Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 06/02/2010 5:11:58 PM PDT by EBH
I thought you might be interested in this.
They should tell the EPA to go to hell, destroy both the blueprints of their equipment and the equipment,tell their help[employees] that their services are no longer needed and pay them in full, then go out of business.
Let the obama worshipping bastards go back to living in the stone age.
History is filled with countless episodes of people not knowing when tyranny was creeping in that tyranny is what it was.
Guess the initial, unprecedented take over of a State Agency by the FEDs isn’t important.
Sorry Mods. I disagree with your point of view on this.
1. All federal laws will be complied with.
2. Any state laws that are more stringent than the federal laws will be complied with.
3. Any corporate policies that are more stringent than the state laws will be complied with.
So for quite some time it seems that states can regulate in certain areas, but only if they are more stringent than the federal government.
This may not be right, but it is not new.
This EPA business has Obama’s fingerprints all over it. Pure and simple, Obama’s targeting Texas for it’s support of Republicans.
This program that the EPA is going after was started by Ann Richards (D) when she was Governor. The EPA never had a problem with it, until now. This is a purely political move and has nothing to do with the Clean Air Act.
The EPA can go to hell: http://texas.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/05/the-epa-can-go-to-hell-and-i-will-go-to-texas/
Someone who lives in this Texas County, please go to SheriffMack.com and buy the book by Sheriff Mack explaining that THE SHERIFF is THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY in his County. Sheriff Mack will mail it to the Sheriff’s Office if you give them the address. Buy yourself a copy, read it and then make an appointment to talk to your Sheriff.
If he’s read the book, he’ll see that HE has more authority in his County than ANYone, even the EPA or the FBI or the President.
He can ACTUALLY ARREST any Federal Agent, including the President, if he’s willing.
It would be soooooo cool to have a Sheriff arrest Obama and then refuse to release him until he shows his birth certificate to verify his citizenship.
EVERYONE who reads this . . . get your County Sheriff a copy of Sheriff Mack’s book.
And please join Oath Keepers. Oath Keepers is for EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. It’s not connected to any other activity. Oath Keepers uses resources like Sheriff Mack’s book and pamphlets to teach the local teachers and police and sheriff’s officers.
>>States rights! hmmmm..where have I heard this before. Its a shame, but I guess we won’t be able to wear gray uniforms this time.<<
Why not? The Yankee Army of Suppression wears blue.
That is correct, but this is the first time the Fed. EPA has taken over a State program.
Texas needs to make them prove the allegations of insufficiency.
The danger in this move by the Fed. EPA is that it can deem ANY state agency insufficient.
The Fed. needs to show where the Texas Air Pollution Regulations don’t at least meet Fed. requirements.
In the simmering battle between the Environmental Protection Agency and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, EPA Region 6 Administrator Al Armendariz told the Chronicle this week that if the state doesn't start issuing federally consistent air permits by June 30, he is prepared to take over the job. Armendariz called from the Gulf Coast, where he's working the BP oil spill, about his plans to make Texas comply with the federal Clean Air Act. (See "Environmental Cage Match," May 28.)
...
Please, Texas, tell Al what Daley from Chicago told the EPA when they directed Chicago to clean up the Chicago River so people could swim in it (as though we don’t have a huge lake right on our door step): “Go swim in the Potomac.”
http://www.epa.gov/region6/6pd/air/pd-r/objectionletters/flint_hills032610-o1272.pdf
The simple fact is that TX is complying. What the EPA is trying to do is backdoor the climate change crap by throwing up technicalities on the permitting process. If challenged on the CAA they would lose because the CAA doesn’t allow them to shut down a refinery for CO2 without also shutting down thousands of other TX businesses that emit smaller amounts of CO2. The application of CO2 permitting to only large emitters is completely fabricated.
Objection 1: The Fed is objecting to the incorporation of a flexible permit to the Title V application. The State Issued permit needs to prove it meets Fed. regulations to be included or the entire Title V permit will be denied. (Business must stop operating until permit is approved).
Objection 2: Looks to be a documentation issue in the permit application. They are also claiming a major source permit is inserted in this section of the permit and should be documented elsewhere in the Title V permit application.
Objection 3: Looks to be a minor source on the permit that has had a revision way back in 1998. EPA is claiming the permit is now not good enough without further documentation.
Objection 4: Again it appears that documentation is missing. For a Title V permit one must present all documentation proving compliance. This may need to be actual testing, pollution control devices installed, etc. There is a certification statement at the end of the section that must be signed by an officer of the company.
Objection 5: Is dealing with point sources on the facility that have been exempt under pollution control standards. This is kind of tricky in that units like these can suddenly be required to have pollution controls mandated under a Title V permit. ALL sources must be accounted for and again, this is a documentation issue that the Feds. will require testing to prove exemption status on a Title V permit.
Objection 6: This is again a failure to properly document which emission sources fall under the regulations stated in the permit application. DETAILS! DETAILS! DETAILS!
Objection 7: More of the same as objection 6, just a different area of the permit application.
I’ve done Title V permits in my career. There is the notice in the front of the letter demanding they submit this information in less than the 90 day compliance time to submit the documentation. This is unreasonable and appears to be excessive. The applicant has the right to take the full 90 days to submit the documentation. The Fed. EPA has no authority to demand it sooner than the law allows.
I had the epa inspection of the water plant I operate yesterday. PITA!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.