PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 222.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Dec 16, 2009
Mercury Pollution Reduction Act - Declares that the United States should develop policies and programs that will reduce: (1) mercury use and emissions; (2) mercury releases from the reservoir of mercury currently in use or circulation; and (3) exposures to mercury, particularly of women of childbearing age and young children.
Amends the Toxic Substances Control Act to prohibit: (1) the manufacture of chlorine or caustic soda using mercury cells at any facility in the United States; and (2) the export of any elemental mercury or the sale of elemental mercury for purposes of export, including compounds and mixtures containing elemental mercury, by the owner or operator of a chlor-alkali facility.
Requires the owner or operator of any existing chlor-alkali facility to notify the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) no later than June 30, 2012, on whether the owner or operator will replace its chlor-alkali facility with a new manufacturing facility that does not use mercury or cease operations. Requires a chlor-alkali facility for which a closure notice is filed to cease manufacturing chlorine or caustic soda using mercury cells no later than June 30, 2013. Authorizes a chlor-alkali facility for which a replacement notice is filed to continue to manufacture chlorine or caustic soda using mercury cells until all of the permitting, financing, engineering, and construction of a non-mercury replacement facility is complete or June 30, 2015, whichever is earlier.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Provides that this Act does not affect the ability of the owner or operator of any chlor-alkali facility to store elemental mercury in accordance with the Mercury Export Ban Act of 2008.
People & committees
Rep. Schakowsky, Janice D. [D-IL-9] · D–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 222.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 111-381.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 111-381.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 29 - 14.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 16 - 10 .
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2190 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2190 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2190 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2190 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.