2
More effective authority to require testing of chemicals:
Eliminates TSCA’s
Catch-22
requirement that EPA first have evidence of risk to require testing. Provides for EPA to issue an order requiring testing, rather than having to promulgate a rule, which can be a multiyear process. Testing authority applies to both new and existing chemicals and in limited instances for purposes of prioritization, specifying that EPA cannot require testing to establish minimum information sets for chemicals.
Review of new chemicals:
Upgrades EPA’s review of new chemicals while retaining a balance with the
need not to unduly impede innovation and speed to market. Requires for the first time that EPA make an affirmative safety finding
–
that a new chemical is likely to meet the safety standard
–
as a condition
for market entry. Maintains current TSCA’s 90
-day review period for new chemicals and shortens that period when EPA makes a positive safety determination.
Regulation of chemicals presenting significant risks:
Strikes TSCA’s u
nworkable mandate that EPA demonstrate that
its regulations impose the “least burdensome” possible requirements. Requires EPA
to consider, based on existing information, costs and the availability of alternatives in selecting among regulatory options while
ensuring that EPA’s regulations are sufficient to address identified risks.
Confidential business information (CBI):
Requires EPA to review past CBI claims for active chemicals on the TSCA Inventory, the identities of which are not publicly available. Requires that certain CBI claims be substantiated when made, expire after 10 years unless re-substantiated, and are to be reviewed by EPA. Identifies specific types of proprietary information for which claims do not require substantiation or re-substantiation. Specifies types of information, including health and safety data, that are not eligible for CBI protection. Requires EPA to review all new CBI claims and require substantiation for chemicals found not to meet the safety standard, and creates a rebuttable presumption of disclosure for a chemical that EPA bans or phases out. For the first time, provides that CBI is to be shared with state governments, health and environmental professionals and first responders, subject to adequate protections and nondisclosure agreements.
User fees:
Requires
EPA to collect fees for the review of new and existing chemicals to defray a portion of the costs of implementing the program. Specifies that fees are capped at 25% of relevant EPA program costs, and that companies are to pay 100% of the costs of safety assessments they request
(50% for those already on EPA’s Work Plan).
Federal-State authority:
Establishes preemption of state authority that is chemical-specific, applies only when EPA take up a chemical, and is confined to the hazards, exposures, risks, uses and conditions of
use of a chemical that are included in EPA’s safety assessment and safety determination (and, where
required, risk management rule). Preemption applies only to state statutes or administrative actions restricting a chemical, not to requirements for reporting, monitoring or disclosure. States can impose restrictions that are identical to a Federal requirement, adopted under the authority of a federal law, or adopted under a state air or water quality or waste treatment or disposal law, unless they conflict with federal requirements.