Letters to the Editor

Support for columnist’s argument holds inaccuracies, reader says

October 26, 2009 —

In response to Stuart Chipman’s Oct. 19 column titled “Selling Environmental Pollution Rights: The EPA’s Penalties Fail”

I feel that it is incumbent upon me to set the record straight regarding the startling level of inaccuracy concerning Valimet, Inc. in Mr. Chipman’s recent (10/19/2009) column “Selling Environmental Pollution Rights: The EPA’s Penalties Fail”.

Mr. Chipman’s comments concerning Valimet, Inc. are grossly inaccurate:

1). The violations alleged by the EPA involved the timely filing of reports on emissions from the Valimet facility. At no time was there ever an allegation against Valimet, Inc. of “massive toxic pollution” emissions. In point of fact, emissions of listed substances from the Valimet facility are extremely small and are a matter of public record.

2). Valimet, Inc. is a small business, with approximately three dozen employees, located in the central valley of California, some 80 miles from San Francisco. The figure of $50 million annual revenue given by Mr. Chipman, is again grossly inaccurate. The actual annual revenue figures for Valimet are a small fraction of Mr. Chipman’s $50 million fantasy and believe me, the $196,000.00 penalty assessed by EPA was extremely painful, and in our opinion was grossly inappropriate given the nature of the alleged violation.

3). We are especially distressed by Mr. Chipman’s inclusion of the Valimet facility and personnel with others who allegedly “dump dioxin into the river and give hundreds of people cancer” to get rich. By EPA’s own statements “Exposure to aluminum dust is usually not harmful.” There has never been, nor will there be in the future, any significant risk to the community or the environment from operations at the Valimet facility.

Valimet is now, and has been, for some time, in complete compliance with its obligations under EPA regulations.

David Oberholtzer
Director of Corporate Services
Valimet, Inc.