Political Quotes

“When TSCA was first enacted in 1976, the Act created a higher level of judicial review for certain rulemakings that would restrict chemicals in commerce. Congress took this approach because it wanted to ensure that rulemakings that would directly affect commerce by imposing restrictions on chemicals would be well supported with substantial evidence. The substantial evidence standard requires an agency rule to be supported by substantial evidence in the rulemaking record taken as a whole. The compromise legislation makes no changes to the process for judicial review of rulemakings or the standard of review. The compromise now provides EPA with expanded authority to pursue certain administrative actions by order in addition to by rule. This new order authority is intended to allow EPA greater flexibility to move quickly to collect certain information and take certain actions. It is intended that an agency order constitute final agency action on issuance and be subject to judicial review. Orders under Sections 4, 5, and 6 of TSCA constitute final agency action on issuance, and continue to be reviewed under the standards established by the Administrative Procedures Act. The intention is that regulatory actions that result in total or partial bans of chemicals, regardless of whether such action is by rule or order authority, be supported by substantial evidence in the rulemaking record taken as a whole.…”