Where you draw the line isn't an exact science , said Jim Hahnenberg
, an EPA scientist who helped write the plan.Hahnenberg
said regulators struggled with balancing cleanup costs against the PCB reduction gained by ever-tougher standards.
We thought the big drop seemed to be at the 1.0 ppm level , he
The DNR's Paulson agreed that a good case can be made for the 1.0 part per million standard.
Where does it stop making sense to go after ... more dilute material?.
And there's another reason why Hahnenberg
believes the 1.0 part per million standard made the most sense.
We wanted to pick a number that we believed we could , if need be , defend in a court of law , he
Discuss this topic in our forums
Back to TopEmail this page to a friend