« Understanding basic process flows under the new TSCA

Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.


  1. Posted June 29, 2016 at 4:53 am | Permalink

    The EPA needs funding to be able to protect the public from all the pollution that the EPA is currently supposed to protect us from. Adding this new mandate won’t help without the funding to back it up. We should be making the polluter (or chemical manufacturer) pay for the testing and cleanup of their messes.

    • Posted July 5, 2016 at 10:26 am | Permalink

      Jane: Thanks for your comment. Happily the Lautenberg Act does add a new source of funding for EPA: user fees to be paid directly by manufacturers and processors of chemicals, with the level initially set at up to $25 million annually but with an ability to raise them to match the pace of EPA chemical reviews. The old law had a much lower level and funds went to the general treasury, not directly to EPA. The new fees are on top of EPA’s federally appropriated budget. While total funding is still modest in comparison to the magnitude of the task at hand, it’s a major improvement over the old law.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>