Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Lead Senior Scientist.
There are some clear similarities, and some clear differences, between the preemption provisions of the TSCA Modernization Act of 2015 (H.R. 2576) and the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (S. 697), the House and Senate TSCA reform bills. Without getting too far into the weeds, I’ll use this post to compare and contrast these controversial and complex aspects of the legislation. Read More
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Lead Senior Scientist.
Yesterday I posted a side-by-side providing a 35,000-foot-level comparison of how the House’s TSCA Modernization Act of 2015 (H.R. 2576) and the Senate’s Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (S. 697), address the key limitations of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
For those left wanting more, [UPDATED 2-15-16 available here] is a more detailed comparison of the bills relative to TSCA that lines them up on 12 major aspects of reform.
Enjoy!
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Lead Senior Scientist.
[UPDATE 2-15-16: I have also posted an updated detailed side-by-side comparison of the bills here.]
Last week, the House of Representatives passed the TSCA Modernization Act of 2015 (H.R. 2576), its bill to reform the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The Senate is poised to consider its own bill, the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (S. 697), within the next few weeks.
How would these bills address the key flaws in current TSCA? The chart below provides a 35,000-foot-level comparison of the two bills. It’s also available as a PDF here.
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Lead Senior Scientist.
Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) appreciates the continued progress toward badly needed reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) represented by Tuesday’s passage by the U.S. House of Representatives of H.R. 2576, the TSCA Modernization Act of 2015. The House has continued to work in a bipartisan manner on this legislation, essential to developing reform legislation that can be enacted into law. We appreciate the attention Representatives John Shimkus, Paul Tonko, Frank Pallone and Chairman Fred Upton have given to TSCA reform.
While EDF welcomes the progress the House’s action represents toward updating the nearly 40-year-old TSCA, we believe a final bill will need to make considerably stronger and more comprehensive reforms in order to live up to the promise of fixing the key flaws in current law.
EDF looks forward to working with all Members of Congress to ensure that the final legislation the President signs into law establishes a strong overall system of protection from dangerous chemicals, one that: ensures primary attention is given to the chemicals that EPA determines are of concern to health and the environment; provides for timely safety reviews for all new and existing chemicals against a purely health-based standard; gives EPA strong testing authority; broadens transparency and information access; provides adequate resources; and gives EPA robust authority to regulate chemicals presenting risks to the public.
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Lead Senior Scientist.
Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) appreciates the continued progress toward badly needed reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) represented by today’s markup of H.R. 2576, the TSCA Modernization Act of 2015, by the House Energy and Commerce Committee. The Committee has continued to work in a bipartisan manner on this legislation, essential to developing reform legislation that can be enacted into law. We appreciate the attention Representatives John Shimkus, Paul Tonko, Frank Pallone and Chairman Fred Upton have given to TSCA reform.
While EDF welcomes the progress toward passage of H.R. 2576 in the House, we share the concerns expressed by Representative Diana DeGette and other Committee members that the legislation still needs significant work to live up to the promise of fixing the key flaws in current TSCA.
EDF looks forward to working with all Members of Congress to ensure that the final legislation the President signs into law establishes a strong overall system of protection from dangerous chemicals, one that: ensures primary attention is given to the chemicals that EPA determines are of concern to health and the environment; provides for timely safety reviews for all new and existing chemicals against a purely health-based standard; gives EPA strong testing authority; broadens transparency and information access; provides adequate resources; and gives EPA robust authority to regulate chemicals presenting risks to the public.
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Lead Senior Scientist.
Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Part 4 Part 5
[NOTES: (1) This post reflects the latest versions of TSCA reform legislation:
(2) All of the earlier posts in this series have been updated to reflect these latest versions.]
This is the fifth in a series of blog posts looking at less talked-about, but critically important, elements of bipartisan legislative proposals to reform the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). This post deals with how costs and other non-risk considerations factor into safety and regulatory risk management decisions. Read More
