108 and 109 of the Act were not considered under this category. “The question of how this law would work arose early. In Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) v. EPA (the "Vinyl Chloride" case), the NRDC challenged the EPA's failure to list vinyl chloride as a HAP under the Act, even though the EPA had concluded that it caused harm to human health”( 112 ) The Natural Resources Defense Council argued the cost of compliancy but what happen next is interest, even though the section 112 require the EPA to establish a level zero emission if they could not come up with a safer with to produce the chemical, they fail to list the chemical as a HAP. I believe that this is where the problem lies when it come to big business they have lawyer to find a variety of loop holes to get there product on the market. The EPA ending up disagreeing with the Natural Resources Defense Council and did not listed the chemical. It is frighten to realize what is tolerated with the EPA when the Clean Air Act was amended in 1990 they could only indentify a list of eight hazardous air pollutants. How is this even possible in the 1990?(Alex Jackson) Even though it has not been proven but indicated that the non-carcinogen HAP like mercury and cadmium can cause birth defects, lung disease.” The detrimental health effects of human exposure to HAPs are uncontested and, as the data indicate, present a serious risk to public health”(Alex Jackson)
108 and 109 of the Act were not considered under this category. “The question of how this law would work arose early. In Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) v. EPA (the "Vinyl Chloride" case), the NRDC challenged the EPA's failure to list vinyl chloride as a HAP under the Act, even though the EPA had concluded that it caused harm to human health”( 112 ) The Natural Resources Defense Council argued the cost of compliancy but what happen next is interest, even though the section 112 require the EPA to establish a level zero emission if they could not come up with a safer with to produce the chemical, they fail to list the chemical as a HAP. I believe that this is where the problem lies when it come to big business they have lawyer to find a variety of loop holes to get there product on the market. The EPA ending up disagreeing with the Natural Resources Defense Council and did not listed the chemical. It is frighten to realize what is tolerated with the EPA when the Clean Air Act was amended in 1990 they could only indentify a list of eight hazardous air pollutants. How is this even possible in the 1990?(Alex Jackson) Even though it has not been proven but indicated that the non-carcinogen HAP like mercury and cadmium can cause birth defects, lung disease.” The detrimental health effects of human exposure to HAPs are uncontested and, as the data indicate, present a serious risk to public health”(Alex Jackson)