Summary: Amends the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) to raise from $2 million to $4 million the amount that may be obligated from the Hazardous Substance Superfund for a response action after which obligations may not continue unless certain criteria are met.

amends comprehensive environmental response compensation liability act cercla raise million million obligated hazardous_substance_superfund response action obligations continue certain criteria met


Summary:
Chemical Safety and Drinking Water Protection Act of 2014 - (Sec. 2) Amends the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) to direct the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or each state exercising primary enforcement responsibility for public water systems to establish within two years a state chemical storage tank surface water protection program for chemicals identified as a hazardous substance under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), subject to emergency planning or reporting requirements of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act, or defined as a contaminant under the Safe Drinking Water Act.

Includes within the program bulk storage tanks that contain chemicals that if released could pose a risk of harm to a public water system. Excludes from the program a tank or container that is subject to regulations to prevent discharges of oil and hazardous substances under the National Response System of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly known as the Clean Water Act). Authorizes the EPA or a state, as applicable, to adopt additional exclusions based on federal or state laws that substantially meet the requirements of this Act, or for tanks that would not pose a risk of harm to a public water system.

Requires the programs to provide for oversight and inspection of each covered chemical storage tank in accordance with minimum requirements, established by this Act, to prevent the release of chemicals into the water supplies of public water systems.

Requires inspections for: (1) high hazard tanks every year by a certified inspector, (2) tanks identified in source water assessment every three years, and (3) for any other covered chemical storage tank every five years.

Requires the program to include a comprehensive inventory of the covered chemical storage tanks in each state.

Requires the EPA or a state, as applicable, to develop within two years a list of covered chemical storage tanks that hold chemicals that if released could pose the greatest risk of harm to public water systems in the state and the greatest risk to public health.

Deems a program and its requirements, for purposes of primary enforcement responsibility, to be part of the national primary drinking water regulations and requires that they be implemented and enforced in accordance with applicable SDWA procedures.

Requires states to notify the EPA within two years on whether the state will be exercising primary enforcement responsibility for public water systems or if it will be opting out. Prohibits a state's decision to implement or opt out of the program from affecting the state's primacy over other programs under the SDWA.

Requires the EPA to issue guidance and provide other technical assistance to states carrying out the programs.

Authorizes the EPA or a state, as applicable, to issue orders to the owner or operator of a tank to carry out this Act.

Sets forth requirements concerning: (1) liability of a tank owner or operator for costs of response actions, and (2) pre-transfer inspections of tanks.

Requires the EPA or a state to make available to public water systems, on request, information regarding emergency response plans, an inventory of each chemical held in the covered chemical storage tanks, existing information on the potential toxicity of the stored chemicals to public health and the environment that is relevant to evaluate the risk of harm to public water systems, and safeguards or other precautions that can be taken to detect, mitigate, or otherwise limit the adverse effects of a release of the stored chemicals.

Directs the EPA or the state to provide emergency response plans required by the program to the agency carrying out the program and to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Requires these plans to be integrated with applicable area contingency plans under the Clean Water Act.

Authorizes an owner or operator of a public water system to commence, or to petition the EPA to commence, a civil action for equitable relief to address possible imminent and substantial endangerment to the health of persons supplied by the water system. Provides a special rule to expedite the EPA's response to a petition in emergency situations.

chemical safety drinking water protection act sec amends safe_drinking_water_act direct environmental_protection_agency epa state exercising primary enforcement responsibility public water systems establish years state chemical storage tank surface water protection program chemicals identified hazardous substance comprehensive environmental response compensation liability act cercla subject emergency planning reporting requirements emergency planning community right know act defined contaminant safe_drinking_water_act includes program bulk storage tanks contain chemicals released pose risk harm public water system excludes program tank container subject regulations prevent discharges oil hazardous substances national response system federal_water_pollution_control_act commonly known clean water act authorizes epa state applicable adopt additional exclusions based federal state laws substantially meet requirements act tanks pose risk harm public water system requires programs provide oversight inspection covered chemical storage tank accordance minimum requirements established act prevent release chemicals water supplies public water systems requires inspections high hazard tanks year certified inspector tanks identified source water assessment years covered chemical storage tank years requires program include comprehensive inventory covered chemical storage tanks state requires epa state applicable develop years list covered chemical storage tanks hold chemicals released pose greatest risk harm public water systems state greatest risk public health deems program requirements purposes primary enforcement responsibility national primary drinking water regulations requires implemented enforced accordance applicable procedures requires states notify epa years state exercising primary enforcement responsibility public water systems opting prohibits state decision implement opt program affecting state programs requires epa issue guidance provide technical assistance states carrying programs authorizes epa state applicable issue orders owner operator tank carry act sets forth requirements concerning liability tank owner operator costs response actions pre transfer inspections tanks requires epa state available public water systems request information emergency response plans inventory chemical held covered chemical storage tanks existing information potential toxicity stored chemicals public health environment relevant evaluate risk harm public water systems safeguards precautions taken detect mitigate limit adverse effects release stored chemicals directs epa state provide emergency response plans required program agency carrying program department_of_homeland_security dhs requires plans integrated applicable area contingency plans clean water act authorizes owner operator public water system commence petition epa commence civil action equitable relief address possible imminent substantial endangerment health persons supplied water system provides special rule expedite epa response petition emergency situations


Summary:
Responsible Electronics Recycling Act - Amends the Solid Waste Disposal Act to: (1) prohibit the export of restricted electronic waste to countries that are not members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) or the European Union (EU), or Liechtenstein; (2) require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop and promulgate procedures for identifying certain electronic equipment as well as additional restricted toxic materials contained in such equipment which poses a potential hazard to human health or the environment; and (3) establish criminal penalties for knowingly exporting restricted electronic waste in violation of this Act. Allows certain exceptions to such export ban.

Defines "restricted electronic waste" to include electronic equipment (excluding parts of a motor vehicle), such as computers, televisions, printers, copiers, video game systems, telephones, and similar used electronic products, that contain cathode ray tubes, batteries, switches, and other parts containing lead, cadmium, mercury, organic solvents, hexavalent chromium, beryllium, or other toxic ingredients.

Requires persons who handle restricted electronic wastes to permit appropriate EPA and state officials access to such wastes upon request.

Directs the Secretary of Energy to establish a competitive research application program to provide grants for research in the recovering and recycling of critical minerals and rare earth elements found in electronic devices.

responsible electronics recycling act_-_amends solid_waste disposal act prohibit export restricted electronic waste countries members organization economic cooperation development european_union require administrator environmental_protection_agency epa develop promulgate procedures identifying certain electronic equipment additional restricted toxic materials contained equipment poses potential hazard human health environment establish criminal penalties knowingly exporting restricted electronic waste violation act allows certain exceptions export ban defines restricted electronic waste include electronic equipment excluding parts motor vehicle computers video game systems telephones similar electronic products contain cathode ray tubes batteries switches parts containing lead mercury organic solvents chromium beryllium toxic ingredients requires persons handle restricted electronic wastes permit appropriate epa state officials access wastes request directs secretary energy establish competitive research application program provide grants research recovering recycling critical minerals rare earth elements found electronic devices


Summary: Amends the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) to preempt a state statute of repose for actions brought under state law for personal injury or property damages caused from or contributed to by exposure to any hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant, if the state statute provides a commencement date that is earlier than the federally required commencement date. (Currently, CERCLA preempts state statutes of limitations, which limit the amount of time a lawsuit can commence from the time the contamination is discovered. The Supreme Court ruled in CTS Corp. v. Waldburger that North Carolina's statute of repose was not preempted by CERCLA. That statute of repose limits the amount of time a lawsuit can commence to 10 years from the defendant's last action, regardless of when the contamination is discovered.)

amends comprehensive environmental response compensation liability act cercla preempt state statute actions brought state law personal injury property damages caused contributed exposure hazardous substance pollutant contaminant state statute provides commencement date earlier federally required commencement date currently cercla preempts state statutes limitations limit time lawsuit commence time contamination discovered supreme_court ruled north_carolina statute preempted cercla statute limits time lawsuit commence years defendant action regardless contamination discovered


Summary: Superfund Polluter Pays Restoration Act of 2014 - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to: (1) reinstate the Hazardous Substance Superfund financing rate beginning 60 days after enactment of this Act; (2) increase such rate from 9.7 cents to 15.8 cents per barrel of crude oil; (3) adjust for inflation in taxable years beginning after 2014 the $3.5 billion Superfund threshold after which no tax is imposed; (4) reinstate and increase the rates of tax on taxable chemicals; (5) modify the definition of "crude oil" to include any bitumen or bituminous mixture, any oil derived from such mixture (including oil derived from tar sands), and any oil derived form kerogen-bearing sources (including oil derived from oil shale); and (6) allow the use of the Superfund for environmental remediation without further appropriation.

polluter pays restoration act amends_the_internal_revenue_code reinstate hazardous_substance_superfund financing rate beginning days enactment act increase rate cents cents barrel crude oil adjust inflation taxable years beginning billion threshold tax imposed reinstate increase rates tax taxable chemicals modify definition crude oil include bitumen bituminous mixture oil derived mixture including oil derived tar_sands oil derived form bearing sources including oil derived oil_shale allow use environmental remediation appropriation


Summary:
Saving America's Pollinators Act of 2015

This bill requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to suspend the registration of members of the nitro group of neonicotinoid insecticides that are registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) for use in seed treatment, soil application, or foliar treatment on bee-attractive plants, trees, and cereals until the EPA determines that the insecticides will not cause unreasonable adverse effects on pollinators. The determination must be based on:

 an evaluation of the published and peer-reviewed scientific evidence on whether the use or uses of those neonicotinoids cause unreasonable adverse effects on pollinators, including native bees, honeybees, birds, bats, and other species of beneficial insects; and a completed field study that meets the criteria required by the EPA and evaluates residues, chronic low-dose exposure, and cumulative effects of multiple chemical exposures. The EPA may not issue new registrations of the neonicotinoid pesticides for any seed treatment, soil application, and foliar treatment on bee-attractive plants, trees, and cereals under FIFRA until it has made the determination with respect to the insecticide.

For purposes of protecting and ensuring the long-term viability of native bees and other pollinators, the Department of the Interior must: (1) regularly monitor the health and population status of native bees, (2) identify the scope and likely causes of unusual native bee mortality, and (3) submit to Congress and make public an annual report on the health and population status of native bees.

saving america pollinators act bill requires environmental_protection_agency epa suspend registration members group registered federal_insecticide fungicide rodenticide_act fifra use seed treatment soil application treatment plants trees epa determines cause unreasonable adverse effects pollinators determination based evaluation published peer reviewed scientific evidence use uses cause unreasonable adverse effects pollinators including native bees birds species beneficial insects completed field study meets criteria required epa evaluates residues chronic low dose exposure cumulative effects multiple chemical exposures epa issue new registrations pesticides seed treatment soil application treatment plants trees fifra determination respect insecticide purposes protecting ensuring long term viability native bees pollinators department_of_the_interior regularly monitor health population status native bees identify scope likely causes unusual native mortality submit congress public annual report health population status native bees


Summary:
Infection Reduction Labeling Act

This bill amends the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) to authorize solid antimicrobial copper alloys, and products made from such alloys, to be marketed, distributed, or sold with labels about their infection reduction and control efficacy if the antimicrobial claims made on the label are consistent with the results of federally-funded clinical trials finding: (1) greater than 25% reductions in infection rate or 50% reductions in microbial burden, or (2) statistically significant reductions in infection rate or microbial burden.

Requirements to submit or review efficacy data related to the antimicrobial claims are waived for these alloys if the claims are consistent with the results of the trials.

An alternative process to modify the labeling of an alloy may be used in lieu of the current process.

This bill amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to exclude a product that is made from the alloy and has the antimicrobial labeling from regulation and treatment as a drug or device.

infection reduction labeling act bill amends federal_insecticide fungicide rodenticide_act fifra authorize solid antimicrobial copper products marketed distributed sold labels infection reduction control efficacy antimicrobial claims label consistent results federally funded clinical trials finding greater reductions infection rate reductions microbial burden statistically significant reductions infection rate microbial burden requirements submit review efficacy data related antimicrobial claims waived claims consistent results trials alternative process modify labeling alloy lieu current process bill amends federal food drug cosmetic act exclude product alloy antimicrobial labeling regulation treatment drug device


Summary:
Brownfields Redevelopment Tax Incentive Reauthorization Act of 2015

Amends the Internal Revenue Code to extend through 2019 the election to expense (i.e., deduct in the current taxable year) environmental remediation costs (i.e., costs for the abatement or control of hazardous substances at a qualified contaminated site). Makes this Act applicable to expenditures paid or incurred after December 31, 2011.

brownfields redevelopment tax incentive reauthorization act amends_the_internal_revenue_code extend election expense deduct current taxable year environmental remediation costs costs abatement control hazardous substances qualified contaminated site makes act applicable expenditures paid incurred december


Summary:
Reducing Exposure to Asbestos Database Act of 2015 or the READ Act

This bill amends the Asbestos Information Act of 1988 to require the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish and maintain a database of asbestos-containing products. The database must be accessible through EPA's website, publicly available, and searchable. An asbestos-containing product is any product to which asbestos is deliberately or knowingly added or in which asbestos is deliberately used or knowingly present in any concentration.

Any person who manufactured, processed, distributed, sold, imported, transported, or stored an asbestos-containing product must report to the EPA each year to identify the characteristics and location of the asbestos-containing products.

Civil penalties are imposed upon any person who knowingly: (1) manufactured, processed, distributed, sold, imported, transported, or stored an asbestos-containing product and who did not submit a report; or (2) provides false or inaccurate information in a report or fails to provide required information.

The Government Accountability Office must report on the utility of the database. The report must contain recommendations for measures to increase use of the database by consumers and further reduce the harm caused by exposure to asbestos.

reducing exposure asbestos database act read act bill amends asbestos information act require environmental_protection_agency epa establish maintain database asbestos containing products database accessible epa website publicly available searchable asbestos containing product product asbestos deliberately knowingly added asbestos deliberately knowingly present concentration person manufactured processed distributed sold imported transported stored asbestos containing product report epa year identify characteristics location asbestos containing products civil penalties imposed person knowingly manufactured processed distributed sold imported transported stored asbestos containing product submit report provides false inaccurate information report fails provide required information government_accountability_office report utility database report contain recommendations measures increase use database consumers reduce harm caused exposure asbestos


Summary:
Examination of Exposures to Environmental Hazards During Military Service and Health Care for Atsugi Naval Air Facility Veterans and their Families Act of 2015

Directs the Secretaries of Defense (DOD) and of Veterans Affairs (VA) to jointly establish the Advisory Board on Environmental Exposures at Atsugi Naval Air Facility to provide expert advice to DOD and VA on matters relating to exposure of current and former members of the Armed Forces (members) and their dependents to environmental hazards at Atsugi Naval Air Facility, Japan, during the period beginning in 1983 in which the air, water, or soil at such facility was contaminated due to an incinerator.

Requires the Board to: (1) consider and study cases of such exposure, (2) evaluate submitted exposure claims, and (3) recommend to such Secretaries that either a claim is insufficient to warrant further consideration or is sufficient to warrant health care or compensation. Authorizes the Board to convene a science panel to consider exposure claims and report results to the Board.

Authorizes the DOD Secretary to provide to such members and dependents the health care benefits recommended by the Board.

Requires the DOD Secretary to: (1) compile a list of individuals exposed to environmental hazards at the facility during the period in which the air, water, or soil was contaminated; and (2) submit a related report to Congress.

examination exposures environmental hazards military service health_care naval air facility veterans families act directs secretaries_of_defense dod veterans_affairs jointly establish advisory_board environmental exposures naval air facility provide expert advice dod matters relating exposure current members armed_forces members dependents environmental hazards naval air facility japan period beginning air water soil facility contaminated incinerator requires board consider study cases exposure evaluate submitted exposure claims recommend secretaries claim insufficient warrant consideration sufficient warrant health_care compensation authorizes board convene science panel consider exposure claims report results board authorizes dod secretary provide members dependents health_care benefits recommended board requires dod secretary compile list individuals exposed environmental hazards facility period air water soil contaminated submit related report congress


Summary:
Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act

 TITLE I--CHEMICAL SAFETY

 This bill amends the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to revise the process and requirements for evaluating and determining whether regulatory control is warranted for manufacturing, distributing, processing, using, and disposing of chemicals. (For purposes of TSCA, the term “chemicals” does not include food, drugs and cosmetics.) The bill revises several provisions in TSCA, including those relating to: (1) chemical testing; (2) review and regulation of new chemicals, new uses of existing chemicals, and existing chemicals; (3) information reporting; (4) confidential business information (CBI); (5) preemption of state regulations; and (6) fees.

 (Sec. 4) The bill revises TSCA requirements on testing chemicals and gives the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) additional testing authority, including by giving the EPA the authority to develop new information for: (1) evaluating unreasonable risks to human health and the environment, (2) prioritizing the risk evaluations, and (3) implementing risk management control actions. The bill also allows the EPA to require the development of information through a consent agreement or an order as well. Currently, the EPA is limited to requiring the development of information through a rule.

 When developing new information, the EPA must employ a tiered screening and testing process that uses the results of screening-level tests or assessments of available information to inform the decision as to whether additional tests are necessary. The EPA may require more advanced testing without conducting screening-level testing when other information available to the EPA justifies the advanced testing.

 The EPA must: (1) reduce and replace the use of vertebrate animals in testing chemicals to the extent practicable and when scientifically justified, (2) develop a strategic plan to promote alternative test methods and strategies that reduce or replace vertebrate animals testing; and (3) ensure that the elements in the strategic plan are reflected in the development of testing requirements. Any person who voluntarily develops information under TSCA must first attempt to develop the information by an alternative test method or strategy before conducting new vertebrate animal testing.

 (Sec. 5) The bill modifies the process of reviewing new chemicals and significant new uses of existing chemicals for unreasonable risks to human health or the environment. The EPA must review new chemicals or significant new uses of existing chemicals, make one of three determinations with respect to those chemicals, and take required risk management control actions.

 The EPA must affirmatively make determinations before those chemicals may be manufactured or processed. During the review, the EPA: (1) may not consider costs or other nonrisk factors; and (2) must consider subpopulations that may be at a greater risk than the general population of adverse health effects from exposure to a chemical, such as infants, children, pregnant women, workers, or the elderly (potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation).

 The three risks determinations that the EPA may make are as follows. First, the EPA may determine that the new chemical or new use presents an unreasonable risk of injury to human health or the environment. If the EPA makes this determination, then it must take action to protect against the risk by issuing a rule, such as a rule that limits or prohibits the amount of the chemical that may be manufactured, processed, or distributed.

 Second, the EPA may determine that: (1) the information available to the EPA is insufficient to permit a reasoned evaluation of a new chemical or new use; (2) in the absence of sufficient information, the chemical may present an unreasonable risk; or (3) the chemical will be produced in substantial quantities and it either enters (or may be anticipated to enter) the environment in substantial quantities or there is or may be significant or substantial human exposure to the chemical. If the EPA makes any of those determinations, then it must: (1) issue an order prohibiting or limiting the manufacture, processing, distribution, use or disposal of the chemical in order to protect against an unreasonable risk of injury, and (2) consider issuing a significant new use rule or explain why the EPA will not be issuing the rule.

 Third, the EPA may determine that the chemical is not likely to present an unreasonable risk. In this case, the chemical may be manufactured or processed.

 If the EPA fails to make a determination by the applicable review period, then the EPA must refund applicable fees to manufactures and processors that notified the EPA of their intention to manufacture or process a chemical.

 (Sec. 6) The bill: (1) revokes the requirement that the EPA must apply the least burdensome regulatory option to restrict a chemical that warrants regulation, (2) establishes a process for conducting and prioritizing risk evaluations for chemicals, and (3) revises requirements concerning risk management control actions.

 Within a year after enactment of this bill, the EPA must establish a risk-based screening process and criteria for designating chemicals as high priority chemicals for risk evaluations or low priority chemicals for which risk evaluations are not warranted at the time. The process must include consideration of chemicals’: (1) hazard and exposure potential (including persistence and bioaccumulation, potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulations, and storage near significant sources of drinking water); (2) conditions of use; and (3) volume. The conditions of use means the circumstances under which a chemical is intended, known, or reasonably foreseen to be manufactured, processed, or disposed of, or used.

 The EPA must designate a chemical as high priority if it concludes that the chemical may present an unreasonable risk of injury to human health or the environment because of a potential hazard and a potential route of exposure under the chemical’s conditions of use, including an unreasonable risk to a potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation. If a chemical does not meet the high priority standard, then the EPA must designate it as a low priority chemical. The EPA, in making these designations, may not consider costs or other nonrisk factors.

 The EPA must ensure that the time required for making a priority designation be at least nine months and no more than one year. If at the end of that period the EPA does not have sufficient information on a chemical to support a low priority designation, it must designate a chemical as high priority. The bill establishes deadlines for requirements under the risk-based screening process.

 The EPA must: (1) initiate risk evaluations for all high priority chemicals; and (2) designate at least one high priority chemical upon the completion of each risk evaluation, other than a risk evaluation conducted upon the request of a manufacturer.

 The EPA may revise a low priority designation for a chemical based on information provided to the EPA about the chemical. Within 180 days after enactment, the EPA must ensure that risk evaluations are being conducted on 10 chemicals from the 2014 update to the TSCA Work Plan for Chemical Assessments (i.e. existing chemicals that the EPA has already prioritized for review).

 Within three and one half years after enactment, the EPA must ensure that: (1) risk evaluations are being conducted on at least 20 high priority chemicals, and (2) designations of low priority chemicals have been made for at least 20 chemicals. At least at least 50% of all chemicals on which risk evaluations are being conducted must be drawn from the 2014 update.

 The EPA must: (1) continue to designate priority chemicals in accordance with the deadlines established by the bill; and (2) conduct the evaluations to determine whether a chemical presents an unreasonable risk of injury to human health or the environment, including an unreasonable risk to a potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation. Costs or other nonrisk factors may not be considered in the evaluations.

 In designating high-priority substances, the EPA must give preference to: (1) chemicals listed in the 2014 update as having a persistence and bioaccumulation score of three, and (2) chemicals listed in the 2014 update that are known human carcinogens and have high acute and chronic toxicity.

In prioritizing and assessing metals and metal compounds, the EPA must use the Framework for Metals Risk Assessment of the Office of the Science Advisor, Risk Assessment Forum, and dated March 2007, or a successor document that addresses metals risk assessment and is peer reviewed by the EPA’s Science Advisory Board.

 The scope of the risk evaluation must be published within six months after initiation.

 Manufacturers may request and pay for risk evaluations for chemicals. Risk evaluations requested by manufacturers must account for at least 25% of ongoing evaluation (if sufficient requests are made) and no more than 50% of ongoing evaluations. The EPA must give preference to the requests if they involve a chemical that has had a significant impact on interstate commerce due to state regulations of the chemical.

 The bill establishes requirements for the EPA to follow when conducting risk evaluations, including: (1) integrating and assessing available information on hazards and exposures information; (2) describing whether aggregate or sentinel exposures to a chemical substance under the conditions of use were considered, and the basis for that consideration; and (3) describing the weight of the scientific evidence for the identified hazard and exposure.

 The EPA must complete risk evaluations as soon practicable, but no later than three years after the evaluation was initiated. The deadline may be extended for six months.

 If the EPA determines from the risk evaluation process that a chemical presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment, the EPA must: (1) propose a rule presenting risk management control options within a year of the risk evaluation being published, and (2) issue the rule within two years of the risk evaluation. The deadlines may be extended under certain circumstances. In selecting risk management options, the EPA must consider, to the extent practicable, the effects and magnitude of exposure, the benefits of the chemical, the reasonably ascertainable economic consequences of the rule, and the costs and benefits of the regulatory action and technically and economically feasible alternatives to that action. The EPA must apply restrictions to a chemical only to the extent necessary to address the identified risks from exposure to the chemical. The bill establishes certain exemptions and limitations from control actions.

 The bill: (1) revises provisions concerning administrative procedures and the effective dates of chemical regulation; and (2) establishes a procedure requiring expedited regulatory action, to the extent practicable, that reduces exposure to certain persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic chemicals.

 (Sec. 8) The bill revises TSCA reporting requirements, including requirements concerning: (1) chemical nomenclature (systems for naming terms with respect to chemicals); and (2) small manufacturers and processors. Within three years of enactment, the EPA must enter into negotiated rulemaking for limiting reporting requirements for inorganic byproducts that are recycled, reused, or reprocessed.

 The EPA must issue a rule within a year of this bill’s enactment that requires manufacturers, and may require processors, to notify the EPA within 180 days of enactment that a chemical has been manufactured or processed during the last 10 years. The EPA must use information collected from the manufacturers and processors to categorize chemicals on the TSCA Inventory (existing chemicals of concern) list as active or inactive in commerce. Any confidential business information (CBI) claims to protect the specific identities of existing, active chemicals on the list from disclosure would need to be reaffirmed and substantiated. The EPA must maintain both a confidential and non-confidential portion of the Inventory. The bill outlines a process for reviewing those CBI claims. One year after compiling the list of active chemicals, the EPA must issue a rule that establishes a five-year plan to complete the review of CBI chemical identity claims on active chemicals.

 The EPA must complete the review process in five years, but the EPA may extend the deadline by two years. The EPA must keep the designations of active and inactive chemicals on the list current.

 By April 1, 2017, and every three years thereafter, the EPA must publish in the Federal Register an inventory of the supply, use, and trade of elementary mercury and mercury. The EPA must: (1) identify manufacturing processes or products that intentionally add mercury, and (2) recommend actions to achieve further reductions in mercury use.

 (Sec. 9) This bill revises TSCA provision concerning relationships to other federal laws, including by requiring the EPA to provide information to relevant agencies when it obtains information about chemical exposures or releases that may be prevented or reduced under another federal law.

 (Sec. 10) The bill establishes a prohibition on the exportation of certain mercury compounds as of January 1, 2020. However, the prohibition does not ban the exportation of mercury to member countries of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development for environmentally sound disposal. Individuals may petition the EPA to prohibit a mercury compound.

 The bill amends the Mercury Export Ban Act of 2008 to extend until January 1, 2019, the date by which a facility in the Department of Energy (DOE) designated for the long-term management and storage of elemental mercury generated within the United States must be operational.

 (Sec. 11) The bill revises and expands provisions relating the protection of CBI from disclosure. The bill enumerates certain categories of CBI that is presumed to be protected from disclosure.

 The bill specifies certain CBI that is not protected, including information about banned or phased-out chemicals.

 The bill establishes substantiation requirements that must be met in asserting claims for CBI protection. However, certain information is not subject to substantiation requirements.

 The bill provides exceptions from CBI protection, including an exemption for sharing CBI information with public health or environmental officials in emergencies. The EPA must develop a request and nonfiction system to expedite access to CBI in emergencies.

 EPA protection of disclosure of CBI is limited to 10 years, with extensions of 10 years.

 The bill establishes: (1) requirements governing the EPA’s review of CBI claims, and (2) criminal penalties for individuals who willfully discloses CBI, unless the individual is a medical professional who discloses the information for the treatment of a patient.

 (Sec. 13) The bill amends TSCA to revise requirements related to federal preemption of state statutes or administrative actions to manage risks from chemicals. Subject to exemptions, states may not establish or continue to enforce statutes or administrative actions concerning: (1) information for testing chemicals for unreasonable risks if the information is likely to produce the same information required by the EPA; (2) restrictions on, or penalties for, the manufacture, processing, or distribution in commerce or use of a chemical if the EPA determined that the chemical does not present an unreasonable risk of injury to human health or the environment, and (3) requirements for a chemical that is already subject to requirements governing significant new uses of chemicals.

 The bill caps the penalties and sanctions available to states at the level available to the EPA. A state may not access a penalty for a violation for which the EPA has already assessed an adequate penalty. If a state has assessed a penalty for a specific violation, the EPA may not assess a penalty for that violation in an amount that would cause the total of the penalties assessed for the violation by the state and the EPA combined to exceed the maximum amount that may be assessed for that violation by the EPA.

 The bill sets forth effective dates after which states may not establish statues, criminal penalties, or administrative actions creating prohibitions or other restrictions concerning high priority chemicals. Preemption begins when the EPA defines the scope of a risk evaluation and ends on the earlier date between: (1) the expiration of the deadline for completing the risk evaluation, or (2) the publication of the risk evaluation.

 The bill preserves certain state requirements, rights, causes of actions, and remedies from being preempted by EPA actions under TSCA. State actions taken before August 22, 2016, or taken under state laws in effect on August 31, 2003, are exempted from preemption.

 (Sec. 14) The bill revises judicial review under TSCA, including by permitting review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit of a designation of a chemical as a low priority substance.

 Low priority determinations may be challenged within 60 day of publication.

 (Sec. 17) The bill revises and expands the EPA's authority under TSCA to collect fees from chemical manufacturers or processors to defray the costs of the bill. The amounts generated by the fee must be deposited in the TSCA Service Fee Fund established by this bill. The EPA's authority to collect fees terminates after 10 years.

 At the beginning of each year, the EPA must publish an annual plan and report concerning risk evaluations.

 (Sec. 21) The bill amends the Public Health Service Act to provide for the investigation of potential cancer clusters.

 Title II -- RURAL HEALTHCARE CONNECTIVITY

 Rural Healthcare Connectivity Act of 2016

 (Sec. 202) This bill amends the Communications Act of 1934 to include skilled nursing facilities among the types of health care providers who may request from a telecommunications carrier under the Universal Service Fund the necessary telecommunications and information services to serve persons who reside in rural areas at rates that are reasonably comparable to rates charged for similar services in urban areas.

frank chemical safety 21st century act title chemical safety bill amends toxic_substances_control_act tsca revise process requirements evaluating determining regulatory control warranted manufacturing distributing processing disposing chemicals purposes tsca term chemicals include food drugs cosmetics bill revises provisions tsca including relating chemical testing review regulation new chemicals new uses existing chemicals existing chemicals information reporting confidential business information preemption state regulations fees sec bill revises tsca requirements testing chemicals gives environmental_protection_agency epa additional testing authority including giving epa authority develop new information evaluating unreasonable risks human health environment prioritizing risk evaluations implementing risk management control actions bill allows epa require development information consent agreement order currently epa limited requiring development information rule developing new information epa employ tiered screening testing process uses results screening level tests assessments available information inform decision additional tests necessary epa require advanced testing conducting screening level testing information available epa justifies advanced testing epa reduce replace use animals testing chemicals extent practicable scientifically justified develop strategic plan promote alternative test methods strategies reduce replace animals testing ensure elements strategic plan reflected development testing requirements person voluntarily develops information tsca attempt develop information alternative test method strategy conducting new animal testing sec bill modifies process reviewing new chemicals significant new uses existing chemicals unreasonable risks human health environment epa review new chemicals significant new uses existing chemicals determinations respect chemicals required risk management control actions epa affirmatively determinations chemicals manufactured processed review epa consider costs factors consider subpopulations greater risk general population adverse health effects exposure chemical infants children pregnant women workers elderly potentially exposed susceptible subpopulation risks determinations epa follows epa determine new chemical new use presents unreasonable risk injury human health environment epa makes determination action protect risk issuing rule rule limits prohibits chemical manufactured processed distributed second epa determine information available epa insufficient permit reasoned evaluation new chemical new use absence sufficient information chemical present unreasonable risk chemical produced substantial quantities enters anticipated enter environment substantial quantities significant substantial human exposure chemical epa makes determinations issue order prohibiting limiting manufacture processing distribution use disposal chemical order protect unreasonable risk injury consider issuing significant new use rule explain epa issuing rule epa determine chemical likely present unreasonable risk case chemical manufactured processed epa fails determination applicable review period epa refund applicable fees manufactures processors notified epa intention manufacture process chemical sec bill revokes requirement epa apply burdensome regulatory option restrict chemical warrants regulation establishes process conducting prioritizing risk evaluations chemicals revises requirements concerning risk management control actions year enactment bill epa establish risk based screening process criteria designating chemicals high priority chemicals risk evaluations low priority chemicals risk evaluations warranted time process include consideration chemicals hazard exposure potential including persistence potentially exposed susceptible subpopulations storage near significant sources drinking water conditions use volume conditions use means circumstances chemical intended known reasonably manufactured processed disposed epa designate chemical high priority concludes chemical present unreasonable risk injury human health environment potential hazard potential route exposure chemical conditions use including unreasonable risk potentially exposed susceptible subpopulation chemical meet high priority standard epa designate low priority chemical epa making designations consider costs factors epa ensure time required making priority designation months year end period epa sufficient information chemical support low priority designation designate chemical high priority bill establishes deadlines requirements risk based screening process epa initiate risk evaluations high priority chemicals designate high priority chemical completion risk evaluation risk evaluation conducted request manufacturer epa revise low priority designation chemical based information provided epa chemical days enactment epa ensure risk evaluations conducted chemicals update tsca work plan chemical assessments existing chemicals epa prioritized review half years enactment epa ensure risk evaluations conducted high priority chemicals designations low priority chemicals chemicals chemicals risk evaluations conducted drawn update epa continue designate priority chemicals accordance deadlines established bill conduct evaluations determine chemical presents unreasonable risk injury human health environment including unreasonable risk potentially exposed susceptible subpopulation costs factors considered evaluations designating high priority substances epa preference chemicals listed update having persistence score chemicals listed update known human carcinogens high acute chronic toxicity prioritizing assessing metals metal compounds epa use framework metals risk assessment office science advisor risk assessment forum dated march successor document addresses metals risk assessment peer reviewed epa science_advisory_board scope risk evaluation published months initiation manufacturers request pay risk evaluations chemicals risk evaluations requested manufacturers account ongoing evaluation sufficient requests ongoing evaluations epa preference requests involve chemical significant impact interstate commerce state regulations chemical bill establishes requirements epa follow conducting risk evaluations including integrating assessing available information hazards exposures information describing aggregate exposures chemical substance conditions use considered basis consideration describing weight scientific evidence identified hazard exposure epa complete risk evaluations soon practicable later years evaluation initiated deadline extended months epa determines risk evaluation process chemical presents unreasonable risk injury health environment epa propose rule presenting risk management control options year risk evaluation published issue rule years risk evaluation deadlines extended certain circumstances selecting risk management options epa consider extent practicable effects magnitude exposure benefits chemical reasonably economic consequences rule costs benefits regulatory action technically economically feasible alternatives action epa apply restrictions chemical extent necessary address identified risks exposure chemical bill establishes certain exemptions limitations control actions bill revises provisions concerning administrative procedures effective dates chemical regulation establishes procedure requiring expedited regulatory action extent practicable reduces exposure certain persistent bioaccumulative toxic chemicals sec bill revises tsca reporting requirements including requirements concerning chemical systems naming terms respect chemicals small manufacturers processors years enactment epa enter negotiated rulemaking limiting reporting requirements byproducts recycled epa issue rule year bill enactment requires manufacturers require processors notify epa days enactment chemical manufactured processed years epa use information collected manufacturers processors categorize chemicals tsca inventory existing chemicals concern list active inactive commerce confidential business information claims protect specific identities existing active chemicals list disclosure need substantiated epa maintain confidential non confidential portion inventory bill outlines process reviewing claims year compiling list active chemicals epa issue rule establishes year plan complete review chemical identity claims active chemicals epa complete review process years epa extend deadline years epa designations active inactive chemicals list current april years epa publish federal_register inventory supply use trade elementary mercury mercury epa identify manufacturing processes products intentionally add mercury recommend actions achieve reductions mercury use sec bill revises tsca provision concerning relationships federal laws including requiring epa provide information relevant agencies obtains information chemical exposures releases prevented reduced federal law sec bill establishes prohibition exportation certain mercury compounds january prohibition ban exportation mercury member countries organization economic operation development environmentally sound disposal individuals petition epa prohibit mercury compound bill amends mercury export ban act extend january date facility department_of_energy doe designated long term management storage elemental mercury generated united_states operational sec bill revises expands provisions relating protection disclosure bill enumerates certain categories presumed protected disclosure bill specifies certain protected including information banned phased chemicals bill establishes substantiation requirements met asserting claims protection certain information subject substantiation requirements bill provides exceptions protection including exemption sharing information public health environmental officials emergencies epa develop request system expedite access emergencies epa protection disclosure limited years extensions years bill establishes requirements governing epa review claims criminal penalties individuals willfully discloses individual medical professional discloses information treatment patient sec bill amends tsca revise requirements related federal preemption state statutes administrative actions manage risks chemicals subject exemptions states establish continue enforce statutes administrative actions concerning information testing chemicals unreasonable risks information likely produce information required epa restrictions penalties manufacture processing distribution commerce use chemical epa determined chemical present unreasonable risk injury human health environment requirements chemical subject requirements governing significant new uses chemicals bill caps penalties sanctions available states level available epa state access penalty violation epa assessed adequate penalty state assessed penalty specific violation epa assess penalty violation cause total penalties assessed violation state epa combined exceed maximum assessed violation epa bill sets forth effective dates states establish statues criminal penalties administrative actions creating prohibitions restrictions concerning high priority chemicals preemption begins epa defines scope risk evaluation ends earlier date expiration deadline completing risk evaluation publication risk evaluation bill preserves certain state requirements rights causes actions remedies preempted epa actions tsca state actions taken august taken state laws effect august exempted preemption sec bill revises judicial review tsca including permitting review court_of_appeals district_of_columbia circuit designation chemical low priority substance low priority determinations challenged day publication sec bill revises expands epa authority tsca collect fees chemical manufacturers processors defray costs bill amounts generated fee deposited tsca service fee fund established bill epa authority collect fees terminates years beginning year epa publish annual plan report concerning risk evaluations sec bill amends public_health_service_act provide investigation potential cancer clusters title rural healthcare connectivity rural healthcare connectivity act sec bill amends communications act include skilled nursing facilities types health_care providers request telecommunications carrier universal service fund necessary telecommunications information services serve persons reside rural areas rates reasonably comparable rates charged similar services urban areas


Summary:
Superfund Reinvestment Act

 Amends the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) to authorize the use of amounts in the Hazardous Substance Superfund for environmental cleanup costs authorized by such Act.

Provides that receipts and disbursements of the Hazardous Substance Superfund: (1) shall not be counted as new budget authority, outlays, receipts, or deficit or surplus, for purposes of the President's budget, the congressional budget, the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, or the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010; (2) shall be exempt from any general budget limitations; and (3) shall be available only for the purposes specified in CERCLA.

Amends the Internal Revenue Code to: (1) reinstate through December 31, 2024 and adjust for inflation annually after 2016, the Hazardous Substance Superfund financing rate and the corporate environmental income tax threshold amount; (2) extend the borrowing authority of the Superfund through 2024; and (3) modify the definition of "crude oil" for purposes of the excise tax on petroleum and petroleum products to include any bitumen or bituminous mixture, any oil derived from a bitumen or bituminous mixture (tar sands), and any oil derived from kerogen-bearing sources (oil shale).

reinvestment act amends comprehensive environmental response compensation liability act cercla authorize use amounts hazardous_substance_superfund environmental cleanup costs authorized act provides receipts disbursements hazardous_substance_superfund shall counted new budget authority outlays receipts deficit surplus purposes president budget congressional_budget balanced_budget emergency deficit control act statutory pay act shall exempt general budget limitations shall available purposes specified cercla amends_the_internal_revenue_code reinstate december adjust inflation annually hazardous_substance_superfund financing rate corporate environmental income tax threshold extend borrowing authority modify definition crude oil purposes excise tax petroleum petroleum products include bitumen bituminous mixture oil derived bitumen bituminous mixture tar_sands oil derived bearing sources oil_shale


Summary:
Superfund Polluter Pays Act

Amends the Internal Revenue Code to reinstate and extend through December 31, 2020, the Hazardous Substance Superfund financing rate and the corporate environmental income tax.

polluter pays act amends_the_internal_revenue_code reinstate extend december hazardous_substance_superfund financing rate corporate environmental income tax


Summary:
Farmers Undertake Environmental Land Stewardship Act or the FUELS Act

This bill directs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to ease the application of the Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) rule on certain farms.

The rule requires certain non-transportation-related facilities to prevent, prepare, and respond to oil discharges that may reach navigable waters or adjoining shorelines. Among other requirements, the rule requires those facilities to: (1) certify compliance with their SPCC plans; and (2) based on the plan, construct containment facilities that would hold the contents of aboveground oil storage tanks if they should spill.

The bill increases the oil storage thresholds that necessitate compliance with those requirements by raising the aggregate aboveground oil storage capacity thresholds for: (1) farms required to have an SPCC plan, (2) farms that self-certify their SPCC plan, and (3) farms that require a certification of their SPCC plan from a professional engineer.

The bill also raises the aboveground oil storage capacity of containers that must be included in calculating the aggregate aboveground storage capacity.

farmers undertake environmental land stewardship act fuels act bill directs environmental_protection_agency epa ease application spill prevention control countermeasure rule certain farms rule requires certain non transportation related facilities prevent prepare respond oil discharges reach navigable waters adjoining shorelines requirements rule requires facilities certify compliance plans based plan construct containment facilities hold contents oil storage tanks spill bill increases oil storage thresholds compliance requirements raising aggregate oil storage capacity thresholds farms required plan farms self certify plan farms require certification plan professional engineer bill raises oil storage capacity containers included calculating aggregate storage capacity


Summary:
No Exemptions for EPA Act of 2015

This bill removes the government's discretionary function exemption from tort claims in connection with a response under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), thereby allowing claims against the Environmental Protection Agency for damages caused by its response at a hazardous waste cleanup site under CERCLA.

exemptions epa act bill removes government discretionary function exemption tort claims connection response comprehensive environmental response compensation liability act cercla allowing claims environmental_protection_agency damages caused response hazardous waste cleanup site cercla


Summary:
Gold King Mine Spill Recovery Act of 2015

This bill entitles persons to compensation for allowable damages (i.e., property, business, or financial losses) under the Federal Tort Claims Act if they were injured by the spill into Cement Creek from the Gold King Mine near Silverton, Colorado. The spill occurred on August 5, 2015.

The bill establishes an Office of Gold King Mine Spill Claims within the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to process and pay compensation claims.

The EPA must work with affected states and Indian tribes to develop, fund, and implement a long-term monitoring program for water quality of the Animas and San Juan Rivers in response to the spill.

The bill amends the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 by requiring certain agencies to work with affected states as well as research universities to: (1) identify the most dangerous abandoned and inactive mines, (2) establish a priority plan for cleaning up those mines, (3) update the plan as new information becomes available, and (4) develop a long-term research initiative. That initiative must evaluate the physical, chemical, and geological attributes of closed, abandoned, and inactive mines and pursue technological developments to aid in the cleanup of those mines.

Prior to carrying out mine remediation activities, agencies must: (1) provide affected tribal, state, and local governments notice of such activities; and (2) develop a spill prevention, control, and countermeasures plan for avoiding and mitigating the impacts of a spill.

gold king spill recovery_act bill entitles persons compensation allowable damages property business financial losses federal tort claims act injured spill cement creek gold king near colorado spill occurred august bill establishes office gold king spill claims environmental_protection_agency epa process pay compensation claims epa work affected states indian tribes develop fund implement long term monitoring program water quality san_juan rivers response spill bill amends comprehensive environmental response compensation liability act requiring certain agencies work affected states research universities identify dangerous abandoned inactive mines establish priority plan cleaning mines update plan new information available develop long term research initiative initiative evaluate physical chemical geological attributes closed abandoned inactive mines pursue technological developments aid cleanup mines prior carrying remediation activities agencies provide affected tribal state local governments notice activities develop spill prevention control countermeasures plan avoiding mitigating impacts spill


Summary:
EPA Pays Act

This bill amends the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) by making the U.S. government liable for economic damages it caused, including damages that resulted while it was providing assistance in cleaning up hazardous substances.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must reimburse the Department of the Treasury for the cost of CERCLA claims for money damages against the United States.

The EPA must make those reimbursements from the unobligated balance of amounts in the "Environmental Programs and Management" account. The EPA must first use amounts in that account that are for outreach. If sufficient amounts are not available from outreach funding, the EPA must use amounts made available for enforcement, and then amounts available for the clean air and climate program area.

epa pays act bill amends comprehensive environmental response compensation liability act cercla making government liable economic damages caused including damages resulted providing assistance cleaning hazardous substances environmental_protection_agency epa reimburse department_of_the_treasury cost cercla claims money damages united_states epa reimbursements unobligated balance amounts environmental programs management account epa use amounts account outreach sufficient amounts available outreach funding epa use amounts available enforcement amounts available clean_air climate program area


Summary:
Brownfields Reauthorization Act of 2016

This bill amends the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA)to revise and reauthorize brownfields revitalization and state response program funding through FY2021.(Brownfields are certain commercial properties that are hindered from reuse or redevelopment due to the presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant.)

The Environmental Protection Agency must establish a program to provide multipurpose grants to carry out inventory, characterization, assessment, planning, or remediation activities at one or more brownfield sites in a proposed area.

Certain nonprofit organizations and community development entities are made eligible for brownfields revitalization funding.

Grant or loan recipients may use up to 8% of brownfields revitalization funding for administrative costs.

Additionally, the bill revises the brownfield site characterization and assessment grant program to allow a governmental entity to receive a grant for property acquired prior to January 11, 2002, even if the entity does not qualify as a bona fide prospective purchaser under CERCLA.

brownfields reauthorization act bill amends comprehensive environmental response compensation liability act revise reauthorize brownfields revitalization state response program funding certain commercial properties reuse redevelopment presence hazardous substance pollutant contaminant environmental_protection_agency establish program provide multipurpose grants carry inventory characterization assessment planning remediation activities brownfield sites proposed area certain nonprofit organizations community development entities eligible brownfields revitalization funding grant loan recipients use brownfields revitalization funding administrative costs additionally bill revises brownfield site characterization assessment grant program allow governmental entity receive grant property acquired prior january entity qualify bona fide prospective purchaser cercla


Summary:
Gold King Mine Spill Accountability Act of 2016

This bill requires the Department of Justice (DOJ) to appoint a special investigator to investigate: (1) who was at fault for the discharge of contaminated water from the Gold King Mine north of Silverton, Colorado, into Cement Creek; (2) which individuals were responsible for the decisions that led to the spill; and (3) what downstream environmental effects were caused by the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) actions, or inactions, after the spill.

The bill: (1) entitles individuals to receive compensation for a claim filed, or civil action brought, under the Federal Tort Claims Act relating to an injury resulting from the spill, and (2) establishes within the EPA the Office of Gold King Mine Spill Claims for processing claims of allowable damages resulting from the spill. The EPA may provide compensation for a claim in an amount greater than $25,000 without the prior approval of DOJ.

The EPA must fund the implementation of the long-term monitoring program developed by the Long-Term Impact Review Team of New Mexico, for the water quality of the Animas and San Juan Rivers.

The EPA may not finalize or work on any rules (including those not related to the spill) until all claims have been paid, except rules that are necessary to address an imminent threat to public health or safety, or other emergency.

gold king spill accountability_act bill requires department_of_justice doj appoint special investigator investigate fault discharge contaminated water gold king north colorado cement creek individuals responsible decisions led spill downstream environmental effects caused environmental_protection_agency epa actions spill bill entitles individuals receive compensation claim filed civil action brought federal tort claims act relating injury resulting spill establishes epa office gold king spill claims processing claims allowable damages resulting spill epa provide compensation claim greater prior approval doj epa fund implementation long term monitoring program developed long term impact review team new_mexico water quality san_juan rivers epa finalize work rules including related spill claims paid rules necessary address imminent threat public health safety emergency


Summary:
Fertilizer Access and Responsible Management Act or the FARM Act

This bill requires the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to withdraw its revised enforcement policy published on July 22, 2015, concerning the exemption of retail facilities from coverage of the process safety management of highly hazardous chemicals standard. (The standard contains requirements for managing hazards associated with processes using highly hazardous chemicals.)

OSHA may publish a proposed rule relating to that exception only if: (1) it arranges for an independent third party to conduct a cost analysis of the proposed rule, and (2) the U.S. Census Bureau establishes a code for farm supply retailers under the North American Industry Classification System in a sector relating to retail trade.

OSHA, when promulgating a rule relating to the exemption of retail facilities from coverage of the standards, must provide an opportunity for the public to submit comments as specified by the bill and invite meaningful public input in the rulemaking.

fertilizer access responsible management act farm act bill requires occupational_safety_and_health_administration osha withdraw revised enforcement policy published july concerning exemption retail facilities coverage process safety management highly hazardous chemicals standard standard contains requirements managing hazards associated processes highly hazardous chemicals osha publish proposed rule relating exception arranges independent party conduct cost analysis proposed rule census bureau establishes code farm supply retailers north american industry classification system sector relating retail trade osha promulgating rule relating exemption retail facilities coverage standards provide opportunity public submit comments specified bill invite meaningful public input rulemaking


Summary:
Brownfields Authorization Increase Act of 2016

This bill amends the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 by: (1) reauthorizing through FY2022 and revising the brownfield revitalization funding program, and (2) permanently reauthorizing a grant program for state and tribal response programs (programs responding to brownfields). (Brownfield sites are certain commercial properties that are hindered from reuse or redevelopment due to the presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant.)

Certain nonprofit organizations and community development entities are made eligible for brownfields revitalization funding.

The bill increases the cap on the amount that may be given in grants for direct remediation of brownfield sites.

The brownfield site characterization and assessment grant program is revised by authorizing eligible entities to receive grants for property they acquired on or before January 11, 2002.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must establish a program to provide multipurpose grants to carry out inventory, characterization, assessment, planning, or remediation activities at brownfield sites. In addition, the EPA must establish a grant program for brownfield projects that reduce the brownfield's environmental impact, increase community livability, and encourage sustainability.

The EPA must establish a grant program that provides training, research, and technical assistance to facilitate the inventory of brownfield sites, site assessments, remediation of brownfield sites, community involvement, or site preparation. (Currently, the EPA may provide funding for this purpose.) The bill authorizes the EPA to use up to a specified amount of the funding made available for the grant program on grants to assist small communities, Indian tribes, rural areas, or disadvantaged areas.

brownfields authorization increase act bill amends comprehensive environmental response compensation liability act reauthorizing fy2022 revising brownfield revitalization funding program permanently reauthorizing grant program state tribal response programs programs responding brownfields brownfield sites certain commercial properties reuse redevelopment presence hazardous substance pollutant contaminant certain nonprofit organizations community development entities eligible brownfields revitalization funding bill increases cap given grants direct remediation brownfield sites brownfield site characterization assessment grant program revised authorizing eligible entities receive grants property acquired january environmental_protection_agency epa establish program provide multipurpose grants carry inventory characterization assessment planning remediation activities brownfield sites addition epa establish grant program brownfield projects reduce brownfield environmental impact increase community encourage sustainability epa establish grant program provides training research technical assistance facilitate inventory brownfield sites site assessments remediation brownfield sites community involvement site preparation currently epa provide funding purpose bill authorizes epa use specified funding available grant program grants assist small communities indian tribes rural areas disadvantaged areas


Summary:
Emergency East Chicago Housing Relief Act of 2016

This bill provides an additional allocation of low-income housing tax credits for Indiana by increasing the state housing credit ceiling in 2017 and 2018.

The bill requires the state housing credit ceiling for Indiana to be increased for 2017 and 2018 by the lesser of: (1) the aggregate housing credit dollar amount allocated for such calendar year by the state housing credit agency of Indiana to buildings located in Lake County, Indiana; or (2) the additional allocation amount calculated by multiplying $18 by the population of Lake County, Indiana.

In the case of 2018, the additional allocation amount taken into account must be reduced by the amount of the increase in the state housing credit ceiling for 2017 that is required by this bill.

emergency east chicago housing relief_act bill provides additional allocation low income housing tax credits indiana increasing state housing credit ceiling bill requires state housing credit ceiling indiana increased lesser aggregate housing credit dollar allocated calendar year state housing credit agency indiana buildings located lake county indiana additional allocation calculated multiplying population lake county indiana case additional allocation taken account reduced increase state housing credit ceiling required bill