scholarly journals Advancing Dose–Response Assessment Methods for Environmental Regulatory Impact Analysis: A Bayesian Belief Network Approach Applied to Inorganic Arsenic

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
pp. 200-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph W. Zabinski ◽  
Gonzalo Garcia-Vargas ◽  
Marisela Rubio-Andrade ◽  
Rebecca C. Fry ◽  
Jacqueline MacDonald Gibson
2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-56
Author(s):  
Endang Kunarsih ◽  
◽  
Iswandarini Iswandarini ◽  
Rusmanto Rusmanto

Brief Review of Accreditation Policy For X-Ray Compliance Testing Laboratory The Compli¬ance Test Program has been Implemented Since 2011 and The Updated Regulation was in 2018. According to the implementation progress, adjustments are needed to the dynamics of the problems that arise. In 2021, it is planned to prepare a draft amendment to BAPETEN Regulation Number 2 of 2018; therefore, an analysis of the implementation profile of the regulation is carried out to identify existing obstacles. One of the problems identified is the polemic of the urgency of accreditation obligations for the Compliance Testing Laboratory, which is the institution appointed by the Head of BAPETEN to carry out compliance tests and issue compliance certificates. Currently, 78% of laboratories are not accredited, most of which are importing companies. Therefore, it will have implications for reducing laboratory availability and constraining the compliance test process in health facilities. This paper aims to identify aspects that can hinder the application for laboratory accreditation, especially for importing companies, and the proposed solution that can recommend. This paper uses a regulatory impact analysis approach. The study results show that laboratory accreditation is essential to maintain the quality of services, competencies, and outputs of the laboratory so that four options that LUK can take are proposed in dealing with obstacles in applying for accreditation. This paper can provide contributions in preparing the draft amendments to BAPETEN Regulation Number 2 of 2018.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Arik Levinson

In April 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington DC agreed with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to delay indefinitely a lawsuit over the Agency’s regulation governing mercury pollution from power plants. Lawyers for the EPA argued that they needed time to evaluate the status of the lawsuit, due to “the recent change in Administration.” The case, Murray v. EPA, centers on the Agency’s analysis of the benefits of reducing mercury pollution. Key to that litigation is the EPA’s treatment of co-benefits—the incidental reductions to pollutants aside from mercury. As of this writing, the Agency has still not decided how to proceed. This case summarizes the EPA’s 2011 Regulatory Impact Analysis at the heart of the legal dispute.1


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document