Senator Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) led a Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee hearing to review a discussion draft of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Fee Reauthorization and Improvement Act of 2026. The hearing focused on proposed changes to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) chemical review process.
In his opening statement, Senator Cramer outlined concerns about the EPA’s current approach to reviewing new chemicals. He stated, “This morning, we will receive testimony on a legislative discussion draft titled, ‘the Toxic Substances Control Act Fee Reauthorization and Improvement Act of 2026.’ This discussion draft would make targeted reforms to the Toxic Substances Control Act, or TSCA, with a straightforward goal: to improve the Environmental Protection Agency’s new chemicals review process.”
Cramer noted that Congress intended for TSCA to balance environmental, economic and social impacts when it was enacted fifty years ago. He said, “Congress set a clear standard when TSCA was signed into law fifty years ago. The EPA was to carry out the law in a reasonable and prudent manner, taking into account environmental, economic and social impacts. That was the right standard then and remains the right standard today to guide our efforts to improve and implement these processes.”
He argued that recent implementation has not met those standards: “In practice today, it is neither reasonable nor prudent and ignores the environmental, economic and social impacts from a prolonged and uncertain approval process. In the case when the EPA does approve new, often innovative and safer chemistries, the agency imposes costly, burdensome or even unnecessary restrictions.”
Cramer cited an example where a company aiming for zero-waste recycling had its approach rejected by EPA rules: “The EPA rejected the approach, not because it was unsafe, but because it did not fit the Agency’s one-size-fits-all rules. Rather than recycle its waste, that company was forced to burn water to comply with EPA’s requirements. That is neither reasonable nor prudent.”
He highlighted how these policies can drive companies overseas: “Companies delay or abandon developing safer alternatives here in America, while shifting investment and production overseas to places like Europe or China. One company now labels its newest innovations as ‘non-TSCA,’ meaning they are developed for every market in the world except the United States.”
National security concerns were also addressed in his remarks: “Throughout our government and across our country, there are coordinated efforts to rebuild domestic semiconductor manufacturing – semiconductors that are required for current and future defense systems.” He continued by explaining that bringing new chip-making chemicals to market in the U.S. can take up to 15 years due to regulatory hurdles.
According to Senator Cramer: “These are extremely low-volume chemistries…which is exactly why Europe and Asia don’t require this level of testing and grant approvals in under three months. The EPA’s onerous requirements simply mean that leading-edge materials are not sent to the United States market.”
The proposed legislation aims for flexibility by matching review periods with each chemical’s risk profile: “Separate pathways are created so novel or higher-risk substances are carefully scrutinized, while familiar chemistries with established data can be approved more quickly.” It would also reauthorize user fees for applicants.
Cramer concluded by stating: “Taken together, the policies in the discussion draft build a system that protects public health, incentivizes innovation and benefits the environment by giving the EPA the resources, the structure and the direction to do its job well. This discussion draft is the starting point for our legislative process. I look forward to working with Ranking Member Whitehouse and all members of the Committee to develop strong, bipartisan and durable legislation.”
The EPW Committee plays a key role in shaping federal policy related to environmental quality, infrastructure maintenance and conservation needs across national programs (source). The committee operates from its administrative base in Washington D.C., supporting hearings such as this one (source). Chaired by Shelley Moore Capito alongside members including Kevin Cramer (source), it oversees subcommittees covering areas like clean air regulation (source) as part of its mandate over nationwide environmental issues (source).
