W
WinterBorn
Guest
And I deviated how?
EPA.... overreaching yet again
- Thread starter Cancel 2016.2
- Start date
And I deviated how?
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
ouch! bfoon got knocked out..
Bfgrn
New member
[Federal Register: January 15, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 10)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 2461-2465]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr15ja09-64]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 112
[EPA-HQ-OPA-2008-0821; FRL-8762-6]
RIN 2050-AG650
Oil Pollution Prevention; Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasure Rule Requirements--Amendments
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) is
proposing to amend the Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure
(SPCC) rule to tailor and streamline the requirements for the dairy
industry. Specifically, EPA proposes to exempt milk containers and
associated piping and appurtenances from the SPCC requirements provided
they are constructed according to the current applicable 3-A Sanitary
Standards, and are subject to the current applicable Grade ``A''
Pasteurized Milk Ordinance (PMO) or a State dairy regulatory
requirement equivalent to the current applicable PMO. This proposal
addresses concerns raised specifically by the dairy sector on the
applicability of the SPCC requirements to milk containers.
http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-WATER/2009/January/Day-15/w830.htm
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
ROFLMAO.... now tell us moron.... if they are proposing to exempt them, does that mean they ARE or ARE NOT currently under this regulation?
WHAT THE FUCK were they under the regulation for in the first place?
also... the proposed exemption is for those that comply with what the EPA thinks is acceptable. Which means the EPA is still regulating milk containers you moron.
So tell us... WHAT environmental danger does spilled milk expose us to?
Bfgrn
New member
WAIT a fucking minute you slime ball...your OP made onerous claims of NEW regulations, restrictions and restraints... when the TRUTH is less regulation.
As far as the environmental dangers of milk, they are enormous. Especially raw milk. Do some research...
W
WinterBorn
Guest
The environmental dangers of raw milk are enormous????
Boy, you really are doing some complicated dance steps on this thread.
Bfgrn
New member
Dairy Cattle as a Source of Food or Waterborne Illness
There is overwhelming evidence that animals are reservoirs for several of the most important food-borne and waterborne agents. Manure and wastewater from animal feeding operations have the potential to contribute pathogens and pollutants, such as antibiotics, nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus), hormones, sediments, heavy metals, organic matter, and ammonia, to the environment and eventually could impact human health. Some of the illnesses resulting from these agents cause only temporary health problems, while others cause severe crises and even death.
Years ago, diseases such as tuberculosis, brucellosis, diphtheria, and scarlet fever were commonly spread through milk (Table 1). TB testing, brucellosis eradication, and pasteurization resulted in a dramatic decline in milk-borne disease outbreaks. From 1950 through the 1970s, several disease outbreaks were caused by pathogens in processed milk and manufactured dairy products (e.g.,Salmonellae in dried milk products, toxicogenic Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus in certain cheeses). In the 1980s several previously undetected bacteria were related to illnesses (Listeria, Campylobacter, and Yersinia).
Even now, pathogen contamination of water and food supplies has received national attention. Salmonellae contamination of pasteurized milk affected hundreds of thousands. Listeriosis in cheese has caused dozens of deaths. Cryptosporidium parvum from farm runoff in the Milwaukee water supply sickened more than 400,000. E. coli O157:H7 has been found in hamburger (often from spent dairy cows), and recently several people were sickened and some children died because of a contaminated water supply at a fairground which may have been polluted by livestock waste
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
NO it's not stupid. Farm runoff is the single biggest source of pollution there is. I exceeds even industry for the volume of point source pollutants. Raw milk has a high fat content and it's biologically active, like manure, If spilled in can run of into navigable water ways or can contaminate ground water with bacteria. Not to mention it's not nice if it goes rancid and contaminates water. Since it's a fat in can cover water in navigable water ways and wetland preventing oxygen from dissolving in the water and causing significant environments problems, such as fish and aquatic life kill off. It could also act as a nutrient causing algal blooms and other problems. These common sense SPCC procedures for small operation farmers to contain such spills, as with manure, are just common sense management practices. The typcial dairly farmer hardly runs a 10,000 gallon storage tank. Usually they have a 1,000 gallon tank and it's emptied on a daily basis. Teir 1 SPCC planing is going to impact industrial food processors who store large volumes, i.e. 10,000 gallons or better and they by god should have a certified SPCC program in place.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Dude, you simply don't know what the fuck your talking about. This isn't left wing nuttery. This is common sense management of materials. Just because a material comes from a farm or is an agricultural product doesn't meant that a large spill couldn't have a substantial environmental impact not to mention property damage. It aint like were talking a gallon of milk here. Were talking 10,000 gallons!! Go read up on SPCC programs.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
You're post may be an example of EPA over reaching. Don't have an opinion there as I don't know the facts. The OP is not an example of EPA over reaching. Why should Farmers be exempt from industrial pollution prevention regulations? Hell their the single biggest source of pollution, by volume, in the country!
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
That is essentially correct. Nor is their legislation exempting Farmers from SPCC requirements.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
I guess I should shut the hell up then, huh? LOL
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
They are significant, just as it would be significant if there was a 10,000 gallon spill of vegetable oil, or peanut oil, or olive oil or manure, etc, etc. Has any on you arm chair QB even fuckin bothered to read the requirements for an SPCC plan? A 10,000 gallon spill of nearly anything can have substantial consequences. Having planing, programs, training and containment measures which work, are properly implemented and inspected to make sure they work is hardly fucking onerous.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Well at the least it would cause a fish kill off. Since it's biologically active their would also be the threat of salmanilla contamination and if that got into municipal waters that would indeed be a serous and costly problem to deal with.
SF is just poppoing off on a topic he's not informed on. Milk may not be methyl ethyl death but a spill of 10,000 gallons of raw milk would have substantial consequences. From health and safety, to environmental impact, to property damage to just plain nuisance. The point being, what the hell is wrong with having common sense planning and preparation in place to minimize spills and containment requirements to prevent large spills from occuring? Sounds like common sense good management practice to me.
W
WinterBorn
Guest
No, I confess I didn't even think about it much. I was just responding to BFoon's comment based on the lunacy of his previous ones.
I stand corrected.
Bfgrn
New member
That's what I found. This is interesting:
USDA announces pilot initiative to help farmers and ranchers comply with SPCC
NRCS Announces $3 Million Pilot Initiative to Help Farmers and Ranchers Comply with On-Farm Oil Spill Regulation
PEMBINA, N.D., October 21, 2010—The Department of Agriculture today announced a pilot initiative in eight states to help agricultural producers comply with revised regulations by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) intended to prevent and mitigate fuel and oil spills on their operations. States participating in the NRCS pilot are: Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah and the Caribbean area. Dave White, Chief of USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), made the announcement on behalf of the Department at a farm outside of of Pembina, N.D.
“An important part of our mission at USDA is helping farmers and ranchers develop plans to protect human health and the environment, including assistance complying new regulations,” said Dave White, NRCS Chief. “This new pilot program will help agricultural producers meet a new regulatory requirement designed to reduce the dangers of on-farm oil spills.”
The pilot program will be administered by NRCS, which will provide up to $3 million to help farmers and ranchers comply with EPA’s Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Program (SPCC). The agency will help develop or update existing spill prevention plans that avoid and mitigate on-farm oil spillage. SPCC plans must be in place no later than November 10, 2011.
Due to the small amount of stored fuel and oil on most operations up to 84 percent of farmers and ranchers are able to “self certify” by completing an online template. Operators with above ground storage capacity of 10,000 gallons or more are required to have a plan prepared by a registered Professional Engineer.
NRCS developed an interim conservation practice standard for secondary oil and fuel containment. Technical Service Providers can use this interim practice to help them design oil/fuel containment facilities conforming to EPA regulation. Funding from NRCS is available to assist in developing SPCC plans and implementing the secondary oil and fuel containment conservation practices.
Earlier this year NRCS partnered with the National Milk Producers Federation to develop a template for dairy producers to help them determine if they needed an SPCC plan and whether or not they could self certify their plans. The SPCC template can be utilized by the 84 percent of farms meeting the self-certification criteria, meeting the EPA revised rules.
