Groups Seek Nationwide Ban on Traditional Lead Ammunition By Petitioning EPA

Constitution Cowboy has done an excellent job of explaining the barrier to a change under TSCA to ban lead based ammunition.

That doesn't mean the EPA might not decide to attempt this. If they made that mistake (and the law is so clear and will be clearly pointed out), that would be challenged in court immediately and they would loose.

Ultimately the only way to ban lead based ammunition is for Congress to pass an amendment to TSCA removing the 3 (2)(A)v opening taxed ammunition to inclusion. I do not think that we can expect such a change in legislation.

We should continue to comment, pointing out that accepting the petition position amounts to usurping Congress's authority wrt to making or amending legislation, ignores a preponderance of scientific data showing lead ammunition represents an insignificant hazard to the environment and public health and would represent an excessive economic harm to the producers of lead based ammunition, hunters and recreational shooters, law enforcement and the military because of the expense of alternatives to lead based ammunition (none of which have been found to be cost effective).

RC,

Thanks!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/27/epa-rejects-calls-ban-lead-ammo-fishing-tackle/

The Environmental Protection Agency has denied a petition filed by environmental activists seeking to ban lead in ammunition and fishing tackle, saying such regulation is beyond the agency's authority.

The agency's decision, announced Friday shortly after FoxNews.com published its report on the issue, sided with hunters and fishermen who had argued that the such regulations weren't allowed under the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976.

"EPA is taking action on many fronts to address major sources of lead in our society, such as eliminating childhood exposures to lead," the agency said in a written statement. "However, EPA was not and is not considering taking action on whether the lead content in hunting ammunition poses an undue threat to wildlife."

Click to expand...

Petition rejected 3 days after submittal! That was quick.

armoredman,

I can't agree. Considering that it would require Congress to amend TSCA it wouldn't take much for EPA to realize that there was no way for them to make a rule change (with people pointing out the fact as well) on this. Kinda like, It doesn't matter how much your kid wants that new pair of useless shoes, there's no need to discuss it once you find out you don't have the money to get them.

I'd like to hope that the EPA simply decided there wasn't any regulatory or technical merit, but the simplest answer is that they decided that there was no way they could make a change and it took 3 days (and a bunch of comments) for the machinery to crank.