I would tend to agree with the statements that are being put forth from the different regulations from the amendments being made to this bill. The pollution that is occurring is not anything natural, but it is instead due to our own actions, our own wastefulness, and our ability to not see how to reuse, but rather dispose of. The argument presented in this bill is basically saying that we need to look more carefully at the different substances that we use and be able to identify what to do with it, as well as how to correctly dispose of it, helping us save the environment. For instance, in the 1st couple of sections from the change to the law, For the Ethylene Production source category, we identified PB-HAP emissions of arsenic compounds, cadmium compounds, lead compounds, mercury compounds, and polycyclic organic matter (POM) (of which polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) is a subset), so we proceeded to the next step of the evaluation. With the exception of lead, the human health risk screening assessment for PB-HAP consists of three tiers. We call this first evaluation of the Tier 1 screening assessment. In a Tier 1 screening assessment, we determine whether the facility-specific emission rates of PB-HAP are large enough to warrant further evaluation of the human health risk through ingestion exposure under reasonable worst-case conditions. To facilitate this step, we used previously developed screening threshold emission rates for several PB-HAP that are based on a hypothetical upper-end screening exposure scenario developed for use in conjunction with the EPA's Total Risk Integrated Methodology. Fate, Transport, and Ecological Exposure (TRIM.FaTE) model. The PB-HAP with screening threshold emission rates is arsenic compounds, cadmium compounds, chlorinated [dibenzo dioxins] and furans, mercury compounds, and POM. Based on the EPA estimates of toxicity and bioaccumulation potential, the pollutants above represent a conservative list for inclusion in multi-pathway risk assessments for RTR rules. (See Volume 1, Appendix D at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/201308/documents/volume_1_reflibrary.pdf.) In this assessment, we compare the facility-specific emission rates of these PB-HAP to the screening threshold emission rates for each PB-HAP to assess the potential for significant human health risks via the ingestion pathway. We call this application of the TRIM.FaTE model the Tier 1 screening assessment. The ratio of a facility's actual emission rate to the Tier 1 screening threshold emission rate is a “screening value.” This evidence prompts that we need to be able to understand what we use on a daily basis on the terms of the environment, as well as proficiently reuse, reduce, and recycle in order to help the environment, as well as help other endangered species and habitat protection.