I
103D CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H. R. 3111
To require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to
seek advice concerning environmental risks, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
SEPTEMBER 21, 1993
Mr. ZIMMER (for himself and Mr. SLATTERY) introduced the following bill;
which was referred jointly to the Committees on Energy and Commerce,
Agriculture, Merchant Marine and Fisheries, Public Works and Trans-
portation, and Science, Space, and Technology
A BILL
To require the Administrator of the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency to seek advice concerning environmental
risks, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Environmental Risk
Reduction Act of 1993’’.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND POLICY.
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds that—
(1) the cost of protecting the quality of the en-
vironment currently exceeds $115,000,000,000 per
year;
(2) providing protection to a continually in-
creasing population from the potentially deleterious
effects of newly discovered environmental hazards
may result in increases in the cost referred to in
paragraph (1);
(3) although the cost referred to in paragraph
(1) is not necessarily excessive, the amount is too
substantial for the funds to be used ineffectively or
inefficiently;
(4) there is a need to coordinate the develop-
ment and implementation of environmental policies
among policymakers of the Federal Government and
the governments of States and political subdivisions
of States;
(5) a key role of the Federal Government in the
development of environmental policy is to support
research to upgrade environmental science and engi-
neering;
(6) ecological resources are extraordinarily valu-
able, and risks to the resources either directly or in-
directly degrade human health and the economy;
(7) the most effective use of the funds referred
to in paragraph (1) would—
(A) protect the greatest number of individ-
uals from the most harm; and
(B) be supported by a public perception
that subparagraph (A) is being carried out;
(8) risk reduction is the preferred technique for
improving human health and the environment and
pollution prevention methods should be considered, if
feasible, in decisions related to reducing risk;
(9) the ranking of relative risk is a critical tool
for determining which human health and environ-
mental risks to reduce;
(10) the determination of safety is a social con-
struct as well as a scientific one, and is based both
on the values of individual control and social equity
and on the knowledge of a defined risk;
(11) notwithstanding paragraph (10), scientific
information plays an essential role in supporting en-
vironmental decisions by policymakers, as members
of the general public use scientific information to
understand the likelihood, nature, and magnitude of
potential risks;
(12) it is necessary to maintain a clear concep-
tual distinction between the techniques of risk as-
sessment and risk management;
(13) a risk assessment should—
(A) be the most accurate and informative
quantitative evaluation of risk that is prac-
ticable to conduct; and
(B) include a statement of important iden-
tifiable uncertainties;
(14) risk management is a political process as
well as a technical one;
(15) risk management integrates the findings of
a risk assessment with other considerations, such as
economic considerations, legislative mandates, and
the level of public concern;
(16) good risk management requires a reliable
and strictly objective risk assessment;
(17) the ranking of relative risks to human
health, welfare, and ecological resources is a complex
task, and is best performed by technical experts who
do not have interests that could bias objective judg-
ment;
(18) applying technology and resources to ad-
dress the highest ranked risks within the intent of
existing environmental laws and identifying highly
ranked risks not addressed by law can significantly
reduce risks to human health, welfare, and ecological
resources;
(19) some populations of special concern appear
to have a greater degree of sensitivity to certain spe-
cific environmental hazards, including pregnant
women and fetuses, children, the elderly, chronically
ill individuals, and individuals with certain racial
and genetic characteristics;
(20) better risk assessment methodologies and
a long-term commitment to collecting monitoring
data on the condition of ecological resources and ex-
posure of humans and ecosystems to pollutants are
necessary to ensure—
(A) the identification of the greatest risks
to human health and the environment;
(B) that environmental laws are applied in
such manner as to accomplish the intended re-
sults of the laws; and
(C) that potential improvements to existing
environmental laws are identified;
(21) ranking risks must be an ongoing process
and must reflect improvements in environmental
data and scientific understanding;
(22) the Administrator needs a major national
data base concerning environmental hazards to aid
in the adjustment of priorities and programs to di-
rect resources to ensure success in efforts to address
the hazards;
(23) the environmental monitoring and assess-
ment program created under this Act provides the
functional equivalent of an environmental statistics
program;
(24) 
although 
the 
National 
Academy 
of
Sciences has documented flaws in the administration
and management of the environmental monitoring
and assessment program of the Agency in an interim
report issued June 1992, the flaws can be addressed
through improvements in the program, and more
time is needed to address the flaws; and
(25) effective and efficient strategies to reduce
risks must quantify significant costs and benefits to
the greatest extent possible.
(b) POLICY.—It is the policy of the United States
that—
(1) the environmental protection activities ad-
ministered by the Administrator shall attain the
greatest risk reduction possible with the resources
available to the Administrator; and
(2) the ability to reduce risks requires—
(A) accurate, quantitative estimates of the
exposure of humans and ecosystems to all im-
portant risk factors;
(B) accurate techniques for predicting the
effects of the exposure referred to in subpara-
graph (A);
(C) an adequate understanding of tech-
nical, economic, social, and legal alternatives to
achieve a reduction in exposure to risk factors;
and
(D) accurate estimates of the costs and
benefits of alternatives for reducing risks.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
As used in this Act:
(1) ADMINISTRATOR.—The term ‘‘Adminis-
trator’’ means the Administrator of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency.
(2) AGENCY.—The term ‘‘Agency’’ means the
Environmental Protection Agency.
(3) ECOLOGICAL RESOURCE.—The term ‘‘eco-
logical resource’’ means a nonhuman living thing or
habitat (and the interaction between a nonhuman
living thing and habitat) including a lake, stream,
forest, wetland, desert, tundra, ocean, estuary,
beach, grassland, agricultural area, or a vegetated
urban or suburban area.
(4) EFFECT.—The term ‘‘effect’’ means a dele-
terious change in the condition—
(A) of a human or other living thing, (in-
cluding death, cancer or other chronic illness,
decreased reproductive capacity, or disfigure-
ment or other debilitating condition); or
(B) of an inanimate thing important to
human welfare (including destruction, degenera-
tion, the loss of intended function, and in-
creased costs for maintenance).
(5) ENVIRONMENTAL
LAW.—The term ‘‘envi-
ronmental law’’ means any environmental law ad-
ministered by the Administrator that provides for
the protection of the environment, including, but not
limited to—
(A) title XIV of the Public Health Service
Act (commonly known as the Safe Drinking
Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.);
(B) the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.);
(C) the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et
seq.);
(D) the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.);
(E) the Toxic Substances Control Act (15
U.S.C. 2601 et seq.);
(F) the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42
U.S.C. 6901 et seq.);
(G) the Comprehensive Environmental Re-
sponse, Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980 (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.);
(H) the Superfund Amendments and Re-
authorization 
Act 
of 
1986 
(Public 
Law
99–499);
(I) the Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1431 et
seq.); and
(J) any law administered by the Adminis-
trator concerning protection from sources of ra-
diation.
(6) EXPOSURE.—The term ‘‘exposure’’ means
the juxtaposition in time and space of a stressor
with a human or other living thing or an inanimate
thing important to human welfare, in such manner
that an effect could result.
(7) IRREVERSIBILITY.—The term ‘‘irrevers-
ibility’’ means the extent to which a return to condi-
tions prior to the occurrence of an effect are either
very slow or will never occur (as determined by the
Administrator).
(8) 
LIKELIHOOD.—The 
term 
‘‘likelihood’’
means the estimated probability that an event will
occur.
(9) 
MAGNITUDE.—The 
term 
‘‘magnitude’’
means the number of individuals or the quantity of
ecological resources or other resources that contrib-
ute to human welfare that are materially affected by
exposure to a stressor.
(10) RESPONSE.—The term ‘‘response’’ has the
same meaning as the term ‘‘effect’’ under paragraph
(4).
(11) RISK.—The term ‘‘risk’’ means the prob-
ability of the occurrence of an effect and includes
the potential for exposure.
(12) RISK ASSESSMENT.—The term ‘‘risk as-
sessment’’ means a process that uses a factual base
to—
(A) identify, characterize, and to the ex-
tent practicable quantify the potential adverse
effects of exposure of individuals, populations,
habitats, ecosystems, or materials to hazardous
pollutants, or other stressors; and
(B) to the extent practicable, identify and
characterize identifiable important uncertain-
ties.
(13) RISK
MANAGEMENT.—The term ‘‘risk
management’’ means, with respect to environmental
decisionmaking, the process of weighing policy alter-
natives and seeking the most appropriate regulatory
action that integrates the results of a risk assess-
ment with social, economic, political, and other ap-
propriate concerns to arrive at a decision.
(14) SERIOUSNESS.—The term ‘‘seriousness’’
means the intensity of effect, independent of the
magnitude.
(15) STRESSOR.—The term ‘‘stressor’’ means a
physical, chemical, or biological factor that is capa-
ble of causing an effect on human health, welfare,
or ecological resources.
(16) SUSTAINABILITY.—With respect to ecologi-
cal resources, the term ‘‘sustainability’’ means the
ability to maintain diverse, self-reproducing biologi-
cal communities that are capable of meeting the cur-
rent needs of humans without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their needs, in-
cluding—
(A) needs for natural resources such as
food, fiber, lumber, fish, and game;
(B) environmental services such as flood
mitigation, water storage, and the regulation of
the chemistry of the atmosphere, oceans, and
inland waters;
(C) opportunities for recreation and sci-
entific study; and
(D) the need for appreciation of the beauty
and diversity of nature.
(17) UNCERTAINTY.—The term ‘‘uncertainty’’
means the quantifiable and unquantifiable potential
error in the estimation of risk that is caused by the
quality or absence of data, or the assumptions used
in risk estimation.
SEC. 4. REDUCTION OF RISK.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Through the careful assessment
and ranking of relative risks and the options for the man-
agement of the risks, the Administrator shall use the re-
sources available to the Administrator pursuant to envi-
ronmental laws to reduce those risks to human health and
welfare, and risks to ecological resources, that the Admin-
istrator determines to be the most likely, most serious,
most irreversible, and of the greatest magnitude with the
goal of achieving the greatest overall reduction in risk pos-
sible with the resources available.
(b) OPERATION OF LAW.—In carrying out subsection
(a) the Administrator shall—
(1) act to reduce risk in a manner consistent
with the requirements of the environmental laws and
any other law;
(2) consider social, economic, and such other
related concerns as the Administrator determines to
be appropriate;
(3) base his determinations on the reports and
findings of the Committees created under section 5;
and
(4) utilize the risk assessment guidelines devel-
oped under section 6 and the results of research con-
ducted under section 7.
SEC. 5. ADVISORY COMMITTEES.
(a) In order to ensure that the reduction of risks re-
ferred to in section 4(a) is based on the best available sci-
entific understanding, the Administrator shall seek the ad-
vice of the expert advisory committees established under
subsections (b), (c), and (d) and shall utilize the reports
of these advisory committees required in those subsections.
(b) COMMITTEE ON RELATIVE RISKS.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator shall es-
tablish a Committee on Relative Risks (hereafter in
this subsection referred to as the ‘‘Committee’’). The
Committee shall be independent from the Science
Advisory Board.
(2) PURPOSE.—The Committee shall provide
expert advice concerning ranking the relative risks of
stressors to human health, welfare, and ecological
resources.
(3) MEMBERS.—
(A) IN
GENERAL.—The Administrator
shall appoint 15 members to the Committee. In
making appointments to the Committee, the
Administrator shall request nominations from
the heads of the National Academy of Sciences,
the National Academy of Engineering, the As-
sistant to the President for Science and Tech-
nology, the Society for Risk Analysis and such
other individuals as the Administrator deter-
mines to be appropriate.
(B) 
REPRESENTATION.—The 
Adminis-
trator shall appoint a representative group of
individuals on the basis of their recognized ex-
pertise and ability of the individuals in the
areas of human health effects (including physi-
(c) DUTIES OF THE ADMINISTRATOR.—The Adminis-
trator shall consider social and economic concerns and
such other concerns as the Administrator considers to be
appropriate to carry out this Act in a reasonable and pru-
dent manner to ensure the protection of public health and
the environment. In carrying out this Act, the Adminis-
trator shall comply with applicable legal requirements and
ensure that the activities of the Administrator are open
to public inspection. Nothing in this Act is intended to
delay the activities of the Administrator in carrying out
responsibilities under other environmental laws.
(d) ONGOING
ASSESSMENT.—The Administrator
shall revise and update the report submitted under this
section to reflect new data or scientific understanding not
later than 2 years after submitting the initial report, and
at least every 2 years thereafter.
SEC. 11. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
Except as provided in sections 5 and 7, nothing in
this Act shall constitute a new authorization for the appro-
priation of funds.
Æ
HR 3111 IH——2
HR 3111 IH——3
HR 3111 IH——4