人类健康和环境不能等待改革:目前联邦政府和各州在《有毒物质控制法》下解决化学品风险的机会。

The American University law review Pub Date : 2011-01-01
Lauren Trevisan
{"title":"人类健康和环境不能等待改革:目前联邦政府和各州在《有毒物质控制法》下解决化学品风险的机会。","authors":"Lauren Trevisan","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Expressing its concern about growing rates of cancer and other diseases, coupled with the lack of data about the effect of the thousands of chemicals used in U.S. society, in 1976 Congress enacted the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Congress intended for TSCA to shed new light on chemical risks and provide the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with a set of tools to address those risks and protect human health and the environment. In the years since TSCA's passage, the procedural hurdles and the difficult-to-meet legal standards built into the statute, along with a court decision rejecting EPA's use of its authority to ban dangerous chemicals, have impeded EPA's ability to regulate chemical use and manufacture. This Comment argues that both the EPA and state governments have the authority to act now to address the risks posed by dangerous chemicals. By utilizing certain sections of the statute in new and aggressive ways, EPA can effectively address chemical risks. Further, this Comment argues that TSCA's preemption provision affords states leeway to continue to regulate the use of chemicals within their borders. Though reform of TSCA is necessary, EPA and states can effectively protect against chemical risks in the near-term by using the full extent of their authority under the current law.</p>","PeriodicalId":80193,"journal":{"name":"The American University law review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Human health and the environment can't wait for reform: current opportunities for the federal government and states to address chemical risks under the Toxic Substances Control Act.\",\"authors\":\"Lauren Trevisan\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Expressing its concern about growing rates of cancer and other diseases, coupled with the lack of data about the effect of the thousands of chemicals used in U.S. society, in 1976 Congress enacted the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Congress intended for TSCA to shed new light on chemical risks and provide the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with a set of tools to address those risks and protect human health and the environment. In the years since TSCA's passage, the procedural hurdles and the difficult-to-meet legal standards built into the statute, along with a court decision rejecting EPA's use of its authority to ban dangerous chemicals, have impeded EPA's ability to regulate chemical use and manufacture. This Comment argues that both the EPA and state governments have the authority to act now to address the risks posed by dangerous chemicals. By utilizing certain sections of the statute in new and aggressive ways, EPA can effectively address chemical risks. Further, this Comment argues that TSCA's preemption provision affords states leeway to continue to regulate the use of chemicals within their borders. Though reform of TSCA is necessary, EPA and states can effectively protect against chemical risks in the near-term by using the full extent of their authority under the current law.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":80193,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The American University law review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The American University law review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American University law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

出于对癌症和其他疾病发病率不断上升的担忧,加上缺乏有关美国社会使用的数千种化学品影响的数据,美国国会于1976年颁布了《有毒物质控制法》(TSCA)。国会希望通过《有毒物质控制法》,使人们对化学品的风险有新的认识,并为美国环境保护署(EPA)提供一套工具,以应对这些风险,保护人类健康和环境。在《有毒物质控制法》通过后的几年里,程序性障碍和难以达到的法律标准,以及法院驳回环保局使用其权力禁止危险化学品的决定,阻碍了环保局监管化学品使用和生产的能力。本评论认为,环保署和州政府现在都有权采取行动,解决危险化学品带来的风险。通过以新的和积极的方式利用法规的某些部分,EPA可以有效地解决化学品风险。此外,本评论认为,TSCA的优先条款为各州提供了继续监管其境内化学品使用的余地。虽然TSCA的改革是必要的,但EPA和各州可以在现行法律下充分利用他们的权力,在短期内有效地防范化学品风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Human health and the environment can't wait for reform: current opportunities for the federal government and states to address chemical risks under the Toxic Substances Control Act.

Expressing its concern about growing rates of cancer and other diseases, coupled with the lack of data about the effect of the thousands of chemicals used in U.S. society, in 1976 Congress enacted the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Congress intended for TSCA to shed new light on chemical risks and provide the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with a set of tools to address those risks and protect human health and the environment. In the years since TSCA's passage, the procedural hurdles and the difficult-to-meet legal standards built into the statute, along with a court decision rejecting EPA's use of its authority to ban dangerous chemicals, have impeded EPA's ability to regulate chemical use and manufacture. This Comment argues that both the EPA and state governments have the authority to act now to address the risks posed by dangerous chemicals. By utilizing certain sections of the statute in new and aggressive ways, EPA can effectively address chemical risks. Further, this Comment argues that TSCA's preemption provision affords states leeway to continue to regulate the use of chemicals within their borders. Though reform of TSCA is necessary, EPA and states can effectively protect against chemical risks in the near-term by using the full extent of their authority under the current law.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信