2 first bi-partisan TSCA reform proposal, and garnered the support of 26 additional members of the Senate. Sadly, Senator Lautenberg passed away shortly after S. 1009 was introduced. Although the Committee held a hearing on general TSCA reform with discus-sions of S. 1009, no further action on the bill was taken before the 113th Congress adjourned. Following Senator Lautenberg’s death, Senator Tom Udall (D– NM) stepped in to fill the late Senator’s leadership role working to pass bipartisan TSCA reform. Senators Udall and Vitter introduced a modified version of S. 1009 on March 10, 2015, which reflected over a year of negotiations and building upon the original CSIA. The new bill, S. 697, contains many important enhancements to the framework first negotiated by Senators Lautenberg and Vitter. On April 28, 2015, the Committee held a business meeting on S. 697. The Committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a sub-stitute offered by Senator Vitter that won the support of Senators Whitehouse (D–RI), Merkley (D–OR), Booker (D–NJ) and Carper (D–DE). The substitute reflects additional modifications to the bill intended to address the concerns of stakeholders in several key areas. The bi-partisan substitute marks an important milestone in TSCA reform, and reflects the spirit of compromise that Frank Lautenberg championed during his tenure in the Senate. TSCA (Pub.L. 94–469, 90 Stat. 2004, 15 U.S.C. 2601
et seq.
) was enacted in 1976. TSCA gives EPA the authority to review new chemicals before they are manufactured, to gather information on existing chemicals in commerce, and to regulate unreasonable risks to health and the environment from the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, use or disposal of chemical substances. TSCA is one of many statutes that regulate chemicals; its unique focus is on industrial chemicals in commerce. TSCA does not give EPA the authority to regulate pesticides; food, drugs and cosmetics; nuclear materials, firearms and ammunition, or tobacco. In the years since TSCA was first enacted, it has become clear that effective implementation of TSCA by the Environmental Pro-tection Agency (EPA) has been challenged by shortcomings in the statute itself, and by several key decisions of Federal Courts and the Agency’s interpretation of those decisions. S. 697, as reported by the Committee, is intended to enhance confidence in the federal chemical regulatory system, provide EPA the authority necessary for efficient and effective regulation of chemical risks, and foster safety and innovation in commercial chemistry. Importantly, S. 697 is designed to ensure that the competitive advantage of the U.S. chemical industry is not eroded by regulatory mandates and that industry is subject to a more consistent set of regulations that equally protect citizens across the nation. S. 697 is intended to address significant concerns about the exist-ing provisions of TSCA and its implementation.
Testing of chemical substances and mixtures
Section 4 of TSCA provides EPA the authority to require manu-facturers to test chemicals, but requires EPA to justify a testing re-quirement based on either a finding that the substance may present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environ-ment, or that the production of a substantial quantity of the sub-stance may create exposures to humans or the environment. EPA
VerDate Sep 11 2014 05:10 Jun 23, 2015Jkt 049010PO 00000Frm 00002Fmt 6659Sfmt 6602E:\HR\OC\SR067.XXXSR067
s m a r t i n e z o n D S K 4 T P T V N 1 P R O D w i t h R E P O R T S - S E N