3 ms·
> “In North Dakota we do not regulate based on volume,” Suess added. “Whether we put a 10 there, a 100 there, a 1,000 there is not going to change our response
by hirundo 7y ago
> “In North Dakota we do not regulate based on volume,” Suess added. “Whether we put a 10 there, a 100 there, a 1,000 there is not going to change our response to the spill, it is not going to change what the responsible party has to do, not going to change their remediation, it is not going to change anything other than your curiosity.”
That's a very self serving opinion Mr. Suess, since if word gets out that _millions_ of gallons were spilled under your agency's watch, yet reported as 10 gallons, that will create a lot of political pressure to change more than curiosity. That difference is a little more than "nothing to see here, move along".
- daniel-cussen 7y agoYeah I wonder if that works the other way too. Suppose instead of 10, it's 1 gallon, or less. Same response?
- munk-a 7y agoOfficially underlisting the volume, even if the state privately responds in an appropriate manner[1], ends up being misleading to the public and downplaying the environmental damage that's on-going. During the Keystone protests it was often repeated how small most spills are - now I'm curious if these small spills are just being under-reported. 1. Which I have extreme doubts about, but I'll just ignore that for a moment.