99 



new chemicals, too, we should think in terms of acceptable uses, 

 not just acceptable chemicals. 



For the second track, we need a long-term sustainable system for 

 these chemicals already in commerce that places initial responsibil- 

 ity on chemical manufacturers and processors. These are the people 

 in the best position to choose the materials, processes, and other 

 alternative techniques that will in the long run reduce or eliminate 

 most harmful toxics. 



This means shifting our expectations and developing the infor- 

 mation needed to make these long term changes. TSCA must pro- 

 vide the tools and incentives for industry to take the lead in reduc- 

 ing harmful toxics. 



To support this effort we must have better and more testing 

 data. We can hardly expect to progress to a sustainable system of 

 safer chemicals and processes if we remain ignorant of the health 

 effects of tens of thousands of chemicals. According to EPA's May 

 test, even adding all the EPA's testing rules, voluntary testing 

 agreements, enforcement consent agreements, and other negotiated 

 testing agreements, only 410 chemicals have been tested in the 

 past 18 years under TSCA's section 4 testing program. This is 410 

 chemicals in relation to some 60,000 to 70,000 that we have. 



Clearly, we must improve this process. Again, I believe that the 

 SIDS program may offer some useful direction. 



Second, we need better and more exposure and use information. 

 If an important element of the risk a chemical presents is how it 

 is used — as several witnesses have suggested — then we need to 

 have a better understanding of the uses and exposures of the 

 chemicals in commerce. EPA has often had difficulty following 

 through on a chemical that the ITC recommends for testing be- 

 cause the agency lacks adequate exposure information. 



Third, we need greater accessibility — information that should be 

 public. While protecting legitimate confidential business informa- 

 tion, we must make chemical risk data more available to States, 

 other Federal agencies, industry, and the public. 



I expect several of today's witnesses will discuss this last point. 

 Some of the advantages I see for greater accountability and acces- 

 sibility to TSCA data are that greater public awareness will in- 

 crease scrutiny and accountability and provide incentives to re- 

 sponsible action. The States and other Federal entities will be able 

 to bring their expertise to the coordinated toxics programs and 

 companies will have the information they need to make compari- 

 sons and choose safer materials, processes, and products. 



A third track is a viable, useful safety net. When industry does 

 not act on its responsibility, when it does not respond to public de- 

 mand for safer and environmentally preferable materials, then the 

 Government must be able to take action against particular chemi- 

 cals or uses. We must reform the process for section 6 regulation 

 and also make clear that pollution prevention is a vital tool for 

 managing chemical risks. 



As GAO testified, EPA has only issued regulations to control five 

 existing chemicals. That includes the asbestos ban overturned by 

 the Fifth Circuit and the phase-out of PCBs, which was mandated 

 by Congress. 



