Page 434

Ensure that new chemical evaluations are conducted in a timely manner, consistent with statutory requirements, to ensure the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturers.

For new chemicals, reset the program to ensure that reviews are completed on a timeline that is consistent with the statute. This includes revising the regulations governing the reviews of new chemicals.

Ensure that risk evaluations and risk management rules presume that workplaces are following all OSHA requirements, including requirements for personal protective equipment (PPE).

Apply real-world use of chemicals when assessing conditions of use for risk evaluations.

Transition the Safer Choice program to the private sector. Right-size the TSCA fee’s rule so that it is consistent with the tasks that the agency is actually completing within the timelines of the statute and is not

covering the costs of EPA inefficiency or overreach.

Revise existing policies to address the requirements of the 2016 Lautenberg amendments to the TSCA”

Develop a framework rule for risk management approaches that will be used under TSCA for existing chemicals.

Needed Reforms and New Policy in OPP (Pesticides)

OPP should rely on Department of Agriculture and state usage data that reflect actual pesticide use in registration reviews and Endangered Species Act (ESA)* analyses. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service should rely on similar data in their ESA analyses.

OPP has rigorous testing requirements that registrants must meet before pesticides are allowed on the market. However, when pesticides undergo registration review every 15 years, EPA relies on publicly available data with differing levels of quality and transparency. Data standards are needed to ensure that information relied on by EPA is made available to the agency at a similar level as the original testing data conducted by registrants to ensure that EPA can conduct a robust review and analysis of the data.

= 434 —

• ESA reform for pesticides is necessary. When approving pesticides, FIFRA allows for cost-benefit balancing, recognizing that pesticides are effective precisely because they harm pests. However, the ESA does not allow for any consideration of the beneficial effects of pesticides. In order to meet ESA obligations, pesticide uses are severely restricted, leaving growers with limited tools for crop protection.

• New policies are needed to ensure that other program offices (such as ORD, OW, and OLEM) will defer to OPP on toxicity issues. OPP has rigorous testing requirements for pesticide ingredients and products to ensure before they go to market that their use will not harm human health and the environment. Assessments by other offices are redundant.

• While individual pesticide registrations are considered adjudications and not reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), consistent with a 1993 OMB guidance, when pesticide tolerances and registrations are withdrawn by the agency (as opposed to being withdrawn voluntarily by registrants), these actions should undergo coordinated interagency review managed by OMB.

Budget

The Biden Administration has expanded the scope and breadth of regulatory actions with respect to OPPT and OPP, but both programs continue to maintain that resources are insufficient.

OPPT (chemicals) suffers from a lack of leadership and an inability to complete the most basic requirements efficiently and in a timely fashion. While EPA has asked for more resources, including higher industry fees, it is not clear that it has the capacity to use additional dollars efficiently.

With regard to OPP (pesticides), pesticide manufacturers feel that the program is underfunded and would like its budget to be increased so that pesticide actions can be reviewed more quickly. Manufacturers are also willing to pay higher fees to the fee-based portion of the program. However, grower groups have been disappointed by EPA’s actions and have significant concerns about EPA’s ability to conduct science-based risk assessments and take risk management actions that appropriately balance benefits and risks as required by FIFRA. Guardrails and third-party audits should be part of any funding increases through the Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA)* or other mechanisms.

OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT (ORD) AND RELATED SCIENCE ACTIVITIES

While much of this work has not been authorized by law, EPA conducts a wide variety of intramural and extramural research, development, regulatory science,