Comment submitted by J. Adler

Document ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2010-0492-0023
Document Type: Public Submission
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Received Date: March 16 2011, at 12:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Date Posted: March 21 2011, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Start Date: March 16 2011, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Due Date: April 15 2011, at 11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time
Tracking Number: 80c092b5
View Document:  View as format xml

View Comment

While the differences between Wisconsin allowance of concentration of chronic and acute copper and nickel, and chronic endrin and selenium are slight and in some cases Wisconsin's proposed equations for concentration of metals in water is stricter than that of the EPA, it should be noted that the formula for the concentration for Chronic Nickel Criteria for cold water, warm water sportfish, warm water forage fish, and limited forage fish is more lax than that set out by the EPA. While this is merely a note and not a demand for action, the EPA would do well to remember that giving any amount of autonomy to a state in terms of environmental protocol opens the gate for more autonomy. In the future it might be best if all rules adopted by states were as strict as or stricter than the national rules.

Related Comments

   
Total: 2
Comment submitted by J. Adler
Public Submission    Posted: 03/21/2011     ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2010-0492-0023

Apr 15,2011 11:59 PM ET
Comment submitted by Tracy L.
Public Submission    Posted: 03/30/2011     ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2010-0492-0024

Apr 15,2011 11:59 PM ET