Premium
Linking incineration to dioxins and furans in lakebed sediments (or, the case of the missing water license condition)
Author(s) -
Wilson Anne,
Fox Dave,
Poole Gary,
Bujold Ron
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
integrated environmental assessment and management
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.665
H-Index - 57
eISSN - 1551-3793
pISSN - 1551-3777
DOI - 10.1002/ieam.170
Subject(s) - license , citation , archaeology , geology , library science , history , law , political science , computer science
on how closely the observed environmental change approaches a significance threshold. Environmental measurements that reach the threshold would constitute a significant adverse effect, while measurements below the threshold would not, even if they were not predicted in the EA. If significance is not explicitly defined during the EA, the Response Framework would be the vehicle for setting significance thresholds during the regulatory phase of a project. The Framework envisions the proponent recommending significance thresholds based on project-specific details, including information from the EA. The WLWB would then seek stakeholder input on the proposed thresholds before a Response Framework document is approved. Setting the significance threshold, during either the EA or the regulatory phase of a project, can be a difficult process. For example, many stakeholders are reluctant to define a limit of acceptable change because they fear that it will become a ‘‘pollute up to’’ limit or an excuse not to take any mitigative action until the limit is reached. The Response Framework would require, however, that action be taken well below the significance threshold and thus maintain the intent of pollution prevention. Furthermore, although it will be challenging to predefine significance thresholds (and associated action levels) for a project, the alternative is having the debate only after some environmental changes or effects have already been measured. In the latter case, unnecessary delays in implementing appropriate management response actions may occur, hindering our ability to minimize project-related effects in a timely and effective way. Finally, although the WLWB already has the ability to assess monitoring results on an on-going basis and decide what action to take, the establishment of a Response Framework— with a well-defined significance threshold and action levels— makes the process more transparent and consistent for all parties. [Note that the guidelines are in draft form and have not been approved by the WLWB. Please contact K. Racher racherk@wlwb.ca if you wish to receive a copy].