Skip to content

Comment Policy

We encourage you to share your thoughts as they relate to the topic being discussed. We review and post comments according to the policy below. The views expressed in comments reflect those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official views of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the federal government.

We want to publish your comments, but we expect comments generally to be courteous. To that end, we have established the following policy.

We reserve the discretion not to post comments that:

  • contain obscene, indecent, or profane language;
  • contain threats or defamatory statements;
  • contain hate speech directed at race, color, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, ethnicity, age, religion, or disability; or
  • promote or endorse services or products. (Note that non-commercial links that are relevant to the topic or another comment are acceptable.)

Do not submit copyrighted or other proprietary material in any form unless you clearly indicate that you have permission to do so. By posting your comments or other work, you grant EPA and anyone viewing the EPA Web site irrevocable permission to copy, distribute, make derivatives, display or perform the commenter’s work publicly and free-of-charge.

If you are a reporter, please send questions to the EPA Newsroom through normal channels rather than by submitting questions here as comments.

We recognize that the Internet is a 24/7 medium and your comments are welcome at any time. However, given the need to manage federal resources, we intend to review and post comments from 8:30 am – 5:30 pm Monday through Friday except for on federal holidays. We intend to review and post comments submitted at other times as soon as possible on the next business day.

In some cases we ask you to provide your name and e-mail address, although providing either is optional. We request your name to make it easier to carry on a conversation. For this reason, we publish your name along with your comment. We ask for your e-mail address so that we can contact you if necessary. It is our policy not to publish your e-mail address.

To protect your privacy, please do not include information (e.g., an e-mail address or phone number) in the text of your comment that identifies you.

You can find additional guidance as to how EPA regards privacy issues within the privacy policy provided on EPA’s main Web site.

Thank you for taking the time to read this comment policy. We encourage your participation in our discussion and look forward to an active exchange of ideas.

If you have questions about this comment policy or how we apply it, please contact us.

12 Responses leave one →
  1. Concerned permalink
    July 24, 2013

    I am concerned that the EPA does not seem to really care about the health of the American people as you continue to allow Monsanto and other companies pollute our food and medicine supplies with untested and harmful chemicals. Many studies have been published recently linking Glyphosphate with numerous health problems and yet despite these studies the EPA has decided to allow the dose of this harmful chemical in our food to be DOUBLED???? How is this protecting me and my family? How can you allow this company to pollute our food like this?Where are people supposed to turn for quality food these days? The EPA should be ashamed for conducting itself this way and turning its back on the American people and common sense.

  2. Thea permalink
    July 31, 2013

    Dear Gina,
    I have supported your nomination from the day I heard the great news. I am so thankful to have a woman with your courage and leadership administering the EPA.

    So I ask you to please familiarize yourself with the state of Science around Radio Frequency Radiation. The International Agency for the Research on Cancer has deemed it a possible carcinogen although it seems that the effects from low levels are far more complicated than simply brain tumors.

    Just as we have with chemicals in this country we are increasing exposure without any proof of safety. This is about my children and yours. How is it that my daughters are attending school with WIFI, a known Class 2 b carcinogen? http://www.bioinitiative.org/

    The American people do not even know that other countries are taking actions to protect their citizens. Will It be years for the US? In the meantime who pays the price if this accumulating research continues to show serious effects? our children.

    Be courageous. Continue your work! take on Radio frequency and support our country in protecting our children.

  3. Sammy Samuelson permalink
    August 1, 2013

    Using A merican M ade S ynthetic Oil, coupled with Washable ,Cleanable, Reusable, Lifetime Oil Filters enhances a number of Environmental
    issues. And Oil Analysis adds more value to the above !
    The results are being able to eliminate foreign oil dependence in America !
    And the products above are produced in the good ‘ol U.S.A. !
    Thank you !

  4. Cheri Gardey permalink
    September 20, 2013

    Dear Gina – I have a few comments. While I think it is wise to reduce green house gases I’m sure that effectively eliminating coal as an energy source without a replacement energy source is very questionable. We don’t want to shoot ourselves in the foot economically. It needs to be done in a balanced way. Here is part of that balance. An effective way to sequester carbon would be to properly care for herbivores. I would like to see a promotion of the grass fed beef and dairy industry and a steep fines placed on the environmentally harming and green house gas producing factory farm industry model. The grass fed model would rejuvinate the land, be healthier for the animals and people – both producers and consumers, and sequester carbon, Isn’t this what we are after? If you and your staff haven’t done so please read the book “Folks, This Ain’t Normal” by Joel Salatin. Listen to Joel Salatin. He knows what he is talking about. We can feed the world healthy food and sequester carbon – it’s a no brainer! If all farmers did this our country would be better off on so many levels. This also bears stating: Please be involved in requiring the labeling of GMO’s GMO’s are environmentally damaging and really should be eliminated but at the very least labeled. In fact, round up ready crops may be why the bees are dying. Talk about an enviromental disaster! The glycophosphate from this crop line is now being found in the digestive systems of both animals and people. As a result of this gm crop our environment has been damaged. Please stop this. Thank-you

  5. Christine permalink
    November 6, 2013

    Dear Ms.McCarthy, I just learned that you commented that Canada’s tar sands oil will be shipped whether EPA approves Keystone or not. I did a quick fact check and find that it’s not clear exactly what you said or in what context. However, Keystone may well go through whatever you do. I’d lend my support to keep it from happening anywhere, despite my special affinity for this country. It hurts our planet, and everyone everywhere, wherever it happens. Perhaps whatever was said was not sign of caving. I want you to know that I and many think that you’ve had enormous courage in taking on an extremely difficult job, one of the most important in the world now, and likely critical to saving our planet. You work under pressures, I’m sure, more severe than most Americans have suffered. In the end, only integrity matters, whatever else you lose. So hard to hang on to it sometimes; sometimes so hard to see where the next step leads. I applaud your courage, again and again. I support you. Please, don’t start asking for whom the bell tolls … that’s a sign that you need to take a deep breath, or 10. I’m with you. You are one of the most important people in my life, and my kids, and my grandkids…….

  6. Otto J. Palmer permalink
    December 1, 2013

    Congratulations for your proposal to reduce the ethanol blend requirement by almost 3 billion gallons. This reduction will slow the current trend to produce more corn from converted conserved lands that has destroyed habitat, polluted water supplies and promotes an ethanol/gas blend higher than many engines can safely handle. Continue to focus on the development of next-generation biofuels made from agricultural waste and “syngas”.

  7. David H tampa fl permalink
    January 29, 2014

    Dirty coal

    when I moved to tampa back in 1989 South hillsbrough county was covered in smoke so bad it left a film on you car even if you just drove though.
    An area that looked like the like it was totaly abandoned with just run down tralors and abanonded busines with broken windows but the EPA sued TECO to pay huge fines or bring the coal plant up curent code and teco did and spent millions on it but did we as consumers feel it? in fact no we did not even get a hike in our rates for 3 years and still have some of the cheeper rates compared to other parts of florida.
    and south Hillsbrough is now part of south Brandon and upscale area
    sadly of those who live around the other 49 dirty coal plants no help came due to an bush exutive letter sent to then curent director of the EPA banning him from sueing the other 49 which is why he stated he quit.So it nice to see the EPA is finaly geting it teeth back

  8. Todd Crase permalink
    March 31, 2014

    Coal is great for our future. Leave it alone. Wyoming does not need you telling us what we can and cannot do. Go away..

  9. Chuck permalink
    May 30, 2014

    Since we as a country continue to overspend and continue to look for areas to cut or trim back, rather than cutting National Defense, I think the EPA is a good place for Congress reduce spending. The EPA continues to aggressively overreach and dictate how to conduct their lives and dictate rules over private property (example: building ponds or modifying their personal property.) As long as citizens are not pouring chemicals on the ground or dumping chemicals into waterways, I think the EPA should stay out of private citizens business.

    Recommend Congress strip the EPA of all enforcement authority and defund enforcement programs as well as remove any implied law enforcement authorities. The EPA should be relagated to an organization that only conducts environmental studies and presents these studies to the individual states with recommendation. The individual States should be the ultimate decision maker on how best to go forward or disregard the EPA report. The EPA should NOT be able to override or dictate anything to a State or to a citizen.

  10. Pearl Arobine permalink
    June 4, 2014

    Dear Gina, Illegal abuses have happened. MillPond apts-Black mold found in bathroom of new apt, Gas leaks from
    Furnace and water heater, freon gas leak from old refrigerator freezer in windowless kitchen.
    Niles Housing Commission-Toxic and pathogenic mold and mildew, laboratory tested found. Management
    Refused to correct. Each timeI was told to leave and evicted. I have collapsed & broken my back, am partially
    Paralyzed and disabled. Pearl Arobine, 755 East 16 Street, Holland Michigan 49423

  11. Pearl Arobine permalink
    June 4, 2014

    Dear Gina McCarthy, I purchased a house thru a realtor and was taxpayer, when I moved in the water well was
    Contaminated with Coliform bacteria. I then became ill & need a prescription for hypothyroid condition for life.
    I drilled a new well and disinfected the plumbing. I was not informed of this condition prior to moving, My house
    Was taken over by force and torn down after I had improved the property. I have not been compensated for
    My loss and damages. Where is Superfund? I have been denied legal counsel.
    Pearl Arobine, 755 East 16 Street, Holland, Michigan 49423

Leave a Reply

Note: You can use basic XHTML in your comments. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS