I am pleased to learn that the committee has directed this level of funding to EPA for this important research. This comprehensive research program is very much needed. At present, there appears to be insufficient data available for the agency to decide what changes, if any, should be made to the current standard. There is no scientific consensus on whether it is necessary to change the current ambient air quality standards for particulate matter to protect human and environmental health. It has come to my attention that in a letter to EPA on June 13, 1996, EPA's own Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee concluded that ``our understanding of the health effects of [particulates] is far from complete,'' and these scientific uncertainties prevented the committee from agreeing on the agency's suggested new particulate standards.
Angie Craig: “I am pleased to learn that the committee has directed this level of funding to EPA for this important research. This…”
On the recordSeptember 4, 1996
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing funding for EPA research on air quality standards for particulate matter.
Share
More from Angie Craig
Aug 10, 2026
But the only way we pass any of the progressive policies that all of us here support is by winning elections and taking damn majorities.
Apr 30, 2026
just wow. Just wow. That entire speech is just wow. At the end of the day, we are sitting here talking about the farm bill, and this amendment does nothing to materially address the very real issues farmers are facing as they look at…
Apr 29, 2026
better late than never bipartisanship. We are happy to agree to these amendments en bloc, and I would be proud to support it. I just want to say that some of the rhetoric though coming out and the lack of fact-based--it is not that…





