The Future of TSCA

• Author: Carolyne R. Hathaway/William K. Rawson/Ann Claassen/Julia A. Hatcher
• Pages: 169-170

Page 169

Chapter XIX:

The Future of TSCA

Despite its relatively low public prole,

TSCA is clearly one of the major federal

environmental laws, imposing signicant

potential civil and criminal liabilities and provid-

ing EPA with broad regulatory and d ata-gathering

powers. In part because of its emphasis on regu-

lating and testing products, TSCA’s structure is

unique and can be a challenge to the practitioner.

Many aspects of the TSCA program are well estab-

lished, yet new trends in risk management and pol-

lution prevention are creating pressure for changes

in the TSCA program. e coming years should be

a period of ux and evolution that will pose new

issues for industry and EPA.

TSCA’s core provisions in Title I have not been

amended since TSC A was enacted in 1976. Much

has been ac complished under TSCA, as has been

described in this Deskbook, but many criticisms of

TSCA a lso have been raised over the years. ere

now appears to be a consensus among stakeholders

that some “reform” or “modernization” of TSCA is

needed, a nd the implementation of a new chemi-

cal management program in Europe, known as

REACH,1 has provided added impetus to the calls

for revisions to TSCA. Congressional hearings on

“TSCA reform” have been held,2 and draft bills

1. Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and

of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registra-

tion, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals

(REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending

Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC)

No. 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1488/94, as

well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Direc-

tives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC, and 2000/21/EC,

2006 O.J. (L 396) 1; see also corrigenda at 2007 O.J. (L 136) 3;

2008 O.J. (L 141) 22; 2009 O.J. (L 36) 84.

2. E.g., Federal Toxic Substances Control Act: Oversight Hearings

Before the Full Comm. and Subcomm. on Superfund, Toxics,

and Envtl. Health of the S. Comm. on Env’t and Public Works,

111th Cong. (Dec. 2, 2009), http://www.epw.senate.gov/

public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Hearings.Hearing&Hearing_

ID=129f8be4-802a-23ad-4217-c8c5900bf3db (last visited

have been introduced in the Senate and House

of Representatives. General principles that might

inform eorts to update and revise TSCA have

been articulated by the Administrator of EPA,3

states,4 t he chemical industry,5 and environmental

groups.6 e principles that have been articulated

by EPA and various stakeholders reect common

ground, but substantia l dierences in opinion

concerning how principles should be turned into

legislation also have been expressed, and more dif-

ferences are likely to surface as any draft legisla-

Sept. 23, 2010); e Toxic Chemicals Safety Act of 2010:

Hearings on H.R. 5820 Before the H. Subcomm. on Commerce,

Trade, and Consumer Protection of the H. Comm. on Energy

and Commerce, 111th Cong. (July 29, 2010), http://energy-

commerce.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view

=article&id=2095:hearing-on-hr-5820-the-toxic-chemicals-

safety-act-of-2010&catid=129:subcommittee-on-commerce-

trade-and-consumer-protection&Itemid=70 (last visited Sept.

23, 2010).

3. Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator, U.S. EPA, Remarks to the

Commonwealth Club of San Francisco, As Prepared (Sept.

9, 2009), http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/8d49f7

ad4bbcf4ef852573590040b7f6/fc4e2a8c05343b328525764

0007081c5!OpenDocument (last visited Sept. 23, 2010); see

also Essential Principles for Reform of Chemicals Management

Legislation, http://www.epa.gov/oppt/existingchemicals/pubs/

principles.pdf (last visited Sept. 23, 2010).

4. Heads of Environmental Agencies of the States of Califor-

nia, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts,

Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Oregon,

Vermont, and Washington, States’ Principles on Reform of the

Toxic Substances Control Act (Dec. 2, 2009), http://www.

saferstates.com/attachments/StatePrinciples.pdf (last visited

Sept. 23, 2010).

5. 10 Principles for Modernizing TSCA, http://www.

americanchemistry.com/s_acc/sec_mediakits.

asp?CID=2178&DID=9938 (last visited Sept. 23, 2010);

SOCMA Position on Reforming the Toxic Substances Control

Act (TSCA) (Mar. 19, 2009), http://www.socma.com/assets/

le/socma1/PDFles/GR_PDF_les/SOCMA-Position-on-

TSCA-031909.pdf (last visited Sept 23, 2010).

6. E.g., Richard Denison, Ten Essential Elements in TSCA Reform,

39 ELR 10020 (2009), reproduced at http://www.edf.org/docu-

ments/9279_Denison_10_Elements_TSCA_Reform.pdf (last

visited Sept. 23, 2010); Safer Chemicals, Health Families Coalition,

A Platform for Reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act, http://

www.saferchemicals.org/PDF/SCHF_Campaign_Platform.pdf

(last visited Sept. 23, 2010).