{
  "id": "RL31652",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "RL31652",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 101447,
      "date": "2002-11-27",
      "retrieved": "2016-05-24T20:02:20.064941",
      "title": "Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs): Background and Issues in the 107th Congress",
      "summary": "Persistent organic pollutants (POPs) are chemicals that can harm human health and wildlife, do\nnot\nbreak down easily in the environment, and tend to accumulate as they move up the food chain. Many\nPOPs are transported in the air and water across international boundaries. In the last four years, the\nUnited States has joined in negotiations of three international agreements to address POPs:\n   the 2001 Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs\nConvention), negotiated under the auspices of the United Nations (UN), \"to protect human health\nand the environment from persistent organic pollutants\" worldwide;  \n   the 1998 Aarhus Protocol on Persistent Organic Pollutants to the 1979 Geneva\nConvention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (POPs Protocol), a regional agreement that\nseeks to \"to control, reduce or eliminate discharge, emissions and losses of persistent organic\npollutants\" in Europe, some former Soviet Union countries, and the United States;\nand  \n   the 1998 Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for\nCertain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade (PIC Convention), negotiated\nunder the auspices of the UN, that requires exporting countries to provide prior notification to\npotential importing nations of substances that are banned or severely restricted in the exporting\ncountry.  \n  Although the United States has signed all three agreements, prior to U.S. ratification of the\nPOPs and PIC Conventions, the Senate must give its advice and consent, and Congress must enact\nenabling (also known as \"implementing\") legislation. The POPs Protocol does not require Senate\napproval; however legislation is needed to resolve inconsistencies between provisions of all three\nagreements and existing U.S. laws. \n  This report compares two Senate proposals in the 107th Congress to implement the agreements,\n S. 2118  and  S. 2507 , as introduced. Both would amend two environmental\nstatutes, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and\nRodenticide Act (FIFRA). Although both bills would have provided EPA the necessary authority\nto implement the POPs Convention and Protocol, the bills differed in the extent to which they would\nhave facilitated full compliance with the agreements, especially with respect to any future\namendments that might add chemicals to be regulated. If similar proposals are introduced into the\n108th Congress, concerns about the domestic and international ramifications of each approach may\nbe a focal point for debate.\n  This report does not constitute a legal analysis of the bills or of amendments to existing law.\nInstead, it summarizes bill provisions, highlights key differences, and considers the implications of\nthose differences for policy development with respect to POPs. This report will not be updated (For\nmore recent information, see CRS Report RL32150,  International Agreements on Persistent\nOrganic\nPollutants (POPs): Background and Issues for Congress ).",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL31652",
          "sha1": "ead40bf22b3185280533999bf0cce676fee60e83",
          "filename": "files/20021127_RL31652_ead40bf22b3185280533999bf0cce676fee60e83.pdf",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20021127_RL31652_ead40bf22b3185280533999bf0cce676fee60e83.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "American Law",
    "Environmental Policy",
    "Foreign Affairs"
  ]
}