...Again, if we were to talk about a monitoring station that is not evaluated as a routine thing, we don't evaluate it as a routine thing, uh, as does the organization that specializes in monitoring, which focuses on monitoring. If this were something strange and unique. If it were something strange and unique. If this were set up under questionable circumstances. If only the circumstances in which they built this thing were dubious. And maybe some other reasons, and maybe all sorts of other reasons that could have been. I would want to visit the monitors. I would like to visit, to see these monitors there..... But that’s not the case here. But this is not the case before us (in detail, pp. 1610-1612).
- Liviki was asked whether she checked when the monitoring stations were calibrated, how they were calibrated and who calibrated them, and replied, among other things:
The witness, Dr. S. Livki: I generally reviewed the monitoring station methodology, including calibration, but. In general, I went through the methodology related to the monitoring and calibration station that was carried out there, but. I didn’t check each day of calibration, but I didn't check the calibration every single day.
:Q Don't you think that in order to give a proper opinion to our honorable judge, it is appropriate that. Check that the measurements were calibrated? Don’t you think that in order to give a worthy opinion to his honor, it would have been appropriate for you to check that the measurements are calibrated?
:A Right, so that’s what, what I did was I looked at the sampling program, generally looked at the calibration methodologies, but. Which I did to your question.
:Q She said Right. She started right but then she was.
A OK, that's right, what I did.
:Q True.
:A I looked at the sampling program and the calibration methodologies, but. I did not record each calibration day or each you know potential, uh, quality assurance check.
[....]