Search

This article deals with the questions related to potential toxicity of nanosized particles and structures, and whether their transport, potential transformation and fate in the environment could harm ecosystems. According to some researchers, the very qualities and properties that make nanosized particles so commercially attractive could make them potentially harmful under some circumstances. For example, the increased surface reactivity of nanosized particles suggests that they exhibit greater biological activity when compared with conventional bulk materials per given mass when taken up by living organisms, assuming the particles are solid. This enhanced biological activity can he beneficial, as in the case of nanosized materials being used as a drug delivery device designed to penetrate cellular barriers, or not beneficial if the biological activity translate to enhanced toxicity that compromises cellular activity or induces some other unwanted effect. United States Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics has focused its ongoing review of nanomaterials consisting of chemical substances under the Toxic Substances Control Act and is perhaps farther along in considering the regulatory implications of nanotechnology than other EPA program offices.

Talks about strategies of the U.S. government for controlling air pollution. Provisions of the 1970 Clean Air Act; Impact of the usage of exhaust air management systems on motorcycle emissions; Initiative of the government to regulate lawn and garden equipments.

The article offers information on the issuance of the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) final rule that adds the category of lead and lead compounds to the Toxic Substance Control Act of 1976 (TSCA) Section 8(d)-model HsSDR rule in the U.S. Such a move was requested by the TSCA Interagency Testing Committee (ITC) in its 60th report. The new rule obliged manufacturers including importers of consumer products intended for use by children to report certain unpublished health and safety data to the EPA.

Explains how companies in the U.S. can avoid being required to have a Title V permit according to the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990. Extensive amounts of record keeping and semi- and annual reporting and certifications required in a Title V permit; Strategies for reducing emissions to levels below the limits that require a Title V permit.

Reports on a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposal that would have coal-burning power plants reduce sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides at their facilities. Cost that utilities would incur in order to comply with the plan and another agency proposal to reduce mercury emissions from such plants; Provision of states with tools to help meet health-based air quality standards without harming local economies.

Focuses on issues related to industrial pollution in the U.S. Percentage of toxic chemicals releases by industries to the environment; Increase on the toxic chemical released by coal mining industry; Need for EPA to enforce antismog standards.

The article reports on the ruling of the U.S. District Judge Virginia Hopkins that the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) has violated air pollution rules over 3,000 times over a two year period because of its coal-fired power plant in northwest Alabama. It is stated that the Alabama Environmental Council and the Sierra Club are the ones which filed the suit against TVA. Meanwhile, the Alabama Department of Environmental Management has adopted a rule in 2003 after the suit has been filed that would allow a certain number of violations each quarter. On the other hand, the utility has been given 60 days to file for an appeal with the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, Georgia.

The article reports on the proposal to amend the general provisions of the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in January 2007. The proposal would replace the 1995 memorandum for maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standards. Under the proposed amendments, a major source may become an area source at any time by limiting its potential to emit hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) to below the major source thresholds of 10 tons per year of a single HAP.

The article reports on the mandate regarding the use of Environmental Protection Agency's standardized hazardous waste manifest form on hazardous waste generators and treatment and disposal facilities starting September 5, 2006 in the U.S. The form will regulate and specify waste's progress from generation to disposal in the facilities. It could also be used in identifying the type, amount and toxicity of waste materials being shipped. The form also allows better tracking of complicated shipments including residues, rejected wastes and interstate shipments.

The article presents information on the environmental policy in the United States. In 1990, Congress amended the Clean Air Act (CAA). Recently, a federal appeals court blocked Environmental Protection Agency (EPP) from going forward with new regulations that many claimed were more apparent to increase pollution. According to the court, EPA's changes violated the language of the CAA, and ruled that any such change can only be authorized by Congress. The court has given the Congress an opportunity to step up and clarify some of the legal language in the CAA.

The article reports that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued a policy statement providing its consolidated views on how it will treat environmental justice matters in agency regulatory and licensing actions. The new policy statement emphasizes that the disproportionately high and adverse effects of a proposed action, which fall heavily on a particular community, call for close scrutiny under the National Environmental Policy Act.

Offers suggestions to pollution engineering professionals in the United States on how to decipher the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Importance of reading the definition of terms; Exemptions; Ways to keep oneself regularly updated on CFR changes.

Details the accusations made by the United States Justice Department and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) against utilities of modernizing coal-fired plants in ten Midwestern and Southern states without updating their air emissions control equipment. EPA requirement for plants to install new equipment and obtain new permits due to the companies' loss of grandfathered status; Utilities' response to the charges.

Focuses on environmental regulations of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the United States. Revision on the management data submitted under the Toxic Release Inventory; Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Regulation proposed by EPA; List of contaminants to be monitored.