Chemical Regulation: TSCA Reform, Pesticide Regulations On Radar

Efforts to modernize the 1976 federal law that governs chemical manufacturing, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), are likely to pick up in the Senate where they left off at the end of the last Congress.

Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-N.J.) will remain a key player in successfully reforming TSCA.

All indications suggest that Lautenberg will reintroduce his TSCA reform bill, the Safe Chemicals Act, this year. The Senate Environment & Public Works Committee approved Lautenberg’s bill last year on a party-line vote, but it was never brought to the Senate floor for a vote. Under that measure, EPA would have to determine the safety of substances on the basis of data that chemical manufacturers would have to provide. The agency would restrict uses of chemicals that cannot be proven safe.

“EPA is still seriously limited under existing law, and we must reform TSCA if we ever hope to truly protect American families from toxic chemicals,” Lautenberg says. “Today, when the EPA identifies a toxic chemical that poses a risk to the public, it remains effectively unable to protect Americans from those risks. We will continue working to reform this broken law to ensure that every chemical that comes into contact with a child has been proven safe.”

But Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), the new top Republican on the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee, is expected to introduce his version of a TSCA reform bill early in the year. Industry groups such as the American Chemistry Council (ACC) and the Society of Chemical Manufacturers & Affiliates (SOCMA) have been working closely with Vitter’s staff to help shape the bill.

ACC Chief Executive Officer Calvin M. Dooley says Vitter is committed to developing and introducing a TSCA modernization bill that has the support of other Republicans and some Democrats. Dooley and others in industry claim that Vitter’s bill will be “balanced,” in contrast to Lautenberg’s TSCA reform legislation championed during the past several years. Industry has long complained that, among other things, Lautenberg’s measures would impose an unworkable safety standard for commercial chemicals.

Nonetheless, Dooley acknowledges that because the House of Representatives is controlled by Republicans and the Senate by Democrats, any TSCA reform legislation faces an uphill battle. A diverse set of industry representatives will lobby Democrats to convince them that Vitter’s approach “is the best policy,” Dooley says.

William E. Allmond IV, vice president of government and public relations at SOCMA, says he is optimistic that a bipartisan approach to TSCA reform can be achieved. SOCMA is pushing for a more incremental strategy to TSCA modernization rather than a comprehensive approach, because consensus in all areas will be difficult if not impossible to achieve, he says.

“We are advocating to first identify areas within TSCA modernization that there is consensus around, and move those issues forward first in legislation,” Allmond says. For example, consensus has been reached on “how we handle confidential business information, how we prioritize chemicals for testing, and how we go about upholding things within TSCA like the new chemicals requirements that work well under TSCA currently,” he tells C&EN.

Regulation of pesticides will also be on the congressional radar this year. In the House, legislation is expected to be introduced that is similar to the Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011, which cleared the House in March 2011 but stalled in the Senate. The legislation would have eliminated a 2009 court-ordered requirement that pesticide applicators obtain a permit under the Clean Water Act when spraying in or near U.S. waters. Those in favor of such legislation say the Clean Water Act permit is unnecessary and duplicative because the effects of pesticides on aquatic environments are already considered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide & Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).

Some senators, however, are opposed to the bill. In the last Congress, Senate Environment & Public Works Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and committee member Benjamin L. Cardin (D-Md.) blocked its consideration, arguing that EPA’s standard for assessing aquatic effects of pesticides under FIFRA is insufficient to protect the environment and humans from harm. It is likely they will continue to oppose any such measure that may be introduced.

Ongoing litigation regarding EPA’s failure to incorporate endangered species consultations into hundreds of pesticide safety reviews may also get the attention of Congress this year. The National Academy of Sciences is expected to release a report in the next six months on EPA’s lack of compliance with the Endangered Species Act. The report could trigger congressional action.