The National Academies: Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
Current Operating Status

The National Academies Testimony before Congress

Public Laws Containing Studies for the National Academies

Briefings to Congress

Congressionally Mandated Reports

Policy Statements and Historical Documents

The OCGA staff

Request a Report (Congressional and Government Staff Only)


Mailing Address:
The Office of Congressional and Government Affairs
The Keck Center of the National Academies
Keck WS1008
500 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Tel: (202) 334-1601
Fax: (202) 334-2419

Back to Main Page


Title of Law:Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2006
Law #:Public Law 109- 54
Passed by Congress:109th Congress (1st Session)

The following are excerpts, highlighted in red, from the final legislation and/or conference report which contain references to The National Academies and studies. (Pound signs [##] between passages denote the deletion of unrelated text.)

HR2361 Taylor, C. (R.-N.C.) 7/29/05
Enrolled (finally passed both houses)

An original bill making appropriations for the Department of the Interior, environment and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and for other purposes.
-- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

######

SEC. 201. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to accept, consider or rely on third-party intentional dosing human toxicity studies for pesticides, or to conduct intentional dosing human toxicity studies for pesticides until the Administrator issues a final rulemaking on this subject. The Administrator shall allow for a period of not less than 90 days for public comment on the Agency’s proposed rule before issuing a final rule. Such rule shall not permit the use of pregnant women, infants or children as subjects; shall be consistent with the principles proposed in the 2004 report of the National Academy of Sciences on intentional human dosing and the principles of the Nuremberg Code with respect to human experimentation; and shall establish an independent Human Subjects Review Board. The final rule shall be issued no later than 180-days after enactment of this Act.

######

************************************************************************************
HRpt 109-188 - To accompany H.R. 2361
- MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2006, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Conference Committee

(7/26/05)
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

######

GENERAL PROVISIONS, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

SEC. 201. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to accept, consider or rely on third-party intentional dosing human toxicity studies for pesticides, or to conduct intentional dosing human toxicity studies for pesticides until the Administrator issues a final rulemaking on this subject. The Administrator shall allow for a period of not less than 90 days for public comment on the Agency’s proposed rule before issuing a final rule. Such rule shall not permit the use of pregnant women, infants or children as subjects; shall be consistent with the principles proposed in the 2004 report of the National Academy of Sciences on intentional human dosing and the principles of the Nuremberg Code with respect to human experimentation; and shall establish an independent Human Subjects Review Board. The final rule shall be issued no later than 180 days after enactment of this Act.

######

HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE SUPERFUND

(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

The conference agreement provides $1,260,621,000 for hazardous substance superfund instead of $1,258,333,000 as proposed by the House and $1,256,165,000 as proposed by the Senate. Changes to the House recommended level are detailed below.

Air Toxics and Quality.—In air toxics and quality, there is a decrease of $175,000 for radiation protection programs.

Enforcement.—In enforcement, there are increases of $200,000 for civil enforcement and $3,000,000 for Superfund enforcement.

Compliance.—In compliance, there are decreases of $11,000 for compliance assistance and centers, $11,000 for compliance incentives, and $200,000 for compliance monitoring.

Information Exchange and Outreach.—There is a decrease of $6,000 for congressional, intergovernmental, and external relations activities.

Information Technology/Data Management/Security.—There is a decrease of $3,000 for information security.

Operations and Administration.—In operations and administration, there is a decrease of $1,000,000 for facilities infrastructure and operations.

Superfund Cleanup.—In Superfund cleanup, there is an increase of $494,000 for emergency response and removal.

Bill Language.—Language is included earmarking $1,260,621,000 as the maximum payment from general revenues for Superfund instead of $1,258,333,000 as proposed by the House and $1,256,165,000 as proposed by the Senate.

The managers are concerned that EPA has not yet issued a Record of Decision (ROD) for Libby, Montana, despite years of cleanup efforts. The managers direct the Agency to issue its Record of Decision for Libby, Montana no later than May 1, 2006. EPA should also provide a report on the contents of the ROD to both the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations no later than June 15, 2006. The managers are disappointed that the Agency could not meet an earlier deadline, originally proposed by the Senate, and expect periodic updates on the progress of completion of the ROD for Libby, Montana.

The House proposed a study by the National Academy of Sciences of Superfund mega sites that involve dredging. Upon further reflection, the managers believe that the appropriate role for the NAS is to act as an independent peer review body that will conduct an objective evaluation of some of the ongoing dredging projects underway at Superfund mega sites. By undertaking such an evaluation, the Academy can serve as an objective voice on this issue. The managers expect that the evaluation will be initiated by December 1, 2005, and finished as soon as possible, but no later than one year after the Academy begins work. In addition, the managers insist that any such evaluation by the Academy should not delay in any way the progress of the Hudson River PCB dredging project or any other Superfund dredging project.

######

GENERAL PROVISIONS, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Section 201 modifies language, proposed by the Senate in sections 201 and 202 and by the House in section 434, dealing with human dosing studies. The managers note the many concerns expressed on both the House and Senate floors with respect to intentional human toxicity dosing studies relied upon by the EPA in reviewing applications for pesticide approvals. Concern is particularly acute for pregnant women, fetuses, and children. The managers believe this is a very serious issue that needs to be addressed by EPA as soon as possible. The managers have included statutory language that prohibits the EPA from accepting, considering, or relying on third party intentional dosing human toxicity studies for pesticides until EPA issues a final rulemaking addressing such studies. The language also requires EPA to provide for at least a 90-day public comment period on its proposed rule and to issue the final rule no later than 180 days after enactment of this Act. Such rule shall not permit the use of pregnant women, infants or children as subjects; shall be consistent with the principles proposed in the 2004 report of the National Academy of Sciences on intentional human dosing and the principles of the Nuremberg Code with respect to human experimentation; and shall establish an independent Human Subjects Review Board.

######

RSS News Feed | Subscribe to e-newsletters | Feedback | Back to Top