{
  "id": "R43136",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "R43136",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 425127,
      "date": "2013-10-23",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-06T23:15:20.267663",
      "title": "Proposed Reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) in the 113th Congress: S. 1009 Compared with S. 696 and Current Statute",
      "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\u2019s 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 the language of the current statute (15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.).\nExisting Law\nTSCA as enacted authorizes the 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 \u201can unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment.\u201d EPA then must regulate to control unreasonable risk, but only to the extent necessary using the \u201cleast burdensome\u201d means of available control. This TSCA standard has been interpreted to require cost-benefit balancing. The current statute preempts state and local laws regarding chemicals specifically regulated by EPA.\nProposed Legislation\nS. 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 \u201ca reasonable certainty of no harm from aggregate exposure,\u201d 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\u2019s decisions and to some information about chemicals that currently is treated as confidential business information. S. 696 would rarely preempt state and local laws. \nS. 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 to one of three categories:\nhigh priority for risk assessment,\nlow priority for risk assessment, or\nin need of additional information.\nS. 1009 would require EPA regulation, by rule or order, ensuring \u201cno unreasonable risk of harm from exposure\u201d 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. \nBoth 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. \nS. 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 \u201cgreen\u201d engineering and chemistry, promote alternatives to toxicity testing on animals, encourage research on children\u2019s environmental health, require biomonitoring of pregnant women and infants, require EPA to identify \u201chot spots\u201d where residents are exposed disproportionately to pollution, and direct EPA to develop strategies for reducing their risks.\nKey provisions of S. 696 and S. 1009 are compared with current statute in Tables 1 through 6 of this CRS report.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R43136",
          "sha1": "c9b99fd64102cbb23e11dd5dc5e40bbce83465d6",
          "filename": "files/20131023_R43136_c9b99fd64102cbb23e11dd5dc5e40bbce83465d6.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R43136",
          "sha1": "8836584d2a8f4a60f90244741149ef9bb8bb7d1a",
          "filename": "files/20131023_R43136_8836584d2a8f4a60f90244741149ef9bb8bb7d1a.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    },
    {
      "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
      "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc817003/",
      "id": "R43136_2013Jul08",
      "date": "2013-07-08",
      "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26",
      "title": "Proposed Reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) in the 113th Congress: S. 1009 Compared with S. 696 and Current Law",
      "summary": null,
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORT",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "filename": "files/20130708_R43136_add622cc77c5a6ef55c33462893bd65d5cbe63f9.pdf"
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20130708_R43136_add622cc77c5a6ef55c33462893bd65d5cbe63f9.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Foreign Affairs"
  ]
}