175 



Statement of David Monsma, Environmental Action Foundation 



Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to testify on the reauthorization of 

 the Tokics Substances Control Act (TSCA) I am David Monsma, Staff Counsel with 

 the Toxics Project of Environmental Action (EA), a national nonprofit environmental 

 education and advocacy organization. Since organizing the first Earth Day teach-in 

 in 1970, Environmental Action has worked to educate the public about toxic risks 

 and has litigated, lobbied and organized to strengthen corporate and government ac- 

 countability in the interests of protecting human health and the environment. 



As staff counsel for the Toxics Project I have directed a campaign to enforce the 

 right to know provisions of SARA Title III, the Emergency Planning and Commu- 

 nity Right To Know Act (EPCRA). I currently coordinate an alliance of community 

 and environmental law clinics that practice environmental justice principles. Imme- 

 diately prior to joining Environmental Action I was a program attorney with the 

 United States Environmental Protection Agency in the Office of Toxic Substances 

 and participated in the CBI Challenge Program. 



Environmenttd Action has emphasized the public's right to know in all matters 

 related to the presence of toxic substances in the workplace, our communities and 

 the environment. My testimony, therefore, is offered from the point of view of a pub- 

 lic interest advocate for community right to know, environmental justice, and pollu- 

 tion prevention principles. 



1. Pollution Prevention 



It is essential to acknowledge at the outset just how important the Toxic Sub- 

 stances Control Act is to public health and environmental protection. Unlike the 

 Clean Air Act, RCRA, Superfund, and other legislation aimed at regulating end of 

 the pipe controls, TSCA is the only true pollution prevention regulatory scheme of 

 its kind. The intent of TSCA has always been directed toward understanding the 

 magnitude of chemicals in commerce and whether particular chemicals or their use 

 present an unreasonable risk to health or the environment. The Act also authorizes 

 the EPA Administrator to regulate the production or use of chemicals that the Agen- 

 cy has determined to present an unreasonable risk to human health or the environ- 

 ment. 



Significantly, TSCA provides the regulatory obligation to remove substances when 

 the risk is unreasonable. Unreasonable risk does not mean unquestionable or irref- 

 utable risk. Moreover, TSCA regulates the production or use of chemicals before 

 they enter the flow of commerce or the wastestream. In this sense, TSCA should 

 be understood as an important pollution prevention and risk prevention law. Unfor- 

 tunately, TSCA's full regulatory effect and prevention potential have not been actu- 

 alized. 



TSCA establishes the public policy and obligation for EPA to become informed 

 about the commercial production and use of chemicals and to control chemicals 

 which have been determined to present an unreasonable risk to himian health or 

 the environment. The responsibility of the government to the public to learn about 

 the potential harmful effects of chemicals, and, once informed of a risk, to mitigate 

 or remove that risk, is rooted firmly in the concept of prevention. TSCA's stance on 

 the harmful or hazardous heedth effects associated with the presence of toxic chemi- 

 cals in our environment is not passive — TSCA says that we must act to control such 

 toxics and prevent such harmful effects. But TSCA has been hampered in its role 

 as a tool of prevention. 



2. Cost-benefit Analysis 



The public is routinely reminded by industry economists that command and con- 

 trol regulations are outmoded and that we are better served by the invisible hand 

 of a self-adjusting marketplace. While this market concept may be acceptable for de- 

 termining the price of widgets, it can be gravely unfitting for the control of persist- 

 ent, bioaccumulating toxic chemicals. 



TSCA has become a hostage in the industrial and ideological raid on reasonable 

 government regulation. Undue limitations by the courts of TSCA's language have 

 severely diminished TSCA regulatory capacity to restrict or limit the production of 

 harmful chemictils in commerce. Absolute cost/benefit analysis and sheer risk as- 



