by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics

Advertisement

Post

Region: Refugia

wrote:Further observing that this overreach ignores member nations who use private companies to survey environments, which results in member nations being forced to create agencies they will not use, meaning that the bureaucracy is even more pointless

GAR#520 5(b) reads (emphasis mine) "establish, if such does not already exist, a state agency or similar organization with the responsibility of inspecting and regulating SWLs in accordance with this resolution and reviewing complaints regarding the operation of particular SWLs," so I'm not sold on this point. This is the subject of a legality challenge from Wallenburg right now, but even if it stands it's not a convincing interpretation.

wrote:Concerned that the poor definition of SWL includes locations such as scrap metal yards, which pose little to no significant harm to public health or the surrounding environment, resulting in harsh mandates being placed on these ‘landfills’ that could cost exorbitant amounts of money;

Wallenburg is also challenging the repeal on the grounds that this is inaccurate, as scrap metal yards are short term storage while GAR#520 defines SWLs as being long term storage facilities.

wrote:Dismayed that systems for the collection and removal of leachate are mandated regardless of the potential danger the leachate causes to public health or to the environment, yet another excessively broad mandate

GAR#520 4(b) reads (emphasis mine) "include effective systems for the collection and removal of leachate for treatment and environmentally safe disposal," which seems to be a similar misunderstanding on the repeal author's part. This is not currently in the legality challenge but probably should be.

ContextReport