Review of EPA's Proposed Ozone and Particulate Matter NAAQS Revisions: Joint Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Health and the Environment and the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the Committee on Commerce, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fifth Congress, First Session, Partie 1
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1997
Avis des internautes - Rédiger un commentaire
Aucun commentaire n'a été trouvé aux emplacements habituels.
Autres éditions - Tout afficher
achieve additional Administrator agency air pollution air quality air quality standards ambient analysis annual appropriate areas asked assessment associated attainment BARTON basis believe benefits BILIRAKIS CASAC cause Chairman cities Clean Air Act Committee concentrations concern consider correct costs criteria decision developed discussed document draft economic emissions EPA's estimates exposure fact Federal final going health effects hearing identified impact implementation important issue Katzen letter levels LIPPMANN look major mean measures meet million monitoring mortality NAAQS ozone panel particulate matter period pollution prepared present problem proposed standards protect public health question range reasonable recognize recommended reduce regulations regulatory request response result revisions risk rules scientific sources specific Staff Paper statement studies Thank understand
Page 152 - Administrator shall issue air quality criteria for an air pollutant within 12 months after he has included such pollutant in a list under paragraph (1). Air quality criteria for an air pollutant shall accurately reflect the latest scientific knowledge useful in indicating the kind and extent of all identifiable effects on public health or welfare which may be expected from the presence of such pollutant in the ambient air, in varying quantities.
Page 233 - Each agency shall assess the effects of Federal regulations on State, local, and tribal governments, including specifically the availability of resources to carry out those mandates, and seek to minimize those burdens that uniquely or significantly affect such governmental entities, consistent with achieving regulatory objectives.
Page 27 - The Administrator shall appoint an independent scientific review committee composed of seven members including at least one member of the National Academy of Sciences, one physician, and one person representing State air pollution control agencies.
Page 27 - Advise the Administrator of any adverse public health, welfare, social, economic, or energy effects which may result from various strategies for attainment and maintenance of such national ambient air quality standards.
Page 148 - STATEMENT OF SALLY KATZEN, ADMINISTRATOR, OFFICE OF INFORMATION AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of this Subcommittee. It is a pleasure to be here today to discuss "Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking.
Page 46 - A multi-year study of air pollution and respiratory hospital admissions in three New York state metropolitan areas: results for 1988 and 1989 summers.
Page 50 - Committee on Methods for the In Vivo Toxicity Testing of Complex Mixtures...
Page 26 - CASAC charter2 states some of their functions: Not later than January 1, 1980, and at five year intervals thereafter, complete a review of the criteria published under section 108 of the Clean Air Act and the national primary and secondary ambient air quality standards and recommend to the Administrator any new national ambient air quality standards or revision of existing criteria and standards as may be appropriate. Advise the Administrator of areas where additional knowledge is required concerning...
Page 155 - ... fine" particle indicators These particles are so small that several thousand of them could fit on the type-written period at the end of a sentence In the simplest of terms, fine particles are of health concern because they can remain in the air for long periods, both indoors and outdoors, and...
Page 58 - It is critical to understand that a biological response does not necessarily imply an adverse health effect. Nevertheless, this means that the paradigm of selecting a standard at the lowest-observable-effects-level and then providing an "adequate margin of safety is not possible.