Sound Science Act of 2026
Sponsored By: Senator Ricketts, Pete [R-NE]
Introduced
Summary
This bill would strengthen scientific transparency and interagency review in how the EPA evaluates and regulates chemicals under the Toxic Substances Control Act. It raises testing standards, demands broader federal input, and creates formal peer review and documentation requirements.
Show full summary
- Communities and consumers would get clearer documentation of the science behind chemical risk decisions. The bill requires EPA to include any scientific assessment relied on in evaluations and to hold in-person peer review with a 30-day minimum review period.
- Workers would see workplace protections explicitly considered in risk decisions. Agencies must factor in Occupational Safety and Health Act protections and gather input from the Department of Defense, the Department of Energy, and the Department of Agriculture.
- Manufacturers and federal agencies would follow updated testing rules that require the use of Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development test guidelines, expanded public notice and comment on proposed test methods, and routine testing at least once every 2 years.
Your PRIA Score
Personalized for You
How does this bill affect your finances?
Sign up for a PRIA Policy Scan to see your personalized alignment score for this bill and every other piece of legislation we track. We analyze your financial profile against policy provisions to show you exactly what matters to your wallet.
Bill Overview
Analyzed Economic Effects
2 provisions identified: 0 benefits, 0 costs, 2 mixed.
Stronger science review and testing
If enacted, the bill would require in-person peer review of EPA chemical risk evaluations with at least a 30-day review window. It would require EPA to identify and use OECD test guidelines and update that list at least once every 2 years. The bill would remove language that barred considering costs for some testing and would let EPA seek public comment on test methods and strategies. These steps would increase documented science but could slow some final decisions and add testing or paperwork costs.
More interagency review and worker input
If enacted, the bill would require EPA to give federal agencies at least 30 days to comment on draft chemical risk evaluations before public notice. It would direct EPA to consider OSHA and other agency exposure limits, not to assume noncompliance, and to consult DoD, DoE, OSHA, and USDA on worker protections. The bill would also replace a 30-day response window with 60 days in one step. These changes would increase worker-protection input but add review time and paperwork for agencies and industry.
Sponsors & CoSponsors
Sponsor
Ricketts, Pete [R-NE]
NE • R
Cosponsors
There are no cosponsors for this bill.
Roll Call Votes
No roll call votes available for this bill.
View on Congress.gov