[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 135 (Friday, December 8, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11746-S11747]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself, Mrs. Boxer, and Mr. Menendez):
  S. 4118. A bill to amend the Emergency Planning and Community Right-
to-Know Act of 1986 to strike a provision relating to modifications in 
reporting frequency; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
that would preserve the public's right to know exactly what types and 
amounts of chemicals are being stored and released into their 
neighborhoods and communities.
  The legislation would stop the Environmental Protection Agency's 
dangerous attempts to undermine the Toxic Release Inventory--TRI--
program--which I authored in 1986--by allowing facilities that release 
up to 5,000 pounds of a toxic chemical to simply provide notice of a 
chemical's presence at the facility, rather than disclose the actual 
amounts released to the land, air, and water. The 5,000 pounds standard 
represents a ten-fold increase of the current reporting threshold; this 
change would eliminate detailed reporting for thousands of facilities 
in communities around the country, including 92 facilities in New 
Jersey, and could eliminate entirely the disclosure of the releases of 
more than a dozen potentially dangerous chemicals. The EPA also has 
proposed to require reports on chemical emissions only every other 
year, instead of the current annual requirement. Under this wildly 
irresponsible proposed rule change, corporations would only be required 
to disclose their chemical emissions every other year. This means that 
communities would have no knowledge of what chemicals have been 
released in the 50 percent of years where emissions are not disclosed; 
additionally, companies would have a perverse incentive to

[[Page S11747]]

concentrate their most egregious releases of toxic chemicals into the 
environment in years which are not reported. Furthermore, the EPA has 
published a proposal to reduce the information available to the public 
regarding the management of some of the most toxic chemicals that 
accumulate in the environment, including lead and mercury. Needless to 
say, I strongly oppose all three of these rule changes; the legislation 
I am introducing will stop them from taking place.
  I firmly believe that it is simply unacceptable for the EPA to reduce 
the amount of information available to the public about chemicals--
including mercury, lead and other carcinogens--stored nearby or 
released into their community. When Congress passed the original 
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act in 1986, as a 
response to the 1984 Union Carbide chemical disaster in Bhopal, India, 
some accountability was finally established in the chemical industry. 
And now, the EPA is attempting to weaken these rules and reduce the 
amount of information available to the public on these critical issues. 
For instance, in my home State of New Jersey, a chemical facility that 
released 2,000 pounds of arsenic via air emissions in 2003 would no 
longer be required to disclose this pollution to the general public. 
Fourteen facilities that released a combined 8,600 pounds of 
carcinogenic styrene would no longer have to report these emissions in 
detail. I find these proposals absolutely outrageous. It truly begs the 
question: who is the EPA really ``protecting''? The general public and 
the environment, or corporate interests that pollute our communities?
  While the EPA touts the benefits of its proposal as ``burden 
reduction'' for industry, I strongly believe that the benefit of 
annual, detailed reporting vastly outweighs the marginal reduction in 
burden that will be provided to industry. In fact, according to the 
EPA's own estimates, the average cost saved for facilities no longer 
required to report the release of toxic chemicals in amounts less than 
5,000 pounds would be approximately $2.32 per day. It is simply 
stunning that the EPA is willing to jeopardize public health and safety 
for a daily cost savings roughly equivalent to a couple cups of coffee.
  There are constructive ways to improve the TRI program, and lessen 
the burdens on industry, without reducing the amount of information 
available to the public. These include improving the system for 
electronic reporting, and offering technical assistance to help 
businesses comply with the requirements.
  The bill I am introducing is simple. First, it would codify the 
requirement that companies which release emissions of more than 500 
pounds of any standard TRI chemical must disclose the details of their 
releases. Releases in amounts less than 500 pounds would continue to be 
allowed to use the less detailed reporting form. Second, it would 
codify the current prohibition on using the less detailed form for the 
most persistent chemicals, including lead, mercury, and dioxin. 
Finally, it would prevent EPA from making the frequency of reporting 
less than every year.
  I would be remiss not to thank my congressional colleagues in the 
House of Representatives, Frank Pallone of New Jersey, and Hilda Solis 
of California, with whom I have been pleased to work on this issue. 
Representatives Pallone and Solis have introduced the companion of this 
bill in the House; I now look forward to continuing to work with them 
to ensure its passage. I would also like to thank my colleagues Senator 
Menendez and Senator Boxer, for being original cosponsors of this 
important legislation.
  As a result of the EPA's dereliction of its duty to protect the 
public and the environment, Congress must act to do so. I strongly 
encourage my colleagues to do just that by enacting this legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the bill be printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 4118

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Toxic Right-to-Know 
     Protection Act''.

     SEC. 2. MODIFICATIONS IN REPORTING FREQUENCY.

       (a) In General.--Section 313 of the Emergency Planning and 
     Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (42 U.S.C. 11023) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (i); and
       (2) by redesignating subsections (j) through (l) as 
     subsections (i) through (k), respectively.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Sections 322(h)(2) and 
     326(a)(1)(B)(iv) of the Emergency Planning and Community 
     Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (42 U.S.C. 11042(h)(2), 
     11046(a)(1)(B)(iv)) are amended by striking ``313(j)'' each 
     place it appears and inserting ``313(i)''.

     SEC. 3. REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO TOXICS RELEASE INVENTORY.

       (a) Form A Certification Statement.--Notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law--
       (1) the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
     Agency (referred to in this section as the ``Administrator'') 
     shall establish the eligibility threshold regarding the use 
     of a form A certification statement under the Toxics Release 
     Inventory Program established under the Emergency Planning 
     and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (42 U.S.C. 11001 et 
     seq.) at not greater than 500 pounds for nonpersistent 
     bioaccumulative and toxic chemicals; and
       (2) the use of a form A certification statement described 
     in paragraph (1), or any equivalent successor to the 
     statement, shall be prohibited with respect to any chemical 
     identified by the Administrator as a chemical of special 
     concern under section 372.28 of title 40, Code of Federal 
     Regulations (or a successor regulation).
       (b) Revision of Requirements.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, the Administrator shall not implement the 
     proposed rule of the Administrator dated October 4, 2005 (70 
     Fed. Reg. 57822), to revise requirements under the Toxics 
     Release Inventory Program described in subsection (a)(1).
                                 ______