The federal Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) has remained largely unchanged since its adoption in 1976, some 35 years ago. Congressional inaction has not gone unnoticed by state governments, which are increasingly dismayed by their federal counterpart’s seeming indifference to the public’s demand for stricter chemical controls and its growing distrust of federal chemical-control measures. As a result, states are taking matters into their own hands by adopting laws, resolutions, and related chemical-control measures.

On April 14, 2011, Senator Lautenberg (D-NJ) introduced the Safe Chemicals Act of 2011 (S. 847) to modernize the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Lautenberg initiated similar legislation, S. 3209, in the 111th Congress. Below is a summary of key differences between Lautenberg's S. 847 and S. 3209.

On April 14, Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg, D-N.J., introduced the Safe Chemicals Act of 2011, which is intended to modernize the Toxic Substances Control Act to require chemical companies to demonstrate the safety of industrial chemicals and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to evaluate safety based on the best available science.

On April 14, 2011, Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) introduced the Safe Chemicals Act of 2011. The bill is intended to amend and modernize the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to require chemical companies to demonstrate the safety of industrial chemicals and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to evaluate safety based on the best available science. The bill is co-sponsored by Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Charles Schumer (D-NY), and Barbara Boxer (D-CA).

While debate continues to swirl around whether, and to what extent, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) needs retooling, just about everyone agrees that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) needs more information on chemical production, use, and exposure in order to make informed decisions about chemical risk management. Most also agree that TSCA could be put to greater use for these purposes.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed important revisions to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Inventory Update Rule (IUR). This column explains why chemical manufacturers and other stakeholders must be aware of the proposal and prepare now for its implications.

On April 15, 2010, Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) released the text of the Safe Chemicals Act of 2010, S. 3209 (SCA),1 which is intended to address the “core failings” of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).

The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) allows the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to keep a list of chemicals that present or may present ‘‘an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment.’’ This authority has not been used since TSCA was enacted in 1976. In April, EPA said it intends to propose a rule to add a category of eight phthalates, a category of polybrominated diphenyl ethers, and bisphenol A to such a list. In this article, the authors explore EPA’s authority under Section 5(b)(4) of the TSCA to create a ‘‘chemicals of concern’’ list and discuss legal and policy issues that may arise.

James V. Aidala began working with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a college intern in the Office of Pesticide Programs; he returned as a policy analyst in the new Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances (OPTS) after graduate school. From Aidala’s perspective, there was much uncertainty in the early years of Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), in part due to challenges with the law’s specificity regarding polychlorinated biphenyls and, later, asbestos and lead, and in part due to logistical, organizational, and legal difficulties in the early years of TSCA. He also felt that the Reagan Administration was fatal to a cohesive toxics program.