Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee released their proposed chemical safety law changes on Thursday.

It comes as committees in both chambers weigh reforms, with Democrats skeptical about the intentions of the Republican majority and chemical companies.

The lengthy discussion draft lays out more detailed guidelines on how EPA should go about chemical reviews and regulations under the Toxic Substances Control Act.

EPW Chair Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) announced the committee will hold a hearing Wednesday morning to discuss the draft, which was prepared by the committee’s majority staff, EPW spokesperson Sarah Franklin confirmed.

Capito echoed a long-standing industry complaint that new chemical reviews take too long under the 2016 amendments to TSCA, creating a backlog that stifles innovation.

"We need to improve our current systems so we can bring better, safer and more innovative chemicals to market — with the predictability and resources to get it right," Capito said in a statement. "This discussion draft is a step in the right direction, and I look forward to working with my colleagues on this during next week’s hearing."

The draft bill spells out a new "tiered review process" and defines vague terms, such as "unreasonable risk," at the center of various lawsuits. But specifics on deadlines — marked as "[XX]-day period" throughout — still need to be ironed out.

It's a different approach compared with the discussion draft Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee released last month, which Democrats and environmental groups criticized as a bill that would limit EPA authority.

The Senate's draft bill is "horrible in different ways," said Maria Doa, who spent over two decades as an EPA chemist and is now the senior director for chemical policy at the Environmental Defense Fund.

"A lot of this bill just seems to make it more complicated for EPA," Doa said, adding that it is "full of exemptions and loopholes" and puts "the profits of industry over the health of everybody."

Capito has previously said TSCA reform efforts should have bipartisan support. The push comes ahead of the 10-year anniversary of an overwhelmingly bipartisan overhaul.

Key Democrats on the committee — EPW ranking member Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Chemical Safety Subcommittee ranking member Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) — did not immediately respond to questions.

Daniel Savery, senior legislative representative at Earthjustice, said he "expect[s] the minority to reject it outright.

"From a bipartisan perspective, nobody should be taking this bill seriously," Savery said. "In many ways, it's worse than we could have imagined."

Savery and Doa are both part of the Alliance for Health and Safe Chemicals, a coalition of nearly 40 environmental organizations banded together to defend TSCA against reforms.

EPA's authority to collect fees from industry expires in September, prompting industry groups' efforts to get lawmakers on board with "surgical tweaks" to problematic aspects of the 2016 amendments.

David Fischer, a partner at Keller and Heckman who leads the TSCA Improvement Coalition, said he was "pleased to see that the discussion draft attempts to" define "unreasonable risk."

"What is and isn’t unreasonable risk is hugely important given that under TSCA, all unreasonable risk must be eliminated, regardless of cost," Fischer said.

A spokesperson for the American Chemistry Council did not respond to requests for comment.