EPA Expands Power

[greybeard]

Regarding the agencies, their powers are extended to them via legislation. There are checks and balances in the system that is intended to oversee abuse of their powers. IMO, the abuse of power occurs but is often exaggerated............I stated the case is interesting and perhaps valid, I am only reserving personal judgement until I know the facts of the case. That is not a very high bar to set.

Whose 'facts' Ron--yours, mine, Jo's or the EPA's? Checks and balance against abuse that is often overstated? That's laughable.
EPA is notorious for double standards. I can only imagine the fine/jail time I wold get if I send 3 million gallons of toxic waste into the East Fork of the San Jacinto River or into/across one of it's "tributaries".

EPA and DoJ 'declined to charge one of it's own employees for doing exactly that on a Colorado river last year.

The EPA's Office of Inspector General said it presented "facts" to the U.S. Attorney's Office in Denver that the employee may have violated the federal Clean Water Act, and provided false statements to investigators over the discharge from the 2015 disaster.

"On October 6, 2016, the (U.S. Attorney's Office) declined to prosecute the EPA employee," the Inspector General's statement said.

Instead, the inspector general's office said, it will submit its findings to EPA's senior management for their review. The agency is required to report back on any administrative action it may take against the employee.

Well whoopee crap--administrative action. Who did NOT see this coming? Govt agencies and their employees and lackeys policing/protecting their own, much as we see here in this thread.
Oct 12, 2016:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-color ... SKCN12D06Y

Captioned:Yellow mine waste water from the Gold King Mine is seen in San Juan County, Colorado, in this picture released by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) taken August 7, 2015. REUTERS/EPA/Handout

 

[Margonme]

Regarding the agencies, their powers are extended to them via legislation. There are checks and balances in the system that is intended to oversee abuse of their powers. IMO, the abuse of power occurs but is often exaggerated............I stated the case is interesting and perhaps valid, I am only reserving personal judgement until I know the facts of the case. That is not a very high bar to set.

Whose 'facts' Ron--yours, mine, Jo's or the EPA's? Checks and balance against abuse that is often overstated? That's laughable.
EPA is notorious for double standards. I can only imagine the fine/jail time I wold get if I send 3 million gallons of toxic waste into the East Fork of the San Jacinto River or into/across one of it's "tributaries".

EPA and DoJ 'declined to charge one of it's own employees for doing exactly that on a Colorado river last year.

The EPA's Office of Inspector General said it presented "facts" to the U.S. Attorney's Office in Denver that the employee may have violated the federal Clean Water Act, and provided false statements to investigators over the discharge from the 2015 disaster.

"On October 6, 2016, the (U.S. Attorney's Office) declined to prosecute the EPA employee," the Inspector General's statement said.

Instead, the inspector general's office said, it will submit its findings to EPA's senior management for their review. The agency is required to report back on any administrative action it may take against the employee.

Well whoopee crap--administrative action. Who did NOT see this coming? Govt agencies and their employees and lackeys policing/protecting their own, much as qwe see here in this thread.
Oct 12, 2016:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-color ... SKCN12D06Y

I don't mean anyone's personal facts. What I mean is case history facts. I guess it goes back to my duties as an enforcement specialist.

If I was given a case like this to manage, I would want to know the circumstances of each inspection. What documents were served. How the operator responded to the documents. Did he refuse service? Did he willfully and knowingly ignore corrective action? Did he file for judiciary relief or did he assume the whole thing was not his problem. Those are case history facts.

I am not being disagreeable to irritate anyone. My only point is that maybe not in this case but in my experience Tabloids rarely present a balanced report.


Edited to add: I acknowledge there are cases of bad enforcement. There are bad enforcers. The EPA deserves criticism in many cases but I need to understand those cases before I jump on the band wagon.

Having said that, there are also cases where propaganda and exaggeration are employed to smear agencies. I have been there, done that.

 

[Anonymous]

Margonme, $75000 in fines per day seems to be an "exaggeration" to me even if he was doing something wrong. He owned the property did he not? I didn't hear where the pond affected anyone around him. IF it did, there are courts for that. The only "propaganda" seems to be coming from the agencies you appear to defend. I'm sure you still have connections so why not check out the story, investigate and then get back to us. Enlighten on why his pond was so detrimental to the environment and why the EPA was after this guy.

 

[Margonme]

Margonme, $75000 in fines per day seems to be an "exaggeration" to me even if he was doing something wrong. He owned the property did he not? I didn't hear where the pond affected anyone around him. IF it did, there are courts for that. The only "propaganda" seems to be coming from the agencies you appear to defend. I'm sure you still have connections so why not check out the story, investigate and then get back to us. Enlighten on why his pond was so detrimental to the environment and why the EPA was after this guy.

The formula for penalties are based on factors such as the following:
1. Significant imminent danger to life and property
2. Willful and knowing violation
3. Repeat offenses
4. Belligerent and uncooperative attitude.
5. Failure to take any corrective measures.
6. Other circumstances for which a higher penalty may provide an incentive for taking corrective measures.

If that penalty is correct, I say if because penalties are often misreported, then the owner/operator has demonstrated that he is uncooperative.

Regarding defending the EPA. Why would I care? I was employed by them and worked because I received a salary to perform that work. I was not in a state of EPA worship while I worked for them and I am not in a state of EPA worship as an ex-EPA employee. You can believe what ever suits you, it is a free society, but my purpose in this thread is to inject fairness. I have seen the knife cut both ways. This case may be a miscarriage of justice.

 

[Anonymous]

1. Significant imminent danger to life and property
2. Willful and knowing violation
3. Repeat offenses
4. Belligerent and uncooperative attitude.
5. Failure to take any corrective measures.
6. Other circumstances for which a higher penalty may provide an incentive for taking corrective measures.
Number 1 is just laughable.....for a pond!! For 2 through 6, Read James Madison's ideas for dealing with too much Federal Power in Federalist #46. (refusal to cooperate with officers of the union). "This case may be a miscarriage of justice." At least you acknowledge the possibility.

 

[hurleyjd]

Why was the Gold King mine allowed to store this nasty water in the abandoned mine and leave it for the government to clean up which the government was trying to do when the accident happened.

 

[greybeard]

Dunno--I wasn't around in 1923 when it was abandoned.

Why did the EPA fail to follow proper protocol and why did the supervisor lie about the risk?

The EPA had considered drilling into the mine from above in order to measure the water level directly before beginning excavation at the entrance, as was done at nearby mines in 2011. Had they done so, they would have discovered the true water level, and changed their plan; the disaster would not have occurred.[15]:2 Operating mines have been required to perform such measurement of water level since a fatal mine flood in 1911.

On February 11, 2016, the Denver Post reported that Hays Griswold, the EPA employee in charge of the Gold King mine, wrote in an e-mail to other EPA officials "that he personally knew the blockage "could be holding back a lot of water and I believe the others in the group knew as well.""[17] The Post added: "Griswold's e-mail appears directly to contradict those findings and statements he made to The Denver Post in the days after the disaster, when he claimed "nobody expected (the acid water backed up in the mine) to be that high." "[18]

You can read the deposition of Gold King Mine/San Juan Corp owner Todd Hennis to US House of Representatives at
https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/ ... is.1.1.pdf
Of interest:

Consequently, San Juan Corp. filed a lawsuit in San Juan District Court alleging water trespass by
Sunnyside into the Mogul property. My attorney asked me to contact the EPA and ask them to join this
lawsuit. I telephoned Ms. Carole Russell of EPA Region 8 to ask the EPA to join the lawsuit and avert
further environmental damage. Ms. Russell informed me that EPA would not consider joining the lawsuit
under any circumstances. I told Ms. Russell that I would send a letter to her requesting EPA join the
lawsuit. Ms. Russell told me explicitly "if you send that letter, I will make you truly sorry." In the face of
this threat, I obviously did not dare send the letter
To protect and to serve?

And you can ask the EPA the same question, since they were the legal operator of the Gold king Mine.
On May 12, 2011 the EPA issued "Administrative Order Directing Compliance with Request for Access,
CERCLA Docket No.: CERCLA-08-2011-0008" against Todd C. Hennis, San Juan Corp., and Salem
Minerals Inc. The Order called for fines up to $37,500 per day as long as I refused them access.
I had to surrender and grant access to the properties to the EPA, together with EPA taking environmental
and operational management of the sites. The Access Agreement has been renewed at least twice and
expires December 2015. I now have approximately ten settling ponds created by the EPA over three
locations on my lands, with unknown environmental consequences.
It was the burrowrats (aka EPA) that was storing the water in that mine and other mines.

 

[Margonme]

1. Significant imminent danger to life and property
2. Willful and knowing violation
3. Repeat offenses
4. Belligerent and uncooperative attitude.
5. Failure to take any corrective measures.
6. Other circumstances for which a higher penalty may provide an incentive for taking corrective measures.
Number 1 is just laughable.....for a pond!! For 2 through 6, Read James Madison's ideas for dealing with too much Federal Power in Federalist #46. (refusal to cooperate with officers of the union). "This case may be a miscarriage of justice." At least you acknowledge the possibility.

zirlottkim: Number 1 is just laughable.....for a pond!!

For any pond or for the subject Fort Bridger Pond? The information on penalties was provided to explain the penalty process. That list is generic and all those items that affect the penalty may not apply to the Fort Bridger Pond. I do not have the case file for the enforcement action on the Fort Bridger pond so I cannot address what contributed to the $75,000 per day fine. Some ponds can pose greater risk than others. Depends on the contamination and the risk of a discharge.

When penalties are assessed on a per day basis, it is usually due to an owner/operator failing to act on a required corrective action. The concept being that the owner/operator will act with more urgency to stop the the daily accumulation of penalty.

Read James Madison's ideas for dealing with too much Federal Power in Federalist #46. Thanks. I will keep that thought in mind

 

[Margonme]

Dunno--I wasn't around in 1923 when it was abandoned.

Why did the EPA fail to follow proper protocol and why did the supervisor lie about the risk?

The EPA had considered drilling into the mine from above in order to measure the water level directly before beginning excavation at the entrance, as was done at nearby mines in 2011. Had they done so, they would have discovered the true water level, and changed their plan; the disaster would not have occurred.[15]:2 Operating mines have been required to perform such measurement of water level since a fatal mine flood in 1911.

On February 11, 2016, the Denver Post reported that Hays Griswold, the EPA employee in charge of the Gold King mine, wrote in an e-mail to other EPA officials "that he personally knew the blockage "could be holding back a lot of water and I believe the others in the group knew as well.""[17] The Post added: "Griswold's e-mail appears directly to contradict those findings and statements he made to The Denver Post in the days after the disaster, when he claimed "nobody expected (the acid water backed up in the mine) to be that high." "[18]

You can read the deposition of Gold King Mine/San Juan Corp owner Todd Hennis to US House of Representatives at
https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/ ... is.1.1.pdf
Of interest:

Consequently, San Juan Corp. filed a lawsuit in San Juan District Court alleging water trespass by
Sunnyside into the Mogul property. My attorney asked me to contact the EPA and ask them to join this
lawsuit. I telephoned Ms. Carole Russell of EPA Region 8 to ask the EPA to join the lawsuit and avert
further environmental damage. Ms. Russell informed me that EPA would not consider joining the lawsuit
under any circumstances. I told Ms. Russell that I would send a letter to her requesting EPA join the
lawsuit. Ms. Russell told me explicitly "if you send that letter, I will make you truly sorry." In the face of
this threat, I obviously did not dare send the letter
To protect and to serve?

And you can ask the EPA the same question, since they were the legal operator of the Gold king Mine.
On May 12, 2011 the EPA issued "Administrative Order Directing Compliance with Request for Access,
CERCLA Docket No.: CERCLA-08-2011-0008" against Todd C. Hennis, San Juan Corp., and Salem
Minerals Inc. The Order called for fines up to $37,500 per day as long as I refused them access.
I had to surrender and grant access to the properties to the EPA, together with EPA taking environmental
and operational management of the sites. The Access Agreement has been renewed at least twice and
expires December 2015. I now have approximately ten settling ponds created by the EPA over three
locations on my lands, with unknown environmental consequences.
It was the burrowrats (aka EPA) that was storing the water in that mine and other mines.

I know Hays Griswold. I imagine he is retired. He might have been 2 to 4 years younger.

Edited to add: Perspective - Federal civil servants are held to high standards. Nevertheless, professional mistakes are made. Greybeard: you hold our men in armed services in high regard but consider the atrocities committed in our history by military personnel. Many of those atrocities taking innocent lives. Some of those atrocities were misjudgements, some perhaps deliberate. The point is, humans fail.

I have talked to some of my previous workmates and Gold King was mentioned only in passing. I don't have a compelling reason to explore the subject. I made mistakes/misjudgements in performance of my duties with EPA and The Office of Surface Mining. None of this magnitude. It did cause me to purchase professional liability insurance.

 

[greybeard]

Edited to add: Perspective - Federal civil servants are held to high standards. Nevertheless, professional mistakes are made. Greybeard: you hold our men in armed services in high regard but consider the atrocities committed in our history by military personnel. Many of those atrocities taking innocent lives. Some of those atrocities were misjudgements, some perhaps deliberate. The point is, humans fail.

I have talked to some of my previous workmates and Gold King was mentioned only in passing. I don't have a compelling reason to explore the subject. I made mistakes/misjudgements in performance of my duties with EPA and The Office of Surface Mining. None of this magnitude. It did cause me to purchase professional liability insurance.

I do hold the military in high regard and to even a higher responsibility and standard. Things like what happened in Colorado can get you a court martial in the military or at the least, non-judicial punishment under UCMJ, & I had to 'write up' several Sailors and Marines in the nearly 10 years I was on active duty and testified against them--some were folks I worked with every day or worked for me.

I wrote an e-3 engineman up for deriliction of duty, hazarding a naval vessel, and failure to follow lawful order after he took a centrifugal pump packing gland off an IR suppression pump without first isolating the pump from a 8" main fire loop that stays charged 24/7. Flooded the port engine room at 1200 gpm salt water and we had to pull out of task force formation with the squadron commodore riding on our vessel. He was doing routine maintenance on inspecting the pump packing, and I reminded him to close the valves and told him where they were when I assigned him the task. The precise instructions were on the preventative maintenance card I handed him as well. He got reduction in rank to e-1, 6 months in brig and forfeiture of pay for 6 months. To this day, I don't know why he failed to close the valves. He had no explanation ofr it tho he did admit he failed to do so.
He was a good kid, very good Sailor otherwise, but mistakes cost people lives and loss of taxpayer dollars and punishment bears that out.
You can read EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy's congressional sub-committee testimony at the link below (152 pgs) , if you can stand to read all the double talk, question hedging, deflections, and outright lies she spewed.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-114h ... g96242.pdf

 

[Margonme]

GB stated: You can read EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy's congressional sub-committee testimony at the link below (152 pgs) , if you can stand to read all the double talk, question hedging, deflections, and outright lies she spewed.

Thanks GB.

I might read that. Just kidding.

Appreciate your dialog.

PS: The news media, the political parties, the special interest groups and the general populace now conduct dialog in a contest to see who can use the most extreme rhetoric and exaggeration. Seems we live in the age of "Tabloid Dialog". Not directed at this thread. It plagues our American society. Everyone is competing to see who can employ the most rhetoric.

 

[True Grit Farms]

The problem is that the adverage person doesn't have the resources to fight the EPA. And the majority of time the scumbags will file civil charges against you. Which in a civil trial a judge who's employer is a scumbag hears the case, and the DA only needs to prove reasonable guilt. And anyone with any common sense knows what the outcome will be.
The government is crooked and controlled by special interest.

 

[Margonme]

The problem is that the adverage person doesn't have the resources to fight the EPA. And the majority of time the scumbags will file civil charges against you. Which in a civil trial a judge who's employer is a scumbag hears the case, and the DA only needs to prove reasonable guilt. And anyone with any common sense knows what the outcome will be.
The government is crooked and controlled by special interest.

Grit: can you document that civil judicial charges are filed most of the time? Federal regulatory violations are handled by Civil Administrative Law as standard procedure. These are civil administrative actions and are non-judicial procedures. If an action goes to court, then it was filed as a civil judicial charge. The Enforcement process begins and usually ends with a notice of violation. Most companies and individuals comply. Only if you refuse to comply would it involve a court action.

Edited to add: Start here my Tabloid friend.

Administrative law is the body of law that governs the activities of administrative agencies of government. Government agency action can include rulemaking, adjudication, or the enforcement of a specific regulatory agenda. Administrative law is considered a branch of public law. As a body of law, administrative law deals with the decision-making of administrative units of government (for example, tribunals, boards or commissions) that are part of a national regulatory scheme in such areas as police law, international trade, manufacturing, the environment, taxation, broadcasting, immigration and transport. Administrative law expanded greatly during the twentieth century, as legislative bodies worldwide created more government agencies to regulate the social, economic and political spheres of human interaction.

 

[True Grit Farms]

I know what they did to me is all I can go by. I assaulted a federal witness and got a criminal charge and jury trial for that. The EPA and NOAA filed civil charges and court was held in front of a federal judge.

 

[Margonme]

I know what they did to me is all I can go by. I assaulted a federal witness and got a criminal charge and jury trial for that. The EPA and NOAA filed civil charges and court was held in front of a federal judge.

Well... I think that explains it.

May not want to answer - for good reason- but how did it come about that you assaulted a federal witness. Rare to hear of a witness being assaulted, in fact, I haven't. Federal witnesses for EPA are usually experts in some academic profession such as a fluvial geomorphologist. Rarely are they in confrontation with the regulated party.

Edited to add: Grit the assault charge would not be pursuant to EPA administrative law. That would be handled no different than if you walked up to me on the street and assaulted me. In regard to the EPA and NOAA filing - that would have been a Civil Judicial Action. Judicial because you apparently were belligerent in your intentions to comply as evidenced by your assault of a federal witness.

My point above is that 95% (speculating, I don't know the exact number) of EPA enforcement actions are non-judicial and are not subject to court.

 

[TexasBred]

I know what they did to me is all I can go by. I assaulted a federal witness and got a criminal charge and jury trial for that. The EPA and NOAA filed civil charges and court was held in front of a federal judge.

Sounds like you got what you asked for and were accomodated well. Glad our courts are doing what we pay them to do. We are "constitutionalist you know".

 

[Anonymous]

QUOTED Margnome:"Administrative law is the body of law that governs the activities of administrative agencies of government. Government agency action can include rulemaking, adjudication, or the enforcement of a specific regulatory agenda. Administrative law is considered a branch of public law. As a body of law, administrative law deals with the decision-making of administrative units of government (for example, tribunals, boards or commissions) that are part of a national regulatory scheme in such areas as police law, international trade, manufacturing, the environment, taxation, broadcasting, immigration and transport. Administrative law expanded greatly during the twentieth century, as legislative bodies worldwide created more government agencies to regulate the social, economic and political spheres of human interaction. " Zirlottkim "Administrative law expanded greatly during the twentieth century" and look how corrupt an administer in current govt can be with no repercussions. Well maybe a few hearings and some verbal lashings by a few just to get their names on "tabloid news" but nothing else. Different set of rules for "administers maybe? Do as your told, not as "we" in govt does. All that means to me is more govt control & less LIBERTY.

 

[True Grit Farms]

I know what they did to me is all I can go by. I assaulted a federal witness and got a criminal charge and jury trial for that. The EPA and NOAA filed civil charges and court was held in front of a federal judge.

Sounds like you got what you asked for and were accomodated well. Glad our courts are doing what we pay them to do. We are "constitutionalist you know".

I paid my fines and served my time, and would do the same thing again at that age. But I still would of like to of been judged by my peers, instead of a government employee. I'll assure you this, if it ever happens again I'll never make it to court at this stage of my life.

 

[TexasBred]

I know what they did to me is all I can go by. I assaulted a federal witness and got a criminal charge and jury trial for that. The EPA and NOAA filed civil charges and court was held in front of a federal judge.

Sounds like you got what you asked for and were accomodated well. Glad our courts are doing what we pay them to do. We are "constitutionalist you know".

I paid my fines and served my time, and would do the same thing again at that age. But I still would of like to of been judged by my peers, instead of a government employee. I'll assure you this, if it ever happens again I'll never make it to court at this stage of my life.

Maybe they'll just pop you behind the ear. :shock: :shock:

 

[Margonme]

QUOTED Margnome:"Administrative law is the body of law that governs the activities of administrative agencies of government. Government agency action can include rulemaking, adjudication, or the enforcement of a specific regulatory agenda. Administrative law is considered a branch of public law. As a body of law, administrative law deals with the decision-making of administrative units of government (for example, tribunals, boards or commissions) that are part of a national regulatory scheme in such areas as police law, international trade, manufacturing, the environment, taxation, broadcasting, immigration and transport. Administrative law expanded greatly during the twentieth century, as legislative bodies worldwide created more government agencies to regulate the social, economic and political spheres of human interaction. " Zirlottkim "Administrative law expanded greatly during the twentieth century" and look how corrupt an administer in current govt can be with no repercussions. Well maybe a few hearings and some verbal lashings by a few just to get their names on "tabloid news" but nothing else. Different set of rules for "administers maybe? Do as your told, not as "we" in govt does. All that means to me is more govt control & less LIBERTY.

I appreciate and respect your philosophy on administrative law.

What would you propose to put in its place to protect society from the adverse practices that damage our country and our property? As an example, to prevent your neighbors from discharging harmful substances into a creek that your cows drink from.