Post
of 14,019
The fact is your representation of the denial conflicts with the actual denial factors as stipulated by RIDEM.
The issues you asked to be pointed out can be summarized in the public hearing concerns - link below to the comments. My opinion is the public hearing comments were the primary reasons factored in the denial.
As stated previously, I feel snpw could have and should have put forth a program educating and promoting this program. Think about it - what community wants medical waste transported into their city from local regions, on their roads, to be processed on a debatable technology, run by a company that had no prior experience in this space etc. Oh, and all during a pandemic.
Here is the link on the public hearing comments. Mitigating concerns, in my opinion, should have been taken by snpw way prior to any public hearing.
https://dem.ri.gov/sites/g/files/xkgbur861/fi...t-0321.pdf
https://dem.ri.gov/sites/g/files/xkgbur861/fi...071321.pdf
The issues you asked to be pointed out can be summarized in the public hearing concerns - link below to the comments. My opinion is the public hearing comments were the primary reasons factored in the denial.
As stated previously, I feel snpw could have and should have put forth a program educating and promoting this program. Think about it - what community wants medical waste transported into their city from local regions, on their roads, to be processed on a debatable technology, run by a company that had no prior experience in this space etc. Oh, and all during a pandemic.
Here is the link on the public hearing comments. Mitigating concerns, in my opinion, should have been taken by snpw way prior to any public hearing.
https://dem.ri.gov/sites/g/files/xkgbur861/fi...t-0321.pdf
https://dem.ri.gov/sites/g/files/xkgbur861/fi...071321.pdf