Jump to full article: Iowans for Equal Rights , 2008-10-10
Intro: Prepared August 29, 2008
The author, subject and related questions for each of the eight letters sent to the Iowa Department of Public Health by directors of Iowans for Equal Rights are presented below. Full text of the letters, including background information, can be accessed by clicking on the inquiry link for each letter.
Inquiry No. 1, Mr. Coates: Effects of emergency declaration; how comments that are part of the formal rulemaking record can be made.
Questions: Based on the foregoing background and my layperson’s understanding I have three questions:
1. What was the “emergency” that caused the department’s Smokefree Air Act’s enforcement rules to adopted through an emergency declaration?
2. Does the health department consider comments submitted through the Web form as provided at www.iowasmokefreeair.gov, or public comments made at forthcoming public meetings presently scheduled for August 20, 2008, to be formal or informal?
3. Does the health department consider itself to have a formal, statutory duty to “consider fully” all comments, data or other submissions presented through the Web form? . . .
2. Why do the health department’s rules not require that identity of persons who file complaints with it concerning the Smokefree Air Act be credibly confirmed or provide for required information to do so?
. . .
Questions: Based on the forgoing and my layperson’s understanding I ask the following questions:
1. What regulatory analysis, including consideration of different material risks arising from exposure to ETS in indoor and outdoor areas, has the Iowa Department of Public Health conducted in drafting its enforcement rules for the Smoke Free Air Act? . . .
Inquiry No. 8, Mr. Shanno: Separate designated smoking rooms according to ASHREA 62.1 Standard 2007.
Questions: Based on the preceding information and my layperson’s understanding I ask the following:
1. Were methods other than a prohibition of smoking in public places seriously considered by the Iowa Department of Public Health in promulgating its enforcement rules for HF 2212, the Smokefree Air Act?
2. Why were separately ventilated smoking rooms rejected by the Iowa Department of Public Health as means for compliance with HF 2212, the Smokefree Air Act?
3. The reduced ventilation rates under ASHRAE Standard 62.1 are contingent on “Smoke Free” environments, such as those created for public places under the health department’s current enforcement rules. How does the Iowa Department of Public Health reconcile increased health risks to employees and patrons caused by reduced ventilation and consequently higher concentrations of airborne toxins and carcinogens not related to tobacco smoke with the legislative purpose “. . . in order to protect the public health and the health of employees”?
Jump to full article » |