject to judicial review under TSCA 19
review of EPA’s decisions about batching,
review of EPA action under proposed
(see Table 6. at “Judicial review of
categorization, and prioritization.
TSCA 4(e).
restrictions and other rules” below).
However, failure to designate or publish a
list of chemical substances assigned to a
batch, category, or priority class is
subject to judicial review and considered
a failure to perform a nondiscretionary
duty.
Source: Compiled by the Congressional Research Service based on the U.S. Code, S. 696, and S. 1009.
CRS-41


Table 4. Safety Standard Determinations and Restrictions in Selected Provisions of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.), the Safe
Chemicals Act (S. 696), and the Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S. 1009)
Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Risk management
TSCA 6(a) [15 U.S.C. 2605(a)] directs EPA by
Proposed TSCA 6(f) would authorize EPA
Proposed TSCA 6(a) requires the
rule to apply one or more requirements “to
to impose conditions on the manufacture,
Administrator to establish requirements,
the extent necessary to protect adequately
processing, use, distribution in commerce,
as appropriate, for risk management of
against” an “unreasonable risk” “using the
or disposal of a chemical substance, or
each high-priority substance or mixture.
least burdensome requirements,” if EPA finds
mixture or article containing a chemical
that “there is a reasonable basis to conclude
substance. Many of the conditions that EPA
Proposed TSCA 6(c)(9) requires EPA to
that the manufacture, processing, distribution
is authorized to impose are the same as the
impose various restrictions on high-
in commerce, use, or disposal of a chemical
regulatory options listed in current law, but
priority chemicals that do not meet the
substance or mixture … presents or will
the proposed law authorizes EPA to manage safety standard for the intended conditions
present an unreasonable risk of injury to
risk in any manner that the Administrator
of use. Many of the conditions that EPA is
health or the environment.” Specifies various
determines is appropriate, and specifically
authorized to impose are the same as the
regulatory options. Authorizes regulations to:
authorizes EPA to impose a requirement
regulatory options listed in current law,
prohibit or limit the amount of substance
that the manufacturers and processors of a
but the proposed law also authorizes EPA
manufactured, processed, or distributed in
chemical substance or mixture or article
to manage risk in any manner that the
commerce, generally or for a specific use;
containing it develop a risk reduction
Administrator determines is appropriate
require labeling, recordkeeping, provision of
management plan to achieve a risk
and to require testing under proposed
notice to distributors and to the public of
reduction specified by the EPA
TSCA 4(f).
unreasonable risk of injury, or replacement or
Administrator.
Like the SCA, the CSIA does not
repurchase of a substance; and specify
authorize limiting conditions to specified
methods of disposal.
The bill does not authorize the option of
requiring manufacturers or processors to
geographic areas, nor does it prohibit
give notice of unreasonable risk of injury to
requiring a person to take an action that
distributors or the public or to replace or
would be in violation of a law or
repurchase a substance.
requirement of a state or political
subdivision.
In addition, the SCA differs from current
law in that the bill does not authorize
limiting conditions to specified geographic
areas, nor does it prohibit requiring a
person to take an action that would be in
violation of a law or requirement of a state
or political subdivision.
Procedure for issuing rules
TSCA 6(c) [15 U.S.C. 2605(c)] specifies
The SCA eliminates current TSCA
Same as the SCA; eliminates the
procedures for rulemaking that allow for
requirements for rulemaking that go beyond requirement.
informal hearings. Requires that EPA’s
the notice and comment requirements of 5
decisions be based on the rulemaking record.
U.S.C. 553.
CRS-42


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Restrictions on substances that do
No specific comparable provision, but TSCA
Proposed TSCA 6(d)(5)(F) prohibits
Proposed TSCA 6(c)(9) requires EPA to
not meet the safety standard
6(a) directs EPA by rule to apply one or more
manufacture, processing, and distribution in
promulgate rules imposing various
requirements (such as labeling or banning
commerce of a chemical substance 18
restrictions (see above) for high-priority
particular uses) “to the extent necessary to
months after EPA determines that the
chemical substances that do not meet the
protect adequately against” an “unreasonable
substance fails to meet the safety standard.
safety standard for the intended conditions
risk” “using the least burdensome
A manufacturer or processor may be
of use (based on weight of the evidence
requirements,” if the EPA Administrator finds
granted a one-time extension of the
and magnitude of risk).
that “there is a reasonable basis to conclude
deadline for a period of no more than five
that the manufacture, processing, distribution
years if the manufacturer or processor
in commerce, use, or disposal of a chemical
demonstrates a compelling technological
substance or mixture, or that any combination need to continue a restricted activity or
of such activities, presents or will present an
that a factor whol y beyond the control of
unreasonable risk of injury to health or the
the manufacturer or processor prevents
environment.”
compliance within the 18-month time
period.
EPA statement
TSCA 6(c) [15 U.S.C. 2605(c)] requires for
This provision is eliminated. The
Proposed TSCA 6(c)(9)(D) requires the
any rule promulgated under TSCA 6(a) that
Administrator would be authorized under
Administrator to base a determination
EPA publish a statement describing the health
proposed TSCA 6(f) to impose needed
that a ban or phase out of manufacture,
and environmental effects, level of exposure,
restrictions by order.
processing, or use of a chemical substance
benefits of the substance, and “reasonably
is necessary on the following
ascertainable economic consequences of the
considerations (which shall be published):
rule, after consideration of the effect on the
availability of technically and economically
national economy, small business,
feasible alternatives for the substance
technological innovation, the environment,
under the intended conditions of use;
and public health.”
relative risks posed by those alternatives;
economic and social costs and benefits of
the proposed regulatory action and
options considered and of potential
alternatives; and the economic and social
benefits and costs of the chemical
substance, alternatives to the chemical
substance, and any necessary restrictions
on the chemical substance or alternatives.
CRS-43


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Exemptions from prohibitions and
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 6(h) authorizes EPA to
Proposed TSCA 6(c)(10) authorizes EPA
other restrictions
grant, by order, exemptions (and renewals
to exempt use of a chemical substance
of exemptions) to restrictions proposed to
from any restriction under proposed
be established under sections
TSCA 6(c)(9) if the Administrator
5(b)(1)(C)(ii)(I), 6(d)(5), 6(e), and 6(f).
determines: the exemption is in the
Exemptions and renewals may be granted,
interest of national security; lack of
by order, for up to five years, if
availability of the chemical substance
manufacturers and processors “have
would cause significant disruption in the
established by clear and convincing evidence
national economy; the use is a critical or
that the uses to be exempted meet the
essential use “no feasible alternative for
exemption criteria.” Those criteria are: 1)
the use would materially reduce risk to
that the exemption is in the paramount
health or the environment;” or no feasible
interest of national security; 2) lack of
alternative for the use is economically,
availability would cause significant disruption technically, or efficiently available; or use
in the national economy; or 3) the use is a
provides a net benefit to human health,
critical or essential use for which there is no the environment, or public safety.
safer feasible and available alternative, or the
specified use compared to available
alternatives provides a substantial net
benefit to human health, the environment,
or public safety.
The manufacturer or processor must notify
customers and the public of any exemptions
granted. EPA is authorized to impose on a
granted exemption any condition that is
necessary to ensure the protection of
human health and the environment.
Regulation under other EPA-
TSCA 6(c)(1) directs EPA to promulgate
Proposed TSCA 6(f) does not require EPA
The CSIA eliminates the provision in
administered federal laws
needed rules under other environmental laws,
to promulgate rules under other
current TSCA 6(c)(1), but not the
unless it is in the public interest to issue rules
environmental laws rather than under TSCA provision in 9(b).
under TSCA. This directive is repeated in
Section 6. However, the provision in
TSCA 9(b).
current TSCA 9(b) is retained.
CRS-44


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Safety standard
No specific comparable provision, but in
For a chemical to meet the safety standard,
Proposed TSCA 3(16) defines the safety
general terms, the standard embedded in
proposed TSCA 6(d)(2)(B)(ii)(II) requires
standard as “a standard that ensures that
TSCA is that EPA should protect against
the EPA Administrator to find that “there is
no unreasonable risk of harm to human
“unreasonable risk of injury to health or the
a reasonable certainty that no harm will
health or the environment will result from
environment,” a standard that appears to
result to human health or the environment
exposure to a chemical substance.”
require risk assessment but al ows balancing
from aggregate exposure to the chemical
of risks and benefits.
substance.” Proposed TSCA 6(d) directs the
EPA Administrator to base a determination
of whether a chemical meets its safety
standard “solely on considerations of human
health and the environment, including the
health of vulnerable populations.” To the
extent practicable, the EPA Administrator is
required to incorporate “any available
scientific information relating to the effect of
cumulative exposure … on human health
and the environment.”
Proposed TSCA 6(d)(1)(B)(i) states that
each manufacturer and processor “shal at
al times bear the burden of proof in any
legal proceeding relating to a decision of the
Administrator regarding whether the
chemical substance meets the safety
standard.” The bill imposes a duty on the
manufacturer or processor of a chemical to
provide sufficient information for EPA to
determine whether the chemical meets the
safety standard, and imposes a duty on EPA
to determine whether a chemical meets the
safety standard.
General process for safety
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 6(d)(2) requires that EPA
Proposed TSCA 6(a) requires the
assessments
produce a risk assessment addressing health
Administrator to conduct a safety
and environmental impacts in support of any assessment for each high-priority
determination that a manufacturer or
substance. Proposed TSCA 4(e)(3)(F)
processor of a chemical substance has met
prohibits the Administrator from
the applicable safety standard.
performing a safety assessment on a low-
priority substance. Proposed TSCA 6(b)
Proposed TSCA 6(d)(2)(H) would require
requires that safety assessments are risk-
no risk assessment when EPA determined
based; consider hazard, use, and exposure
that a manufacturer or processor has not
information (including exposure of
met the burden of proof that the safety
vulnerable subpopulations) for the
standard is met, and such determination is
chemical substance under the intended
not subject to judicial review.
conditions of use; and are based “solely on

considerations of risk to human health and
CRS-45


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
the environment.”
Requirements for safety
No comparable provision.
Risk assessments must be transparent and
Directs EPA to establish procedural rules
assessments
understandable to the public and to risk
for safety assessments, including schedules
managers. Risk assessments to support
for data submissions and safety
safety determinations must be conducted by assessments. Rules must identify the basis
EPA employees with no financial interest in
for decisions about the relative priority of
the outcome. Peer reviewers of such
high-priority substances for safety
assessments also must have no financial
assessment and determination. Rules must
interest in the outcome. Assessments must
require the Administrator to inform the
address health or environmental impacts
public about the process, schedule,
including potential or demonstrated cancer
deadlines, and informational needs of
and non-cancer endpoints.
assessments. Rules also must allow
interested persons to submit information,
and must make available to the public
information taken into consideration in
preparing each safety assessment and
determination. Requires the Administrator
to develop and at least every five years to
review and possibly revise a science-based
methodology (using the best available
science) for conducting safety assessments.
Methodology must address specified issues
and be subject to public comment and
scientific peer review. Directs the
Administrator to provide an opportunity
for interested persons to submit additional
information, and authorizes the
Administrator to promulgate a rule, enter
into a testing agreement, or issue an order
under section 4 to require development of
information. (See proposed TSCA 4(f)
above.)
Safety of chemicals for export
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 6(d)(2)(G) directs EPA to
No comparable provision.
consider risks that a chemical manufactured
in whole or in part for export may pose in
the United States during production and
distribution in commerce, including in
imported products containing the substance.
CRS-46


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Safety determinations for existing



chemicals
EPA’s determination
No comparable provision.
Beginning with substances assigned to the
Proposed TSCA 6(a) and (c) requires the
first batch and designated as Priority Class
Administrator to determine (using the
1, the Administrator is directed to conduct
best available science) whether each high-
and publish safety standard determinations
priority chemical substance meets the
for all chemical substances in the category
safety standard under the intended
Substances to Undergo Safety Standard
conditions of use based solely on
Determinations within five years of the date
considerations of risk to human health and
of enactment of the Safe Chemicals Act. For the environment. Proposed TSCA 6(b)
subsequent batches, EPA is given five years
directs EPA to establish procedural rules
from the date on which EPA designates
for safety determinations, including
substances as Priority Class 1to complete
schedules for data submissions, safety
safety standard designations. [Proposed
assessments, and safety determinations.
TSCA 6(d)(4)]
Proposed TSCA 6(c) requires the
Administrator to make a determination
Proposed TSCA 6(d)(5) directs EPA to seek
whether each high-priority chemical
to publish safety standard determinations
substance: meets the safety standard
and risk management decisions
under the intended conditions of use; does
concurrently, to the maximum extent
not meet the safety standard under
practicable, but is directed to not unduly
intended conditions of use; or requires
delay issuance of a safety standard
additional information to make a
determination if more information or
determination. Requires the Administrator
analysis is required to make decisions
to take into consideration and publish a
regarding risk management. Requires EPA
statement that includes: the safety
to provide reasonable public notice and
assessment, range of exposure; weight of
opportunity for comment on all published
the evidence of risk; and magnitude of risk
safety standard determinations.
posed. Requires EPA to provide notice
and an opportunity for public comment on
each proposed safety determination. If
EPA determines additional information is
needed, requires EPA to provide an
opportunity for interested persons to
submit additional information, and
authorizes the Administrator to
promulgate a rule, enter into a testing
agreement, or issue an order under
section 4 to require development of
information.
Manufacturer failure to meet a
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 6(d)(4)(D) authorizes the
No comparable provision.
duty
Administrator, by order, to take any action
authorized under proposed TSCA 6(f) if a
manufacturer or processor fails to meet any
duty related to a safety standard
CRS-47


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
determination.
Failure by EPA to meet required
No comparable provision.
If EPA fails to meet the deadline for a safety
No comparable provision.
deadline
determination, proposed TSCA 6(d)(4)(C)
provides that manufacturers and processors
are required to notify EPA, the public, their
employees, and customers in writing that a
determination by EPA of the safety of the
chemical is pending.
Redetermination
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 6(d)(5)(E) requires EPA to
No comparable provision.
initiate a redetermination of whether a
chemical meets the safety standard if new
information raises a question in that regard.
Authorizes EPA to initiate a
redetermination if significant changes have
occurred in the methodologies used in
conducting safety standard determinations.
Requires that EPA continual y assess new
information to decide whether it raises a
credible question about the safety of a
chemical substance.
CRS-48


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Petition for redetermination
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 6(d)(5)(E) also authorizes
No comparable provision.
any person to petition the EPA
Administrator for a redetermination. The
Administrator must decide whether to
make the requested redetermination and
publish that decision and its basis in the
Federal Register within 180 days. If EPA
decides to conduct a redetermination, it
must be completed within three years of
the decision.
Statement of reasons for not
If EPA does not take action with respect to a
This provision would be eliminated.
This provision would be eliminated.
taking action
chemical that is covered by a test rule [under
TSCA 4(a)] or a significant new use rule
[under TSCA 5(a)(1)(B)], or is listed as a
chemical of concern under TSCA 5(b)(4), then
TSCA 5(g) directs the EPA Administrator to
publish a statement of reasons for not taking
action.
Use restrictions for substances
No comparable provision.
For chemical substances and uses that meet
No comparable provision.
meeting the safety standard
the safety standard, proposed TSCA
6(d)(5)(D) requires the Administrator to
specify allowed uses and to prescribe
conditions of use to ensure the safety
standard is met. Prohibits manufacture,
processing, and distribution in commerce of
the substance, mixture, or article containing
the chemical substance for any use not
specified in the safety determination.
Compliance is required 90 days after the
standard is issued if no new conditions are
imposed on chemical use. The deadline for
compliance is18 months after the safety
determination is issued when new
conditions are imposed. A manufacturer or
processor may be granted a one-time
extension of the deadline for a period of no
more than five years if the manufacturer or
processor demonstrates a compelling
technological need to continue a restricted
activity or that a factor whol y beyond the
control of the manufacturer or processor
prevents compliance within the 18-month
time period.
CRS-49


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Judicial review of rules
TSCA 19 [15 U.S.C. 2618] subjects rules
Proposed TSCA 19 subjects al rules and
Proposed TSCA 6(b)(6) declares that
promulgated under TSCA 6(a) to judicial
orders issued under TSCA to judicial
safety assessments are not final agency
review.
review.
actions and are not subject to judicial
review. However, proposed TSCA
6(c)(11) makes a safety determination a
final agency action subject to judicial
review, including review of the associated
safety assessment.
Expedited action for SVHCs
No comparable provision.
Within 180 days of categorization of a
No comparable provision.
chemical as a Substance of Very High
Concern, proposed TSCA 6(e) authorizes
the Administrator to require, by order,
submission of additional information as
necessary to conduct an expedited
assessment of the known uses of, and
exposures to, the chemical substance.
Within one year of such categorization,
requires that EPA complete and publish an
identification and assessment of the known
uses of, and exposures to, the chemical
substance. As soon as practicable, but no
later than 18 months fol owing
categorization, the Administrator must
impose, by order, use restrictions and other
conditions, on the manufacturing,
processing, use, distribution in commerce,
and disposal of the chemical substance as
needed “to achieve the maximum
practicable reduction in human or
environmental exposure.” Compliance
generally is required within 18 months of
the issuance of the order restricting the
chemical. Within one year of the
compliance deadline, the Administrator is
required to determine whether the
substance meets the safety standard and to
impose any additional restrictions necessary
to ensure that the chemical substance meets
the safety standard.
CRS-50


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Effective date of Section 6 rules
TSCA 6(d) [15 U.S.C. 2605(d)] directs EPA to
Proposed TSCA 6(m) directs EPA to specify Eliminates this provision.
make such rules effective “as soon as feasible,” a date on which a rule or order shall take
and allows EPA to make a proposed rule
effect and that such date should be “as soon
effective upon publication until the effective
as practicable.”
date of the final rule if there is an
unreasonable risk of serious or widespread
injury to health or the environment and a
court has granted relief under section 7.
Quality control of manufacturing
TSCA 6(b) [15 U.S.C. 2605(b)] authorizes
Proposed TSCA 6(g) is similar to current
Eliminates this provision.
and processing
EPA to review and regulate a manufacturer’s
law but applies when there is “a reasonable
or processor’s quality control procedures if
basis to conclude” that the manner of
there is “a reasonable basis to conclude” that
manufacturing or processing “may present a
the manner of manufacturing or processing
substantial endangerment to health or the
“unintentional y causes a chemical … to
environment.” Does not require such
present or which will cause it to present an
determination to be made on the record
unreasonable risk of injury to health or the
after opportunity for hearing.
environment.” EPA also is authorized to order
the manufacturer or processor to provide
notice to its customers of such risk and to
replace or repurchase the substance as is
necessary to adequately protect health or the
environment. Requires any determination that
a chemical presents an unreasonable risk to
be made on the record after opportunity for
hearing.
Resale of used articles
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 6(h)(3) provides that
No comparable provision.
restrictions established under sections
5(b)(1)(C)(ii)(I), 6(d)(5), 6(e), or 6(f) would
not apply to resale of an article if the article
has previously been used.
CRS-51


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Delay of effective date of
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 6(h)(4) authorizes EPA to
No comparable provision.
restrictions
order delay in the effective date of a
restriction for three years for retail sales to
an end consumer of a chemical substance,
mixture, or article subject to a restriction
under proposed TSCA sections
5(b)(1)(C)(ii)(I), 6(d)(5), 6(e), or 6(f), if it “(i)
is necessary and appropriate to allow for
depletion of the existing retail inventory;
and (ii) will not present a substantial
endangerment to human health or the
environment.” EPA authority does not
extend to any retailer who has failed to
comply with an order requesting
information under proposed TSCA section
8.

No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 6(l) requires that each
No comparable provision.
submission of information under a rule or
Certification of the quality of
order be accompanied by a certification of
submitted information
the accuracy, reliability, and completeness
(to the extent reasonably ascertainable) of
the information provided. Such certification
must be signed by a responsible official of
the manufacturer or processor.
Mercury
TSCA section 6(f) [15 U.S.C. 2605(f)]
Proposed TSCA 6(j) is similar to current
Proposed TSCA 6(e) is the same as
prohibits federal agencies from conveying,
law, but exempts mercury contained within
current TSCA 6(f).
selling, or distributing elemental mercury to
an article from the general prohibition.
any federal agency, state or local government,
or private entity, except to facilitate storage at
a federal agency.
CRS-52


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
TSCA 6(e) [15 U.S.C. 2605(e)] directs EPA to
Proposed TSCA 6(i) is similar to existing
Proposed TSCA 6(d) is similar to existing
prescribe methods of disposal for PCBs and
TSCA 6(e), but removes the requirement
TSCA 6(e), but removes the requirement
to require PCBs to be marked with clear and
for rulemaking under current TSCA 6(c).
for rulemaking under current TSCA 6(c).
adequate warnings and instructions regarding
processing, distribution in commerce, use, or
disposal. Prohibits use of any PCB other than
“in a totally enclosed manner,” unless EPA
finds that such activity “will not present an
unreasonable risk of injury to health or the
environment.” Prohibits manufacture,
processing, and distribution in commerce.
Authorizes any person to petition for an
exemption and authorizes EPA to grant such
exemption if EPA finds that an unreasonable
risk would not result, and “good faith efforts
have been made to develop a chemical
substance which does not present an
unreasonable risk … and which may be
substituted for such [PCB].” Requires use of
rulemaking procedure in TSCA 6(c).
Asbestos
No comparable provision, although TSCA
Proposed TSCA 6(k) requires the
No comparable provision, but the
Title II addresses emergency response to
Administrator to designate asbestos a
definition of asbestos in TSCA 202(3) is
asbestos hazards.
Substance of Very High Concern, to
retained.
complete and publish a report within 90
TSCA 202(3) defines asbestos as “asbestiform
days of categorization, and within 12
varieties of—(A) chrysotile (serpentine), (B)
months to impose use restrictions and
crocidolite (riebeckite), (C) amosite
conditions to achieve the maximum
(cummingtonite-grunerite), (D) anthophyllite,
practicable reduction in human or
(E) tremolite, or (F) actinolite.”
environmental exposure to asbestos.
Section 7(b) of the SCA proposes an
expanded definition for asbestos. Proposed
TSCA 202(3) would include “(G) any
material formally classified as tremolite,
including—(i) winchire asbestos, and (ii)
richterite asbestos, and (H) any asbestiform
amphibole mineral.”
Imminent hazards



Relief
TSCA 7 [15 U.S.C. 2606] authorizes an
Section 8 of the SCA amends TSCA 7 but
Proposed TSCA 7 is the same as current
appropriate district court to grant relief
relief afforded is similar to current law.
TSCA 7.
necessary to protect health or the
Proposed TSCA 7 would authorize the
environment from “unreasonable risk.”
District Court to grant relief necessary to
protect health or the environment from
“the risk associated with the activity
CRS-53


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
involved in the civil action.”
Civil actions
TSCA 7(a) [15 U.S.C. 2606(a)] authorizes EPA Proposed TSCA 7 is similar to current law,
Proposed TSCA 7(a) is similar to current
to begin a civil action: for seizure of “an
but authorizes EPA civil action against a
law but does not require EPA to
imminently hazardous” chemical substance,
person who manufactures, processes,
commence civil action if the agency has
mixture, or article; for relief against any
distributes in commerce, uses, or disposes
not made a rule under proposed TSCA
person who manufactures, processes,
of a chemical substance or mixture, or any
6(a) effective immediately. The proposed
distributes in commerce, or uses, or disposes
article containing a chemical substance or
definition of an “imminently hazardous”
of such chemical or article; or for both
mixture, when a chemical, mixture, or
chemical substance eliminates the adjective
seizure and relief. Requires EPA to commence article “may present an imminent and
“unreasonable.”
such civil action if the agency has not made a
substantial endangerment to health or the
rule under TSCA 6(a) effective immediately.
environment, as determined by the
Requires that EPA “where appropriate,
Administrator.” Does not require EPA to
concurrently with the filing of an action …
commence action if the agency has not
initiate a proceeding for the promulgation of a
made a rule effective immediately
rule” under TSCA 6(a). Defines “imminently
concerning the chemical. Authorizes EPA to
hazardous chemical substance or mixture” to
issue an order to protect health or the
mean a chemical that “presents an imminent
environment from a substance or mixture
and unreasonable risk of serious or
or article containing such substance or
widespread injury to health or the
mixture that may present an imminent and
environment.”
substantial endangerment to health or the
environment.
Source: Compiled by the Congressional Research Service from the U.S. Code, S. 696, and S. 1009.
CRS-54


Table 5. Reporting Requirements in Selected Provisions of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.), the Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696), and
the Chemical Safety Improvement Act (S. 1009)
Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Definition of “known to, or
No comparable provision.
The SCA Section 9 amends TSCA Section
No comparable provision.
reasonably ascertainable by”
8. Proposed TSCA 8(a)(1) defines “known
to, or reasonably ascertainable by” to have
the meaning contained in 40 CFR 704.3
(or successor regulations), which currently
reads: “all information in a person's
possession or control, plus all information
that a reasonable person similarly situated
might be expected to possess, control, or
know.”
Declaration
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 8(b) requires each
No comparable provision.
manufacturer of a chemical substance in
which the manufacturer has a current
commercial interest to submit within 180
days of the enactment of the Safe
Chemicals Act a declaration of interest in
the chemical substance. A processor of a
chemical substance in which the processor
has a current commercial interest also
may submit a declaration voluntarily within
one year fol owing enactment of the SCA.
A manufacturer or processor may
voluntarily submit a declaration for a
chemical substance in which there is
potential commercial interest.
Scope and criteria for declarations
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 8(b) applies only to
No comparable provision.
chemical substances in commerce (as of
the date of enactment of the SCA) in
which a manufacturer or processor has a
current commercial interest, or chemicals
of potential commercial interest because
they may serve as substitutes for chemicals
of current interest.
Content of the declaration
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 8(b)(5) requires the
No comparable provision.
declaration to include: the chemical
identity and substance characteristics;
identity and primary business location of
the manufacturer or processor; and
information supporting the declaration of
CRS-55


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
commercial interest.
Declaration of cessation of
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 8(b)(4) authorizes a
No comparable provision.
manufacturing or processing
former or current manufacturer or
processor to voluntarily submit a
Declaration that manufacture or
processing has ceased or will cease not
later than 180 days after the date on which
the declaration is submitted.
Reporting and record keeping
TSCA 8(a) [15 U.S.C. 2607(a)] authorizes
Proposed TSCA 8(c) is similar to TSCA
Proposed TSCA 8(a) is the same as
EPA, to the extent necessary for the
8(a), but requires the Administrator to
current law, but the CSIA adds at the end
effective enforcement of the law, to
maintain a periodic reporting program for
two new paragraphs TSCA 8(a)(4) and (5),
promulgate rules requiring maintenance of
manufacturers of chemical substances.
which direct the Administrator to
records and submission of reports to EPA
Authorizes exemptions. Proposed TSCA
promulgate rules requiring the reporting
by persons who manufacture or process
8(d) requires each manufacturer and
of information known by, or reasonably
or who propose to manufacture or
processor of a chemical substance
ascertainable by the manufacturer or
process a chemical substance. Prohibits a
distributed in commerce to maintain
processor making the report sufficient to
rule requiring maintenance of records or
records of the information submitted to
permit EPA to carry out proposed TSCA
submission of reports with respect to
EPA as well as supporting information.
4 and 6. Proposed TSCA 8(a)(4) provides
changes in the proportions of the
Proposed TSCA 8(e) directs the
that the rules: may impose different
components of a mixture unless necessary
Administrator to specify, by rule,
reporting requirements on manufacturers
for effective enforcement. TSCA 8(a)(2)
information that chemical processors are
and processors; shall be limited to active
authorizes collection of “all existing data
required to record and submit periodically
substances or mixtures containing active
concerning the environmental and health
for each chemical processed for use and
substances; and shall apply only to the
effects,” number of individuals exposed,
intentionally added to each consumer or
extent the Administrator determines
and, in the initial report, the manner of
commercial product category specified by
submission is necessary for the effective
disposal.
the Administrator. Proposed TSCA 8(g)
enforcement of proposed TSCA. Directs
authorizes the Administrator, by rule or
EPA to develop guidance relating to the
TSCA 8(d) [15 U.S.C. 2607(d)] directs
order, to require any person who
information required.
EPA to require manufacturers, processors, manufactures, processes, distributes in
and distributors to submit lists and copies
commerce, uses, or disposes of a chemical
Proposed TSCA 8(d) is the same as
of health and safety studies for each
substance, or a mixture or article
current law.
chemical manufactured or processed.
containing the chemical substance, to
maintain records of, and report by a
specified date, any existing information
concerning the substance that would assist
the Administrator in administering TSCA.
CRS-56


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Exemptions
TSCA 8(a)(1) exempts smal
Proposed TSCA 8(c)(2)(B) authorizes EPA
Proposed TSCA 8(a)(1) and (3) and
manufacturers and processors from most
to promulgate a rule or order exempting
8(b)(1) are the same as current law.a
reporting under the subsection, but TSCA
from specified reporting requirements
8(a)(3) authorizes EPA to require a smal
certain manufacturers involved in activities
manufacturer or processor to submit
with small quantities of a chemical
needed information for the purpose of
substance for purposes of scientific
developing the inventory under TSCA
experimentation or analysis or chemical
8(b). In addition, the Administrator is
research, including product development.
authorized to require reporting by small
Also authorizes exemptions for small
entities when they manufacture or process businesses if EPA determines that their
a chemical substance or mixture subject to participation would not assist in the
a rule proposed or promulgated under
administration of TSCA.
TSCA 4, 5(b)(4), or 6, or an order in
effect under section 5(e), or with respect
to which relief has been granted pursuant
to a civil action brought under section 5
or 7. TSCA 8(b)(1) excludes from the
inventory “any chemical substance which is
manufactured or processed only in small
quantities (as defined by the Administrator
by rule) solely for purposes of scientific
experimentation or analysis or chemical
research on, or analysis of, such substance
or another substance, including such
research or analysis for the development
of a product.”
Inventory of chemicals in commerce
TSCA 8(b) [15 U.S.C. 2607(b)] directs
Proposed TSCA 8(h) requires
Proposed TSCA 8(b)(1) and (2) are the
EPA to compile, keep current, and publish
development and publication of two
same as current law, but new paragraphs
an inventory of each chemical
inventories, one for active and the other
(3) through (8) are added. Proposed TSCA
manufactured or processed in the United
for inactive chemicals. The proposed law
8(b)(3) provides directives regarding the
States. New chemicals are to be listed
omits the authority in current law to list
use of Class 2 nomenclature and the Soap
when manufacture or processing begins.
chemicals by category rather than
and Detergent Association Nomenclature
The list should exclude chemicals
individually.
System, and treatment of specified
produced in small quantities for purposes
“components of categories that are
of scientific experimentation, analysis, or
considered to be statutory mixtures”
research. Authorizes EPA to list chemicals
under TSCA. Also directs EPA to maintain
by category rather than individually.
nomenclature conventions and develop
new guidance allowing for multiple
nomenclature conventions.
CRS-57


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Development of an inventory of active No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 8(h) is similar to TSCA
Proposed TSCA 8(b)(4) directs EPA to
chemicals in commerce
8(b) except that it includes all chemicals
develop and make publically available a list
for which notice is submitted under
of candidate active chemical substances to
proposed TSCA 5(d) and for which a
include any chemical substance that: has
declaration of current commercial interest
been reported to EPA under 40 CFR 711
or manufacture or processing is submitted
(which contains the TSCA chemical data
under proposed TSCA 8(b)(2). The
reporting requirements) at any time during
proposed law omits the authority in
the 10 years prior to enactment of the
current law to list chemicals by category
CSIA; has been the subject of a submitted
rather than individually.
notice of commencement of manufacture
or significant new use; has been the
Proposed TSCA 8(b)(6) directs the
subject of an export notification during the
Administrator to review each declaration
10 years before the date of enactment of
and to add to the inventory of active
the CSIA; or the Administrator is likely to
substances created under proposed TSCA
qualify as active.
8(h) each chemical substance in which
current interest is declared, and to
Proposed TSCA 8(b)(4) directs EPA to
remove from the inventory any chemical
issue a rule requiring manufacturers and
for which EPA received no declaration or
processors to notify EPA that they have
only declarations of cessation of
manufactured or processed a chemical
manufacturing or processing.
substance on the candidate list compiled
by the Administrator under proposed
TSCA 8(b)(4) or on the current inventory
list compiled in response to current TSCA
8(b)(1) for a nonexempt commercial
purpose during the 5-year period prior to
the date of enactment of the CSIA.
Proposed TSCA 8(b)(5) directs the
Administrator to designate each chemical
substance on the proposed TSCA 8(b)(1)
inventory as active or inactive.
Designations must be updated as soon as
practicable fol owing publication of the
most recent information reported under
40 CFR 711.
CRS-58


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Confidential chemical substances
No comparable provision.
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 8(b)(4) also directs EPA
to provide public “guidance relating to the
rule for chemical substances on the
confidential portion of the candidate list of
active substances” and of the current
inventory list compiled in response to
TSCA 8(b)(1). Guidance is required with
regard to accession numbers,
premanufacture notice case numbers, if
applicable, and generic names. The rule
must require a manufacturer or processor
to indicate whether the specific identity of
the substances is claimed to be
confidential, to certify the accuracy of each
report, and to retain a record supporting
certification for five years.
Active chemicals
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 8(h) requires the
Proposed TSCA 8(b)(6) directs the
Administrator to list as active chemical
Administrator to designate a chemical
substances for which notice of
substance “active” if it: has been
commencement of manufacture is
manufactured or processed for a
submitted under proposed TSCA 5(d) or
nonexempt commercial purpose at any
for which a valid declaration is submitted
point during the 5-year period prior to the
under proposed TSCA 8(b)(2).
date of enactment of the CSIA; is added to
the TSCA 8(b)(1) inventory after
enactment of the CSIA; is the subject of a
notice received that a person intends to
manufacture or process a chemical
designated as inactive; or is reported
under 40 CFR 711 after the date of
enactment of the CSIA.
CRS-59


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Inventory of inactive chemicals
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 8(h)(5) directs EPA to
Proposed TSCA 8(b)(7) directs the
compile, keep current, and publish an
Administrator to designate a chemical
inactive list of chemical substances for
substance inactive if it has not been
which the only declarations submitted are
manufactured for processed for a
for chemicals of potential commercial
nonexempt commercial purpose in the 5-
interest.
year period before enactment of the CSIA.
Such chemical substances remain on the
If a manufacturer or processor plans to
TSCA 8(b)(1) inventory.
begin manufacture or processing of a
chemical substance on this list, at least 30
Directs any person who intends to
days prior to beginning, notice must be
manufacture or process for a nonexempt
provided to the Administrator along with
commercial purpose a chemical substance
specified information. EPA must move
designated as an inactive substance to
such substances onto the inventory of
notify EPA before the date on which the
active chemicals, add the substance to the
substance is manufactured or processed.
current batch of chemical substances, and
The Administrator must then designate
categorize the substance.
the chemical substance as active and
review its priority for a safety assessment.
Chemical specific identity disclosure
No comparable provision.
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 8(b)(8) directs the
Administrator to make available to the
public specified information about
chemicals on the non-confidential portion
of the TSCA 8(b)(1) inventory; the
accession number, generic name, and, if
applicable, premanufacture notice case
number for each chemical substance on
the confidential portion of the TSCA
(8)(b)(1) inventory for which a claim of
confidentiality was received; and the
specific identity of any active or inactive
substance on the confidential portion of
the TSCA 8(b)(1) inventory for which no
claim of confidentiality was received, after
publishing a notice in the Federal Register
identifying the accession number, generic
name, and, if applicable, premanufacture
notice case number for the substance and
providing an opportunity for any person to
claim confidentiality for the specific
identity of the substance. Prohibits the
Administrator from making available to the
general public the specific chemical identity
of any substance for which EPA receives
such notice of intent to manufacture or
process and a claim for confidentiality.
CRS-60


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Records of significant adverse
TSCA 8(c) [15 U.S.C. 2607(c)] requires al
Proposed TSCA 8(j) is similar to current
Proposed TSCA 8(c) is the same as
reactions
manufacturers and processors to keep
TSCA 8(c).
current law.
records of all reports of significant adverse
reactions to health or the environment
alleged to have resulted from exposure to
a chemical substance or mixture.
Information from other federal
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 8(k) requires each federal
No comparable provision.
agencies
agency and institution to submit to EPA a
synopsis of the data and records in its
control that may be useful to EPA in
carrying out TSCA Title I. Such synopsis
shall be updated and resubmitted at least
once every three years. On request by the
EPA Administrator, federal agencies are
directed to submit information relating to
hazard, use, exposure, or risk of a
chemical substance (or mixture or article
containing that chemical substance).
Substantial risk notice
TSCA 8(e) [15 U.S.C. 2607(e)] requires
Proposed TSCA 8(l) is the same as current Proposed TSCA 8(e) is the same as
manufacturers, processors, and
TSCA 8(e).
current law but adds paragraph (2)
distributors who obtain information
providing that any person may submit data
“which reasonably supports the
and information reasonably supporting the
conclusion” that a chemical substance or
conclusion that a chemical substance or
mixture “presents a substantial risk of
mixture does not present a substantial risk
injury to health or the environment” to
of injury to health and the environment.
inform EPA.
Certification
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 8(m) requires that each
Proposed TSCA 8(b)(4) directs EPA to
submission of information under a rule or
issue a rule requiring manufacturers and
order be accompanied by a certification of
processors to notify EPA that they have
the accuracy, reliability, and completeness
manufactured or processed a chemical
(to the extent reasonably ascertainable) of
substance on the candidate list. The rule
the information provided. Such
must require a manufacturer or processor
certification must be signed by a
to certify the accuracy of each report, and
responsible official of the manufacturer or
to retain a record supporting certification
processor.
for five years.
“Manufacture” and “process”
TSCA 8(f) [15 U.S.C. 2607(f)] defines
Proposed TSCA 8(a) is the same as
Proposed TSCA 8(f) is the same as
“manufacture” and “process” to mean
current TSCA 8(f).
current law.
manufacture or process for commercial
purposes.
CRS-61


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Additional authority to enforce
No comparable provision.
EPA may by order prohibit manufacture,
No comparable provision.
processing, or distribution of any
substance if a manufacturer or processor
violates EPA requirements under
proposed TSCA 8(n).
Source: Compiled by the Congressional Research Service from the U.S. Code, S. 696, and S. 1009.
a. However, current TSCA 8(a)(3) refers to other sections that are proposed to be amended or omitted by the CSIA. For example, there is no proposed TSCA 5(b)(4)
in the CSIA. This may be a drafting oversight.
CRS-62


Table 6. Other Selected Provisions of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.), the Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696), and the Chemical Safety
Improvement Act (S. 1009)
Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Action under laws administered by other
If EPA has a reasonable basis to conclude
The SCA section 10 amends TSCA 9.
Proposed TSCA 9(a) is similar to current
federal agencies
that activities with respect to a chemical
Proposed TSCA 9(a) is similar to current
law but requires EPA to conclude that
substance or mixture present or will
law, but does not apply to mixtures and
chemical activity “does not meet the
present an unreasonable risk, and EPA
the criterion for EPA action differs. If the
safety standard under the intended
determines that such risk may be
EPA Administrator determines “that the
conditions of use.” If EPA makes a report
prevented or reduced to a sufficient
manufacture, processing, distribution in
and the other federal agency either (1)
extent by action taken under a federal
commerce, use, or disposal of a chemical
issues an order declaring that the
law not administered by EPA, then TSCA
… does not meet a safety standard … or
activities do not present the risk, or (2)
9(a) [15 U.S.C. 2608(a)] directs EPA to
requires conditions or restrictions” to do
initiates action to protect against such
submit to the agency which administers
so, and “that action may be taken under a
risk, then EPA may not require
such law a report describing the risk and
Federal law not administered by the
development of additional data to permit
activities that present such risks. The EPA Administrator” then EPA must submit a
a safety determination under proposed
report must request that the other
report to the other agency describing the
TSCA 6(c)(8), and may not restrict
federal agency 1) tell EPA whether the
activities that prevent the chemical from
chemical activity under proposed TSCA
risk may be prevented or reduced under
meeting the safety standard or restrictions
6(c)(9) or proposed TSCA 7.
the law the agency administers, and 2)
or conditions required to meet the safety
issue an order declaring whether the
standard. The report must request that the
activities present a risk. If EPA makes a
other agency 1) determine whether action
report and the other agency either 1)
may be taken under a federal law
issues an order declaring that the
administered by the agency, and if so, 2)
activities do not present the risk, or 2)
initiate such action and provide a timetable
initiates action to protect against such
for action, and 3) respond to EPA’s report.
risk, then EPA may not take regulatory
If the other agency initiates civil action
action under TSCA 6 or 7.
under federal law within 90 days, EPA may
not take action under proposed TSCA with
respect to the civil action except under
TSCA 7. If the other agency determines
that action cannot be taken under its
authorities; does not initiate action or
complete action within the timeframe
provided; or fails to respond, then EPA
may, by order, initiate action to ensure
compliance with a safety standard.
Regulation under other EPA-administered TSCA 9(b) directs EPA to promulgate
Proposed TSCA 9(b) is the same as
Proposed TSCA 9(b) is the same as
federal laws
needed rules under other environmental
current law. However, the SCA eliminates
current law, but the CSIA eliminates the
laws, unless it is in the public interest to
the provision in TSCA 6(c)(1).
provision in current TSCA 6(c)(1).
issue rules under TSCA. This directive is
repeated in TSCA 6(c)(1).
CRS-63


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Occupational safety and health
TSCA 9(c) states that any EPA exercise
Same as current law. In addition, the SCA
Proposed TSCA 9(c) is the same as
of authority under TSCA is deemed to be directs EPA to ensure that any EPA actions
current law.
exercising statutory authority to
to address workplace exposures “are
prescribe or enforce standards or
consistent with the industrial hygiene
regulations affecting occupational safety
hierarchy of controls.”
and health.
Coordination
TSCA 9(d) directs EPA to consult and
The Safe Chemicals Act Section 10(3)
Proposed TSCA 9(d) is the same as
coordinate with appropriate federal
strikes the requirement that coordination
current law.
agency heads to achieve “maximum
for the purpose of enforcement should
enforcement” “... while imposing the least impose the least burden of duplicative
burdens of duplicative requirements” on
requirements.
those being regulated.
Inspections
TSCA 11 [15 U.S.C. 2610] authorizes
The SCA 11 amends TSCA 11. Proposed
Proposed TSCA 11 is the same as
EPA to inspect premises in which
TSCA 11(a) and (b) are similar to current
current law.
chemicals are manufactured, processed,
TSCA 11 but also apply to premises and
stored, or held before or after
conveyances handling articles subject to
distribution in commerce and any
TSCA. Inspections are not limited by
conveyance used to transport chemicals
requiring presentation of credentials or
in commerce. Limits inspections by
provision of written notice. Authorizes
requiring presentation of appropriate
EPA to inspect any place where records
credentials and written notice to the
relating to compliance with the law are
person in charge of the premises or
held and to inspect and obtain samples of
conveyance to be inspected on each
any chemicals, containers, or labeling. Does
occasion of inspection. Requires
not prohibit inspection of any data.
inspections to begin and end with
reasonable promptness and to “be
conducted at reasonable times, within
reasonable limits, and in a reasonable
manner.” Prohibits inspection of financial,
sales, pricing, personnel, or research
data, unless they are described specifically
in the required written notice.
Subpoenas and warrants
TSCA 11(c) [15 U.S.C. 2610(c)]
Proposed TSCA 11(c) authorizes EPA to
Proposed TSCA 11 is the same as
authorizes EPA to require by subpoena
require attendance, testimony, and
current law.
attendance and testimony of witnesses,
production of documents, items, answers
production of reports, documents,
to questions and other information
answers to questions, and other
deemed necessary. In the event that “there
information. Authorizes district courts to
is reason to believe that the provisions” of
order compliance in the event of
the law have been violated, proposed
contumacy, failure, or refusal to obey.
TSCA 11(d) empowers EPA to obtain and
to execute warrants authorizing entry,
inspection, and copying of records, or
seizures of any chemical in violation.
CRS-64


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Exports

Exclusion from requirements
TSCA 12(a)(1) [15 U.S.C. 2611(a)(1)]
The SCA 12 would eliminate TSCA 12(a)
Proposed TSCA 12(a)(1) is the same as
excludes chemical products manufactured which provides an exclusion from TSCA
current law, but proposed TSCA 12(a)(2)
for export (other than elemental
requirements for chemicals manufactured,
does not exclude from TSCA
mercury) from TSCA requirements
processed, or distributed in commerce
requirements those chemicals
except for reporting and record keeping
solely for the purpose of export.
manufactured for export if they are new
requirements in Section 8. This exclusion
chemicals unlikely to meet the safety
applies as long as the products are
standard or existing chemicals that do
labeled for export only. TSCA 12(a)(2)
not meet the safety standard. Authorizes
excepts from this provision chemicals
EPA to determine that export also is not
manufactured for export if the
permitted for articles and mixtures
Administrator finds that manufacture,
containing such chemicals above a
processing, or distribution will present an
threshold concentration.
unreasonable risk within the United
States. EPA may require testing to al ow
assessment of the risk within the United
States.
CRS-65


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Notice of export
TSCA 12(b) [15 U.S.C. 2611(b)] requires
Proposed TSCA 12(a) is similar to current
Proposed TSCA 12(b) requires any
anyone who exports or intends to export TSCA 12(b), but excludes from
person to notify EPA if that person is
a substance that is subject to a test rule
requirements those who “intend” to
exporting or intends to export: a new
or order under section 4 or a proposed
export, and applies to exports of chemicals
chemical substance or mixture not likely
or final rule under section 5 or 6, or for
subject to data submission requirements
to meet the safety standard under the
which action is pending or relief has been
under proposed TSCA 4, 5, or 6(b), or for
intended conditions of use; an existing
granted under section 5 or 7, to notify
which action has been taken under
chemical substance or mixture that does
EPA of such exportation or intent, and
proposed TSCA 6 or 7. Also, the SCA
not meet the safety standard under the
EPA must then notify the countries that
would specify that exporters must notify
intended conditions of use; or a chemical
will be receiving the substance that data
EPA within 30 days of the date of export,
substance for which the United States is
are available or that restrictions are in
and that EPA must provide notice to
obligated by treaty to provide export
place in the United States for such
countries “promptly thereafter.” Requires
notification. Requires the Administrator
substance.
exporters to notify EPA, and EPA to notify
to promulgate regulations to implement
receiving countries, of any change in the
these provisions. Requires the
status of a chemical. EPA also must notify
Administrator to submit to the
receiving countries that it has received new government of each country to which a
data or if there is any change in risk
substance is exported a notice that
management action taken under proposed
information can be obtained from EPA
section 6 or 7. Requires EPA to maintain
about the substance. Requires EPA to
copies of current notices provided to
provide notice that satisfies the obligation
other governments and to make them
of the United States under the applicable
available to the public electronically.
treaty if the chemical substance is
covered by treaty.
Mercury
TSCA 12(c) [15 U.S.C. 2611(c)] prohibits
Proposed TSCA 12(b) is the same as
Proposed TSCA 12(c) is the same as
the export of elemental mercury (but not current law, but adds a requirement that
current law, but excludes the
of coal containing mercury). Requires a
EPA maintain copies of all current notices
requirement for a report to Congress on
report to Congress on mercury
provided to other governments and make
mercury compounds.
compounds. Authorizes exemptions from such copies available to the public in
this prohibition for essential uses.
electronic format.
CRS-66


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Imports
TSCA 13 [15 U.S.C. 2612] directs the
Proposed TSCA 13 is similar to current
Proposed TSCA 13 is similar to current
Secretary of the Treasury to refuse entry
law but transfers authority to the Secretary law but authorizes the Secretary of
into the United States of chemicals that
of the Department of Homeland Security.
Homeland Security to refuse entry into
fail to comply with a rule under TSCA or
In addition, a new paragraph (3) in
the United States of chemicals that do
that are in violation of TSCA.
proposed TSCA 13(a) explicitly subjects to
not meet the safety standard under the
TSCA requirements chemical substances
intended conditions of use or that are in
and mixtures imported as part of an article, violation of a rule or order in effect
except “as the Administrator may provide
under proposed TSCA. In addition,
by rule under this Act, or as the Secretary
proposed TSCA 13(c) requires a person
of Homeland Security may provide by
offering a chemical substance or mixture
rule.”
for entry into the United States to certify
that the chemical is in compliance with
any applicable rule, consent agreement,
or order under proposed TSCA 5 or 6
and included on the list under section
8(b) or exempt from the inventory
requirements. Such person also is
required to notify the Secretary of
Homeland Security if the chemical is a
high-priority substance, a chemical for
which the United States is obligated to
provide export notification by treaty, or
has been found not to meet the safety
standard and is identified in a rule
promulgated as meriting notification due
to the potential impact of the chemical
substance or mixture or article on human
health or the environment. Requires the
Secretary of Homeland Security to issue
rules implementing proposed TSCA
13(c).
CRS-67


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Protection from disclosure of confidential TSCA 14 [15 U.S.C. 2613] provides
Proposed TSCA 14 requires conformance
Proposed TSCA 14 is similar to current
business information (CBI)
broad protection of proprietary
to the standards of the Freedom of
law, but is clarified and explicitly requires
confidential information about chemicals
Information Act (FOIA). Like current law,
persons to substantiate any claim that
in commerce. Disclosure by EPA
the SCA prohibits disclosure of proprietary information qualifies for disclosure
employees of such information generally
confidential information by EPA employees
protection. Proposed TSCA 14(a)
is not permitted, except to other federal
except to other federal agencies and EPA
prohibits the Administrator from
employees or when relevant in any
contractors or if the disclosure is
disclosing information exempt from
proceeding under TSCA. Disclosure of
necessary to protect human health or the
disclosure under 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4), as
information is required when “necessary
environment (the qualifier “against an
well as information specifically defined as
to protect health or the environment
unreasonable risk” is omitted). Proposed
presumed to be protected. Also identifies
against an unreasonable risk of injury to
TSCA 14 also directs EPA to disclose
information not protected from
health or the environment.”
information upon request to a state or
disclosure, including: identity of a
Manufacturers, processors, or
tribal government for the purpose of
chemical unless the person meets
distributors in commerce may designate
administration or enforcement of a law, if
substantiation requirements of proposed
data that they believe is entitled to
an agreement ensures that the recipient
TSCA 14(d); specified health and safety
confidential treatment. If EPA proposes
government will take appropriate steps to
information and determinations; and
to release such data the EPA
maintain the confidentiality of the
certain general information.
Administrator must notify the
information with procedures equivalent to
manufacturer, processor, or distributor
those used by EPA. EPA also is directed to
Proposed TSCA 14(d) requires the
who designated the data.
disclose information to public health or
submitter to justify why information
environmental health professionals or
qualifies for protection, and to certify
medical personnel if disclosure is in the
that the information submitted is true
public interest, the recipient does not have
and correct.
a conflict of interest, and agreements are in In addition, CBI claims related to
place to ensure comparable protections to
chemical identity require submitter to
those provided by EPA to maintain
provide specified information
confidentiality. Proposed TSCA 14(b)
demonstrating that confidentiality of the
categorizes and specifies types of CBI as (1) identity has been and is likely to be
information always eligible for protection,
protected, and disclosure is likely to
(2) information that may be eligible for
cause substantial harm to the competitive
protection, and (3) information never
position of the person. In such cases,
eligible for protection.
submitter must identify a time period for
which disclosure protection is necessary
and a generic name for the chemical.
CRS-68


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Protection from disclosure of

Directs EPA to promulgate rules specifying
As in current law, the proposed
information (cont.)
acceptable bases on which written requests requirements do not apply if the
to maintain confidentiality may be
Administrator determines that disclosure
approved, documentation and justification
is necessary to protect human health or
that must accompany such a request, and
the environment (the qualifier “against an
types of information that warrant
unreasonable risk” is omitted) nor to
protection for an indefinite period of time.
disclosure of information to an officer,
The Administrator is required to review
employee, contractor or employees of
and respond to requests for confidentiality
that contractor of the United States.
within 90 days of receiving the information.
Information also may be disclosed to a
Requires those designating data as
state or political subdivision of a state, or
confidential to justify such claims and to
to a health professional under specified
certify that the information is not
circumstances. Information may be
otherwise publicly available. If approved,
disclosed when necessary in a proceeding
submitted information will be protected
under proposed TSCA or to any duly
from disclosure for up to five years.
authorized committee of the Congress.
Requires the Administrator to protect
from disclosure information for the
period of time requested by the person
submitting and justifying the claim, or for
such period of time as the Administrator
determines to be reasonable. Authorizes
the Administrator to request
redocumentation of a claim.
Dictates process for receiving and acting
on claims for protection from disclosure.
Details process and recourse in the event
the Administrator decides to release such
data.
Ensures that EPA may not require
substantiation of a claim for protection
from disclosure of information submitted
to EPA prior to the date of enactment of
the CSIA or to require more
substantiation than proposed TSCA 14
requires.
CRS-69


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Penalties for disclosure and inappropriate
TSCA 14(d) provides that knowing and
Proposed TSCA 14(d) is similar to current
Penalties for unlawful disclosure include
designation
willful disclosure of protected
TSCA 14(d), but willful disclosure may
fines under title 18 of the U.S. Code, and
information by a federal employee may
subject an employee to disciplinary action
removal from office or employment.
result in a fine of up to $5,000 or
and a monetary penalty of up to $10,000,
Other penalties are similar to current
imprisonment for up to one year, or
but not imprisonment. Knowing
law.
both.
designation of information as eligible for
confidential treatment when it is in fact
ineligible also is subject to a monetary
penalty of up to $10,000.
Risk information for workers
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 14(f) requires EPA to
No comparable provision.
facilitate sharing of information about
chemical substances or mixtures or articles
that workers may be exposed to with
those workers and representatives of each
certified or recognized bargaining agent.
Prohibited Acts
TSCA 15 [15 U.S.C. 2614] prohibits any
Proposed TSCA 15 is similar to current
Proposed TSCA 15 is similar to current
person from failing or refusing to comply
law and prohibits all the same actions, but
law but also prohibits failure or refusal to
with rules, orders, or other requirements also prohibits manufacturing, processing,
comply with consent agreements or
of TSCA, using for commercial purposes
distributing in commerce, or disposing of a
orders.
a chemical substance or mixture that was
chemical or article or using an article that
known to be manufactured, processed,
was known to have been manufactured,
or distributed in commerce in violation
processed, or distributed in commerce in
of the law, failing or refusing to establish
violation of the law. Proposed TSCA 15
and maintain records, submit reports,
also prohibits failing or refusing to establish
notices, or other information, or to
and maintain “accurate and complete”
permit access to or copying of records,
records, reports, notices, information,
or failing or refusing to permit entry or
disclosures, declarations, certifications, or
inspection.
other information. Prohibits submitting
information “that is materially false” or
falsifying or concealing “any material fact.”
Prohibits taking any action prohibited by
proposed TSCA.
CRS-70


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Penalties
TSCA 16 [15 U.S.C. 2615] authorizes
Proposed TSCA 16 increases the maximum Proposed TSCA 16 is the same as
civil penalties, not to exceed $25,000 per
civil penalty per violation per day to
current law.
violation per day, and affords the
$37,500 and authorizes EPA to commence
defendant an opportunity to request a
a civil action in an appropriate U.S. District
hearing before an order is issued and to
Court to assess penalties. Changes the
petition for judicial review of an order
court in which a person may file a petition
after it is issued with the U.S. Court of
for judicial review to the District Court for
Appeals for the District of Columbia
the district in which the person resides or
Circuit or for any other circuit in which
transacts business. Removes criminal
the person resides or transacts business.
sanctions for “willfully” violating any
provision of TSCA, as proposed, but
Criminal penalties of up to $25,000 per
increases the maximum penalty for
day of violation or up to one year of
“knowing” violations to $50,000 per day or
imprisonment, or both, also are
up to five years of imprisonment, or both.
authorized for knowing or willful
Adds a fine of up to $250,000 or
violations.
imprisonment of up to 15 years, or both
for a knowing violation that places a person
in imminent danger of death or serious
bodily injury. A person who is not an
individual is subject to a fine of not more
than $1,000,000.
Seizure
TSCA 17 [15 U.S.C. 2616] makes
Proposed TSCA 17 is similar to current
Proposed TSCA 17 is the same as
substances produced in violation of Title
law but the SCA applies to “articles” rather current law.
IV (Lead Exposure Reduction) liable to be than “products” and to any articles,
proceeded against, by process of libel, for substances, or mixtures that are subject to
seizure and condemnation in any district
any title of TSCA.
where the substance is found.
CRS-71


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Enforcement
TSCA 17 [15 U.S.C. 2616] provides
Proposed TSCA 17 authorizes the EPA
Proposed TSCA 17 is the same as
jurisdiction to district courts over civil
Administrator to commence a civil action
current law.
actions to restrain any violation or any
in the appropriate district court to compel
person from taking any action prohibited,
compliance of any person with any
to compel the taking of any action
provision of TSCA or any rule or order
required, or to direct any manufacturer
promulgated pursuant to TSCA.
or processor in violation of section 5 or
Authorizes EPA to seek civil or criminal
6 or of Title IV (or a rule or order under
penalties, enjoin any violation, or order
those provisions): to give notice to
compliance, through an administrative
distributors and to others in possession
proceeding, with any provision of TSCA or
of the substance, to give public notice of
with any rule or order issued under it.
risk, and to replace or repurchase the
substance.
Provides district courts jurisdiction for civil
actions to seek penalties or enjoin
Authorizes civil actions brought in the
violations in the U.S. District Court for the
U.S. district court for the judicial district
district wherein any violation occurred or
wherein any violation occurred or where
where the defendant is found or transacts
the defendant is found or transacts
business. Provides jurisdiction for civil
business.
actions ordering compliance to the U.S.
District Court for the judicial district
where the defendant is found or transacts
business.
CRS-72


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Preemption of state law
TSCA 18 [15 U.S.C. 2617] does not
Proposed TSCA 18 does not preempt laws
Proposed TSCA 18 is similar to current
preempt new and existing state laws,
of states or political subdivisions relating to law. It preempts new and existing state
with two exceptions: 1) when EPA
a chemical substance, mixture, or article
laws that: (1) require testing or
requires testing of a chemical under
unless compliance with both the law of the
information “reasonably likely to produce
section 4, no state may require testing of
state or political subdivision and federal law the same data and information required”
the same substance for similar purposes;
is impossible.
by rule, consent agreement, or order
and 2) if EPA prescribes a rule or order
under proposed TSCA 4, 5, or 6; (2)
under section 5 or 6 to protect against a
prohibit or restrict the manufacturing,
risk, no state or political subdivision may
processing, distribution in commerce, or
have a requirement for such substance to
use of a chemical after issuance of a
protect against such risk unless it is
completed safety determination under
identical to the EPA requirement, is
proposed TSCA 6; or (3) require
adopted under authority of the Clean Air
notification for a significant new use of a
Act or another federal law, or prohibits
chemical if EPA requires notification
the use of such substance in such state or
under proposed TSCA 5.
political subdivision (other than use in
manufacture or processing of other
Proposed TSCA 18 also preempts new
substances or mixtures).
state prohibitions or restrictions for any
high-priority and low-priority substance.
Exceptions to general preemption
include: laws adopted under the authority
of any other federal law; implementing a
reporting or information collection
requirement not redundant of federal
law; adopted pursuant to state authority
related to water quality air quality, or
waste treatment or disposal as long as it
does not impose a restriction on the
manufacture, processing, distribution in
commerce, or use of a chemical and is
not redundant or inconsistent with an
EPA action under proposed TSCA 5 or 6.
CRS-73


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Exemption from state or local law
TSCA 18 [15 U.S.C. 2617] authorizes
No comparable provision. (Since state laws
Proposed TSCA 18(d) authorizes
preemption
EPA, upon application by a state or
are not preempted, there is no need for an
application by a state or political
political subdivision, by rule to exempt a
exemption.)
subdivision for an exemption from
law in effect in the state or political
preemption for any state or local
subdivision, if compliance with the
requirement (other than a new
requirement would not cause activities
prohibition or restriction on a low-
involving the substance to be in violation
priority substance) that relates to the
of the EPA requirement, and the
effects or exposure to a chemical
requirement of the state or political
substance under the intended conditions
subdivision provides a significantly higher
of use. Requires various state and EPA
degree of protection from the risk than
determinations and certifications,
the federal requirement does and does
subjects applications to public notice and
not “unduly burden interstate
comment, and subjects the
commerce.”
Administrator’s decision to judicial
review.
Legal evidence
No comparable provision.
No comparable provision.
Proposed TSCA 18(e) makes a safety
determination admissible as evidence in
any public or private action in any court
of the United States or state court for
recovery of damages or for equitable
relief relating to injury to human health
or the environment from exposure to a
chemical substance.
Judicial review of restrictions and other
TSCA 19 [15 U.S.C. 2816] authorizes any Similar to current law, but TSCA 19, as
Proposed TSCA 19 is similar to current
rules
person to file a petition with the U.S.
proposed, authorizes filing a petition for
law, but authorizes filing a petition for
Court of Appeals for the District of
judicial review of any rule or order issued
judicial review of a rule (not an order)
Columbia Circuit or for the circuit in
under TSCA, as proposed, rather than only under proposed TSCA 4(f), 6(c), 6(e), or
which such person resides or in which
specified rules, and would eliminate the
8. Judicial review is not authorized for
the person's principal place of business is
directive in current law to the court (to set significant new use determinations under
located, for judicial review of rules
aside a rule not supported by substantial
proposed TSCA 5(a)(2), rules regarding
promulgated under TSCA sections 4(a),
evidence in the rulemaking record taken as
PCBs under proposed TSCA 6(d), or
5(a)(2), 5(b)(4), 6(a), 6(e), or 8 or Title II
a whole).
rules regarding asbestos or lead-based
or Title IV within 60 days of issuance.
paint under Titles II and IV, respectively.
The appropriate district court is directed
However, judicial review would be
to set aside rules promulgated under
authorized for rules regarding elemental
TSCA 4(a), 5(b)(4), 6(a), or 6(e) if they
mercury under proposed TSCA 6(e).
are not supported by “substantial
Would retain the standard of evidence
evidence in the rulemaking record …
for rules promulgated under proposed
taken as a whole,” which is defined in
TSCA 4(f), 6(c) or 6(e), but would define
TSCA 19(a)(3).
“evidence” to mean any matter in the
rulemaking record and prohibit review of
the contents and adequacy of the
statement of basis and purpose except as
part of the rulemaking record as a whole.
CRS-74


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Citizen suits
TSCA 20 [15 U.S.C. 2619] authorizes
Proposed TSCA 20 is similar to current
Proposed TSCA 20 is the same as
civil suits by any person against any
law, but authorizes suits against any person
current law.
person in violation of TSCA or rules or
in violation of rules or orders promulgated
orders promulgated under specified
under any provision of TSCA, as proposed.
sections of TSCA. It also authorizes suits
against EPA to compel performance of
nondiscretionary actions under TSCA.
Citizen petitions
TSCA 21 [15 U.S.C. 2620] provides the
The SCA 21 amends TSCA 21. Proposed
Proposed TSCA 21 is similar to current
public with the right to petition EPA to
TSCA 21 is similar to current law, but
law but places different requirements on
initiate rulemaking or repeal of specified
authorizes petitions for EPA to initiate any
petitioners, depending on the rule or
rules. Requires the EPA Administrator to
action authorized under the law.
order that is the subject of the petition.
grant or deny the petition within 90 days
of its filing.
Employment effects
TSCA 24 [15 U.S.C. 2623] directs the
The SCA 22 amends TSCA 24. Proposed
Proposed TSCA 24 is the same as
EPA Administrator to continual y
TSCA 24 is similar to current law, but
current law.
evaluate the potential effects of specified
directs the EPA Administrator to evaluate
rules, orders, and requirements under
potential effects of the law as a whole,
specified TSCA provisions on
rather than specific provisions, and
employment.
reporting is to be “periodic,” rather than
continual.
CRS-75


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Administration and fees
TSCA 26(a) [15 U.S.C. 2625(a)]
The SCA 23 amends TSCA 26. Proposed
Proposed TSCA 26 is the same as
authorizes federal agencies, upon request
TSCA 26, as amended, is similar to current
current law. However, with regard to
from EPA, to provide services, personnel, law, except for proposed subsections (b)
categories authorized by both current
facilities, and information to EPA to assist
and (c) and a new subsection (h).
and proposed TSCA 26(c), proposed
in implementation of TSCA.
TSCA 8(b)(7)(D) states that inactive
Proposed TSCA 26(b) authorizes
chemical substances may not be
TSCA 26(b) [15 U.S.C. 2625(b)]
col ection of fees from any data submitter
considered a category subject to EPA
authorizes EPA to collect fees from
(not just those submitting under section 4
actions.
persons required to submit data under
or 5) to defray the cost of administering
section 4 or 5 to defray the cost to EPA
TSCA. It removes the restrictions in the

of administering the Act. Such fees may
original TSCA 26(b) on the amount of such
not exceed $2,500, or in the case of a
fees.
small business $100.
Proposed TSCA 26(c) also authorizes the
TSCA 26(c) [15 U.S.C. 2625(c)]
EPA Administrator to take an action with
authorizes EPA to impose regulatory
respect to a mixture if such action is
controls on categories of chemicals,
authorized or required under any provision
rather than on a case-by-case basis.
of the Act with respect to a chemical
Prohibits regulation of a group based
substance, if the Administrator determines
solely on the fact that it consists of new
it is “reasonable and efficient” to do so.
chemical substances.
New TSCA 26(h) authorizes the EPA
TSCA 26(d) [15 U.S.C. 2625(d)] directs
Administrator to issue orders and
EPA to establish an office to assist the
prescribe regulations as necessary to carry
regulated community.
out the law.
TSCA 26(e) [15 U.S.C. 2625(e)] requires
that EPA establish a procedure to ensure
disclosure of financial interests in the
regulated community by EPA employees.
TSCA 26(f) [15 U.S.C. 2625(f)] provides
that final orders issued under TSCA must
contain a statement of basis and purpose.
TSCA 26(g) [15 U.S.C. 2625(g)] requires
appointment of an Assistant
Administrator for Toxic Substances.
State programs
TSCA 28 [15 U.S.C. 2627] authorizes
The SCA 24 amends TSCA 28. Proposed
Proposed TSCA 28 is similar to current
grants to states to establish and operate
TSCA 28 is similar to current law, but
law, but a reporting requirement and
programs to prevent or eliminate
grants are authorized to prevent or
authorization for appropriations for
unreasonable risks to health or the
eliminate any risks that EPA has not
grants are eliminated.
environment which EPA is unable or is
addressed. In addition, EPA is directed to
not likely to address under TSCA.
establish a process to coordinate with the
states “to share data and priorities relating
to the management of chemical
substances” under TSCA, as proposed, and
CRS-76


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
under state programs.
Authorization of appropriations
TSCA 29 authorizes appropriations for
The SCA 25 proposes to redesignate
This provision is eliminated.
1982 and 1983.
TSCA 29 as TSCA 38 and to authorize
such sums as may be necessary to carry
out the Act for the fiscal years 2013
through 2020.
CRS-77


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Children’s environmental health research
No comparable provision.
The SCA 26 adds new sections 29 through
No comparable provision.
36. Proposed TSCA 29(a) would establish a
Children’s Environmental Health Research
Program at EPA and authorize the EPA
Administrator to enter into contracts and
make grants to conduct research that will
“further understanding of the vulnerability
of children to chemical substances and
mixtures.” Proposed TSCA 29(b)
establishes an Interagency Science Advisory
Board on Children’s Health Research and
makes it subject to the Administrative
Procedure Act and Chapter 7 of Title 5 of
the U.S. Code, which pertains to judicial
review. The purpose of the Board is to
provide independent advice upon request
of the EPA Administrator or Congress
relating to the implementation of the
proposed TSCA “with respect to
protecting children’s health and research.”
The committee members would include
representatives of the National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences, the
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, the National Toxicology
Program, the National Cancer Institute, the
National Tribal Science Council, and not
fewer than 3 centers of children’s health at
leading institutions of higher education.
Monitoring exposures
No comparable provision.
New TSCA 29(c) would direct EPA to
No comparable provision.
coordinate with the Secretary of Health
and Human Services (HHS) to conduct a
biomonitoring study to determine the
presence of a chemical in human biological
media in pregnant women and infants, if
research has indicated that it may be
present and may have adverse effects on
development. Study results must be
published. If the study finds that the
chemical is present in human biological
media, manufacturers and processors must
disclose to EPA, commercial customers,
consumers, and the public al known uses
of the chemical and all articles in which the
chemical is expected to be present.
CRS-78


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Animal-based testing
No comparable provision.0
New TSCA 30 would direct the EPA
Proposed TSCA 4(i) directs the
Administrator to minimize the use of
Administrator to minimize the use of
animals in testing of chemical substances or animals in testing of chemical substances
mixtures. Establishes an Interagency
or mixtures through various means.
Science Advisory Board on Alternative
Requires the Administrator to promote
Testing Methods subject to Title 5,
development and timely incorporation of
Chapter 5, Subchapter 11 and Chapter 7.
new testing methods that are not
The Board is directed to provide
laboratory animal-based. Authorizes the
independent advice and peer review to the
Administrator to adapt or waive animal-
EPA Administrator and Congress and to
testing requirements on request from a
publish a list of testing methods that
manufacturer or processor under
reduce the use of animals in testing under
specified circumstances.
proposed TSCA 4. Directs the EPA
Administrator in consultation with the
Board to develop a strategic plan, biennially
report to Congress on progress in
implementing this section, and fund and
carry out research, development,
performance assessment, and translational
studies to accelerate the development of
test methods and strategies for use in
safety standard determinations under
proposed TSCA 6(b). Authorizes the EPA
Administrator, on request of a
manufacturer or processor, to adapt or
waive animal-based testing of a chemical
substance or mixture under specific
conditions.
CRS-79


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Safer alternatives
No comparable provision.b
New TSCA 31(a) would establish a
No comparable provision.
program to create market incentives for
the development of safer alternatives to
existing chemical substances that reduce or
avoid the use and generation of hazardous
substances. Requires that the program
include expedited review of new chemical
substances for which an alternatives
analysis indicates it is a safer alternative,
and recognition for a substance or product
determined by EPA to be a safer
alternative.
Green chemistry and green engineering
No comparable provision.b
New TSCA 31(b) would direct the EPA
No comparable provision.
Administrator to establish a network of at
least four green chemistry and engineering
centers in various U.S. regions. New TSCA
31(c) would direct EPA to make grants to
promote and support research,
development, and adoption of safer
alternatives. New TSCA 31(d) would
create a program to facilitate the
development of a workforce that produces
safer alternatives to existing chemical
substances.
International cooperation
No comparable provision.
New TSCA 32 would direct the EPA
No comparable provision.
Administrator to cooperate with the
Secretary of State and the head of any
other appropriate federal agency “with
international efforts as appropriate” to
develop a common protocol or electronic
database relating to chemical substances or
to develop safer alternatives for chemical
substances.
CRS-80


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Hot spots
No comparable provision.
As proposed, a new TSCA 34 requires that No comparable provision.
EPA promulgate a rule to establish criteria
to identify any locality that is
disproportionately exposed. Defines
“disproportionate exposure” to mean
residential population exposure to one or
more toxic chemical substances and
mixtures at levels that are significantly
greater than the average exposure in the
United States. Directs EPA, within 120 days
of promulgation of the rule, to identify
localities subject to such exposure using
data in EPA’s National Air Toxic
Assessment Database and other available
data, and providing an opportunity for
public nominations of localities. Requires
EPA to publish a list of such localities, and
to update it at least once every five years.
The locations on the list are not subject to
judicial review. Publication of a list is a
nondiscretionary duty and subject to
judicial review. Requires the EPA
Administrator to develop and publish an
action plan that includes an identification of
the chemicals that contribute to the
disproportionate exposure, and a
description of actions to be taken to
reduce exposure. Directs EPA to report
annual y to Congress.
CRS-81


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
Federal agencies subject to TSCA
No comparable provision.
New TSCA 35 would provide that all
No comparable provision.
federal agencies are subject to the
provisions of TSCA, as proposed, and
expressly waive any immunity otherwise
applicable to the United States. However,
no agent, employee, or officer of the
United States is personally liable for any
civil penalty under TSCA with respect to
any act or omission within the scope of the
official duties of that person. Such persons
are subject to any criminal sanction under
proposed TSCA. The President is
authorized to grant an exemption for any
federal agency from compliance with any
requirement of TSCA, as proposed, if “the
President determines it is in the paramount
interest of the United States.” An
exemption may be granted due to lack of
appropriation if the President specifically
requested such appropriation and
Congress failed to make available such
requested appropriation. Directs the
President annually to report to Congress
al exemptions granted during the previous
year.
Authorizes enforcement action against any
federal agency, as well as voluntary
resolution or settlement set forth in a
consent order.
CRS-82


Chemical Safety Improvement Act
Provision
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.
Safe Chemicals Act (S. 696)
(S. 1009)
International agreements
No comparable provision
New TSCA 36 would authorize EPA to
No comparable provision, but see
implement three international agreements:
proposed TSCA 12 and 13 above with
the Stockholm Convention on Persistent
regard to chemicals subject to treaties to
Organic Pollutants, the Aarhus Protocol to
which the United States is obligated.
the Convention on Long-Range
Transboundary Air Pollution, and the
Rotterdam Convention on the Prior
Informed Consent Procedure for Certain
Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in
International Trade (known as the PIC
Convention). Directs the EPA
Administrator to implement the three
agreements that have entered into force
for the United States. Prohibits
manufacture, processing, distribution in
commerce, use, disposal, or any other
action with respect to a covered chemical,
mixture, or substance that is part of an
article in a manner inconsistent with
applicable international obligations. Directs
EPA to provide timely public notice and
opportunity to comment on: a chemical
proposed for listing, a recommendation
made to list a chemical on any Annex in
advance of any meeting of the Parties at
which the recommendation is to be
considered, and any decision by the
Meeting of the Parties to list a chemical.
Authorizes the EPA Administrator to
prescribe regulations to carry out
provisions of the three agreements or to
ensure compliance with obligations under
them. Prohibitions and other requirements
shall be enforced in the same way as final
rules or orders under proposed TSCA 6.
Source: Compiled by the Congressional Research Service from the U.S. Code, S. 696 and S. 1009.
Notes:
a. EPA has stated that it “is committed to examining alternative test methods that reduce the number of animals needed for testing, reduce pain and suffering of test
animals, and whenever possible, replace animals in testing with validated in vitro (non-animal) test systems. EPA has released guidance on this issue. …” U.S. EPA, “Fact
Sheet on Animal Welfare,” April 2001, EPA 745-F-99-003, http://www.epa.gov/HPV/pubs/general/anfacs.pdf.
b. Although there is no explicit authority in TSCA, EPA currently promotes green chemistry (http://www.epa.gov/greenchemistry/), safer products (http://www.epa.gov/
dfe/product_label_consumer.html), green engineering (http://www.epa.gov/oppt/greenengineering/pubs/whats_ge.html), and other “green” initiatives.
CRS-83


c. Although there is no explicit authority in TSCA, EPA currently requires substantiation of confidentiality claims for specific chemical identity. See title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations at 720.85.


CRS-84

Proposed Reform of TSCA in the 113th Congress: S. 1009, S. 696, and Current Law


Author Contact Information

Linda-Jo Schierow

Specialist in Environmental Policy
lschierow@crs.loc.gov, 7-7279

Acknowledgments
Dr. Jerry Yen, a summer intern at CRS, made important contributions to this report.

Congressional Research Service
85