LegisTrack
Back to all bills
HR 123119th CongressIn Committee

Improving Science in Chemical Assessments Act

Introduced: Jan 3, 2025
Standard Summary
Comprehensive overview in 1-2 paragraphs

The Improving Science in Chemical Assessments Act would shift certain EPA chemical toxicity work away from the IRIS (Integrated Risk Information System) program and into the agency’s individual program offices (like Office of Water, Office of Air and Radiation, etc.), subject to defined standards and processes. It would require a new steering committee to coordinate these assessments and avoid duplicative effort, establish a formal set of scientific standards (7B) for how hazard identifications and dose–response assessments are conducted, and create a centralized chemical assessment database within the Office of Research and Development (ORD) to store and update toxicity values. The bill also imposes periodic certification to Congress that covered assessments meet the new standards and requires consideration of third-party assessments under transparent, independent review. Overall, the bill aims to improve consistency, transparency, and scientific rigor in EPA chemical risk assessments, while coordinating research priorities across EPA offices.

Key Points

  • 1Reallocation of certain toxicity assessments: Beginning at enactment, covered hazard identification and dose–response assessments for chronic human health effects would be carried out by the relevant EPA program office (not the IRIS program), so long as the office determines there is a need for the assessment; these assessments must adhere to the standards in section 7B and reflect weight of the scientific evidence.
  • 2Steering Committee to coordinate and avoid duplication: The bill creates a chemical hazard identification and dose–response steering committee within 30 days of enactment. It coordinates to prevent duplication of effort among program offices, and can consider third‑party assessments that meet specified requirements to supplement a covered assessment.
  • 3Scientific standards (Section 7B): Assessments must use best available science and consider: alignment with the intended use of data, relevance to decision-making, documentation and transparency, handling of uncertainty, independent verification or peer review, reproducibility, and the ability to support nonlinear dose–response modeling.
  • 4Chemical Assessment Database and retention of IRIS data: A toxicity value(s) assigned under these provisions must be stored in a new chemical assessment database managed by ORD. All completed assessments currently in EPA’s IRIS database as of enactment must be retained in this new database, and the database must be updated with subsequent program-office assessments.
  • 5Certification and oversight: Starting two years after enactment and every two years thereafter, ORD must certify to Congress that all covered assessments conducted during the period complied with the Section 7B standards. The bill also requires third‑party assessments to meet the same standards and undergo independent review for transparency, completeness, and quality.

Impact Areas

Primary group/area affected- EPA program offices (Office of Water, Office of Air and Radiation, Office of Land and Emergency Management, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, and any successors) and the Office of Research and Development (ORD). The bill shifts authority and workload for certain toxicity assessments to these offices and introduces a steering committee to coordinate efforts.Secondary group/area affected- Public health decision-makers and regulatory programs relying on EPA toxicity assessments; scientists and researchers within EPA; industry stakeholders and states that use EPA risk assessments for policy or compliance; and international partners that align with EPA risk evaluations.Additional impacts- Potential for more consistent use of scientific standards and improved transparency in how toxicity values are developed and updated. Possible changes to timelines for assessments due to added coordination and standards, along with new reporting requirements and potential resource needs to staff and implement the database and steering committee. The retention and updating of IRIS data within a centralized ORD database could affect how historical assessments are used in decision-making.
Generated by gpt-5-nano on Nov 4, 2025