[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: dispute resolution
>ONE Solution: Whether many of you realize it or not, technology has
>quickly ramped up to a stage of answering these questions without
>touching foot on the facility. Whether we are talking about fenceline
>monitoring for air emissions, open path FTIR, or taking waste stream
>samples, there are ways to do this legally and still prove that a
>company is in violation of its air/water/waste permits. So instead of
>relying on enforcement personnel, which are overworked (and some of you
>could care less for), you could become more active in the enforcement
>role (instead of reviewing paperwork supplied by the industry itself)?
>Maybe we/you should be thinking about coordinated efforts to bring
>together a testing group that can approach this problem actively,
>accurately, and honestly, with the full weight of the law AND science
>behind them? Very few organizations can fund even limited sampling
>efforts. But a coordinated effort by all could field a small team and
>keep them busy year round to the benefit of all concerned.
>Food for thought.
this may be a constructive seque-away into terminating the discussion.
i've known sam virtually for 2-3 years (first on sci.environment) and
consistantly found him to be full of constructive suggestions such as this
one; also his expertise has been very useful as a consultant for us on a
citizen's caa (mostly) lawsuit. he is very open & up front with his
opinions and motivations, very fact driven, and a font of information. i
put his utility to dioxin-l right up there w/ professionals like alan &
alex (no ranking intended).
[as an aside, any moral flaws of gp's pvc/edc sampling did not involve the
w/holding of data, as is all too common in industry. that's a key point
for science-driven personalities!]
anyway, sampling is always a huge roadblock for enviros, and i'd encourage
enviros to go w/ his idea of a testing group. a private email list might
be a point to begin discussions.