This report focuses on the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 (TSCA). Recent legal, scientific, and technological developments are prompting legislators to reexamine TSCA; it has been the subject of a hearing and several legislative proposals in the 111 th Congress. The basic TSCA Title I provisions concerning chemical regulation have never been amended. Policies, Intent, and Scope

TSCA established three general federal policies with respect to chemical substances and mixtures in U.S. commerce, "... that—
•    [A]dequate data should be developed with respect to the effect of chemical substances and mixtures on health and the environment and that the development of such data should be the responsibility of those who manufacture and those who process such chemical substances and mixtures;
•    [A]dequate authority should exist to regulate chemical substances and mixtures which present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment, and to take action with respect to chemical substances and mixtures which are imminent hazards; and
•    [A]uthority over chemical substances and mixtures should be exercised in such a manner as not to impede unduly or create unnecessary economic barriers to technological innovation while fulfilling the primary purpose of this act to assure that such innovation and commerce in such chemical substances and mixtures do not present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment." It identified approximately 62,000 chemicals that manufacturers and importers reported had been produced in, or imported into, the United States for commercial purposes after January 1, 1975. Two of these regulations were later superseded by regulations under other environmental laws. State Laws and Local Ordinances

Many states and localities have enacted laws restricting the sale or use of various chemicals or categories of substances that are federally managed under TSCA. Some California legislators have been modeling proposals based on the laws of other nations. International commerce in chemicals has grown significantly during the 30 years of TSCA's existence, and most of the largest chemical manufacturers, processors, and distributors now operate internationally. To implement the international agreements, TSCA would have to be amended to permit regulation of chemical production for export, at least in the case of the chemicals specified in the treaties. Others reject the approach taken by REACH and defend TSCA, arguing that the U.S. approach continues to provide the leading example of chemical regulation based on sound, risk-based science. The resulting genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are useful for various purposes. 6100 and S. 3040 , would have amended TSCA, adding a new title to the end of the act, to significantly reshape U.S. chemical assessment and management. Known as the Kid-Safe Chemicals Act of 2008, H.R. H.R. Some analysts, and most in the regulated community, believe that generally TSCA has performed as intended, and they support TSCA in its current form, although most admit it needs minor adjustments. They praise TSCA as a flexible, efficient, and effective limit to over-regulation. Other policy analysts and legal commentators want to amend TSCA, because they think that it has not accomplished the tasks laid out for it by Congress and is unlikely to do better in the future, especially given recent and emerging changes in science and technology. The available evidence indicates that EPA has had limited success using TSCA to gather information about new chemicals, but has demonstrated creativity and expertise in making use of available information to categorize such chemicals based on hazard potential, thereby reducing risks potentially associated with exposure to chemicals entering U.S. commerce. 6903 would have banned many asbestos-containing materials. Numerous states also have acted to control risks from chemicals that are not regulated under TSCA. In addition, many nations have joined together to regulate persistent, organic, pollutants and persistent, bioaccumulative toxic substances in ways that the United States cannot under the current provisions of TSCA.
The basic structure of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 1976 has never been amended, but recent legal, scientific, and technological changes are prompting some policy makers to reexamine the law. The Kid-Safe Chemicals Act (H.R. 6100/S. 3040 in the 110th Congress) would have reshaped risk assessment and management of industrial chemicals in U.S. commerce. TSCA currently regulates potential risks based on three policies: (1) Chemical manufacturers are responsible for testing chemicals to determine their potential effects on health and the environment; (2) EPA should regulate chemicals that present an unreasonable risk to health or the environment; and (3) EPA's implementation of the law should not create unnecessary economic barriers to technological innovation. Few have expressed concern about the last TSCA purpose, but TSCA's progress in achieving the first two goals has been debated: where some see success, others see failure, and both groups point to EPA's history of implementation and voluntary initiatives in support of their views. EPA has compiled an inventory of roughly 82,000 chemicals that have been produced in, or imported into, the United States at some time since 1976. The agency has promulgated regulations to restrict production or use of five chemicals under TSCA.
Recently, many states and localities have acted to regulate chemicals not regulated under TSCA using state or local authority. A few states are considering broad new laws to regulate chemicals more generally. Some large chemical manufacturers, processors, and distributors object to the emerging legal patchwork. The U.S. Congress also has considered, and in several cases enacted, legislation restricting use of specific chemicals. For example, in the 110th Congress, S. 742 and H.R. 6903 would have banned many asbestos-containing materials from U.S. commerce. Multinational companies also are faced with a variety of national laws restricting international commerce in chemicals. International cooperation to harmonize regulations, and to eliminate certain persistent pollutants, has led to several international agreements that aim to ease the legal confusion, but amendments to TSCA would be required if the United States were to fully implement the agreements. New laws in other nations also have provided alternative models for chemical regulation, which some would prefer to TSCA. Others defend the current U.S. approach, arguing that TSCA is based on sound, risk-based science.
Recent progress in science and technology also pose challenges to EPA implementation of TSCA. Scientists now know that the timing and duration of exposure to a chemical can determine its effects, as can the age, gender, and heritable traits of people who are exposed. Biotechnology and nanotechnology have created genetically modified organisms and nanomaterials, respectively, which EPA must categorize as "existing" or "new" and manage as "chemical substances" under TSCA.
Faced with these challenges to TSCA, some analysts, and many in the regulated community, nevertheless believe that TSCA has performed as intended, and they support TSCA in its current form. They praise TSCA as a flexible, efficient, and effective limit to over-regulation. Other legal commentators, analysts, and some policy makers want to amend TSCA which, they contend, has not accomplished the tasks laid out for it by Congress, and is unlikely to do better in the future.