It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

EPA wants to ease toxic spill reporting

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 24 2005 @ 08:46 PM
link   



EPA wants to ease toxic spill reporting

Wednesday, September 21, 2005

By JOHN HEILPRIN
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER

WASHINGTON -- The government wants to quit forcing companies to report small releases of toxic pollutants and allow them to submit reports on their pollution less frequently.

Saying it wants to ease its regulatory burden on companies, the Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday proposed adopting a "short form" that would excuse companies from disclosing spills and other releases of toxic substances if:

-They claim to release fewer than 5,000 pounds of a specific chemical. The current limit is 500 pounds.

-They store onsite but claim to release "zero" amounts of the worst pollutants, such as mercury, DDT and PCBs, that persist in the environment and work up the food chain. However, they must report if they have stored dioxin or dioxin-like compounds, even if none is released.

EPA said it also plans to ask Congress for permission to require the accounting every other year instead of annually. The EPA's annual Toxics Release Inventory began under a 1986 community right-to-know law. The first year the change could be possible, if Congress agreed, would be 2008.

more...



Give me a break! This is just insane. 5000 lbs sound reasonable to anyone? Who watches to see I haven't spilled 4999 lbs a hundred times this year?

What a crock! HEY, EPA, ISN'T THAT YOUR JOB!!!




posted on Sep, 25 2005 @ 12:17 PM
link   
Just what would one do about a 2 year old liquid chemical spill? Oh yes... cheap concrete cap.

And... this means I could release 4999 pounds of anahydrous ammonia, 4999 pounds of dichlorodiflouromethane, and 4999 pounds of sulfuric acid... all in one day... and not have to tell a soul.

I like it. ...and to think... yesterday I was planning out my new septic system... a biogas system that released only burnable methane and sterile organic nitrates for fertilizer... why bother now? ...might as well go poo in the river. everyone else can.


Someone ought to tell the terrorists that they could create a lot more destruction in the US (and get away with it scott free) if they just incorporated themselves: Osama, Inc.

There was a time when we could swim in our mississippi. We ought to remember that.

Clean water, air, and dirt are things worth dying for.

Sri Oracle



posted on Sep, 25 2005 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sri Oracle
Someone ought to tell the terrorists that they could create a lot more destruction in the US (and get away with it scott free) if they just incorporated themselves: Osama, Inc.




That is so sad.....and yet so true....



posted on Sep, 25 2005 @ 12:42 PM
link   
Add in this news of Tony Blair's betrayal and I say we're #ed.

news.independent.co.uk...

Just when I thought that Blair couldn't sell his people and the Human Race out anymore then he already has, he goes and does this.

Resurgent Creationism + Rampant Apathy + Corrupt Politicians = A ripe playing field for the ambitious assholes who take advantage of the Zealots to spread their vile virulent meme's where they don't belong.

We are well and truely #ed.

[edit on 25-9-2005 by sardion2000]



posted on Sep, 25 2005 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sri Oracle

Someone ought to tell the terrorists that they could create a lot more destruction in the US (and get away with it scott free) if they just incorporated themselves: Osama, Inc.




Funny - BUT - just who do you think the real terrorists are, in this world?

...Never mind poisonous contaminants in the environment, and the wholesale creation and dumping of prions, but international corporations are the only 'entities' positioned to come out ahead by using population destabilization weapons, for example. Can you spell 'Katrina,' or 'bird flu'?



posted on Sep, 25 2005 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Sofi. No one is going to come out ahead. That is the "Big Lie" of this day and age. The planet is slowly made uninhabitable for Humanity it will affect the Corps just as much as us, they are just too lazy, stupid and incompetent to realize it...

[edit on 25-9-2005 by sardion2000]



posted on Sep, 25 2005 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000
Sofi. No one is going to come out ahead. That is the "Big Lie" of this day and age. The planet is slowly made uninhabitable for Humanity it will affect the Corps just as much as us, they are just too lazy, stupid and incompetent to realize it...




I agree, really - but know they plan to "leave" - why do you think there's such a big push on space exploration? But yeah, they're all fools. No one is winning here.

Can you not find any reason for hope? Or at least a revolution? Remember Hemingway?


.



posted on Sep, 25 2005 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
but know they plan to "leave" - why do you think there's such a big push on space exploration?


Interesting you say that. Read this.


NASA's Griffin: 'Humans Will Colonize the Solar System'



[edit on 25-9-2005 by loam]



posted on Sep, 25 2005 @ 01:55 PM
link   
Thanks. Interesting. FYI - there is an organization that goes into schools, gives "living in space" workshops, and then creates a controlled 'site' where kids live for a day as if they were in space. Sorry - just can't remember the name...

IMO - the plan is to transition with space mining - which will just SUCK for the poor fools who think $1000 bucks a day is big money.

...The corporations are on it already - just trying to siphon as many tax dollars as they can for the game.



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 09:20 AM
link   
THE STORY GROWS!!!






Thousands of Firms Could Stop Reporting Emissions

Thousands of companies throughout the nation, including many in the Los Angeles region, would no longer have to provide the public with details of toxic chemicals they release into the environment under a Bush administration proposal to streamline the nation's environmental right-to-know law.

For nearly 20 years, the national Toxics Release Inventory has allowed people to access detailed data about chemicals that are used and released in their neighborhoods. In about 9,000 communities, the annual reports identify which industrial plants emit the most toxic substances, whether their emissions are increasing and what compounds may be contaminating their air and water.

Seeking to ease the financial burden on industry, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has proposed eliminating some requirements for smaller facilities that must monitor their emissions and file the complex annual reports. The EPA will make a final decision on the proposal next year, after a public comment period.

Under the agency's proposal, 922 communities would lose all information from the inventory detailing emissions, according to a report released Thursday by the environmental group National Environmental Trust...

Kim Nelson, an assistant administrator at the EPA, said the companies that would benefit from the proposal are "tiny, tiny businesses, mom-and-pop shops operating on Main Street, that, in an aggregate, amount to less than 1% of the emissions in this country."

But according to the agency's electronic inventory, many of the facilities are near residential areas, in communities with large low-income or minority populations. Many are owned by large corporations, including Pepsi Bottling Group in Buena Park, Clorox Products in Los Angeles, Raytheon in Goleta, U.S. Gypsum Co. in Santa Fe Springs and Foamex in the Bay Area city of San Leandro.

Under existing rules, facilities that release 500 or more pounds of toxic substances each year must reveal how much of each chemical is emitted into the air, discharged into waterways and taken to landfills or other disposal sites.

But under the EPA proposal, unveiled in September, that threshold would be raised to 5,000 pounds. The smaller emitters would be required only to list chemical names without any data on environmental releases, such as amounts discharged into the air. Among the industries that could benefit are metal-plating plants, electronics firms, pharmaceutical companies, foam manufacturers, food processors and petrochemical and oil facilities....

More....



Initially, this was about spills! Now it's about emissions!

What is the point of the EPA????

I am sick of these guys and this administration! What a disgrace!




[edit on 2-12-2005 by loam]



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 09:27 AM
link   


The headline should be "EPA Obsolete" or maybe "Redundant." Not sure, have to look it up.

FYI - it's not the government scientists - their hands are tied. It is the administration, and top down unwritten policies. Also gag orders.





posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 09:59 AM
link   
Just another in a long list of betrayals.

"EPA wants to ease toxic spill reporting."

Of course they do! They're the Environmental Protection Agency! In this wonderful double-speak America we live in, that means their job is to remove any and all protections bestowed by environmental laws.

Look at the people staffing this agency at the top spots. Look at their record of employment, and follow the money/support back down the rat hole, all the way to the nest. That nest has been screwing this country over for the benefit of wealthy private individuals for at least 70 years, probably longer.

The American government has been almost completely co-opted.

The people who are in charge of maintaining our living environment are doing a terrible job at it. Why? Because they don't have to freakin' live here, once they cash their 'vichey' checks they can live wherever they please. They have no allegiance to their country, no allegiance to their fellow citizens - these are dollar worshippers plain and simple.



posted on Dec, 11 2005 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne

The American government has been almost completely co-opted.

The people who are in charge of maintaining our living environment are doing a terrible job at it. Why? Because they don't have to freakin' live here, once they cash their 'vichey' checks they can live wherever they please. They have no allegiance to their country, no allegiance to their fellow citizens - these are dollar worshippers plain and simple.


But they just don't get it. Everything is connected. They can't escape the poisons.





posted on Dec, 12 2005 @ 12:37 AM
link   
Sofi
What about the moon base? Or even better, Utah?



Seriously though, there's still a great deal of uninhabited and for the most part uninhabitable land in this country. That could change if interested parties threw a whole bunch of (our) money at the project.

I think, no, I'm SURE, they THINK they can weasel out of this. They can't, not in the long run, but they certainly don't appear to know that.



posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 09:34 AM
link   
The deal is done...





EPA Rule

EPA on Dec. 18 issued a final rule that will make it easier for companies to be eligible to use a shorter, less-detailed reporting form – known as "Form A" – and, for the first time in TRI's history, will allow some companies that handle persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) chemicals to use Form A.

"The TRI program was designed to inform citizens and communities about what is going on in their backyards," Clayton Northouse, information policy analyst at OMB Watch, said during a Dec. 14 conference call. "It's clear that EPA is not reducing the burden but is merely shifting the burden from industrial facilities to families living near facilities, increasing their risk of exposure to dangerous toxic chemicals."


Northouse, along with Sean Moulton, director of federal information policy for OMB Watch, co-authored a report titled "Against the Public's Will," which offers an analysis of the comments submitted to EPA during the rulemaking process. According to the report, of the 122,420 comments EPA received during the public comment period, 122,386 – or 99.97 percent – expressed opposition to all of the changes that EPA proposed for TRI.

Only 34 comments – or .03 percent of the total comments received – "expressed even some degree of support for the proposal," Moulton said.

"This is a clear case of the agency disregarding the will of the American people," Moulton said. "The EPA has no scientific or health data supporting the changes they want to make – nothing to assure the public will still be safe. Instead, the agency is just interested in saving polluting companies a few dollars, at the possible expense of public health."

More...






posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 11:27 AM
link   

"The TRI program was designed to inform citizens and communities about what is going on in their backyards," Clayton Northouse, information policy analyst at OMB Watch, said during a Dec. 14 conference call. "It's clear that EPA is not reducing the burden but is merely shifting the burden from industrial facilities to families living near facilities, increasing their risk of exposure to dangerous toxic chemicals."




It's all about "personal responsibility."

FYI - corporations are legally defined as "persons," and they have all the rights and liberties of "personhood" - but NO "personal responsibility."

Why is that?





posted on Jan, 31 2009 @ 06:49 AM
link   
this is to reporet at 5444 vineland ave north hollywood ca
there is 6( six ) 50 gal drums of oil/paint thinner /used paint/gasoline/an unknowen outher that was in a basement of a house in the police inpound lot for north hollywood that house was torn down an bace ment filled over with out removing sead toxic liqueds that was covered to make extra parking spots this sight is right in side of lot faceing vineland ave.has been bareyed appx 12 to 13 years now an there was some leaking that was seen when covered...notice property was at time leased by lee archer to a e.c.britten/jim milhone .but is now in use by russell milhoan .as ARCHERS TOWING INC.....now there has been a high school built just across street from this sight at vine land an cumpston st.
as of now this lot is used as storage for cars.

owner r milhoan .new of sight but had it covered anyway.should be looked into befor leaking gets out of control or get into what under ground water there is ...THIS NEEDS TO BE LOOKED INTO ASAP.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join