genset perkins genset foton genset cummins murah

Jual Sparepart Genset Doosan Murah di Lebong Hubungi : 0821 - 1310 - 3112/(021) 9224 - 2423 PT. Tribuana Diesel Adalah penjualan Generating-Set (genset) berkualitas import (builtup) bagi anda yang membutuhkan product berkualitas serta pengadaan yang cepat urgent tanpa berbelit-belit, Genset kami di lengkapi dengan dokumen Certificate Of Original , Manual book engine dan manual book generator, Kami sediakan Genset kapasitas 10 Kva - 650Kva (ANDA PESAN KAMI ANTAR).

Jual Sparepart Genset Doosan Murah di Lebong Kami juga menerima pembuatan box silent dan perakitan diesel generator set. Produk kami meliputi berbagai diesel generator set model open, silent lokal yang ukuranya menyesuaikan lokasi pondasi genset, mobile/ trailer . Sebagian besar mesin kami menggunakan Merk : Perkins, Cummins, Deutz, Lovol, Isuzu Foton dengan generator Leroy Somer, Stamford, kualitas terbaik brushless alternator. Jual Sparepart Genset Doosan Murah di Lebong

Jual Sparepart Genset Doosan Murah di Lebong

Tag :
Jual Genset Lovol | Jual Sparepart Genset Doosan Murah di Lebong | Jual Genset Lovol kav 45 kva | jual genset lovol Kap 70 Kva Prime Power type 1004TG | Genset Lovol | Genset Lovol kav 45 kva | Jual Genset cummins |

Jual GENSET CUMMINS 10 KVA - 1000 KVA Type Open Dan Silent di Ngada

Jual GENSET CUMMINS 10 KVA - 1000 KVA Type Open Dan Silent di Ngada Hubungi : 0821 - 1310 - 3112/(021) 9224 - 2423 PT. Tribuana Diesel Adalah penjualan Generating-Set (genset) berkualitas import (builtup) bagi anda yang membutuhkan product berkualitas serta pengadaan yang cepat urgent tanpa berbelit-belit, Genset kami di lengkapi dengan dokumen Certificate Of Original , Manual book engine dan manual book generator, Kami sediakan Genset kapasitas 10 Kva - 650Kva (ANDA PESAN KAMI ANTAR). Jual GENSET CUMMINS 10 KVA - 1000 KVA Type Open Dan Silent di Ngada

Perseteruan antara Apple dan Samsung tampaknya akan kembali memanas di pengadilan. Apple diketahui telah meminta pengadilan distrik AS untuk memasukkan smartphone Samsung Galaxy S4 dalam daftar tuntutan.

Saco- Indonesia.com - Perseteruan antara Apple dan Samsung tampaknya akan kembali memanas di pengadilan. Apple diketahui telah meminta pengadilan distrik AS untuk memasukkan smartphone Samsung Galaxy S4 dalam daftar tuntutan.

Apple telah menganalisis Galaxy S4 dan akhirnya memutuskan untuk masuk ke daftar produk yang melanggar hak paten, seperti dikutip dari GSMArena, Jumat (17/5/2013).

Saat ini, dalam daftar tersebut, Apple sudah memiliki 22 nama produk yang dianggap melanggar hak paten mereka. Apabila ingin mendaftarkan produk Galaxy S4 ke daftar "hitam" ini, Apple setidaknya harus "membuang" sebuah produk lain dari kasus tersebut.

Samsung sebenarnya juga memiliki daftar berisikan 22 produk Apple yang dianggap melanggar paten.  

Meski begitu, saat menjelang persidangan nanti, kedua perusahaan tersebut harus mengurangi jumlah produk dalam daftar menjadi masing-masing 10 perangkat. Keduanya juga harus mengurangi jumlah paten yang dituntut menjadi lima perangkat.

Samsung Galaxy S4 sendiri saat ini telah menjadi mesin uang bagi Samsung. Produk ini mendapatkan respon yang sangat positif dari pasaran.

Tidak sampai sebulan, perangkat tersebut sudah laku 6 juta unit. Samsung Galaxy S4 juga telah mencetak rekor perangkat Android high-end dengan waktu penjualan tercepat, yaitu 4 juta perangkat hanya dalam waktu 5 hari.

Berikut daftar produk Samsung yang dituntut oleh Apple.
- Admire
- Captivate Glide
- Conquer 4G
- Dart
- Exhibit II 4G
- Galaxy Nexus
- Galaxy Note
- Galaxy Note 10.1
- Galaxy Note II
- Galaxy Player 4.0
- Galaxy Player 5.0
- Galaxy Rugby Pro
- Galaxy S II
- Galaxy S II Epic 4G Touch
- Galaxy S II Skyrocket
- Galaxy S III
- Galaxy Tab 7.0 Plus
- Galaxy Tab 8.9
- Galaxy Tab 2 10.1
- Illusion
- Stratosphere
- Transform Ultra

Sedangkan produk Apple yang dituntut oleh Samsung adalah:
- iPhone 3G
- iPhone 3GS
- iPhone 4
- iPhone 4S
- iPhone 5
- iPad
- iPad 2
- iPad 3
- iPad 4
- iPad mini
- iPod Touch (5th generation)
- iPod Touch (4th generation)
- iPod Touch (3rd generation)
- MacBook Air
- MacBook Pro
- iMac
- Mac mini
- Mac Pro
- iTunes (including iTunes Match)
- iCloud
- Apple TV (3rd generation)
- Apple TV (1st generation)

Editor: Reza Wahyudi

Maharajo Dirajo Dalam hal ini timbul suatu kontradiksi keterangan-keterangan, yaitu nama Maharajo Dirajo sudah disebutkan se

Maharajo Dirajo Dalam hal ini timbul suatu kontradiksi keterangan-keterangan, yaitu nama Maharajo Dirajo sudah disebutkan sebelumnya sebagai salah seorang panglima Iskandar Zulkarnain yang tugaskan menguasai Pulau Emas. Kalau memang demikian keadaannya, lalu bagaimana dengan Maharajo Dirajo yang sedang kita bicarakan ini yang waktunya sudah sangat jauh berbeda. Dalam hal ini kita tidak dapat memberikan jawaban yang pasti. Maharajo Dirajo yang sudah kita bicarakan hanya merupakan perkiraan saja dan belum tentu benar. Tetapi berdasarkan logika berfikir kira-kira diwaktu itulah hidupnya Maharajo Dirajo jika dihubungkan dengan nama Iskandar Zulkarnain. Sedangkan Maharajo Dirajo yang sedang dibicarakan sekarang ini adalah seperti yang dikatakan Tambo Alam Minangkabau yang mana yang benar perlu penelitian lebih lanjut. Dalam kesempatan ini kita hanya ingin memperlihatkan betapa rawannya penafsiran dari data yang diberikan Tambo Alam Minangkabau. Maharajo Dirajo yang sekarang dibicarakan adalah Maharajo Dirajo seperti yang dikatakan Tambo. Dalam hal ini kita ingin mengangkat data dari Tambo menjadi Fakta sejarah Minangkabau. Dalam Tambo disebutkan bahwa Iskandar Zulkarnain mempunyai tiga anak, yaitu Maharajo Alif, Maharajo Dipang, dan Maharajo Dirajo. Maharajo Alif menjadi raja di Benua Ruhun (Romawi), tetapi Josselin de Jong mengatakan, menjadi raja di Turki. Maharajo Dipang menjadi raja di negeri Cina, sedangkan Maharajo Dirajo menjadi raja di Pulau Emas (Sumatera). Kalau kita melihat kalimat-kalimat Tambo sendiri, maka dikatakan sebagai berikut: “…Tatkala maso dahulu, batigo rajo naiek nobat, nan sorang Maharajo Alif, nan pai ka banua Ruhun, nan sorang Maharajo Dipang nan pai ka Nagari Cino, nan sorang Maharajo Dirajo manapek ka pulau ameh nan ko…” (pada masa dahulu kala, ada tiga orang yang naik tahta kerajaan, seorang bernama Maharaja Alif yang pergi ke negeri Ruhun, yang seorang Maharajo Dipang yang pergi ke negeri Cina, dan seorang lagi bernama Maharajo Dirajo yang menepat ke pulau Sumatera). Dari keterangan Tambo itu tidak ada dikatakan angka tahunnya hanya dengan istilah “Masa dahulu kala” itulah yang memberikan petunjuk kepada kita bahwa kejadian itu sudah berlangsung sangat lama sekali, sedangkan waktu yang mencakup zaman dahulu kala itu sangat banyak sekali dan tidak ada kepastiannya. Kita hanya akan bertanya-tanya atau menduga-duga dengan tidak akan mendapat jawaban yang pasti. Di kerajaan Romawi atau Cina memang ada sejarah raja-raja yang besar, tetapi raja mana yang dimaksudkan oleh Tambo tidak kita ketahui. Dalam hal ini rupanya Tambo Alam Minangkabau tidak mementingkan angka tahun selain dari mementingkan kebesaran kemasyuran nama-nama rajanya. Percantuman raja Romawi dalam Tambo menurut hemat kita hanya usaha dari pembuat Tambo untuk menyetarakan kemasyhuran raja Minangkabau dengan nama raja di luar negeri yang memang sudah sangat terkenal di seantero penjuru dunia. Dengan mensejajarkan kedudukan raja-raja Minangkabau dengan raja yang sangat terkenal itu maka pandangan rakyat Minangkabau terhadap rajanya sendiri akan semakin tinggi pula. Disini kita bertemu dengan satu kebiasaan dunia Timur untuk mendongengkan tuah kebesaran rajanya kepada anak cucunya. Gelar Maharajo Dirajo sendiri terlepas ada tidaknya raja tersebut, menunjukan kebesaran kekuasaan rajanya, karena istilah itu berarti penguasa sekalian raja-raja yang tunduk di bawah kekuasaannya. Josselin de Jong mengatakan Lord of the Word atau Raja Dunia. Dalam sejarah Indonesia gelar Maharaja Diraja tidak hanya menjadi milik orang Minangkabau saja, melainkan juga ada raja lain yang bergelar demikian seperti Karta Negara dari Singasari dengan gelar Maharaja Diraja seperti yang tertulis pada arca Amogapasa tahun 1286 sebagai atasan dari Darmasraya yang bernama raja Tribuana. Tambo mengatakan bahwa Maharajo Dirajo adalah raja Minangkabau pertama. Tetapi ada pendapat lain yang mengatakan bahwa Srimaharaja Diraja yang disebut dalam tambo sebagai raja Minangkabau yang pertama itu tidak lain dari Adityawarman sendiri yang menyebut dirinya dengan Maraja Diraja. Tentang Adityawarman mempergunakan gelar Maharaja Diraja memang semua ahli sudah sependapat, karena Adityawarman sendiri telah menulis demikian dalam prasasti Pagaruyung. Dari gelar Maharaja Diraja yang dipakai Adityawarman menunjukan kepada kita bahwa sewaktu Adityawarman berkuasa di Minangkabau tidak ada lagi kekuasaan lain yang ada di atasnya, atau dengan perkataan lain dapat dikatakan pada waktu itu Minangkabau sudah berdiri sendiri, tidak berada di bawah kekuasaan Majapahit atau sudah melepaskan diri dari Majapahit. Kerajaan Majapahit adalah ahli waris dari Singasari. Sedangkan Singasari pernah menundukkan melayu Darmasraya, tentu berada di bawah kekuasaan Singasari - Majapahit itu, maka untuk melepaskan diri dari Singasari - Majapahit itu Adiyawarman memindahkan pusat kekuasaannya kepedalaman Minangkabau dan menyatakan tidak ada lagi yang berkuasa di atasnya dengan memakai gelar Maharaja Diraja. Ada sesuatu pertanyaan kecil yang perlu dijawab, yaitu apakah tidak ada lagi kemungkinan bahwa gelar Maharajo Dirajo itu merupakan gelar keturunan bagi raja-raja Minangkabau, sehingga diwaktu Adityawarman menjadi raja di Minangkabau dia merasa perlu mempergunakan gelar tersebut agar dihormati oleh rakyat Minangkabau. Kalau memang demikian, maka kita akan dapat menghubungkannya dengan Maharajo Dirajo yang kita bicarakan kehidupannya sebelum abad Masehi. Tetapi hal ini kembali hanya berupa dugaan saja yang masih memerlukan pembuktian lebih lanjut. Kalau kita mengikuti pendapat yang mengatakan bahwa Maharaja Diraja itu sama dengan Adityawarman, maka satu kepastian dapat dikatakan bahwa kerajaan Minangkabau baru bermula pad tahun 1347, yaitu pada waktu Adityawarman menjadi raja di Minangkabau yang berpusat di Pagaruyuang. Logikanya tentu sebelum Adityawarman, belum ada raja di Minangkabau, kalau ada baru merupakan daerah-daerahyang dikuasai oleh seorang kepala suku saja. Kalau pendapat itu tidak dapat diterima kebenarannya, maka tokoh Maharajo Dirajo yang disebut di dalam Tambo itu masih tetap merupakan seorang tokoh legendaris dalam sejarah Minangkabau dan hal ini akan tetap mengundang bermacam-macam pertanyaan yang pro dan kontra. Kemungkinan gelar Maharajo sudah dipergunakan sebelum kedatangan Adityawarman memang ada. Tetapi apakah gelar itu merupakan gelar keturunan dari raja-raja Minangkabau masih belum lagi dapat diketahui dengan pasti. Yang jelas pada waktu sekarang ini, banyak gelar para penghulu di Sumatera Barat yang memakai gelar Maharajo sebagai gelar kepenghulunya disamping nama lainnya, seperti Dt. Maharajo, Dt. Marajo, Dt. Maharajo Basa, Dt. Maharajo Dirajo. Kelihatan gelar tersebut dipergunakan oleh masyarakat Minangkabau sebagai gelar pusaka yang turun-menurun. Sebaliknya raja-raja Pagaruyung sendiri tidak mempergunakan gelar tersebut sebagai pusaka kerajaannya. Jadi, dapat disimpulkan bahwa gelar Maharajo Dirajo tersebut merupakan gelar pusaka Minangkabau dan sudah ada sebelum Adityawarman menjadi raja di Pagaruyung. Barangkali memang gelar itu diturunkan dari Maharajo dirajo seperti disebutkan dalam Tambo itu.

The career criminals in genre novels don’t have money problems. If they need some, they just go out and steal it. But such financial transactions can backfire, which is what happened back in 2004 when the Texas gang in Michael

WASHINGTON — A decade after emergency trailers meant to shelter Hurricane Katrina victims instead caused burning eyes, sore throats and other more serious ailments, the Environmental Protection Agency is on the verge of regulating the culprit: formaldehyde, a chemical that can be found in commonplace things like clothes and furniture.

But an unusual assortment of players, including furniture makers, the Chinese government, Republicans from states with a large base of furniture manufacturing and even some Democrats who championed early regulatory efforts, have questioned the E.P.A. proposal. The sustained opposition has held sway, as the agency is now preparing to ease key testing requirements before it releases the landmark federal health standard.

The E.P.A.’s five-year effort to adopt this rule offers another example of how industry opposition can delay and hamper attempts by the federal government to issue regulations, even to control substances known to be harmful to human health.

Continue reading the main story
 

Document: The Formaldehyde Fight

Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen that can also cause respiratory ailments like asthma, but the potential of long-term exposure to cause cancers like myeloid leukemia is less well understood.

The E.P.A.’s decision would be the first time that the federal government has regulated formaldehyde inside most American homes.

“The stakes are high for public health,” said Tom Neltner, senior adviser for regulatory affairs at the National Center for Healthy Housing, who has closely monitored the debate over the rules. “What we can’t have here is an outcome that fails to confront the health threat we all know exists.”

The proposal would not ban formaldehyde — commonly used as an ingredient in wood glue in furniture and flooring — but it would impose rules that prevent dangerous levels of the chemical’s vapors from those products, and would set testing standards to ensure that products sold in the United States comply with those limits. The debate has sharpened in the face of growing concern about the safety of formaldehyde-treated flooring imported from Asia, especially China.

What is certain is that a lot of money is at stake: American companies sell billions of dollars’ worth of wood products each year that contain formaldehyde, and some argue that the proposed regulation would impose unfair costs and restrictions.

Determined to block the agency’s rule as proposed, these industry players have turned to the White House, members of Congress and top E.P.A. officials, pressing them to roll back the testing requirements in particular, calling them redundant and too expensive.

“There are potentially over a million manufacturing jobs that will be impacted if the proposed rule is finalized without changes,” wrote Bill Perdue, the chief lobbyist at the American Home Furnishings Alliance, a leading critic of the testing requirements in the proposed regulation, in one letter to the E.P.A.

Industry opposition helped create an odd alignment of forces working to thwart the rule. The White House moved to strike out key aspects of the proposal. Subsequent appeals for more changes were voiced by players as varied as Senator Barbara Boxer, Democrat of California, and Senator Roger Wicker, Republican of Mississippi, as well as furniture industry lobbyists.

Hurricane Katrina in 2005 helped ignite the public debate over formaldehyde, after the deadly storm destroyed or damaged hundreds of thousands of homes along the Gulf of Mexico, forcing families into temporary trailers provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

The displaced storm victims quickly began reporting respiratory problems, burning eyes and other issues, and tests then confirmed high levels of formaldehyde fumes leaking into the air inside the trailers, which in many cases had been hastily constructed.

Public health advocates petitioned the E.P.A. to issue limits on formaldehyde in building materials and furniture used in homes, given that limits already existed for exposure in workplaces. But three years after the storm, only California had issued such limits.

Industry groups like the American Chemistry Council have repeatedly challenged the science linking formaldehyde to cancer, a position championed by David Vitter, the Republican senator from Louisiana, who is a major recipient of chemical industry campaign contributions, and whom environmental groups have mockingly nicknamed “Senator Formaldehyde.”

Continue reading the main story

Formaldehyde in Laminate Flooring

In laminate flooring, formaldehyde is used as a bonding agent in the fiberboard (or other composite wood) core layer and may also be used in glues that bind layers together. Concerns were raised in March when certain laminate flooring imported from China was reported to contain levels of formaldehyde far exceeding the limit permitted by California.

Typical

laminate

flooring

CLEAR FINISH LAYER

Often made of melamine resin

PATTERN LAYER

Paper printed to resemble wood,

or a thin wood veneer

GLUE

Layers may be bound using

formaldehyde-based glues

CORE LAYER

Fiberboard or other

composite, formed using

formaldehyde-based adhesives

BASE LAYER

Moisture-resistant vapor barrier

What is formaldehyde?

Formaldehyde is a common chemical used in many industrial and household products as an adhesive, bonding agent or preservative. It is classified as a volatile organic compound. The term volatile means that, at room temperature, formaldehyde will vaporize, or become a gas. Products made with formaldehyde tend to release this gas into the air. If breathed in large quantities, it may cause health problems.

WHERE IT IS COMMONLY FOUND

POTENTIAL HEALTH RISKS

Pressed-wood and composite wood products

Wallpaper and paints

Spray foam insulation used in construction

Commercial wood floor finishes

Crease-resistant fabrics

In cigarette smoke, or in the fumes from combustion of other materials, including wood, oil and gasoline.

Exposure to formaldehyde in sufficient amounts may cause eye, throat or skin irritation, allergic reactions, and respiratory problems like coughing, wheezing or asthma.

Long-term exposure to high levels has been associated with cancer in humans and laboratory animals.

Exposure to formaldehyde may affect some people more severely than others.

By 2010, public health advocates and some industry groups secured bipartisan support in Congress for legislation that ordered the E.P.A. to issue federal rules that largely mirrored California’s restrictions. At the time, concerns were rising over the growing number of lower-priced furniture imports from Asia that might include contaminated products, while also hurting sales of American-made products.

Maneuvering began almost immediately after the E.P.A. prepared draft rules to formally enact the new standards.

White House records show at least five meetings in mid-2012 with industry executives — kitchen cabinet makers, chemical manufacturers, furniture trade associations and their lobbyists, like Brock R. Landry, of the Venable law firm. These parties, along with Senator Vitter’s office, appealed to top administration officials, asking them to intervene to roll back the E.P.A. proposal.

The White House Office of Management and Budget, which reviews major federal regulations before they are adopted, apparently agreed. After the White House review, the E.P.A. “redlined” many of the estimates of the monetary benefits that would be gained by reductions in related health ailments, like asthma and fertility issues, documents reviewed by The New York Times show.

As a result, the estimated benefit of the proposed rule dropped to $48 million a year, from as much as $278 million a year. The much-reduced amount deeply weakened the agency’s justification for the sometimes costly new testing that would be required under the new rules, a federal official involved in the effort said.

“It’s a redlining blood bath,” said Lisa Heinzerling, a Georgetown University Law School professor and a former E.P.A. official, using the Washington phrase to describe when language is stricken from a proposed rule. “Almost the entire discussion of these potential benefits was excised.”

Senator Vitter’s staff was pleased.

“That’s a huge difference,” said Luke Bolar, a spokesman for Mr. Vitter, of the reduced estimated financial benefits, saying the change was “clearly highlighting more mismanagement” at the E.P.A.

Advertisement

The review’s outcome galvanized opponents in the furniture industry. They then targeted a provision that mandated new testing of laminated wood, a cheaper alternative to hardwood. (The California standard on which the law was based did not require such testing.)

But E.P.A. scientists had concluded that these laminate products — millions of which are sold annually in the United States — posed a particular risk. They said that when thin layers of wood, also known as laminate or veneer, are added to furniture or flooring in the final stages of manufacturing, the resulting product can generate dangerous levels of fumes from often-used formaldehyde-based glues.

Industry executives, outraged by what they considered an unnecessary and financially burdensome level of testing, turned every lever within reach to get the requirement removed. It would be particularly onerous, they argued, for small manufacturers that would have to repeatedly interrupt their work to do expensive new testing. The E.P.A. estimated that the expanded requirements for laminate products would cost the furniture industry tens of millions of dollars annually, while the industry said that the proposed rule over all would cost its 7,000 American manufacturing facilities over $200 million each year.

“A lot of people don’t seem to appreciate what a lot of these requirements do to a small operation,” said Dick Titus, executive vice president of the Kitchen Cabinet Manufacturers Association, whose members are predominantly small businesses. “A 10-person shop, for example, just really isn’t equipped to handle that type of thing.”

Photo
 
Becky Gillette wants strong regulation of formaldehyde. Credit Beth Hall for The New York Times

Big industry players also weighed in. Executives from companies including La-Z-Boy, Hooker Furniture and Ashley Furniture all flew to Washington for a series of meetings with the offices of lawmakers including House Speaker John Boehner, Republican of Ohio, and about a dozen other lawmakers, asking several of them to sign a letter prepared by the industry to press the E.P.A. to back down, according to an industry report describing the lobbying visit.

Within a matter of weeks, two letters — using nearly identical language — were sent by House and Senate lawmakers to the E.P.A. — with the industry group forwarding copies of the letters to the agency as well, and then posting them on its website.

The industry lobbyists also held their own meeting at E.P.A. headquarters, and they urged Jim Jones, who oversaw the rule-making process as the assistant administrator for the agency’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, to visit a North Carolina furniture manufacturing plant. According to the trade group, Mr. Jones told them that the visit had “helped the agency shift its thinking” about the rules and how laminated products should be treated.

The resistance was particularly intense from lawmakers like Mr. Wicker of Mississippi, whose state is home to major manufacturing plants owned by Ashley Furniture Industries, the world’s largest furniture maker, and who is one of the biggest recipients in Congress of donations from the industry’s trade association. Asked if the political support played a role, a spokesman for Mr. Wicker replied: “Thousands of Mississippians depend on the furniture manufacturing industry for their livelihoods. Senator Wicker is committed to defending all Mississippians from government overreach.”

Individual companies like Ikea also intervened, as did the Chinese government, which claimed that the new rule would create a “great barrier” to the import of Chinese products because of higher costs.

Perhaps the most surprising objection came from Senator Boxer, of California, a longtime environmental advocate, whose office questioned why the E.P.A.’s rule went further than her home state’s in seeking testing on laminated products. “We did not advocate an outcome, other than safety,” her office said in a statement about why the senator raised concerns. “We said ‘Take a look to see if you have it right.’ ”

Safety advocates say that tighter restrictions — like the ones Ms. Boxer and Mr. Wicker, along with Representative Doris Matsui, a California Democrat, have questioned — are necessary, particularly for products coming from China, where items as varied as toys and Christmas lights have been found to violate American safety standards.

While Mr. Neltner, the environmental advocate who has been most involved in the review process, has been open to compromise, he has pressed the E.P.A. not to back down entirely, and to maintain a requirement that laminators verify that their products are safe.

An episode of CBS’s “60 Minutes” in March brought attention to the issue when it accused Lumber Liquidators, the discount flooring retailer, of selling laminate products with dangerous levels of formaldehyde. The company has disputed the show’s findings and test methods, maintaining that its products are safe.

“People think that just because Congress passed the legislation five years ago, the problem has been fixed,” said Becky Gillette, who then lived in coastal Mississippi, in the area hit by Hurricane Katrina, and was among the first to notice a pattern of complaints from people living in the trailers. “Real people’s faces and names come up in front of me when I think of the thousands of people who could get sick if this rule is not done right.”

An aide to Ms. Matsui rejected any suggestion that she was bending to industry pressure.

“From the beginning the public health has been our No. 1 concern,” said Kyle J. Victor, an aide to Ms. Matsui.

But further changes to the rule are likely, agency officials concede, as they say they are searching for a way to reduce the cost of complying with any final rule while maintaining public health goals. The question is just how radically the agency will revamp the testing requirement for laminated products — if it keeps it at all.

“It’s not a secret to anybody that is the most challenging issue,” said Mr. Jones, the E.P.A. official overseeing the process, adding that the health consequences from formaldehyde are real. “We have to reduce those exposures so that people can live healthy lives and not have to worry about being in their homes.”

Artikel lainnya »