Exceed the standard discharge only fined 603 yuan, in the end is not condoned-gamelink

Excessive emissions only fined 603 yuan, in the end is not condoned? Original title: excessive emissions only fined 603 yuan, in the end is not condoned? If the local environmental protection department vivid discussions since that punishment in strict accordance with the law, so please make public "system on the basis of 603 yuan punishment, and open the local environmental administrative penalty discretion discretion standard, after all, this has caused widespread concern of public opinion. 26, the new network reporter was informed that the Jiangsu provincial Environmental Protection Office announced to the public in the second half of 2015 the province’s 4 cases of environmental violations investigated. Among them, Yangzhou Guangming Chemical Plant in Gaoyou was sentenced to 603 yuan fine because of excessive discharge of wastewater. The result of the punishment immediately attracted public attention. This news has three problems worthy of our attention, first, the Gaoyou fishery supervision brigade had to light chemical plant in the soil samples after sampling, and sent to the Jiangsu Provincial Center of physical testing and chemical testing, chemical plant samples showed through the detection of the indicators do not exceed the standard. However, the environmental protection department of Yangzhou has found that there are such problems as the excessive pH value of the waste water in Guangming Chemical plant. Why are these two tests different? Second, the penalty of "603 yuan" is puzzling. As we all know, the new environmental law implemented in January 1st last year is called "the most stringent in history". The environmental protection department found that the enterprise has exceed the standard discharge of waste water, the annual output of 800 tons more than without the EIA not approval of relevant environmental procedures, hazardous waste extended storage problems. There are so many problems, but only fined 603 yuan, how to serve the public? Third, local farmers 70 acres of fish ponds due to pollution near the chemical plant, the emergence of a large number of malformed fish, will inevitably cause some economic losses, but does not seem to get compensation for farmers. Since the local environmental protection department has finally identified the problem of excessive discharge of wastewater from the Guangming Chemical Plant, this may indicate that the deformed fish is related to the enterprise. Generally speaking, it is necessary to make reasonable compensation for the loss of the farmers, but it has not been seen in the reports. Obviously, only in strict accordance with the penalties for environmental violations of the enterprise, and make the enterprise should bear the compensation, in order to play the purpose of punishment; otherwise, is a kind of connivance. Judging from today’s price level, the "603 yuan" penalty is not different from no punishment. And the cost of illegal enterprises is low, also means that illegal income is high, enterprises will not care about pollution problems, and will not put the new environmental law in the eyes. May the local environmental protection departments, "603 yuan" the results of this punishment is made strictly according to law discretion — because they do not meet the daily penalty situation, and cooperate with the investigation of the attitude, so less fines. But in my opinion, if the local environmental protection department since that punishment in strict accordance with the law, so please make public "system on the basis of 603 yuan punishment, and open the local environmental administrative penalty discretion discretion standard, after all, this has caused widespread concern of public opinion, and even become a touchstone to test new environmental law. Unfortunately, I did not find the discretion standard of Yangzhou city environmental administrative penalty discretion, also in the local environmental protection bureau official website is not found 4

超标排放仅罚603元,到底是不是纵容?   原标题:超标排放仅罚603元,到底是不是纵容?   议论风生   如果当地环保部门自认为严格依法处罚,那么请尽快公开做出“603元”处罚的制度依据,并公开当地的环境行政处罚自由裁量权裁量标准,毕竟此事已经引发舆论的广泛关注。   26日,中新网记者获悉,江苏省环保厅向社会公布了2015年下半年该省的4起环境违法案件查处情况。其中,扬州高邮市光明化工厂因超标排放废水,被处以603元的罚款。这一处罚结果立即引起舆论关注。   这条新闻有三个问题值得我们关注,其一,高邮渔政监督大队曾对光明化工厂内的水土样本进行过取样,并送交江苏省理化测试中心进行检测,显示化工厂样本经检测各项指标均不超标。然而,扬州环保部门却检查发现,光明化工厂存在排放废水pH值超标等问题。这两种检测结果究竟为何不同?   其二,“603元”这一处罚结果令人费解。众所周知,去年1月1日实施的新环保法被称为“史上最严”,提出对环境违法行为按日计罚、上不封顶。环保部门发现,该企业存在超标排放废水、擅自超过环评年产量800吨未报批相关环保手续、危险废物超期贮存等问题。存在这么多问题却只罚603元,何以服众?   其三,当地养殖户的70亩鱼塘疑因附近化工厂污染,出现了大量的畸形鱼,必然造成一定经济损失,但养殖户似乎未得到赔偿。既然当地环保部门最终认定光明化工厂存在超标排放废水问题,这或许说明畸形鱼与该企业有关。按理说,应该对养殖户的损失进行合理赔偿,但从报道中却没有看到。   显然,只有严格依法处罚环境违法企业,并让该企业承担应有的赔偿,才能起到惩戒目的;否则,就是一种变相纵容。以今天的物价水平来看,“603元”罚款额与无处罚没有多少区别。而且企业违法成本低,也意味着违法收益高,企业更不会在意污染问题,也不会把新环保法放在眼里。   可能当地环保部门认为,“603元”这一处罚结果是严格依法做出的裁量――由于不符合按日计罚的情形,且配合调查的态度好,所以罚款额比较少。但在笔者看来,如果当地环保部门自认为严格依法处罚,那么请尽快公开做出“603元”处罚的制度依据,并公开当地的环境行政处罚自由裁量权裁量标准,毕竟此事已经引发舆论的广泛关注,甚至成为一块检验新环境法的试金石。   遗憾的是,笔者并没有检索到扬州市环境行政处罚自由裁量权的裁量标准,也在当地环保局官网上没有找到相关处罚标准。而根据《江苏省环境保护条例》规定,对违反有关规定,造成环境污染事故的企业事业单位,可根据所造成的危害后果处以罚款。试问,“603元”与危害后果相适应吗?   既然处罚金额“603元”让人难以理解,那么当地环保部门有必要对此处罚结果做出详细解释。如果处罚不到位,应该重新裁量;如果处罚合情合理,也可打消公众疑虑。但是,却不能视舆情而不见。   □冯海宁(职员) 责任编辑:黄睿 SN224相关的主题文章: