About the EPA...

[Jolly]

Get ready.

I talked to a friend of mine yesterday, who has been a Washington lobbyist for farm policy since the first Bush Administration. He told me that Obama is somewhat stymied in much of his agenda by the current make-up of congress, but that he has hinted some executive order changes are in store for the EPA.

Expect to see further restrictions on wetland usage, chemical usage and another back door run at lead usage.

[gibbsgirl]

The epa sucks. Just another federal agency dreamed up and launched into existence that has no right to exist constitutionally.

[rambler]

It is the job of government to regulate and oversee business, from the giants to the mom and pop.

Left to itself business tends to foul its own waters, just the nature of trading goods and services.....

But, EPA has gone over the cliff of sensible, reasonable.

And getting worser.

Paul

[arabian knight]

Some regulations are fine, but like you said they are now way out of their minds on many things.

[gibbsgirl]

Epa should not have a say in anything unless it is at the point it crosses a national border in my opinion.

All the other issues should fall under the jurisdiction of the individual states.

I realize resources and pollution crosses state lines. But, I see no reason why states should not have to work out those issues amongst each other.

[Cornhusker]

The EPA is the Gestapo of the Democratic party

[rambler]

Maybe this will slow them down.

Mess with a mans cooking, and we might get some action....

http://qpolitical.com/what-the-epa-j...-stand-for-it/

EPA thinks it will be good to put filters, fans, and such on BBQ grills.

Wonder of we will need to add DEF to them also?

Paul

[plowjockey]

Originally Posted by gibbsgirl

Epa should not have a say in anything unless it is at the point it crosses a national border in my opinion.

All the other issues should fall under the jurisdiction of the individual states.

I realize resources and pollution crosses state lines. But, I see no reason why states should not have to work out those issues amongst each other.

Careful what you wish for. This is not uncommon - at all, for State EPA's

Colorado generally follows the federal rules for defining hazardous wastes. The state's definition of what constitutes waste and hazardous waste in Colorado is stricter than the federal rules because the state has not adopted the waste exclusions for condensates derived from the overhead gases from kraft mill steam strippers and comparable fuels or comparable syngas fuels.

http://www.envcap.org/statetools/hzrl/hwr2001.cfm?st=CO

Also State EPA relationships can be "bought" much easier, as the Gov Scott Walker, Koch industries has shown.

It comes down to clean air/water vs money.

Walker And Prosser Crushed Regulations On Koch Industry’s Phosphorus Pollution In Wisconsin

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/201...ch-phosphorus/

[gibbsgirl]

I still think citizens have more access at th state level and therefore at least a better chance fighting it there than federally.

I also think that if states maintain their own agencies, then citizens will have somewhere else to go to pursue o her opportunities. I won't be the same thing everywhere with no hope of escape.

[mreynolds]

Yes one company I worked for once got a 33,000 dollar fine for dirt on the street. Just dirt mind you. The dirt was there because there was a bad storm and some of the storm prevention measures had collapsed.

The storm was hurricane Ike for crying out loud.

They appealed and won but that is just crazy. It was a first time offense too.

[gibbsgirl]

Originally Posted by mreynolds

Yes one company I worked for once got a 33,000 dollar fine for dirt on the street. Just dirt mind you. The dirt was there because there was a bad storm and some of the storm prevention measures had collapsed.

The storm was hurricane Ike for crying out loud.

They appealed and won but that is just crazy. It was a first time offense too.

And the losses of time, productivity, and money, and lost opportunities because of the charges likely cost them quite a lot. Kinda makes me cringe when people don't understand when you say defeating them and prevailing defending yoursel f is a rather anticlimactic feeling.

[mreynolds]

Originally Posted by gibbsgirl

And the losses of time, productivity, and money, and lost opportunities because of the charges likely cost them quite a lot. Kinda makes me cringe when people don't understand when you say defeating them and prevailing defending yoursel f is a rather anticlimactic feeling.

I went to a class once on the storm water prevention for construction. They told us there that they can fine you up to whatever they deem for simple dirt in the street. Its up to the individual agent. It holds the same principal as a hazmat spill. I have seen actual cases in that class for tickets of 180 thousand for dirt leaving that job site.

And you are right about the incidental charges. But guess what? They are passed on to the client. It is a line item for any commercial contract. It aint cheap either. All the measures that have to be taken during the process of a big job is costly. Plus you have to have someone everyday check everything and log it in the book. Fix it if need be or redo it. If a job last two years that is materials and labor added to that job.

Everyday

For dirt

OTOH now I work for a gas transport company doing his real estate projects. Once he got a 2000 gallon spill from an employee that was not on the ball and got charged $35,000. It got in a creek some too.


Hmmmm, dirt is worse than gasoline.......

These guys are just too smart for me I guess. I'll go back to raising tomatoes I guess and leave the smart stuff to the EPA.

[mnn2501]

While I am all for Clean air and water, the EPA is just another example of something that started out doing good, now has to justify its continued existence and growth by imposing more and more ridiculous regulations. Pretty much the same with many government agencies.

[arabian knight]

On WOTUS, EPA is taking the law into its own hands

THIS should put each and every homesteader on HIGH Alert!
Number of States Suing EPA Over WOTUS Rule Jumps to 27
http://www.proag.com/News/Number-of-...015-07-01/3554

On the tail end of a long holiday weekend after members of Congress had left Washington to return home to their districts, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Army Corps of Engineers announced the sweeping final “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS) rule, which defines which streams, rivers, ponds, wetlands, ditches, and waterways are subject to the regulations of the Clean Water Act. The rule massively broadens the scope of the agency's power.

The EPA's announcement came just weeks after a bipartisan coalition in the House passed the Regulatory Integrity Protection Act (H.R. 1732), which required the EPA to withdraw the rule. Numerous governors and state attorney generals also spoke out against the rule as well as agriculture organizations and trade associations.

http://thehill.com/opinion/op-ed/243...-its-own-hands