RUN, RUN, RUN - AROUND

This is a post for letting off steam-letting loose my frustration with toxic environmental sites and the people who have power over what happens (or doesn't happen) with clean up. I'm imagining a scenario where a concerned citizen asks a govt expert for information about a toxic site then seeks remediation.

I think the deal goes down from the viewpoint of the govt "expert" - kind of like this...

1. Site recognition/Citizen approaches the expert who asks himself: Is this really part of my job? Is this site actually in my area? Who else might be potentially liable for handling this time-consuming, upset person?
2. Concern but with with perspective: Your situation has already been addressed and most likely resolved. Don't worry. We've got everything under control. Note: Search for old or any records begins (and never ends)...leading to...
3. Go fetch: Here are a few agencies you could call for more information.
4. Harsh reality: The person responsible for this project has left and no director is currently available.
5. Hope!: A study by UT is in progress and results may be given to the public in twelve months. (Surely citizen won't persevere this long!)
6. Progress: Your polluter has really been working hard at partial, cost-effective clean up, but has done all he can. He's just all out of scientific answers and is out of here!
7. No progress: Yes, he has left most of these initial jobs undone, but they will be completed in the very near future.
8. Heartfelt assurance: Though the worst contamination remains, the site is essentially safe. It's been (wonderful news) re-classified!
9. Heartfelt promise: We will monitor the site-regularly.
10. Formal good-bye (typed on an Internet document): No further action will be taken.

And the polluter is thinking...
"Maybe I didn't really do what they say I did. It could have been a wood-working or dry-cleaners that dropped all this TCE back in 1938 and the land records are lost! The real polluter just disappeared! Facts, records - they don't really matter. It's all how facts are interpreted...and what they can prove I'm rich, I can buy my way out of this. Who owes me a favor? Who makes money off of me? Oh, if I have to clean up some of this mess, I'll make an effort-but spend as little as possible! Digging and dirt are pretty cheap, after all. Can I auction off this place? Could it become a luxury-lifestyle community or a DART station? A wildlife preserve or cemetery? I need a marketer-fast! Oh, no worries. All my cohorts agree my site is safe after all!"

Lastly, the resident on contaminated property asks: What is going on? I barely speak English and have no money to move. Are my children safe? Can they play outside? Can we plant flowers in the dirt? What happens if heavy rains and flood come? What will my neighborhood be like in a few years? Will I get cancer? No one ever gave me a chance to vote on chemicals and clean up and it's a very big deal. Do I have any rights in this situation?

And the observer who lives in a better neighborhood thinks: "This is how it's always been. The little guy finishes last-if he can even make it to the end. The powerful guy always wins-UNLESS all of us other guys really get sick of the situation and
change the way things always go down..."

Of course, there are always exceptions. You may know a polluter who performed clean up responsibly. Someone else may have lived in Highland Park and had TCE thoroughly
obliterated from under her mansion - at taxpayer expense. An outrageous thought! And that's just my point. Doing nothing about a TCE plume in a wealthy neighborhood just would not "fly"-clay or no clay. Soil gas level/home vapor level would really not be the determining factor in decision-making. Educated people would look at the the big picture and evaluate it using common sense guided by information that shows how dangerous even a low level of TCE really is. That "big picture" would also include future effects-long term safety and property value.
Why does a lower class neighborhood get "no further action"?