From George Vernon
Monroe
To the editor:
The Times' recent story more or less summarized the content of the groundwater study that was the subject of a March 30 County Board hearing, but left me with questions about some of the terms used in the study, and more importantly, its implications.
Specifically,
1. What is "recharge?" How does recharge relate to an area's susceptibility for contamination?
2. What, in plain English, is the bottom line of the study's findings with respect to the Pinnacle Dairy site? We are told that the "area had a fairly uniform flow" and soil types with "notable variability." What does that mean?
3. Assuming that this study was commissioned and paid for, at least in part, to shed light on the advisability of proceeding with permitting the Pinnacle site, what possible sense can one make of the statement of the County Board president that "There's no way we have the ability of enacting any ordinances from this."? Is this because the study gives the site a clean bill of health? Or because the study can only speak in probabilities? What more information does the County Board need to be in a position to "enact any ordinances" on this subject, and what steps is the Board planning to make to obtain that information?
Monroe
To the editor:
The Times' recent story more or less summarized the content of the groundwater study that was the subject of a March 30 County Board hearing, but left me with questions about some of the terms used in the study, and more importantly, its implications.
Specifically,
1. What is "recharge?" How does recharge relate to an area's susceptibility for contamination?
2. What, in plain English, is the bottom line of the study's findings with respect to the Pinnacle Dairy site? We are told that the "area had a fairly uniform flow" and soil types with "notable variability." What does that mean?
3. Assuming that this study was commissioned and paid for, at least in part, to shed light on the advisability of proceeding with permitting the Pinnacle site, what possible sense can one make of the statement of the County Board president that "There's no way we have the ability of enacting any ordinances from this."? Is this because the study gives the site a clean bill of health? Or because the study can only speak in probabilities? What more information does the County Board need to be in a position to "enact any ordinances" on this subject, and what steps is the Board planning to make to obtain that information?
