Trending
The Feb. 3 Mirror article "Blair targeting hazmat scofflaws" seems to depict a situation reminiscent of the municipal governments decades ago that made pronouncements about their intent to crack down on those violating the municipalities' junk-vehicle ordinances.
The important point that most of those municipalities failed to address while revealing their intentions to crack down was why they hadn't enforced their ordinances all along, rather than having allowed junk vehicles to accumulate in yards, vacant lots, alleys and along streets -- and who knows where else.
If a municipality is not going to enforce a particular law on its books, that law should be repealed. The same is true for counties, the state and the federal government.
If Blair County emergency planners, however long ago, stopped being fully committed, or somehow were prevented from carrying out the responsibilities entrusted to them under Act 165, the 1990 Pennsylvania Hazardous Material Emergency Planning and Response Act, that fact should have been made known to someone with the power to deal with that situation.
Because that apparently did not happen, Blair County now finds itself trying to build seemingly from the ground up a database on who possesses what hazardous substances, and whether those possessing such substances are handling, using and storing them properly.
Then there are the whys and hows associated with the apparent deterioration of the county's compliance with the 1990 law, as well as why the state did not notice that something might be amiss here.
It seems that the proverbial ball was dropped in a big way in regard to Act 165 and that there might be plenty of avenues of blame to go around.
County residents should not fail to grasp the significance of the fact that the law in question is more than 30 years old. Could it really be that, say, 10, 20 or more years have been lost on the safety and environmental fronts here because compliance regarding the law was so lacking?
Ohio's major train derailment has delivered a sobering message about the seriousness, scope and potential consequences of the dangerous chemicals issue.
The Feb. 3 article talks about the county eying firms out of compliance with the hazardous-substance rules that require companies to report their storage or handling of hazardous chemicals.
It is a reporting goal that is in fact reasonable because of the terrible possibilities that could occur based on absence of the knowledge that the law aims to attain and maintain for the general public's and emergency responders' benefit.
What has happened needs to be fully identified, evaluated and fixed. Trouble is, local officials have yet to provide concrete assurance that they even have ascertained where to begin.
One good early step might be to follow a recommendation of an Altoona Fire Department official who suggested sending a letter to firms that previously were compliant but have stopped reporting.
Much work obviously lies ahead, if the county is going to get a solid grip about what is out there and in the hands of whom.
It is clear that the task ahead will not be of short-term duration, just like it wasn't for junk-vehicle-infested communities of the past that suddenly woke up to the problem.
The Blair Act 165 situation should be characterized as embarrassing for a county that does so many things expertly.