By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
On May 3, 2023, the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies will hold a hearing entitled “A Review of the President’s Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Request for the Environmental Protection Agency.” The only scheduled witness is Michael S. Regan, Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). On May 10, 2023, the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on the Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials will hold a hearing on “The Fiscal Year 2024 Environmental Protection Agency Budget.” Regan is expected to be the only witness. As reported in our memoranda, both the Senate and House held hearings in March 2023 on EPA’s proposed fiscal year (FY) 2024 budget.

• Email This
• Print

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
On March 28, 2023, the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies will hold a hearing on the fiscal year (FY) 2024 budget request for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). As reported in our March 22, 2023, blog item, EPA has posted the justification for its FY 2024 appropriation estimates for the Committee on Appropriations (Congressional Justification (CJ)). According to the CJ, EPA’s FY 2024 budget includes $470.7 million and 1,677 full-time equivalents (FTE) for Objective 7.1, “Ensure Chemical and Pesticide Safety.” The CJ includes the following target dates for actions under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA):

• By September 30, 2026, complete at least eight high-priority substance TSCA risk evaluations annually within statutory timelines compared to the FY 2020 baseline of one;
   
• By September 30, 2026, initiate all TSCA risk management actions within 45 days of the completion of a final existing chemical risk evaluation; and
   
• By September 30, 2026, review 90 percent of risk management actions for past TSCA new chemical substances reported to the 2020 Chemical Data Reporting Rule (CDR) compared to the FY 2021 baseline of none.

Our March 24, 2023, blog item provides details on resources requested for the Safer Choice, Environmentally Preferable Purchasing (EPP), and Green Chemistry Programs. As reported in our March 23, 2023, memorandum, the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works held a hearing on March 22, 2023, on EPA’s FY 2024 budget request.

• Email This
• Print

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has posted the justification for its fiscal year (FY) 2024 appropriation estimates for the Committee on Appropriations (Congressional Justification (CJ)). According to the CJ, EPA’s FY 2024 budget includes $470.7 million and 1,677 full-time equivalents (FTE) for Objective 7.1, “Ensure Chemical and Pesticide Safety.” The CJ includes the following target dates for actions under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA):

• By September 30, 2026, complete at least eight high-priority substance TSCA risk evaluations annually within statutory timelines compared to the FY 2020 baseline of one;
• By September 30, 2026, initiate all TSCA risk management actions within 45 days of the completion of a final existing chemical risk evaluation; and
• By September 30, 2026, review 90 percent of risk management actions for past TSCA new chemical substances reported to the 2020 Chemical Data Reporting Rule (CDR) compared to the FY 2021 baseline of none.

The CJ provides a summary of activities for the Chemical Risk Review and Reduction (CRRR) Program. According to the CJ, in FY 2024, EPA will emphasize the integrity of scientific products, adherence to statutory intent and requirements, and timelines applicable to pre-market review of new chemicals, chemical risk evaluation and management, data development and information collection, the review of confidential business information (CBI) claims, and other statutory requirements. The CJ states that the resources requested are essential for EPA to address its workload, including:

• Maintaining at least 20 EPA-initiated existing chemical risk evaluations in development at all times and completing EPA-initiated existing chemical risk evaluations within the statutory timeframe;
• Having up to five existing chemical risk evaluations requested by manufacturers in development;
• Issuing protective regulations in accordance with statutory timelines addressing all unreasonable risks identified in each risk evaluation;
• Establishing a pipeline of chemicals to be prioritized for future risk evaluation;
• Using test orders and a new strategy for tiered data collection, requiring development of data critical to existing chemical risk evaluation and risk management activities, and systematically collecting, reviewing, and synthesizing data for risk assessments in a transparent manner as mandated by the 2016 TSCA amendments;
• Conducting risk assessments for approximately 550 new chemical notices and exemption submissions and managing the identified risks associated with the chemicals;
• Continuing to implement a collaborative research program focused on developing new scientific approaches for performing risk assessments on new chemical substances;
• Reviewing and making determinations on CBI claims contained in TSCA submissions; making certain non-CBI available to stakeholders; and publishing identifiers for each chemical substance for which a confidentiality claim for specific chemical identity is approved; and
• Carrying out other required TSCA CRRR activities.

The Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works held a hearing on March 22, 2023, on EPA’s proposed FY 2024 budget. A summary of the hearing will be available in our forthcoming memorandum.

• Email This
• Print

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works will hold a hearing on March 22, 2023, on the proposed fiscal year (FY) 2024 budget for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The only listed witness is EPA Administrator Michael Regan. As reported in our March 14, 2023, blog item, the budget requests over $12 billion in discretionary budget authority for EPA, a $1.9 billion or 19 percent increase from the FY 2023 enacted level. Highlights of the FY 2024 budget include:

• Ensuring Safety of Chemicals for People and the Environment: The budget provides an investment of $130 million, $49 million more than the 2023 enacted level, to build core capacity to implement the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Under TSCA, EPA has a responsibility to ensure the safety of chemicals in or entering commerce. According to EPA, in FY 2024, it “will focus on evaluating, assessing, and managing risks from exposure to new and existing industrial chemicals to advance human health protection in our communities.” EPA states that “[a]nother priority is to implement [the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)] to ensure pesticides pose no unreasonable risks to human health and the environment.”
   
• Tackling Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Pollution: The budget provides approximately $170 million to combat PFAS pollution. This request allows EPA to continue working toward commitments made under EPA’s 2021 PFAS Strategic Roadmap, including: increasing its knowledge of PFAS impacts on human health and ecological effects; restricting use to prevent PFAS from entering the air, land, and water; and remediating PFAS that have been released into the environment.

• Email This
• Print

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
On March 9, 2023, President Biden released his fiscal year (FY) 2024 budget. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) March 9, 2023, press release, the budget requests over $12 billion in discretionary budget authority for EPA in FY 2024, a $1.9 billion or 19 percent increase from the FY 2023 enacted level. Highlights of the FY 2024 budget include:

• Ensuring Safety of Chemicals for People and the Environment: The budget provides an investment of $130 million, $49 million more than the 2023 enacted level, to build core capacity to implement the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Under TSCA, EPA has a responsibility to ensure the safety of chemicals in or entering commerce. According to EPA, in FY 2024, it “will focus on evaluating, assessing, and managing risks from exposure to new and existing industrial chemicals to advance human health protection in our communities.” EPA states that “[a]nother priority is to implement [the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)] to ensure pesticides pose no unreasonable risks to human health and the environment.”
   
• Tackling Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Pollution: The budget provides approximately $170 million to combat PFAS pollution. This request allows EPA to continue working toward commitments made under EPA’s 2021 PFAS Strategic Roadmap, including: increasing its knowledge of PFAS impacts on human health and ecological effects; restricting use to prevent PFAS from entering the air, land, and water; and remediating PFAS that have been released into the environment.

EPA states that it will release the full Congressional Justification and Budget in Brief materials “soon.”

• Email This
• Print

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Carla N. Hutton
 
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has provided a report to Congress on its capacity to implement certain provisions of the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (Lautenberg Act). The report provides point-in-time estimates of EPA’s current estimated capacity and resources needed to implement the 2016 Lautenberg Act amendments to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). EPA states that it recognizes its responsibility to identify and implement opportunities to reduce costs as it incorporates lessons learned since the Lautenberg Act was enacted and builds the scientific, regulatory, and other infrastructure needed to implement the program effectively. For example:

• The resources included in President Biden’s fiscal year (FY) 2023 budget request would allow EPA to modernize its information technology (IT) systems, which at times hinder and significantly slow chemical review work. These improvements will ultimately reduce TSCA implementation costs;
• The resources included in the FY 2023 budget request would allow EPA to increase and further diversify the expertise of the TSCA program’s scientific workforce, which will reduce re-work and enable more timely and robust chemical reviews, and thus ultimately reduce TSCA implementation costs;
• As EPA further develops its scientific and regulatory tools (including but not limited to systematic review, techniques to assess chemical risks to potentially exposed and susceptible subpopulations, and potential measures to address occupational safety), EPA expects costs of developing these tools to decrease;
• EPA has made significant efforts to enhance its intra- and inter-agency coordination to improve the efficiency of the prioritization, risk evaluation, and regulatory processes by identifying and resolving concerns earlier, thus increasing EPA’s capacity to implement the Lautenberg Act in accordance with statutory deadlines; and
• Many of the first 30 chemicals subject to the amended TSCA risk evaluation and regulatory process are high production volume substances used by many sectors for many purposes, and about which health and environmental concerns are known to exist. As EPA continues to meet the TSCA mandate continuously to select and evaluate chemical substances from among the thousands of chemical substances in commerce, it is reasonable to expect that a reduction in the scope and complexity of each risk evaluation, as well as the associated risk management actions, would reduce implementation costs.

According to the report, the combination of the resources included in Biden’s FY 2023 budget request, an amended fees rule, and EPA’s ongoing efforts to build and improve the scientific, regulatory, and other infrastructure needed to implement TSCA more efficiently should, over time, reduce the levels of resources needed in the future. Our forthcoming memorandum will include a detailed summary of the proposed rule and an insightful commentary.

• Email This
• Print

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Margaret R. Graham, M.S.

On March 11, 2019, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its Fiscal Year (FY) 2020 Justification of Appropriation Estimates for the Committee on Appropriations.  EPA’s budget request reduces the overall budget by $2.76 billion (31 percent), to $6.068 billion, but requests $66.418 million to support its Chemical Risk Review and Reduction (CRRR) program, an increase of $5.313 million. 

EPA zeros out the other programs under Toxics Risk Review and Prevention, however, including the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP), the Pollution Prevention (P2) program, and the Lead Risk Reduction Program.  EPA states that it will “absorb the remaining functions [of the EDSP] within the Pesticides Program using the currently available tiered testing battery,”  “continue to meet core statutory requirements under the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 in other programs,” and that “lead paint certifications will continue under the [CRRR] Program.”

In its budget, EPA states that “the resources requested by EPA will support continued implementation of the amendments to [the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)], with emphasis on the critical mandates and timelines applicable to pre-market review of new chemicals, chemical risk evaluation and management, review and determinations on incoming [confidential business information (CBI)] claims, and other statutory priorities.”  EPA anticipates an increased workload to support these efforts in FY 2020 as the Agency reaches statutory deadlines to conclude the first ten risk evaluations for existing chemicals, and initiate risk management regulatory actions as necessary.  As part of this work load, EPA lists its primary TSCA implementation activities under Sections 4, 5, 6, 14; its other TSCA mandates and activities under Section 8; and the information technology systems being developed in support of TSCA implementation, all of which are extensive.

• Email This
• Print

By Lynn L. Bergeson and Margaret R. Graham

On April 26, 2018, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt was grilled by Members of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Environment at a hearing titled The Fiscal Year 2019 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Budget.  The budget was plainly not the primary topic as the House Committee Members covered a lot of ground.  Pruitt fielded many questions and comments from House Democrats on his alleged ethical lapses regarding spending, security details, retaliation towards EPA employees who reportedly questioned his practices, and concerns about a hostile work environment.  Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle expressed concern over the installation of a secure phone booth in his office.  His opening statement addressed these criticisms only vaguely, stating that they are merely a distraction and an attempt to “attack and derail the President’s agenda and these administration’s priorities.”  There were also questions concerning the delay of the proposed rule banning the use of methylene chloride, and criticism regarding EPA’s recent proposed rule to strengthen transparency in regulatory science (the “secret” Science Rule). 

No attempt is made here to summarize the lengthy hearing.

Pruitt’s testimony statement is available here.  It does not contain information on the Science Rule, but it briefly references the implementation of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) in a section entitled “Ensuring the Safety of Chemicals in Commerce.”

More information on the many TSCA implementation initiatives is available on our TSCA Reform News & Information webpage, as well as the TSCAblog^TM.  A summary of Pruitt’s testimony before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works is available in our blog item “Pruitt Addresses Legacy Issues, TSCA Implementation in Oversight Hearing.” 

• Email This
• Print

By Christopher R. Bryant, Lynn L. Bergeson, and Margaret R. Graham

Facing a government shutdown, late on April 30, 2017, lawmakers reached agreement on a spending bill that funds the federal government through September 2017, which is the end of Fiscal Year (FY) 2017. 

President Trump’s budget blueprint sought to slash EPA’s coffers by some 31 percent (and more if certain programs were eliminated from the base).  The deal reached by lawmakers, however, would essentially fund EPA at its current levels and retain current staff levels.  The bill appropriates $8.058 billion for EPA, paring a little over $80 million -- about one percent -- from EPA’s FY 2016 budget. 

Programs targeted for elimination by President Trump remain funded, at least through September, when Congress will face another budget showdown.  For example, the bill funds the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, the Chesapeake Bay Program, and lead elimination programs. 

While EPA’s budget is generally unchanged, the bill does contain several policy riders.  It would require EPA to treat air emissions from forest biomass as carbon neutral.  EPA also would not be allowed to regulate manure and similar agricultural byproducts as wastes under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and the bill would bar EPA from requiring Clean Water Act (CWA) permits for certain agricultural practices.  The legislation also prohibits funding to regulate lead content of ammunition, ammunition components, and fishing tackle under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) or any other law.

Senate Report No. 114-281 on the pending FY 2017 budget deal and an accompanying explanatory statement also address specifically TSCA, the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), and nanomaterials.  The specific language is below.

• Toxic Substances Control Act Modernization -- The Committee notes that legislation to modernize the Toxic Substances Control Act [TSCA] was recently approved by both the Senate and the House of Representatives. This bill includes language that will enable the EPA to collect and spend new fees to conduct additional chemical reviews, consistent with TSCA modernization legislation. Those fees are expected to be $25,000,000 per year once the program is fully implemented. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that in fiscal year 2017, fee collections will begin several months after the beginning of the fiscal year and will total $4,000,000. This bill also includes language ensuring that new fee collections will supplement, not supplant, appropriated resources for these activities.
• Integrated Risk Information System -- The Committee is aware of efforts by the Agency to implement the 2011 National Academy of Science’s [NAS] Chapter 7 and 2014 NAS report recommendations for the Integrated Risk Information System [IRIS] but remains concerned that the recommendations have not been fully implemented. In published appendices that accompany final IRIS assessments, EPA has detailed some of the Agency’s deficiencies in meeting the NAS high-priority reforms. The Committee directs the Agency to convene an interagency working group to be Co-Chaired with the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs and to include relevant executive branch stakeholders to review compliance with the NAS recommendations in IRIS assessments issued since the 2014 NAS report. The working group shall focus specifically on transition from the use of single point estimates of hazard and exposure to presenting more complete information on the distribution of estimated hazards, exposures, and/or risks, including central tendency values; on processes for evaluating study quality, relevance, and risk of bias; the use of a transparent and reproducible weight-of-evidence process for applying scientific findings; the selection of an adverse outcome; and the use of default linear low-dose extrapolation and other default modeling approaches to hazard determinations. The Committee directs the Agency to issue a report to the Committees of Appropriations of the House and Senate on the findings of the working group and the implementation plans of its findings within 180 days of enactment of this act. The working group report shall also include a timetable for EPA’s full implementation of the NAS recommendations for all IRIS assessments issued since the 2014 NAS report.
• Nanomaterials Research -- The Committee notes the increased capabilities that the Food and Drug Administration [FDA] has developed to study environment, health, and safety of nanomaterials [nanoEHS] within FDA’s Jefferson Laboratory Campus, including the National Center for Toxicological Research, and its consolidated headquarters at White Oak, Maryland. The FDA can and should be more involved in nanoEHS research with other agencies, particularly in activities involving human health. Out of the amounts appropriated, the [EPA} Administrator shall seek to involve the FDA in nanoEHS research to the maximum extent possible, including participation in EPA funded research.

• Email This
• Print