**Q. Muddiest" thing: This entire concept of guidance documents is not acceptable by me. I think that there should be one standard method of analyzing chemicals or toxins instead of publishing guidance documents. This is like compromising on the health and safety of the public. Since the most important part in environmental law making are the limiting standards then why not have standard methods adopted for getting for each chemical. Why let companies and agencies manipulate this loophole for their own profit.
A. I don't think they are manipulating for profit, so much as, trying to get around the long slow process of getting a regulation promulgated. Technical standards are often a "moving target," while the law is supposed to stay change slowly, if at all.

*Q. There are so many laws in the constitution so how does the government assign the jobs, I mean there are laws every year and some times 2 to 3 in a year, so does the government implement these laws?
The constitution is really not a law, but rather the framework that explains how to make and enforce the laws. Congress, called the legislative branch of government, makes the laws. Congress is really just 535 people, 100 in the Senate and 435 in the House of Representatives. The laws congress passes are carried out by the executive branch, which has millions of people. The executive is organized into major departments and agencies. Such as the Department of Defense and the Environmental Protection Agency. Each agency will have "programs" within it. Say the EPA has the "Solid Waste Program" or the "Office of Solid Waste." This office will administer all the laws and regulations that deal with solid waste. If congress demands a new regulation regarding solid waste, that office will promulgate it. However, they might not have the people or resources to enforce the regulation. Therefore, congress must appropriate enough money for the agency to enforce the new law. If they don't, which sometimes happens, the situation get clumsy. Generally the agency just does not do anything, until congress comes up with the money.

Q. Most of the items in this module were clear but this module does not mention much about, how, different agencies and organizations established for safeguard of environment, coordinated with each other at the situation of common interest.
A.You are assuming they coordinate with each other. They do, somewhat. At the federal level, when a new law is proposed, the involved agencies testify to the congress and try to get wording in the law that make responsibilities clear and avoid conflicts. Then when the regulations are proposed, the agencies can comment on each other's regulations. This helps. A few laws call for agencies to jointly administer a regulatory program. In this case they try to draft regulations that make responsibilities clear. In the main they do a good job of it, I believe, but it is not perfect, and conflicts do happen. On the other hand, conflicts between state and federal regulations are common, and there is often an overlap in responsibilities, reporting, and permitting.

Q. I was left wondering why Congress is unable to organize the various reg's into a single inclusive framework.
A. It is organized, in the sense it is cataloged, in the same sense a library is organized. But there is so much there, you need to know where you are going. I never do a search of the regulations, because I get hundreds of hits within the CFR. I try to find the citation somewhere else, then look in the regulations.

Q. As for me, the most intricate piece in the module was the cartoon demonstrating the laws that control hazardous waste operations. It seemed to be pretty simple. On the other hand, due to this picture I made the conclusion that OSHA administers the HMTA, which was wrong.
A. What the cartoon is showing, in the top bar, is that all the operations are covered by OSHA, that is the worker's health.
Module 2 Index