Skip to comments.Boeing fears regulatory wave amid battle over fish, water pollution
Posted on 07/07/2014 3:48:39 PM PDT by jazusamo
Aerospace giant Boeing finds itself in a fishy fight against Native Americans and environmentalists over pollution in the waterways -- a disagreement that could affect where Washington state's largest employer builds the next generation of planes.
At the heart of the fight, which could impact thousands of jobs, is a peculiar question: How much locally caught fish do Washingtonians eat, and what are the health risks?
Green groups, alone with Washington state tribes, have sued the Environmental Protection Agency to push for increased fish consumption rates -- currently set at six-and-a-half grams a day.
If the number is set higher, it would trigger tougher standards on toxins flowing into the Puget Sound.
Businesses -- and especially Boeing -- are bracing for a possible regulatory blow. Any EPA decision to jack up the fish consumption rates, and in turn pollution standards, could force the aerospace company to pay tens of millions of dollars more to treat storm water runoff.
"To mandate this one-size-fits-all, incredibly stringent requirement that you can't even comply with because the technology doesn't even exist to even measure that standard or comply with that standard -- it's absurd," said Erin Shannon, with the Washington Policy Center.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
At first glance, I thought this was going to be about pollution from fuselages dumped into the river by the derailed freight train. My bad.
As if union agitation in WA isn’t enough. Hell, here’s another reason to move production to SC.
Boeing already has production facilities in South Carolina that they could use.
What business does the EPA have deciding fish consumption rates? What business does any agency of the Federal government have deciding fish consumption rates?
Yep, the movement of Boeing to SC in total may well be on the mind of Gov. Inslee.
They shouldn’t, but the enviro-nazis are in tight with the EPA.
Any regulatory action with this much impact, should be done by congress, not any regulatory agency that is not answerable to the electorate. The EPA is the leader of the defacto 4th branch of gov't.
The unions won’t like that. Boeing’s a huge employer they want to squeeze max milk out of.
Grudge match: Unions vs. greens?
There could be an opportunity here - set the union enforcers against the enviros and hope they friendly fire each other.
What they don't do to damage the nation and economy the feral government will do for them.
Exactly, but it wouldn’t surprise me if they try it, they’ve done it before.
These green bozos are going to drive a mega-industry out of Washington State and leave a lot of people jobless who once had great paying jobs. Not that they give a flip.
Don’t forget this is the agency that banned over the counter asthma inhalers. That’s just mean.
See my #14 post
Could very well be, the unions are ticked over 0bummer and Keystone.
You’re right, the enviro-nazis would sacrifice them all to stop using petroleum.
Plus they want dams destroyed because of salmon but don’t give a whit about eagles and other birds...hypocrites.
Well, the fish DO consume THEIR water after all........
EPA - The Eating Protection Agency
Seriously, pisspoor article. Should have mentioned what were the pollutants Boeing generated that when into the waters and what kind of health threats they posed, or might pose.
Having worked on environmental cases of this type, the first thing one asks is “What is the pollutant” and “what are the suspected or known sources of them.”
Then you take it from there re health protection, job protection and sane, feasible environmental protection technology available to correct any real problems.
The limousine liberals in Seattle don’t want any of those pesky middle class people on their roads or beaches.
Boeing can and does use contractors much to the consternation of the union thugs. The only reason they are still staying in Seattle is the infrastructure is there. You simply can not move a production facility that size somewhere else. Also you’ll need to relocate the employees. You can’t show up in a new town and have thousands of engineers and laborers ready to go. Another thing, with this vindictive jackwad of a president would Boeing EVER get permission to build a facility anywhere???
Obama and the EPA know Boeing can’t leave Seattle and they’ll wring them out for every penny they can.
Mostly true, but not completely. After all, they did start up a line in SC.
Exactly. Shutdown operations in Washington. Let em suck clean air!!
Boeing can star a line for either brand new components or aircraft models. For realistic purposes they can not move the Washington plant because of the infrastructure already in place. The SC plant builds components and ‘rear ends’ for the tails of the 787. They do some completion work there but only after the aircraft are flying.
(Recovering engineer in the business 15 years until I quit and started my own company)