PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1589)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 6, 2013
Lead Exposure Reduction Amendments Act of 2013 - Amends the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to exclude from the definition of "abatement" any renovation, remodeling, or other activity: (1) the primary purpose of which is to repair, restore, or remodel target housing, public buildings constructed before 1978, or commercial buildings; and (2) that incidentally results in a reduction or elimination of lead-based paint hazards.
Requires the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), no later than one year prior to proposing any renovation and remodeling regulation, to study the extent to which persons engaged in such activities: (1) are exposed to lead, and (2) disturb lead and create a lead-based paint hazard. Exempts from any such regulation an emergency renovation that is carried out in response to an event that is an act of God as defined by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), that presents a risk to the public health or safety, or that threatens to cause significant damage to equipment or property if not attended to immediately. Prohibits such a regulation from requiring post-abatement clearance testing.
Requires the Administrator to promulgate regulations to permit an owner of a residential dwelling that is target housing, who resides in such dwelling, to authorize a contractor to forego compliance with such a regulation if the owner submits a certification stating that: (1) the renovation or remodeling project is to be carried out at such dwelling, (2) no pregnant woman or child under the age of six resides or will reside in such housing, and (3) the owner acknowledges that such contractor will be exempt from the requirements of such regulation. Prohibits the Administrator from holding a contractor responsible for a misrepresentation made by the owner of such dwelling unless the contractor has actual knowledge of such a misrepresentation.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Administrator to: (1) recognize a qualifying test kit for use under such Act, and (2) suspend enforcement of any regulation relating to renovation and remodeling of target housing and commercial buildings constructed after January 1, 1960, and public buildings constructed between January 1, 1960, and January 1, 1978, until a specified period after the Administrator recognizes such a test kit.
People & committees
Sen. Inhofe, James M. [R-OK] · R–OK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1589)
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1236-1237)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1235-1236)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 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 S.484 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 S.484 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 S.484 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 S.484 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.