Abatement fraud in NYC

How good is your data?  Spending countless hours as a chemistry major at university, and then working as a chemist for many year, good documentation practices have been driven into my subconscious.  But that only applies to me generating data.  I am confident of the quality of the data in my lab notebook:  after all, it's mine.

What about the lead analysis I did at my internship?  I'm sure about how the samples were collected.  But what about the lab reports?  Are the numbers even real?  Well, I'm forced to assume they are.  I got the numbers directly from the laboratory.

What about the mercury sampling I had done at my last house?  I watched them do the sampling.  But what about the results?

How do I know they weren't lying?

I haven't given much though to what I, as an ordinary person, would do in the situation of needing environmental testing.  The people I purchased that house from had done lead testing.  What would I do?  Just call an 'inspector'?  How does a person verify their honesty/quality, beyond calling to verify the license is current?

This fellow, creating a ruckus in New York City, demonstrates both the fractured nature of public offices as well as the consequences of underfunding government agencies.  The result?  Moaning and wringing hands over the inability of the state to control this, then crying that too many agencies aren't working together.  Is anyone going to sit down, ask "so how can we do this better?" and then change something? change anything?

.

justice? Or just ...

While looking for a case indicating the liability specifically of the individual owner/operator, rather than the corporate entity, I thought "Grace!" I couldn't find the final court decision, only some motions regarding evidentiary matters. The media, however, carried it. They don't cite case numbers, unfortunately. One of the respondents was quoted saying something along the lines of "it's regretable that anyone was injured, but that's not what this case was about." What did he think it was about? Or was he just weasel-wording it to separate public health from environmental contamination? The U.S. lost its case. I'd really like to read the opinions to see what the justification was, for morbid curiosity, if nothing else. Especially, given that quotation, to see which law was cited as being violated.

Libby, part 2

earlier in the saga, the EPA posted Q&A about the earlier suit: Q : Can Grace sue me to recover money it is required to pay EPA for cleanup of my property?

A : Yes. Grace has the right to sue you, but the court must first decide to what extent you may be held responsible. EPA provided No Action Assurances to owners of residential and business properties in Libby. These assurances indicate that EPA will not seek the cost of cleanup from you. The No Action Assurance will tell the court that EPA does not believe you should be held responsible for those costs.

So, the EPA won't screw you out of money to pay for this??? What in god's name do they think funds the EPA? My taxes. Oh, okay - so EPA won't see restitution from the residents - they get it from me! Grace being able to sue a homeowner to recoup money they need to spend to cover their illegal/unethical activities which caused the homeowner to get asbestosis(read: lung cancer)? How much more obscene can you get?

Libby, part 1

Well, a bit delayed with posting ... From February... W.R. Grace was back in the news with a new lawsuit. This is the owner of the vermiculite mine in Libby, Montana. The stupendous point of this is that the defendants in the suit are the Grace executives, not the company. This is the first time the EPA has tried this. They - unlike OSHA - are allowed to directly bring suit against individuals. Actually, I’m not sure OSHA is even allowed to sue anyone, just implement fines. I’m sure the rest of the legal community is waiting with baited breath (assuming we don’t have asbestosis, of course). The company did ban smoking at the mine in 1978 — smoking compounds the dangers of asbestos, doctors say — and also issued respirator masks to workers. But showers that the miners could have used at the end of their shifts before heading home were ruled out, because they might have overly worried people. In the largest judgment after trial (in 2003) in the history of the federal Superfund law, the Justice Department and the Environmental Protection Agency announced that the District Court of Montana has ordered W.R. Grace & Co. to pay over $54.5 million to reimburse the federal government for the costs of investigation and cleanup of asbestos contamination in Libby, Montana. There is asbestos all over the entire town. Usually asbestos abatement brings an image of workers in Tyvek suits & respirators working behind plastic sheeting. This abatement is somehow supposed to be the entire city of Libby.