EPA stripped of its own toxicity science in pollution rules
H.R. 1415 — No IRIS Act of 2025 · Filed by Glenn Grothman (R-WI) · 24 cosponsors · Introduced Feb 18, 2025 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill prohibits the EPA from using scientific assessments generated by its Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program in any rulemaking, enforcement action, or permitting decision. IRIS assessments are peer-reviewed evaluations of how toxic chemicals affect human health—the scientific foundation for pollution regulations. The bill strips the EPA of this tool, effectively preventing the agency from using its own health-risk data to justify environmental protections.
Why we flagged it
The bill's operative mechanism is not a direct repeal of environmental law but a procedural prohibition on the EPA's use of its own scientific assessment tool. This is a deregulation strategy that works by disarming the agency's evidentiary foundation rather than openly repealing protections.
What the text implies
- IRIS assessments are used not only for new rules but to update existing regulations as science evolves. Blocking their use freezes the EPA's ability to strengthen protections for chemicals already regulated, even if new evidence emerges.
- The bill does not prohibit the EPA from regulating chemicals—only from using IRIS data. The EPA may attempt to regulate using other (potentially weaker or less rigorous) scientific sources, creating regulatory uncertainty and potential legal vulnerability.
- IRIS assessments are peer-reviewed and publicly available. Blocking their regulatory use removes a transparent, science-based constraint on agency discretion, potentially shifting decision-making to less-documented or more-political grounds.
- Industries subject to chemical-toxicity regulations (petrochemicals, manufacturing, mining) benefit from the removal of a standardized, rigorous health-risk assessment tool that has historically justified stricter pollution controls.
Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.
Who it affects
Citizens lose regulatory protections against toxic chemical exposure because the EPA is barred from using its own peer-reviewed health-risk assessments to justify pollution rules. The bill does not replace IRIS with an alternative scientific standard; it simply removes the tool, leaving the EPA unable to regulate based on chemical toxicity data.
Who stands to gain
- chemical manufacturers
- petrochemical refineries
- industrial manufacturers subject to air toxics regulations
- mining and extraction industries
Named in the bill
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
Where it stands
24 cosponsors: 24 Republicans.
- Feb 18, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
- Feb 18, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and House Committee on Agriculture · Congress.gov: “Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment”
Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.
Money around this bill
13 lobbying clients named this bill on 21 disclosure filings across 3 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $9,230,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 13 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.
More lobbying clients named this bill than 94% of bills with at least one filing.
Glenn Grothman, the sponsor, reported $325,000 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.
- Dow Chemical Company Dba Dow — $2,740,000 on 2 filings
- American Chemistry Council — $2,570,000 on 1 filing
- Covestro LLC — $1,020,000 on 3 filings
- National Mining Association — $820,000 on 1 filing
- Syensqo USA LLC — $650,000 on 2 filings
Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 22, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.
How this was measured
Analysis — Quorum's AI read the bill text published by Congress.gov (626 characters) on Oct 3, 2026. Section numbers in the findings refer to that text, linked below; transparency and hidden-provision scores are compared against the median of 16,222 analysed bills.
Status and sponsors — Congress.gov's bill record — actions, committee referrals and cosponsors — loaded nightly. The timeline shows status changes, not every procedural action.
Money — Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act filings whose specific-issue field names this bill for quarters ending Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. A filing's amount is reported whole beside the median number of bills a filing names; it is never divided across them. PAC receipts are FEC-reported contributions to the sponsor's candidate committee in the 2026 cycle.
As of — lobbying records through Jul 22, 2026 · page rendered 2026-10-20.
“EPA stripped of its own toxicity science in pollution rules” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/hr1415 Report an error
The week in bills
One email, Sunday: what Congress passed, what it changed, and who paid.
One link arrives to confirm the address. It is used for this email and nothing else, and every issue carries an unsubscribe link.