There appears to be a growing controversy concerning whether a state has the authority to prevent the federal government from disposing of nuclear wastes within it and transporting nuclear wastes through it. Several states have statutes purporting to veto the federal government's action in these areas. This report investigates whether these state statutes may be unconstitutional and preempted by federal statutes and regulations.
Facilities handling large amounts of potentially hazardous chemical (i.e., chemical facilities) might be of interest to terrorists, either as targets for direct attacks meant to release chemicals into the community or as a source of chemicals for use elsewhere. For any individual facility, the risk is very small, but the risks may be increasing -- with potentially severe consequences for human health and the environment. Congress might choose to rely on existing efforts in the public and private sectors to improve chemical site security over time. Alternatively, Congress could expand existing environmental planning requirements for chemical facilities to require consideration of terrorism. Congress might also enact legislation to reduce risks, either by "hardening" defenses against terrorists or by requiring industries to consider use of safer chemicals, procedures, or processes.
Facilities handling large amounts of potentially hazardous chemical (i.e., chemical facilities) might be of interest to terrorists, either as targets for direct attacks meant to release chemicals into the community or as a source of chemicals for use elsewhere. For any individual facility, the risk is very small, but the risks may be increasing -- with potentially severe consequences for human health and the environment. Congress might choose to rely on existing efforts in the public and private sectors to improve chemical site security over time. Alternatively, Congress could expand existing environmental planning requirements for chemical facilities to require consideration of terrorism. Congress might also enact legislation to reduce risks, either by "hardening" defenses against terrorists or by requiring industries to consider use of safer chemicals, procedures, or processes.
This report provides a brief overview of the existing statutory authority and the regulation implementing this authority. It describes several policy issues raised in previous debates regarding chemical facility security and identifies policy options for congressional consideration. Finally, legislation in the 112th Congress is discussed.
The 108th Congress is considering legislation to reduce chemical facilities’ vulnerability to acts of terrorism, so as to protect critical sectors of the U.S. infrastructure and reduce risks to public health and the environment. Competing bills, S. 994 and S. 157, have been introduced into the Senate. Both would require chemical facilities to conduct vulnerability assessments and develop and implement site security plans, but the approaches of the bills differ with respect to the chemicals and facilities covered, planning requirements and mechanisms for federal and facility accountability.
The federal Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act; as amended, established requirements for the detection and control of lead-based paint hazards in public and private housing. Only some local governments have implementation responsibilities, but all local governments are eligible for federal grants to establish poisoning prevention programs.
Report concerning food safety, the resources required to ensure food safety, and whether federal food safety laws themselves, first enacted in the early 1900s, have kept pace with the significant changes that have occurred in the food production, processing, and marketing sectors since then.
The 104th congress enacted significant changes to the Federal Insecticide, fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), governing U.S. sale and use of pesticide products, and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), which limits pesticide residues on food. The vehicle of these changes was H.R. 1627, the "Food Quality Protection Act of 1996" (FQPA), enacted August 3, 1996, as Public Law 104-170. Under FIFRA, the new law will facilitate registrations and reregistrations of pesticides for special (so-called"minor") uses and authorize collection of maintenance fees of support pesticide reregistration. Food safety provisions will establish a single standard of safety for pesticide residue on raw and processed foods; provide information through large food retail stores to consumers about the health risks of pesticide residues and how to avoid them; preempt state and local food safety laws if they are based on concentrations of pesticide residues below recently established federal residue limits(called"tolerances"); and ensure that tolerances protect the health of infants and children.
This dialog allows you to filter your current search.
Each of the Serial/Series Titles listed note their name and the number of records that will be limited down to if you choose that option.
This dialog allows you to filter your current search.
Each of the World Regions listed note their name and the number of records that will be limited down to if you choose that option.
This dialog allows you to filter your current search.
Each of the Countries listed note their name and the number of records that will be limited down to if you choose that option.
This dialog allows you to filter your current search.
Each of the Decades listed note their name and the number of records that will be limited down to if you choose that option.
This dialog allows you to filter your current search.
Each of the Years listed note their name and the number of records that will be limited down to if you choose that option.
The list can be sorted by name or the count.
This dialog allows you to filter your current search.
Each of the Months listed note their name and the number of records that will be limited down to if you choose that option.
The list can be sorted by name or the count.