PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 9, 2002
Arsenic-Treated Lumber Prohibition and Disposal Act - Amends the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act to require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to promulgate regulations prohibiting the use of lumber treated with a pesticide that is a chromated copper arsenical (CCA lumber) in the manufacture, production, or use of any product that may be used for or by children and for any residential purpose.Amends the Solid Waste Disposal Act to: (1) list CCA lumber as a hazardous waste; (2) require disposal of discarded CCA lumber, notwithstanding regulations exempting certain solid wastes from the definition of hazardous waste, in a lined landfill with a leachate system and groundwater monitoring system; (3) require the Administrator to conduct an assessment of the risks of CCA lumber production and use; and (4) direct the Administrator to promulgate regulations for the gradual cessation and prohibition of production of such lumber.Requires the Administrator to: (1) develop and conduct an educational program to assist consumers, municipalities, and school systems in testing arsenic levels and making decisions concerning CCA lumber containment and removal; and (2) establish a pilot program of grants and technical assistance to assist school systems in removal of playground and other equipment containing CCA lumber and remediation activities.
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.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, Nutrition and Forestry.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E780)
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 19, 2025. 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.4707 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.4707 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.4707 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.4707 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.