On the recordJuly 11, 1995
The answer is that they could, because those parts per million would relate to a benefit to health or the environment and, therefore, would be a nonquantifiable benefit to health or the environment.
Source
govinfo.govDavid Cay Johnston: “The answer is that they could, because those parts per million would relate to a benefit to health or the environment…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of environmental regulations on health benefits.
Share
More from David Cay Johnston
Jul 31, 1996
Then how in the world can the Senator say they are transferring the duty of disposing of nuclear waste from the Federal Government or the taxpayers and giving that to the utilities?
Sep 5, 1996
The University of New Orleans has developed an entrepreneurship program designed not only to assist in the development of skills, but also to assist in the creating of individual, family, and small businesses in our inner cities. The two…
Sep 25, 2023
This is absolutely devastating for Donald Trump, and unless a Court of Appeals overturns this, which I would think highly unlikely, we're going to see his properties seized, dissolved, and the creditors paid off, and he will be permanently…
Jul 31, 1996
What is the difference in liability between having the duty to dispose of and in taking title?
Other voices in this conversation
