Dear Editor It is a brilliant move by Fibervision to apply for an increase in the emission of particulate matter during these hard economic times.

The promise of a possibility of new jobs because "it is hard to say how many" and the maybe of an increase in demand as well as the long process of application and approval. Actually it is fairly simple for them as they can apply for a modification online, but I must mail a comment either pro or con.

The genius is in the timing when people are starved for work and even the elusive possibility, not assurance, brings some hope and with it the disregard, or at least the down playing of other factors that should override jobs. Overriding jobs with environmental considerations is a lose, lose situation for those looking at the big picture. The big picture? The big picture is about quality of life. It is about people with breathing issues, COPD etc. It is about a communtiy with a quarry (rock dust) on the one side and particulate emissions on the other. So Fibervision minimizes these considerations by applying now with the maybe of more jobs and the maybe of more business with only a 2 percent increase in emissions which means, if my math is correct, that they are emitting .02x=3 tons or 15,000 tons into the air of Covington, Oxford and environs.

So which is it to be? The promise of possibility and the most assured downgrade of air quality or cleaner air? The choice is ours.

James Windham
Oxford