Conversations
with government officials, she says, can be incredibly
frustrating: “It’s like, my God, I feel like I’m talking to a
two-year-old!” Washington lives “in a bubble,” she says, “I’m in
it every day.”
Asked whether the White House bears
any responsibility for the agency’s
failures, she responds, “I don’t think the current
administration has done as much environmentally as I’d hoped or thought
they’d do.”
While some of Ms. Brockovich’s complaints come from the left, there are
times when she sounds more like one of the EPA’s
Republican critics.
“With the EPA
shoving more policies down industry’s throat, you can’t get them to comply with
what’s on the books,” she says of the agency’s
pile-it-on approach to regulation. “You almost set them up into a position
where they cannot comply.”
“I’m not going to sit here and vilify industry,” she says. “I will not do
it. I think they have an opportunity to do the right thing. I’m not going to
blame it all on government either. But they have to admit their failures.”
Superfund sites — areas designated as contaminated and hazardous by the Environmental
Protection Agency — come up frequently, as does a sort of calculated
nonpartisan populist outrage. “We have 30,000 Superfund sites that aren’t
cleaned,” she complains several times.
Despite her long history of pitting communities against businesses, she
tries to stay above the fray. “It’s not a Republican or Democrat issue, is it?
It’s all of our issue. It’s a human rights issue. We all need water. And we all
have a pollution problem. And we can all see it,” she says. “I really think
that it is time, in my perspective, that we come into a new socially conscious
world, that government and industry both sit down with the people. This is
where we have a problem.”
Federal Government Found Liable Under CERCLA
On March 4, 2011, in Nu-West Mining Inc. v. United States, the
district court for the District of Idaho determined that the United
States’ oversight of waste disposal activities at historic mines sufficient to establish arranger liability.
LOCATORS' RIGHT OF
POSSESSION & ENJOYMENT OF
SURFACE GROUND, & OF THE LODE.
§ 60. Locators'
rights of possession and enjoyment.
§ 61. Status of
lode-claims previously located.
§ 62. Patents for
veins or lodes previously issued.
5 63. Priority of
location, importance of.
§
82. Adverse occupation as against a
patent.—
§
83. The patent, what is granted.—
§
84. Who may apply.—
§ 85. Evidence of
ownership—Deraigning title—Identity of
applicant
§
207. Existing water rights obtained by
patent not affected.—
§
209. Recognition of doctrine of prior
appropriation— Reasonable use.—
Reversionary
Interest
A reversionary
interest places a condition on the transferee's right to own and occupy the
land. If the condition is violated, the property is returned to the original owner
or the owner's successors. Each owner in the chain of title must comply with the
conditions placed on the property. If the condition is violated the property can
revert to the original owner, even if there have been several transfers in the chain
of title.
Siting
Restrictions
Siting restrictions control land use in areas subject to natural hazards, such
as earthquakes, fires, or floods. Such restrictions are created through
statutory authority to require that states implement and enforce certain land use
controls as well as through local ordinances.
Stakeholder
Stakeholders include federal, state, and local officials, community organizations,
property owners, and others having a personal interest or involvement, or
having a monetary or commercial involvement in the real property which is to undergo
an OE response action.
Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization (SARA)
Enacted
in 1986, this legislation establishes standards for cleanup activities, requires
federal facility compliance with CERCLA, and clarifies public involvement requirement
This week, USDA released a report
summarizing what they have learned from this stakeholder feedback.
According to the report, key areas of common interest to all
stakeholders included:
Policy Stability. Stakeholders encouraged a greater
long-term commitment at the Congressional and Departmental levels to
biofuel energy policy so that uncertainty and risks in steady private
sector investment could be avoided. Stakeholders were also strongly in
favor of complementary legislation and regulation policies, rather than
apparent opposing policies. There is a need for clear policy direction,
common definitions, and fewer conflicting programmatic and regulatory
policies.
Market Development. Increasing consumer awareness
and understanding of the benefits from bioenergy can help create demand
pull and new markets. Addressing some of the misinformation regarding
food and biofuel conflicts would benefit market development.
Complete Economic Analysis. A cost-benefit study for
biofuels focusing on energy security, environment, and economic
development should be conducted. This analysis would facilitate further
development of bioenergy.
Additional Biomass Resources. Biomass for feedstock
production can include sugar beets, industrial sweet potato,
agricultural and industrial waste, fish waste, algae, municipal solid
waste, agricultural waste from Tribal Lands, and other dedicated energy
crops not included in the roadmap (e.g., guayule, and jojoba).
Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). Stakeholders
expressed that not all CRP acreage is enrolled as non-productive or
marginal lands. For productive lands: while there remains a strong
commitment in preserving key conservation and wildlife goals of the CRP,
there is room for allowing for penalty-free sustainable harvesting of
energy biomass on a more than periodic basis.
Cropping Approaches. Stakeholders urged more
analysis on double cropping, intercropping, reserve cropping, and
reclaimed land cropping opportunities.
Local Energy. Bioenergy policies should include a
higher number of regionally-tailored approaches and receive federal
attention that involves all of America and avoid energy markets
dominated by single regions. Examples provided included smaller
biorefinery facilities that could reduce the transportation distances of
feedstocks and fuels to reduce transportation and delivery costs.
Wood. Stakeholders from major forestry regions of
the country believed that a greater recognition of the role of both
existing and new woody resources is merited. Interest was strong in
ensuring that wood residues are sustainably harvested, and that
potential disruption of existing markets be considered. Purpose-grown
wood could also be a major contributor in some regions, and significant
potential exists for use of wood from forest health and fuel reduction
treatments for energy purposes.
Biomass for heat and power. Many stakeholders
expressed support for a greater acknowledgement of solid biomass in
replacing or displacing fossil fuels for heat and power. This creates
additional and possibly competing demand for biomass.
During the stakeholder workshops, organizers asked
participants a series of questions regarding different aspects of
biofuel production and use. Among these, they asked what issues might
deter farmers from growing biofuel crops. Common responses included
market risk and the need for guaranteed markets for the crops, the “food
versus fuel” issue and environmental protection, management issues and
concerns over long-term viability of the biofuels industry.
Asked whether biofuels should be sustainable, about
half said yes, with many others apparently unsure how to interpret the
term “sustainable.” Asked to define it, most indicated it is the ability
to maintain or increase levels of production/harvest for perpetuity.
Several others defined it in terms of economic viability and others in
terms of environmental quality.
A widely accepted framework for sustainability in
agricultural production involves the “triple bottom line” of being
economically viable, environmentally sound and socially acceptable.
Whether biofuel production can meet those criteria while growing at the
rates specified in the RFS remain to be seen.
Dysfunctional, co-dependent and functionally paralyzed
EPA is functioning like an abused child
Like an abused child too terrified to perform
normal tasks, is the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency too terrified
to do its job? The words I hear in the halls of the agency are, “They
want to turn off the lights and lock the doors."
Before I address
who “they” are, some background. The EPA has a mission to protect human
health and the environment mandated under the Clean Water Act, Clean Air
Act, Superfund Act, and others. The creation of this agency and
enabling legislation was a result of a century and a half of industrial
progress without recognized consequence. It is EPA’s responsibility to
protect more than 300 million Americans from the effects of poor water
quality, unhealthy air and toxic chemicals. Failure to do so would
result in hundreds of thousands of deaths each year.
At its
conception, the EPA assumed authority of certain municipal and
industrial processes heretofore unregulated or under-regulated. For
example, the pesticide industry was required to comply with risk-based
standards. This industry and others developed a pathological reaction to
an increasingly popular belief in environmental health protection.
Thus, a union of anti-regulatory profiteers and ideologues have
persistently, and with almost unlimited funding, created a system to
terrify the regulators of pollution, pharmaceuticals, tobacco and fossil
fuels.
With unprecedented access and affiliation they manipulated
congressional budget allocations and agency oversight, and they formed
abusive strategies which damaged and confused the EPA. Years of threats
from lobbyists and their congressional minions have intimidated EPA
managers, reduced funding, imposed draconian travel restrictions, called
for “science-based” studies to delay the common sense implementation of
best management practices. Rule writing “assistance” by regulated trade
groups has psychologically turned the EPA into a “whipping boy.” The
result has been to severely restrict the ability of the EPA to
efficiently protect our health and the environment.
Dysfunctional,
co-dependent and functionally paralyzed describe some children who have
been physically abused by their parent. These situations are made worse
when the victim realizes those who are supposed to protect them will
not. This is exactly what happened to the EPA under the George W. Bush
Administration regarding global warming and pesticide regulation.
I
believe this is what might be happening to the EPA. Not only is it
afraid to function, but when it does, it functions to please its
abusers. The EPA needs to be protected and learn to trust. It must learn
to behave properly and be accountable.
In the first two years of
the Obama administration, the EPA did develop confidence to perform its
tasks, only to see congressional abusers start leering after the
mid-term election in 2010 and reminding this vulnerable agency just who
is in charge. Now is the time for the president, those in Congress who
still believe in environmental protection and all Americans to
demonstrate their faith and support for the EPA. Or will we let the
abusers quietly smile, lock the doors and turn out the lights?
Professor
Marc Lame teaches environmental management in the School of Public and
Environmental Affairs at Indiana University. He serves on the EPA's
Federal Advisory Committee and is the former chair of Arizona’s Supreme
Court’s Foster-care Review Board. The opinion expressed in this column
is the writer's and not necessarily that of The Times.
Right: POGO Investigator Jake Wiens, photo by House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
|
By DANA LIEBELSON
When the President fails to nominate the watchdogs who expose
government wrongdoing, how can Congress ensure that taxpayers are
getting the oversight they deserve? That was the question legislators
sought to answer yesterday morning at a House Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform hearing.
POGO Investigator Jake Wiens testified at the hearing (his very first
congressional testimony—woo hoo!) on the importance of promptly
nominating permanent Inspectors General (IGs). Wiens is the mastermind
behind POGO’s new website “Where Are All the Watchdogs?” which tracks the number and length of IG vacancies.
“POGO firmly believes that the effectiveness of an IG office can be
diminished when that office does not have permanent leadership,
especially when that vacancy exists for an extended period of time,”
Wiens said in his opening statement.
At present, 10 of the 73 Inspector General positions are vacant.
Eight of these positions require nomination by President Obama. The
longest vacancy is at the State Department, where the IG office has now
been without permanent leadership for almost 1,600 days.
“The president has had more than three years to make a
recommendation…why hasn’t he made a decision on this? Aren’t there
plenty of competent people that can do the job?” said Rep. Dan Burton
(R-IN), referring to the State Department vacancy. Burton is a former
chairman for the House oversight committee.
Current Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) pointed out that
the hearing on IG vacancies was not held in order to reflect upon the
Obama Administration— but to instead determine how best to ensure that
future administrations nominate IGs in a prompt manner.
“A robust group of IGs at federal agencies is the best way to prevent waste, fraud and abuse,” Rep. Issa said.
Several of the representatives made a concerted effort to recognize
the good work that acting IGs have done under President Obama. Rep.
Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) asked one of the witnesses, General Services Administration (GSA) IG Brian Miller—whose office recently cracked the GSA Las Vegas scandal—whether he treated acting or permanent IGs differently.
“I give equal weight to both permanent and temporary IGs” Miller
said. He told Rep. Maloney he believes he would have still been able to
unearth the GSA scandal even if he had been an acting IG, instead of
permanent. However, at the hearing, Miller also emphasized the
importance of the vetting process for permanent IGs.
“Finding and nominating the right person for the job is absolutely
vital” Miller said. “IGs need time and experience on the job to
develop.”
POGO found in its latest investigation that:
A permanent IG has the ability to set a long-term strategic plan for
the office, including setting investigative and audit priorities. An
acting official, on the other hand, is known by all OIG staff to be
temporary, which one former IG has argued “can have a debilitating
effect on [an] OIG, particularly over a lengthy period.” Senator Charles
Grassley (R-IA) has echoed that sentiment,
saying “Even the best acting inspector general lacks the standing to
make lasting changes needed to improve his or her office.”
Wiens, in reflecting upon the hearing, said that the issue isn’t
about pitting permanent IGs against acting IGs, but instead determining
whether “in that same position, a permanent IG could do a better job—I
would make the case that the answer is yes.”
Overall, Wiens said that he was pleased to see that the
Representatives “took the issue of Inspector General vacancies seriously
and focused on substance, not partisanship.”
Dana Liebelson is POGO’s Beth Daley Impact Fellow.
Beneath the EPA push to stop Pebble Mine
May 10, 2012 -- 8:00 PM
There's
little doubt the Environmental Protection Agency is sabotaging Alaska's
Pebble Mine -- not to save Bristol Bay salmon but to procure Big
Green's support for the re-election of President Obama.
The whisper among Beltway Machiavellians goes
that Big Green's noisy anti-Pebble flackery is just the tip of the
iceberg. If that's true, what's the bottom of the iceberg? It isn't
pretty.
The EPA pre-emptively used a provision of the
Clean Water Act's Section 404(c) to forbid the deposit of mining fill
material on the Pebble site, neatly blocking the entire
multibillion-dollar operation. That gave the EPA an end run around the
legal permit process, which would have at least given the developers the
right to defend themselves.
"Follow the money" is good advice for
investigating the bottom of the Big Green iceberg. Where does the money
start? Nowadays it's not just club membership dues or nature magazine
subscriptions, it's wealthy foundations.
These are not the traditional philanthropies
that fund medical research or benevolent service organizations, but the
later breed of "Golden Donors," institutionalized private fortunes
driven by the personal ideologies and power urges of the original rich
donor or later administrators.
Most foundations that fund anti-Pebble green
groups are members of the Environmental Grantmakers Association, a New
York City-based gathering that enables its member foundations to share
experience, evaluate potential grantees, coordinate their giving and
prescribe action on multiple fronts.
For example, the Foundation Center database
shows the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation (2010 assets $5.2 billion)
spread $3.5 million between the Nature Conservancy, Alaska Conservation
Foundation, Renewable Resources Coalition and Earthworks for anti-Pebble
programs. Moore's 2008 Internal Revenue Service Form 990 shows the fund
gave $1.1 million to the ACF for "Pebble mine campaign coordination."
Moore gave a single group, Trout Unlimited,
$2.3 million for Alaska programs. TU also got $150,000 from the William
and Flora Hewlett Foundation with the blatant instruction to spend the
money "For prevention of development of Pebble Mine in Bristol Bay."
That's only seed money. In large part, grants
are spent hiring high-powered public relations firms to devise
fundraising campaigns. It's not free money. Today's foundations demand a
return on their investment. Recipients must show foundation managers
results both in upsetting the public and in self-sufficiency -- in part
so they won't come begging forever. The help of PR firms is essential.
According to a 2011 congressional lobbying
report, Trout Unlimited hired the Seattle-based PR firm Strategies 360
-- run by lobbyist and high-profile CEO Ron Dotzauer -- to stop Pebble
Mine with a sophisticated fundraising campaign. It included lobbying and
advertising, of course, but Dotzauer also put on a series of restaurant
events with chefs touting salmon and cursing Pebble Mine. They could
save these delicious, non-endangered fish by giving Trout Unlimited big
bucks.
Dotzauer has political connections, too. He
served as campaign manager for Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., according
to the Seattle Times, "in all of her races since the mid-1980s."
Cantwell had once been his employee, his girlfriend and his creditor --
she lent him money to help with the costs of his divorce.
In September of last year, Cantwell sent a
letter urging EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to use that Clean Water Act
gimmick to stop Pebble Mine.
Examiner Columnist Ron Arnold is executive vice president of the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise.
Abraham Lincoln and Agriculture
Abraham Lincoln
True
to his roots as a frontier farm boy, President Abraham Lincoln signed
agricultural legislation that expanded and transformed American farming,
including such significant reforms as the creation of the U.S.
Department of Agriculture, the Homestead Act, and the establishment of
the Land Grant agricultural university system. Read more about Lincoln's agricultural legacy.
Lincoln Legislation
In
a three month span in 1862, Lincoln signed into law three important
pieces of legislation that would have a profound and lasting impact on
U.S. agriculture and society.
An Act to Establish a Department of Agriculture
- Established the Department's basic mission "to acquire and diffuse
among the people of the United States useful information on subjects
connected with agriculture in the most general and comprehensive sense
of the word."
Homestead Act - Stimulated Western migration by offering qualified individuals 160 acres of public land for settlement and cultivation.
Morrill Land Grant College Act
- Provided public lands to U.S. states and territories for the
establishment of colleges specializing in agricultural research and
instruction.
In addition to these acts directly related to agriculture, Lincoln
was also responsible for legislation that related indirectly to
agriculture.
Pacific Railway Act
- Provided Federal government support for the building of the first
transcontinental railroad, which was completed on May 10, 1869.
Emancipation Proclamation
- Proclaimed the freedom of slaves in the ten states then in rebellion
(Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Alabama,
Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas).
Lincoln's Views on Agriculture
In Lincoln's own words:
Lincoln's Milwaukee Speech
This speech to the Wisconsin State Agricultural Society on September
30, 1859 is Lincoln's only extended public address on agriculture. He
highlighted the national importance of agriculture as well as the need
for innovation and labor reforms.
Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and Agriculture.
(PDF | 11MB) Edwards, Everett Eugene and U.S. Bureau of Agricultural
Economics. Washington, D.C., United States Department of Agriculture,
1937. NAL call no. 1.9 Ec7Wa.
A collection of observations on agriculture by Washington,
Jefferson, and Lincoln, collected for the 75th anniversary of the
creation of the U.S. Department
of Agriculture. Lincoln's section begins on page 77 and includes his
Milwaukee speech, excerpts from his first and second annual messages to
Congress, and the agricultural laws of 1862: Act Establishing the Department of Agriculture, Homestead Act, and the Land Grant College [Morrill] Act.
Lincoln's Papers and Other Selected Resources
In the words of others:
"Lincoln's Attitude Toward Farm Problems".
(PDF | 1.3MB) Edwards, Everett Eugene. 1931. 4 pages. Given as a radio
talk, then published in Agricultural Library Notes, Volume 6, Number 2,
February 1931, and revised into this statement. NAL Special Collections, Everett Eugene Edwards Papers. NAL call no. 1.9 Ec752Li.
Describes Lincoln's childhood in pioneer farming to provide some
context for his later statements and opinions about agriculture that
culminated in his approval of the three 1862 agricultural acts. Numerous
references provided.
Lincoln’s view of agriculture--1859
(with some projections by Hopkins--1909) : an address read before the
University of Illinois Assembly, Morrow Hall, Lincoln week, 1909 (PDF |
1MB). Hopkins, Cyril G. Urbana, Ill., 1909. NAL call no. 30.4 H772.
Hopkins quotes extensively from Lincoln's Milwaukee speech and
expresses his concerns over the present state of U.S. agriculture and
practices that are leading to land ruin.
"Lincoln and Agriculture." Ross, Earle D. Agricultural History, vol. 3(2): pages 51-66, 1929. NAL call no. 30.98 Ag8.
Ross describes Lincoln's early exposure to aspects of agriculture
and how the political climate in the early 1860s influenced the
development and early days of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, including the passage of the Homestead and Morrill Acts. The numerous references throughout may be of use to the historical researcher.
"Lincoln and Agriculture." (PDF | 630KB) Stine, Oscar Clemen. 1930. NAL Special Collections, Everett Eugene Edwards Papers. NAL call no. HD1771.5.E48.
Radio talk presented by O.C. Stine of the Bureau of Agricultural
Economics on 12 February 1930. Describes Lincoln's early life as an
influence on his willingness to listen to farmers' interests when he was
a politician, first in Illinois and then as President.
Lincoln's Early Life
Born
in Kentucky in 1809, Lincoln grew up mostly in Indiana, then moved to
Illinois. In his adult life, he married and had four children, was a
captain in the Black Hawk War, spent eight years in the Illinois
legislature, and acted as an Illinois circuit court lawyer before being
elected President in 1861. Find out more about Lincoln's life.
Lincoln as President
Lincoln
is best known for being the 16th President of the U.S. (1861-1865) when
he guided the nation through the Civil War, and the assassination that
prematurely ended his second term as President. Learn more about Lincoln's presidency.
Agriculture in Lincoln's Time
From
the country's founding, farming and farm culture have shaped the image
of the U.S. as a nation of hardworking, independent, creative people. In
the 21st century the U.S. continues to be a leading agricultural
producer, but the nature and scope of American farming have changed considerably since Lincoln's time when almost half the population worked in agriculture.
Lincoln and the National Agricultural Library
In
1863, the first annual report of the new Department of Agriculture
recommended the creation of an agricultural library to support the
Department's mission of collecting and distributing agricultural
information to the American people. This vision was fulfilled by the
establishment of the National Agricultural Library. Lincoln's role in the creation of USDA is commemorated in the Abraham Lincoln Building which houses the Library today.
Last Modified: May-09-2012
RESOLUTION
Recognizing the importance of the property rights granted by the
United States Constitution; affirming the duty of each Member of this
body to support and defend such rights; and asserting that no public
body should unlawfully obtain the property of any citizen of the United
States for the benefit of another private citizen or corporation.
Whereas there is no greater expression of freedom and liberty than
the defense of the God-given right of an individual to hold, possess,
and use private property;
Whereas John Locke, the great political philosopher lauded by so
many of the Founders of this Nation, stated, `the preservation of
property [is the reason] for which men enter into society' and that `no
[government] hath a right to take their [property], or any part of it,
without their own consent, for this would be in effect to leave them no
property at all.';
Whereas William Blackstone, whose lectures shaped and helped inspire
the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and primal laws of
America, wrote: `So great moreover is the regard of the law for private
property, that it will not authorize the least violation of it; no, not
even for the general good of the whole community.';
Whereas Samuel Adams, the political writer, statesman, and signer of
the Declaration of Independence, declared that our rights included:
`First, a right to life; Secondly, to liberty; Thirdly, to property;
together with the right to support and defend them.';
Whereas John Adams, diplomat, signer of the Declaration of
Independence, and President of the United States, firmly proclaimed:
`The moment the idea is admitted into society, that property is not as
sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and
public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.' and that
`Property is surely a right of mankind as real as liberty.';
Whereas John Adams also affirmed: `Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist.';
Whereas James Madison, author of the Constitution, and President of
the United States, announced: `Government is instituted to protect
property. . . . This being the end of government, that alone is a just
government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his
own.';
Whereas John Dickinson, signer of the Constitution, stated: `Let
these truths be indelibly impressed on our minds: (1) that we cannot be
happy without being free; (2) that we cannot be free, without being
secure in our property; (3) that we cannot be secure in our property,
if, without our consent, others may, as by right, take it away.';
Whereas Thomas Jefferson, the mind behind the Declaration of
Independence, and President of the United States, wrote: `The true
foundation of republican government is the equal right of every citizen
in his person and property and in their management.' and `The first
foundations of the social compact would be broken up were we definitely
to refuse to its members the protection of their persons and property
while in their lawful pursuits.';
Whereas Thomas Jefferson also affirmed: `Charged with the care of
the general interest of the nation, and among these with the
preservation of their lands from intrusion, I exercised, on their
behalf, a right given by nature to all men, individual or associated,
that of rescuing their own property wrongfully taken.';
Whereas Noah Webster, the `Father of American Scholarship and
Education', stated: `It is admitted that all men have an equal right to
the enjoyment of their life, property and personal security; and it is
the duty as it is the object, of government to protect every man in this
enjoyment.';
Whereas John Jay opined: `No power on earth has a right to take our property from us without our consent.'; and
Whereas Fisher Ames, framer of the Bill of Rights and Massachusetts
Representative to the first four Congresses, said: `The chief duty and
care of all governments is to protect the rights of property.': Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved, That--
(1) these ideals did motivate and continue to justify the drafting
of article 1, section 8 of the United States Constitution, which states
that it is the responsibility of Congress `to promote the Progress of
Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and
Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and
Discoveries', and the writing of the 5th amendment to our Constitution,
which clearly states: `No person shall be . . . deprived of life,
liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private
property be taken for public use, without just compensation.';
(2) since every Member of this body has sworn or affirmed to both
support and defend the entire Constitution and `to bear true faith and
allegiance to the same', any act not in accordance with that oath is
both a betrayal of the United States Constitution and a violation of
Federal law; and
(3) in the constant pursuit of a more perfect union, all citizens of
the United States should remain secure in the possession of private
property, and no court, legislature, or executive shall, by predatory
law or tyrannical force, obtain the property of any citizen of the
United States for the benefit of another private citizen or corporation.
The term ‘‘Indian tribe’’ means any Indian tribe, band,
nation, or other organized group or community. 1 The words ‘‘or the
Indian tribe’’ were inserted after the words ‘‘State Government’’ in the
previous version of this sentence, but the same law also removed the
sentence containing those words and replaced it with this new sentence
which does not contain the words ‘‘State Government’’. See sections
107(d)(2) and 207(c)(2)(D) of the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986.
in accordance with section 553 of title 5, United
States Code, the President shall by rule promulgate amendments to the
hazard ranking system in effect on September 1, 1984. Such amendments
shall assure, to the maximum extent feasible, that the hazard ranking
system accurately assesses the relative degree of risk to human health
and the environment posed by sites and facilities subject to review.
Article 15. Vested Rights Determination
Section 3950. Purpose of Regulations.
No person who has obtained a vested right to conduct surface mining
operations prior to January 1, 1976 shall be required to secure a permit
pursuant to Section 2770 of the Public Resources Code. Any person
claiming a vested right to conduct surface mining operations in a
jurisdiction where the State Mining and Geology Board (the Board) is
lead agency pursuant to section 2774.4 of the Public Resources Code must
establish such claim in a public proceeding under this article. In such
a proceeding the Claimant shall assume the burden of proof.
NOTE
Authority: Sections 2755 and 2775, Public Resources Code. Reference: Calvert v. County of Yuba, (2007) 145 Cal. App. 4th 613.
Section 3951 Vested Right(s) - Definition.
A “vested right” is the right to conduct a legal nonconforming use of
real property if that right existed lawfully before a zoning or other
land use restriction became effective and the use is not in conformity
with that restriction when it continues thereafter. A vested mining
right, in the surface mining context, may include but shall not be
limited to: the area of mine operations, the depth of mine operations,
the nature of mining activity, the nature of material extracted, and the
quantity of material available for extraction.
A person shall be deemed to have a vested right or rights to conduct
surface mining operations if, prior to January 1, 1976, the person has,
in good faith and in reliance upon a permit or other authorization, if
the permit or other authorization was required, diligently commenced
surface mining operations and incurred substantial liabilities for
work and materials necessary for the surface mining operations. Expenses
incurred in obtaining the enactment of an ordinance in relation to a
particular operation or the issuance of a permit shall not be deemed
liabilities for work or materials. Expansion of surface mining
operations after January 1, 1976 may be recognized as a vested
nonconforming use under the doctrine of diminishing assets” as set
forth in Hansen Brothers Enterprises, Inc. v. Board of Supervisors
(1996) 12 Cal.4th 533.
NOTE
Authority: Sections 2755, 2776 and 2775, Public Resources Code; Hansen
Brothers Enterprises, Inc. v. Board of Supervisors (1996) 12 Cal.4th
533.) Reference: Calvert v. County of Yuba, (2007) 145 Cal. App. 4th
613.
“When the well is dry, we learn the worth of water.” -Benjamin Franklin
- "That Accounts for a Good Deal," said Eeyore gloomily. "It Explains
Everything. No Wonder."
- "You must have left it somewhere," said Winnie the Pooh.
- "Somebody must have taken it," said Eeyore. "How Like Them," he added,
after a long silence.
| by Steve Leone, Associate Editor, RenewableEnergyWorld.com | May 3, 2012 |
 | Knowledge
has always been power, but how that information is stored has emerged
as one of the most challenging issues facing the evolution of
technology. Full Article |
| |
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." - Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius (AD 121-180)
"The desire to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it" -- H L Mencken
'Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action' -- Goethe
“Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.” -- Voltaire
Lord Salisbury: "No lesson seems to be so deeply inculcated by
experience of life as that you should never trust experts. If you
believe doctors, nothing is wholesome; if you believe theologians,
nothing is innocent; if you believe soldiers, nothing is safe."
Bertrand Russell knew about consensus: "The fact that an opinion has
been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd;
indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a
widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible.”
There goes another beautiful theory about to be murdered by a brutal gang of facts. - Duc de La Rochefoucauld, French writer and moralist (1613-1680)
"In science, refuting an accepted belief is celebrated as an advance in knowledge; in religion it is condemned as heresy". (Bob Parks, Physics, U of Maryland). No prizes for guessing how global warming skepticism is normally responded to.
"Almost all professors of the arts and sciences are egregiously conceited, and derive their happiness from their conceit" -- Erasmus
"The improver of natural knowledge absolutely refuses to
acknowledge authority, as such. For him, scepticism is the highest of
duties; blind faith the one unpardonable sin." -- Thomas H. Huxley
“Affordable energy in ample quantities is the lifeblood
of the industrial societies and a prerequisite for the economic
development of the others.” -- John P. Holdren, Science Adviser to President Obama. Published in Science 9 February 2001
'The
closer science looks at the real world processes involved in climate
regulation the more absurd the IPCC's computer driven fairy tale
appears. Instead of blithely modeling climate based on hunches and
suppositions, climate scientists would be better off abandoning their
ivory towers and actually measuring what happens in the real world.' -- Doug L Hoffman
Time was, people warning the world "Repent - the end is
nigh!" were snickered at as fruitcakes. Now they own the media and run
the schools.
Do you want to know what is really extreme? The creation of the
Department of Education, after surviving almost 200 years without it.
Since the DOE was created, the cost of college tuition has increased over 439% adjusted for inflation!
The rate of increase is almost exactly commensurate with the rate of
growth of DOE subsidization. As you can see from this chart, the government-induced housing bubble pales in comparison to the government-induced Big Education bubble.
- US News and World Report
"One of the sources of the Fascist movement is the desire to avoid a too-rational and too-comfortable world" -- George Orwell, 1943 in Can Socialists Be Happy?
Storm Shelters Old and New - Still a Good Idea
When Don Wood built his storm shelter 25 years ago, he didn’t
know how often he’d have to use it. As it turned out, Wood and his
family sought protection in that shelter through several windstorms and a
few tornadoes during those 25 years. After tornadoes ripped through
southern Indiana in early March 2012, anyone pondering whether or not to
install or build a storm shelter, or perhaps “harden” an existing
basement against future extreme wind storms, might consider Wood’s
experience and advice.
Wood’s home doesn’t have a basement, so the entrance to his storm
shelter is just a few steps beyond the back door. Access to the shelter
is through a trap door in his deck, and then down a short flight of
stairs to an inward-opening steel door. The shelter itself is an 8-foot
by 12-foot by 8-foot-high concrete enclosure. The walls are 8-inch-thick
concrete-filled concrete blocks, and the roof a 12-inch-thick slab of
reinforced (with rebar) concrete. The shelter rests on a 6-inch-thick
concrete slab. Wood estimates that it could be built today for $6,000;
the cost would be greater if it were built by a contractor/builder.
Jeremy Shireman decided to incorporate a dedicated storm shelter
in the basement of his new home. Shireman’s storm shelter will occupy
the space below the front porch of his home, and the concrete floor of
the porch will serve as the roof of the shelter. Because the walls of
the shelter were poured at the same time as the rest of his home’s
foundation, Shireman estimates the cost for the storm shelter was
approximately $2,000. Shireman considers the cost of his storm shelter
as an investment that will provide safety and protection for his family.
NOTE: It is recommended that your local fire department, local
emergency management agency (EMA), and other relevant local officials be
given the location of your storm shelter. That information can be vital
in post-disaster recovery efforts. In the event that debris is
surrounding or on top of your shelter, this will allow officials to
check on it to make sure any occupants are not trapped inside.
For additional information visit:
1.) FEMA Safe Room Resources website at http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/saferoom/sr_resources.shtm
2.) FEMA P-320, "Taking Shelter from the Storm: Building a Safe
Room for Your Home or Small Business" (2008)
http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/saferoom/fema320.shtm
3) FEMA P_361, "Design and Construction Guidance for Community
Safe Room" (2008) http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/saferoom/fema361.shtm
Don't panic – yet... Our expert guide to the coming storm
K-12 schools and community colleges would be hit hardest
By Jonathan Lippman, Chief Judge of the State of New York
More
than anything else, what makes this country great is our commitment to
the rule of law and our protection of the liberties enshrined in our
state and federal constitutions. It is that promise of liberty and
freedom - that singular dedication to the rule of law that applies
equally to each and every person in this country regardless of their
standing in life - that sets us apart and extends our capacity to grow
and excel. To live up to that promise, we must have an independent and
impartial judiciary, adequately funded and co-equal to the other
branches of government.
| Subject: | Earth Month Tip of the Day: Wait for the storm to pass. |
| | From: | |
Today's
environmental tip: Wait for the storm to pass! Don't fertilize before a
rain storm. Your fertilizer
- along with your money - can just wash off
your lawn and down the storm drain. Fertilizer runoff can pollute
rivers, lakes, and bays, and cause problems in recreational areas or
fishing grounds. Check the weather forecast before you head out, and
wait for the storm to pass.
More information: http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/conserve/rrr/greenscapes/owners.htm
Podcast: http://www.epa.gov/earthday/podcasts
en
español: ¡Deje que pase la tormenta! No abone antes de una lluvia
fuerte. Su fertilizante y su dinero se escurrirán con la lluvia y se
irán por el alcantarillado. Las escorrentías de fertilizantes contaminan
ríos, lagos, y bahías y ocasionan problemas en áreas de recreo y áreas
de pesca. Verifique el pronóstico del tiempo antes de salir y deje que
pase la tormenta.
Más información: http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/conserve/rrr/greenscapes/pubs/owner-sp.pdf
Podcast: http://www.epa.gov/earthday/espanol/podcasts.htm
Want
more tips? Visit EPA's Earth Day site to learn more about Earth Day,
the US Environmental Protection Agency, and what you can do to help
protect human health and the environment. http://www.epa.gov/earthday/tips.htm
Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Grant Safe Rooms.
IMMI Safety and Compliance
Office Public announcement concerning shelters
at satellite re-locations. “The whole point of mitigation is that you plan prior
to some disaster happening. You can’t put a price tag on someone being swept
away when you could have done something to prevent it.
Compared to that, the cost of a shelter is a drop in the
bucket.”
http://www.fema.gov/mitigationbp/brief.do?mitssId=9251
Quakertown a winner in water conservation challenge
Posted: Monday, May 14, 2012 5:00 am
|
Updated: 9:15 am, Mon May 14, 2012.
By Hilary Bentman
Staff writer
|
Quakertown is one of 12 towns to win a national water conservation challenge.
The Upper Bucks community has
been recognized because its residents signed an online pledge in April
to reduce their water usage.
The pledge was part of the 2012 National Mayor’s
Challenge for Water Conservation, which encouraged people across the
country to save water and energy and reduce pollution.
The program was sponsored by Toyota and the Wyland
Foundation, a California-based nonprofit organization that teaches
students around the country about the oceans, rivers, lakes and other
bodies of water.
Between March 30 and April 30, people were asked to
sign the pledge “to change their behavior at home, in their yard and
around their town,” said Steve Creech, executive director of the Wyland
Foundation.
Enough residents with Quakertown ZIP Codes of 18951
signed up to make the community one of the 12 winning cities, joining
such places as Madison, Wis., Toms River, N.J., and Laguna Beach, Calif.
Quakertown ranked first in the 30,001- to 100,000-resident category.
Pledge by oath or affirmation?
Confirmation?
Privacy and civil liberties groups have expressed alarm with overreaching cyber-security measures, like the Cyber
Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act of 2011 (CISPA), which the
House passed last month. The broad coalition of advocacy groups warned:
CISPA creates an exception to all
privacy laws to permit companies to share our information with each
other and with the government in the name of cybersecurity. Although a
carefully-crafted information sharing program that strictly limits the
information to be shared and includes robust privacy safeguards could be
an effective approach to cybersecurity, CISPA lacks such protections
for individual rights.
If the Bush-era National Security Agency (NSA) warrantless spying scandal - which according to recent whistleblowers' disclosures is
far from resolved - it should be that privacy cannot be an afterthought
then privacy telecom companies and the government decide to "team-up"
for our own "security."
Considering what we've learned in
just the past few months, Americans should be more than wary of
partnerships between internet service providers and government. NSA
whistleblower disclosures of
late signify the danger in allowing telecoms to hand our private
information to the government in secret without court oversight.
Disclosures over the past few weeks included:
- The first public description of Stellar Wind, the NSA’s massive
domestic spying program, which has the capacity to intercept trillions
of domestic electronic communications of Americans, including e-mails,
phone calls, and internet activities.
- That Stellar Wind gave the NSA warrantless access to
telecommunications companies’ massive domestic and international billing
records, amounting to an estimated “over a billion and a half calls a
day.”
- That “…after 9/11, all the wraps came off for NSA, and they decided
to – between the White House and NSA and CIA – they decided to eliminate
the protections on U.S. citizens and collect on, domestically. So they
started collecting from a commercial – the one commercial company that I
know of that participated provided over 300 – probably, on the average,
about 320 million records of communication of a U.S. citizen to a U.S.
citizen inside this country.” . . .
- That since 9/11, the NSA has intercepted an estimated “between 15 and 20 trillion” electronic transactions.
- That the scope of Stellar Wind is much larger than what was
previously publicly known “Binney says Stellar Wind was far larger than
has been publicly disclosed and included not just eavesdropping on
domestic phone calls but the inspection of domestic email.”
- That the patriotic-sounding “Terrorist Surveillance Program” was
used as a cover for Stellar Wind: “But it was grouped with Stellar Wind
and some other programs, so that they could give cover to it, talk about
some programs, say they’re talking about the Terrorist Surveillance
Program, but it was basically a group of programs, some of which they
did not want to talk about.”
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
”First Evaluation of the Clean Water Act's Effects“
"We wanted to assume that the Clean Water Act was working".
“Fortunately for us, we have the data"...the ocean responds and cleans
itself. The system is resilient " said Sergio
Sañudo-Wilhelmy, professor of Biological and Earth sciences
at the USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences. who led the
research team, attributing the
cleaner water to sewage treatment regulations that were part of the
Clean Water Act of 1972
| 11/15/2011 |
37
| Filed order (DIARMUID F. O'SCANNLAIN
and STEPHEN S. TROTT) The motion by John F. Hutchens to appear ex parte
and to intervene is denied.
No motions for reconsideration, rehearing or clarification of this
denial shall be entertained.
Appellant T.W. Arman’s request to file a late, oversized opening
brief is denied. Appellant T.W. Arman shall file an opening brief that
complies with Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and Ninth Circuit
Rules within 30 days after the date of this order. Failure to comply
with this order will result in the automatic dismissal of this petition
for review by the Clerk for failure to prosecute. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1.
The answering brief is due 30 days after service of the opening brief
and the optional reply brief is due within 14 days after service of the
answering brief. [7965922] (KKW) |
| 12/16/2011 |
38
| Filed Appellant T. W. Arman motion for
name clearing hearing on premises or congress assembled absolute order *
high appellation. [8005256] (MT) |
| 12/16/2011 |
39
| Filed Appellant T. W. Arman original
mandamus, prayers and application for prohibition and quo warranto, (for
rest of text see document). Served on 12/15/2011. [8006039] (MT) |
| 01/09/2012 |
40
| Filed order (WILLIAM C. CANBY, BARRY
G. SILVERMAN and RICHARD A. PAEZ) Appellant T.W. Arman’s “motion for
name clearing hearing†is denied. To the extent that motion also
requests injunctive relief, it is also denied.
Appellant/petitioner T.W. Arman has not demonstrated that this case
warrants the intervention of this court by means of the extraordinary
remedy of mandamus. See Bauman v. United States Dist. Court, 557 F.2d
650 (9th Cir. 1977). Accordingly, the petition is denied.
No motions for reconsideration, rehearing or clarification of these
denials shall be entertained.
Appellant T.W. Arman shall be given one final opportunity to file an
opening brief that complies with Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure
and Ninth Circuit Rules. This opening brief is due within 30 days after
the date of this order. Failure to comply with this order will result
in the automatic dismissal of this petition for review by the Clerk for
failure to prosecute. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1.
The answering brief is due 30 days after service of the opening brief
and the optional reply brief is due within 14 days after service of the
answering brief.
Any motions and responses thereto filed after the date of this order,
other
than motions related to the filing of the briefs, shall be referred to
the panel that
will hear the merits of this appeal for whatever consideration the panel
deems
appropriate. [8024749] (KKW) |
To make a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, please send us your request in writing to the contact addressed below.
FOIA Contact:
Sarah Lu
FOIA Coordinator
Department of Justice
Environment and Natural Resources Division
Law and Policy Section
P.O. Box 7415, Ben Franklin Station
Washington, DC 20044
(202) 514-0424Fax: (202) 514-4231
E-mail: FOIARouting.enrd@usdoj.gov
Rule 35(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, which
permits the Court of Appeals to hear an appeal for the first time with
all circuit judges empanelled when "necessary to secure or maintain
uniformity of the court's decisions."
“you make examples out of people who are not complying"
Chapter II.
Statutory Provisions and Guidelines
of the Antitrust Division
A.
Statutes Enforced by the Antitrust Division
.........................................
II-3
1.
Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1-7
.......................................
II-3
2.
Wilson Tariff Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 8-11
.........................................
II-4
3.
Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 12-27
.............................................
II-4
4.
Antitrust Civil Process Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1311-14
...............................
II-7
5.
International Antitrust Enforcement Assistance Act of 1994, 15 U.S.C. §§ 6201-12
. . . .
II-7
6.
Miscellaneous
............................................................
II-8
B.
Statutes Used in Criminal Antitrust Investigations and Prosecutions
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
II-9
1.
Offenses that Arise from Conduct Accompanying a Sherman Act Violation
. . . . . . . . . . .
II-9
a.
Conspiracy; Aiding and Abetting
........................................
II-9
b.
Fraud
..............................................................
II-9
c.
Money Laundering
..................................................
II-10
d.
Tax Offenses
.......................................................
II-10
2.
Offenses Involving the Integrity of the Investigative Process
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
II-10
a.
Obstruction
........................................................
II-10
b.
Perjury and False Statements
..........................................
II-11
c.
Criminal Contempt
..................................................
II-11
3.
Procedural Statutes
.......................................................
II-12
4.
Statutes of Limitation
.....................................................
II-12
5.
Victim and Witness Rights
.................................................
II-13
a.
Attorney General Guidelines
..........................................
II-13
b.
Statutes Governing Victims’ Rights and Services for Victims
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
II-13
6.
Sentencing.
............................................................
II-13
a.
General Provisions
..................................................
II-14
b.
Probation
..........................................................
II-15
c.
Fines
.............................................................
II-15
d.
Imprisonment
......................................................
II-16
e.
Restitution
.........................................................
II-16
f.
Miscellaneous
......................................................
II-17
C.
Statutes Affecting the Competition Advocacy of the Antitrust Division
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
II-17
1.
Statutory Antitrust Immunities
.............................................
II-17
a.
Agricultural Immunities .
............................................
II-17
b.
Export Trade Immunities
.............................................
II-18
c.
Insurance Immunities
................................................
II-19
d.
Labor Immunities
...................................................
II-19
e.
Fishing Immunities
..................................................
II-20
f.
Defense Preparedness
...............................................
II-20
g.
Newspaper Joint Operating Arrangements
...............................
II-20
h.
Professional Sports .
................................................
II-20
i.
Small Business Joint Ventures .
.......................................
II-20
j. Local Governments
.................................................
II-21
2.
Statutes Relating to the Regulated Industries Activities of the Antitrust Division
.. . . . .
II-21
a.
Banking
..........................................................
II-22
b.
Communications
...................................................
II-24
c.
Foreign Trade .
....................................................
II-25
d.
Energy
...........................................................
II-26
e.
Transportation
.....................................................
II-28
3.
Statutes Relating to Joint Research and Development, Production, and Standards
Development.
..........................................................
II-29
D.
Antitrust Division Guidelines
...................................................
II-30
1.
Merger Guidelines
.......................................................
II-30
2.
Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property
.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
II-31
3.
Antitrust Enforcement Guidelines for International Operations
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
II-31
4.
Statements of Antitrust Enforcement Policy and Analytical Principles Relating to
Health Care and Antitrust
..................................................
II-31
Antitrust Division Manual, Fourth Edition II-2
Applicability of parens patriae actions Clayton Act § 5 (Tunney Act), 15 U.S.C. § 16 Judgments
1. Offenses that Arise from Conduct Accompanying a Sherman Act Violation
a. Conspiracy; Aiding and Abetting
18 U.S.C. § 2
Principals [aiding and abetting]
18 U.S.C. § 371
Conspiracy to commit offense or defraud the United States
18 U.S.C. § 1349
Attempt and conspiracy [mail and wire fraud]
b. Fraud
18 U.S.C. § 201
Bribery of public officials and witnesses
18 U.S.C. § 666
Theft or bribery concerning programs receiving Federal funds
18 U.S.C. § 1001
Statements or entries generally [false statements]
18 U.S.C. § 1341
Frauds and swindles [mail fraud]
Antitrust Division Manual, Fourth Edition II-9
18 U.S.C. § 1343
Fraud by wire, radio, or television [wire fraud]
c.
Money Laundering
18 U.S.C. § 1952
Interstate and foreign travel or transportation in aid of racketeering enterprise
18 U.S.C. § 1956
Laundering of monetary instruments
18 U.S.C. § 1957
Engaging in monetary transactions in property derived from specified unlawful activity
d.
Tax Offenses
26 U.S.C. § 7201
Attempt to evade or defeat tax
26 U.S.C. § 7206
Fraud and false statements
2.
Offenses Involving the Integrity of the Investigative Process
a.
Obstruction
18 U.S.C. § 1503
Influencing or injuring officer or juror generally
Antitrust Division Manual, Fourth Edition II-10
18 U.S.C. § 1505
Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees.
This statute is used when there is obstruction of proceedings under the
Antitrust Civil Process Act.
18 U.S.C. § 1509
Obstruction of court orders
18 U.S.C. § 1510
Obstruction of criminal investigations
18 U.S.C. § 1512
Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant
18 U.S.C. § 1519
Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations and bankruptcy
b.
Perjury and False Statements
18 U.S.C. § 1621
Perjury generally
18 U.S.C. § 1622
Subornation of perjury
18 U.S.C. § 1623
False declarations before grand jury or court
c.
Criminal Contempt
18 U.S.C. § 402
Contempts constituting crimes
Antitrust Division Manual, Fourth Edition II-11
18 U.S.C. § 3691
Jury trial of criminal contempts Fed. R. Crim. P. 42
Criminal contempt
3.
Procedural Statutes
18 U.S.C. § 3143
Release or detention of a defendant pending sentence or appeal
Speedy Trial Act of 1974, 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161-3174
Demands for production of statements and reports of witnesses
Jencks Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3500
18 U.S.C. §§ 6001-6005
Immunity of witnesses
zealous enforcement
“It is kind of like how the Romans used to conquer villages in the
Mediterranean – they’d go into a little Turkish town somewhere and
they’d find the first five guys they saw and they’d crucify them,” Mr.
Armendariz says on the tape. “Then that little town was really easy to
manage for the next few years.”
He goes on: “And so, you make
examples out of people who are, in this case, not complying with the
law. You find people who are not complying with the law and you hit them
as hard as you can and you make examples out of them. There’s a
deterrent effect there. And companies that are smart see that. They
don’t want to play that game, and they decide at that point that it’s
time to clean up. And that won’t happen unless you have somebody out
there making examples of people.”
a “heavy burden of justification”
Cabacera
del Rio Buenaventura ex jure
naturæ status quo ante
bellum
OFFICIAL MANDATORY JUDICIAL
NOTICE
“The continued
exercise of a franchise, without
right, is a continuously renewed
usurpation on which a new cause of
action arises each day.”
People v. Jefferds, 126 Cal.,
296. (The language of the court in
the last citation.),
People v. Stanford, 77 Cal.,
360, 377; People v. Reclamation
District, 50 Pac.
Rep., 1068;
“It is insisted,
however, that the owner of
property is entitled to a
reasonable compensation for its
use, even though it be clothed
with a public interest, and that
what is reasonable is a judicial
and not a legislative question.”
Munn v. Illinois,
94 U.S.
113
The reach of the Clean
Water Act is notoriously unclear...
property owners are at the agency’s
mercy. The EPA issued compliance
orders demanding that the owners
cease construction, engage
in expensive remedial measures, and
abandon any use of the property. the
owner did not do the EPA’s bidding, and
the EPA sued the previous owners, (all
fortune 500 companies,) essentially
terminating the lawful purchase of the
Iron Mountain Mines property ten years earlier; and holding
all hostage that they may be fined up to
$75,000 per day ($37,500 for violating
the Act and another $37,500 for
violating the compliance order). And if
the new owners want their day in court
to show that their property does
not include covered wetlands, well, as a
practical matter, that is just too bad.
Even when the EPA sued, we are
blocked from access to the courts, and
the EPA may wait as long as it wants
before deciding to perfect its CERCLA
lien. By that time, the potential fines
may easily have reached the billions and
the sun turned into a red giant.
In a nation that values due process,
equal protection, and above all private
property, such treatment is unthinkable and unconscionable.
In the
memory of virtue when it is present,
people imitate it, and they long for it
when it has gone;
A
"modest measure of relief“ from the "hopelessly
indeterminate” scope of “waters of the United
States” - Justice Alito
The government has a “heavy burden of justification” - Justice Kennedy
Legion of E.P.A.'s ‘Crucifying’ Polluters enforcement policy
EPA Pilate program; (Employees must wash hands before returning to work.) Eelyomercinarius Publius Americanus?
Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
And
when Pilate saw that nothing availed, but that there was an increasing
clamor, he took water, washing his hands before the crowds and he said,
“I am free from the blood of this righteous man. Know that.”
h
Deuteronomy 21:6 Then all the elders of the town nearest the body shall wash their hands over the heifer whose neck was broken in the valley,
Matthew 26:5 "But not during the Feast," they said, "or there may be a riot among the people."
Matthew 27:4
"I have sinned," he said, "for I have betrayed innocent blood." "What
is that to us?" they replied. "That's your responsibility."
Matthew 27:19
While Pilate was sitting on the judge's seat, his wife sent him this
message: "Don't have anything to do with that innocent man, for I have
suffered a great deal today in a dream because of him."
Matthew 27:23 "Why? What crime has he committed?" asked Pilate. But they shouted all the louder, "Crucify him!"
Blood Contrary Disturbance Hands Innocent Multitude Murder Righteous Riot Threatening Tumult Washed Water
haec manus inimica tyrannus
A
high-ranking Environmental Protection Agency official has apologized
for remarks he made to subordinates suggesting that the agency “crucify”
some violators of pollution laws to deter others.
Whistleblower – ‘Essentially Suicide’ to Stand Up to JPMorgan Chase Bank
Today
Summary:
A whistleblower who tried to report fraud internally at JPMorgan Chase
was fired and ostracized, after word got out. She called her decision to
report fraud “essentially suicide.” Her family had been living off her
salary and faces a number of financial hardships now.
GAP’s
Corporate & Financial Accountability program represents several
notable bank whistleblowers. GAP client Eileen Foster, who attempted to
expose pervasive fraud at Countrywide and Bank of America, won the Ridenhour Prize for Truth-Telling last month.
Summary:
A whistleblower who tried to report fraud internally at JPMorgan Chase
was fired and ostracized, after word got out. She called her decision to
report fraud “essentially suicide.” Her family had been living off her
salary and faces a number of financial hardships now.
GAP’s
Corporate & Financial Accountability program represents several
notable bank whistleblowers. GAP client Eileen Foster, who attempted to
expose pervasive fraud at Countrywide and Bank of America, won the Ridenhour Prize for Truth-Telling last month.
Key Quote:
Her fate is far from unusual. "Employees get fired all the time for
blowing the whistle," said Dana Gold, a senior fellow at the Government Accountability Project, a nonprofit organization that advocates for whistleblowers. "We see it so much," Gold said. "It's a predictable phenomenon."
To help compensate for such risks, 2010's Dodd-Frank financial
regulatory law offers incentives to sweeten the pot for some
whistleblowers. While Gold and other employee advocates applaud the new
provisions, neither Almonte nor any of the hundreds of other
whistleblowers who have filed complaints under the new program have
received a payout for their information. Instead these informants, who
have risked their careers, wait to learn whether they will receive
millions in government awards or nothing.
Viewpoint with Eliot Spitzer: NSA Whistleblowers Warn of Secret Spying Programs That Can Target Anyone
May 7, 2012
Summary: National Security Agency whistleblowers and GAP clients William Binney, J. Kirk Wiebe, and Thomas Drake appeared on Viewpoint with Eliot Spitzer
to talk the expanding surveillance state and their respective decisions
to blow the whistle. They have also made appearances on Democracy Now! and the Glenn Beck Show in recent weeks.
James Bamford: State Department and WikiLeaks ‘Alice in Wonderland’
May 7, 2012
Summary:
State Department whistleblower and GAP client Peter Van Buren asked
James Bamford, a prominent national security journalist, and Matthew
Miller, a former Justice Department spokesman, about the Obama
administration’s assertion that WikiLeaks documents – despite being
available online to the world – remain “classified.” The video of the
response is embedded in this post.
Federal Times: Lawmakers Scrutinize Conference Spending by IRS, NOAA
May 4, 2012
Summary:
Since the General Services Administration's excessive spending spree at
a federal conference, Congress is increasing its scrutiny of other
federal conferences.
The New York Times: Conservative Nonprofit Acts as a Stealth Business Lobbyist
April 21, 2012
Summary:
A conservative nonprofit, American Legislative Exchange Council, has
come under heavy criticism for appearing to be nothing more than a
business-backed group that opposes 'false claims' legislation – laws
that often incentivize whistleblowers to report wrongdoing and fraud
against the state. In Ohio, for instance, a false claims bill was
reworked to accommodate some of ALEC’s concerns. Now, Common Cause, a
political watchdog group and GAP coalition member, has filed a complaint
against ALEC, accusing them of violating their tax-exempt status by
lobbying state legislators.
Related Article: Bloomberg News
The New York Times: These Islands Aren’t Just a Shelter from Taxes
May 5, 2012
Summary:
This op-ed argues that tax laws should be reformed in an effort to
prevent money laundering and tax fraud through the use of island ‘tax
shelters.’ The author specifically refers to whistleblowers as one of
the only ways to combat this kind of tax evasion.
Huffington Post: Whistleblower Workers Face Deportation Despite Obama Administration Policy
May 7, 2012
Summary:
Immigrant workers who speak out face a kind of retaliation that isn’t
used against US-born workers – deportation. The Obama administration has
said the Immigration and Customs Enforcement offices would protect
immigrant whistleblowers, but this has not happened in practice.
Irish Times: Official Secrets Act to Protect Sensitive Data
Today
Summary:
In response to new whistleblower protection legislation, Irish
lawmakers are expected to amend the Official Secrets Act to prevent
“highly sensitive and secret” information being disclosed.
"Roadmap to Achieving a Lean Workforce," on
Thursday, May 17 at 2:00p.m.
Join Kronos Industry Principal Beth Berndt as she highlights how
companies are sustaining gains and improving operations using Lean Labor
techniques. She'll provide insight into best practices for identifying
labor-related waste and applying the proven principles of Lean thinking
to workforces across the energy industry.
The fourth in our four-part Operational Excellence Webinar Series, this one-hour event will help you to:
- Learn how to apply Lean techniques to the workforce
- Start thinking about your labor and operations in new and innovative ways
- Identify the most common types of labor-related waste
- Understand how workforce management solutions can enhance continuous improvement strategies
Washington
is a city known for allegations of waste and fraud. Mere mention of the
government’s impropriety can get people elected. At most federal
agencies, that oversight falls to an inspector general, a position
appointed by the president with full independence to investigate
complaints and root out abuse.
But
for more than four years, the Department of State has been without a
top watchdog. The agency, which oversees millions in foreign contracts
and America’s often shadowy diplomacy efforts, hasn’t had an executive
in its oversight office since the Bush administration. And employees
there don’t know why.
“You’ll
have to ask the White House because we really have no idea,” says Doug
Welty, a spokesman for the inspector general’s office at the State
Department. The office has received no word from top administration
officials about filling the top vacancy—to have contact about an
appointee would be improper, Welty says—and has been functioning
decently over the past few years, ramping up investigations and
increasing its staff.
Nine
other agencies lack top watchdogs as well, including the Departments of
Interior and Labor, both of which have been without full-time
inspectors general since early 2009. The Office of the Special Inspector
General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, the source of hefty overseas
spending often away from the public eye, hasn’t had an inspector general
for over a year. And the Pentagon, which handles billions in contracts
and covert war policy, has lacked a top oversight official since
December.
The
White House says it is working diligently to find the best people to
fill the vacancies, and that it takes time to find qualified, interested
people who can pass through Congress. “The administration is firmly
committed to strong inspectors general, and we are working diligently to
identify the best candidates to fill these unique posts,” Eric Schultz,
an administration spokesman, tells The Daily Beast.
Left to right: Government Services Administration Inspector General
Brian Miller, former GSA Administrator Martha Johnson, GSA Regional
Commissioner Jeff Neely, GSA Chief of Staff Michael Robertson and GSA
Deputy Commissioner David Foley testified before the House Oversight and
Government Reform Committee on April 16. (Chip Somodevilla / Getty
Images)
Congress
hasn’t been pleased with the administration’s foot dragging, even
though two nominees—for the Department of Homeland Security and the
Corporation for National and Community Service—are being considered by
the Senate. The House Oversight Committee is investigating the matter,
beginning with a hearing on Thursday on Capitol Hill. Rep. Darrell Issa,
the panel’s chairman, says vacancies “send the wrong message” about the
government’s commitment to self policing. Last April, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen
held a hearing on State’s oversight, focusing on complaints by some
whistleblowers that the inspector general’s office was unprepared to
take their grievances.
The
work of inspectors general often makes it to the public, frequently
through journalists. Last year, after a series of unflattering reports
on Recovery Act spending for renewable-energy projects, a Newsweek report sought answers from the White House. Evidence
that Government Services Administration officials had overspent on
extravagant travel and conferences, all on the taxpayers’ dime, was
initially discovered by the agency’s internal investigator.
“When you have someone in a temporary role, it can be a crippling position for an inspector-general office.”
Many
inspector general offices with a missing chief say their oversight
efforts run smoothly and efficiently, despite the vacancies. Several
officials in these offices who declined to be identified pointed out
that the number of probes they conduct has increased and that oversight
has never been stronger.
The
Project on Government Oversight, a government watchdog nonprofit that
initially looked into the matter, isn’t swayed. “When you have someone
in a temporary role, it can be a crippling position for an
inspector-general office,” says Jake Wiens, an investigator with POGO
who will testify before lawmakers on Thursday. Only official appointees
have full autonomy, he says.
Filling
inspector-general vacancies has taken a long time for most
administrations, primarily because the person selected is the agency’s
first and last stop to identify fraud. Many inspectors general have no
term limits, as well. Still, POGO researchers point out that Obama is
the second slowest president in history to appoint official oversight
chiefs at federal agencies. The first was Ronald Reagan.
NOAA Accountability?
May 10, 2012 By
scottbrown
U.S. Sen. Scott Brown Wednesday faulted NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco for overseeing an agency without accountability.
In a letter to Commerce Secretary John Bryson, Brown asked the
Commerce chief to review and report on two new instances of unexplained
actions — the brief solicitation for a “magician” to preside at a
leadership conference, and a mass meeting of agency lawyers at a hotel
in Philadelphia, a two hour ride from NOAA’s Silver Spring, Md.,
headquarters.
“NOAA’s continued disregard for being efficient and effective
stewards of taxpayer dollars illustrates the rampant culture of waste at
this agency, which has been fostered by Administrator Lubchenco’s
failure to punish obvious misconduct,” Brown wrote. “NOAA’s decision to
seek an outside magician is just another troubling example.
“It has already been documented that Administrator Lubchenco
previously retained an employee who made 80 percent of the agency’s law
enforcement files disappear in a ‘shredding party’ during an Inspector
General investigation. This is the same well-paid NOAA employee who
supported the purchase of a $300,000 luxury fishing boat, despite
warnings from a NOAA procurement lawyer.”
Racketeering Charge Against BofA and MERS
Posted by Larry Doyle on May 10, 2012 5:32 AM |
Did Wall Street Violate the Racketeering Act?
Believing that the activity did likely rise to a level of racketeering, I
recommended that attorneys general should pursue institutions involved in these
fraudulent and abusive practices with a RICO action.
Well, it appears that somebody is now doing just that with specific focus on
activities that transpired at Bank of America and MERS (Mortgage
Electronic Registration System).
American Banker highlights this specific case and much more in
writing, Will R-I-C-O Spell Relief for B Of A Mortgage Borrowers?,
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 16, 2012
EPA Announces NAS’ Review of IRIS Assessment Development Process
WASHINGTON
– The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today announced that the
National Academy of Sciences (NAS) will conduct a comprehensive review
of the agency’s Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program’s
assessment development process. The
IRIS program helps EPA protect Americans’ health and the environment by
conducting health assessments of over 550 chemicals that may be present
in our environment.
In
April 2011, NAS recommended several ways to improve the development of
IRIS assessments. EPA has embraced these recommendations and is
implementing them using a phased approach. Future
draft IRIS assessments released for public comment and peer review will
demonstrate the progress EPA has made in implementing NAS
recommendations.
“EPA
is committed to a strong and robust IRIS program,” said Lek Kadeli,
acting assistant administrator for the EPA’s Office of Research and
Development. “This program plays a significant role in protecting the
health of our country’s citizens and the environment in which they live.
We welcome the NAS’ review of the IRIS assessment development process
and look forward to working with them to continue to strengthen the
program.”
NAS
will conduct a review of the IRIS assessment development process and
the changes that are currently being made or planned by EPA in response
to NAS’ April 2011 recommendations. NAS will also review current methods
for weight of evidence analyses and recommend approaches for weighing
scientific evidence for chemical hazard identification.
EPA’s
IRIS program provides health profiles of chemicals to which the public
may be exposed from releases to air, water, and land and through the use
and disposal of chemicals. IRIS assessments inform EPA rulemakings, and
the release of final IRIS assessments is consistent with EPA’s
ongoing efforts to improve Americans’ health and protect the
environment.
More information about IRIS: http://www.epa.gov/iris
Science, Engineering and Education for Sustainability NSF-Wide Investment
(SEES)
SEES Mission Statement
To advance science, engineering, and education
to inform the societal actions needed for environmental and economic
sustainability and sustainable human well-being.
CONTACTS
For general inquiries about SEES related activities: nsf-sees-info@nsf.gov.
For program or discipline-specific questions, please see the full list of contacts at: http://www.nsf.gov/geo/sees/sees_contacts.jsp
SYNOPSIS
Science, Engineering, and Education for
Sustainability (SEES) is a portfolio of activities that highlights NSF's
unique role in helping society address the challenge(s) of achieving
sustainability.
SEES Portolio of Programs:
Courtney
Warner Crowell, a Merkley spokeswoman, said the senator wants families
living near contaminated areas to be notified and hopes that state and
federal agencies will partner to clean them up.
In
a statement, the EPA said it "shares the Senators' concern for
protecting Americans' health. EPA is currently reviewing USA Today's
sampling data and case studies and has already begun evaluating a number
of the sites on the list to determine if they pose a risk to the
surrounding communities - we will continue to work with states and local
partners to evaluate those sites."
Green group files FOIA lawsuit seeking details about White House EPA meetings
By Andrew Restuccia
-
05/09/12
The Environmental Integrity Project filed a Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA) lawsuit Tuesday seeking details about dozens of White House
meetings with interest groups to discuss Environmental Protection Agency
regulations.
The non-profit group, which advocates for the enforcement of environmental rules, filed
the lawsuit
after receiving no response from the White House Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) to a January FOIA request seeking more
details on the meetings.
Media Advisory 12-014
National Research Council Sustainability Symposium Features National Science Foundation Leaders
NSF-sponsored "Science, Innovation, and Partnerships for Sustainability" event to take place May 16-18
News From the Field
Increasing Speed Gives New Insight
carousel
Federal court dismisses EPA’s CERCLA claim as untimely
A federal court in Illinois has dismissed a claim filed by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCL A) against
the possible owner of a contaminated site in Chicago, ruling that the
claim was barred by the statute of limitations United States v. Capital Tax Corp., No. 04-4138 (N.D. Ill. 4/16/12).
The named defendant, Capital Tax Corp., acquired the former site of a
paint factory at an undisclosed time. In 2004, EPA spent more than $2
million removing hazardous substances from the site and later the same
year filed a CERCL A lawsuit against Capital Tax and three individuals
to recover its response costs. At trial, Capital Tax admitted owning the
site.
After the trial court found Capital Tax liable as an owner, the company
appealed to the Seventh Circuit, arguing that it had reached an
agreement with an individual, Marvin Dukatt, to sell the property to
him, and was therefore, not the owner. Dukatt denied there was an
agreement. The appeals court remanded the case for consideration of
whether Capital Tax and Dukatt “entered a valid, oral agreement for the
purchase” of the site, “such that an equitable conversion had occurred .
. . .” In an affidavit, Dukatt said he had reached agreement with
Capital Tax but had reneged after EPA became involved.
In March 2010, the United States amended the complaint to add Dukatt as
a defendant. Dukatt then moved for summary judgment, arguing that the
government’s claims were time-barred. The government argued that Dukatt
should be equitably stopped from asserting the statute of limitations or
that the statute should be equitably tolled because Dukatt did not deny
entering an agreement with Capital Tax until after the statute had run.
Ruling for Dukatt, the court held that for equitable tolling to be
appropriate, plaintiff must show “(1) that he has been pursuing his
rights diligently, and (2) that some extraordinary circumstance stood in
his way and prevented his filing.” For equitable estoppel to apply, the
government would have to show (1) improper conduct by Dukatt; and (2)
that it actually and reasonably relied on his conduct. The court ruled
that equitable tolling was not factually justified and that, as to
equitable estoppel, the government never asserted that it relied on
Dukatt’s assertions.
AIG ex-CEO Greenberg fraud case
cleared for trial
A New York appeals court on Tuesday cleared the way for former American International Group Inc
Chief Executive Maurice "Hank" Greenberg case to go to trial in the
state's fraud lawsuit against him over two suspect reinsurance
transactions.
The appeals panel said a lower court judge was premature to
hold Greenberg and former AIG Chief Financial Officer Howard Smith
liable in October 2010 for damages over an auto warranty insurance
transaction with Capco Reinsurance Co, which the state called a sham
that helped AIG hide more $200 million of losses, but New York
State Supreme Court Justice Charles Ramos rejected the
defendants' bid to dismiss claims over a better-known transaction with
reinsurer General Re Corp. The state said this transaction helped AIG
inflate loss reserves by $500 million without transferring risk.
General Re is a unit of Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Inc .
The unsigned 4-1 decision is the latest saga in a case dating from 2005, when then-New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer
accused Greenberg and Smith of helping to engineer the transactions to
hide losses at AIG, which had been the largest U.S. insurer by market
value.
These transactions led AIG to restate its 2001 to 2004 financial statements. Spitzer's successors Andrew Cuomo
and Eric Schneiderman have also pursued the civil case, which invokes
the Martin Act, a powerful state law to combat securities fraud.
James Freedland, a spokesman for
Schneiderman, said: "We are pleased that the court has paved the way for
a trial to hold the defendants accountable for perpetrating a major
reinsurance scheme to defraud investors."
Greenberg and Smith plan to ask the state's highest court,
the Court of Appeals, to dismiss the entire case, according to a joint
statement from Greenberg's lawyers David Boies and John Gardiner and
Smith's lawyer Vincent Sama.
The attorney general
"failed to develop and present any proper, admissible evidence to
support its allegations against Mr. Greenberg and Mr. Smith," Boies and
Gardiner said.
The
appeals panel said there are "triable issues of fact as to whether
defendants knew of, or participated in the fraudulent aspects of the Gen
Re and Capco schemes, given the nature and degree of their personal
involvement in both of the challenged transactions, as well as
defendants' responsibilities within the corporation."
It also said a definitive ruling on Capco was premature in light of
the defendants' sworn denials that they had committed fraud, and their
testimony that an AIG senior vice president had assured them that the
transaction was proper.
Justice James Catterson
dissented. He said that federal law preempted the state's case, and that
even if it did not the General Re claims should be thrown out.
Greenberg left AIG in March 2005 after nearly four decades
at the helm. AIG in 2006 paid $1.64 billion to settle federal and state
probes into its business practices, and in July 2010 agreed to pay $725
million to settle a shareholder lawsuit accusing it of accounting fraud
and stock price manipulation.
AIG's transaction
with General Re led to five convictions and two guilty pleas of former
officials of those companies. A federal appeals court threw out those
convictions last August, and a new trial has been scheduled for January
2013.
The U.S. government still owns 61 percent of
AIG following $182.3 billion of taxpayer-funded bailouts in 2008 and
2009.
Greenberg's company Starr International Co,
once AIG's largest shareholder, is suing the government for $25 billion,
calling the bailouts unconstitutional.
The case is
New York v. Greenberg et al, New York State Supreme Court, Appellate
Division, 1st Department, No. 5297.
(Reporting By Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Phil Berlowitz) SOME MORE EDITING BY ME.
(AIG obtained the
'fraudulent reinsurance' from General Re at the same time it assumed
the obligation and liability for Iron Mountain Mines Superfund cleanup;
as a result, it's ratings and it's subsidiaries ratings didn't even
budge in spite of their assuming potential unlimited CERCLA superfund
liabilities. After it's contractor filed bankruptcy in 2002, AIG took
over the daily maintenance of Iron Mountain Operations, LLC; in
2003 it petitioned the court to be excused from finding another
contractor; the court observed that as a rule fiduciaries are
prohibited from doing business with themselves as trustees and
contractors, but with the DOJ's and EPA's support, the Eastern District
Court's judge Levi waived the prohibition, because AIG was such a big,
responsible, & triple A rated company. Since the 2008 bailout,
the federal government has owned a controlling interest in AIG. No word
from the courts on the issue of a new waiver for the rule of
prohibition forbidding a contractor from doing business with itself as
fiduciary, trustee, and Lead government oversight agency. Warren
Buffet invested $50,000 in Iron Mountain Mines original hydropower
project in 1980, but Ted Arman cancelled the deal after Buffet
tried to take over the project. ) -Ed.
Clean
Cities significant obstacles: 1) Policies; 2) Barrier Reduction; 3)
Safety and Training; and 4) Market Development/Outreach.
Risk. A combination of the likelihood that a negative outcome will occur and the severity of the subsequent negative consequences.
Humans at risk
Most
people bitten by a mosquito carrying West Nile experience no symptoms.
Twenty to 30 percent, however, will contract West Nile fever and
flu-like symptoms, according to the Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector
Control District. Since 1999, the U.S. has had more than 30,000 reported human cases, with 1,220 deaths.
"We could definitely see
an increase in the number of human cases of West Nile virus," said Steve
Schutz, scientific program manager for the Concord-based agency.
Scientists
from the state's 65 vector control agencies are meeting at their annual
conference in Burlingame this week to discuss the issues.
Leaders
of the mosquito-abatement agencies in Alameda, Contra Costa, Santa
Clara and San Mateo counties all said they believe the restrictions on
fogging are unnecessary and could complicate long-term efforts to combat
West Nile.
With months before the
fogging season begins, mosquito control agencies are crossing their
fingers and lobbying legislators to halt the regulations.
"It's
the only known way to reduce adult mosquito populations," said Gary
Goodman, assistant manager for the Sacramento-Yolo agency, stressing
that the products are sanctioned by the EPA.
Mosquitoes already have
awakened from their hibernation, and a late rain could create perfect
breeding conditions for West Nile, just as a federal court ruling
imposes strict regulations on the use of mosquito-abatement pesticides.
The
ruling, which took effect in the fall, requires pesticide use to adhere
to the Clean Water Act, meaning seasonal fogging may cease in parts of
the Bay Area. That will increase the chances of humans getting infected
with the potentially fatal virus, experts say. A bill that would free
vector control agencies from these rules is stuck in Congress.
Meanwhile, the agencies are
watching closely an infestation of the Asian tiger mosquito in Southern
California. This dangerous mosquito can carry not only West Nile but
also dengue fever, known as "break-bone fever" because of its
accompanying joint and muscle pains. This mosquito was found in Santa
Clara County six years ago but was quarantined before it could spread.
House of
Representatives Bill 872, which would reduce the regulatory burdens,
passed the House but has stalled in the U.S. Senate. The bill has enough
votes to pass, but Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., has put a hold on it,
said Sacramento-Yolo manager David Brown.
RIVER RALLY 2012 IS FILLED. REGISTRATION CLOSED. RALLY HO!
Lisa Jackson
Environmental Protection Agency
Administrator Lisa Jackson stopped by
Portland today to tour the city's "green infrastructure"
and deliver the opening address for "River Rally 2012,"
a gathering of river activists from around the globe
in Portland this weekend.
An international gathering of the watershed conservation community
A joint production of:
EVENT INFORMATION
River Rally 2012 Sponsors
River Network and Waterkeeper Alliance wish to thank the following for their generous support of River Rally 2012
Lead Sponsor
($25,000 and above)
Basin Sponsor
($15,000-24,999)
Watershed Sponsor
($10,000-14,999)
River Sponsor
($5,000-9,999)
Budweiser
City of Portland - Office of Healthy Working Rivers
Corporation for National & Community Service
Environment Now
Meyer Memorial Trust
Scotts Miracle-Gro Company
Summit Fund of Washington
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Stream Sponsor
($2,500-4,999)
Keith Campbell Foundation for the Environment
Johnson Foundation at Wingspread
Klean Kanteen
The Kresge Foundation
National Park Service
Park Foundation
Brook Sponsor
($1,000-2,499)
Clif Bar
Columbia Sportswear
Econscious
RiverSides Foundation
Storm Water Systems, Inc.
Your True Nature
Spring Sponsor
($500-999)
Aquatic Contracting, LLC
Bee Natural
Beehive Insurance
Chick of All Trades
Enviroscape
Filterra Bioretention Systems
Freshwaters Illustrated
LaMotte Company
Lead Green
LOOPTWORKS
National Fish Habitat Partnership
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
New Outlook Financial, LLC
The Rain Barrel Depot
ThinkShout
Water Words That Work
Zach King
Friend of River Rally
($250-499)
American Canoe Association
Gold Systems, Inc.
Media Sponsor
With 59 percent saying no, voters have rejected a mail-in ballot for a
Contra Costa County parcel tax for clean water projects, the Contra
Costa Clean Water Program announced Monday.
Possible infractions involving a contract awarded for cleanup work.
May 11, 2012
Feature
In the third year of the Early Career Research Program
managed by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science, five
researchers at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) were
on the list of 68 recipients from 47 institutions announced earlier
this week.
The awards focus on areas of high priority for the nation and for
DOE’s mission, supporting exceptional researchers during the critical
stages of their formative work by funding their research for up to five
years and $2.5 million. The grants are administered by the major program
offices within the Office of Science.
Berkeley Lab’s winners are:
Hank Childs
of the Computational Research Division’s Visualization Group and the
Department of Computer Science at the University of California at Davis.
Childs is the architect of VisIt, one of the most popular frameworks
for data analysis and scientific visualization. He joined Berkeley Lab
in 2009 after nearly a decade in Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory’s Advanced Simulation and Computing program, where he was a
member of the original VisIt development team. He continues to enhance
VisIt for the petascale visualization and analysis needs of researchers
in the Department of Energy’s Office of Science. Child’s Early Career
Award for “Data Exploration at the Exascale” from the Office of Advanced
Scientific Computing Research furthers this research.
John Dueber of the Physical Biosciences Division, UC Berkeley College of Engineering, and the Energy Biosciences Institute.
A bioengineer who uses the tools of synthetic biology to engineer
microbes for producing liquid transportation fuels from plant biomass,
one of Dueber’s major efforts is to improve the efficiency of xylose
catabolism in the common yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Xylose is the
major constituent of hemicellulose, an attractive but so far untapped
feedstock sugar for fuel. Dueber and his group pursue a combination of
strategies including optimizing the expression of crucial enzymes, by
screening a library of promising promoters, and addressing bottlenecks
at the protein level, by designing synthetic scaffolds to co-localize
enzymes for increased efficiency and limited loss, which will improve
xylose import. Dueber’s Early Career Award is for Repurposing the
Saccharomyces Cerevisiae Peroxisome for Compartmentalizing Multi-Enzyme
Pathways is from the Office of Basic Energy Sciences.
Oliver Gessner of the Ultrafast X-Ray Science Laboratory Chemical Sciences Division in the Chemical Sciences Division.
In 2010 Gessner led the Berkeley Lab contingent of a
multi-institutional team that published the very first research results
from SLAC National Laboratory’s LCLS, the Linac Coherent Light Source,
detailing their counterintuitive discovery that as x-ray pulses
impacting nitrogen molecules grow shorter and more powerful, they do
less damage, not more. He continues his research with x-ray pulses
measured in femtoseconds, including recent work to figure out why
coating semiconductors with dye molecules to help them absorb a broad
spectrum of sunlight and convert it into electrical current has so far
lagged behind its early promise of cheap, efficient solar cells.
Gessner’s Early Career Award for Ultrafast X‐ray Studies of
Intramolecular and Interfacial Charge Migration, from the Office of
Basic Energy Sciences, will examine this and related questions.
Daniel Kasen of the Nuclear Science Division and the Department of Physics at the University of California at Berkeley.
Starting as a graduate student in Berkeley Lab’s Computational
Research Division, Kasen has concentrated on applying high-performance
computing and simulation to further our understanding of supernovae and
other stellar explosions. The nucleosynthesis that occurs under extreme
conditions inside supernova explosions has produced the majority of the
heavier elements in the periodic table. Although they account for only a
minor part of the universe’s total mass, these elements make life and
its environs possible. Kasen’s Early Career Award for Modeling
Astrophysical Explosions and the Nucleosynthesis of the Heavy Elements,
from the Office of Nuclear Physics, will continue this research,
improving our understanding of photon and neutrino physics within
explosive astrophysical environments and further developing and applying
advanced simulation codes to address fundamental questions in nuclear
astrophysics.
Kevin Wilson, of the Chemical Dynamics Beamline in the Chemical Sciences Division.
Wilson investigates surface reactions of free radicals at organic
interfaces with relevance for environmental, atmospheric aerosol and
cloud chemistry. His award from the Office of Basic Energy Sciences is
for his proposal entitled, “Free Radical Reactions of Hydrocarbons at
Aqueous Interfaces.”
Fiscal year 2012 marks the third year of a planned annual program of
research awards from the Office of Science. This year’s winners were
chosen based on peer review by outside scientists unaffiliated with DOE,
who considered over 850 proposals submitted last fall. For more
information, see DOE’s announcement at http://science.energy.gov/early-career/
###
DOE’s Office of Science is the single largest supporter of basic
research in the physical sciences in the United States, and is working
to address some of the most pressing challenges of our time. For more
information, please visit science.energy.gov/.
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory addresses the world’s most
urgent scientific challenges by advancing sustainable energy, protecting
human health, creating new materials, and revealing the origin and
fate of the universe. Founded in 1931, Berkeley Lab’s scientific
expertise has been recognized with 13 Nobel prizes. The University of
California manages Berkeley Lab for the U.S. Department of Energy’s
Office of Science. For more, visit www.lbl.gov/.
EPA Whistleblower Gets Job Back
Posted in Liberaland by Stuart Shapiro • May 8, 2012,by Stuart Shapiro
Cate
Jenkins was the first EPA official to warn of the dangers of the air at
the World Trade Center ruins. Was she rewarded for an insight that was
later proven correct? Nope, she was harassed and finally, in 2010,
fired. This week she got her job back:
A
federal court ordered that Cate Jenkins, a chemist at the Environmental
Protection Agency, be reinstated to her job with back pay.
Her
lawyer said the decision, although based on matters of legal process,
amounted to vindication for Jenkins’s claims that the EPA had covered up
the danger posed to first responders and others in lower Manhattan from
the asbestos and highly corrosive dust that rose from the wreckage of
the World Trade Center.
It was also a rare victory for whistleblowers, said lawyer Paula Dinerstein. “This doesn’t happen that often.”
Being
a whistleblower requires courage and the ability to speak truth to
power. Protecting whistleblowers is one way we ensure accountability
for government.
|
| published Tuesday, May 01, 2012 |
|
|
 |
Hanford Challenge Decries Appalling Lack of Oversight, demands
Immediate Stand Down and Complete Investigation
Immediate
Release - April 30, 2012
Contact: Tom Carpenter (206) 419-5829 Richland,
WA: The Department of Energy’s Office of Inspector General released a
report today that revealed a disturbing breakdown in Hanford’s quality
program that allowed radioactive waste processing vessels to be
installed without required documentation proving their integrity. This
means that the Department of Energy is unable to prove the safety of the
Waste Treatment Plant (WTP). The IG also found a
critical lack of oversight on the DOE’s part, and a failure to collect
the repayment of a $15 million assessment against Bechtel, the
contractor, when DOE discovered a defective vessel. Tom Carpenter, Executive Director of the public interest group Hanford Challenge stated: The
Hanford WTP plant continues to be designed and built despite the tidal
wave of allegations and findings on the lack of safety by key engineers
and managers, who have sacrificed their careers to do so. Now we have
the findings of the Inspector General which reveal an appalling pattern
of failing to design and construct a facility that safeguards the public
-- a situation that we won’t tolerate here in Washington State.
Hanford Challenge calls for a stand-down of design and construction at
the WTP and reconsideration of how to get this plant back on track.
Carpenter pointed out that a 2006 60 Minutes show
revealed the same allegations, when it was discovered that Hanford
waste vessels called “scrubber tanks” were installed defectively and
without proper quality assurance documentation and inspection. “Six
years ago, the Department was put on notice of this problem in a 60
Minutes feature yet failed to act. The GAO testified about this issue
in April 2006. When will Congress realize that this agency cannot
juggle safety considerations against cost and schedule pressures?”
stated Carpenter. The DOE Inspector General report,
entitled, “Audit Report on "The Department of Energy's $12.2 Billion
Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant – Quality Assurance Issues –
Black Cell Vessels," was released on April 30, 2012. According to the
report - - “[T]he Department had procured and installed
vessels in WTP that did not always meet quality assurance and/or
contract requirements . . .we identified multiple instances where
quality assurance records were either missing or were not traceable to
the specific area or part of the vessel.”
- “We also found that
the Department paid the WTP contractor a $15 million incentive fee for
production of a vessel that was later determined to be defective.
Although the Department demanded return of the fee, it did not follow up
on the matter and the fee was never reimbursed. Weaknesses in quality
assurance records associated with black cell and hard-to-reach
processing vessels occurred because of deficiencies in Bechtel's
implementation of its quality assurance program and a lack of Department
oversight."
- “The importance of black cells and hard-to-reach
components cannot be over stated. Premature failure of these components
could potentially impact safety, contaminate large portions of a
multi-billion dollar facility and interrupt waste processing for an
unknown period of time. For these reasons, we have made several
recommendations designed to strengthen quality assurance controls at
WTP. We have also recommended a more intense effort to recover
contractor fee for the nonconforming vessel.”
Hanford Challenge has been urging Congress to give another federal agency, the Defense Nuclear Safety Board (DNFSB),
more authority and resources to oversee the Hanford Waste Treatment
Plant. So far, there has been no action. Similarly, the Department of
Energy has not taken meaningful steps to beef up its inspection or
enforcement function, or otherwise show that it is willing or capable of
conducting the proper oversight. “The WTP is a
decade behind schedule, 240% over its projected costs, and is able to
treat only a fraction of the high-level waste that we were told it
would. So we are spending more and waiting longer for a facility that
will do less. And it is riddled with safety issues that appear
irresolvable. The stark truth is that the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, if it had jurisdiction here, would probably not license this
facility given its “quality indeterminate” state," said Carpenter. The
consequences of a vessel failure inside the Waste Treatment Plant could
be catastrophic. Like Fukushima, the radioactive waste generates large
amounts of explosive hydrogen gas. The current design is under attack
by Hanford engineer whistleblowers over the failure of the design to
prevent or mitigate the possible release of radioactive materials to the
environment in the case of an explosion or fire. That is why the
quality of the equipment inside the plant is key to safety. |
DAVIS, Calif., May 8, 2012 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ --
Landowners in five watersheds will receive targeted funding to improve water quality
In conjunction with a national water quality initiative, The USDA
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) in California will invest
$2.5 million in targeted funds to improve water quality in five high
priority watersheds in California.
"NRCS California is proud to participate in this national campaign to
add on-farm water quality improvements within targeted watersheds," said
Ed Burton, NRCS California state conservationist. "These additional
funds will help landowners to voluntarily address issues related to
Clean Water Act compliance and keep their farms and ranches healthy and
productive."
Using funds through the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP),
NRCS will provide financial and technical assistance to farmers and
ranchers to install conservation practices that help to stabilize soil
and reduce the transport of sediments and other pollutants into public
waters. This assistance will help landowners address high priority
water resource concerns in small watersheds with streams or water bodies
that are impacted by agricultural runoff and under increased regulatory
scrutiny.
Applications will be batched and evaluated on May 18 and again on June
15, 2012; those received by the earlier date will have a higher chance
of being funded.
Through this effort, eligible farmers and ranchers will partner with
NRCS to invest in voluntary conservation actions to help provide cleaner
water for their neighbors and communities. The selected watersheds were
identified with help from state and federal agencies, and other
conservation partners.
The following five watersheds are eligible for assistance:
Calleguas Creek: Revlon Slough, Ventura County
Calleguas Creek: Town of Nyland - Frontal Pacific Ocean, Ventura County
Big-Navarro-Garcia: Upper Garcia River, Mendocino County
Big-Navarro-Garcia: Middle Garcia River, Mendocino County
Lower Eel: Salt River, Humboldt County
This effort helps landowners in eligible watersheds to qualify for
financial assistance by competing for targeted funds with a smaller pool
of applicants. Typically, NRCS receives a large number of applications
for EQIP funding each fiscal year and only about 30 percent of farmers
and ranchers are successful.
Eligible farmers and ranchers should visit
http://www.ca.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/ or contact their local NRCS
office for additional information on eligible practices and to submit an
application.
NRCS has provided leadership in a partnership effort to help America's
private land owners and managers conserve their soil, water and other
natural resources since 1935. For more information on NRCS, visit
www.nrcs.usda.gov .
SOURCE USDA - Natural Resources Conservation Service
This sign near the entrance of Talking Water Gardens doesn't mention smoking. (Hasso Hering/Democrat-Herald)
Albany, Millersburg officials want no butts getting into the river
Dogs on leashes are OK at the Talking Water Gardens, but smoking tobacco is not.
Albany Councilman Floyd Collins told the city council
Monday that the joint Albany-Millersburg committee managing the area had
made that decision in March.
The Water Gardens are the 50-acre constructed wetlands
where treated wastewater from the cities and the Wah Chang industrial
plant gets additional filtering in a series of ponds and waterfalls
before being discharged to the Willamette River.
The area at the north end of Waverly Drive, laced with
two miles of walkways, has become a haven for wildlife. The area is now
open to the public. A grand opening is scheduled for June 20.
At Monday’s council work session, Collins just wanted to
let his colleagues know what the management committee had decided. But
an extended discussion ensued.
Signs have already been put up regarding the smoking ban, the council was told. But the D-H could not find any Monday night.
The joint management committee decided on the smoking ban
because essentially the area is part of a treatment facility, Collins
said, and the committee did not want cigarette butts and filters to get
into the water and then the river.
The question of enforcement came up. It’s complicated
because Talking Water Gardens is not an Albany park, so park regulations
would not apply even if parks restricted smoking, which only Monteith
Riverpark does during River Rhythms concerts.
Also, the Water Gardens are in Millersburg, where Albany
ordinances have no sway. But Millersburg lacks a city court, so if it
wanted to ban smoking, it could not back it up.
City Attorney Jim Delapoer said nobody wants to be
heavy-handed about this, but any ban will inevitably be tested. He
suggested writing up a regulation against smoking at Talking Water
Gardens plus an intergovernmental agreement in which Millersburg would
ask Albany to enforce the prohibition.
Mayor Sharon Konopa and City Manager Wes Hare said they
would ask the city attorney to draft an agreement, for council action
later.
Councilor Bessie Johnson said it would be an
unenforceable law. But Councilor Bill Coburn said the issue should be
taken seriously because elsewhere, a corporate property owner had been
penalized for violating the Clean Water Act when construction workers
tossed away paper cups that found their way into a waterway.
Hare said that even before rules are written, he was sure most people would simply observe no-smoking signs.
Copyright
2012 democratherald.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be
published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Copyright (C) 2012 PR Newswire. All rights reserved
Fishing for answers
The Corps of Engineers is studying how steelhead and chinook salmon fare when they pass through the turbines at Foster Dam
FOSTER — For the next few weeks, biologist Robert
McDonald’s job will be to stand near the spillway at Foster Dam and herd
5- to 6-inch steelhead and chinook salmon smolt into a basket attached
to a long rope.
It’s not an easy task.
But brightly colored balloons attached to the smolt make the job a bit easier for McDonald and co-worker Matthew Williams.
“We hope to collect 150 fish today,” McDonald said
Friday, as Williams collected a bright silver smolt from the basket and
removed the balloon.
Their work is part of a month-long study to improve the
survival rate of steelhead and chinook salmon passing through the dam
that was built and has been operated since the mid-1960s by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers.
Their research is looking at the survival rates of smolt
that pass through two electricity-producing turbines in the dam and over
a temporary weir in one of the four steel spillway gates.
Corps of Engineers spokesman Scott Clemans said the
project is based in part on the July 2008 biological opinion concerning
the effect of the dams on threatened and endangered fish species issued
by the National Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
“The 13 Willamette Valley Project dams were constructed
from the 1940s through the 1960s,” Clemans said. “They were designed for
flood control, irrigation and recreation. But to fish, they are a big
stop sign.”
| Monday, May 7, 2012 |
| Daily Newsletter |
|
Posted: Sunday, May 6, 2012
By CHRIS CARLSON/Guest columnist
Ed Moreen, a project manger for
EPA, working on the clean-up of the Silver Valley, is a nice guy. So is
Terry Harwood, an employee of the Idaho Department of Ecology.
Sincerity oozes from both as
they explain what government is doing to protect human health, and the
flora, fauna and wildlife within a mammoth basin-wide Superfund site
covering the full drainages of the South Fork and North Forks of the
Coeur d’Alene River.
Both men, however, reflect the arrogance so many
bureaucrats display----that smugness that comes from feeling they have
the facts and all the answers. .
The ancient Greeks called it “hubris.” It was on full
display last week when the agency conducted an informational meeting at
the Medimont Grange Hall. Twenty of my neighbors and I showed up to
listen and ask questions.
Like all the “chain lakes” that lie on either side of
the Coeur d’Alene River between Cataldo and Harrison, nearby Cave and
Medicine were swollen with water from the spring mountain run-off and
unusually heavy rains. Adjacent fields in the flood plain were mostly
underwater.
Therein lies the problem. Each year this seasonal
flow brings new amounts of lead and zinc from historic waste dumps
throughout one of the most mineralized and mined areas in the nation.
EPA, under the Superfund Law and the Clean Water Act, is the lead agency
in overseeing removal of the most contaminated soils and then
remediation.
Funding this effort is $750 million extracted from
Asarco, HECLA and other mining companies who historically contributed to
the creation of the waste. By law the money can only be expended for
clean-up in the basin.
But how clean is clean? And how much sense does it
make to remove and remediate areas in the flood-plain that just a year
later are flooded again with contaminated water? How thorough are
studies on human health impacts in the area as opposed to studies about
the white swans several of which die each year from ingesting excessive
zinc and lead in the plants they eat.
EPA has divided the basin into an upper and a lower
portion. Most work so far has been done in the upper basin, cleaning up
in the 21 square mile “box” surrounding the old Bunker Hill site in
Kellogg,. Now attention is turning to the lower basin and there are
significant differences EPA best take note of.
Utilizing its traditional methods of public
participation, EPA is forming “collaboratives” of interested parties.
They claim these advisory groups will have real input into their
“adaptive management” approach to clean up solutions.
People are justifiably skeptical. What they see is an
agency hell bent on spending $750 million on clean up whether it is
justified or not. Despite having been in the Silver Valley 20 years, the
agency has no real time-line nor any real cost numbers for its plans in
the lower basin, or so it claims.
Despite federal law clearly defining EPA’s authority
to be limited to just navigable waters with ground water management left
to the states, they see and read about an agency that proposes
legislation to do away with that distinction and give them control over
ground water also. Just to the north, in Bonner County, they see where
EPA tried to deny property owners the right of judicial review of EPA’s
decisions to decide what is and is not a wetland.
They also see an agency whose subcontractors tell
property owners if they don’t submit to soil sampling they’ll never be
able to sell their property because while they of course won’t inform
title companies which properties are clean and/or remediated, they will
of course have to answer questions that lenders inevitably will pose.
That of course is not a threat.
What Ed and Terry don’t get is folks around here
don’t like the sense of money being spent just because it is there to
spend. They want to know just what goes into the cost benefit formulas
and whether the models constructed allow for empirical data, or just
some bureaucrat’s calculation of what the variables are.
Ed and Terry’s arrogance really showed at the end
when they dismissed as a “pipe dream” a question regarding Congress
possibly accessing the settlement funds since federal appropriations for
NPL clean-ups are declining under other pressures. “Never will happen,”
Ed said.
Ed and his agency ignore at their peril this flag.
The suggestion that their “storebox” might be raided came from none
other than Idaho Second District congressman Mike Simpson, the chairman
of the appropriation subcommittee over-seeing the EPA budget.
Yes, EPA is offering short-term jobs without benefits
to those contracted with locally to undertake clean-up activities. My
neighbors are trying to tell EPA you have created such a stigma by
over-playing the health threat that it is going to be impossible for the
current mining operations, which offer long-term jobs with benefits, to
ever again flourish despite there being plenty of minerals left to be
extracted compatibly with the environment.
Especially noteworthy and sad to this observer was
the meeting had no moment of silence or any mention that the day, May
2nd, was the 40th anniversary of the Sunshine Mining disaster that took
91 lives from the valley.
Believe me, the people of my home valley understand
risk as well as reward, productive work as opposed to make work,
benefits that outweigh costs, humility as opposed to arrogance, respect
as opposed to benign tolerance. EPA still doesn’t get it.
Inspector General presses for answers on certain lab costs ...
The Office of Inspector General
issued a report this week which looks into the questioned, unresolved
and potentially unallowable costs that have been incurred ...
www.lamonitor.com/.../inspector-general-presses-answers-cert...
| Subject: | Earth Month Tip of the Day: Play it safe. |
| | From: | |
Play it safe.
Today's
environmental tip: Play it safe! Children are curious but they are also
more sensitive to substances in the environment. Protect children from
accidental poisoning by locking up your household cleaners, pesticides,
paint thinners, and other substances. Household products are safe and
effective when used properly. Remember to read the label.
More information: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/health/poisonprevention.htm
Podcast: http://www.epa.gov/earthday/podcasts
en
español: ¡Juegue a lo seguro! Los niños son curiosos, pero también
pueden ser susceptibles a sustancias en el medio ambiente. Protéjalos de
los envenenamientos accidentales. Ponga los productos de limpieza
caseros, solventes de pintura y otras sustancias fuera del alcance de
los niños y siempre lea la etiqueta. Las sustancias químicas caseras son
seguras y eficaces cuando se usan de manera responsable.
Más información: http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/health/poisonprevention_sp.htm
Podcast: http://www.epa.gov/earthday/espanol/podcasts.htm
------------------
NOTE
- This is the last Earth Month daily tip email message. To receive
monthly "what you can do" information, subscribe to the GoGreen!
newsletter with information and activities you can use in your home,
community, or office. Go to http://www.epa.gov/gogreen
And there are still things you can do online such as
-"Six Words for the Environment" - contribute yours
-"Expand the Conversation" - discussion forum
-"State of the Environment" Photo Project - submit yours
...go to http://www.epa.gov/earthday for more info!
Thanks!
Coming like a beggar to the back door. No references, please, to “cutting greenhouse emissions” or
“sustainability” or “carbon reduction” except as bi-products of
“improving military security” and “factoring in true costs of energy for
equipment, purchases, and operations.”
"Energy security and cost", according to Admiral
Mike Mullen, "can no longer be ignored. Half the casualties in Iraq and
Afghanistan have been related to fuel convoys. Dependence on oil equals
vulnerability, everywhere and always".
MENTAL illness, associated with isolation
and overwork, looms as a threat to the mining boom and affects up to
10,000 workers each year in the sector in NSW alone.
Illnesses such as depression and anxiety disorder are costing
the state's mining industry between $320 million and $450m in reduced
productivity, according to a new report.
Subject: Scattering Long Range Population Trapping Forces
Constant decay
sets the scale for mass perturbation. (and in the pursuit of fulfillment & a Grant from the
Private Industry Council).
Translate This Page
Investigators routinely disregarded rules while rejecting complaints of reprisals for reporting waste, fraud and abuse
The Defense Department has inadequately
protected from reprisals whistleblowers who have reported wrongdoing,
according to an internal Pentagon report, and critics are calling for
action to be taken against those who have been negligent.
The report,
dated May 2011, accuses the officials, who work in the Defense
Department’s Office of Inspector General, of persistent sloppiness and a
systematic disregard for Pentagon rules meant to protect those who
report fraud, abuses, and the waste of taxpayer funds, according to a
previously-undisclosed copy. The report was obtained by the Project on
Government Oversight, a nonprofit watchdog group.
South Shore, Ky., one of 12 national winners of conservation challenge
Challenge sponsored by Wyland Foundation and Toyota
One
of the murals by the artist and environmentalist Wyland, who created
the Wyland Foundation, in honor of the 40th anniversary of the Clean
Water Act.
MIAMI (May 7, 2012) — A Kentucky city has been named a winner of the
2012 National Mayor’s Challenge for Water Conservation, an online
competition conducted throughout April that encouraged residents in all
50 states to conserve water, save energy and reduce pollution.
South Shore, Ky., was among 12 winning cities, including:
• Laguna Beach, Calif.
• Victoria, Minn.
• Charlestown, N.H.
• Manhattan Beach, Calif.
• Eden Prairie, Minn.
• Fort Pierce, Fla.
• Quakertown, Pa.
• Greeley, Colo.
• Madison, Wis.
• Charlottesville, Va.
• Toms River, N.J.
The Wyland Foundation, founded by environmental artist Wyland,
created the Challenge with Toyota in honor of the 40th anniversary of
the Clean Water Act, the primary federal law protecting water resources
in the United States. Organizations spearheading the effort also include
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, U.S. Forest
Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, WaterPik, Rain
Bird, Lowe’s, STERLING Plumbing, PADI and Project AWARE.
“We had two goals for the National Mayor’s Challenge,” Wyland said.
“It brings communities together and gets people thinking about simple
ways to take their commitment to conservation even further.”
The challenge divided cities into four regions (West, Midwest, South
and Northeast) and categorized them by population according to ZIP Codes
(5,000 to 30,000 residents, 30,001 to 100,000 residents, 100,000+
residents). Cities with the highest percentage of residents within the
city’s ZIP code boundaries who made online pledges at
www.mywaterpledge.com to reduce their water use were recognized as the
winners. Participants in the winning cities will now be entered into a
drawing to win more than $50,000 in prizes, including the grand prize of
a Toyota Prius c Hybrid, as well as custom-designed sprinkler systems
from Rain Bird, Eco-Flow Showerheads from WaterPik, water-saving toilets
from STERLING Plumbing, and 1,000 gift cards for Lowe’s Home
Improvement Stores.
“Conserving water is one of the most important actions we can take to
protect this irreplaceable resource, and small actions that people take
in their homes can add up to make a big difference,” said U.S. EPA
Acting Assistant Administrator for Water Nancy Stoner. “EPA was proud to
partner with the Wyland Foundation and Toyota on this challenge and
congratulates the winning cities, and everyone who participated.”
To celebrate the winners of the National Mayor’s Challenge for Water
Conservation, the Wyland Foundation and Toyota hosted an event on May 3
in Miami Beach where Wyland joined members of the community to paint a
400-square-foot marine life mural celebrating South Florida marine life.
Toyota’s support of the Wyland Foundation is part of the automobile
company’s long-standing commitment to sustainability.
A study published this week in Nature
by researchers at Rice University, two Max Planck Institutes in
Dresden, Germany, and University of California, Los Angeles, finds that
"quantum critical points" (QCP) in exotic electronic materials can act
much like polarizing "hot button issues" in an election. On either side
of the QCP, electrons fall into line and behave as traditionally
expected.
Full story at
http://news.rice.edu/2012/04/25/electron-politics-physicists-probe-organization-at-the-quantum-level/
| Subject: | Data Infrastructure Building Blocks (DIBBs) |
| | From: | |
You
are subscribed to All NSF Program Announcements and Information for
National Science Foundation Update. This information has recently been
updated, and is now available.
Available Formats:
HTML: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2012/nsf12557/nsf12557.htm?WT.mc_id=USNSF_25&WT.mc_ev=click
PDF: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2012/nsf12557/nsf12557.pdf?WT.mc_id=USNSF_25&WT.mc_ev=click
TXT: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2012/nsf12557/nsf12557.txt?WT.mc_id=USNSF_25&WT.mc_ev=click
Document Number: nsf12557
Event
BIGDATA Webinar
Core Techniques and Technologies for Advancing Big Data Science & Engineering (BIGDATA)
May 8, 2012 11:00 AM
to
May 8, 2012 12:00 PM
NSF
The National Science Foundation and the National
Institutes of Health invite you to attend a webinar to learn more about
their joint Core Techniques and Technologies for Advancing Big Data Science & Engineering (BIGDATA) solicitation -- NSF 12-499: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2012/nsf12499/nsf12499.htm.
The
BIGDATA solicitation aims to advance the core scientific and
technological means of managing, analyzing, visualizing, and extracting
useful information from large, diverse, distributed and heterogeneous
data sets so as to: accelerate the progress of scientific discovery and
innovation; lead to new fields of inquiry that would not otherwise be
possible; encourage the development of new data analytic tools and
algorithms; facilitate scalable, accessible, and sustainable data
infrastructure; increase understanding of human and social processes and
interactions; and promote economic growth and improved health and
quality of life.
The phrase "big data" in this solicitation does
not refer just to the volume of data, but also to its variety and
velocity. Big data includes large, diverse, complex, longitudinal,
and/or distributed data sets generated from instruments, sensors,
Internet transactions, email, video, click streams, and/or all other
digital sources.
The focus is on core scientific and
technological advances (e.g., in computer science, mathematics,
computational science and statistics). Proposals that focus primarily on
the application of existing methods (e.g., machine learning algorithms,
statistical analysis) to data sets in a specific science domain or on
implementation of software tools or databases based on existing
techniques are not appropriate for this solicitation.
NIH-specific information can be found at: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-GM-12-109.html.
An FAQ about the solicitation is available at: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2012/nsf12070/nsf12070.jsp
This
webinar is designed to describe the goals and focus of the BIGDATA
solicitation, help investigators understand its scope, and answer any
questions potential Principal Investigators (PIs) may have.
The
Webinar will be held from 11am to noon EST on May 8, 2012. Questions
about the solicitation can be submitted in advance or during the webinar
to bigdata@nsf.gov.
Please register for the webinar by May 7, 2012 23:59 PDT at: https://mmancusa.webex.com/mmancusa/j.php?ED=181853737&RG=1&UID=0&RT=MiMxMQ%3D%3D
After
your registration is accepted, you will get an email with a URL to join
the meeting. Please be sure to join a few minutes before the start of
the webinar. This system does not establish a voice connection on your
computer; instead, your acceptance message will have a toll-free phone
number that you will be prompted to call after joining. Please note
that this registration is a manual process; therefore, do not expect an
immediate acceptance. In the event the number of requests exceeds the
capacity, some requests may have to be denied.
The webinar will be archived for later viewing and linked to the BIGDATA program web page at: http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=504767. The archived version will be available within a few days after the webinar.
If you have any additional questions or concerns, please contact bigdata@nsf.gov .
This event is part of Webinars/Webcasts.
Submissions are now being accepted through July 15, 2012
on the latest research and developments in diverse areas of materials
science and engineering technology. TMS2013 authors will represent
numerous levels of industry, academia, and governmental labs and hail
from more than 68 countries.
TMS2013 will feature more than 65 symposia covering these technical themes:
- Advanced Characterization, Modeling, and Performance
- High Performance Materials
- Light Metals: Aluminum, Magnesium, and Titanium
- Materials and Society: Energy Technology, Policy, and Education
- Materials Processing and Production
- Nanoscale and Amorphous Materials
- REWAS2013 – Enabling Materials Resource Sustainability
More
than 4,300 professionals attended TMS2012 in Orlando, Florida in March.
Join this outstanding exchange of technical knowledge at TMS2013! Submit your abstract now!
Your
abstract is sought to create the ultimate in technical programming for
the must-attend global forum for materials scientists and engineers: The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society (TMS) 142nd Annual Meeting & Exhibition, March 3-7, 2013 in San Antonio, Texas.
News From the Field
Nature Gives Long Look at Who Benefits From Tourist Research
Using nature out of poverty draws automatic conservation ticket
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent federal
agency that supports fundamental research and education across all
fields of science and engineering. In fiscal year (FY) 2012, its budget
is $7.0 billion. NSF funds reach all 50 states through grants to nearly
2,000 colleges, universities and other institutions. Each year, NSF
receives over 50,000 competitive requests for funding, and makes about
11,000 new funding awards. NSF also awards nearly $420 million in
professional and service contracts yearly.
In 2009 alone,
ocean-related tourism and recreation generated more than 1.8 million jobs and contributed more than $61 billion to the nation’s GDP. That same year, the
commercial fishing industry supported more than 1 million jobs. In fact, the U.S. ocean economy is larger than the entire U.S. farm sector.
Protect yourself from drinking America's
6000 water
toxins
Americans have been ingesting them for years—perchlorate, hexavalent
chromium, volatile organic compounds—not because they’re safe, but
because they are among 6,000 suspected toxins the EPA has not gotten around to
regulating in municipal drinking water systems.
But after a scathing review by the General Accounting Office, the EPA has begun to develop regulations of these chemicals in drinking water.
"The Agency is considering eight currently regulated
compounds (benzene; carbon tetrachloride; 1,2- dichloroethane;
1,2-dichloropropane; dichloromethane; tetrachloroethylene;
trichloroethylene; vinyl chloride) and eight unregulated compounds
(aniline; benzyl chloride; 1,3-butadiene; 1,1-dichloroethane;
nitrobenzene; oxirane methyl; 1,2,3-trichloropropane and urethane). All
of these VOCs are known or suspected to cause cancer.”
via EPA (pdf)
"Say anything that you like about me except that I drink water".
"I never drink water. I'm afraid it will become habit-forming".
"Never cry over spilt milk, because it may have been poisoned".
Is this a game of chance? Not the way I play it, no.- W.C. Fields
According to the National Sanitation Foundation, reverse osmosis won’t help you get volatile organic compounds out of
your water, but carbon filtration will.
Measure to Stop Clean Water Act Manipulation
The legislation introduced Friday to prevent the EPA and the Army
Corps of Engineers from using clean water guidance to expand the
regulatory regime under the Clean Water Act has the support of the
National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and the Public Lands Council.
According to NCBA President J.D. Alexander – the Administration has used
guidance documents as opposed to going through the rulemaking process to bypass the consideration of legal,
economic and unintended consequences. While the guidance claims to
provide clarity and certainty to landowners – but PLC President John Falen
says the only thing clear and certain is more federal regulation and costly
permits.
Despite three Supreme Court rulings and a letter from 170 members of
Congress opposing the guidance – Alexander says EPA and the Corps have
crowned themselves kings of every drop of water in the country. He says
the bill introduced by the leaders of the Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee and the Agriculture Committee is the best path
forward.
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chair John Mica says the Obama Administration and its agencies
are ignoring law and rulemaking procedures. According to Senator Mica –
"the Administration needs to realize it’s not above the law".
Also this week, the House Appropriations Committee added a policy rider
to their energy and water FY 2013 spending bill that would – in a
similar fashion – bar the agencies from implementing their final
guidance. The amendment, introduced by Rep. Dennis Rehberg (R-Mont.)
and passed by a vote of 29-20, prohibits using funds to “develop, adopt,
implement, administer, or enforce” guidance that purports to clarify
which waters of the United States fall under federal protection.
CHAPTER XXXI.
showing
that the roman generals were never severely punished for any faults they
committed, not even when by their ignorance and unfortunate operations
they occasioned serious losses to the republic.
shining ‘green light' makes anything look green.
parent agency DHS
Secretary Napolitano "will leave no stone unturned" in its "full and thorough investigation".
HSPD 10: Biodefense for the 21st Century
Legislation and Directives
The
government has promulgated legislation and directives in recognition of
the increased need to protect the nation's water supply and utilities
from terrorist attacks. The Homeland Security Presidential Directives
(HSPDs) and the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and
Response Act (Bioterrorism Act) of 2002 specifically denote the
responsibilities of EPA and the water sector in:
- Assessing vulnerabilities of water utilities
- Developing strategies for responding to and preparing for emergencies and incidents
- Promoting information exchange among stakeholders
- Developing and using technological advances in water security
These directives and laws supplement existing legislation, such as
the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Clean Water Act, which have always
had the goals of promoting a clean and safe supply of water for the
nation's population and protecting the integrity of the nation's
waterways. These directives and laws affect the actions and obligations
of EPA, the Water Security Division, and water utilities, and they are
described below.
Homeland Security Presidential Directives (HSPDs)
The government uses these directives to disseminate Presidential and Homeland Security decisions on national security matters.
HSPDs 7, 8, 9, and 10 are of particular relevance to water security issues.
HSPD 7: Critical Infrastructure Identification, Prioritization, and Protection
HSPD
7 designates EPA as the sector specific agency responsible for
infrastructure protection activities for the nation's drinking water and
wastewater systems. As such, EPA is responsible for:
- Identifying, prioritizing, and coordinating infrastructure
protection activities for the nation's drinking water and water
treatment systems;
- Working with federal departments and agencies, state and local
governments, and the private sector to facilitate vulnerability
assessments;
- Encouraging the development of risk management strategies to protect
against and mitigate the effects of potential attacks on critical
resources; and
- Developing mechanisms for information sharing and analysis.
Under HSPD 7, the Water Security Division has been tasked with
developing a water sector specific plan as input to the National
Infrastructure Protection Plan that the Department of Homeland Security
must produce. The sector specific plan must address processes for:
- Identifying assets within the sector;
- Identifying and assessing vulnerabilities, and prioritizing assets within the sector;
- Developing sector specific strategic protective programs; and
- Measuring the effectiveness of the sector specific critical infrastructure protection program.
Top of page
HSPD 8: National Preparedness
HSPD
8 establishes policies to strengthen the preparedness to prevent and
respond to threatened or actual domestic terrorist attacks, major
disasters, and other emergencies by establishing mechanisms for improved
delivery of federal preparedness assistance to state and local
governments.
HSPD 9: Defense of United States Agriculture and Food
Under
HSPD 9, EPA is to develop a robust, comprehensive surveillance and
monitoring program to provide early warning in the event of a terrorist
attack using biological, chemical, or radiological contaminants. HSPD 9
also directs EPA to develop a nationwide laboratory network to support
the routine monitoring and response requirements of the surveillance
program. HSPD 10, which is currently a classified document, basically
reaffirms EPA's responsibilities under HSPD 9 while adding a clear
directive on the Agency's responsibilities in decontamination efforts.
The following programs have been developed by EPA in response to HSPD 9:
Water Security Initiative
EPA is is implementing a demonstration project program to design,
deploy, and evaluate a model contamination warning system for drinking
water security. The program, which is being developed in partnership
with select cities and laboratories, responds to a Homeland Security
Presidential Directive that charges EPA to develop surveillance and
monitoring systems to provide early detection of water contamination.
Water Laboratory Alliance
The purpose of the WLA is to provide the drinking water sector with an
integrated nationwide network of laboratories with the analytical
capabilities and capacity to support monitoring and surveillance,
response, and remediation of intentional and unintentional drinking
water supply contamination events involving chemical, biological, and
radiochemical contaminants.
HSPD 10: Biodefense for the 21st Century
HSPD 10 provides directives to further strengthen the Biodefense
Program through threat awareness, prevention and protection,
surveillance and detection, and response and recovery.
Water Quality Standards Regulations and Determinations
-
Industrial Regulations
Effluent guidelines are national standards for wastewater discharges
to surface waters and publicly owned treatment works (sometimes called
municipal sewage treatment plants). We issue effluent guidelines for
categories of existing sources and new sources under Title III of the
Clean Water Act. The standards are technology-based (i.e. they are based
on the performance of treatment and control technologies); they are not
based on risk or impacts upon receiving waters.
Best Management Practices for Unused Pharmaceuticals at Health Care Facilities - Draft for Public Comment
Questionnaire for Alaskan Seafood Processors
On this page:
Regulations Under Development
Existing Regulations
The table below lists the effluent guidelines promulgated by EPA,
sorted alphabetically by industry category. The links in the 'Industry
Category' column provide an overview of the regulation and available EPA
publications for the category. The links under '40 CFR' go directly to
the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).
For many of the newer guidelines (especially those promulgated after
1995), we provide individual industry pp. with the Federal Register
notices of proposed and final rules, supplemental notices, fact sheets
and other background information. For older guidelines, individual pp.
are being developed. We provide an interim link to an EPA staff contact.
Existing Effluent Guidelines
| Industry Category |
40 CFR Part |
First Promulgated |
Limitations and Standards |
| Aluminum Forming |
467 |
1983 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
| Asbestos Manufacturing |
427 |
1974 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS |
| Battery Manufacturing |
461 |
1984 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
| Canned and Preserved Fruits and Vegetable Processing |
407 |
1974 |
BPT, BCT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
Canned and Preserved Seafood
(Seafood Processing) |
408 |
1974 |
BPT, BCT, NSPS |
| Carbon Black Manufacturing |
458 |
1978 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSNS |
| Cement Manufacturing |
411 |
1974 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS |
| Centralized Waste Treatment |
437 |
2000 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
| Coal Mining |
434 |
1985 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS |
| Coil Coating |
465 |
1983 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations
(CAFO) |
412 |
1974 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSNS |
Concentrated Aquatic Animal Production
(Aquaculture) |
451 |
2004 |
BPT, BAT, BCT, NSPS |
| Copper Forming |
468 |
1983 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
| Dairy Products Processing |
405 |
1974 |
BPT, BCT, NSPS |
| Electrical and Electronic Components |
469 |
1983 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
| Electroplating |
413 |
1981 |
PSES |
| Explosives Manufacturing |
457 |
1976 |
BPT |
| Ferroalloy Manufacturing |
424 |
1974 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS |
| Fertilizer Manufacturing |
418 |
1974 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSNS |
| Glass Manufacturing |
426 |
1974 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSNS |
| Grain Mills Manufacturing |
406 |
1974 |
BPT, BCT, NSPS, PSNS |
| Gum and Wood Chemicals |
454 |
1976 |
BPT |
| Hospitals |
460 |
1976 |
BPT |
| Ink Formulating |
447 |
1975 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSNS |
| Inorganic Chemicals |
415 |
1982 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
| Iron and Steel Manufacturing |
420 |
1982 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
| Landfills |
445 |
2000 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS |
| Leather Tanning and Finishing |
425 |
1982 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
| Meat and Poultry Products |
432 |
1974 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, |
| Metal Finishing |
433 |
1983 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
Metal Molding and Casting
(Foundries) |
464 |
1985 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
| Metal Products and Machinery |
438 |
2003 |
BPT, BCT, NSPS |
| Mineral Mining and Processing |
436 |
1975 |
BPT, NSPS |
| Nonferrous Metals Forming and Metal Powders |
471 |
1985 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
| Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing |
421 |
1984 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
| Oil and Gas Extraction |
435 |
1979 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
Ore Mining and Dressing
(Hard Rock Mining) |
440 |
1982 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS, BMP |
Organic Chemicals, Plastics
and Synthetic Fibers (OCPSF) |
414 |
1987 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
| Paint Formulating |
446 |
1975 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSNS |
Paving and Roofing Materials
(Tars and Asphalt) |
443 |
1975 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSNS |
Pesticide Chemicals Manufacturing,
Formulating and Packaging |
455 |
1978 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
| Petroleum Refining |
419 |
1982 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
| Pharmaceutical Manufacturing |
439 |
1983 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
| Phosphate Manufacturing |
422 |
1974 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS |
| Photographic |
459 |
1976 |
BPT |
| Plastic Molding and Forming |
463 |
1984 |
BPT, BCT, NSPS |
| Porcelain Enameling |
466 |
1982 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
| Pulp, Paper and Paperboard |
430 |
1998 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS, BMP |
| Rubber Manufacturing |
428 |
1974 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSNS |
| Soaps and Detergents Manufacturing |
417 |
1974 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSNS |
| Steam Electric Power Generating |
423 |
1982 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
| Sugar Processing |
409 |
1974 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS |
| Textile Mills |
410 |
1982 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS |
| Timber Products Processing |
429 |
1981 |
BPT, BAT, NSPS |
| Transportation Equipment Cleaning |
442 |
2000 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
| Waste Combustors |
444 |
2000 |
BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS |
Top of page
Other Publications Related to Effluent Guidelines
Preliminary Studies
Preliminary Studies provide recent technical and economic information
on a category of dischargers. The findings are published as
"Preliminary Data Summaries", and are not used directly as a basis for
rulemaking, but are used by EPA management to help select new rulemaking
projects.
Top of page
Area Navigation
Water Home
| Subject: | Drips, Drops and Spills: Automate Spill Management – Get New White Paper |
| | From: | |
Part of your subscription to Environmental Leader.
| |
| Download White Paper From Enviance Hazardous
material spills are a frequent occurrence in any EH&S professional
realm of responsibility, regardless of the size of your corporation.
With state regulations enforcing the reporting of spills with
significant fines, it is imperative that organizations streamline their
processes for recording and reporting spills. By
leveraging workflow capabilities in your Environmental Management
Information System (EMIS), you can easily develop an effective process
flow that ensures accountability and meets inspection requirements. Get new white paper Take
a look at how a utility company with a large number of spills has
overcome spill management recording and reporting obstacles to achieve
zero fines to-date. You will learn more about: - Designing an effective spill incident workflow process and recording system
- Automating a spill management process with EMIS capabilities
- Improving the decision making process with a spill incident management system
Don’t
let spills and their reporting requirements be a common source of
frustration in your organization. Learn new ways to streamline and
automate your spill management process, reducing headaches and fines. | | | |
high-stakes pursuit of a greener globe in a dialogue with experts and readers.
Today's
environmental tip: Get the lead out! If you're doing work on an older
home or school building, be sure to follow lead-safe work practices.
Contain the work area and keep kids and pets away. Minimize dust. And
clean up thoroughly. Lead is harmful to adults and children, and common
renovation jobs like sanding, cutting, or demolition can create lead
dust and chips.
More information: http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/renovation.htm
Podcast: http://www.epa.gov/earthday/podcasts
en
español: ¡Elimine el plomo! Si está realizando trabajo en una casa o
edificio escolar antiguo, asegúrese de que se utilicen prácticas
laborales seguras para el plomo. Contenga el área de trabajo y deje los
niños y mascotas alejados. Minimice el polvo. Y limpie cabalmente. El
plomo es dañino para adultos y niños. Las actividades de remodelación
comunes como lijado, recortes, y demoliciones pueden crear polvo o
cáscaras de plomo.
Más información: http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/renovaterightbrochuresp.pdf
Podcast: http://www.epa.gov/earthday/espanol/podcasts.htm
Want
more tips? Visit EPA's Earth Day site to learn more about Earth Day,
the US Environmental Protection Agency, and what you can do to help
protect human health and the environment. http://www.epa.gov/earthday/tips.htm
| Subject: | Earth Month Tip of the Day: Don't trash it - reuse it! |
| | From: | |
Today's
environmental tip: Don't trash it - reuse it! Be creative as you look
for new ways to reduce the amount or kinds of household waste. Give
cardboard tubes to pet hamsters or gerbils. Plant seeds in an egg
carton. Make a flower pot out of a plastic ice cream tub. By thinking
creatively, you will often find new uses for common items and new ways
to recycle and reduce waste.
More information: http://www.epa.gov/osw/wycd/catbook/tip12.htm
Podcast: http://www.epa.gov/earthday/podcasts
en
español: ¡No lo tire a la basura, reutilícelo! Sea creativo en
encontrar nuevas maneras de reducir la cantidad y variedades de desechos
caseros. Por ejemplo, dé los tubos de cartón a mascotas como hámsters
para jugar. Siembre semillas en un cartón de huevos. Haga un tiesto de
un envase plástico de helados. Si piensa de manera creativa, podrá
encontrar nuevos usos para artículos comunes y nuevas maneras de
reciclar y reducir los desechos.
Más información: http://www.epa.gov/osw/wycd/funfacts/indexsp.htm
Podcast: http://www.epa.gov/earthday/espanol/podcasts.htm
Want
more tips? Visit EPA's Earth Day site to learn more about Earth Day,
the US Environmental Protection Agency, and what you can do to help
protect human health and the environment. http://www.epa.gov/earthday/tips.htm
Topics
Science
Forests, oceans, air, species, land use and the climate debate.
Business
Renewable and conventional energy, markets and green technology.
Politics
Legislation, lobbying, policy debates, regulation and international diplomacy.
Living
Lifestyle changes and environmentally pitched products and services.
TIPS & SUGGESTIONS
Have a news tip or a suggestion for coverage overall? E-mail us at greenblog@nytimes.com.
Q & A
Chatting with scientists, policy experts and activists about environmental issues.
Metals for Energy & the Environment 2012, Las Vegas, 6-8 June
MEE 2012
is your opportunity to meet global leaders from the metals and rare
earths industry and learn how demand impacts on green energy and the
protection of the environment.
Last year over 250 delegates attended from companies including:
As
metals play an increasingly important and essential role in people's
lives, particularly in technology and the generation of clean energy, we
can no longer take their supply for granted. MEE will focus on and
review the supply of these metals, their current demand, potential new
uses, recycling, current production and future supply projections to
assess whether there will be enough material to meet demand.
Who should attend?
- Mining Companies
- Producers & recyclers of strategic metals & rare earths
- Metal traders
- Buyers of strategic metals and rare earths
- Banks and financial institutions
- Service providers to the strategic metals and rare earth industries
- Government agencies
- Industry analysts and consultants
The full speaker programme can be viewed
here. I look forward to welcoming you to the conference in Las Vegas!
Kind regards,
Nigel Tunna
Managing Director
Energy Recap: Celebrating Earth Day!
President
Barack Obama signs a proclamation regarding the establishment of the
Fort Ord National Monument, in the Oval Office, April 20, 2012.
(Official White House Photo by Sonya N. Herbert)
On
April 22nd, more than 1 billion people in 192 countries participated in
the 42nd Earth Day. The President celebrated by designating a new
National Monument at Fort Ord, a former military base in California. By
protecting Ford Ord, President Obama has ensured that the area's vast
canyons and grasslands will provide enjoyment and recreation to
generations of Americans.
Earlier in the week, the President
spoke in the White House rose garden about increasing energy market
oversight to make sure that excess speculation is not impacting gas
prices. While reiterating that there are no silver bullets to increased
gas prices, the President urged Congress to further strengthen market
oversight and detailed the steps he has taken to protect consumers.
These
actions represent just a snapshot of the Administration's efforts to
promote American-made energy. For more information, check out the
highlights below and read the blog posts by Heather Zichal, the Deputy
Assistant to the President on Energy and Climate Change, about natural gas production and building efficiency.
Events
President Obama announces new steps to strengthen oversight of energy markets
On April 16th, President Obama spoke in the White House rose garden,
announcing that the Administration is taking new executive actions to
analyze trading activities in energy markets and implement consumer
protections. During his remarks, the President called on Congress to
provide increased funding for market surveillance and enforcement, to
increase the civil and criminal penalties for illegal market
manipulation, and to grant new authority to the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission to protect against excess speculation. Read the President's speech and check out this White House blog post.
Secretary Salazar travels to North Dakota, unveiling new energy development initiatives
Concluding his two-day visit to North Dakota on April 3rd, Secretary
Salazar unveiled new initiatives to expedite safe and responsible
development of domestic energy resources on U.S. public lands and Indian
trust lands. As part of the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) ongoing
efforts to ensure efficient processing of oil and gas permit
applications, the agency will implement new automated tracking systems
that could reduce the review period for drilling permits by two-thirds. Learn more about the Secretary's visit and the Agency's new initiatives.
The Clean Energy Ministerial announce new commitments for energy sustainability
On April 26th, the 23-government Clean Energy Ministerial (CEM)
concluded its two-day meeting in London and, together with the UN
Secretary-General's Sustainable Energy for All initiative (SE4All),
outlined specific commitments by participating countries and private
sector leaders which will promote improved energy efficiency, renewable
energy technologies, and increased energy access around the world. Read more about these important commitments.
News
President Obama designates Fort Ord a National Monument
On April 20th, President Obama signed a Proclamation to designate
federal lands within the former Fort Ord as a National Monument under
the Antiquities Act. Fort Ord, a former military base located on
California's Central Coast, is a world-class destination for hikers,
mountain bikers, and outdoor enthusiasts who come to enjoy the area's
history and scenic landscapes. Read the full proclamation and learn more about Ford Ord.
The Energy Department announces the first-ever "Apps for Energy" Competition
On April 5th, the Department of Energy's launched the first-ever "Apps
for Energy" competition, offering $100,000 in cash prizes. "Apps for
Energy" challenges innovative software developers to build new apps –
for mobile phones, computers, tablets, software programs and more – that
utilize data from major utility companies to help consumers and
businesses use less energy and save money. Learn more about the competition and then take up the challenge.
Secretary Chu announces $30 million for next generation energy storage technologies
On April 11th, U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu announced a $30 million
research competition that will engage our country's brightest
scientists, engineers and entrepreneurs in improving the performance and
safety of energy storage devices, including hybrid energy storage
modules being developed by the Department of Defense for military
applications. Learn more about this announcement.
Army announces "Green Warrior Convoy"
On April 11th, the Army announced plans for a "Green Warrior Convoy" to
demonstrate and educate the value of science and technology in Army
vehicles. The announcement was made during the opening of the Army's new
Ground Systems Power and Energy Laboratory, or GSPEL, at the Detroit
Arsenal, Warren, Mich. The "Green Warrior Convoy" will launch next year
and will travel from Detroit to Washington as part of the road testing
of technologies and systems developed at the Tank Automotive Research,
Development and Engineering Center, or TARDEC. Learn more about the
"Green Warrior Convoy" here and read more about the military's commitment to advanced energy technologies at this White House blog post.
Get Updates
To learn more about the President’s vision for a more secure energy future and sign up to get updates, please visit: WhiteHouse.gov/energy.
Stay Connected
by Dennis Crouch
Minkin v. Gibbons P.C (Fed. Cir. 2012)
In yet another malpractice action, the Federal Circuit has granted
itself jurisdiction and ruled in favor of the law firm defendant (here,
Gibbons). Attorney malpractice is normally a state-law cause of action
brought in state court. However, the Federal Circuit has increasingly
claimed appellate jurisdiction over these cases based upon its arising under jurisdiction.
Federal Circuit Appellate Jurisdiction. As amended
in the AIA, 28 U.S.C. § 1295 defines the Federal Circuit's appellate
jurisdiction to include “exclusive jurisdiction” over “an appeal from a
final decision” in “a civil action arising under . . . any Act of
Congress relating to patents.”
The new statute overrules Holmes Group, Inc., v. Vornado Air Circulation Systems, Inc.
535 U.S. 826 (2002). In that decision, the Supreme Court held that the
existence of a patent law issue in a counterclaim is insufficient to
create Federal Circuit jurisdiction. The revised statute makes clear
that the Federal Circuit has exclusive jurisdiction over appeals that
only raise patent issues in “a compulsory counterclaim.”
The new statute does not change the “arising under” language itself. The Supreme Court interpreted that language in Christianson v. Colt Industries Operating Corp.,
486 U.S. 800 (1988). In Christianson, the court wrote that the
Federal Circuit's jurisdiction extended only to those cases in which
a well-pleaded complaint established either (1) that the federal patent
law created the cause of action or (2) that the plaintiff's right to
relief necessarily depended upon resolution of a “substantial question
of federal patent law.” (New statute is no longer bound by a
“complaint.”).
In non-patent cases, the Supreme Court has placed some limitations on
the exercise of arising under jurisdiction when the underlying cause
of action is – as here – a state law claim. In Grable & Sons Metal Products v. Darue Eng'g,
545 U.S. 308 (2005), the court explained that the exercise of
jurisdiction over state-law claims with an embedded issue of federal law
should occur only when the state-law claim contains a federal issue
that is “disputed” and “substantial,” and when the exercise of federal
jurisdiction is “consistent with congressional judgment about the sound
division of labor between state and federal courts.” Grable
made clear that the mere presence of a disputed federal question is
insufficient to create federal jurisdiction. Rather, a court must also
assess “any disruptive portent in exercising federal jurisdiction.” This
sentiment was repeated by the Court in the later case of Empire
Healthchoice Assur., Inc. v. McVeigh, 547 U.S. 677, 701 (2006) (“it
takes more than a federal element ‘to open the ‘arising under’ door”).
In this case, the Gibbons firm handled prosecution
of Minkin's U.S. Patent No. 6,012,363 (Extended Reach Pliers). Soon
after Minkin went to market, one of his customers designed its own
version of the device that avoided Minkin's patent claim. Minkin then
sued Gibbons for negligence – arguing that the claims offered no
meaningful protection for Minkin's invention. At trial expert witness
Richard Gearhart presented an alternative claim that was arguably
patentable. Because Gearhart did not present a patentability analysis
under Section 103(a), the district court rejected the evidence as
insufficient and awarded summary judgment for the law firm. On appeal,
the Federal Circuit affirmed that finding. “We find that the 37-page
Gearhart report contains nothing to assist the trier of fact with
respect to the unique tests and proofs of § 103(a), and provides no
insight into the question of whether the alternate claims would
ultimately have been allowed by the PTO.”
Regarding Jurisdiction, the Federal Circuit noted
that the malpractice claim (under N.J. Law) requires that the plaintiff
prove that better representation would have resulted in a better
outcome. Here, that proof requires analysis of patentability of a
hypothetical claim and thus raises substantial a question of Patent Law
and therefore the case falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the
Federal Circuit.
Writing in concurrence, Judge O'Malley again repeated her call for an en banc rehearing on the issue of jurisdiction.
Notes:
Fed Rules: E.P.A. bills for uncapped category that covers preparation of the action plan commonly known as the "Rest of River" & workshops held at "Shakespeare & Company" enforcement above and beyond oversight costs dead balls Null.
In games played under the
Official Baseball Rules, a balk results in a
dead ball
or delayed dead ball. In certain other circumstances, a balk may be
wholly or partially disregarded. Under other rule sets, notably in the
United States under the National Federation of High Schools (Fed or Federation) Baseball Rules, a balk results in an immediate
dead ball.
In the event a balk is enforced, the pitch is generally (but not
always) nullified, each runner is awarded one base, and the batter
(generally) remains at bat, and with the previous count. The balk rule
in
Major League Baseball was introduced in 1898.
[1]
Summary of Federal Requirements
Septic system regulation is usually a state, tribal, and local responsibility but the U.S. EPA does provide guidance on their operation and maintenance.
Some septic systems are regulated by EPA as Class V underground injection wells (UIC) if they receive industrial or commercial wastes and/or they have the capacity to serve 20 or more people.
On 12 January 2005 the U.S. EPA entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU
with the National Association of Towns and Townships (NATaT); National
Association of Wastewater Transporters, Inc. (NAWT); National
Environmental Health Association (NEHA); National Environmental Services
Center (NESC); National Onsite Wastewater Recycling Association, Inc.
(NOWRA); Rural Community Assistance Partnership, Inc. (RCAP); Water
Environment Federation (WEF); and Consortium of Institutes for
Decentralized Wastewater Treatment (CIDWT)). This memorandum focuses on
better planning, septic system design, and long-term operation and
maintenance of septic systems.
Summary of State Requirements
The definition for large capacity may vary from State to State,
but should be comparable to the Federal definition. Some examples of
alternative definitions include use waste flow rates or cesspool volume
capacity to classify a cesspool as large-capacity. Check with the
appropriate State UIC Program for more information.
Laws and Statutes
Clean Water Act
Laws & Regulation
Laws & Executive Orders
There are a number of federal statutes passed by Congress and signed
into law by the President that are central to the Office of Water’s
mission. In addition, Presidential Executive Orders (EOs) play a central
role in a number of Office of Water activities. EOs are legally binding
orders that direct EPA and other federal agencies in their execution of
Congressionally established laws and policies.
Executive Order 13547 -summary-Stewardship
To use science and the best available understanding and awareness from Regional Advisory Committees in
consultation with their nonfederal co-lead agencies and membership and
Coordinating Committee officials from State, tribal, and local
governments to improve our knowledge and to inform decisions by the National Ocean Council affecting the respect of rights and the protection of freedoms preserving our Nation's treasured maritime heritage of safe, secure, and productive access while performing duties bolstering communities and to provide jobs, food, energy resources, ecological services, recreation,
and tourism opportunities, and promoting our Nation's
transportation, economy, and trade, improved sustainable uses of land and building a foundation and framework for the collaborative and cooperating participation of federal, State, tribal, and local authorities, regional
governance structures, and nongovernmental organizations ensuring a cohesive policy of promoting actions for the beneficial public and
the private sectors stewardship.and comprehensive adaptive
management to enable sustainability, human health and well-being,
national prosperity,
adaptation, social justice,
international diplomacy, security, and a more integrated, comprehensive,
flexible, and
proactive approach to planning and managing sustainable multiple uses
across sectors pursuing the United States' accession to the Law of the
Sea Convention and improve ocean conservation in a fiscally responsible ecosystem-based transparent manner to promote the well-being, prosperity, and security that present and future generations of Americans can rely on .
Regulatory Information
Congress authorizes EPA and other federal agencies to write rules and
regulations that explain the critical details necessary to implement
environmental laws. Below are some of the key rules and regulations that
the Office of Water employs to implement key statutes and programs.
Policy & Guidance
- National Geographic Green Guide
- AutoBlog Green
- Blue Marble Blog
- Climate Progress
- Climate Shifts
- Coal Tattoo
- Conscious Consuming
- Cool Green Science, The Nature Conservancy
- Dominion Energy's E-Conserve Blog
- Environmental Economics
- Forrest for the Trees
- gGadget.org
- GoodCleanTech
- Green Business
- Green Energy Reporter
- Green Herring
- Green Trust Sustainability
- Groovy Green
- Livable Future Blog
- Los Angeles Times: Greenspace
- MapAWatt Blog
- RealClimate
- Reuters Environment Forum
- Sustainablog
- The Goat
- The Inspired Economist
- The Oil Drum
- The Vine
- World Changing
- Solar Buzz
- The Daily Green
- Treehugger
- Conscious Consuming
- Greenwire
- High Country News
- Yale Environment 360
- Bright Green Talent
- Clean Edge Jobs
- CleanTechies
- DOE: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
- Energy Star
- European and Chicago Climate Exchanges
- European Commission Directorate General for Environment
- European Federation for Transport and Environment
- International Energy Agency
- National Renewable Energy Laboratory
- United Nations Environment Program
- United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
- US Department of Energy
- World Meteorlogical Association
- CleanTechRecruits.com
- EcoEmploy
- Green Career Central
- Green Dream Jobs
- GreenCareers from Monster
- GreenJobs from Treehugger
- Grist Jobs
- Renewable Energy Jobs
- EPA Official Jobs: EPAs
- What's This?
-
- tries to raise spirits at an agency under siege
- E.P.A. measures spirits, takes shot, spills.Tries to raise measures to control green. Aims Wasted.
- Passes on gas, gathers on vapours, expands from intrusion; pathways, greenhouse gases, air, water and coal;
- “You’ve got a president who is grateful and will stand with you every inch of the way"
- A diriment impediment of the blind leading the blind & driving us off a cliff while pretending deafness
- Critical infrastructure septic bottle-neck, shocked at moral hazard, Federal Reserve &Treasury take credit.
- Inspector General looks for roots, finds
systemic collapse, seismic disturbance, orders clear relief &
watershed change from the longstanding obstruction.
- House Vows to Cut Budget,
- Democrat's vow to stop taking Vows. Stagnation becoming turgid as citizens' sit side tracked by the green aim & blurred vision of the E.P.A.
- E.P.A. marks 40th year taking aim, mountainous misses shifts focus of climate change dream jobs aim.
-
- New Rules for Boilers and Incinerators
-
15 April 2012
The time may soon come for chemists to throw away all their
old glass reaction vessels. UK and Norwegian scientists have now shown
that far better and more effective vessels can be fabricated on a 3D
printer.
Not only do 3D printers offer the possibility of
producing vessels with much more complex architectures, but the vessels
can be designed to influence the course of the reaction or even to take
part in it. And if that's not enough, 3D printers also offer a
convenient way to introduce reactant chemicals into the vessels.
'I
have always been interested in new ways of doing complex chemistry and
exploring new reaction spaces,' explains lead researcher Lee Cronin at
the University of Glasgow. 'I had never used a 3D printer before but met
a researcher interested in designing new objects for 3D printed
architecture and got to asking them about combining it with chemistry.'
Printing different reaction vessels can actually change the final product of a chemical reaction |
So
after building a low-cost 3D printer in his laboratory, following
instructions provided by the Fab@Home open-source project, Cronin set
about using it to produce a reaction vessel.1 Guided by a
computer-generated design, the printer fabricated the vessel using 'ink'
made from a quick-drying silicone polymer usually used as a bathroom
sealant to build the vessel up layer by layer. The end result was a
plastic vessel comprising two separate solution-holding chambers both
leading to a larger mixing and reaction chamber.
Next, Cronin
used the printer to introduce different chemical solutions into the two
chambers. The two solutions are sucked into the reaction chambers at a
controlled rate by poking a needle attached to a vacuum source through
the walls of the vessel. Once in the reaction chamber, the chemicals
react together, while the hole made by the needle automatically closes
up, leaving the vessel water-tight.
Tip of the iceberg
Cronin
and his team tried this process with both organic and inorganic
chemicals, finding that they were able to produce an organic heterocycle
and two inorganic nanoclusters that had never been seen before. By
inserting electrodes into the reaction vessel, they were also able to
perform electrochemical reactions and even turn the vessel into a
working electrochemical cell. But that proved to be just the tip of the
iceberg.
Cronin then showed that they could alter the progress of
a reaction by simply changing the architecture of the reaction vessel.
Using the same basic design, they produced two versions of the vessel
with different size reaction chambers: one had a volume of 9.5ml, while
the other had a volume of just 2ml.
They then added two
different chemical solutions into the solution-holding chambers of each
vessel, adding three times more of one solution than the other. The
vessel with the large chamber could hold the entirety of both solutions,
which thus mixed together in a ratio of three to one, reacting to
produce a specific heterocycle. The vessel with the small chamber, on
the other hand, could only hold 1ml of each solution, which thus mixed
together in an equal ratio, producing a completely different heterocycle
(see figure).
Finally, Cronin and his team showed that they
could produce reaction vessels that play an active role in a chemical
reaction. To do this, they simply added catalytic particles of palladium
on carbon (Pd/C) to the polymer 'ink'. Pd/C is very good at catalysing
hydrogenation reactions and the reaction vessel fabricated with this
Pd/C-containing ink was able to convert styrene into ethylbenzene within
around 30 minutes at room temperature.
The potential scope of
this novel approach to chemical synthesis is huge, says Cronin, because
3D printing allows you to create reaction vessels with a vast array of
different architectures and capabilities. 'This is a fundamentally new
way of thinking, blurring the distinction between the reactor and the
reaction,' he tells Chemistry World. 'This is a key aspect because chemists can use CAD (computer-aided design) and reaction design together.'
Daniel
Johnson, a chemist at Murray State University in Kentucky, US,
certainly thinks the idea will catch on. In an associated News &
Views article in Nature Chemistry,2 he says: 'It is
likely that 3D printing will be attractive to a range of groups because
of the customisation aspect, that is, the inherent control over size,
shape and integrated function.'
To this end, Cronin is now busy
developing 'apps' to make it easy for others to print their own reaction
vessels. Good news for chemists, but perhaps not such good news for
glassblowers.
Jon Evans
You are here: Water
Laws & Regulations
Laws & Regulations
Laws & Executive Orders
There are a number of federal statutes passed by Congress and signed
into law by the President that are central to the Office of Water’s
mission. In addition, Presidential Executive Orders (EOs) play a central
role in a number of Office of Water activities. EOs are legally binding
orders that direct EPA and other federal agencies in their execution of
Congressionally established laws and policies.
Regulatory Information
Congress authorizes EPA and other federal agencies to write rules and
regulations that explain the critical details necessary to implement
environmental laws. Below are some of the key rules and regulations that
the Office of Water employs to implement key statutes and programs.
Policy & Guidance
Policy & guidance for implementing Office of Water programs.
– Richard Feynman
Introduction to pH
pH is a
unit of measure which describes the degree of acidity or alkalinity of a
solution.
It is measured on a scale of 0 to 14.
pH indicator
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
A pH indicator is a halochromic
chemical compound that is added in small amounts to a solution so
that the pH (acidity or basicity) of the solution can be determined
visually. Hence a pH indicator is a chemical
detector for hydronium
ions (H3O+) or hydrogen ions (H+) in the Arrhenius model. Normally, the
indicator causes the colour of the solution to change depending on the pH. At
25 °C, considered the standard temperature, the pH value of a neutral
solution is 7.0. Solutions with a pH value below 7.0 are considered acidic,
whereas solutions with pH value above 7.0 are basic. As most naturally occurring
organic compounds are weak protolytes, carboxylic
acids and amines,
pH indicators find many applications in biology and analytical chemistry.
Moreover, pH indicators form one of the three main types of indicator compounds
used in chemical analysis. For the quantitative analysis of metal cations, the
use of complexometric indicators is preferred,
whereas the third compound class, the redox
indicators, are used in titrations involving a redox reaction as the basis
of the analysis.
Theory
In and of themselves, pH
indicators are frequently weak acids or weak bases. The general reaction scheme
of a pH indicator can be formulated as follows:
HInd + H2O ⇌ H3O+
+ Ind-
Here HInd stands for the acid
form and Ind-
for the conjugate base of the indicator. It is the ratio of these that
determines the color of the solution and that connects the color to the pH
value. For pH indicators that are weak protolytes, we can write the Henderson-Hasselbalch equation for
them:
![\textrm{pH} = \textrm{pK}_{a}+ \log \frac{[\textrm{Ind}^-]}{[\textrm{HInd}]}](file:///D:/DOCUME%7E1/jacque/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/msohtml1/01/clip_image001.gif)
The equation, derived from the acidity
constant, states that when pH equals the pKa value of the indicator, both
species are present in 1:1 ratio. If pH is above the pKa value, the
concentration of the conjugate base is greater than the concentration of the
acid, and the color associated with the conjugate base dominates. If pH is
below the pKa value, the converse is true.
Usually, the color change is not
instantaneous at the pKa value, but there is a pH range where a mixture of
colors is present. This pH range varies between indicators, but as a rule of
thumb, it falls between the pKa value plus or minus one. This assumes that solutions
retain their color as long as at least 10% of the other species persists. For
example, if the concentration of the conjugate base is ten times greater than
the concentration of the acid, their ratio is 10:1, and consequently the pH is
pKa + 1. Conversely, if there is a tenfold excess of the acid with
respect to the base, the ratio is 1:10 and the pH is pKa – 1.
For optimal accuracy, the color
difference between the two species should be as clear as possible, and the
narrower the pH range of the color change the better. In some indicators, such
as phenolphthalein, one of the species is colorless,
whereas in other indicators, such as methyl red,
both species confer a color. While pH indicators work efficiently at their
designated pH range, they are usually destroyed at the extreme ends of the pH
scale due to undesired side-reactions.
Application
pH indicators are frequently
employed in titrations
in analytical chemistry and biology to determine
the extent of a chemical reaction. Because of the subjective
choice (determination) of color, pH indicators are susceptible to imprecise
readings. For applications requiring precise measurement of pH, a pH meter is
frequently used. Sometimes a blend of different indicators is used to achieve
several smooth color changes over a wide range of pH values. These commercial
indicators (e.g., universal indicator and Hydrion
papers) are used when only rough knowledge of pH is necessary.
Tabulated below are several
common laboratory pH indicators. Indicators usually exhibit intermediate colors
at pH values inside the listed transition range. For example, phenol red
exhibits an orange color between pH 6.8 and pH 8.4. The transition range may
shift slightly depending on the concentration of the indicator in the solution
and on the temperature at which it is used.
Equivalence
point
In acid-base titrations, an
unfitting pH indicator may induce a color change in the indicator-containing
solution before or after the actual equivalence point. As a result, different
equivalence points for a solution can be concluded based on the pH indicator
used. This is because the slightest color change of the indicator-containing
solution suggests the equivalence point has been reached. Therefore, the most
suitable pH indicator has an effective pH range, where the change in color is
apparent, that encompasses the pH of the equivalence point of the solution
being titrated. [1]
Litmus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is
about the chemical test. For the political term, see Litmus test (politics). For other uses, see Litmus (disambiguation).
Litmus is a water-soluble mixture
of different dyes extracted from lichens,
especially Roccella tinctoria. It is often absorbed
onto filter
paper to produce one of the oldest forms of pH
indicator, used to test materials for acidity. Blue litmus paper turns red under acidic conditions and
red litmus paper turns blue
under basic (i.e. alkaline) conditions, with the color
change occurring over the pH
range 4.5-8.3 at 25 °C. Neutral litmus paper is purple.[1] Litmus can
also be prepared as an aqueous solution that functions similarly. Under acidic
conditions the solution is red, and under basic conditions the solution is
blue.
The litmus mixture has the CAS number
1393-92-6 and contains 10 to 15 different dyes. Most of the chemical components
of litmus are likely to be the same as those of the related mixture known as orcein, but in
different proportions. In contrast with orcein, the principal constituent of
litmus has average molecular weight of 3300.[2] Acid-base
indicators on litmus owe their properties to a 7-hydroxyphenoxazone chromophore.[3] Some fractions of litmus were given specific names
including erythrolitmin (or erythrolein), azolitmin,
spaniolitmin, leucoorcein and leucazolitmin. Azolitmin shows nearly the same
effect as litmus.[4]
History
Litmus was used for the first
time about 1300 AD by Spanish alchemist Arnaldus de Villa Nova. From the 16th
century on, the blue dye was extracted from some lichens, especially
in the Netherlands.
Natural
sources
Litmus can be found in different
species of lichens.The dyes would be extracted from such species as Roccella tinctoria (South America), Roccella fuciformis (Angola and
Madagascar), Roccella pygmaea (Algeria), Roccella phycopsis, Lecanora
tartarea (Norway, Sweden), Variolaria dealbata, Ochrolechia parella, Parmotrema tinctorum and Parmelia. Currently, the main sources are Roccella montagnei (Mozambique) and Dendrographa leucophoea (California).[citation needed]
Uses
The main use of litmus is to test
whether a solution is acidic or basic. Wet litmus paper can also be used to
test water-soluble gases; the gas dissolves in the water and the resulting
solution colors the litmus paper. For instance, ammonia gas,
which is alkaline, colors the red litmus paper blue.
Chemical reactions other than
acid-base reaction can also cause a color-change to litmus paper. For instance,
chlorine gas
turns blue litmus paper white – the litmus paper is bleached[5], due to
presence of hypochlorite ions. This reaction is irreversible and therefore the
litmus is not acting as an indicator in this situation.
Litmus test (politics)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation,
search
For other uses,
see Litmus (disambiguation).
A litmus test is a
question asked of a potential candidate for high office, the answer to which
would determine whether the nominating official would proceed with the
appointment or nomination. (The expression is a metaphor based on the litmus test in chemistry.) Those who must
approve a nominee, such as a justice of the Supreme Court of the United States,
may also be said to apply a litmus test to determine whether the nominee will
receive their vote. In these contexts, the phrase comes up most often with
respect to nominations to the judiciary.
Usage
During United States presidential election
campaigns, litmus tests the nominees might use are more fervently discussed
when vacancies for the U.S. Supreme Court appear
likely. Advocates for various social ideas or policies often wrangle heatedly
over what litmus test, if any, the president ought to apply when nominating a
new candidate for a spot on the Supreme Court. Support for, or opposition to, abortion is one example of a common
decisive factor in single-issue politics; another might be
support of strict constructionism. Defenders of litmus
tests argue that some issues are so important that it overwhelms other concerns
(especially if there are other qualified candidates that pass the test).
The political litmus test is
often used when appointing judges. However, this test to determine the
political attitude of a nominee is not without error. Supreme Court Chief
Justice Earl
Warren was appointed under the impression that he was conservative but his
tenure was marked by liberal dissents. Today, the litmus test is used along
with other methods such as past voting records when selecting political
candidates.
The Republican Liberty Caucus is
opposed to litmus tests for judges. "We oppose ‘litmus tests’ for judicial
nominees who are qualified and recognize that the sole function of the courts
is to interpret the Constitution. We oppose judicial amendments or the crafting
of new law by any court."[1]
Professor Eugene
Volokh believes that the legitimacy of such tests is a "tough
question", and argues that they may undermine the fairness of the judiciary:
Imagine a justice testifies under oath before the Senate about his views on
(say) abortion, and later reaches a contrary decision [after carefully
examining the arguments]. "Perjury!" partisans on the relevant side
will likely cry: They'll assume the statement made with an eye towards
confirmation was a lie, rather than that the justice has genuinely changed his
mind. Even if no calls for impeachment follow, the rancor and contempt towards
the justice would be much greater than if he had simply disappointed his
backers' expectations.
Faced with that danger, a justice may well feel pressured into deciding the
way that he testified, and rejecting attempts at persuasion. Yet that would be
a violation of the judge's duty to sincerely consider the parties' arguments.[2]
References
1.
^ Wyoming Republican Liberty Caucus:
"Goals, Principles and Positions"
2.
^ The Volokh Conspiracy:
`"Questioning Supreme Court Nominees About Their Views on Specific
Questions"
www.pnas.org/content/96/7/3455.full
by DK Nordstrom - 1999
- Cited
by 191 - Related
articles
Mar 30, 1999 – Negative pH,
efflorescent mineralogy, and consequences for environmental restoration at the Iron
Mountain Superfund site, California ...
wwwbrr.cr.usgs.gov/projects/GWC_chemtherm/ironmtn.htm
Jan 20, 2011 – The
copper mines at Iron
Mountain, a Superfund site since 1983, ... mass balance studies,
measurements of negative pH, and modeling to ...
www.mendeley.com/.../negative-ph-and-extremely-acidic-mine-wate...
Dec 10, 1999 – Negative pH, efflorescent mineralogy, and consequences for environmental
restoration at the Iron Mountain Superfund site,
California ...
digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1488...
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat
by DK Nordstrom - 2000 - Cited
by 200 - Related
articles
Negative pH and Extremely Acidic Mine Waters from Iron
Mountain, California. Darrell Kirk Nordstrom. U.S.
Geological Survey, dkn@usgs.gov. Charles N. Alpers ...
www.epa.gov/aml/tech/imm.pdf
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick
View
Mar 7, 2006 – Early in its history, Iron
Mountain Mine was famous for being the ...... “Negative
pH, efflorescent mineralogy, and consequences for ...
books.google.com/books?isbn=0750678887...Daniel
A. Vallero - 2006 - Science - 563 pages
Case of the Negative pH: Iron Mountain,
California3 The acidity is so strong in some waters receiving runoff from
mining activities that the calculated pH values ...
ice.ucdavis.edu/education/esp179/?q=node/164
Negative pH, Efflorescent
Mineralogy, and Consequences for Environmental Restoration at the Iron
Mountain Superfund Site, California. Retrieved May 4, 2007, ...
You've visited this page many times.
www.wolkersdorfer.info/publication/bht/nordstrom_wm25.pdf
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick
View
by DK Nordstrom - Cited
by 1 - Related
articles
125. Negative pH, Efflorescent
Mineralogy, and the Challenge of Environmental Restoration at the Iron Mountain Superfund
site or why not to plug a Mine ...
www.scienceblog.com/community/older/archives/E/usgs028.html
To put the hydrology of the Iron Mountain site in
context, the drip rate of the negative pH waters
found in the Richmond Mine is on the order of less than one ...
THE PHONY NEGATIVE 3.6 pH AMD TRICK
articles.latimes.com/2005/may/10/local/me-mine10
May 10, 2005 – But few are as notorious as Iron Mountain Mine -- and Arman has become ... The acidic runoff ate workers' shovel heads and turned nearby ...
THE PHONY RUSTY SHOVEL TRICK
...there's
no instance where we have recorded levels of heavy metal above the
drinking water standard. EPA's first Iron Mountain Mine superfund project manager Tom Mix - 1985;
EPA Selects New Science Adviser
Lisa Jackson, head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), announced today that she has picked Glenn Paulson to be her
science adviser.
Paulson will replace Paul Anastas, who returned to Yale
University in February. "I'm very positive about Glenn; he's superb,"
says public health expert
Bernard Goldstein of the University of Pittsburgh Graduate
School of Public Health in Pennsylvania.
Paulson received a Ph.D. in environmental science in 1971 before
joining the Natural Resources Defense Council to work on air and water
pollution
issues. He spent several years at the New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection, where he was the primary author of the state's
Superfund law.
Most recently, Paulson was associate dean for research and
professor of environmental and occupational health at the University of
Medicine and
Dentistry of New Jersey, a position he left about a year ago to
return home to Wyoming.
Jackson's memo to her staff members says that Paulson will begin
the job soon. Anastas, in contrast, had to cool his heels for several
months because
of a hold that was placed on his Senate confirmation to lead
EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD). Paulson will wear only
the hat of science
adviser, with Lek Kadeli remaining as acting head of ORD.
That division of duties makes sense to Goldstein, a former ORD
administrator. He says it will allow the science advisor to focus on
providing input on
policy issues demanding Jackson's attention. "The administrator
should have someone sitting at her elbow listening to what she needs."
Gestapo-like abuse of power by the EPA
Background:
(Vidrine v. United States)
The
Washington Legal Foundation (WLF) filed a federal lawsuit today in U.S.
District Court for the Western District of Louisiana in Lafayette
against the United States for maliciously prosecuting Hubert P. Vidrine,
Jr. of Opelousas, LA, for allegedly storing a hazardous substance
without a permit from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
After
four years of prosecution, felony charges were suddenly dropped on the
eve of trial in September 2003 after Vidrine discovered that the only
witness for the government was addicted to cocaine causing
hallucinations.
Even after putting their witness under hypnosis
in vain, the EPA could not produce the allegedly hazardous substance or
any test results.
The suit, filed under the Federal Tort Claims
Act (FTCA) seeks a total of $5 million in damages. Mr. Vidrine, a plant
manager at Canal Refining Co. in Church Point, LA, was indicted in 1999
in federal court for allegedly violating the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) for the improper storage of hazardous waste without a
permit.
A few years before Vidrine was indicted, a "SWAT Team"
consisting of almost two dozen armed Special EPA Agents from EPA's
Criminal Investigation Division (CID), FBI, and other law enforcement
officers raided Canal Refining with M-16 rifles and police dogs; falsely
accused Mr. Vidrine of storing hazardous waste and lying about it;
prevented employees from using the restrooms for several hours;
prevented those same employees from calling their homes and daycare
centers to make plans to have children picked up; falsely told the
employees that Mr. Vidrine had been poisoning them and giving them
cancer; and threatened them with imprisonment if they did not provide
damaging evidence against Mr. Vidrine.
It appears that the EPA's
chief witness in the case, Mike Franklin, claimed that he had taken
samples of the alleged hazardous waste and had it tested. However,
neither the EPA nor federal prosecutors could produce the test results
allegedly proving RCRA violations.
Mr. Vidrine later discovered
that Mr. Franklin was addicted to cocaine. Nevertheless, federal
prosecutors and the EPA insisted on using Mr. Franklin as their key
witness, even though subpoenas issued by the prosecutors to chemical
testing laboratories in the area failed to turn up any lab results of
the alleged hazardous waste in question.
To no avail, the
government went so far as to place Mr. Franklin under hypnosis in a
desperate attempt to obtain information about the alleged testing
samples.
The trial judge ruled that Mr. Franklin could not be
used as a witness. At the urging of EPA agents, federal prosecutors
continued to insist that the government should be able to use Mr.
Franklin as their key witness and appealed the judge's decision to
exclude Mr. Franklin's testimony to the Fifth Circuit.
They
reluctantly withdrew the appeal when the U.S. Solicitor General's Office
decided not to approve it. On September 17, 2003, on the eve of trial,
federal prosecutors filed a motion to dismiss the indictment against Mr.
Vidrine and two other defendants, which was granted the next day.
Mr.
Vidrine was forced to spend over $180,000, his entire retirement
savings, to defend himself against the bogus charges. After the charges
were dropped, Mr. Vidrine stated, "I didn't think that this could happen
in America."
Mr. Vidrine contacted WLF for legal assistance
because of WLF's work on behalf of another small business in Worcester,
Massachusetts, which was raided by armed EPA agents and where EPA
misconduct led to charges being dropped on the eve of trial against the
company (Riverdale Mills Corp.) and its owner (James M. Knott, Sr.).
WLF
filed complaints in November 2003 with EPA's Inspector General and the
Office of Professional Responsibility of the Department of Justice to
investigate the misconduct.
In September 2005, Vidrine filed a
claim for damages against the EPA and the Department of Justice under
the FTCA for compensation for malicious prosecution and other
misconduct. Both agencies have failed to respond to Vidrine's claim,
thus necessitating the filing of today's lawsuit.
"This is an
outrageous case of malicious prosecution and misconduct by the EPA and
the U.S. Attorney's Office in Louisiana," said Paul Kamenar, WLF's
Senior Executive Counsel. "The EPA and the Department of Justice has a
sad history of using heavy-handed tactics and criminalizing business
activities where administrative or civil remedies would be more
appropriate," Kamenar added.
SOURCE
Update of October 7, 2011:
The
legal might of the U.S. government is usually enough to roll right over
someone like Opelousas, La. plant manager Hubert Vidrine Jr. But last
week the underdog had his day: a federal court awarded Vidrine $1.7
million for having been maliciously prosecuted by the federal
Environmental Protection Agency. Our friends at the Washington Legal
Foundation, who helped represent Vidrine, give details:
"The
just-resolved case started in 1996 when the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) ordered its SWAT-like special operations team (equipped
with M-16 rifles and police dogs) to raid the Canal Refinery, Mr.
Vidrine’s workplace. The raid led to a criminal investigation against
Mr. Vidrine for allegedly unlawful storage and disposal of hazardous
wastes under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).
When
it discovered that evidence of the alleged offense was lacking, the
feds refused to back off and in fact redoubled their zeal. In a scathing
142-page ruling, Judge Rebecca Doherty wrote that federal prosecutor
Keith Phillips “set out with intent and reckless and callous disregard
for anyone’s rights other than his own, and reckless disregard for the
processes and power which had been bestowed on him, to effectively
destroy another man’s life.”
A Greenwire dispatch published in
the New York Times is at pains to present the Vidrine case (quoting a
former enforcement official) an “isolated situation” arising from the
actions of a “rogue” agent. As a local paper reported, “Phillips was
accused of targeting Vidrine because of his outspokenness and choosing
an investigation in Louisiana to be close to a woman with whom he was
having a sexual affair.” The second of these motives, at least,
presumably doesn’t figure very often in decisions to pursue federal
criminal charges.
Cato readers have reason to be less than
surprised when federal enforcers abuse their powers, especially at an
agency as convinced of its own righteousness as the EPA. Nine years ago,
Cato published James V. DeLong’s “Out of Bounds, Out of Control:
Regulatory Enforcement at the EPA.” In 2009 congressional testimony,
Cato’s Tim Lynch discussed troubling cases like that of Alaska railroad
employee Edward Hanousek (“prosecuted under the Clean Water Act even
though he was off duty and at home when the accident occurred”).
Yesterday,
incidentally, brought another setback in court for the EPA: a federal
judge slapped it down for flagrantly overstepping its legal charter by
usurping the Army Corps of Engineers’s statutory role as part of its
efforts to restrict coal mining in Appalachia. How many times do the
agency and its enforcers have to overstep their authority before those
incidents cease to be just ”isolated situation[s]“?
SOURCE
Footnote:
A key EPA agent in the case, Keith Phillips, has just been
convicted of lying during the civil trial.
The Court concludes:
[T]his court finds Agent Phillips testimony, conduct and
documentation illustrate a deliberate patten of disregard for oaths
taken, truth of the matter involved, wholly lacking in intellectual
honesty, and exhibiting a deliberate intent to mislead all involved,
particularly the prosecutors with whom he worked and who were relying
upon his investigation and technical expertise in order to evaluate
their case. Agent Phillips has displayed the very worst example of abuse
and misuse of the power and trust bestowed upon a governmental agent,
and has brought great shame upon the agency which had entrusted him with
that power, responsibility, and authority.
Wow again. Kudos to the Washington Legal Foundation for its pro bono work representing Vidrine.
UPDATE: I see that Agent Phillips received his due in the case. According to a DOJ press release dated October 4, Phillips recent pled guilty to perjury and obstruction:
A former special agent with the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), Criminal Investigation Division (CID) in Dallas has
pleaded guilty to lying under oath and obstructing justice, announced
Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Justice Department’s
Criminal Division and Inspector General Arthur A. Elkins Jr. of the
EPA’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG).
Keith Phillips, 61, of Kent, Texas, pleaded guilty yesterday before
U.S. District Judge Richard T. Haik Sr. in the Western District of
Louisiana to a two-count indictment charging him with obstruction of
justice and perjury. The charges stemmed from his sworn testimony in
relation to a case that was pending in the Western District of
Louisiana.
. . . Phillips faces a maximum of 10 years in prison and a fine of
$250,000 on the obstruction of justice count, and five years in prison
and a fine of $250,000 on the perjury count. A sentencing date has not
yet been scheduled by the court.
“There is universal consensus that less flagrant violations with
lesser environmental consequences should be addressed through
administrative or civil monetary penalties and remedial orders."
Earl Devaney
Director, EPA Office of Criminal Enforcement (1994)
"I'm a salesman. I sell jail time to people."
EPA Special Agent
Criminal Investigation Division (2003)
This is an isolated situation because it is rare — freakishly rare,
struck-twice-by-lightening rare — for federal law enforcement agents or
federal prosecutors to be held accountable in any meaningful way for
even serious misconduct against the Americans they accuse and pursue.
Even in the relatively rare cases where deferential courts find
government misconduct, those findings rarely yield consequences more
than dismissals of prosecutions or reversals of convictions. A recent USA Today study found
that over 12 years courts found misconduct by federal prosecutors in
201 cases — yet only one of those instances of misconduct resulted in
state bar action against the government miscreant. Other studies
produce similar results — take, for instance, this study by the Northern California Innocence Project,
which found that (1) prosecutorial misconduct was found in hundreds of
surveyed cases, but only found to be material — that is, only yielded
some sort of relief to the defendant — in 20% of those cases, and (2) of
the 600 cases of prosecutorial misconduct found, only 1% resulted in
California State Bar action.
Our courts are complicit. They rarely name the prosecutors in opinions finding misconduct. A few journalists and bloggers struggle to counter this by naming names — as they should.
But for the most part, the vast majority of law enforcement is not
detected or not reported, and what is reported or detected is not
addressed. Law enforcement remains largely protected by the law, which
immunizes its misconduct in all but the most extreme cases. (Today's
example courtesy of Radley Balko
— did an FBI agent take your Ferrari for a joyride like a bit character
in Ferris Bueller's Day Off, and wreck it? Sorry bub — the government is immune. Tough luck!)
The fault lies not just in law enforcement or courts, but in
ourselves — we have bought the law-enforcement-as-unquestionable-heroes
concept uncritically, have re-embraced it after the noble sacrifices of
law enforcement on 9/11, and have convinced ourselves that it is
rational to mistrust government but trust law enforcement at the same time.
We need a society-wide change in the way we view law enforcement. We
need to begin to look with skepticism at 40 years of insipid "law and
order" rhetoric. Some conservatives need to stop their senseless habit
of viewing the agent with the raid jacket and the gun as somehow more
reliable or trustworthy than the regulator with the clipboard. Some
liberals need to stop suspending their appropriate suspicion of law
enforcement when cops are on the trail of something ideologically
important to them, like environmental crime or sexual assault. We need,
as a society, to reject the servile concept that questioning law
enforcement is "setting criminals free" or "looney liberal" or the like.
If we don't, then the small measure of justice that Hubert Vidrine
Jr. obtained will remain isolated and elusive. Government misconduct
will continue.
SPECIAL REPORT:
Federal Erosion
of Business
Civil Liberties
CALIFORNIA - EPA DELISTING IRON MOUNTAIN MINE!
"the
revised PHG of 300 g/L is two orders of magnitude greater than the
applicable numeric chemical-specific standards identified in ROD 5 for
the protection of freshwater aquatic life." Rick Sugarek, EPA project
manager for Iron Mountain Mine Superfund cleanup, 2008 5 year review.
CALIFORNIA - COPPER,
CADMIUM, AND ZINC; QAPP Information: QA Info Missing; Not one biota, not
one iota; No further evidence required to facially apparent facts
05/01/ 1986 P R C Environmental Management, Inc.
Environmental Protection Agency - Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
Endangerment assessment draft final rpt, w/TL to T Mix fr T Brisbin
51189
12/15/2000 C H 2 M Hill Environmental Protection
Agency - Region 6FSP, QAPP, Health & Safety Plan for surface-water
sampling 103636
03/17/1997 Charles Alpers / US Geological Survey
Richard Sugarek / Environmental Protection Agency - Region 9Ltr:
Transmits QAPP, draft workplan, & draft FSP, w/attchs
08/01/2001C H 2 M HillEnvironmental Protection
Agency - Region 9Amended QAPP for air & surface-water sampling (QAPP
& amendment 1)165834
Keswick dam to Cottonwood Creek; Final Listing Decision: Delist from 303(d) list. JUNE 15, 2010;
EPA has not yet implemented ICs (Institutional Controls) as required at the IMM Superfund Site in the five signed RODs
(EPA, 1986; EPA, 1992; EPA, 1993; EPA, 1997; EPA, 2004)
The powers reserved to the
several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary
course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the
people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the
State.” (James Madison, Federalist 45 )
PROCLAMATION TERMINATING THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY, 2010-0021996 Shasta County Court
Last Update: July 24, 2010 This page compares maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) and public health goals (PHGs).
Posted by the EPA on August 20th, 2010 - 11:58 AM
IMMI's STRATEGY FOR ACHIEVING THE SAFE WATERSHED REFORM-ACT (SWR)
Court for the Eastern District shall be held at Redding.
Read more: http://vlex.com/vid/sec-california-19212558#ixzz11HJZkgsS
28 USC 84 - Sec. 84. California
US Code - Title 28: Judiciary and Judicial Procedure
a private party may “recover expenses associated
with cleaning up contaminated sites.” United States v.
Atl. Research Corp., 551 U.S. 128, 131
October 11, 2010 CERCLA 'Arranger' Liability Narrowed
See also Madison 's explanation of the purpose of the 9 th Amendment in response to Hamilton 's objection in Federalist 84 :
1. “It has been objected also against a bill of
rights, that, by enumerating particular exceptions to the grant of
power, it would disparage those rights which were not placed in that
enumeration, and it might follow by implication, that those rights which
were not singled out, were intended to be assigned into the hands of
the general (i.e. Federal) government, and were consequently insecure.
This is one of the most plausible arguments I have ever heard urged
against the admission of a bill of rights into this system; but, I
conceive, that may be guarded against. I have attempted it, as
gentlemen may see by turning to the last clause of the 4 th resolution
(i.e. the original draft of the 9 th amendment)” (James Madison, U.S.
House of Representatives, June 8, 1789)
2. “The exceptions here or elsewhere in the
constitution, made in favor of particular rights, shall not be construed
as to diminish the just importance of other rights retained by the
people; or as to enlarge the powers delegated by the constitution; but
either as actual limitations of such powers, or as inserted merely for
greater caution” (An early version of the 9 th amendment—the last clause
of the 4 th resolution—as submitted by James Madison, June 8, 1789).
"The Billion Dollar Settlement" Cashout Advance, Iron Mountain Mine Superfund
Cashout Advances are funds received by EPA, a state, or PRP under the terms of a
settlement agreement (e.g., consent decree) to finance response action costs at a specified
Superfund site. Under CERCLA Section 122(b)(3), cashout funds received by EPA are
placed in site-specific, interest bearing accounts known as special accounts and are used for
potential future work at such sites in accordance with the terms of the settlement agreement.
Funds placed in special accounts may be disbursed to PRPs, to states that take responsibility
for the site, or to other Federal agencies to conduct or finance response actions in lieu of EPA
without further appropriation by Congress. As of September 30, 2009 and 2008, cashout
advances are $572 million and $489 million as restated, respectively.
a. “Right of the People.” The first salient feature of
the operative clause is that it codifies a “right of the people.”
The unamended Constitution and the Bill of Rights
use the phrase “right of the people” two other times, in the
First Amendment’s Assembly-and-Petition Clause and in
the Fourth Amendment’s Search-and-Seizure Clause. The
Ninth Amendment uses very similar terminology (“The
enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall
not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by
the people”). All three of these instances unambiguously
refer to individual rights, not “collective” rights, or rights
that may be exercised only through participation in some
corporate body.5
in a context other than “rights”—the famous preamble
(“We the people”), §2 of Article I (providing that “the people”
will choose members of the House), and the Tenth
Amendment (providing that those powers not given the
Federal Government remain with “the States” or “the
people”). Those provisions arguably refer to “the people”
acting collectively—but they deal with the exercise or
reservation of powers, not rights. Nowhere else in the
Constitution does a “right” attributed to “the people” refer
to anything other than an individual right.6
What is more, in all six other provisions of the Constitution
that mention “the people,” the term unambiguously
refers to all members of the political community, not an
unspecified subset. As we said in United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U. S. 259, 265 (1990):
April 25, 2012, 12:02 a.m. EDT
Taxpayers still on hook for $119 bln in TARP funds
Community banks face uphill battle to exit government program: report
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — Taxpayers are still owed $119 billion in
outstanding Troubled Asset Relief Program funds, a watchdog for the
government crisis response program said Wednesday in a quarterly report
to Congress.
That number is down from $133 billion in TARP funds owed as of January,
according to the author of the report, the Office of the Special
Inspector General for the TARP. The government expects TARP to lose $60
billion.
The program was set up during the height of the financial crisis of 2008
to stem a growing credit contagion by providing taxpayer-funded capital
injections into big and smaller banks.
Most of the remaining costs come from investments including taxpayer-funded stakes in American International Group Inc.
AIG
+0.97%
, General Motors Co.
GM
-0.26%
and Ally Financial, as well as $18 billion from banks that still must
repay their TARP injections, and another $15 billion in costs come from
the public-private investment program, in which the government matched
private investment into mortgage securities.
The reduction in money owed to taxpayers comes partly from banks
repaying their TARP and exiting the program. Regions Financial Corp.
RF
+5.91%
repaid TARP $3.5 billion on April 4 and exited the program. Until it
paid back the Treasury, Regions was the largest bank remaining in the
TARP program, the report noted.
AIG, through a combination of buy-backs from Treasury and Treasury sales
of the troubled insurer’s shares on the open market, repaid about $7
billion. Treasury still has a 70% stake in AIG following the
transactions, according to the report.
The report added that a key reason for the costs is that many community
banks have an uphill battle to exit TARP because they cannot find new
capital. It noted that community banks with less than $1.5 billion in
assets typically don’t have access to capital from private equity firms,
mutual funds, foundations, and other institutional investors.
The report said that of 351 banks remaining in the TARP program as of
March 31, 163 were not current on dividend payments they are obliged to
make to the Treasury Department. Over a hundred banks have missed five
or more dividend payments and dozens more face formal enforcement
actions by their federal regulator, the report added.
However, the report notes that Treasury has already written off or realized losses of $14 billion in TARP investments.
The report noted that most regional mid-sized banks remaining in TARP
have taken steps to issue new stock or debt or selling assets as part of
plans to repay the government.
Ten regional banks remained in the program as of April, including Cathay General Bancorp.
CATY
+1.28%
, First Bancorp.
FNLC
+1.05%
, Flagstar Bancorp, Inc.
FBC
+4.28%
, International Bancshares Corp.
IBOC
+2.25%
, M&T Bank Corp.
MTB
+0.96%
, New York Private Bank & Trust Corporation, Popular Inc.
BPOP
+1.10%
, PrivateBancorp Inc.
PVTB
+7.00%
, Synovus Financial Corp.
SNV
+2.90%
, and Zions Bancorp.
ZION
-3.58%
.
New costs are expected to hit banks beginning in late 2013, when banks
still in the program will face a significant rise in dividend payments
they are obliged to make to the government from 5% to 9%.
“Getting the community banks left in TARP back on their feet without
government assistance must be a high priority for Treasury and the
federal banking regulators,” said Special Inspector General Christy
Romero.
Banks receiving TARP capital injections must initially pay a 5% dividend
per year, with payment to Treasury due four times a year. Five years
after signing a contract to receive those funds, TARP recipients must
pay dividends of 9%, based on a provision to encourage banks to pay back
the funds they have received.
Ronald D. Orol is a MarketWatch reporter, based in Washington.
- BUSINESS
- Updated April 24, 2012, 8:31 p.m. ET
TARP: Billions in Loans in Doubt
BY VICTORIA MCGRANE,ROBIN SIDEL AND JEFFREY SPARSHOTT
Hundreds of small banks can't afford to repay
federal bailout loans, a top watchdog will warn Wednesday in a report
that challenges the government's upbeat assessment of its
financial-system rescue.
Christy Romero, special inspector general for the
Troubled Asset Relief Program, said 351 small banks with some $15
billion in outstanding TARP loans face a "significant challenge" in
raising new funds to repay the government.
Ms. Romero made the
comments in her quarterly report to Congress, the first since the Senate
approved her appointment in March as special inspector general for the
program. She urged the government and regulators to ...
Available to WSJ.com Subscribers
sponsored links
Bank of America®Supporting The Non Profits That Address Critical Community Needs
DUE DILIGENCE
“Whenever the legislators
endeavor to take away and destroy the property of the people, . . . they
put themselves into a state of war with the people who are thereupon
absolved from any further obedience . . . .” Id. 222, at 233 (emphasis
added). Locke
[$ 542] 5. Effect of
Possession by Tenant. Within the rule that actual possession of part of a
tract of land under color of title gives constructive possession to the
extent of the boundaries designated in the conveyance, the possession
of part of a tract of land by a tenant of the holder of color of title,
who has been put into possession under a lease which does not restrict
the possession to any definite part of the tract, will give the lessor
constructive posses sion coextensive with the boundaries of his deed,* 4
since the possession of the tenant inures to the benefit of the lessor;
35 and it is not material that only a small part of the land is
actually occupied. 38 It has also been held in a number of decisions
that even though the lease restricts the possession of the tenant to a
definite portion of the tract, his possession will, by construction, be
extended to the boundaries of the deed under which the lessor claims, 37
provided of course no one else is in actual possession of the balance
of the tract. 38 And in other decisions, where the opinion does not show
definitely whether the lease contained such a restriction, the rule is
broadly otherwise expressed, if one claiming under an assurance of title
defining boundaries places a tenant in possession without limiting him
to any definite part, the tenant's possession will extend to the
landlord's boundaries, although the land actually occupied is but a
small part of the whole Bell v. North American Coal, etc Co., 155 Fed.
712, 84 CCA 60.
Possession by one's tenant is his own possession. State v. Harmon, 57 W. Va. 447, 50 SK 828
"U.S. Marshall McKeough explained the object of the meeting in a few
pertinent remarks. He said that Mr. Hutchens told him on
yesterday that unless they give up the water in the
creek aforesaid, that he, Hutchens, would take a body of
men and take the water by force of arms and hold the same
until he and his men were whipped off the ground.
His party
as above mentioned claim right of possession of the water, and
are suing for breach of Close and holding over by deceit.
In this dilemma Mr. Arman
calls upon all his fellow-miners and countrymen to assist him in defending his
rights, agreeable to the old miners' laws.
They said that this
was a serious affair, they are willing to defend the old
established miners' laws and the right."
THE IDEAL LODE
TAKING, UNJUST - When the government acquires
private property and fails to compensate an owner fairly. A taking can
occur even without the actual physical seizure of property, such as when
a government regulation has substantially devalued a property.
An otherwise valid exercise of the police power constitutes a taking for
which compensation is due if the owner suffers a permanent, physical
occupation of the property. Yee v. Escondido, 112 S. Ct. 1522 (1992);
Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council, 112 S. Ct. 2886, 2900 (1992);
Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., 458 U.S. 419, 427-28
(1982); Pumpelly v. Green Bay Co., 80 U.S. (13 Wall.) 166 (1871);
Ferguson, 852 P.2d at 207. Physical invasions have been found where the
government interferes with the owner's "right to exclude." See, e.g.,
Kaiser Aetna v. United States, 444 U.S. 164 (1979) (public access to
pond); Nollan v. California Coastal Comm'n, 483 U.S. 825 (1987) (public
easement to beach); Loretto, 458 U.S. at 427-28 (installation of cable);
Pumpelly, 80 U.S. at 166 (flooding); Hawkins v. City of La Grande, 843
P.2d 400 (Or. 1992) (one-time flooding).
However, the state may enter property to enforce a valid land use
regulation and destroy the offending property. This does not amount to a
physical occupation even where the government's activity has a
permanent effect. See Miller v. Schoene, 276 U.S. 272, 278 (1928)
(permitting state entomologist to enter property and destroy diseased
trees without affecting a taking); see also Bowditch v. Boston, 101 U.S.
16, 18-19 (1880) (denying compensation to owners whose houses were
destroyed to prevent spread of fire); Shaffer, 576 P.2d at 824-25
(finding that city may enter to demolish substandard vacant building
without compensating owner). "[T]he government affects a physical taking
only when it requires the land owner to submit to the physical
occupation of his land." Ferguson, 852 P.2d at 207.
"There is, of course, no federal Constitutional right to be free from
changes in the land use laws." Lakeview Dev. Corp. v. City of South Lake
Tahoe, 915 F.2d 1290 (9th Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 501 U.S. 1251
(1991); see also William C. Haas & Co. v. City & County of San
Francisco, 605 F.2d 1117 (9th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 445 U.S. 928
(1980). To establish a violation of their right to substantive due
process, the Dodds must prove that the County's actions were "clearly
arbitrary and unreasonable, having no substantial relation to the public
health, safety, morals, or general welfare." Euclid v. Ambler Realty
Co., 272 U.S. 365, 395 (1926); see also Sinaloa Lake, 882 F.2d at 1407. A
substantive due process claim requires proof that the interference with
property rights was irrational and arbitrary. Usery v. Turner Elkhorn
Mining Co., 428 U.S. 1, 15 (1976). Federal judicial interference with a
local government zoning decision is proper only where the government
body could have no legitimate reason for its decision. Minnesota v.
Clover Leaf Creamery Co., 449 U.S. 456, 464 (1981); Herrington, 834 F.2d
at 1498 n. 7. There is no denial of substantive due process if the
question as to whether the government acted arbitrarily or capriciously
is "at least debatable." Clover Leaf Creamery Co., 449 U.S. at 469.
According to the Supreme Court, an unconstitutional taking consists of
two components: taking of property and subsequent denial of just
compensation. If a property owner receives just compensation through the
process the government provides, the property owner does not have a
taking claim. Id. at 194-95. Williamson County Regional Planning Comm'n
v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, 473 U.S. 172, 194 (1985).
Inverse condemnation suits do not provide only the just compensation
required under state law. Rather, such suits are a method of obtaining
the just compensation required by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.
"A landowner is entitled to bring an action in inverse condemnation as a
result of the self-executing character of the constitutional provision
with respect to compensation." First English Evangelical Lutheran Church
v. County of Los Angeles, 482 U.S. 304, 315 (1987). "Claims for just
compensation are grounded in the Constitution itself." Id. The state
procedure Williamson County references is the procedure necessary to
raise a federal taking claim in state court. Thus, under Williamson
County, a taking claimant must litigate the federal constitutional claim
through the processes the state provides.
The Supreme Court compared the process for making a claim against state
or local governments to the process for making a claim against the
federal government. A taking claim against the federal government is
"premature until the property owner has availed itself of the process
provided by the Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. S 1491." Williamson County, 473
U.S. at 195 (citing Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co., 467 U.S. 986, 1016-1020
(1984)). The Tucker Act grants the U.S. Claims Court " `jurisdiction to
render judgment upon any claim against the United States founded . . .
upon the Constitution.' " Monsanto, 467 U.S. at 1017 (citing 28 U.S.C. S
1491). Thus, a Tucker Act taking claim is a claim for the just
compensation required by the Fifth Amendment. The Supreme Court
indicated that the Tucker Act procedure is analogous to the state
proceedings claimants must follow to obtain just compensation from state
and local governments. Williamson County, 473 U.S. at 195. Therefore,
claimants following state procedures, like those utilizing the procedure
established under the Tucker Act, should raise the federal just
compensation requirement.
The decision in Williamson County, 473 U.S. 172 (1985), established two
distinct requirements for taking claims under the rubric of ripeness:
First, "the government entity charged with implementing the regulations
[must have] reached a final decision regarding the application of the
regulations to the property at issue." 473 U.S. at 186.
Second, plaintiffs must have sought "compensation through the procedures
provided by the State for obtaining such compensation." 473 U.S. at
195.
Both the final decision and compensation elements must be ripe before the claim is justiciable.
The final decision element is well-developed. Beginning with Penn Cent.
Transp. Co. v. City of New York, 438 U.S. 104 (1978), Agins v. City of
Tiburon, 447 U.S. 255 (1980), and Hodel v. Virginia Surface Min. &
Reclamation Ass'n. Inc., 452 U.S. 264 (1981), the Court has declined to
rule on taking claims when it believed the property owner had not
received a final and definitive decision from a land use regulatory body
on development of the property at issue. In Williamson County, the
taking claim was unripe because there remained the "potential for . . .
administrative solutions." 473 U.S. at 187 (landowner failed to seek
variances that could have allowed development).
In applying the final decision requirement, we have emphasized that
local decision-makers must be given the opportunity to review at least
one reasonable development proposal before we will consider ripe an
as-applied challenge to a land use regulation. See, e.g., Southern
Pacific Transp. Co. v. City of Los Angeles, 922 F.2d 498, 503 (9th Cir.
1990), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 943 (1991); Kinzli v. City of Santa Cruz,
818 F.2d 1449, 1454 (9th Cir.), modified, 830 F.2d 968 (1987), cert.
denied, 484 U.S. 1043 (1988). Finality also requires the local
government to determine the type and intensity of development that land
use regulations will allow on the subject property; this determination
helps the court evaluate whether regulation of the subject property is
excessive by identifying the extent of the regulation. See Herrington v.
County of Sonoma, 857 F.2d at 570; Lai v. City and County of Honolulu,
841 F.2d 301, 303 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 994 (1988). Thus, a
landowner may need to submit modified development proposals that
satisfy the local government's objections to the development as
initially proposed. Del Monte Dunes at Monterey, Ltd. v. City of
Monterey, 920 F.2d 1496, 1501 (9th Cir. 1990); MacDonald, Sommer &
Frates v. Yolo County, 477 U.S. 340, 351-53 (1986).
Once the appropriate state agency reaches a final decision, the second
ripeness requirement of Williamson County, the compensation element, is
triggered. A federal court lacks jurisdiction to consider an as-applied
regulatory taking claim until a determination is reached that "just
compensation" has been denied by the state: [B]ecause the Fifth
Amendment proscribes taking without just compensation, no constitutional
violation occurs until just compensation has been denied. The nature of
the constitutional right therefore requires that a property owner
utilize procedures for obtaining compensation before bringing a Section
1983 action. 473 U.S. at 194 n. 13 (emphasis added).
In Williamson County, the Court concluded that Hamilton Bank's taking
claim was not ripe because the Bank failed to utilize available state
procedures: Under Tennessee law, a property owner may bring an inverse
condemnation action to obtain just compensation for an alleged taking of
property under certain circumstances . . . [U]ntil it has utilized that
procedure, its taking claim is premature. Id. at 196-97. See also Jama
Const. v. City of Los Angeles, 938 F.2d 1045, 1047-48 (9th Cir. 1991)
(Dismissed as unripe where plaintiff "did not seek compensation through
California procedures before bringing its federal action."), cert.
denied, 503 U.S. 919 (1992); Bateson v. Geisse, 857 F.2d 1300, 1306 (9th
Cir. 1988) (Because Montana recognizes inverse condemnation under the
State Constitution, plaintiff must "pursue [that claim] before he can
state a [federal ] taking claim.").
[I]f a state provides an adequate procedure for seeking just
compensation, the property owner cannot claim a violation of the Just
Compensation Clause until it has used the procedure and been denied just
compensation. 473 U.S. at 195.
The central concern of ripeness is whether the case involves uncertain
or contingent future events that may not occur as anticipated, or indeed
may not occur at all. 13A Charles A. Wright & Arthur R. Miller,
Federal Practice and Procedure S 3532 at 126 (citing Thomas v. Union
Carbide Agr. Prods. Co., 473 U.S. 568, 580 (1985)). If an issue can be
illuminated by the development of a better factual record, a challenge
may be unripe. See Pacific Legal Found. v. State Energy Resources
Conservation and Dev. Comm'n, 659 F.2d 903, 915 (9th Cir. 1981), aff'd
on other grounds, 461 U.S. 190 (1983); Hoehne, 870 F.2d at 532. The
Fifth Amendment action is not more "developed" or "ripened " through
presentation of the ultimate issue -- the failure of a state to provide
adequate compensation for a taking -- to the state court. Indeed, such a
requirement would not ripen the claim, rather it would extinguish the
claim. See Palomar Mobilehome Park v. City of San Marcos, 989 F.2d 362
(9th Cir. 1993). Declining to hear a case on ripeness grounds is
appropriate in situations where there is a reasonable prospect that the
state courts may adjust state law to avoid or alter the constitutional
question. 13A Charles A. Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice
and Procedure S 3532.5 at 126. But where deference rests instead "on
the prospect that the state courts may entertain and decide the
constitutional question, the issue of comity should be addressed
directly without reliance on ripeness." Id.
The case law is clear that with the exception of federal habeas corpus
review of state convictions under 28 U.S.C. S 2254, the determination of
federal constitutional questions in state court systems may not be
reviewed or repeated in the federal systems. The Court in Allen v.
McCurry, 449 U.S. 90, 94, 104 (1980) said that"[t]he federal courts have
traditionally adhered to the related doctrines of res judicata and
collateral estoppel," excepting only "a federal writ of habeas corpus,
the purpose of which is not to redress civil injury but to release the
applicant from unlawful physical confinement."
[I]t has been established at least since Jacobs v. United States, 290
U.S. 13 (1933), that claims for just compensation are grounded in the
Constitution itself. [The claim] rested upon the Fifth Amendment.
Statutory recognition [by the state] was not necessary. [I]n the event
of a taking, the compensation remedy is required by the Constitution.
First English Evangelical Lutheran Church of Glendale v. County of Los
Angeles, 482 U.S. 304, 315-16 (1987) (citations omitted).
Courts routinely have held that state procedures are considered
inadequate only when state law provides no postdeprivation remedy for a
taking. See Austin, 840 F.2d at 681 (Hawaiian courts and legislature had
neither accepted nor rejected inverse condemnation action under Article
I, Section 20 of the Hawaiian Constitution); Levald Inc. v. City of
Palm Desert, 998 F.2d 680, 688 (9th Cir. 1993) ("the unavailability of
state remedies is the functional equivalent of the denial of just
compensation"), cert. denied, 114 S. Ct. 924 (1994); see also New Port
Largo, Inc. v. Monroe County, 985 F.2d 1488, 1493-94 (11th Cir.)
("Florida law . . . provided no post-deprivation remedy."), cert.
denied, 114 S. Ct. 439 (1993).
Oct 28
Filed Under Articles of Confederation , CONSTITUTION , LEARNING THE LAW , Northwest Ordinance , ORGANIC LAWS
The powers of all governments are almost universally conceded
to be: legislative, executive and judicial and law is either written or
unwritten law, so in the United States of America, where government is
without equivocation believed to be tripartite, written law controls
government. The surprise is that written law is limited to the territory
owned by the United States of America, which is a simple definition of
territorial jurisdiction.
The Constitution of September 17, 1787 and the Constitution of
the United States are the two Constitutions that control the government
of the United States, which is composed of territory belonging to the
United States of America. The oft forgotten and erroneously reported as a
dead Constitution, the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777,
still guides and controls the federal government and Senate of the
United States of America.
A word search of the Organic Laws of the United States of
America for a clear connection of territorial jurisdiction with anyone
of the three government powers reveals the obvious difference between
the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777 and the Constitution
of September 17, 1787. The subject of territorial jurisdiction in the
Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777 is purely a matter of the
sovereign States involved in territorial disputes. This is consistent
with the Articles of Confederation's purpose as an establishment of a
defensive Union, without powers other than those expressly delegated.
The Constitution of September 17, 1787 would, when ratified by nine
States of the first Union create another Union of States composed of
States primarily owned by the United States of America.
Both the kind of government and the territorial jurisdiction of
a Government of the United States headed by a President of the United
States is revealed in the Northwest Ordinance of July 13, 1787, which
provides a temporary government for the federal district then known as
the Northwest Territory. The temporary government for the Northwest
Territory federal district became the permanent government for the
District of Columbia and other territory and other property belonging to
the United States of America, when nine States of the first Union
ratified the Constitution of September 17, 1787. Ratification of this
Constitution made the temporary territorial jurisdiction of the
Northwest Ordinance of July 13, 1787 permanent.
Does the Constitution of September 17, 1787 expand the
territorial jurisdiction of the permanent form of government proposed
for the Northwest Territory? The answer has to be an unqualified no.
Article IV Section 3 Clause 2 of that Constitution secures the
proprietary power over “Territory or other Property belonging to the
United States” meaning, of course, the United States of America.
Territorial jurisdiction is rooted in the proprietary power of the
Congress of the United States under the authority of the Articles of
Confederation. The Constitution of September 17, 1787 only confers
legislative power when ratified by nine States. Proprietary power can
only be transferred by the conveyance of the territory or property.
What's the importance of knowing the difference between the
territorial jurisdiction of the Articles of Confederation of November
15, 1777 and the Article IV Section 3 Clause 2 territorial jurisdiction
of the Constitution of September 17, 1787? The Constitution of September
17, 1787 allows the States of the first and second Unions to draw the
lines of a Congressional district even if there's no territory owned by
the United States of America within the territory making up the
district. Territory owned by the United States of America doesn't get
the Representative a vote in the House of Representatives. Only
Representatives with districts made up of territory not owned by the
United States of America can vote on federal taxation legislation on
settlers and inhabitants of territory owned by and ceded to the United
States of America.
§ 409. b. New assignment.—Yet in many actions tha
plaintiff, who has alleged in his declaration a general wrong, may in
his replication, after an evasive plea by the defendant, reduce that
them in the defamatory sense imputed by the innuendo, or in any
defamatory or actionable sense which the words themselves imported,
asserted that the occasion was privileged, and also denied that the
words were spoken of the plaintiff in the way of his profession or
trade, whenever they were alleged to have been so spoken. But now this
compendious mode of pleading is abolished. "Not Guilty" can no longer be
pleaded in a civil action. The defendant must deal specifically with
every allegation of which he docs not admit the truth.
(iv) Demurrers were abolished. It is true that either party is still allowed to place on the record an objection in point of law, which
is very similar to the former demurrer. But there is this important
difference. The party demurring could formerly insist on having his
demurrer separately argued, which caused delay. But now such points of
law are argued at the trial of the action; it is only by consent of the
parties, or by order of the court or a judge, that the party objecting
can have the point set down for argument and disposed of before the
trial. And, as a rule, such an order will only be made where the
decision of the point of law will practically render any trial of the
action unnecessary.
(v) Pleas in abatement were abolished. If cither party
desires to add or strike out a party, he must apply by summons (see
Kendall v. Hamilton, [1879] 4 App. Cas. 504; Pilley v. Robinson, [1887]
20 Q. B. D. 155; Wilson v. Balcarres Brook Steamship Co., [1893] 1 Q. B.
422). No cause or matter now "shall be defeated by reason of the
misjoinder or nonjoinder of parties."
(vi) Equitable relief is now granted, and equitable
claims and defenses are now recognized, in all actions in the high court
of justice.
(vii) Payment into court was for the first time allowed generally in all actions.
(viii) The right of setoff was preserved unchanged; but
a very large power was given to a defendant to counterclaim. He can
raise any kind of crossclaim against the plaintiff, and in some cases
even against the plaintiff with others, subject only to the power of a
master or judge to order the claim
fraud."—(1) The word "fraud," as used
in the statute providing that possession, to be the foundation of
prescription, cannot originate in fraud, the fraud meant is actual
fraud—a moral fraud, a wrongful act, and not a legal act which the law
denominates a fraud regardless of the bona fides of the parties. Dixon
v. Patterson, 135 Ga. 183, 69 SE 21: Floyd v. Ricketson, 129 Ga. 668, 59
SE 909; Bower v. Cohen, 126 Ga. 35, 54 SE 918: Arnold v. Limeburger,
122 Ga. 72, 49 SE 812; Street v. Collier, 118 Ga. 470, 45 SE 294;
Connell v. Culpepper, 111 Ga. 805, 35 SE 667; Lee v. Ogden, 83 Ga. 325,
10 SE 349 [disappr Hunt v. Dunn, 74 Ga. 120]; Ware v. Barlow, 81 Ga. 1, 6
SE 465; Wingfleld v. Virgin, 51 Ga. 139. (2) "To defeat prescriptive
title the fraud of the party claiming thereunder must be such as to
charge his conscience. He must be cognizant of the fraud, not by
constructive, but by actual notice." Shingler v. Bailey, 135 Ga. 666,
668, 70 SE 563 (per Atkinson, J.). (3) An honest mistake of law as to
the effect of the writing cannot of course, amount to a moral fraud as
against the true owner. Bower v. Cohen, supra.
"Minerals like copper and zinc are necessary nutrients, not poisons. We don't threaten salmon, we eat salmon when it is served."
John F. Hutchens -Full Article at Sacramento Bee
DECLARATIONS OF TED ARMAN
 |
Document ID: |
1952-0000349 |
|
|
Assessor Parcel #: |
Please Contact Assessor's Office |
|
Recorded on: |
1/23/1952 |
|
|
Book Page #: |
Book: 365 : Page: 22 |
|
No. of Pages: |
1 |
|
|
Image: |
A scanned image of this document is not available. |
CONTRACT
Grantors: |
Grantees: |
| IRON MOUNTAIN INVESTMENT CO |
IRON MOUNTAIN INVEST CO |
| UNITED STATES |
UNITED STATES |
Index Items: |
References: |
| None |
None |
|
Document ID: |
1974-0015100 |
|
|
Assessor Parcel #: |
Please Contact Assessor's Office |
|
Recorded on: |
8/15/1974 |
|
|
Book Page #: |
Book: 1234 : Page: 649 |
|
No. of Pages: |
Unknown |
|
|
Image: |
Documents can only be viewed in Records Office, Internet access is not available. |
PATENT
Grantors: |
Grantees: |
| USA BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT |
IRON MOUNTAIN INVESTMENT CO |
Index Items: |
References: |
| None |
None |
|
Document ID: |
1976-0033165 |
|
|
Assessor Parcel #: |
Please Contact Assessor's Office |
|
Recorded on: |
12/17/1976 |
|
|
Book Page #: |
Book: 1385 : Page: 546 |
|
No. of Pages: |
Unknown |
|
|
Image: |
Documents can only be viewed in Records Office, Internet access is not available. |
DEED
Grantors: |
Grantees: |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC |
IRON MOUNTAIN INVESTMENT CO |
Index Items: |
References: |
| None |
None |
|
Document ID: |
1977-0023077 |
|
|
Assessor Parcel #: |
Please Contact Assessor's Office |
|
Recorded on: |
7/20/1977 |
|
|
Book Page #: |
Book: 1442 : Page: 285 |
|
No. of Pages: |
Unknown |
|
|
Image: |
Documents can only be viewed in Records Office, Internet access is not available. |
DEED
Grantors: |
Grantees: |
| IRON MOUNTAIN INVESTMENT CO |
IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC |
Index Items: |
References: |
| None |
None |
|
Document ID: |
1990-0018344 |
|
|
Assessor Parcel #: |
Please Contact Assessor's Office |
|
Recorded on: |
5/2/1990 |
|
|
Book Page #: |
Book: 48 : Page: 177 |
|
No. of Pages: |
Unknown |
|
|
Image: |
A scanned image of this document is not available. |
LAND SURVEY
Grantors: |
Grantees: |
| ARMAN, T W |
None |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES |
|
Index Items: |
References: |
| None |
None |
|
Document ID: |
2000-0016716 |
|
|
Assessor Parcel #: |
Please Contact Assessor's Office |
|
Recorded on: |
5/11/2000 3:27:17 PM |
|
|
Book Page #: |
No Book Page Found |
|
No. of Pages: |
12 |
|
|
Image: |
Documents can only be viewed in Records Office, Internet access is not available. |
LIEN
Grantors: |
Grantees: |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC |
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
Index Items: |
References: |
| None |
None |
|
Document ID: |
2011-0005844 |
|
|
Assessor Parcel #: |
Please Contact Assessor's Office |
|
Recorded on: |
2/28/2011 11:22:41 AM |
|
|
Book Page #: |
No Book Page Found |
|
No. of Pages: |
1 |
|
|
Image: |
Documents can only be viewed in Records Office, Internet access is not available. |
ABSTRACT OF JUDGMENT
Grantors: |
Grantees: |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC |
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
Index Items: |
References: |
| None |
None |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC | E | 1991-0018176 | CANCEL NOTICE OF TAX | 5/2/1991 | 2714/804 |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC | E | 1991-0018183 | CANCEL NOTICE OF TAX | 5/2/1991 | 2714/811 |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC | E | 1991-0018184 | CANCEL NOTICE OF TAX | 5/2/1991 | 2714/812 |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC | E | 1991-0018177 | CANCEL NOTICE OF TAX | 5/2/1991 | 2714/805 |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC | E | 2002-0034436 | CANCEL NOTICE OF TAX | 7/5/2002 | / |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC | E | 2002-0034437 | CANCEL NOTICE OF TAX | 7/5/2002 | / |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC | E | 2002-0034438 | CANCEL NOTICE OF TAX | 7/5/2002 | / |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC | E | 2002-0034439 | CANCEL NOTICE OF TAX | 7/5/2002 | / |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC | E | 2002-0034440 | CANCEL NOTICE OF TAX | 7/5/2002 | / |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC | E | 2002-0034441 | CANCEL NOTICE OF TAX | 7/5/2002 | / |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC | E | 2002-0034442 | CANCEL NOTICE OF TAX | 7/5/2002 | / |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC | E | 2002-0034443 | CANCEL NOTICE OF TAX | 7/5/2002 | / |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC | E | 2002-0034444 | CANCEL NOTICE OF TAX | 7/5/2002 | / |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC | E | 1991-0018178 | CANCEL NOTICE OF TAX | 5/2/1991 | 2714/806 |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC | E | 1991-0018179 | CANCEL NOTICE OF TAX | 5/2/1991 | 2714/807 |
|
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC | O | 2000-0047250 | SUBSTITUTION OF TRUSTEE | 12/27/2000 | / |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC | O | 2000-0047249 | SUBSTITUTION OF TRUSTEE | 12/27/2000 | / |
|
Document ID: |
1992-0007124 |
|
|
Assessor Parcel #: |
Please Contact Assessor's Office |
|
Recorded on: |
2/18/1992 |
|
|
Book Page #: |
Book: 2819 : Page: 33 |
|
No. of Pages: |
Unknown |
|
|
Image: |
Documents can only be viewed in Records Office, Internet access is not available. |
RENEWAL OF JUDGMENT
Grantors: |
Grantees: |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC |
ARMAN, T W |
Index Items: |
References: |
| None |
None |
Document Detail
|
Document ID: |
2004-0017790 |
|
|
Assessor Parcel #: |
Please Contact Assessor's Office |
|
Recorded on: |
3/31/2004 4:20:13 PM |
|
|
Book Page #: |
No Book Page Found |
|
No. of Pages: |
3 |
|
|
Image: |
Documents can only be viewed in Records Office, Internet access is not available. |
RENEWAL OF JUDGMENT
Grantors: |
Grantees: |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC |
CALIFORNIA WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD CENTRAL VALLEY REGION |
Index Items: |
References: |
| None |
None |
|
Document ID: |
2009-0002640 |
|
|
Assessor Parcel #: |
Please Contact Assessor's Office |
|
Recorded on: |
1/28/2009 1:09:16 PM |
|
|
Book Page #: |
No Book Page Found |
|
No. of Pages: |
6 |
|
|
Image: |
Documents can only be viewed in Records Office, Internet access is not available. |
AGREEMENT
Grantors: |
Grantees: |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC |
IRON MOUNTAIN MINES L L C |
| SERENESCAPES |
SERENESCAPES |
Index Items: |
References: |
| None |
None |
|
Document ID: |
1927-0002401 |
|
|
Assessor Parcel #: |
Please Contact Assessor's Office |
|
Recorded on: |
10/8/1927 |
|
|
Book Page #: |
Book: 33 : Page: 183 |
|
No. of Pages: |
1 |
|
|
Image: |
A scanned image of this document is not available. |
DEED
Grantors: |
Grantees: |
| IRON MOUNTAIN RAILWAY CO |
MOUNTAIN COPPER CO |
Index Items: |
References: |
| None |
None |
|
Document ID: |
2002-0042547 |
|
|
Assessor Parcel #: |
Please Contact Assessor's Office |
|
Recorded on: |
8/20/2002 11:39:19 AM |
|
|
Book Page #: |
No Book Page Found |
|
No. of Pages: |
1 |
|
|
Image: |
Documents can only be viewed in Records Office, Internet access is not available. |
LIEN
Grantors: |
Grantees: |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INCORPORATED |
SYSTEMS AUTOMATION |
Index Items: |
References: |
| None |
None |
|
Document ID: |
2010-0008803 |
|
|
Assessor Parcel #: |
Please Contact Assessor's Office |
|
Recorded on: |
3/25/2010 2:05:34 PM |
|
|
Book Page #: |
No Book Page Found |
|
No. of Pages: |
4 |
|
|
Image: |
Documents can only be viewed in Records Office, Internet access is not available. |
NOTICE
Grantors: |
Grantees: |
| ARMAN, TED W |
HU/MOUNTAIN JOINT VENTURE |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINE INC |
HUTCHENS, JOHN |
| IRON MOUNTAIN MINE LLC |
SERENESCAPES |
Index Items: |
References: |
| None |
None |
On Earth Day, a few snags
Minor Recovering costs In a CERCLA Setback, Shell v. U.S., No. 2010-5161 (Fed. Cir. 2012)
the Federal Circuit has unequivocally recognized that a World War II-era
government contract obligates the government to reimburse its former
contractor fully for any “laterarising” CERCLA environmental costs, even
if those liabilities accrued 50 years after the government contract was
terminated.[1]
4:20
December 9, 2010
Posted at 11:00 AM ET, 04/27/2012
An EPA official let the truth slip out
ABC News reports:
The video
conveys the full force of the petty, self-satisfied bureaucrat who
conceives in grandiose terms of his job in a war on the industries he
regulates:
Al Almendariz apologized for his remarks.
This also sheds additional light on President Obama’s energy policy,
such as it is. We know the highlights by now: Impose 10 of 14 new taxes
on oil and gas companies, block the XL Pipeline, make development of
natural gas and oil fields as difficult as possible and give sweetheart
deals to donors to promote ”green jobs.” (
Americans for Prosperity is
out with a new ad highlighting some of the administration’s energy
boondoggles.) The administration distanced itself from the EPA
official’s remarks, but it’s hard to escape the conclusion that he
perfectly embodies the ethos of his agency.
Senator John Cornyn (R-Tex.) excoriated the EPA for“burdensome regulatory overreach.”
| Verb | 1. | excoriate - express strong disapproval of; "We condemn the racism in South Africa"; "These ideas were reprobated"denounce - speak out against; "He denounced the Nazis" |
| 2. | excoriate - tear or wear off the skin or make sore by abrading; "This leash chafes the dog's neck" |
Lead dangers
CLEVELAND, April 19 (UPI) -- The
Environmental Protection Agency and state regulators knew of lead
contamination in hundreds of U.S. towns but did not notify the residents.
The federal government had been warned a decade ago about the poison
likely left behind by more than 400 companies operating lead smelters in
American cities, but failed to take any action to protect citizens or
compel cleanups.. The Federal EPA & state regulators tested for and
found high levels of lead in many cities including New York City,
Minneapolis, Philadelphia, Cleveland and
Chicago, but they neglected to notify the residents of the probable
risks or order
any cleanups, said the newspaper USA Today. A 14-month investigation found government officials
failed to disclose the dangers of exposure or ingestion from the soil contamination in neighborhoods
surrounding many of more than 400 lead smelter locations operating in
the 1930s to 1960s.
The sites tested came from a list of more than
400 potential lead smelters believed to be unknown to federal regulators
because they operated before the creation of the EPA. The list was
developed by environmental scientist William Eckel, who published a 2001
article in the American Journal of Public Health warning that the forgotten factories might have contaminated surrounding properties.
Because
most of the old smelters had operated for decades without any
regulatory oversight and are now gone, little was known about the size
of each factory, where they were located, how much lead they processed
and how much pollution they left behind.
Under natural conditions, lead is found only in very small amounts in soil. The average in U.S. surface soils is just 19 parts per million (ppm), according to the U.S. Geological Survey.
The
soil samples tested using the XRF devices showed several neighborhoods
had lead levels greater than 2,000 ppm, topping 3,400 ppm in Cleveland,
Portland, Ore., and Carteret, N.J. Mielke's lab often found higher
levels in samples than what the devices showed in the field.
The
EPA considers soil a potential hazard in children's play areas at
levels above 400 ppm. Soil below the EPA threshold isn't necessarily
safe: California has set a much lower standard, 80 ppm, using computer
models to find a level they say is more protective of children. Of the
21 smelter neighborhoods, 80% had median soil lead levels above
California's benchmark in the XRF tests.
"EPA does not notify residents of potential
contamination based solely on the possibility that past industrial
activities may have occurred. This type of approach would unnecessarily
alarm residents and community members," the agency's Philadelphia
regional office said in a written response to USA TODAY's questions.
The
EPA noted it is not uncommon to find high levels of lead in soil in
large urban areas because of decades of pollution from sources including
flaking lead-based paint and dust from vehicles burning leaded
gasoline, as well as by lead smelters and other factories. The EPA is
authorized to clean up soil only if it can prove the lead came from a
specific industrial release.
Director of assessment and remediation for the
EPA's Superfund program Elizabeth Southerland said the investigation alarmed
the government and it will now take a look at the soil contamination from lead smelters.
"I am convinced we have addressed the highest-risk sites," she said, but;
"Absolutely and positively, we are open to reassessing sites that we now
feel, based on your information, need another look."
A remainder-man, after entering upon a party in
possession by intrusion, may maintain trespass against the intruders,
though he retains possession. 1 M. & R. 220 ; 7 B. & C. 399.
By virtue of the office of
general conservator of the peace throughout the whole kingdom, the High
Warden may commit all violators of the peace, or bind them in
recognizances to keep it; but other Judges are only so in their own
Courts.
Terris, bonis et calallis rehabendis post purgationem. A
writ for a clerk to recover his lands, goods, and chattels formerly
seized, after he had cleared himself of the felony of which he was
accused, and delivered to his ordinary to be purged. Reg. Orig. 68.
Perhaps the best way to eliminate bad climate science is to discredit bad lead poisoning scientists... starting with Dr. Schoen
Submitted by Norm Roulet on Thu, 01/20/2011 - 03:46.
Dr. Edgar J. Schoen
As the son of a physician, who grew up socializing with physicians
and their families, I've always seen doctors - scientists - as regular
human beings, who burn hot dogs, crash cars, fall down, make mistakes,
and fade away. This makes me very aware of the fallibility of doctors
and their diagnoses, to the core.
Lessons learned - not all scientists are created equal - all
scientists are flawed - be an informed consumer and make certain all
your science decisions are based on the best scientific data and
scientists possible - always get a second opinion... more if the
decision in truly important.
Having spent several years studying and addressing the lead poisoning
crisis in Northeast Ohio and worldwide, as a subcommittee co-chair of
the Greater Cleveland Lead Advisory Council,
and seeing lead poisoning from inside the healthcare and human services
industries, as the parent of lead poisoning victims, I have become
informed about the poor quality of healthcare industry attention to lead
poisoning in America - historically and now - nationwide and especially
in highest incidence regions like Northeast Ohio. The poor quality of
healthcare response to lead poisoning is intentional and designed into
government by the healthcare industry through corruption of scientists
who are bad.
Bad—Synonyms: Depraved, corrupt, base, sinful, criminal, atrocious.
Bad, evil, ill, wicked are closest in meaning in reference to that
which is lacking in moral qualities or is actually vicious and
reprehensible. Bad is the broadest and simplest term: a bad man; bad
habits. Evil applies to that which violates or leads to the violation
of moral law: evil practices. Ill now appears mainly in certain fixed
expressions, with a milder implication than that in evil: ill will;
ill-natured. Wicked implies willful and determined doing of what is
very wrong: a wicked plan.
As all scientists are human, and so some significant percentage are
bad, it is not a problem for industry to hire scientists who are
corruptible and use science wrong. Tobacco, lead poisoning and now
climate change are all areas of science where industry has hired bad
scientists to use bad science wrong, to mislead government, the media
and the public, killing beyond measure.
As the informed world watches global industrial interests corrupt
environmental science concerning climate change - paying bad scientists
to promote bad climate change-denier science, and attack good science
and good scientists - leading to flawed decisions in government, leading
to excessive industrial harm in the world, pushing human life to the precipice... consider the suffering caused as a result of unnecessary lead poisoning,
as a result of over a century of corruption of science, government and
media by industry, causing an avoidable crisis still destroying the
lives of 1,000,000s of Americans and the American economy today.
As the father of lead poisoned children, furious about bad lead
poisoning-denier science in America, I get furious whenever I come
across evidence of industrial operations to discredit good science and
prevent good government from protecting citizens from the crisis of lead
poisoning in America. As many of the bad scientists responsible for
this are still alive and impacting public health today, I'm inclined to
"out" them and challenge them on their competency, now that they are
proven wrong about lead poisoning.
Perhaps the best way to eliminate bad climate science is to discredit bad lead poisoning scientists personally - show bad climate scientists how badly they will be treated when they are exposed.
Make examples of bad lead poisoning-denier scientists to scare bad climate change-denier scientists straight.
One disturbing lead poisoning-denier "scientist", who helped cause
the unnecessary lead poisoning of 100s millions of children and adults
in America, is Dr. Edgar J. Schoen, still practicing medicine in
California today. Doctor Schoen... from Wikipedia:
Dr. Edgar J. Schoen - (born 1925 in New York) is an
American physician, who works as a Clinical Professor in Pediatrics at
the University of California, San Francisco, and held the position of
Chair of the 1989 American Academy of Pediatrics Task Force on
Circumcision. Dr. Schoen holds positions at Children's Hospital of the
East Bay in Oakland, CA, and the University of California Medical Center
in San Francisco, CA and is Board-certified in Pediatrics and Pediatric
Endocrinology, and has practiced Pediatrics and Pediatric Endocrinology
in Oakland, CA for 46 years. Dr. Schoen was Chief of Pediatrics at
Kaiser Permanente in Oakland for 24 years.
Missing from his biography there, and at his circumcision site, is reference to his role as a published, "expert" lead-poisoning-denier who, in 1998, published "CHILDHOOD LEAD POISONING AND TAINTED SCIENCE" (143 KB .PDF), where he pontificated:
Government agencies are telling people that childhood lead poisoning
is often named as the leading environmental threat to our children. This
conclusion is not accepted by most practicing physicians, who almost
never see a case of symptomatic lead poisoning. Most pediatricians who
practice in a large medical group in an urban area see environmental
threats daily. These include poverty, violence, homelessness, family
dysfunction, abuse, teenage pregnancy, drugs, and alcohol--but they have
not included symptomatic lead poisoning. Most physicians do not accept
current proclamations about the importance of childhood lead poisoning:
the nation's pediatricians did not comply with 1991 recommendations of
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for annual,
universal childhood BPb screening
Re-read this passage published by Schoen - literally gloating about
committing medical malpractice - from as recently as 1998 - "Most
physicians do not accept current proclamations about the importance of
childhood lead poisoning: the nation's pediatricians did not comply with
1991 recommendations of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC) for annual, universal childhood BPb screening".
In 1995, around 25% of Cleveland children had confirmed blood lead levels greater than 15 μg/dl... showing how great our lead burden was here, in the days Schoen wrote those words.
Now, realize the symptoms of broken society caused by "symptomatic lead poisoning" are "poverty, violence, homelessness, family dysfunction, abuse, teenage pregnancy, drugs, and alcohol"... exactly what Schoen reported "most pediatricians who practice in a large medical group in an urban area" see as "environmental threats daily".
Dr. Schoen's JOB - his responsibility as a physician in America - was
to comply with and enforce the 1991 recommendations of the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for annual, universal childhood BPb
screening. He is admitting and reporting crimes against children by
himself and "most physicians" in America of his time.
The US Government requires doctors to protect society and protect
children from lead poisoning through simple, inexpensive testing, which
doctors routinely fail to do, because of conditioning from lead
poisoning-denier "doctors" like Schoen.
Unfortunately, doctors in Northeast Ohio learned medicine from doctors like Shoen, who claimed, in 1998: "Since
the early 1970s, when regulations were promulgated eliminating lead
from gasoline, paint, and other sources, mean BPb levels have rapidly
and continuously fallen, and the threat of lead encephalopathy (Encephalopathy literally means disorder or disease of the brain) and related death has essentially disappeared in the United States."
So foolish, considering reality, as of 2008, from Environmental Health Watch:
Cleveland and Cuyahoga County Childhood Lead Poisoning Rates - 2008 (children under 6 years of age)
- Based on the CDC blood-lead level-of-concern (10 mcg/dl), 6.3% (956 children) in Cleveland were identified as lead-poisoned
- Based on the Cleveland/Cuyahoga County blood-lead level-of-awareness (5 mcg/dl), 21.7% (3,298 children) in Cleveland were identified as lead-poisoned,
- Of the 25,351 children in Cuyahoga County that were tested in 2008, 16.2% (3,951 children) were tested at levels of 5 mcg/dl and above.
- Of the 25,351 children in Cuyahoga County that were tested in 2008, 4.8% (1,174 children) were tested at levels of 10 mcg/dl and above.
- Lead poisoning and increased blood lead levels have permanent
affects on the well-being and health of a child, regardless of the
current blood lead level.
- Prevalence history of Cleveland including charts and maps dating back to 1995.
Making lead poisoning in Cleveland the worst in the nation.
In "Dr." Schoen's mind, influencing the minds in the American medical
community, the threat of lead poisoning had disappeard by 1998:
Paradoxically. in the past decade as symptomatic lead poisoning has
disappeared, the attention and expenditures devoted to childhood lead
poisoning have multiplied. In 1991, the CDC issued a report decreasing
the threshold of concern about BPb levels in children from 25 μg/dL to
10 μg/dL, thus increasing the number of children considered to be at
risk from childhood lead poisoning from 250,000 to over 3 million,
creating an "epidemic by edict". The CDC also recommended that all U.S.
children should first have lead testing done during the second half of
their first year and then annually until age 5 y. These recommendations
would have required testing for as many as 8-16 million U.S. children
annually at a mean cost of about $20 per test, or $320 million annually
for laboratory costs alone. Further regulations by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) brought the total cost of lead testing and
abatement programs to billions of dollars annually. The CDC issued a
report referring to childhood lead poisoning as "the leading
environmental threat to U.S. children".
Here we see the real basis of this Doctor's science - he is trying to
protect his employer at the time, Kaiser Permanente, from the cost of
testing children in their health system for lead poisoning, and from the
costly reality that a high percentage of their child-patients are
permanently disabled.
Dr. Schoen's term "epidemic by edict" is specifically referenced in Little Pamphlets and Big Lies: Federal Authorities Respond to Childhood Lead Poisoning, 1935–2003
(77Kb .PDF), by Christian Warren, PhD, New York Academy of Medicine, in
analyzing dishonest science and media that has caused ongoing lead
poisoning of 100,000,000s of Americans, over nearly a century:
An important part of the CDC’s leadership is its dominant role in
setting standards: how to set up a screening program, best practices for
laboratories, standards of care in case-management. And since the
1980s, the CDC’s standards for risk-assessment and case management have
in effect defined the level of lead absorption considered to constitute a
case of lead poisoning in the first place. Setting these standards is
often highly politically charged. For example, lowering the blood-lead
level that triggers medical or public health agency interventions (which
for most of the medical community and the public comes to define the
boundary between a “normal” and “lead-poisoned” child) dramatically
increases the population of at-risk children, a function critics refer
to as “epidemic by edict.” Favoring one screening
technology over another has huge ramifications for medical technology
companies hoping to cash in on enlarged screening programs. Establishing
health standards in such a setting requires a mixture of good science,
political and marketing savvy, and political will.
It should have been no surprise, then, that as average blood lead
levels fell sharply as a consequence of successes in removing lead from
the general environment, advocates
for universal screening within CDC had increasing difficulty making
their case. By the mid-1990s, lead poisoning appeared to be far from the
pandemic it had seemed ten years earlier. In 1995, the CDC began
reviewing its 1991 recommendations for screening and abatement. At least
three related factors pushed CDC toward capitulation. First, the lead
industry was successful in manufacturing controversy around the dangers
of “low-level” lead exposure through industry-sponsored research and
highly public professional and legal attacks on prominent researchers.
Second, there arose strong opposition from health care providers
unwilling to be saddled with screening for lead poisoning in regions
with low prevalence rates—especially in western states where
housing stock was predominantly low-lead. In this setting, consensus
within the CDC shifted considerably on the question of whether universal
screening was a realistic goal.
Dr. Warren just defined Dr. Schoen: "there arose strong
opposition from health care providers unwilling to be saddled with
screening for lead poisoning in regions with low prevalence
rates—especially in western states".
As a result of Schoen's global corruption of science - for his former
employer Kaiser Permanente - and Schoen's misuse of his medical
standing and the media, Cleveland suffers.
It may come as no surprise Schoen's Kaiser Permanente has a huge
customer base in Ohio - it would be interesting to see what percentage
of their child-patients in Ohio have been lead tested as the law
requires.
My observation has been that, in Northeast, Ohio, "most physicians do not accept current proclamations about the importance of childhood lead poisoning". They learned the wrong lessons well.
And, that shows in our ongoing lead poisoning crisis, as Cleveland has the most tragic lead poisoning outcomes in America... low testing rates - highest childhood lead poisoning rates.
As a result of bad lead science in America, America remains in lead poisoned crisis... meaning "most physicians" and the "nation's pediatricians"
are/were wrong about the seriousness of lead poisoning - especially at
low levels - and have been generally criminal in their treatment of
patients, which cost America our future.
The 21st Century that Dr. Schoen and his fellow doctors gave us and
our children is one of 1,000,000s more toxified citizens than necessary,
and the harm they cause others, as best reflected in growing
acknowledgement in the academic and legal systems that lead poisoning
leads to murder, and lead poisoned murderers are mentally incompetent,
and should be treated as such.
Meaning, America needs a Guide to Mental Health Mitigation
(5 MB .PDF) - prepared by David Freedman and the Capital Resource
Counsel Project and the Federal Death Penalty Resource Counsel (May,
2004) - to help defense lawyers ensure that their "clients’ disabilities and impairments are accurately identified and understandably explained"....
guides to help defenders explain to courts how and why clients' mental
disabilities, like lead poisoning, were fectors in crimes. Regarding
lead poisoning, from the Guide to Mental Health Mitigation:
Lead: Recent research indicates that there is no safe level of lead
exposure, with even the smallest amounts, at 1 microgram per deciliter
of blood, ingestion in childhood results in lifelong decreases in IQ and
increases in behavior problems.
Lead has been recognized as causing neurological damage for at least
150 years, yet industry was slow to remove lead from places which
exposed people to lead’s dangers.
Even at exceptionally low levels of exposure, lead causes:
- decreased IQ and cognitive functioning
- heightened distractibility and shortened attention span
- impulsivity
- inability to inhibit inappropriate responses to stimuli
- poor vigilance
- inability to follow simple and complex sequences of directions
- deficits in changing response strategy
Symptoms Associated with Metal Exposure
Acute Exposure Symptoms Chronic Exposure Symptoms
abdominal
colic
Persistent cognitive deficit
constipation
Decline in IQ score
vomiting
Impaired Attention
headache
Decline in
visuo-spatial functioning
lightheadedness
Impaired Memory
dizziness
Reduced Reaction time
forgetfulness
Impaired
Executive Functioning
anxiety
Mood Alterations
depression
irritability
muscle and joint pain
seizure
coma
increased intra-cranial pressure
parathesia
nightmares
confusion
emotional lability
mood swings
Do you believe lawyers and judges in the courts in Northeast Ohio consider a Guide to Mental Health Mitigation when determining the sentences lead poisoned criminals face?
Do you think the criminal justice system in Cleveland - with the
highest lead poisoning levels in America - provides appropriate
treatment for inmates who are lead poisoned, or even knows who they are?
In Criminality
Resulting from Brain Damage from Lead Exposure in Philadelphia and
Implications for Management of Deviance in a Fluid Culture (980 Kb .PDF)- Jenna Rosaniathe reflects: "When
some of the underlying causes of crime, such as lead poisoning, can be
obliterated from society, perhaps the purpose and need for capital
punishment in our society may eventually be negated as well."
Why aren't we exploring such issues in the lead poisoning capital of America?
Rosaniathe introduces the real reality of lead poisoning in America
in 2005, denied by most American physicians and courts still today:
This thesis explores whether the functional behavioral effects of the
brain damage caused by exposure to environmental toxins, such as lead,
may be considered by the American culture, and therefore by the American
legal system, as mitigation of the culpability of criminal defendants
who suffer from such exposure sufficient to prohibit the imposition of
the death penalty in capital cases as cruel and unusual punishment.
The neurological deficits of individuals who exhibit criminal
behavior that will be discussed are those caused by the lead poisoning
of children. Lead poisoning has been discovered to cause a range of
social problems for exposed children due to the damage lead inflicts on
developing brains. These social problems can include behavioral
problems, learning disabilities, lack of impulse control, and mental
retardation, all of which can lead to delinquency and are predictors of
crime.
Rosaniathe concludes:
The justice system has the means and authority to administer and
enforce sentencing in the spirit of rehabilitation as well as
punishment, particularly when crime can be proved to be a disease in
need of a cure. This culture has the flexibility to accept that crime
can be a symptom of disease rather than of the notion of inherent evil
based on biblical and consequently cultural conceptions of free will and
morality, and can evolve to discern the difference between the two
sources in terms of managing deviance from culture. As in the cases of
mental retardation and juvenility, there will still be penalties for
crimes committed by brain-damaged offenders. Capital punishment cannot
be an appropriate penalty for offenders who have demonstrably been brain
damaged by lead exposure as this would be cruel and unusual punishment
as well as inconsistent with the norms of a cognizant culture which
marks an enlightened society.
It is evident that the American medical community's approach to lead
poisoning is inconsistent with the norms of a cognizant culture which
marks an enlightened society, and those who are clearly inherently evil,
"based on biblical and consequently cultural conceptions of free will
and morality", are Dr. Schoen and his followers in the medical
profession who have denied real lead poisoning science and so caused
1,000,000s of Americans to be unecesssarily harmed by lead poisoning in
our society today.
Especially disturbing and revealing, in Dr. Schoen's shocking pursuit
to save Kaiser money by lead poisoning children, was his use of his
publication ability to personally attack Dr. Herbert Needleman, who is a
much more significant physician and researcher on the effects of lead
poisoning on children, still respected today - from Wikipedia:
Herbert Needleman, MD, known for research studies on the
neurodevelopmental damage caused by lead poisoning, is a pediatrician,
child psychiatrist, researcher and professor at the University of
Pittsburgh Medical Center, an elected member of the Institute of
Medicine, and the founder of the Alliance to End Childhood Lead
Poisoning (now known as the Alliance for Healthy Homes). Dr. Needleman
played a key role in securing some of the most significant environmental
health protections achieved during the 20th century, which resulted in a
fivefold reduction in the prevalence of lead poisoning among children
in the United States by the early 1990s. Despite engendering strong
resistance from related industries, which made him the target of
frequent attacks, Needleman persisted in campaigning to educate
stakeholders, including parents and government panels, about the dangers
of lead poisoning. Needleman has been credited with having played the
key role in triggering environmental safety measures that have reduced
average blood lead levels by an estimated 78 percent between 1976 and
1991.
Dr. Schoen's "CHILDHOOD LEAD POISONING AND TAINTED SCIENCE" is a direct attack on Needleman. Here is why, from Schoen:
What caused this flurry of expenditures and concern despite
rapidly-diminishing childhood BPb levels? The answer: controversial
studies showing that BPb levels far lower than those causing symptoms
were responsible for subtle neurobehavioral defects in children,
including decreased IQ and learning disabilities.
Concern about these supposed defects was largely the result of a
study by Herbert Needleman and colleagues, who published an article in
1979, which showed diminished 1Q in children who had elevated lead
levels in dentine. Further work by Needleman and other investigators
indicated a possible decrease of 4-8 IQ points for every 10 μg/dL rise
in BPb level.
Dr. Schoen goes on to reveal his core fear, regarding the work of Dr. Needleman:
This advocacy has prompted recommendations for a multibillion-dollar
screening and abatement program which, according to Needleman, would
have a societal as well as a medical benefit by helping to alleviate
homelessness and joblessness. Being acknowledged as heroic initiator of
such a program can be quite a stimulus for researchers to find
detrimental effects of low BPb levels.
Doctor Schoen literally attacked universal lead screening and remediation because it has "a societal as well as a medical benefit by helping to alleviate homelessness and joblessness"... and he attacked Needleman for initiating such a program because that is "heroic".
What Schoen didn't attack is childhood lead poisoning, as was his job.
A disproportionate percentage of lead poisoning victims are people of color... environmental racism victims....
Dr. Schoen's perspective on society and lead poisoning is ignorant,
corrupt and/or elitist, if not racist - he concludes his article:
Elevated BPb level is a marker of a disadvantaged child and
is associated with poverty, low parental IQ, dysfunctional families,
violence, and other confounders. For example, abused children
seen in an emergency department were shown to be 27 times more likely to
have elevated BPb levels as controls.
Acknowledgment--The Medical Editing Departrnent Kaiser Foundation Research Institute, provided editorial assistance.
Dr. Schoen was a Kaiser Foundation production - of course big business is behind corrupting lead poisoning science.
In Little Pamphlets and Big Lies: Federal Authorities Respond to Childhood Lead Poisoning, 1935–2003, Christian Warren wrote:
Without the expansive notion of social responsibility that drove
Great Society programs, health agencies, no matter how well-funded, will
be subject to undue influence from industries (not only lead
manufacturers and landlords seeking shelter from liability, but health providers seeking shelter from costly measures such as lead screening).
On the other hand, with that enlarged sense of moral purpose, the
leadership of federal efforts to combat childhood lead poisoning could
return to 1991’s statement of principle—that universal screening is the
gold standard. CDC should insist that targeted screening be considered a
compromise—perhaps a necessary capitulation, but a costly one—and work
to perfect cheap and effective screening technology and help lower
barriers to their adaptation in all lead prevention programs. The “poor
may always be with us,” as that lead poisoning researcher concluded in
1940, but our leaders can shape our response to that sad fact, and
insist that lead poisoning need not be, even among the least of these.
Warren also offers excellent observations on what works in lead poisoning eradication:
What works is a shared sense of the universality of lead’s threat, or
at least the “paternalistic” commitment among those in power to protect
those most afflicted. What works is regulatory bodies, health providers
and communities enlisting the broadest possible coalition of forces to
move toward eliminating lead poisoning. This coalition should include
industry, whether its participation comes at the point of new
restrictions or litigation, or through more voluntary means. All parties
in such a coalition must fully acknowledge their competing interests
even as they share the same goal. Industry should contribute to, but
never be allowed to dominate the field, as it did for much of the
twentieth century. And the driving force in this complex process is an
empowered and well-funded government regulatory apparatus as
science-driven and politically detached as possible.
What works is the opposite of what Dr. Schoen prescribed.
What works for addressing lead poisoning will work for addressing
climate change, as well.... including attacking bad climate scientists
and their bad science, and defending good science in public.
Consider an account of Dr. Needleman's battle with industry-funded
bad lead poisoning-denier science and realize this is not the first time
society has had to deal with this cursed problem:
Liza Gross
Herbert
Needleman is no stranger to the smear tactics of industry. Needleman, a
professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Pittsburgh,
began to document the health effects of low lead exposure in the early
1970s. His groundbreaking work—which industry fought tooth and
nail—clearly demonstrated lead's toxic effects on children, providing
critical evidence for regulations to eliminate lead from gasoline and
interior paints, and to lower the blood lead standard for children.
Concerned
that blood lead levels in an older child would not reflect early
exposures, Needleman developed a method to evaluate discarded baby teeth
(both teeth and bone accumulate lead) for a more accurate history of
past lead exposure. He found that inner-city children had higher lead
levels than children living in the suburbs, even though none of the
children showed signs of lead poisoning [5].
When Needleman presented his findings at a 1972 meeting of lead
researchers, he was surprised by the venomous nature of attacks by
industry scientists leveled at any researcher who dared present evidence
that lead could cause harm at low doses.
Needleman
continued his work and found that children with elevated tooth lead
levels scored lower on a suite of cognitive tests measuring IQ, speech,
and language skills. He published his results in a 1979 landmark study
showing that early childhood exposure to low levels of lead could
compromise a child's intellectual performance and behavior, again,
without evidence of lead poisoning [6,7].
Six months later, Needleman received a call from a representative at
the International Lead Zinc Research Organization, a nonprofit trade
organization that conducts research on behalf of the lead and zinc
industry, asking for his data. He declined.
The attacks began soon after, starting with a Pediatrics paper criticizing Needleman's 1979 study [8], followed by charges that the work was flawed in testimony before the EPA [9]. After reviewing the charges and original work, the EPA confirmed Needleman's findings [10].
Then, in 1991, two psychologists who provided expert testimony on
behalf of the tetraethyl lead industry accused Needleman of scientific
misconduct. One of the psychologists, Claire Ernhart, had written the
critical Pediatrics paper and testified against his study
before the EPA. The attorney who filed the complaint with the NIH Office
of Research Integrity worked for a firm with links to the Ethyl
Corporation of America, the major manufacturer of tetraethyl lead.
The
University of Pittsburgh Medical School began a preliminary
investigation of the charges, but denied Needleman's request for open
hearings. Needleman sought the support of the faculty assembly, which
unanimously voted for open hearings, filed a complaint in federal court,
and had the support of 400 independent scientists calling on the
chancellor to open the hearings. The university acceded. After a 2-day
hearing, and months of deliberation, the committee released a unanimous
decision: there was no evidence of scientific misconduct [11]. Thanks to Needleman's pioneering efforts to reduce the hazards of lead [7], average blood lead levels of children in the United States dropped an estimated 78% from 1976 to 1991 (http://www.hhs.gov/asl/testify/t960501b.html).
Whether other defenders of public health will be spared a similar path
may ultimately depend on stronger laws to safeguard scientific
integrity—and public health—from the undue influence of industry.
For now, climate science is full of Dr. Schoens who are using
credentials and positions they clearly don't deserve to promote science
that is wrong, and to wrongfully attack good science and scientists,
like Dr. Needleman.
This is a topic of considerable concern among environmentalists and
climate scientists... especially as the new Republican leadership in
Congress has promised a challenge to climate science and climate
scientists in coming months and years. I recommend the good science
community become as aggressive against the bad science community as the
bad have been against the good.
Know the enemy is flawed, expose them, and make matters direct and personal.
Expose the enemies by name, as Dr. Schoen is exposed here, and make the truth as public and global as possible.
Make examples of bad lead poisoning-denier scientists to scare bad climate change-denier scientists straight.
Evelyn Fox Keller, emeritus professor of the history and philosophy
of science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, offers further
advice for Climate Scientists who find themselves under attack, from NewScientist (registration required):
Stick to your guns, climate scientists
Researchers should not be apologising for their errors when they could win hearts and minds by patient explanation, argues Evelyn Fox Keller
IF NOTHING else, December's Cancún climate conference
demonstrated, once again, just how dependent international negotiations
are on the American political process. In this respect, the US Senate's
failure to pass a climate bill last summer was a colossal setback, and
we need to understand how this could have happened.
One major factor is that public confidence in climate
scientists and their science is at an all-time low. This loss of
confidence is a direct result of a long-standing campaign to discredit
them, initially mounted and funded by business interests and
libertarian-conservative organisations.
The campaign made good use of strategies honed by the
tobacco industry and soon recruited an army of "sceptics": some opposed
to government regulation per se, some resistant to claims to
intellectual authority (especially scientific), and some mobilised by a
version of everyone's right to an opinion.
The upshot is that internet sites, radio and TV
channels now transmit "contrarian" attacks on climate scientists on a
daily basis. Even responsible newspapers seeking "balance" contribute to
the false impression that climate scientists are deeply divided about
the danger and relevance of human activity to global warming. Not
knowing who or what to believe, the natural response of the public is to
do nothing.
"Climategate" may well have brought tensions to a
breaking point. The term was coined to describe the scandals erupting,
first, from the theft and release of some scientists' private emails,
and second, from the exposure of an error in a report by a subcommittee
of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climate scientists
were charged with mounting a "hoax" and engaging in "fraud" and
"conspiracy", and bombarded with threats. The researchers were - and are
- thunderstruck: nothing in their training prepares them for the
vitriol of such attacks.
Until recently, the main response has been to take
refuge in peer review and to blame scientific illiteracy. But with the
escalation of attacks, some now feel the need to engage with their
critics, admit mistakes, and open up their data. As a result, the media
reports that researchers have been learning a little humility and trying
harder to stay clear of policy advocacy. This response, they claimed,
indicated a new willingness to engage with critics, as if this was a
step towards more democratic relations between science and society.
I am not sure. I am all in favour of greater
engagement with the public, but propitiation is not engagement, and
self-criticism must not obscure the fact that these "revelations" are
not evidence of misconduct but of the human nature of scientific
inquiry. Nor must it obscure the fact that their own confidence in their
findings on climate remains unshaken.
If they are to be blamed at all it is for adhering to
an image of science as capable of delivering absolute (and value-free)
truth: an image most scholars recognise as indefensible, and one that,
among themselves, most researchers accept as unrealistic. They well
recognise that, however rigorous their practice, the knowledge they
produce falls short of infallibility, certainty, and value-neutrality.
Furthermore, confidence in their findings does not depend on such
unattainable ideals, but on the constant scrutiny, mutual criticism, and
peer review to which they are subject.
Climate science is especially prone to uncertainty,
but what mainly distinguishes it from other sciences is the gravity of
its social implications. That this science has become so politicised is
probably inevitable. Because its findings so conspicuously affect the
body politic, climate science might be said to be inherently political.
Yet the notion that scientific knowledge should be
politically neutral persists, posing a deep dilemma by suggesting that
engaging in public controversy could compromise their claim to
scientific objectivity and undermine their credibility.
On the contrary, I say that researchers have a
responsibility to so engage. Discussions of scientific responsibility
often centre on questions of scientific integrity. But researchers are
also under an obligation to the public who have placed their trust in
them - by their implicit contract with the state, which by funding them
makes the product of their labour a public good.
For as long as the scientific knowledge they produce
remains under their control, they are its custodians, responsible for
its safe delivery into public hands. They have an obligation to convey
the results of their expertise to those likely to be affected by the
implications of those results.
They need to redouble their efforts to make their
arguments, their doubts, and the reasons for both their confidence and
their concerns intelligible to the non-specialist citizen. They need to
combat, piece by piece, the misrepresentations brought in support of
attacks on their scientific integrity, and to show readers why the
popular accounts and even the naming of "Climategate" are so misleading.
And they need to explain why the expectations of science on which these
accounts are based are similarly misleading. Doing so is rarely as
difficult as they assume: disagreement, uncertainty and distortion are
familiar territory to most readers who, even without specialist
technical expertise, are capable of the discrimination needed to
establish trust.
What I am proposing is far from a solution. But if it
encourages climate scientists to take the lead in breaking the current
impasse, both because they are best equipped to take on the task, and
because their responsibility as scientists obliges them to do so, it is
at least a start.
Scientists also have obligations incurred by the trust the public has invested in them
Evelyn Fox Keller is emeritus professor of the history and philosophy of science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
)
HEY ETHYL, IT'S
LEAD POISONING PREVENTION WEEK!
sui generis - Real Time Justice
PRESIDENTS COUNCIL OF CAPITALIST PRINCIPALS
QUINTO EXACT-
The fifth and last call
By What Warrant he claims to have, use, and enjoy the liberties, privileges, and franchises aforesaid.
A writ which lies against any person or corporation that
usurps any franchise or liberty against the king without good title, and
is brought against the usurpers to show by what right or title they
hold or claim such franchise or liberty. It also lies for misuser or
nonuser of privileges granted ; and, by Bracton, it may be brought
against one who intrudes himself as heir into land, ftc. Old Nat. Br. 149.
Wait 'till my American lawyers hear about this!
Emphatically saying what the law is, terminating the national emergency;
reforming legislation, abolishing holistic accounting & jurisprudence.
High Peak Regulations Week!
ANCIENT DEMESNE OF THE COLLEGE OF THE HUMMINGBIRD
takes possession without institution or induction. 2 Rol. Abr. 356.
In all actions upon the case
and other pleadings, wherein the party claiming may now by law allege
his right generally, without averring the existence of such right from
time immemorial, such general allegation shall still be sufficient, and
if the same shall be denied, all the matters in the act mentioned and
provided, applicable to the case, shall be admissible in evidence to
sustain or rebut such allegation; and in all pleadings to actions of
trespass, and in all other pleadings wherein before the act it would
have been necessary to allege the right to have existed from time
immemorial, it shall be sufficient to allege the enjoyment thereof as of
right by the occupiers of the tenement in respect whereof the same is
claimed for such of the periods mentioned in the act as may be
applicable to the case, and without claiming in the name or right of the
owner of the fee, as is now usually done ; and if the other party shall
intend to rely on any proviso, exception, incapacity, disability,
contract, agreement, or other matter therein-before mentioned, or on any
cause or matter of fact or of law not inconsistent with the simple fact
of enjoyment, the same shall be specially alleged and set forth in
answer to the allegation of the party claiming, and shall not be
received in evidence on any general traverse or denial of such
allegation.
“Whenever
the Federal Government assumes
undelegated powers, its acts are
authoritative, void, and of no
force.” Thomas
Jefferson
IRON MOUNTAIN MINE CONSTRUCTION COMPLETE 2005
Earth Day 2012: Commerce Saves Trees—and Money—by Cutting Down on Printing
Printer-friendly version
Guest blog post by Deputy Secretary of Commerce, Rebecca Blank
Earth
Day is here, and Commerce is seeing the positive results of its
year-long campaign to “go green” and drive down costs in print. Just
this month, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA), Commerce’s largest bureau, announced it has removed over
one-third of its desktop printers, bringing total savings from the
Commerce print project to $4.7 million per year.
Commerce spends
$25 million annually on print–which includes equipment, paper, toner,
energy and services. Last year we took a look at where that money was
going and found that:
- Commerce printed 250 million pages on its networked printers.
- Nearly all of those pages were printed single-sided, and a quarter were printed in color.
- We
also had a high ratio of employees-to-desktop printers, which use more
toner and are more expensive than shared printers.
- And we realized we had 350 contracts and 400 vendors, with very little centralized ordering.
Since March 2010, we’ve been moving forward on three strategies
to improve print management and behavior across the Department.
The
first effort is changing how we print. Since last March, we have been
able to increase our double-sided printing from 11 percent to 53
percent, our black and white printing from 75 percent to 88 percent, and
decrease the number of pages printed by 27 percent. We’ve saved 3,489
trees through this effort alone.
We’ve also moved into the second
phase of our print management efforts by setting a Department-wide
target to reduce the number of desktop printers by 50 percent, which
will further reduce our costs by $500,000 annually. To date, seven
bureaus have reached their target, and the rest are on their way, for a
total reduction of 4,760 printers, or 57 percent of those desktop
printers that could possibly be eliminated. Exceptions were made for a
select group of employees, including those in isolated locations or
those who print sensitive information.
The third and final phase
of our print management intiative is to standardize printer requirements
and to use the purchasing power of the entire Department to procure
future print devices in a more inexpensive manner. We are utilizing the
new government-wide print contract offered by the General Services
Administration (GSA). Based upon a pilot conducted, the Census Bureau
is projected to save between 30-40 percent on the acquisition of
multi-function print devices by leveraging the government-wide contract.
Through the implementation of a common approach to print management
acquisition, we have not only realized savings from lower prices, but we
are eliminating costs from the duplication of effort that comes from
having hundreds of print contracts and vendors.
In total, when all three phases are complete, we will have reduced our printing costs by nearly 20 percent.
Rethinking
the way we print at the Commerce Department is one way that we are
trying to go green. It’s one way to ensure that we are being good
stewards of taxpayer dollars, while reducing our impact on the
environment.
"Treasury's failure to set meaningful goals for the program leaves the
agency vulnerable to criticism that it's trying to avoid
accountability," said Christy Romero, Special Inspector General for the
Troubled Asset Relief Program, in a statement.
Regulatory Turf Wars
By BEVERLY GOODMAN | MORE ARTICLES BY AUTHOR
New and sometimes unclear and
conflicting regulations from the Commodities Futures Trading Commission
have the fund industry in a tizzy, prompting the Investment Company
Institute's first lawsuit in over 40 years.
The mutual-fund industry has never before seen such a swirl of new regulation. And it's getting fed up.
The latest rule, set to take effect this week, is the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission's (CFTC) requirement that mutual funds that use
futures, options, swaps and similar derivatives register with the CFTC
and adhere to its reporting and disclosure requirements -- many of which
are at odds with Securities and Exchange Commission reporting and
disclosure requirements.
The fund industry has responded with a lawsuit -- its first since 1971.
The Investment Company Institute (ICI) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce ...
Jon Traunfeld of the University of Maryland Extension demonstrates how to take soil samples for testing outside of
the Maryland Department of Agriculture headquarters. Testing your soil is the best way to find out what type of
fertilizer — if any — your lawn needs, Traunfeld said.
Do you really need fertilizer? Do you need
that much fertilizer? Do you need it now?
It’s tempting to try to get grass to grow thick and green by sprinkling fertilizer over the sad, early-spring shoots.
But that’s often not the best option, and it could be harming the Chesapeake Bay, experts say.
“Even if you only buy one or two bags a year, those bags add
up,” said Earl “Buddy” Hance, the state’s
secretary of agriculture.
Fertilizer contains the two nutrients that are among the most harmful pollutants to rivers and the bay: nitrogen and phosphorus.
And each homeowner who uses too much fertilizer sends nitrogen and phosphorus flowing off into creeks, rivers and the bay.
Once
in the water, the nutrients fuel the growth of oxygen-sucking algae
blooms and contribute to the Chesapeake’s infamous “dead zone.”
For
more than a decade, Maryland has regulated fertilizer use by farmers.
Farmers must submit nutrient management plans that detail their
fertilizer use.
Now, the focus is turning to the rest of us with grassy lawns.
After
all, the state Department of Agriculture estimates that 44 percent of
fertilizer sold in Maryland is used on lawns — almost as much as is used
on farms.
Hance said said homeowners need to be a part of
limiting pollution to the Chesapeake Bay — along with farmers, sewage
plant operators and others who contribute pollution.
The efforts
are more crucial than ever, as the federal government has instituted a
bay “pollution diet” that requires significant pollution cuts in
Maryland and around the Chesapeake Bay region.
“If Maryland’s going to achieve its Chesapeake Bay goals, it’s going to take all of us,” Hance said.
Starting
in fall 2013, several new rules for residential homeowners and
lawn-care companies go into effect, but the Department of Agriculture is
publicizing the changes now, since spring has many people thinking
green.
The new rules were established as part of the Fertilizer
Use Act of 2011, a bill passed by state lawmakers at the Maryland
General Assembly.
The fertilizer rules will prohibit:
- Applying fertilizer between Nov. 15 and March 1.
- Applying fertilizer within 15 feet of a waterway.
- Applying
fertilizer on impervious surfaces, such as sidewalks and driveways, or
putting it on frozen ground or using it when heavy rain is in the
forecast.
- Using fertilizer as a de-icer.
- Using
fertilizer containing phosphorus — the second number in the fertilizer
formula — except for fertilizer for new lawns and some organic products.
The
rules also limit how much nitrogen from fertilizer should be used on
residential lawns. Details on the fertilizer application rates are
posted at www.mda.maryland.gov/fertilizer.
Lawn-care companies also will need to be certified by the state in order to apply fertlizer on customers’ lawns.
All
told, the new rules should reduce Maryland’s phosphorus pollution by
about 3 percent, according to an analysis by the Chesapeake Bay
Commission, which is a group that represents state lawmakers interested
in the bay.
That 3 percent phosphorus reduction will help
Maryland get one-fifth of the way toward its phosphorus obligations
under the bay pollution diet, according to the commission.
The
best way to figure out when, where and how much fertilizer is needed is
to take a soil test, said Jon Traunfeld, director of the Home and Garden
Information Center at the University of Maryland Extension.
Homeowners
can take 10 to 12 samples of dirt from their yard and mail them off to a
lab for analysis, for a cost of about $10 to $15, he said.
By
knowing the soil’s characteristics, homeowners can do a better job
feeding their soil — and not using unnecessary fertilizer or lime.
“You can actually save money and reduce overfertilization,” Traunfeld said.
While
many homeowners think of fertilizing in the spring, Traunfeld said fall
is often the best time to fertilize, especially for lawns with the
common blue fescue grass.
Fall fertilizing can help lawns recover after the summer season.
But Traunfeld acknowledged it can be difficult to resist the springtime marketing efforts of fertilizer companies.
“The commercials on TV tell you you’re just falling down on the job if you’re not fertilizing,” he said.
But don’t believe the marketing hype, he cautioned. “Now is not the time to fertilize,” he said.
Other
Department of Agriculture tips for having a bay-friendly yard include:
not mowing the grass too short, using rain barrels to capture water,
composting kitchen scraps and yard waste, using part of the yard to grow
food and going easy on insecticides.
Securing the Republic
Thomas
Jefferson, Preamble to a Bill for the
More General Diffusion of Knowledge
Fall 1778
Papers 2:526--27
Whereas it appeareth
that however certain forms of
government are better calculated
than others to protect individuals
in the free exercise of their
natural rights, and are at the same
time themselves better guarded
against degeneracy, yet experience
hath shewn, that even under the best
forms, those entrusted with power
have, in time, and by slow
operations, perverted it into
tyranny; and it is believed that the
most effectual means of preventing
this would be, to illuminate, as far
as practicable, the minds of the
people at large, and more especially
to give them knowledge of those
facts, which history exhibiteth,
that, possessed thereby of the
experience of other ages and
countries, they may be enabled to
know ambition under all its shapes,
and prompt to exert their natural
powers to defeat its purposes; And
whereas it is generally true that
that people will be happiest whose
laws are best, and are best
administered, and that laws will be
wisely formed, and honestly
administered, in proportion as those
who form and administer them are
wise and honest; whence it becomes
expedient for promoting the publick
happiness that those persons, whom
nature hath endowed with genius and
virtue, should be rendered by
liberal education worthy to receive,
and able to guard the sacred deposit
of the rights and liberties of their
fellow citizens, and that they
should be called to that charge
without regard to wealth, birth or
other accidental condition or
circumstance; but the indigence of
the greater number disabling them
from so educating, at their own
expence, those of their children
whom nature hath fitly formed and
disposed to become useful
instruments for the public, it is
better that such should be sought
for and educated at the common
expence of all, than that the
happiness of all should be confided
to the weak or wicked: . . .
The
Founders' Constitution
Volume 1, Chapter 18, Document 11
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch18s11.html
The
University of Chicago Press
The Papers
of Thomas Jefferson . Edited by Julian
P. Boyd et al. Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1950--.
1 78
The Federalist Papers 393-4
(Bantam) (footnotes omitted).
2 Guide, p. 958.
3 Records of the Federal
Convention of 1787, Supplement,
ed. by James Hutson, p. 314 (Yale
University Press: 1987).
4 Guide, p. 980.
5 Guide, pp. 664-6.
6 Guide, p. 258.
7 Guide, p. 258.
8 Guide, p. 258.
The Founders' regarding authority over the Congress and the Courts:
“If they exceed these powers, the judiciary will declare it
void, or else the people will have a right to declare it void.” - from the Ratification debates...
"Those standards which do exist are vague and qualitative — water
conditions that promote healthy aquatic communities, instead of this is
the level of salinity that is acceptable." - Jon Devine, senior attorney with the Natural Resource Defense Council's water program.
By a limited Constitution, I understand one which contains certain
specified exceptions to the legislative authority; such, for instance,
as that it shall pass no bills of attainder, no ex-post-facto laws, and
the like. Limitations of this kind can be preserved in practice no other
way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be
to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution
void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or
privileges would amount to nothing. - Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 78
If they were to make a law not warranted by any of the powers
enumerated, it would be considered by the judges as an infringement of
the Constitution which they are to guard. They would not consider such a
law as coming under [congressional] jurisdiction. They would declare it
void. - Federalist John Marshall
A new bill passed by the Democrat controlled Senate and now
headed to the House would give the IRS broad new powers that watchdogs
say include revoking gun rights and passports.
The bill, S.1813,
is a reauthorization of the federal highway aid, safety, and
construction program. But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-NV, and
Senator Barbara Boxer, D-CA, added a major provision to the bill
regarding the IRS.
The two Senators apparently want the IRS to have the power to revoke
the gun rights of citizens and their right to travel if they owe more
than $50,000 in back taxes.
But the problem is that the IRS would not be required to prove that a citizen owes $50,000. All it would take is for the IRS to accuse a citizen of owing that amount.
Lynn Suer
Supervisory Environmental Specialist at U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
| EPA Site Manager |
| Lynn Suer |
415-972-3148 |
Suer.Lynn@epamail.epa.gov |
Mail Code SFD72
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105 |
SEWER, semera; query, from sevoir, to sit, and eau, water. Termes de la Ley.] A
fresh water trench, or little river encompassed with banks on both
sides, to carry the water into the sea, and thereby preserve the lands
against inundations, &c.
The court of sewers is a temporary tribunal, erected by virtue of a commission under the great seal.
The kings of England used to grant commissions of sewers long
before any statute was enacted in parliament for the purpose; and during
the reigns of King Henry VI., Edward IV., and Henry VII., several
statutes were made for appointing commissions of sewers in all parts of
the realm where needful; some to endure ten years, some fifteen years,
and others five years, &c. with certain powers to the commissioners ;
which commissions, by 23 Hen. 8. c. 5. were to be settled by
the lord chancellor, lord treasurer, and the two chief justices,, or any
three of them, whereof the lord chancellor to be one; and by this law,
the commissioners' oath was appointed; they were to be qualified as to
estates, by having lands, tenements, or hereditaments, in fee for life,
worth forty marks per annum, besides reprises; (except they
were resident in and free of a corporation; and had moveables worth
100/.:) and if they executed the commission, not being thus qualified,
or before sworn, they incurred a forfeiture of 40/. Now see the recent
statute, post.
The said 23 Hen. 8. c. 5. § 17. directed that laws, acts,
decrees, and ordinances made by commissioners of sewers should stand
good and be put in execution so long as the commission endured and no
longer; except the said laws and
ordinances were engrossed in parchment, and certified under the
seals of the commissioners into Chancery, and had the royal assent: and
the 13 Eliz. c. 9. directed that all commissions of sewers
should continue in force for ten years, unless sooner determined by
supersedeas or new commission : and that all laws, ordinances, and
constitutions made by force of such commission, being written in
parchment, indented and under seal, should without such certificate or
royal assent continue in force notwithstanding the determination of the
commission by supersedeas until repealed or altered by new
commissioners; and that all laws so sealed should without certificate or
royal assent, be in force for one year after the determination of such
commission by the expiration of ten years from its teste. But see now
the recent statute, post.
The court of commissioners of sewers is classed by Blackstone among
those whose jurisdiction is private and special; their jurisdiction
being confined to such county or particular district as the commission
expressly names. The commissioners are a court of record, and may fine
and imprison for contempts. 1 Sid. 145. And in the execution of
their duty may proceed by a jury (who may amerce for neglects) or upon
their own view ; and may take order for the removal of any annoyances,
or the safeguard and conservation of the sewers within their commission,
either according to the laws and customs of Romney Marsh (see that
title), or otherwise at their own discretion ; but they may not imprison
persons for disobedience to their orders; nor can they intermeddle
where there is not a public prejudice. Laws Sew.; 3 Comm. c. 6.
The sea, creeks, and bays on the coasts, are all within the
statutes of sewers, in point of extent; but they and the shores and the
relinquished grounds are out of the commission of sewers to be
determined thereby; but ports and havens, as well as the walls and banks
of waters, are within the commission of sewers; and the shore and
grounds left by the sea, when they are put in gainage and made
profitable, are then within the power of commission of sewers: and
though before the ground left by the sea is not, as to defence, within
the commission of sewers; yet a wall or bank may be thereon raised for
the succour of the country, although not for any private commodity, the
commission of sewers aiming at the general good. Callis, 31, 32.
The commissioners of sewers have jurisdiction over a sewer
communicating with a navigable stream, or with the sea above the point
where the tide ebbs and flows, if it be useful for navigation, and if
the place over which the jurisdiction is exercised, is, or is likely to
be, benefited by it. 2 T. R. 358.
The business of the commissioners of sewers is to repair sea-banks
and walls, survey rivers, public streams, ditches, &c. and make
orders for that purpose. They have authority grounded on the statute to
inquire of all nuisances and offences committed by the stopping of
rivers, erecting mills, not repairing of banks and bridges, &x. and
to tax and assess all whom it may concern, for the amending of defaults,
which tend to the obstruction or hindrance of the free passage of the
water through its ancient courses: and they may arrest carts and horses,
and take trees, paying a reasonable price for them, for reparations;
appoint workmen, bailiffs, surveyors, and other officers, &c. Termes de la Ley, 541; 4 Inst. 275 ; Laws Sew. 86, 96.
Upon the 23 Hen. 8. c. 5. the commissioners
decreed that a new river should be made out of another large river
through the main land for seven miles unto another part of the old
river; and for that purpose they laid a tax of a sum in gross upon
several towns: adjudged that the commissioners have no power to make a
new river, or any new invention to cast out water, &c, for such
things are to be done in parliament; but they may order an old bank to
be new made, or alter a sewer upon any inevitable necessity. The tax of a
sum in gross was not warranted by their commission, they being to tax
every owner or possessor of the lands according to the quality of their
lands, rents, and number of acres, and their respective portions and
profits, whether of pasture, fishing, &c. 10 Rep. 141. See the powers given to the commissioners by the late statute, post.
The commissioners of sewers cannot assess a person, in respect of
drains which communicate with other drains that fall into the great
sewer, if the level of his drain is so much above the sewer that the
stopping of the sewer could not possibly throw back the water so as to
injure his premises, and if he be not, and it does not appear that he
is, likely to be benefited by the works done upon the sewer. 3 M. fy S. 447.
There are several causes and considerations for which persons may
be obliged to repair and maintain sewers, as frontagers were bound to
the repairs of the walls and banks, &c. by reason of frontage. 37 Lib. /Issis. pi. 10.
The being owner of a bank, wall, or other defence, is a sufficient
inducement to impose the charge of the repairs thereof upon such owner. 1
Hen. 7. Prescription and custom are much of the same nature,
and the law takes notice of them in this case ; but prescription doth
not bind a man to the repairs, except it be ratione tenures. 21 Edtv. 4. 38 ; 19 Hen. 7. By tenure of land, a person may be bound to repair a wall, bank, or defence, mentioned in the statute of sewers. 12 Hen. 4.
A man may bind himself and his heirs by covenant expressly to repair a
bank, wall, or sewer, and be good ; yet this shall not bind the heir
after his death, where assets are not left from the ancestor, who
entered into the covenant. Callis's Reading on Sewers. That this is a good authority on the subject of sewers, see 2 T. R. 365.
The use of defences may tie a man to the reparation thereof, if one
and his ancestors have had the use of a river by sailing up and down
the same, or have used a ferry on or over it, &c. If no person or
grounds can be known, who ought to make repairs by tenure, prescription,
custom, or otherwise, then the commissioners are to tax the level. Laws Sewers, 57, 67, 68.
If a sea-bank or wall, which the owners of particular lands are
bound to repair, be destroyed by tempest, without any default in such
owners, the commissioners of sewers may order a new one, even in a
different form, if necessary, to be erected at the expense of the whole
level. 8 T. R. 312.
By the 3 & 4 Wm. 4. c. 22. the laws relating to sewers have been amended. The following is an outline of the principal provisions of the act.
By § 1. the qualification of the commissioners is increased.
And § 2. Quakers may act as commissioners, upon making an affirmation.
§ 3. imposes an oath of qualification to be taken by other
commissioners before acting, in addition to the oath prescribed by the
23 Hen. 8.
§ 4. imposes a penalty of 100Z. on persons acting not qualified.
But proceedings are not to be impeached on account of disqualification.
By § 5. ex-officio commissioners are not required to qualify.
By § 6. every commission of sewers is' to continue for ten years, unless renewed or repealed by writ of supersedeas.
By § 7. all laws, decrees, and ordinances, made by any court of
sewers, and duly registered in the rolls of such court, are to continue
in force notwithstanding the expiration of the commission, and although
not ingrossed in parchment, or not certified into the Court of Chancery.
§ 8, 9. regulate the meetings of the commissioners.
§ 10. after reciting that doubts have arisen as to the extent of
the jurisdiction of commissioners of sewers, enacts, that all walls,
banks, culverts, and other defences whatsoever,
whether natural or artificial, situate or being by the coasts of
the sea, and all rivers, streams, sewers, and watercourses, which now
are or hereafter shall be navigable, or in which the tide now does or
hereafter shall or may ebb and flow, or which now do or hereafter shall
or may directly or indirectly communicate with any such navigable or
tide river, stream, or sewer, and all walls, banks, culverts, bridges,
dams, floodgates, and other works erected or to be erected upon or
adjoining to any such river, streams, sewers, or watercourses, shall be
within and subject to the jurisdiction of commissioners of sewers :
provided, that nothing therein contained shall empower any commissioners
of sewers to exercise authority over any dams, floodgates, or other
works erected for ornament, previous to the act, in, upon, or over any
rivers, streams, ditches, gutters, sewers, or watercourses near or
contiguous to any house or building, or in any garden, yard, paddock,
park, planted walk, or avenue to a house, without the consent in writing
of the owner or proprietor thereof respectively first obtained.
§ 11 & 12. specify the manner in which juries are to be
summoned to make inquiries or presentments either under the old law or
that act.
§ 13. declares that a presentment of a jury shall not be necessary upon each occasion to repair.
By § 14. rates are to be made for every distinct level or district.
But (§ 15.) nothing therein contained is to discharge persons from liability by tenure, &c.
And by § 17. nothing contained in the act is to preclude courts of
sewers from causing inquiry and presentment by jury as before.
By § 18. rates are to be apportioned between outgoing and incoming tenants.
By § 19. any court of sewers may decree and ordain any new walls,
banks, sewers, guts, gotes, calcies, bridges, tunnels, culverts,
sluices, floodgates, tumbling bays, cuts, or other works, aids, and
defences, or any alteration in the gauge, dimension, course, direction,
or situation of any old or existing wall, &c. to be constructed, for
the more effectually defending any lands and premises within the
jurisdiction of such court against the irruption of the sea, or for
carrying off* the superfluous fresh waters, and also, in like manner and
at their discretion, may decree any former walls or defences against
the sea, or against any rivers, streams, sewers, or watercourses, within
their commission, to be abandoned and given up, and new defences and
walls, banks, sluices, floodgates, tumbling bays, cuts, and other works
to be made and continued in lieu thereof; and in every such case may
direct, by inquiry and presentment of a jury, in what manner and
proportions the same shall thereafter be repaired and maintained by the
person, body politic or corporate, deriving advantage or avoiding damage
thereby or therefrom, having regard to previous liabilities in respect
of the walls and defences so to be abandoned.
Provided (§ 21.) that no new works are to be made without the
consent of the owners and occupiers of three-fourth parts in value of
the lands to be charged.
§ 22. Occupiers of land adjoining sewers may take away soil and weeds from the banks for their own use.
And (§ 23.) upon neglect of occupiers to remove soil, surveyors may remove it.
By § 24. the commissioners are authorized to contract for the purchase of lands, &c.
And (§ 26.) where persons shall neglect or refuse to treat, &c.
commissioners are to issue their warrants to the sheriff" to impanel a
jury. The jury may be challenged. Witnesses are to be summoned and
examined upon oath ; and the jury are to assess damages ; and their
verdict to be binding.
By § 27. commissioners may impose a fine on the sheriff*, witnesses, &c. making default.
§ 39. enables commissioners to sell lands, &c. which are not
wanted ; and the first offer is to be given to the owners of adjoining
grounds.
§ 41. empowers the courts of sewers to borrow and take up money at interest for making and maintaining works.
And (§ 42.) the courts of sewers may grant securities to persons advancing money in the form therein set forth.
And (§ 43.) such securities may be transferred.
By § 44. courts of sewers may be held out of the limits of the
commission, at any place not exceeding five miles from such limits.
And by § 45. all acts of commissioners done without the district of
the commission, but within five miles thereof, are declared valid.
By § 46. several defaults may be included in one presentment, and separately traversed.
By § 52. constables, &c. are to obey orders of commissioners.
And (§ 53.) fines, &c. may be levied by warrant of commissioners of sewers.
§ 55. Commissioners may decree and assess costs ; and in default of
distress may raise the same upon the lands of the defaulters.
§ 57. Commissioners of sewers may sue and be sued in the name of their clerk.
By § 61. the act is not to prejudice any local act.
And by § 62. the rights of the city of London are saved.
The 3 Jac. 1. c. 14. ordains that all ditches, banks,
bridges, streams, and watercourses, within two miles of London, falling
into the Thames, shall be subject to a commission of sewers ; and the
lord mayor, &c. is to appoint persons who have power of
commissioners of sewers.
The conduct of commissioners of sewers is under the control of the
Court of King's Bench, which will prevent or punish any illegal or
arbitrary proceedings. Cro. Jac. 336. And yet in the reign of
King James I. (8th Nov. 1616) the privy council took upon them to order
that no action or complaint should be prosecuted against the
commissioners unless before that board, and committed several to prison
who had brought such actions at common law, till they had released the
same; and one of the reasons for discharging Sir Edward Coke from his
office of lord chief justice was for countenancing those proceedings at
law. Moor, 825, 826 ; see 3 Comm. 55, 74. But now it
is clearly established that this (like other inferior jurisdictions) is
subject to the discretionary coercion of the Court of King's Bench. 1 Vent. 66, 67 ; Salk. 146.
If it is found before commissioners of sewers that a certain person
ought to repair a bank, and this is removed into B. It., the court will
not quash the inquisition, or grant a new trial, except he repair it;
and if afterwards he is acquitted, he shall be reimbursed. Sid. 78. In case of sewers the Court of King's Bench inquire into the nature of the fact before they grant a certiorari to
remove orders, that no mischief may happen by inundations in the mean
time, which is a discretionary execution of their power. 1 Salk. 146.
The court commonly hears counsel on both sides, where orders of commissioners of sewers are removed by certiorari, before such orders are filed ; for if good, the court will grant a procedendo, which cannot be done after they are filed ; but they will file them in any case where there is no danger likely to ensue. 1 Salk. 145. If commissioners of sewers proceed after a certiorari delivered out of B. R. attachment will issue against them, and they may be fined. 3 Nek. Abr. 218.
Orders of sewers being removed by certiorari, the court
would not file the orders till they had heard the objections debated, so
as to have it in their.power to send the orders back again. 2 Str. 1263. The court held, that a certiorari to
bring up an order made by the commissioners for the removal of their
own clerk, was of common right, and not discretionary, as in the case of
other orders, where great inconveniences may follow by inundations. 1 Str. 609.
With respect to offences committed against the property of the commissioners of sewers, see Indictment, V.
As to breaking down sea-banks and sea-walls, and persons removing piles, &c. see Malicious Injuries.
By the 31 EUz. c. 6. corrupt
elections and resignations, in colleges, hospitals, and other
eleemosynary corporations, are also punished with forfeiture of double
the value, vacating the place or office, and a devolution of the right
of election for that turn to the crown. §§ 2, 3
|
|
|
Goldman squid grabs
Europe
By Ellen Brown
The Goldman Sachs coup that failed in
America has nearly succeeded in Europe - a
permanent, irrevocable, unchallengeable bailout
for the banks underwritten by the taxpayers.
In September 2008, Henry Paulson, former
CEO of Goldman Sachs, managed to extort a US$700
billion bank bailout from the US Congress. To pull
it off, he had to fall on his knees and threaten
the collapse of the entire global financial system
and the imposition of martial law; and the bailout
was a one-time affair.
Paulson's plea for
a permanent bailout fund - the Troubled Asset
Relief Program or TARP - was opposed by congress
and ultimately rejected.
By December 2011,
European Central Bank (ECB) president
Mario Draghi, former vice
president of Goldman Sachs Europe, was able to
approve a 500 billion euro (US$657 billion)
bailout for European banks without asking anyone's
permission.
And in January 2012, a
permanent rescue funding program called the
European Stability Mechanism (ESM) was passed in
the dead of night with barely even a mention in
the press. The ESM imposes an open-ended debt on
EU member governments, putting taxpayers on the
hook for whatever the ESM's eurocrat overseers
demand.
The bankers' coup has triumphed in
Europe seemingly without a fight. The ESM is
cheered by eurozone governments, their creditors,
and "the market" alike because it means investors
will keep buying sovereign debt. All is sacrificed
to the demands of the creditors, because where
else can the money be had to float the crippling
debts of the Eurozone governments?
There
is another alternative to debt slavery to the
banks. But first, a closer look at the nefarious
underbelly of the ESM and Goldman's silent
takeover
of the ECB ...
| | |
SOLE CORPORATIONS. See Corporations.
SOLET ET DEBET. Vide Debet et Solet.
SOLE TENANT, solus tenens.] He that holds lands by his own
right only, without any other joined; and if a man and his wife hold
lands for their lives, with remainder to their son for life; here the
man dying, the lord shall not have an heriot, because he dies not sole
tenant. Kitch. 134.
SOLICITATIONS. It is an indictable offence to solicit and incite
another to commit a felony, although no felony be in fact committed ;
and the sessions have cognizance of such an offence as having a tendency
to a breach of the peace. 2 East, 5.
SOLICITOR, solicitator.] A person employed to follow and
take care of suits depending in courts of equity. Solicitors are to be
sworn and admitted by the judges, like unto attornies, before they shall
practise in the common law courts; attornies may be admitted solicitors
in the courts of equity, &c. a Geo. 2. c. 23. See Attorney.
There is also a solicitor-general to the king, who is a great officer next to the attorney-general.
STANDARD, from the Fr. estandart, $c. signum, vexillum.~] In
the general signification, is an ensign in war. And it is used for the
standing measure of the king, to the scantling whereof all the measures
in the land are or ought to be framed by the clerks of markets,
aulnagers, or other officers, according to Magna Carta and divers
statutes. This is not without good reason called a standard, because it
standeth constant and immoveable, having all measures coming towards it
for their conformity : even soldiers in the field have their standard or
colours for their direction in their march, &c. to repair to. Britton, c. 30. See Measure.
There is a standard of money, directing what quantity of fine
silver and gold, and how much allay, are to be contained in coin of old
sterling, &c.; and standard of plate, and silver manufactures. 6 Geo. 1. c. 11. See Allay, Gold, Money, &c.
STAND ARDUS. True standard, or legal weight or measure. Cartular. S. Edmund. MS. 268.
Responses to Questions from the Webinar held on April 12, 2012 entitled
“Implementing CERCLA Section 120(h)"
1. Q: How to initiate formal condemnation/eminient domain proceedings on the
Chappie/Shasta OHVA
This question is beyond the scope of this webinar. GSA and EPA cannot give legal advice to other agencies. We recommend that you contact counsel at your agency to answer this question.
Failure-Resistant Systems (FRS)
A Joint Initiative between NSF and SRC
 |
|
National Science Foundation
Directorate for Computer & Information Science & Engineering
Division of Computing and Communication Foundations
Directorate for Engineering
Division of Electrical, Communications and Cyber Systems |
|
 |
 |
Semiconductor Research Corporation
|
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
July 26, 2012
04/24/2012
In a conversation with Monica Chaturvedi Charna, Dr R.P. Singh,
Executive Vice Chairman, Jindal Power finds development of hydro
projects in the country a challenging task, given numerous
infrastructural bottlenecks. He suggests some benefits/incentives should
be provided by the government to harness the full potential of hydro in
India...
As we near the end of this fiscal, do you think the power generation
industry is on track to achieve the capacity addition target as per the
11th Five Year Plan?
The 11th Plan initially targeted a capacity addition of 78,700 MW which
was revised down to about 62,400 MW after the mid term plan review. The
actual achievement as announced by the Ministry of Power is 54,000 MW,
which represents 69 per cent achievement of the target of 78,700 MW
originally fixed and 86.5 per cent of the target fixed after the mid
term review. Of the total capacity addition, the share of private sector
is close to 60 per cent. This speaks volumes of the positive role
played by the private sector in the development of power sector. The
challenge for developers, though, is how to run the newly commissioned
projects, as nearly all of them are facing fuel shortages.
With the customs duty on thermal coal having been exempted in Budget
2012, to what extent do you think the step will alleviate the coal
shortage situation in the country?
Since CIL is not in a position to meet the coal requirements of power
stations from indigenous sources, the additional requirements have to be
met from imported coal.
The decision of the government to exempt the imported coal from the
customs duty is, therefore, a welcome step. It is estimated that a cut
in import duty from 5 per cent to nil would translate into around Rs
1600 crore of savings for the coal importers assuming 80 million tonnes
of import. This would translate into savings of 8-9 paise per unit.
However, this is not going to be permanent solutions and urgent steps
need to be taken for increasing the indigenous availability of coal.
What are the key issues that the Ministry of Power needs to urgently address to deal with power supply woes in India?
According to the Economic Survey tabled in Parliament, power sector
would require a whopping investment of about Rs 11 lakh crore in the
next five years to achieve the targetted capacity addition of over
1,00,000 MW and to build commensurate transmission and distribution
capacity. Survey also says that power sector is likely to be constrained
by shortage of fuel and environmental issues. Shortage in supply of
coal and gas to the power sector has been impacting the output at
present. A delay in forest and environmental clearances, in particular
for hydro-based power projects, has slowed down capacity addition.
In the Budget, this year, the government has allowed players in power,
aviation, roads and low-cost housing projects to go for external
commercial borrowings (ECBs), as domestic borrowings turn costly under
the high interest rate regime and certain sectors find it difficult to
raise funds. FM has also slashed withholding tax on interest payments on
ECBs by select infrastructure companies as the core sectors crawl to
grow in line with India's needs.
However, analysts say that the thing to watch will be how many companies
are able to raise cash via ECBs. Power sector woes have exacerbated
over the last few years due to fall in merchant power realisations,
sharp jump in imported fuel costs, lower availability of domestic coal,
inability to pass on the fuel hikes to the buyers and lower off-take and
delayed payments by the troubled distribution sector. All these issues
need to be addressed if power sector is to make fast progress to the
meet the rising electricity demand.
We have a huge potential of hydro power generation which unfortunately
we have not been able to harness. In today's scenario of massive coal
deficit, India must focus on development of hydroelectric power
projects. The development of hydro power projects is a challenging task
given the large infrastructure bottlenecks in those areas. Government
must announce some benefits/ incentives for the cleaner hydro power
along with the support for infrastructure development.
Availability of finance for power generation projects is another key
concern. How can the sector win back the confidence of financial
institutions to attract more equity?
Government has to take steps for restructuring of the distribution
sector, extension of tax holiday (80IA) for the upcoming power projects,
relooking at the mega power policy by making it relaxed for the power
developer to benefit from it and encouraging higher investments by
enhancing the limits of infrastructure bonds. The sector can win back
the confidence of financial institutions only if the fundamental
problems of sector are addressed, i.e.; coal availability and State
Electricity Board losses.
What are your views on the slow growth of the captive coal mines in
India? Do you think government's stand on competitive bidding has been
fair?
The main causes responsible for slow growth on the captive coal mines are:
(a) delay in processing the proposals
(b) lack of infrastructure
(c) problems in environment and forest clearances
(d) delay in land acquisition and
(e) insurgency problems in the coal bearing areas
It was the high-powered Investment Commission set up by the Government
that had suggested a competitive bidding regime for coal block
allocations in February 2006. The Investment Commission had recommended a
series of steps to attract an investment of $15 billion in coal mining
by 2010.
No one would call that the bidding process is unfair. The important
question is not whether Government is fair or not in introducing the
bidding process, the important question that country loses valuable time
in taking decisions. Investment Commission had expected that the
process of competitive bidding would be completed much before 2010 to
attract financial investment of US$ 15 Billion. It is now 2012 and the
bidding process for allocation of coal blocks is yet to take place.
In the wake of world's oil and gas reserves going through a sharp
decline and international coal prices shooting up, do you think
renewable will become the mainstay in the near future?
Renewable is an important aspect of any countries energy mix, however we
believe renewable in India are going to play an incremental role only
at least for few more years. It is interesting to see the tariffs of
solar power coming as low as 7.5 Rs / kwh, however we are still to see
the scale in the renewable projects. We believe Hydroelectric power
should be India's answer to the world for renewable energy but
unfortunately the focus on the same is still missing.
Elaborate on the current trends in the conventional power generation
sector and where do you think it will lead in the next 10 years?
In the present scenario, there is a need for sustainable and
eco-friendly power generation. Conventional power generation puts
pressure on natural resources such as water and the eco system as a
whole. Even a nuclear power plant consumes a lot of water. Hence,
emphasis must be laid on non-conventional power sources such as solar
and wind.
However, sources such as wind and solar are intermittent and
non-reliable in nature. Thus, efforts must be made towards integration
of nonconventional and conventional sources of power to create an energy
mix or energy alloy. For sustained development of power, we should
create power plants based on a combination of various sources such as
wind, solar, thermal, gas etc. Jindal Power limitd as a company, is
trying to innovate in this segment.
What are JPL's plans in the realm of power generation and which are the projects that the company is currently working on?
As far as thermal power generation is concerned, currently, we have a
1000 MW operational plant. Projects which are under the planning phase
include 6 units of 400 MW each in Chhattisgarh, 10 units of 135 MW each
in Chhattisgarh and Orissa, two power plants of 2640 MW each in
Jharkhand, one unit of 1320 MW in Orissa and one power plant of 2400-
3000 MW in the southern coastal regions.
Under the domain of hydro generation, we plan to operate a power plant
of 4000 MW in Etalin and 500 MW in Atulini. There is one more project of
1600 MW in Subasiri in Arunachal Pradesh. In additional to setting up
power plants in India, we are looking at setting up power plants in
South Arica, Mozambique, Bolivia and parts of the Middle East.
"Power sector woes have exacerbated over the last few years due to fall
in merchant power realisations, sharp jump in imported fuel costs, lower
availability of domestic coal, inability to pass on the fuel hikes to
the buyers and lower off-take and delayed payments by the troubled
distribution sector. All these issues need to be addressed if power
sector is to make fast progress to the meet the rising electricity
demand"
Copyright 2012 Next Gen Publishing, distributed by Contify.com
All Rights Reserved
The Writ of Quominus , or Writ of Quo Minus , was a writ and legal fiction which allowed the Court of Exchequer to obtain a jurisdiction over cases normally brought in the Court of Common Pleas .
The Exchequer was tasked with collecting the King's revenue, and the
legal fiction worked by having the plaintiff in a debt case claim that
he was a debtor to the king, and that the defendant's debt prevented him
paying the King. As such, the defendant would be arrested, and the case
heard by the Exchequer. The writ's predecessors were in use from at
least 1230, and it was in common (albeit strict) use during the 16th
century. The use continued into the 19th century, until all original
writs were abolished in 1883.
Writ
The Court of Exchequer 's main task was collecting royal revenues and taxes, partially through ensuring that debts to The Crown were paid. [ 1 ] It soon developed the ability to hear "common" cases, usually heard by the Court of Common Pleas , and did so through the writ of quominus .
The origins of the writ are unknown, although some academics link it to
a process through which a claimant could bring a claim jointly with the
King or in part payment towards his debt to the King, in cases where
the King had an interest. [ 2 ] The earliest record of a similar writ is 1230, although not with the quo minus wording. [ 3 ] The use was similar to that of the Bill of Middlesex , a similar legal fiction used by the Court of King's Bench ;
where a plaintiff claims money from a defendant for payment of a debt,
the plaintiff would claim to be a debtor to the King, unable to pay his
money to the King because of the defendant's debt. [ 4 ]
If this legal fiction was successful, the defendant would be
arrested and brought before the Court of Exchequer, where the case would
be heard. [ 5 ]
By the 16th century, the writ was commonly used in the Court of
Exchequer, although fairly strictly; when taking a case the Court would
investigate whether there was any benefit to the King in hearing it, and
if not would refer the case to another court. [ 6 ]
There was little interruption by the Court of Common Pleas, mainly due
to their ongoing struggle with the Court of King's Bench over the Bill
of Middlesex, which occupied most of their time. [ 7 ]
Wurzel suggests that the introduction and widespread use of this writ
was not due to any arrogance on the part of the Exchequer, but rather
because they felt that as "the most ancient" court they should have
superior jurisdiction. [ 8 ] The writ continued into the 19th century, [ 9 ] although it was abolished with the rest of the original writs through the Civil Procedure Rules of the Supreme Court of Judicature in 1883. [ 10 ]
Free family event will celebrate Earth, Sky and technology
FILE/STAFF
The
Dupont Planetarium will have four showings of To the Moon and Beyond
for Saturday's Family Earth and Sky Night. During the event, members of
the Astronomy Club of Augusta will help visitors identify objects in the
sky.
Correspondent
The organizers of Family Earth and Sky Night are on a mission – to
get families to come together to celebrate Earth Day and National
Astronomy Day.
RUTH PATRICK SCIENCE EDUCATION CENTER/SPECIAL
Family
Earth and Sky Night at Ruth Patrick Science Education Center includes
hands-on activities such as making bird feeders. Visitors also have a
chance to interact with snakes, turtles, alligators and owls and to see
the sky through the Bechtel telescope on the roof.
“First of all, this is a free event, and it’s our mission to get the
entire community involved in science, math and technology,” said John
Hutchens, the director of special programs for the Ruth Patrick Science
Education Center at the University of South Carolina Aiken.
He said area science buffs and novices alike will convene to enjoy a
great family event, and, “this is a great way to celebrate our great
Earth.”
Family Earth and Sky Night will be from 6:30 to 11 p.m. Saturday,
April 28, at Ruth Patrick Science Education Center, 471 University
Parkway, Aiken.
From 6:30-9:30 p.m., a variety of free, hands-on activities will
allow participants to explore the wonders of Earth and space science,
make items to take home and interact with snakes, turtles, owls and
alligators.
In addition to its regular 7 and 8 p.m. Saturday shows, the DuPont Planetarium is adding 9 and 10 p.m. showings of To the Moon and Beyond.
Viewers will renew their knowledge of the moon and NASA’s 50 years in
space and see what’s ahead for space exploration. Planetarium shows will
be available first come, first serve and cost $4.50 for adults, $3.50
for senior citizens, $2.50 for students in 4K-12th grades and $1 for USC
Aiken students and staff.
Once it’s dark outside, the observatory on the roof of the science
center will open for night-sky viewing using the Bechtel Telescope.
Weather permitting, Saturn and the crescent moon will be visible, as
will star clusters.
Members of the Astronomy Club of Augusta will have telescopes set up
on the lawn to help visitors find celestial bodies and learn more about
the constellations.
Hutchens said Family Earth and Sky Night is related to President
Obama’s initiative to impart millions of public-private corporate
dollars to build on science, technology, education and math (STEM)
initiatives for teachers and students alike – ultimately, to inspire
students to pursue degrees in the sciences.
“It’s our way of infusing the love of those topics to inquiring
students while developing a more informed citizenry and a future
workforce,” Hutchens said.
The event is held by The Ruth Patrick Science Education Center, the
DuPont Planetarium, the University of South Carolina Aiken, and the
Astronomy Club of Augusta.
Family Earth and Sky Night will be held rain or shine. For more information, visit rpsec.usca.edu or call (803) 641-3313.
|
|
Berkeley
Nanogeoscience Center
|
|
Nanogeoscience at
Berkeley
Nanoscale
mineral
particles -- nanoparticles -- are naturally formed and removed from the
environment by numerous chemical and biological processes. Our mission
is to uncover the numerous roles played by nanoparticles in geochemical
and biogeochemical
processes.
Introduction to Nanogeoscience
Click here to learn more
about the importance of natural nanoparticles in the environment
Research Highlights
A
pump-probe method for studying ferrous iron sites in ferric iron oxides
 Geochemical
reactions are complex, multistep processes in
which the elementary steps are too fast for direct observation.
However, developments in the field of ultrafast spectroscopy offer new
ways to observe chemical reactions at the timescales that they occur.
An introduction to pump-probe studies of geochemical reactions can be
found here.
We are particularly interested in studying interfacial
electron transfer reactions, such as the reductive dissolution of
ferric iron oxides and oxyhydroxides by inorganic or protein electron
donors. We recently demonstrated a method for light-initiated electron
transfer to iron oxide nanoparticles, and used this to perform the
first measurements of electron hopping rates in these solid phases.
Read this
paper in Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters
Nanoparticle
Coastlines: Predictions of water structure around iron oxide
nanoparticles
 Water is
ubiquitous at the Earth's surface, and the interactions of water with
mineral surfaces is in an important factor for
their stability and reactivity. Dino Spagnoli
performed large-scale molecular dynamics simulations using the
Geochemistry cluster computer to investigate how the size and shape of
iron oxide (hematite) nanoparticles affected the sorption and structure
of interfacial water. The simuations predict that the surfaces cause
the formation of ordered, layered water but that the ordering
descreases with the particle size. Moreover, the dynamic properties of
interfacial water are affected, with the residence time of water
molecules near the surface being shorter for smaller, less-crystalline
nanoparticles than for larger nanoparticles or a bulk hematite surface.
Read this paper in Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta
Read the Science Editor's
Choice feature on this article
Extracellular Proteins Sweep Up
Nanoparticles
 Certain
microorganisms are proficient at precipitating mineral
nanoparticles as a by-product of their metabolism. In oxygen-poor and
zinc-rich waters, sulfate reducing bacteria can precipitate zinc
sulfide nanoparticles, reducing the dissolved concentrations of this
toxic metal. However, the effects of ZnS precipitation on the bacteria,
and mobility
in groundwater of the resulting
nanoparticles are not well understood. John Moreau and colleagues
studied the . They found that extracellular proteins or polypeptides
associate with the nanoparticles and likely cause the aggregation of
the nanoparticles thus limiting the spread of the nanoparticles.
Read this paper in Science
Nanocluster Formation in Aqueous
Nanoparticle Suspensions
 We
discovered that
~ 6 nm nanoparticles of iron
oxyhydroxide
(FeOOH) exhibit qualitatively new colloid behavior. In addition to
regimes of aqueous chemical
conditions for which the nanoparticles are (i) fully suspended and (ii)
completely aggregated and settled, there is an additional regime in
which the nanoparticles (iii) undergo partial aggregation to form nanoclusters.
The cluster
size
is controlled by solution pH, indicating that it is the charge on the
nanoparticle surfaces that is the crucial parameter. Although
nanocluster formation can be explained by classical concepts in
colloid science, it is a size-dependent phenomenon.
Read this paper in JCIS
Water-Driven Structural Transition in
Nanoparticles
 An important consequence
of small particle size is the high proportion of surface sites at which
atoms may be unable to adopt the chemical environment found in the
interior. Molecular dynamics simulations indicated that this can lead
to high surface energies for nanomaterials, and suggested the
possibility that nanoparticle structure may be sensitive to the type
and extent of ligand binding. We tested this idea by allowing water
molecules to adsorb to ZnS nanoparticle synthesized in anyhydrous
conditions, and found the water binding stimulated a profound
re-arrangement of the nanoparticle structure. Our results indicated
that nanoparticle structure is not kinetically trapped, but responsive
to environmental changes. Any nanoscale material or component may be
susceptible to unpredictable structural change if exposed to water, or
other adsorbates.
Read this paper in Nature
Archived Research Highlights 
    |
Florida
Acosta found that the EPA decision to adopt
the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality's (DEQ) "natural
conditions criteria" was "arbitrary and capricious."
He said
that the EPA decision "ignores or otherwise discounts" changes to water
temperature and fish population that scientists have observed in Oregon,
and that the EPA was unable to present a rational basis for approving
the state criteria.
"Despite the fact that Oregon is required to
use the best scientific data available to do so, it is a process rife
with uncertainty,"
Dysfunctional Science: 'Alarming increase in scientific retractions 'a symptom of a dysfunctional scientific climate'
- Warmism
fades into sunset: Gallup survey: Climate dead-last among all
ENVIRONMENTAL concerns -- 'Americans Worry Most About Water
Contamination, Least About Global Warming'
- GALLUP
Survey: WORRIES ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT AT ALL-TIME LOWS -- 'Of the seven
environmental issues Gallup tested, worries about global warming
finished dead last' -- 7th out 7 env. issues!
- The
Capricious Dr. Hansen of NASA: 'It is one thing for a scientist to cook
up ideas with abandon, but quite another to do so with the papers
stamped by the government'
- Max Planck Institute Dir. Admits 'Physical Causes Unclear...Models Inconsistent With Observations'
- NASA's Hansen doubles down: Defends accusing climate skeptics of 'Crimes Against Humanity' -- Skeptics = Nazis?
james.e.hansen@nasa.gov
- Global
Cooling: be very afraid: 'If analysis of declining sunspot activity is
correct, then global mean temps going to decline by about 2 degrees C by
2040'
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-sponsored
and funded “human health effects science” research is unreliable and
makes irresponsible and outrageous claims about how air pollution causes
thousands of deaths. Then the EPA claims that it can prevent those
deaths with its latest set of regulations of emissions. This junk
science can be challenged effectively, legally, and politically, as
described below.
The science misconduct is the result of the politicization of public
health science, something Eisenhower warned about in his farewell speech in 1961. There are political, judicial, and administrative solutions to this perfidy.
First, what is the junk science?
Judging Science: Scientific Knowledge and the Federal Courts (
MIT press, 1995), by Peter Huber, Ph.D., J.D. and Ken Foster, Ph.D. —
written two years after the Supreme Court decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow 509 U.S. 579 (1993),
is a comprehensive and thorough book on junk science and legal
solutions to prevent junk evidence. The book also explains Daubert evidentiary dicta, discussed in a previous essay. We also discussed the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence (RSME) (1994, 2000, and 2011), published by the Federal Judicial Center, intended to educate judges on their Daubert duty to be gatekeepers for reliable scientific evidence in the courtroom.
Fallacious thinking makes EPA research in human health effects
science unreliable, forsaking the most important responsibility of a
scientist: be your own most severe critic, and retain a skeptical
attitude about your ideas and theories. The key is to test your hypothesis — your theory. If it can’t be tested, it isn’t science.
The scientific method is based on skeptical experimentation that
looks for reliable evidence. Fallacies of scientific inquiry include
confusing temporal with causal relationships (post hoc, propter hoc fallacy);
reporting results that are within normal range of events (noise) or
projecting observations of a specific event and projecting it to a
general rule without good evidence (inductive error); and relying on a
theory by an authority, by consensus, or by popularity without proper
evidentiary challenge.
Another fallacy is denigration and rejection of opposing, even
minority viewpoints without proper testing and evaluation, or asserting
that a pile of weak studies makes for strong evidence, and relying on
quantity rather than quality of evidence — as the good investigators
will say, the weakest link measures the strength of the chain of
evidence.
Less well-understood fallacies of scientific inquiry are intentional
or negligent deception by misuse of relative risk as absolute risk and
the more common deceit, misuse of the words “statistical significance”
to imply good evidence. Statistical significance is a statistical test
that does not address the reliability of the evidence — just whether the
study avoids excess randomness errors.
Some EPA research scientists fail in their professional ethics
because they have become propagandists and have succumbed to many of
these biases and fallacies.
Well-paid researchers for the EPA junk science project
Some examples of individuals who corrupt the EPA human health effects science research:
- Arden Pope, Ph.D. (study in 1995) and Douglas Dockery, Ph.D. (study in
1993) started the corruption by use of weak associations as proof of
causation. The Pope and Dockery Group (they were co-authors in their
studies) showed small associations and pushed the bounds of credibility
so much that the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) of the
United States Environmental Protections Agency (EPA), chaired by Roger
McClellan, DVM, rejected the studies and advised Carol Browner, the EPA
administrator, not to push new ozone and small particle regulations.
Browner, a true believer, ignored the advice or the CASAC and many
others and pushed the new regulations. Pope and Dockery continue to
enjoy fame and success as mavens of air pollution research.
- Daniel Krewski, Ph.D. headed a large group whose research showed
no air pollution human health effect in California, but they pushed
ahead, hiding the results and ignoring the same findings by James
Enstrom from UCLA .
- Michael Jerrett, Ph.D., a University of California
member of the air pollution researcher club sponsored by the EPA,
admitted in a symposium conducted by the California Air Resources Board
on February 26, 2010 that he couldn’t find an air pollution effect in California, but less than a year later he tortured the data to show a minor “association.”
Dr. Jerrett’s flawed data dredge, which included as co-authors many
of the
leading
lights in the air pollution research
club, costing more than 750,000 dollars, was adopted by and then used by
the California Air Resources Board to justify more draconian state air
pollution regulations.
- Jon Samet, M.S., M.D. succeeded Roger McClellan as
the CASAC chair. McClellan and the protesting CASAC members were, after
the battle in the ’90s, eliminated, and others were appointed to the
CASAC who were more sympathetic to aggressive regulatory activity
without regard to the reliability of the human health science claims.
CASAC Chair Jon Samet approves aggressive air pollution regulatory
activity on weak research results and is personally committed to the
view that there is no threshold for safety of air pollutants. His assertions for no threshold contradict his own research, published in 2000,
that showed no negative human health effects for ozone, the ozone
precursors nitrous and sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide. Dr. Samet found a
weak association for particle pollution that was no better than the
Pope and Dockery weak associations.
Does it matter?
- Associations reported in the EPA air pollution research are so small
that they do not meet the requirements to prove anything in an
observational study, since the uncertainties of the methods cannot be
overcome by small associations, but no matter.
- The biological plausibility of air pollutants causing deaths is not established in any reasonable and reliable way, but no matter.
- Millions of dollars are granted to researchers to repeat and magnify
the EPA research with the same methods and unreliable science, but no matter.
- The EPA presents the “evidence” of pollution causing thousands of
deaths — though the EPA could easily be harvesting deaths that occur as
normal death rate variations (noise) — without any real medical
investigation that shows a plausible disease or cause of death (valid
signal), but no matter.
- The EPA studies are desktop exercises in death certificate counting
using lax rules for cause of death that exaggerate deaths attributed to
air pollution, but no matter.
It won’t matter until industry, business, citizens, and the Congress
and the courts start holding the EPA to account. Presently business,
industry, and the Congress are intimidated by the well-paid, slick, and
arrogant army of EPA scientists who have the media as their shills and
don’t have to answer hard questions on the reliability of their
research. No one asks them even the basic question: how can you be
reliable when you rely on the EPA for a living and career advancement?
Conflicts of professional interest created
by millions of dollars in research funded by the EPA and EPA-allied
entities are a serious problem that compromises public policy-making.
Legal and Political Strategies to Stop EPA Junk Science
The Administrative Procedure Act provides
the means to challenge EPA conduct, actions, and policy-making. The
burden of the challenge to an action or ruling or fine or penalty is to
prove that the agency was arbitrary and capricious. A commonsense
understanding of those words entails actions taken without good
justification or rationale. The courts have been inclined to be lazy
and deferential and allow Agency hegemony.
Jurisprudence (that’s the legal scholarship) shows that the judicial
deference to and agency is limited to allowing agency discretion in
matters of ambiguous statutory provisions, described by Justice Scalia
in the Whitman v. American Trucking case as reasonable interpretations of ambiguous statutory provisions.
Obviously, that focused deference has nothing to do admissibility
decisions on junk science and bad science or policy that relies on
unreliable research. That brings us back to admissibility of scientific
evidence at the trial or hearing level. Once the record is made, the
appellate level doesn’t offer a remedy for bad evidence unless the
admissibility ruling is appealed as error.
Judges and lawyers have been intimidated by the idea of challenging a
powerful agency. Lawyers and judges are too often ill-equipped to
frame the challenges to junk EPA science well; they are badly advised,
and they end up going back to what makes them comfortable — arguments on
the law and economics.
But — a big but — judges are, and always have been, the
ones to decide what’s admissible as evidence. Even
before Daubert,
you could tell whether you were getting a hometown job in court on the
basis of admissibility rulings and the attitude of the judge about your
expert. The challenges to evidence and testimony can be pursued
regardless of whether the evidence is used to argue for or against the
agency action. Agency discretion under the jurisprudence of the Chevron case does not allow bad evidence into the record, whether it’s a hearing or a trial.
The evidence must be admissible for purposes of proving that the
Agency is or is not being arbitrary or capricious, which makes the
decision on evidentiary admissibility and reliability separate from
whatever tortured idea the court might have about agency authority and
discretion. Unreliable scientific evidence is inadmissible and
therefore cannot be used to justify inappropriate actions. The
admissibility rulings on evidence trump some arcane idea about agency
discretion that is all tied up in the jurisprudence on Congressional
Delegation. There is no law that the Congress has passed that permits
agencies to pursue junk science.
In the political sphere, the Congress can modify the standards of
administrative and judicial review to demand good science and a better
standard for agency conduct, with more reasonable rules on challenges to
EPA actions, similar to the rules for challenges to actions by the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration that are civil court
evidentiary preponderance of evidence burdens.
However, even without congressional help, responsible, competent, and
serious lawyers can force judges and frame evidentiary challenges so
that the judges will be required to make clear rulings on admissibility
of scientific evidence and even require that the court provide a
rationale for the ruling. A bad ruling is a reversible error; a good
ruling will nurture good science in the courtroom, the job of
conscientious judges, and the responsibility of lawyers. No lawyer but a
pettifogger would admit to arguing for bad science that violates the
public trust.
In trials involving challenges to EPA actions that interfere with
property, cause compliance burdens, and enforce onerous and harassing
fines or penalties, parties certainly have been able to provide
full-throated challenges to EPA evidentiary submissions, so at the
administrative hearing stage, it would be just as appropriate to
challenge the scientific basis of EPA conduct, even if it would force
judges or magistrates to be more active, stop acting like potted plants,
and start doing their job — gate-keeping for good scientific evidence.
Changing the EPA agenda means challenging inadequate and unreliable
EPA science and demanding reliable and skeptical science in the public
interest. It can be done politically and legally by proper use of
modifications of law and statutes — even modification of the
Administrative Procedure Act, properly conducted administrative
hearings, evidentiary challenges in any number of different forums, and
political and legal and political action to modify statutory
requirements for agency conduct and to clarify proper process for
challenges of agency actions. It can be done if parties in disputes do
it right, if lawyers do their jobs, and if politicians work hard to
force better rules for sensible agency conduct and fairer rules for
citizen challenges of agency decisions and actions.
The EPA can be forced to be more reasonable in its regulatory actions
and regimes. It can be done if citizens, politicians, lawyers, and
judges have the fortitude — it’s always about the fortitude.
That will bring the heat for the EPA and its well-paid and arrogant research army.
Who knows what might develop from such a thing?
-John Dale Dunn, M.D., J.D. & Steve Milloy, MHS, J.D., LLM
Event Date 1: April 17, 2012 08:00 am - 10:00 am
U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan and U.S. Agriculture
Secretary Tom Vilsack will keynote the second Summit on the Role of
Education in Economic Development in Rural America. The event, taking
place Tuesday, April 17, at the Hyatt Regency Crystal City in Arlington,
Va., is co-hosted by the White House Rural Council and the Education
Commission of the States. Duncan will address the connections between
the Administration’s education reform efforts and recommendations made
following last year’s summit. Both Secretaries will engage the audience
in a discussion about solutions for overcoming the unique challenges
faced by distant and remote rural communities. Throughout the day,
federal, state, and local partners will present and discuss effective
economic development models that can be replicated in rural areas.
U.S. Department of Education officials also will participate in the
summit and provide updates on federal rural program efforts. John White,
deputy assistant secretary for rural outreach, will deliver luncheon
remarks on available resources and necessary collaborations at the
local, state and federal levels. Larkin Tackett, director of place-based
initiatives in the Office of Innovation and Improvement, will discuss
Promise Neighborhoods and Choice Neighborhoods; and Sue Liu, senior
policy advisor in the Office of Vocational and Adult Education, will
discuss the Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career
Training grants.
United
States is liable as arranger and
operator, someone who
“takes intentional steps to dispose
of a hazardous substance.” 129 S.
Ct. 1870, 1879 (2009)
The cartel "is the most
pervasive and harmful criminal antitrust conspiracy ever uncovered,"
declared Joel Klein, chief of the Justice Department's antitrust
division. The price-fixing ring "hurt the pocketbook of virtually every
American consumer, anyone who took a vitamin, drank a glass of milk, or
had a bowl of cereal," he said.
"Wasting Our Waterways," compiled by Environment America, calls the Clean Water Act an "unfulfilled promise"
Services not so secret, agents exposed, hard questions
U.S. Secret Service agents, along with a group of military personnel,
had a drunken night with Cartagena, Colombia prostitutes.
Initiating the agency’s investigation into the 11 agents who were said
to be drunk and with prostitutes in Cartagena, Colombia, is the female
special agent in charge of the Miami office who alleged the shameful
acts and was on assignment in
Cartagena at the time. In common with the “excessive, wasteful, and in
some cases impermissible” General Services Administration scandal over a
federal agency conference outside of Las Vegas, Nevada; in both cases,
federal employees were responsible for exposing the bad behavior of
their colleagues. Federal workers must maintain a higher
standard because they are guardians of taxpayer money and the people’s
trust. Is there something in the culture and organization of the federal
government that allows the
individual government employees to deem their shamefully “excessive,
wasteful, and in some cases impermissible” or even illegal and immoral
actions acceptable, and especially when two agent
supervisors were involved? Reps. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Elijah E.
Cummings (D-Md.), the
chairman and ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform
Committee, sent Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan a letter asking for information on 10 points, including two that get to agency culture:
“What agency failures or lapses has the USSS (U.S. Secret Service) identified that contributed to this incident?
“Moving
forward, what steps does the USSS intend to take to prevent a
recurrence of a similar serious security failure and diplomatic
embarrassment?”
Who knew, until now, that some of these strong, silent types really like to party hard? The Washington Post - Federal Diary
- Inquiry points to wider Secret Service scandal involving as many as 21 women
To maintain a claim that EPA has “unreasonably
delayed” its duties under CERCLA, the court held that plaintiffs may
continue to press their claims under another statute, the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA), but must do so in another court.
The court stated, “plaintiffs may bring an APA claim in the Court of
Appeals for the D.C. Circuit alleging EPA unreasonably delayed in
promulgating the financial responsibility regulations required under
Section 108(b).” Id . at 6. Unless and until such a litigation is
brought and decided, the timeline for financial assurance requirements
under CERCLA will remain unclear.
Report: Alive
The prior appropriation doctrine in today’s
western water law
Posted by: Maven on June
12, 2011 at 7:46 am
From the Social Science Research Network (hat
tip to the
Water Sisweb!):
EPA to hold community meeting on Lockwood toxic cleanup
Billings Gazette
In the 12 years since the Environmental Protection Agency designated 580 acres in Lockwood a Superfund
site because the soil and water was contaminated by toxic chemicals, no
actual cleanup work has been done. This summer, the EPA will do more
testing ...
FAISALABAD: US Embassy’s
Deputy Agriculture Counsellor Devid Wolf has said the US Department of
Agriculture (USDA) will continue to develop the agricultural sector of
Pakistan by providing funds for development projects and research work.
America assisted developing countries in the agricultural sector to
make it more efficient, productive and sustainable, which would lead to
an increase in supply and reduce the cost of food, Wolf said during a
visit to the University of Agriculture Faisalabad (UAF).
He also reviewed USDA’s ongoing projects aimed at developing the
agricultural sector and said the goal of the projects was to eradicate
extreme poverty and hunger and required significant investment from the
donors and private sector.
Talking about various initiatives, Wolf said US was working on
developing agricultural markets, trade and finance, promoting food and
nutritional security, funding collaborative science and technological
research and developing and supporting sound programmes for livestock
and sustainable agriculture.
Speaking on the occasion, UAF Vice Chancellor Dr Iqrar Ahmad said the
university was running around 150 agricultural projects with financial
assistance from the US. These funds were used in faculty development,
technology transfer, product commercialisation and research.
The university is also working on outreach programmes for educating farmers about increasing productivity.
Published in The Express Tribune, April 21st, 2012.
CONFERENCE DESCRIPTION
The organizer
World Federation of Engineering Organizations is coming up with the
Conference titled as International Conference on Sustainable Development
of Critical Infrastructure in November 2012. The language of the
Conference will be in English. The Conference will be attended by the
professional practitioners, academic researchers, government engineers,
and operational managers of infrastructure systems. The topics to be
discussed during the event are: sustainability, safety, risk assessment
and management, and life-cycle performance and cost. This Conference is
helpful in making future contacts and business prospects. The Conference
aims to highlight both to build a new interactive instrument on
environmental protection between the nation and society for the
Development of all sustainable engineering systems.
Job Title:Counselor to the Inspector General
Department:Department Of Justice
Agency:Justice, Office of the Inspector General
Job Announcement Number:OIG-2012-11
SALARY RANGE:
|
$123,758.00
to
$155,500.00
/ Per Year |
OPEN PERIOD:
|
Friday, April 20, 2012 to Friday, April 27, 2012 |
SERIES & GRADE:
|
GS-0905-15 |
POSITION INFORMATION:
|
Full Time -
Temporary NTE 1 Year |
|
DUTY LOCATIONS:
|
01 vacancy(s) -
Washington DC Metro Area, DC United States
|
WHO MAY BE CONSIDERED:
|
All groups of qualified individuals |
Earth Day at US Department of Agriculture
Give a Hoot! Earth Day in Albuquerque New Mexico is to inspire awareness and appreciation for the Earth's Natural Environment!
The Unieted States Department of Agriculture - Forest Service Proudly Presents: 5th Annual Give a Hoot Fair!
For
40 years Earth Day has inspired and mobilized individuals and
organizations worldwide to demonstrate their commitment to Enviromental
Protection and sustainability. Earth day programs believe that the
nation's future relies on well-educated public so that we can be wise
stewards of the enviroment that susatins us, our families, our
communites and future genrations.
Earth Day Event April 20, 2012
10am to 1pm
4000 Masthead North East
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87109
Decision Rejects Decades of Lower Court Precedent
In a stunning rebuke to decades of EPA practice, the United
States Supreme Court on March 21, 2012 changed the way many of our
federal environmental laws will be enforced. The Court unanimously
rejected decades of EPA practice, and overturned lower court
precedent, by declaring that recipients of EPA compliance orders
under the Clean Water Act have the right to immediately challenge
the issuance of these orders in court. This ruling, in Sackett
v. Environmental Protection Agency, et al, will substantially
reduce EPA's reliance on such orders and likely require the
agency to engage with the regulated community in a more cooperative
fashion. It can be expected that this change in course will be seen
not only in matters under the Clean Water Act, but possibly under
many of the other major federal environmental programs, including
the Clean Air Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
("RCRA"), and the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Recovery Act ("CERCLA").
On March 21, 2012, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed a
decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit, holding that a compliance order issued under the Clean
Water Act ("the Act") constitutes a "final agency
action" and that recipients of these orders may immediately
file suit challenging such orders under the Administrative
Procedure Act ("APA"). The decision repudiates the
position of the United States Environmental Protection Agency
("EPA") that the targets of such orders must wait until
EPA decides to enforce the order before seeking judicial
review.
The ruling not only means that recipients of compliance orders
can seek judicial review immediately, it will also cause the EPA to
develop more robust enforcement cases before issuing compliance
orders so that such orders are able to withstand judicial scrutiny.
The implications of this ruling will also likely reach into other
administrative contexts (both environmental and otherwise) and
enable regulated entities to challenge regulatory actions
sooner.
Protecting Water at the Source
Troubled Waters,
a new Environmental Working Group report released today (April 12),
examines the water pollution caused by farm runoff in the upper Midwest
and demonstrates that treating the problem after the fact is
increasingly expensive, difficult and, if current trends continue,
ultimately unsustainable. Because most farm operations are exempt from
the requirements of the federal Clean Water Act and states have little
authority to compel farmers to control water contamination, the burden
of cleaning up agricultural pollution in drinking water falls mostly on
municipal treatment systems -- and the taxpayers who pay for them.
"We need to
determine how our 'built' water
systems and our governance systems
can be made more reliable,
resilient and sustainable," Tim Killeen, NSF Geosciences
assist. dir.
"This type of research is key to
determining what needs to be done
to ensure sustainability." says
Tom Torgersen, NSF lead program
director |
- "Eeyore, what are you doing there?" said Rabbit.
- "I'll give you three guesses, Rabbit. Digging holes in the ground?
Wrong. Leaping from branch to branch of a young oak tree? Wrong. Waiting for
somebody to help me out of the river? Right. Give Rabbit time, and he'll
always get the answer."
- "But, Eeyore," said Pooh in distress, "what can we - I mean, how shall
we - do you think if we -"
- "Yes," said Eeyore. "One of those would be just the thing. Thank you,
Pooh."
- "Oh, Eeyore, you are wet!" said Piglet, feeling him.
- Eeyore shook himself, and asked somebody to explain to Piglet what
happened when you had been inside a river for quite a long time. He
turned around angrily on the others and said "Everybody crowds round
so in this Forest. There's no Space. I never saw a more Spreading
lot of
animals in my life, and in all the wrong places."
-
RELOCATION OF THE THISTLE LODE CLAIM
| Accession Nr: |
848679 |
|
Document Type: |
Serial Patent |
|
State: |
California |
|
Issue Date: |
2/13/1922 |
|
Cancelled: |
No |
Removal of organic matter in waste water is a major part of the waste
water treatment system. Too much organic matter in water is
detrimental to water quality. Organic matter must be decomposed (or
broken down) and this process is oxygen intensive. The oxygen that is
taken from water and used to break down organic material is supposed to
supply the organisms and plants in the water. Without oxygen, the
natural habitat of the water suffers and causes a noticeable decrease in
water quality.
Although it is nearly impossible prevent all organic matter from
entering the water system, it is possible to decrease the amount of
organic material people discharge into water. Instead of throwing food
scraps, yard clippings, and other biodegradable waste into the trash or
drain, they can be disposed of through composting.
Composting is simple; anyone with a plastic bin and a patio or yard
can set one up! Through composting, people can dispose of organic waste,
such as old fruit and weeds, and convert it into soil. This soil can be
used as garden or lawn fertilizer. Compost bins can be purchased at
garden stores or they can be made out of plastic bins.
How to Make a Compost Bin
- Take a medium or large sized plastic bin with secure cover
- Drill holes around it to allow air to flow into it
- Place it in a well-ventilated area
- Add soil and other organic wastes
The contents within the bin will need to be mixed every few days. It
can be mixed with a shovel or simply by rolling it on its side. To
maintain an efficient composting rate, the contents of the bin must be
balanced. Half of the contents should be green (i.e. yard clippings) and
the other half should be brown (i.e. wood chips) to keep equal amounts
of nitrogen and carbon in the system. It is important to maintain this
balance and mix the bin because it prevents odors.
Visit the following website to learn more about composting.
http://www.treehugger.com/green-food/compost-how-to-make-it-bins-piles-and-more.html
-
Park Service Broadens Sacred Tribal Area of
Shasta Bally Towers
Whiskeytown
National Recreation Area is finalizing the
Environmental Assessment that will guide the
future management of wireless communication
facilities by non-National Park Service entities
on the summit of Shasta Bally. After several
meetings with Redding Rancheria tribal leaders and
the National Park Service (NPS) regarding
potential impacts and mitigation measures from the
continued operation of the towers and people
visiting the summit, the NPS has revised the area
of potential effect for this project to include
the entire Shasta Bally Mountain.
Working closely with the tribe, the National
Park Service redefined the area that is considered
sacred to Wintu people. The effort will ensure
that the continued operation of the communications
facilities under NPS right-of-way permits and the
delineation of the visitor parking areas and trail
system at the summit will not adversely affect any
traditional uses or sacred sites on the mountain.
-
TRUCK FARM IS A SIMPLE CONCEPT WITH A BIG IMPACT
In the spring of 2011, the Truck Farm fleet expanded to include 25
trucks all across the country. Each farm-on-wheels is unique, but
together the fleet pursues the core mission of the Truck Farm project:
teaching people young and old that growing food can be fun, easy, and
rewarding — even if you don’t have a lot of land.
House of
Representatives Bill 872, which would reduce the regulatory burdens,
passed the House but has stalled in the U.S. Senate. The bill has enough
votes to pass, but Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., has put a hold on it,
said Sacramento-Yolo manager David Brown.
| Subject: | Automatic reply: |
| | From: | |
I
have left the Department of Justice. For assistance with litigation, please contact Jamie MacAyeal at Jamie.MacAyeal@usdoj.gov. If you need other assistance, please contact my paralegal.
Best wishes to you, and Happy New Year. Larry Corcoran -
I. THE MIGRATORY BIRD TREATIES AND
CONVENTIONS At the beginning of the
Twentieth Century, market hunters or "pot
hunters" killed migratory birds on a vast
...
Larry M. Corcoran & Elinor
Colbourn, Shocked, Crushed and
Poisoned: Criminal Enforcement in
Non-Hunting Cases Under the Migratory Bird
Treaties, 77 Denv. ...
The Superfund stopped getting funded in 1995.
President Clinton unsuccessfully tried to reinstate
the tax on polluters that originally filled the fund's
coffers, and the fund actually ran out of money in
2003. Since then the program has relied on
appropriations whose amount and consistency shift
according to the prevailing congressional winds.
The Center for Public Integrity critically
investigated the Superfund program in 2007; one of
their findings was that the EPA was unable to undertake
cleanups because of their lack of funding.
In 2009, the agency
drafted a rule that addresses this in part --
they want mining companies to provide evidence that
they'll be able to stay in business not just when
they're making money off a mine, but years after the
fact, when a messy, expensive cleanup -- like the one
in Libby, Mont. -- might be needed.
This new rule was spurred by a Sierra Club lawsuit
alleging that the 63 hardrock mining sites on the
National Priorities List have estimated cleanup costs
of $7.8 billion, and $2.4 billion of those costs were
going be footed by taxpayers. Meanwhile, many
more Western mining sites are being considered for
Superfund listing, and the costs
of cleaning up each site keep getting higher .
Notable opponents to the 2009 EPA rule include Alaska
Senator Lisa Murkowski, a mining fan, and -- shocker
-- the National Mining Association. (Read Murkowki's letter
to the EPA [PDF])
03/07/2012 06:03:30 PM EST
11th Circuit: Consent Decree Bars Claims For Recovery Costs Under CERCLA
Posted by
LexisNexis® Mealey's™ Daily Legal News
ATLANTA - A federal magistrate judge in Alabama did not
err in finding that a consent decree entered into between plaintiff
companies and the U.S. government barred the companies' claim for cost
recovery under Section 107(a) of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), an 11th Circuit U.S.
Court of Appeals panel ruled March 6 in affirming an award of summary
judgment to the defendants (Solutia Inc., et al. v. McWane Inc., et al.,
No. 10-15639, 11th Cir.)
This week, in the case of Solutia, Inc. and Pharmacia
Corp. v. McWane, Inc. (Solutia), the Eleventh Circuit held that a party
that performs a cleanup in compliance with a consent decree has no
right under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (“CERCLA”) section 107(a) to recover its cleanup costs.
This case represents a continuance of the courts’ clarification of when
claims can be brought under CERCLA sections 107(a) and 113(f). To
understand the significance of this case, it is best to start by
examining the United States Supreme Court cases that proceeded it,
beginning with the Supreme Court’s decision in Cooper Indus., Inc. v.
Aviall Servs., Inc., 543 U.S. 157 (2004).
In Cooper v. Aviall, the Supreme Court turned decades
of CERCLA jurisprudence on its head. Relying on the plain language of
CERCLA section 113(f), the court held that a potentially responsible
party (“PRP”) can only seek contribution under section 113(f) from other
parties “during or following” a civil action under CERCLA section 106
or 107. Therefore, a party that had not been sued and had not entered
into a settlement could not seek contribution under CERCLA section
113(f). The court did not address when a party could bring an action
under section 107.
Prior to Cooper v. Aviall, courts as a matter of course
permitted PRPs to bring contribution actions under section 113(f),
regardless of whether they had been sued under CERCLA. Conversely, many
courts did not permit PRPs to bring suit under section 107(a), which
provides for joint and several liability. The Supreme Court left open
the question of whether PRPs that voluntarily incurred response costs
could now bring suit under section 107(a). Three years later the
Supreme Court answered this question with a resounding YES.
Please see full article below for more information.
| by Eric Chabrow |
 | Until
these deficiencies are fully addressed, a GAO audit reveals, increased
risk exists to unauthorized access to sensitive data and programs and
disruption of critical operations on managing the federal debt.
More... | |
Upcoming Webinar
|
- Today's top fraud threats;
- How to plan your technology investments;
- Tips to secure internal buy-in for anti-fraud investments.
|
We take seriously our stewardship of the environment, our customers and suppliers, our employees, and our community.
- We are in full CERCLA compliance with all applicable standards of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation & Liability Act.
- We comply with all local, state, and federal laws regarding air, water, and land quality.
We have a comprehensive disaster recovery plan
We are committed to promoting employee well-being through a safe and
healthy work environment, advancement opportunities, and financial
security.
Ground Water Withdrawal Analysis and Permitting
Keeping our Project in the Pipeline
Staying Current in the Continually Evolving Compliance World
Reuse - Materials Waste Minimization - Keep it Clean!
We’d all prefer to protect an existing water supply than deal
with the long, costly process of remediating an impaired supply and / or
developing new sources. With this general principle in mind, regulatory
agencies at municipal, state, and federal levels created source water
protection regulations to help safeguard these precious supplies of
drinking water.
Hold-ups due to environmental
regulations can be expensive, time-consuming, maddening, and unnecessary.
CALIFORNIA
- EPA DELISTING IRON MOUNTAIN
MINE!
"the
revised PHG of 300 g/L is two
orders of magnitude greater than
the applicable numeric
chemical-specific standards
identified in ROD 5 for the
protection of freshwater aquatic
life." Rick Sugarek, EPA project
manager for Iron Mountain Mine
Superfund cleanup, 2008 5 year
review.
CALIFORNIA
- COPPER, CADMIUM, AND ZINC; QAPP
Information: QA Info Missing;
Not
one biota, not one iota; No further
evidence required to facially
apparent facts
SECURE
Water Act Section 9503(c)– Reclamation Climate Change and Water 2011.
Reclamation’s planning and operations rely upon assumptions of present and
future water supplies based on climate. Reclamation’s vision is to protect
local economies and preserve natural resources and ecosystems through the
effective use of water.
SECURE
Water authorized Reclamation to continually evaluate and report on the risks
and impacts from a changing climate and to identify appropriate adaptation and
mitigation strategies utilizing the best available science in conjunction with
stakeholders.
With a
focus on Reclamation’s role as a Federal agency conducting water management and
related activities, Reclamation is assessing risks to the water resources of
the Western United States and developing strategies to mitigate risks to help
ensure that the long-term water resources management of the United States
is sustainable.
| Subject: | Confirmation |
| | From: | |
Dear John Hutchens,
Thank you for taking the time to complete our online registration process for POWERGRID International
I please myself with
imagining a State at last which can
afford to be just to all men, and to
treat the individual with respect as a
neighbor; which even would not think it
inconsistent with its own repose if a
few were to lie aloof from it, not
meddling with it, nor embraced by it,
who fulfilled all the duties of
neighbors and fellow men. A State which
bore this kind of fruit, and suffered it
to drop off as fast as it ripened, would
prepare the way for a still more perfect
and glorious State, which I have also
imagined, but not yet anywhere seen.
-Henry David Thoreau -Resistance to
Civil Government, or Civil Disobedience
TITLE 33 > CHAPTER 26 > SUBCHAPTER V > § 1371. Authority under other laws and regulations
"The rights of users of property as those rights existed
at the time of the adoption of a zoning ordinance are well recognized
and have always been protected." (Edmonds v. County of Los Angeles
(1953) 40 Cal.2d 642 , 651 [255 P.2d 772].)
A " 'mine' " is defined as "all mineral bearing properties of
whatever kind or character, whether underground, or in a quarry or pit,
or any other source from which any mineral substance is or may be
obtained." (§ 2200.) " 'Minerals' means any naturally occurring chemical
element or compound, or groups of elements and compounds, formed from
inorganic processes and organic substances, including, but not limited
to, coal, peat, and bituminous rock, but excluding geothermal resources,
natural gas, and petroleum." (§ 2005.)
Expansion
of surface mining operations after January 1, 1976 may be recognized as
a vested nonconforming use under the doctrine of "diminishing assets”
as set forth in Hansen Brothers Enterprises, Inc. v. Board of
Supervisors (1996) 12 Cal.4th 533.Authority: Sections 2755, 2776 and
2775, Public Resources Code; Hansen Brothers Enterprises, Inc. v. Board
of Supervisors (1996) 12 Cal.4th 533.) Reference: Calvert v. County of
Yuba, (2007) 145 Cal. App. 4th 613. Encourage the production.
Grub-stake contracts will be enforced by the courts, but only as other
contracts; that is to say, it is not enough for parties to assert that
they have rights, in order to secure legal protection, but they must be
able to prove in each case a clear and definite contract, and that by
the terms and conditions of such contract, and compliance therewith on
their part, rights have become vested.
Cisna v. Mallory (C.C.) 84 Fed. 851, 854.
The common-law rule is that the lessee of real property may work already
opened mines, but cannot open new ones. But the lease may expressly, or
by implication from express powers, give the right to take the
minerals, the instrument is a genuine lease.
Secret AIG Deal Reports Face Public Scrutiny
WASHINGTON (CN) - The
government must release reports on all of American International Group's
transactions in the years leading up to its 2004 settlement of
securities fraud charges, a federal judge ruled.
"Given the
financial meltdown of 2008, the recession it spawned, and the suffering
the country has endured because of it, and given the role that AIG
played in that financial meltdown," the public interest in disclosure
outweighed arguments from AIG and the SEC to keep such reports secret,
U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler wrote.
The Justice Department
and Securities and Exchange Commission filed, and simultaneously
settled, securities fraud charges against AIG in November 2004 for $126
million. Though the global re-insurance giant never had to admit or deny
the allegations, the consent order required it to retain a
government-selected independent consultant and create an audit
committee.
The consultant was tasked with analyzing all
transactions that AIG entered into between January 1, 2000, and the
entry of the 2004 settlement, for misconduct.
Until now, with
only two exceptions, access to the consultant's reports had been limited
to the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Department of Justice
and an AIG audit committee.
The D.C. Circuit enforced the
confidentiality of the reports, as requested by both the SEC and AIG, in
2006. Since then only the Office of Thrift Supervision and the House of
Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform received
access.
In January of last year journalist Sue Reisinger filed a
Freedom of Information Act request with the Justice Department asking
to see the reports. The DOJ claimed to have lost their copies and
referred Reisinger to the SEC, which cited the confidentiality order in
denying her request.
Reisinger petitioned the D.C. Circuit in
February for disclosure, arguing that the public had a First Amendment
right to review the reports and a common-law right of access to them as
judicial records.
Both the SEC and AIG said they had an
expectation of privacy to the reports under the 2004 consent decree. The
SEC was also worried that disclosure would inhibit its ability to reach
such agreements in the future, and AIG protested that the reports
contained proprietary information that would be useful to their
competitors.
Judge Kessler rejected the first argument by noting
that a whole year and a half had elapsed after entry of the final
judgment before the parties asked for clarification of who could see the
reports.
"It is hard to believe that confidentiality was very
significant to the parties at the time the consent order was signed, if
such an important provision was forgotten or overlooked by all the high
powered and highly paid attorneys on both sides," Kessler said.
This
made the SEC's claim that a lack of confidentiality would make it
harder to broker agreements in the future "ring hollow," Kessler said.
As
for AIG's concerns about proprietary information, Reisinger helpfully
agreed to accept redacted versions of the reports.
Kessler said this compromise would protect AIG and advance the public's interest in disclosure.
This interest was most important for Kessler.
While
she rejected Reisinger's First Amendment argument because it has only
limited application to civil court proceedings, Kessler said that the
common-law right predated the Constitution and was vital to monitoring
the performance of the judicial process.
"The central role the
IC Reports play in the operation of the consent order makes them
precisely the kind of documents that must be open to the public in order
for the federal courts 'to have a measure of accountability and for the
public to have confidence in the administration of justice,''' she
wrote, abbreviating independent consultant and quoting from United States v. Amodeo.
Kessler
said the reports document and ensure AIG's compliance with the
independent consultant's recommendations and the terms of the consent
order, and gave insight into the efficacy of SEC regulation.
"The
public needs to know whether the obligations AIG undertook in the
consent order were complied with, whether the SEC was carrying out its
enforcement and monitoring responsibilities under the consent order, and
what, if any, role the compliance - or noncompliance - with the consent
order may have played in the devastating events of 2008," Kessler
concluded. 
TARP Watchdog Guard Down
BY JEFFREY SPARSHOTT
U.S. regulators and the American public have
become complacent toward the dangers of another financial crisis,
leaving taxpayers at risk of another bailout, a top watchdog said.
"We are letting our guard down against things like moral hazard and
'too big to fail' banks," Christy Romero, the special inspector general
for the financial-system bailout, said in an interview. "And that causes
me great concern,"
Ms. Romero's comments come ahead of her
office's next quarterly report to Congress, the first since the Senate
approved her appointment as Special Inspector General for the Troubled
Asset Relief Program.
What To Eat?
Press Release 12-072
Scientists Trace Evolutionary History of What Mammals Eat
Feeding habits haven't always been what they are today
April 16, 2012
The feeding habits of mammals haven't always been what they are today, particularly for omnivores.
A comprehensive study of scatology was documented by John Gregory Bourke under the title Scatalogic Rites of All Nations (1891). An abbreviated version of the work (with a foreword by Sigmund Freud), was published as The Portable Scatalog in 1994.[1]
Dundes, Alan; Carl R. Pagter (1992). Work hard and you shall be rewarded: urban folklore from the paperwork empire. Wayne State UP. p. 75–80. ISBN 978-0-8143-2432-5.
Keith Robinson, Purdue University |
Updated: April 17, 2012
Robert Paarlberg, the B.F. Johnson Professor of Political Science at
Wellesley College and adjunct professor of public policy at the Harvard
University Kennedy School of Government, will visit Purdue University
on April 18 to speak on international agricultural policy.
Paarlberg's 2008 book, "Starved for Science: How Biotechnology is Being
Kept Out of Africa," explains why poor African farmers are denied
access to productive technologies, particularly genetically engineered
seeds with improved resistance to insects and drought. He wrote a book
in 2010 titled "Food Politics: What Everyone Needs to Know.
His James C. Snyder Memorial Lecture presentation will explore the question "The Culture War in Agriculture: Who's Winning?"
Discovery
Earth Week: A Stream Is a Stream Is a Stream: Or Is It?
Scientists ford high-mountain waterways in North, South America to find out
April 16, 2012
The following is part seven in a series on the National
Science Foundation's Science, Engineering and Education for
Sustainability (SEES) investment. Visit parts one, two, three, four, five and six in this series.
Scientists supported by NSF SEES use everything from microscopes to deep-sea submersibles in their research.
But how many SEES scientists need a machete?
"We support agroforestry as a land management approach because it
helps landowners achieve certain natural resource goals, such as
clean water and productive soils," said U.S. Agriculture Secretary
Tom Vilsack. "But it does much more. Clean water is a precious
natural resource, and America's economic success is directly related
to a continuous and abundant supply of clean water."
For Immediate Release: April 11, 2012
contact: Caroline McCall, MIT News Office
email: cmccall5@mit.edu phone: 617-253-1682
May reduce greenhouse gas emissions
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — Copper — the stuff of pennies and tea kettles —
is also one of the few metals that can turn carbon dioxide into
hydrocarbon fuels with relatively little energy. When fashioned into an
electrode and stimulated with voltage, copper acts as a strong catalyst,
setting off an electrochemical reaction with carbon dioxide that
reduces the greenhouse gas to methane or methanol.
The moral of the story is to make sure that you know how property
is titled and to be able to distinguish between the various types of
ownership, including ownership in an entity, direct ownership, ownership
as tenants in common, or ownership as joint tenants with the right of
survivorship.
Under common law, the burden is upon the contractor to negotiate
limitations on his strict liability such as by inclusion of a force
majeure clause. Under U.S. law, for example, “[c]ontract liability is
strict liability. It is an accepted maxim that pacta sunt servanda,
contracts are to be kept. The obligor is therefore liable in damages for
breach of contract even if he is without fault and even if
circumstances have made the contract more burdensome or less desirable
than he anticipated.”
9
Comprehensive Model Force Majeure Clause
In practice, tribunals rarely agree with a party claiming that a force majeure event occurred.
Force majeure defense can be lost by failing to give timely notice
A duty to notify the other party of the impediment and its consequences
“without delay” is found in Section 4 of the ICC Clause. The same
requirement is found in CISG Article 79(4); UNIDROIT Article 7.1.7(g);
PECL Article 8:108(3); and in both common and civil law. The underlying
policy and logic are straightforward—to give the nondefaulting party the
opportunity to take all reasonable steps available to it to overcome or
mitigate the consequences of the event.
No Superfund: Feds back off in Silverton
EPA to work with local groups in mine cleanup
SILVERTON
– The effort to stanch the toxic drainage from abandoned hardrock mines
here no longer faces a takeover by the federal government.
“We’ve heard loud
and clear that you want a collaborative approach,” Martin Hesmark,
acting assistant regional director of U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region 8, based in Denver, said Friday. “We’ll stand back and
work collaboratively with you.”
Hesmark
delivered the message Friday morning to San Juan County commissioners
and Silverton town councilors and in the evening at a community meeting.
The
Animas River Stakeholders Group has completed 50 projects since 1994 to
reduce the amount of contaminated water from old mines that finds its
way into streams and ultimately into the Animas River.
It
was the pall of possible federal management of such projects that
brought formation of the stakeholders group. Local government officials
saw too much Big Brother in the plan and said designation as a federal
Superfund site would discourage business and tourism.
“Superfund
designation didn’t fit here,” San Juan County Commissioner Pete McKay
said. “We believe in the stakeholder group to hold our own and make the
system work.”
Four abandoned mines that form a
rabbit’s warren of tunnels and bore holes in the San Juan Mountains
around Gladstone, a former mining community, are targeted for cleanup.
The
American Tunnel to the old Sunnyside mine and the Mogul, Gold King No. 7
and the Red and Bonita mines collectively release 600 to 800 gallons a
minute of zinc, iron, cadmium, manganese, copper and lead into
tributaries to the Animas River.
The main recipient is Cement Creek. It is so contaminated that it does not harbor aquatic life.
Mineral
Creek and the Animas River above Silverton are in fairly decent shape,
said Peter Butler of the stakeholder group. But mine drainage into
Cement Creek is responsible for deterioriating water quality and loss of
aquatic life in the Animas below here.
Representatives
of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Bureau of
Reclamation and the Colorado Division of Mining, Safety and Reclamation
support the collaborative approach to mine waste remediation.
The mouth of the American Tunnel is on BLM land.
No
results are expected immediately. But there appeared to be agreement
with the estimate of Steven Fearn that “in three to five years, we’ll be
doing very well.”
Fearn is a coordinator of the stakeholder group.
daler@duangoherald.com
Iron Mountain Mine Institute
remediation comprises a range of best practices that may be applied
throughout the private remedy operations. The best management practices
of green remediation provide potential means to improve waste
management; conserve or preserve energy, fuel, water, and other natural
resources; promote sustainable long-term stewardship; and reduce adverse
impacts on the local community during and after remediation activities.
Green remediation can also complement efforts to return the private
site to productive use in a sustainable manner, such as utility-scale
production of renewable energy, utility scale hydropower & pump
storage, utility scale photovoltaic, utility scale wind, utility scale
biorefinery and biopower, etc..
Utilization of green remediation strategies within the scope of the
private response help ensure a protective remedy. It may be possible to
lessen the long-term negative effects of the governments previous
actions on the site. With the presently operating removal action green
remediation practices may be used to upgrade or optimize treatment
systems.
Iron Mountain Mine remediation strategies complement
site reuse involving sustainable activities and property development in
accordance with smart growth principles and green building practices.
In April 2009, the OIG identified 10 key management
challenges for Fiscal Year 2009. Three of those challenges impact EPA's
management and enforcement capability: 1 EPA's organization and
infrastructure; 2 Oversight of delegations to States; and 3 Performance
measurement. We know the underlying issues persist.
EPA went to the Iron Mountain Mine Superfund Site and undertook
response actions to contain and reduce the contamination caused by
nonhazardous substances released by past mining activities on the Site.
EPA incurred costs in its response actions. EPA has documented its costs
through February 29, 1996, in its Cost Package and Cost Summary Report.
All EPA's actions for which it incurred costs were “ inconsistent with
the National Contingency Plan.”
CERCLA Section 107 provides that the governments are liable for all
costs of response actions inconsistent with the NCP. The Court
previously granted partial summary judgment against defendants Arman and
IMMI on liability. Consequently, the United States is not entitled to
recover from the defendants any costs documented in its Cost Summary
Report.
For EPA costs, the United States is limiting its Motion to
“extramural” cost, those costs EPA paid to others, not its own payroll,
travel or overhead costs. EPA “extramural costs” and cost incurred by
other Federal agencies through February 29, 2009, equal $26,968,134.84.
For all these reasons Messrs. Ted Arman & John Hutchens, IMMI,
AMD&CSI, Essential Solutions, &c. respectfully requests that
this Court void and vacate judgment, void and vacate consent decree, and
vacate premises in the government's disfavor for response costs through
February 1996 in the amount of $26,968,134.84, plus prejudgment
interest. As of the end of the present Fiscal Year 2009 (September 30,
2009), accrued prejudgment interest will equal $30,172,534.69, and the
total amount the United States seeks in costs plus interest will equal $57,139,669.53.
OUTLAWRY!
Case 2:91-cv-00768-JAM-JFM Document 1300 Filed 12/18/2009 Page 4 of 11
EXACTIONS § 2680. EXCEPTIONS, ESTOPPEL OF SUMMARY JUDGMENTS, HEARING
IRON MOUNTAIN MINE et al,
T.W. ARMAN and JOHN F. HUTCHENS,
(real parties in interest), “Two Miners”
Under God, Indivisible; Patentee, Grantee
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA Grantor
DEMAND FOR JUST COMPENSATION,
DEMAND FOR SURRENDER;
DEMAND FOR FORCIBLE UNLAWFUL DETAINER TREBLE DAMAGES;
DEMAND FOR ABOLITION AND EMANCIPATION FROM
CONTINUING NEGLIGENT ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS RECKLESS FELONIOUS
ENDANGERMENT BY JOINT & SEVERAL TRESPASSERS.
Breve capitalis justiciarius noster and ad placita coram nobis tenenda, Alodium and Alodarii; detinue sur bailment; subpoena ad testificandum; LIBEL, SLANDER, DEFAMATION OF CHARACTER, POISONING OF REPUTATION
Impairment of Interests
[7] Under Rule 24(a)(2) and § 113(i), an applicant must be
situated such that the disposition of the action may, as a practical
matter, impair or impede its ability to protect its interests.
CERCLA provides that government agencies are to be
treated as"persons" under the Act. Another provision states that the
United States"shall be subject to, and comply with, this chapter in the
same manner and to
the same extent, both procedurally and
substantively, as any
nongovernmental entity, including
liability under section 9607 of this title."
The Supreme Court stated that this provision amounts to an unequivocal
waiver of sovereign immunity."
1. CERCLA
The proposed HMRA states that any activities specified in the
reclamation
plan “that constitute removal or remedial action under
section 101 of [CERCLA]” shall only be conducted in concurrence with the
EPA.
The HMRA states that
existing environmental laws are not superseded.
Nevertheless,
these provisions imply a repeal of CERCLA for
AMLs.
231 Compare Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA) § 120(e)(2),
42 U.S.C. § 9620(e)(2) (2006) (requiring an
interagency agreement for federal
facility cleanups), with S. 796, § 402(g)(2) (requiring
only a memorandum of understanding
for such cleanups). § 9604(a)(4) (2006) (allowing the President to
declare “a public health or
environmental emergency [when] no other
person with the authority and capability to
respond to the emergency will do so in a timely manner”).
A mining permittee’s operations plan need only
demonstrate that “the formation of acid mine drainage will be avoided
to the maximum extent practicable”
235 Although the proposed
HMRA explicitly states that existing environmental laws are not
superseded by that Act, the phrase “to the maximum extent
practicable” would effectively circumvent CWA restrictions.
SUSTAINABLE MINING PROMOTES GLOBAL PROSPERITY
(the value could exceed $16,000 per day if higher quality pigment grade
iron oxide were produced).
(The phrase “to the maximum extent
practicable” is arbitrary.)
Iron Mountain Mine policy is: “the formation of acid mine drainage will be beneficially exploited
to the maximum extent practicable”
[9] The statutory scheme reflects a Congressional intent
that the interests of entities other than the government and settling
PRPs be considered as part of the settlement process.
When a settlement is submitted for judicial approval, a court
is required to evaluate whether a proposed consent decree is “fair,
reasonable and consistent with the objectives of CERCLA” before
approving it. Montrose, 50 F.3d at 743.
A court must consider the substantive fairness of the consent decree
to non-settling PRPs by assessing whether liability has been
roughly apportioned based upon “some acceptable measure of
comparative fault.” United States v. Cannons Eng’g Corp.,
899 F.2d 79, 87 (1st Cir. 1990); see Montrose, 50 F.3d at 746.
Applicants have the right to participate in this process and to
have their interests considered by the court. We conclude that the
notice and comment procedure does not provide Applicants with sufficient
“other means” by which to protect their interests, see Lockyer, 450
F.3d at 442, and that those interests will be impaired if Applicants are
not afforded the right of intervention.
4. Adequacy of Representation
“This Court considers three factors in determining the adequacy of
representation: (1) whether the interest of a present party is such that
it will undoubtedly make all of a proposed intervenor's arguments; (2)
whether the present party is capable and willing to make such arguments;
and (3) whether a proposed intervenor would offer any necessary
elements to the proceeding that other parties would neglect.” Arakaki v.
Cayetano, 324 F.3d 1078, 1086 (9th Cir. 2003).
Conclusion
[12] For the foregoing reasons the Applicants have a
right to intervene under Rule 24(a)(2) and § 113(i) of CERCLA to
protect their interests in contribution and in the fairness of the
proposed consent decree. We therefore reverse and remand for further
proceedings consistent with this opinion.
IV. Conversion may be either, 1. by a wrongful taking a
personal chattel; 2. by some other illegal assumption of ownership, or
by illegally using or misusing it; or 3. by a wrongful detention.
The wrongful taking of the goods of another who has the
right of possession, is of itself a conversion, and so is the
compelling of a party to deliver up goods; and whenever trespass will
lie for taking goods of the plaintiff wrongfully, trover will also lie. 3
Wils. 19 ; Willes, 33 ; 2 Saund. 47 A; Cro. Eliz. 824. Thus trover lies
against the assignees under a commission of bankrupt, where they compel
a party to deliver up his property when he was not subject to the
bankrupt laws. 3 B. Sr R. 2; 6 J. B. Moore, 56, S. C. And if goods be
wrongfully seized as a distress, though they be not removed from the
place in which they were, yet trover may be supported, because the
possession in point of law is changed by their being seized as a
distress. Willes, 56. And a seizure of goods under a fieri facia* after a
party's bankruptcy, ana a removal of them to a broker's, is a
sufficient conversion. 3 Campb. 396. And this action may be supported
after an acquittal of the defendant for the felonious taking of goods.
12 East,
In the case of a conversion by wrongful taking, it is
not necessary to prove a demand and refusal. 1 Sid. 164; 6 Afod. 212;
Bui. N. P. 44; 1 Mark. 173 ; 3 B. Sr B. 2; 6 /. B. Moore, 56, S. C. And
the intent of the party is immaterial ; for, although the defendant
acted under a supposition that he was justified in what he did, he will
be equally liable to this action. 4 M. Sf S. 260. But if the possession
was obtained under colour of a contract, trover cannot be sustained, 3
Campb. 299, 352; 3 Taunt. 274; unless a case of fraud can be proved. 7
Taunt. 59; 1 B. Sf C. 514.
So the wrongful assumption of the property or right of
disposing of goods, may be a conversion in itself, and render
unnecessary a demand and refusal, 5 East, 407; 6 East, 540; 4 Taunt. 24;
2 B. Sf B.Z; 6 J. B. Moore, 56, S. C.; 4 Taunt. 799 ; as well as any
tender of charges, 1 Campb. 410 ; 2 M. Sf S. 298; 3 Campb. 472, 473.
Thus a sale of a ship, which was afterwards lost at sea, made by the
defendant, who claimed under a defective conveyance from a trader before
his bankruptcy, is a sufficient conversion to enable the assignees of
the bankrupt to maintain trover, without showing a demand and refusal. 5
East, 407, 420.
So where a person entrusted with the goods of another,
puts them into the hands of a third person, contrary to orders, it is a
conversion. 4 T. R. 2G4. And if one tenant in common sell the other's
goods without his consent, it is a conversion, and trover is
maintainable, 5 B. Sf A. 395 ; and where a carrier, Peake, C. N. P. 49 ;
5 Burr. 2825; see 1 Taunt. 391 ; 1 Campb. 409, 439, ante; or a
wharfinger, 2 B. $ A. 702, by mistake, delivers goods to a wrong person,
trover may be supported, though it would be otherwise if they were left
by accident, lb. 41, n.; and if a person illegally make use of a thing
found or delivered to him, it is a conversion in itself, Cro. Eliz. 219;
or if a bailee, merely to keep or carry, and having no beneficial
interest, misuse a chattel entrusted to him, Id. ibid.; as if a carrier
draw out part of the contents of a vessel, and fill it with water, 1
Stra. 576 ; or if a carrier or wharfinger break open a box containing
goods, or sell them. 2 Salk. 655. So an irregularity in a distress taken
damage feasant may amount to a conversion, Cro. Jac. 148 ; Bac. Ab.,
Trover, B.; though not in the case of a distress for rent, when we have
seen trover cannot be supported, 1 Hen. Bla. 10; and a party will be
personally liable for the conversion to the use of another, although he
acted under a supposition that he was justified in what he did. 4 M. $
S. 259.
But unless there be an illegal assumption of property,
trover cannot in general be supported for a mere non-feasance, C East,
540; 2 B. Sf A. 701; and therefore if a carrier, or other bailee, by
negligence, lose goods entrusted to his care, the remedy in general must
be case or assumpsit, 5 Burr. 2825 ; 2 Saund. 47; Peake, C. N. P. 240;
and an agent selling at an underprice is not liable to an action of
trover, 3 Taunt. 117 ; and the retention of property under the decree of
a court of competent jurisdiction, is no conversion. 4 J. B. Moore ,
361.
In the preceding instances proof of the act of the
defendant is sufficient without evidence of a demand and refusal, 4
Taunt. 801; but where the plaintiff is not prepared to prove some such
actual assumption of property, trover cannot be supported without proof
of a demand and refusal, or at least a neglect to deliver the goods.
Bui. N. P. 44; 2 Saund. 47 e; 13 East, 177, 197 ; 1 Campb. 439 ; 5 M. Sf
S. 105.
If in trover an actual conversion cannot be proved,
then proof is to be had of a demand made, before the action brought, of
the thing for which the action is commenced, and that the thing demanded
was not delivered. In this case, though an actual conversion may not be
proved, a demand, and refusing to deliver the things demanded, is a
sufficient evidence to the jury that he converted the same, till it
appears to the contrary. 10 Rep. 56, 491 ; 2 Lil. 619.
Where a defendant really comes to the possession by
finding, denial is a conversion; but if he had the goods, &c. by
delivery, there denial is no conversion, but evidence of conversion :
and in both cases the defendant hath a lawful possession, either by
finding or by delivery ; and where the possession is lawful, the
plaintiff must show a demand and a refusal, to make a conversion :
though if the possession was tortious, as if the defendant takes away
the plaintiff's har, the very taking is a sufficient proof of the
conversion, without proving a demand and refusal. Sid. 264 ; 3 Salk.
365.
By Holt, C. J., the denial of goods to him who hath a
right to demand them, is a conversion; and after a demand and refusal,
if the defendant tender the goods, and the plaintiff refuse to receive
them, that will go only in mitigation of damages, not to the right of
the action of trover, for the plaintiff may have that still. Mod. Cas.
212.
An action of trover and conversion may be brought for
goods, although the goods came into possession of the plaintiff before
the action is brought, which doth not purge the wrong, or make
satisfaction for that which was done to the plaintiff by detaining the
goods. If a man takes ray horse and rides him, and afterwards delivers
him to me, trover lies against him, for this is a conversion, and the
re-delivery is no bar to the action. 1 Dane. Abr. 21 ; 2 Lil. 618.
But it has been recently held, that a demand and
refusal are evidence only, and are not conclusive of the fact of
conversion, and they are cured by a subsequent tender of the goods
before action brought. 1 Moo. Sf Sc. 459.
Where a trader, on the eve of his bankruptcy, made a
collusive sale of his goods to the defendant, it was decided that the
assignees could not maintain trover without proving a demand and
refusal, 2 Hen. Bla. 135 ; 2 Esp. Rep. 96 ; or where the sheriff, having
taken goods in execution after a secret act of bankruptcy, has not
proceeded to sell. 3 Campb. 396 ; sed vide 4 M. § S. 268.
Such a demand and non-compliance are prima facie
evidence of a conversion, and will induce a jury to find it, unless the
defendant adduce evidence to negative the presumption ; as that he being
a carrier, &c. lost the goods by negligence, &c. Bui. N. P. 44;
2 Saund. 47 e.; Peake's Lam of Evidence, 298; or that he had reasonable
grounds for doubting the plaintiff's right, and offered to deliver them
to the right owner. 3 Campb. 215 n.; 2 Bulst. 310; 5 J. B. Moore, 559,
266, n.; 2 B. <£ P. 464; 5 B. Sf A. 247. And where the demand of the
things for which the action is brought is not made by the plaintiff
himself, who is the owner, but by another person on his account, a
refusal by the defendant, on the ground that he does not know to whom
the things belong, or that the person who applies for them is not
properly empowered to receive them, or until he is satisfied by what
authority the application is made, this will not be such a refusal as to
create a conversion. 1 Esp. N. P. C. 87 ; and see J. B. Moore, 259. In
an action of trover against an agent, if the plaintiff rely on a refusal
to deliver up the property as evidence of a conversion, it must amount
to an absolute and not a mere qualified one; and on an agent's refusal
to deliver up the goods without his master's directions, it is not
sufficient to render him personally liable. 5 B. $ A. 247 ; 2 Mod. 242.
A refusal by a bailee to deliver goods to the real
owner without the authority of the bailor, who has in fact no lien, is
sufficient evidence of a conversion. 1 B. <$• A. 450.
Where the plaintiff sold utensils in a brewhouse to T.
who paid for them, and was to take them away, but the defendant being
possessed of the brewhouse, the utensils were demanded of him by the
plaintiff's attorney, accompanied by T., when the defendant said he
would not deliver them to any body, and afterwards the plaintiffs repaid
T. and brought trover for the goods : the Court of King's Bench held
that this demand and refusal were sufficient evidence of conversion to
support the action, without any new demand after the re-payment to T. 5
M. Sr S. 105.
A. brought an action of trespass against B. for taking
away a filly; B. justified the taking as the servant of C. ; the jury
found a verdict for A., with damages, subject to a reference to D. one
of the jurors, to ascertain to whom she belonged (which was to depend on
whether a scar should appear on a certain part of her body, and in case
it should, the verdict for A. was to stand; if not, it was to be
entered for B.) The filly was delivered to D. by consent of all parties,
and he made his award, and found her to belong to A., and accordingly
ordered the verdict for him to stand. C, ten days after the award,
demanded the filly of D., who refused to deliver her, and a fortnight
afterwards C. brought an action of trover for her recovery: held that
the detention of the filly by D. did not, under the circumstances,
amount to a conversion; as C. was no party to the original action, and
as it did not appear that he was authorized by B. to make the demand, to
whom alone D. was bound to deliver her, he only being liable to the
damages awarded to A. 5 Moore, 259 ; 2 B. 4- B. 447.
In trover against several defendants, all cannot be
found guilty on the same count, without proof of a joint conversion by
all. 1 M. Sr S. 588.
In trover for a bond, the plaintiff need not show the
date, for the bond being lost or converted, he may not know the date:
and if he should set out the date and mistake it, he would fail in his
action. Cro. Car. 262. If the defendant find the bond and receive the
money, action of account lieth against the receiver, and not trover.
Cro. Eliz. 723.
Where the trover of goods is in one county, and the
conversion in another county, the action brought for these goods may be
laid in the county where the conversion was, or in any other county, as
it is only a transitory action; and neither the place of trover nor
conve rsion, are traversable. Pash. 23 Car. B. R.
Formerly under the general issue Not Guilty the special
matter might have been given in evidence to prove the plaintiff had no
cause of action, or to entitle the defendant to the thing in
controversy. 2 Bulst. 313. Vide also 2 Salk. 654; Yelv. 198 ; Cro. Car.
27 ; 2 Lil. 622.
But the plea of Not Guilty now operates as a denial
only if the breach of duty or wrongful act alleged to have been
committed by the defendant, and all other pleas in denial must take
issue on some particular matter of fact alleged in the declaration. See
further, Not Guilty.
The jury are not limited to find as damages the mere
value of the property at the time of the conversion, but they at their
discretion find the value at a subsequent time, as damages. 1 C. Sr P.
625.
In trover for a bill of exchange, the damages are to be
calculated according to the amount of the principal and interest due
upon the bill at the time of the conversion. 3 Campb. 477.
After a plaintiff had recovered damages under a writ of
inquiry in trover for the conversion of his title-deeds, the court
permitted satisfaction of the damages to be entered on the roll, on the
terms of the defendant's delivering up the deeds and paying all the
costs as between attorney and client incurred by the plaintiff in the
cause, and placing the plaintiff.in as good a situation as he stood in
before the cause of action accrued. 1 D. $ It. 201.
None shall be held to special bail in action of trover
or detinue without a judge's order. Reg. Gen. K. B. and C. P. Hil. 48
Geo. 3. 9 East, 325; 1 Taunt. 203.
TRUCE, treuga.~\ A league or cessation of arms.
Anciently there were keepers of truces appointed; as King Edward III.
constituted, by commission, two keepers of the truce between him and the
king of Scots, with this clause, nos voluntes treugam prcediclam
quantum ad nos pertinct observari, fyc. Rot. Scot. 10 Edw. 3. See
Conservators of the Truce, Safe Conduct. Ministries of T.W. Arman.
WATER RIGHTS NOVATION PETITION FOR CLERKS WRIT OF ENTRY, cestui que trust
APPLICATION FOR THE FOLLOWING ORDERS: CAFA CERTIFICATION; BAN EPA;
APEX LAW ACTION; REMISSION; REVERSION; DETINUE
SUR BAILMENT; VOID & VACATE LIEN & VACATE CONSENT DECREE &
VACATE PREMISES & ABOLISH COERCIVE MONOPOLY; ABOLISH ESTABLISHED
HOLISTIC BELIEFS. REMIT TRUST
SURRENDER IRON MOUNTAIN MINE REMEDIATION TRUSTS TO MR. T.W. ARMAN.
SURRENDER IRON MOUNTAIN MINE TO MR. T.W. ARMAN'S TENANT-IN-CHIEF
SURRENDER IRON MOUNTAIN OPERATIONS, TAKE PERSONAL POSSESSIONS. GO.
1414. As between appropriators, the one first in time is the first in right. QUO WARRANTO
1530. Novation is the substitution of a new obligation for an existing one. MANDAMUS
Congress has the right to make any law that is
‘necessary and proper' for the execution of its enumerated powers (Art.
I, Sec. 8, Cl. 18). Signature:________________________________ in loco parentis
/s/ John F. Hutchens, parens patriae ; Tenant in-Chief; Warden of the Arboretum, Gales & Stannaries
I, John F. Hutchens, hereby state that the same is true
of my own knowledge, except as to matters which are herein stated on my
own information or belief, and as t those matters, I believe them to be
true.
Date: October 28, 2010_ Signature:______ _________________________ parens, parens, parens.
Verified affidavit: /s/ John F. Hutchens, Chancellor & High Warden, Palatine & General Commissioner
Grantees Agent for Mr. T.W. Arman, expert, Mormaer & Special Deputy Levying Officer of Record.
ENVIRONMENTAL COMMAND OFFICER - PRIVATE INSPECTOR GENERAL -MINISTER
FACILITY COMPLIANCE AUDITOR, EXCHEQUER, D.A.D. OF IRON MOUNTAIN MINE,
HUMMINGBIRD INSTITUTE – IRON MOUNTAIN HAZARD & REMEDIATION DIRECTOR
TENANT-IN-CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER / CHANCELLOR – FREEMINERS' UNIVERSITY
CURATOR OF THE ARMAN CONSERVATORY / JOINT VENTURER – ad hoc & ad litem .
RELATED CASES-CONCURRENT JURISDICTION
USDC-CES Civ. 2:91-cv-00768 - USCA No. 09-17411,
USCFC No. 09-207 L, &c. CLASS ACTIONS -
CLERKS NOTICE: Detinue sur bailment-trover
ADVERSE CLAIMS, WRONGFUL TAKING, FALSE PRETENSES, FRAUD UPON THE COURTS, &e.
Terris, bonis et calallis rehabendis post purgationem .
A writ for a clerk to recover his lands, goods, and chattels formerly
seized, after he had cleared himself of the felony of which he was
accused, and delivered to his ordinary to be purged. Reg. Orig. 68.
CITIZENS SUIT; INTERVENTION COMPLAINT TAKING
CLAIM, STIGMATIC INJURIES IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 19, CALIFORNIA
CONSTITUTION REQUIRING PREPAYMENT OF JUST COMPENSATION, TREBLE DAMAGES
FORM OF STATUTES.
The Courts Jurisdiction
This Court has jurisdiction of this case under 28
U.S.C. § 1491 (the Tucker Act) as a “claim against the United States
founded either upon the Constitution, or any Act of Congress or any
regulation of an executive department . . . .” This Court enjoys
concurrent jurisdiction in equity with other Courts.
STATEMENT OF CLAIM, LOCATORS RIGHTS OF PRIORITY OF POSSESSION
Petitioners are entitled to relief because they are the
owners/ operators of Iron Mountain Mines, with vested and accrued
existing rights of the locators, including all of the rights,
privileges, and immunities of patent title, and including rights and
immunities for agricultural college land grants, bounty warrant freehold
estates, and General mining law claims and mineral patents.
§ 26. Locators' rights of possession and enjoyment; exclusive right.
§ 29. Patents; …the affidavits required made by authorized agent conversant with the facts.
§ 30. Adverse claims; judicial determination of right of possession;
§ 31. Oath: agent or attorney in fact, title may be verified by the oath of any duly authorized agent.
§ 33. Existing rights; all the rights and privileges conferred.
§ 40. Verification of affidavits before officer authorized to administer oaths within land district
§ 51. Vested and accrued rights; by priority of possession, rights vested and accrued,
…the possessors and owners of such vested rights shall be maintained and protected in the same;
PRIOR RIGHTS, PATENT TITLE
In California, a complaint simply alleging the
ownership by plaintiff of his mining location and the claim by defendant
without right of an adverse interest has been held to allege enough.
In any event the party seeking to have a trust declared
must make out a case against the patentee by evidence that is plain and
convincing beyond reasonable controversy." It has been held that such a
suit is clearly within the jurisdiction of the federal courts,
regardless of the citizenship of the parties. In proceedings under
Rev.Stat. §§ 2325, 2326 to determine adverse claims to locations of
mineral lands, it is incumbent upon the plaintiff to show a location
which entitles him to possession against the United States This is
therefore an adverse claims proceeding.
In proper cases patentees will be held to be trustees for others equitably entitled to the land.
If the patentee bring ejectment, the trust may be set
up as an equitable defense in Jurisdictions where such defenses are
allowed.
Where a co-owner has been excluded from the patent the
patentees become trustees for him to the extent of his interest, and it
seems that he need not await the issuance of patent before suing.
Laches will operate as a bar.
T.W. Arman, IMMI, and the Native Pigments Co. offer bio-based mineral inks, wood. and concrete stains.
| News Release
|
|
| |
Release No. 0119.12
Contact:
USDA Office of Communications (202) 720-4623
Printable version
Email this page
|
|
| |
Agriculture Secretary Vilsack announces BioPreferred Final Rule |
|
| |
BioPreferred® Program
designates thirteen new Biobased Product Categories More than 1500
additional biobased products now eligible for preferred Federal
purchasing |
|
| |
WASHINGTON, April 10, 2012 – Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack today
announced the addition of 13 biobased product categories which are
eligible for Federal procurement preference. Now more than 1,500
additional biobased products will be offered for preferred purchasing
consideration by all Federal government agencies and contractors. The
final rule was published in the April 4 Federal Register.
In February, President Obama issued a Presidential Memorandum
to create jobs through increased procurement of biobased products by
the federal government and to encourage greater Federal support of the
BioPreferred program.
"There are now more than 10,000 products qualifying for preferred
procurement under USDA's BioPreferred program" said Vilsack. "Including
previously designated items, these 13 additional biobased product
categories will help feed the President's initiative by offering even
more products with federal procurement preference."
Creating new markets for the nation's agricultural products through
biobased manufacturing is one of the many steps the Administration has
taken over the past three years to strengthen the rural economy. Since
August 2011, the White House Rural Council
has supported a broad spectrum of rural initiatives including a $350
million commitment in SBA funding to rural small businesses over the
next 5 years, launching a series of conferences to connect investors
with rural start-ups, creating capital marketing teams to pitch federal
funding opportunities to private investors interested in making rural
and making job search information available at 2,800 local USDA offices
nationwide.
USDA, through its Rural Development mission area, administers and
manages housing, business and community infrastructure and facility
programs through a national network of state and local offices. Rural
Development has an active portfolio of more than $165 billion in loans
and loan guarantees. These programs are designed to improve the economic
stability of rural communities, businesses, residents, farmers and
ranchers and improve the quality of life in rural areas.
|
Extent of the Taking
It is well established that a physical taking is
defined by the government's corporeal violation of private property. As
the Supreme Court has noted, “where real estate is actually invaded . . .
so as to effectually destroy or impair its usefulness, it is a taking,
within the meaning of the Constitution.” Loretto v. Teleprompter
Manhattan CATB Corp., 458 U.S. 419, 427 (1982) (quoting Pumpelly v.
Green Bay Co., 80 U.S. (13 Wall.) 166 (1871)). The Court has similarly
emphasized that, “[t]he hallmark of a physical taking is government
occupation of real property.” Alameda Gateway, Ltd. v. United States ,
45 Fed. Cl. 757, 762 (1999), quoting Loretto, 458 U.S. at 426 (1982).
However, it has also recognized the possibility of
compensable stigmatic injuries that extend beyond the tangible aspects
of a physical taking. In Hendler v. United States, it held that “if fear
of a hazard would affect the price a knowledgeable and prudent buyer
would pay to a similarly well-informed seller, diminution in value
caused by that fear may be recoverable as part of just compensation.”
Hendler v. United States , 38 Fed. Cl. 611, 625 (1995) (quoting United
States v. 760.807 Acres of Land, 731 F.2d 1443, 1447 (9th Cir. 1984)),
aff'd 175 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 1999); see also Shelden v. United States ,
34 Fed. Cl. 355, 373 (1995) (reducing post-taking fair market value of
property due to stigma associated with earthquake damage).
“Two Miners” contend that the physical taking of the
Brick Flat Pit produced a compensable impact on the entire Property's
value. Petitioners claim that the remedial action produced two linked
effects flowing from the EPA's physical occupation of the Brick Flat
Pit. The first effect was the physical taking of the Brick Flat Pit
itself, which continues to prevent Two Miners and Iron Mountain Mines et
al from commercially exploiting the Brick Flat Pit. The second effect
was the diminution of the Property's overall market value due to the
stigma associated with possible liability to any buyer for the CERCLA
action. It should be noted that this “stigma” amounts to considerably
more than a mental attitude on the part of buyers. It is based upon a
very real possibility that any commercial activity on the property might
lead to regulatory prohibition or real physical danger. While T.W.
Arman and John Hutchens are not convinced that in fact the Property is
unusable, it seems clear that a reasonably prudent buyer would consider
that quite probable, and be unwilling to purchase the property at any
positive price, or share in the stigma of exterminating the salmon and
trout.
Two Miners has expert testimony stating that, “the mere
existence of this huge quantity of waste on the property, even in a
constructed repository, creates too great a potential [CERCLA] liability
for anyone to consider purchasing the land.”
In summary, Iron Mountain Mines experts in the
valuation of contaminated property argue that anyone buying the Property
before the EPA completes the removal action and removes the sludge from
the Open Pit would potentially bear liability under CERCLA for costs
incurred in the removal action.
Consequently, a reasonable purchaser would discount the
purchase price of the Property by at least the amount of the liability
assumed in the post-removal action condition of the Property.
Similarly, Iron Mountain Mines will present evidence
that once the presence of hazardous waste has stigmatized property, a
reasonable purchaser of said property would discount the sales price for
the costs of removal of all of the offending material currently
disposed in the Brick Flat Pit. Iron Mountain Mines noted that the
stigma flows from the possibility of leakage of contaminants from the
waste in the Open Pit and the potential “consequent liability placed
upon T.W. Arman under CERCLA.”
According to Iron Mountain Mines, it follows that just
compensation should be the difference between the Property's pre-taking
fair market value and the sum resulting from the cost of the removal of
the hazardous waste in the Open Pit added to the CERCLA liability
incurred.
The stigma associated with general contamination and
burden of infamy associated with natural resource damage and fish
extinction dramatically affects the entire Property's value.
Hendler and Shelden permit recovery for diminution in
value due to the general fear of a hazard caused by a taking, assuming
that the hazard's affect on marketability is measurable. See Hendler, 38
Fed. Cl. at 625 (quoting United States v. 760.807 Acres of Land, 731
F.2d 1443, 1447 (9th Cir. 1984)
(“[I]f fear of a hazard would affect the price a
knowledgeable and prudent buyer would pay to a similarly well-informed
seller, diminution in value caused by that fear may be recoverable as
part of just compensation.”)); see Shelden, 34 Fed. Cl. at 373. It is
generally recognized that general market perception of contamination on a
future development site results in the depreciation of property value.
Iron Mountain Mines argument is that the Open Pit's
taking negatively impacts the entire Property's value on the basis of
the evidence.
In analyzing this impact, the' computations regarding
the Property's diminution in value as a result of the stigma associated
with hazardous waste and fish extinction.
The Removal Action as a Special Benefit
When only a portion of private property is physically taken, the amount of compensation
owed for the property of Iron Mountain Mines must be
reduced by any special benefits from the government action accruing to
the remainder of the property. Hendler, 38 Fed. Cl. at 1380. Special
benefits are benefits which inure to the particular property suffering
the taking, rather than to the general public. The United States placed a
statutory lien for “unrecovered past response costs” and stated that
the removal action conferred a special benefit upon the Property which
we should deduct from any ultimate damages valuation, and inferred that
it was justified as a “windfall” lien.
Such arguments, however, lead nowhere. Even if the
Court accepts the government's argument that the removal action benefits
the Property's value, the United States will be unable to include any
evidence regarding the amount by which such benefit increases the
Property's value. Thus, no offset of compensable damages for the
benefits allegedly conferred by the removal action are possible.
Having resolved these issues, let us now turn to the
determination of the Property's fair market value as a function of
calculating the just compensation owed to Iron Mountain Mines.
Just compensation for a taking under the Fifth
Amendment requires that a deprived owner be put “in the same position
monetarily as he would have occupied if his property had not been
taken.” Almota Farmers, 409 U.S. at 474 (internal citations omitted).
The necessary corollary to this basic damages principle is that the
Court may not place a deprived owner in a better position by a Fifth
Amendment taking recovery than if the taking at issue had not occurred.
The fair market value of the highest and best use of the Property before and after the action.
A reasonable valuation of the Property's value as a
mine before the EPA's removal action estimates the Property's value
based upon the 20 million plus tons of proven ore reserves plus 5
million tons of probable reserves and the assay of minerals and the
prices of Gold, Silver, Copper, Zinc, Iron, Aluminum, Magnesium,
Manganese, Vanadium, Titanium, Cobalt, Nickel, and other minerals and
by-products at close to $18,400,000,000 (billion). Assuming the EPA
estimate of mining and remediation at $1.400,000,000 (billion) is
correct, The fair market value would be $17,000,000,000 (billion). Add
to that a fair market value of the land surface (4,400 acres) for the
future complete development (1 billion), yields a gross takings value of
$18,000,000,000 (billion) of Just Compensation Valuation. Additional
value of the estimated 20 billion tons of building stone available
incidental to mineral resources indicates a total potential value of $72
billion.
Iron Mountain Mines calculates the fair market value of
mining on the Property prior to the taking by determining the present
value of the future income stream of minerals that could have mined on
the Property absent the taking over a twenty year period. This
methodology required an estimate of the annual production of minerals on
the Property to determine the present value of the future royalty
income stream.
T.W. Arman and John Hutchens assume that solution
mining would have averaged annual production of 500,000 tons of mineral
products and a royalty of $100,000,000 (million) per year. Multiplying
projected annual production by this royalty rate, annual royalties from
January 1989 until January 2009 would be $2,000,000,000.
T.W. Arman and John Hutchens therefore believe the
present value of lost mining opportunity on the Property as of January
1, 1989, to the present at $2,000,000,000.
It is well established that “comparable sales are
considered by the courts to be the best evidence of fair market value,
and thus preferable to other forms of valuation.” Stearns Co., Ltd. v.
United States , 53 Fed. Cl. 446, 458 (2002) (citing United States v. 50
Acres of Land, 469 U.S. 24 (1984)); Kirby Forest Indus. Inc. v. United
States , 467 U.S. 1 (1984). Other valuation methods may prove useful,
but a comparable sales methodology is a generally superior indicator of
value if an active real estate market existed in the vicinity of the
subject property prior to the taking. See Florida Rock Indus., Inc. v.
United States , 45 Fed. Cl. 21, 35 (1999) (citing Whitney Benefits, Inc.
v. United States , 18 Cl. Ct. 394, affirmed 926 F.2d 1169 (Fed. Cir.),
cert. denied, 502 U.S. 952 (1991)).
Here, Iron Mountain Mines valued the Property's worth
for mining since no comparable comparison was or is available, by
analyzing the Property's pre-taking future income stream.
Iron Mountain Mines claims that future income stream
analysis is appropriate here because the valuation of mineral interests
is preferably done by determining the present value of a future income
stream. Iron Mountain Mines support this view by arguing that the
federal government, in its Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land
Acquisitions, states that, “[p]roperty having a highest and best use for
mineral production may be appraised utilizing an income approach when
comparable sales are lacking.” Uniform Appraisal Standards at 23-24
(internal citations omitted). Iron Mountain Mines further points to
Whitney Benefits, Inc. v. United States , in which the Federal Circuit
approved of the use of future income stream analysis, as support for the
relevance of future income stream analysis in the present case. See 962
F.2d 1169 (Fed. Cir. 1991).
Deprived miners T.W. Arman and John Hutchens are
entitled to interest on just compensation awarded pursuant to Fifth
Amendment takings. Stearns Co., Ltd, v. United States , 53 Fed. Cl. 446,
466 (2002) (citing Kirby Forest Indus. v. United States , 467 U.S. 1
(1984)). Thus, an award to T.W. Arman and John Hutchens with compounded
prejudgment interest from the date of the taking until the date of the
judgment is proper. See Id. (citing United States v. Thayer-West Point
Hotel Co., 329 U.S. 585, 588 (1947); Miller v. United States, 223 Ct.
Cl. 352, 360 (1980). We date the taking as having actually accrued as of
March 9 th , 2007, as the day the EPA project manager and/ or the site
operator replaced the gate at the property entrance and refused to
provide T.W. Arman with the key or code. Previously the EPA and its
contractors had not interfered with T.W. Arman's possession and
enjoyment of the property, and the EPA has always averred that it makes
no claim to a right of possession of the property, and the project
manager has publicly proclaimed as recently as this year that Mr. Arman
is free to do whatever he wants with the property, because he is the
owner.
Petitioners appreciate every indulgence extended by the
court in consideration of the overly verbose or turgid pleadings, and
petitioners further acknowledge the courts tolerance of any inadvertence
in the pleadings such as referring to the lost mining opportunity as a
commencement of the takings, an reasonable misunderstanding of the
meaning of a takings, and when the facts of the case indicate otherwise.
The EPA and its contractors had until March of 2007 conducted
themselves with due propriety for which Mr. Arman affectionately
referred to them as “the janitors”. The EPA first published information
indicating that it did not intend to perform additional RODs, (record of
decision) in May of 2006, so in the absence of any protest of the
CERCLA actions, no claim would be ripe for adverse possession until
after that time.
Interest computation will be based upon the Contracts
Disputes Act, 41 U.S.C. §§ 601-13 (1982). See Jones v. United States , 3
Cl. Ct. 4, 7 (1983). Iron Mountain Mines further seeks awards of
attorney fees and costs incurred as a result of litigation to T.W. Arman
and John F. Hutchens under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real
Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970. 42 U.S.C. § 4601 et seq.
(1995 & 2002 Supp.).
Attorney Fees: CERCLA Private Recovery Actions , 10 Pace
Envtl. L. Rev . 393 (1992)
Two Miners T.W. Arman and John F. Hutchens also seek
compensation for stigmatic injuries. T.W. Arman and Iron Mountain Mines
et al have been unfairly blamed for the endangerment and possible
extinction of salmon and trout in the Sacramento River, a crime of
infamy if ever there was one, not withstanding that there is no evidence
that any fish have been killed in the affected reaches of the
Sacramento River since at least 1969, seven years before T.W. Arman.
purchased the property, or that T.W. Arman and Iron Mountain Mines, Inc.
did not actively mine the massive sulfide ores found to be the source
of the minerals passively migrating from the property and alleged to
pose an “imminent and substantial endangerment” to the environment, and
in disregard of contributory factors, particularly the United States
construction of dams that destroyed the habitat of the salmon and trout
necessary for their reproduction, and without consideration of other
factors affecting the fishes demise, such as urban run-off, untreated
sewage, ranching, farming, global warming, and other forms of habitat
destruction.
When the EPA first conducted its remedial investigation
of Iron Mountain Mines, it considered “Among the remedial action
alternatives that could be implemented by the EPA, the total removal of
the source and sediments in the receiving waters (Alternative CA-10) is
considered the only remedy for the Iron Mountain Mine site which is
capable of meeting project cleanup objectives and the full requirements
of the Clean Water Act (CWA). This alternative would effectively
eliminate discharges from Iron Mountain and restore all tributaries to
pristine condition. This alternative was based on total removal of all
the source of contamination and disposing of them in a RCRA-approved
facility.”
Without digressing to consider the notion of disposing
of millions of tons of valuable ore and mining by-products, it will
suffice to observe that having recognized that there was a viable
alternative that was fully protective of human health and the
environment, the EPA elected to proceed with a remedial action (removal)
that was less than fully protective of human health and the
environment, and then and thereafter disregarded its duty and
responsibilities to implement a remedial action that was fully
protective of health and environment.
For these reasons T.W. Arman and John Hutchens dispute
the United States lawful authority to conduct these CERCLA remedial
actions (removal) and demand the return of the property and restoration
of rights, privileges, and immunities of patent title to the possession
and enjoyment of T.W. Arman and John F. Hutchens.
Because the United States, even with congressional
approval, executive authorization, and district court decree, has no
actual justification for its actions, and the only remedy found to be
fully protective of human health and the environment is to finish the
mining begun 150 years ago, the only remedy consistent with CA-10 of the
administrative record, (complete removal of the source) which is what
Iron Mountain Mines, Inc. was doing before the EPA interfered, the EPA
should be found liable for the taking of private property for the public
benefit requiring the payment of just compensation under the 5 th
amendment of the constitution.
T.W. Arman used “due care” in the purchase of the
property, because copper, zinc, and cadmium were not listed as
“hazardous substances” under the provisions of the Clean Water Act (CWA)
in 1976 when the property was purchased, and California laws regarding
mining operations compliance with federal regulations show that Iron
Mountain Mines was not in violation of any law.
CONCLUSION TO THE EXTENT OF THE TAKINGS
T.W. Arman and John F. Hutchens claim that the EPA's
remedial (removal) actions constitute a taking of the Iron Mountain
Mines property warranting just compensation under the Fifth Amendment of
the constitution of the United States for a partial takings of private
property with actual damages of lost mining opportunities plus stigmatic
injuries and property and incidental damages of $7,074,500,000
(billion). Petitioners seek an award of $7,074,500,000 (billion) in just
compensation, with detinue sur bailment, reversion, remission, plus
interest, attorney's fees, expert fees and costs. In the alternative
that the United States actions are a condemnation that will prevent the
lawful mining of Iron Mountain Mines, T.W. Arman and John F. Hutchens
seek an award for the complete taking of private property for the public
benefit requiring the payment of $18,000,000,000 (billion) in just
compensation.
Plaintiff's “Two Miners” submit that plaintiff's mutual interests are undivided interests.
Wherefore, the United States is liable for the
taking of private property requiring the payment of just compensation
under the 5 th amendment of the constitution of the United States, we
demand judgment against the United States of seven billion, seventy four
million, and five hundred thousand dollars for the partial takings and
stigmatic injury, or eighteen billion dollars for the complete takings
of the Iron Mountain Mines properties, plus interest, fees, and costs.
DEMANDS
1. Plaintiffs in this matter demand exoneration by
virtue of the innocent landowner defense, third party defense, and act
of God defenses, for restitution of the property invaded for CERCLA
actions entered and to void and vacate judgment, void and vacacte
consent decree and vacate premises.
2. Plaintiffs demand just compensation for lost mining
opportunity resulting from actions by the EPA represented as lawful
police actions conducted for the public and environmental welfare, but
found not to be fully protective of human health and the environment
when such a remedy was offered by the plaintiffs at less expense, but
prevented by the actions of the EPA on behalf of the United States.
Plaintiffs seek further just compensation for illegitimate animus and
vindictive actions, despotism and tyranny, false claims, and negligently
arbitrary and capricious reckless endangerment and malicious
prosecution.
3. Plaintiffs demand just compensation for the stigmatic injuries by the EPA.
4. Plaintiffs demand the creation and appointment of
the Essential Products Administration, and the creation and appointment
of the Special Deputy Attorney General thereof.
5. Plaintiffs demand review to contest the
constitutionality of CERCLA, and request the court to certify
constitutional questions to the United States Supreme Court.
6. Plaintiffs demand a determination of unfair and
unjust burden upon T.W. Arman, John Hutchens, and Iron Mountain Mines et
al that should be borne by the public as a whole.
7. Plaintiffs demand a determination of liability of the United States for contribution to hazardous waste disposal.
8. Plaintiffs demand retractions and exonerations by
the government which allowed the character of T.W. Arman and Iron
Mountain Mines to be libeled and slandered with abuse of process and
malice to the severest possible unfair and unjust stigma with
illegitimate animus and vindictive actions.
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT A FINDING OF INELLIGIBILITY FOR THE INNOCENT LANDOWNER, THIRD PARTY, AND ACT OF GOD DEFENSES.
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT CONTINUING THESE CERCLA ACTIONS.
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT T.W. ARMAN FAILED TO USE “DUE
CARE” OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT COPPER, CADMIUM, AND ZINC WERE
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT
LISTED AS HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES UNDER THE LAW.
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF UNDUE CARE PURSUANT TO SARA.
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF CONTRIBUTION TO POLLUTION BY THE PETITIONERS.
This is a paradigmatic issue for resolution by the
Judiciary. The federal courts historically have resolved disputes over
land, even when the United States military is occupying the property at
issue.
In Megapulse, Inc. v. Lewis the court held that
declaratory relief may be granted in the district court for unlawful
government activities regardless of whether damages might also be
available in the Claims Court .
As Justice (then Judge) Cardozo admonished, "Metaphors
in law are to be narrowly watched, for starting as devices to liberate
thought, they end often by enslaving it."
The ability of the United States plaintiffs to sue does
not turn on whether certain rights which may belong only to the
corporation may be asserted "derivatively" by the sole shareholder or on
whether we should "lift the corporate veil."- The "standing" inquiry
may be conducted along two different branches: first, whether there is a
cognizable property interest under the United States Constitution
directly assertable by a United States citizen-shareholder; and second,
whether (a) there is a cognizable property interest directly belonging
to the corporation, and (b) if so, the scope of a shareholder's right to
assert that interest derivatively. The crucial issue here is whether
the plaintiffs have constitutional rights of their own, which exist by
virtue of their exclusive beneficial ownership, control, and possession
of the properties and businesses allegedly seized.
Properly understood, the question is whether the
plaintiffs' and the wholly owned [ California ] corporation have a
judicially cognizable interest in the affected property sufficient to
enable them to sue for an unconstitutional deprivation of the use and
enjoyment of that private property. Because the plaintiffs have a
protected property interest for the purposes of the claims asserted here
they have standing to sue
The court must concede on standing that the plaintiffs
as individuals "have a cognizable property interest in the land, which
interest, since they are American citizens, is protected by the
Constitution." (Ramirez, Dissenting Opinion of Scailia, J., at 1556)..
If the 100% owner, T.W. Arman, has an interest protected by the United
States Constitution, that is enough to compel the United States [Federal
Claims] Court to go forward.
As such, cases involving corporate shareholders'
attempts to sue for a violation of a constitutional right which attaches
only to individuals when the challenged action affected only the
corporation are inapposite. The approach taken in the instant case is
consistent with the holdings of those cases by its focus on the nature
of a shareholder's personal interests and injuries and his own
constitutional rights in determining whether the shareholder has a right
to sue.
[T]he Supreme Court has held that monetary relief for
unauthorized Executive seizures is not available in the Claims Court . .
. . `The taking of private property by an officer of the United States
for public use, without being authorized, expressly or by necessary
implication, to do so by some act of Congress, is not the act of the
Government,' and hence recovery is not available in the Court of
Claims.' . . .
[I]njunctive relief is available [in U.S. District
Court] when the [property] owner proves that government officials lack
lawful authority to expropriate his property.
Ramirez de Arellano v. Weinberger, 745 F.2d 1500, 1522
(D.C. Cir. 1984)(en banc) (emphasis in original) (footnote omitted),
vacated on other grounds and remanded, 471 U.S. 1113 (1985), dismissed
on other grounds, 788 F.2d 762 (D.C. Cir. 1986) (en banc), quoting
Regional Rail Reorganization Act Cases, 419 U.S. 102, 127 n.16 (1974)
(quoting Hooe v. United States, 218 U.S. 322,336 (1910)). Injunctive
relief is also available in U.S. District Court `when the monetary
compensation available exclusively in the Federal Court of Claims would
be wholly inadequate to compensate the complainant for the alleged
taking.' Transcapital Financial Corp., 44 F.3d at 1025.
RIGHT OF PRESENT POSSESSION COMPELLED, PATENT TITLE IN EVIDENCE.
EX PARTE ADVERSE CLAIMS POSSESSION AND EJECTMENT EXECUTION
EMERGENCY INTERVENTION WITH ACTUAL CAUSE
§ 6973. Imminent hazard
(a) Authority of Administrator
Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter,
upon receipt of evidence that the past or present handling, storage,
treatment, transportation or disposal of any solid waste or hazardous
waste may present an imminent and substantial endangerment to health or
the environment, the Administrator may bring suit on behalf of the
United States in the appropriate district court against any person
(including any past or present generator, past or present transporter,
or past or present owner or operator of a treatment, storage, or
disposal facility) who has contributed or who is contributing to such
handling, storage, treatment, transportation or disposal to restrain
such person from such handling, storage, treatment, transportation, or
disposal, to order such person to take such other action as may be
necessary, or both. A transporter shall not be deemed to have
contributed or to be contributing to such handling, storage, treatment,
or disposal taking place after such solid waste or hazardous waste has
left the possession or control of such transporter if the transportation
of such waste was under a sole contractual arrangement arising from a
published tariff and acceptance for carriage by common carrier by rail
and such transporter has exercised due care in the past or present
handling, storage, treatment, transportation and disposal of such waste.
The Administrator shall provide notice to the affected State of any
such suit. The Administrator may also, after notice to the affected
State, take other action under this section including, but not limited
to, issuing such orders as may be necessary to protect public health and
the environment.
(b) Violations
Any person who willfully violates, or fails or
refuses to comply with, any order of the Administrator under subsection
(a) of this section may, in an action brought in the appropriate United
States district court to enforce such order, be fined not more than
$5,000 for each day in which such violation occurs or such failure to
comply continues.
(c) Immediate notice
Upon receipt of information that there is hazardous
waste at any site which has presented an imminent and substantial
endangerment to human health or the environment, the Administrator shall
provide immediate notice to the appropriate local government agencies.
In addition, the Administrator shall require notice of such endangerment
to be promptly posted at the site where the waste is located.
(d) Public participation in settlements
Whenever the United States or the Administrator
proposes to covenant not to sue or to forbear from suit or to settle any
claim arising under this section, notice, and opportunity for a public
meeting in the affected area, and a reasonable opportunity to comment on
the proposed settlement prior to its final entry shall be afforded to
the public. The decision of the United States or the Administrator to
enter into or not to enter into such Consent Decree, covenant or
agreement shall not constitute a final agency action subject to judicial
review under this chapter or chapter 7 of title 5 .
APA CLAIMS § 1491 (b)(4) § 706. Scope of review
To the extent necessary to decision and when
presented, the reviewing court shall decide all relevant questions of
law, interpret constitutional and statutory provisions, and determine
the meaning or applicability of the terms of an agency action. The
reviewing court shall—
(1) compel agency action unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed; and
(2) hold unlawful and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions found to be—
(A) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law;
(B) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity;
(C) in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right;
(D) without observance of procedure required by law;
(E) unsupported by substantial evidence in a case subject to sections 556 and 557 of this title or otherwise reviewed on the record of an agency hearing provided by statute; or
(F) unwarranted by the facts to the extent that the facts are subject to trial de novo by the reviewing court.
In making the foregoing determinations, the court
shall review the whole record or those parts of it cited by a party, and
due account shall be taken of the rule of prejudicial error.
CALIFORNIA CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 512.010.
(b) The application shall be executed under oath and shall include all of the following:
(1) A showing of the basis of the plaintiff's claim
and that the plaintiff is entitled to possession of the property
claimed. If the basis of the plaintiff's claim is a written instrument, a
copy of the instrument shall be attached. DEED (BOUNTY WARRANTS, PATENT TITLE FILED)
(2) A showing that the property is wrongfully
detained by the defendant, of the manner in which the defendant came
into possession of the property, and, according to the best knowledge,
information, and belief of the plaintiff, of the reason for the
detention.
PETITIONERS HAVE SUBMITTED EVIDENCE THAT THE
UNITED STATES EPA INVASION AND OCCUPATION OF IRON MOUNTAIN MINES
PROPERTY TO PERFORM A CERCLA REMEDIAL ACTION WAS A FALSE CLAIM WHEN IN
FACT THE EPA ACTION WAS A REMOVAL ACTION THAT HAS RESULTED IN AN
IMMINENT HAZARD TO THE PETITIONERS, THE PROPERTY, THE PEOPLE, AND THE
ENVIRONMENT. THE EPA HAS IN FACT CREATED AN IMMINENT AND SUBSTANTIAL
ENDANGERMENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT IS NOTHING LESS THAN ARBITRARY
AND CAPRICIOUS FELONIOUS UNLAWFUL DETAINER.
PETITIONERS HAVE SHOWN THAT EPA ACTIONS,
AUTHORIZED BY THE PRESIDENT, APPROVED BY CONGRESS, AND DECREED BY THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, HAVE CAUSED THE UNNECESSARY DISPOSAL OF
OVER 500 THOUSAND TONS OF ACUTELY NONTOXIC NONHAZARDOUS WASTES IN A
NONTOXIC PIT LOCATED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY WITHOUT A MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING WITH THE OWNER CONCERNING THE DISPOSAL.
THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD, PARTICULARY THE
MOST RECENT 5 YEAR REVIEW OF THE CERCLA ACTION, INFORMS THAT THE
“DISPOSAL CELL” HAS FAILED AND THAT THE LEACHATE FROM THE PIT NO LONGER
FLOWS INTO THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM INTENDED TO CAPTURE IT FOR TREATMENT.
PETITIONERS DEMAND THE SURRENDER OF THE PROPERTY TO PROCEED WITH THE
PROPER REMEDY. THE EPA HAS FAILED ITS DUTIES TO PERFORM. THE DOJ AND THE
COURTS IN ERROR HAVE PERPETUATED THIS NEGLECT IN VIOLATION OF THE
REQUIREMENTS OF CERCLA 121 AND IN DEFIANCE OF COMMON SENSE.
PETITIONERS HAVE SHOWN THAT AGENCY ACTIONS DO NOT ACHIEVE THE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CWA IN AND ARE IN VIOLATION OF ESA.
PETITIONERS HAVE SHOWN THAT REVOLUTIONARY
TECHNOLOGY IS NOW AVAILABLE TO THE PETITIONERS THAT WILL MEET THE
DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CWA AND ESA, ELIMINATE THE TOXIC SLUDGE
DISPOSAL, AND ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR THE EPA LIME TREATMENT PLANT.
THE EPA REFUSES TO CONSIDER ANY RESOURCE RECOVERY TECHNOLOGIES THAT WOULD INTERFERE WITH THE ONGOING RESPONSE ACTION.
PETITIONERS HAVE SHOWN THAT EPA ACTIONS AND
CONDUCT OF OFFICERS OF THE UNITED STATES EPA AND DOJ WERE MISTAKEN BUT
COGNIZABLE UNDER THE DOCTRINE OF ESTABLISHED BELIEFS ACCORDING TO THE
SUPREME COURT; SO NO TORT CLAIMS WOULD BE POSSIBLE, AND PLAINTIFFS HAVE
ACKNOWLEDGED AND FORGIVEN THOSE IN ERROR WITH A WAIVER.
PETITIONERS HAVE SHOWN THAT EPA ACTIONS,
HOWEVER WELL MEANT OR INTENTIONED, HAVE FAILED TO ACHIEVE THE
PERFORMANCE MANDATED BY STATUTE AND REQUIRED BY CONGRESS, COURT ORDERS,
THE CWA AND ESA.
PETITIONERS HAVE SHOWN THAT JUDICIAL
SWADDLING AND DEFERENCE TO AGENCY ACTIONS, EVEN IF UNLAWFULLY WITHELD OR
UNREASONABLY DELAYED, HAS RESULTED IN AN IMMINENT HAZARD AND A
NEGLIGENTLY ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS RECKLESS NEGLIGENT ENDANGERMENT OF
THE PETITIONERS AND THEIR PRIVATE PROPERTY AS WELL AS TO THE NATION.
PETITIONERS HAVE SHOWN THAT COURT RULES,
PARTICULARLY RULES WHICH DISCRIMINATE AGAINST CITIZENS WITHOUT
REPRESENTATION BY ADMITTED ATTORNEYS, DEPRIVES CITIZENS OF THE
CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS OF DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION, AND
SERVES TO DEPRIVE THESE PETITIONERS OF PROTECTIONS GUARANTEED UNDER THE
5TH AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION FOR TAKINGS OF PRIVATE PROPERTY
REQUIRING JUST COMPENSATION AND JUST, SPEEDY, AND ADEQUATE REMEDY.
A RULE SUPERIOR TO THE CONSTITUTION CANNOT BE ADMITTED.
PETITIONERS HAVE SHOWN THAT THE DETENTION OF
IRON MOUNTAIN MINES BY THE EPA UNDER CERCLA WAS A MISTAKE, THAT THE EPA
ACTIONS HAVE BEEN INADEQUATE AND INAPPROPRIATE, THAT THE EPA ACTIONS
EXCEED ANY LAWFUL AUTHORITY, MOST PARTICULARLY THE LIMITATIONS IMPOSED UNDER CERCLA SEC. 9604. RESPONSE AUTHORITIES. (3)(A)
(3) Limitations on Response.--The President
shall not provide for a removal or remedial action under this section in
response to a release or threat of release--
(A) of a naturally occurring substance in its
unaltered form, or altered solely through naturally occurring processes
or phenomena, from a location where it is naturally found;
(3) A particular description of the property and a statement of its value.
T.W. ARMAN'S IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INSTITUTES' (et al) PROPERTIES INCLUDE
A CERTAIN FREEHOLD OF 360 ACRES OF LAND BY BOUNTY WARRANTS OF MILITARY
SCRIP AND AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE LAND GRANTS PATENTS FOR LAND IN LIEU OF LAND IN THE MAJOR PIERSON B. READING MEXICAN LAND GRANT PATENT; SIGNED BY PRESIDENT ABRAHAM LINCOLN AS
CONFIRMED BY THE TREATY OF GUADALUPE HIDALGO RATIFIED BY THE UNITED
STATES CONGRESS & UPHELD BY THE SUPREME COURT; A PARAMOUNT TITLE OF
ANCIENT DEMESNE FROM THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE STATE &
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA.
PART OF
2384 ACRES OF LAND FOR CERTAIN QUARTZ LODE MINING PATENTS IN 4400 ACRES OF LAND CONTIGUOUS AND ABSOLUTE FEE SIMPLE FROM THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
PARTS OF
8000 ACRES OF LAND FOR CERTAIN INCIDENTAL & PEREMPTORY EMINENT
DOMAIN & ADVERSE CLAIMS IN REVERSION, REMISSION, RECLAMATION,
RESTITUTION, REMAINDER, DETINUE SUR BAILMENT, TROVER, CESTUI QUE
TRUST, CESTUI QUE USE; GUARANTEED RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES, AND
IMMUNITIES VESTED AND ACCRUED OF A SOVEREIGN, ABSOLUTE, ORIGINAL, &
PARAMOUNT TITLE BY THE PRIORITY OF POSSESSION OF THE LOCATORS, AND OUR PROTECTIONS IN THE SAME, FOR
THEIR AND THEIR HEIRS, SUCCESSORS, AND ASSIGNS USE AND BEHOOF, FOREVER;
AS AGAINST THE WHOLE WORLD BUT THE TRUE OWNER; FOR THE EXCLUSIVE
POSSESSION AND ENJOYMENT OF THE HEADWATERS FOREST OF THE LOST CONFIDENCE
MINE & IRON MOUNTAIN MINES
FORESTS OF THE NORTH; EL CABACERA DEL RIO BUENAVENTURA PERDIDO BOSQUES
DEL NORTE; WHICH IS THE ENTIRE CONTIGUOUS WATERSHED
& MINERAL ESTATE KNOWN AS THE IRON MOUNTAIN MINES SUPERFUND SITE.
and
THE INFAMOUS "BILLION DOLLAR SETTLEMENT" FOR THE IRON MOUNTAIN MINES CLEANUP.
and
THE WRONGFUL TAKING CLAIMS, BILL OF ATTAINDER, CRIME OF INFAMY,
EXPOST FACTO, VOID FOR VAGUENESS AND ILLEGITIMATE ANIMUS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL REPUGNANT LAW LITIGATION; TREBLE DAMAGES FORM OF
STATUTE.
and
THE SEPARATION OF FEDERAL STATE SPONSORED RELIGION CLAIM WITH
NULLIFICATION, ABOLITION, AND EMANCIPATION LITIGATION; NONUPLED DAMAGES
FORM OF STATUTE.
and
137
THOUSAND
ACRES OF LAND FOR CERTAIN CALIFORNIA EMPIRE TERRITORY WITH PUEBLO, PROPRIETARY, NATIVE, RIPARIAN,
AND PRIOR APPROPRIATION
WATER RIGHTS IN EMINENT DOMAIN; DEMOCRAT MOUNTAIN, MATHESON TO CROWN
POINT, RELOCATION OF THE THISTLE LODE, RELOCATION OF THE PERSHING LODE,
REMISSION OF THE CHAPPIE/SHASTA OHVA AND THE KESWICK AND THE
BATTLE CREEK WATERSHEDS; HIGHEST AND BEST USE EXPLAINED.
and
ONE MILLION ACRES OF NEW LAND & FRESH WATER BY EMINENT DOMAIN PRE-EMPTION FOR THE LAGO BUENAVENTURA &
THE ISTHMUS OF ARMAN (OLD BAY-DELTA/ CAL-FED) IN THE CALIFORNIA EMPIRE TERRITORY WITH AN
ESTIMATED VALUE OF $365 BILLION DOLLARS.
(4) A statement, according to the best knowledge, information, and belief of the plaintiff, of the location of the property ( SHASTA COUNTY , CALIFORNIA )
(5) A statement that the property has not been taken
for a tax, assessment, or fine, pursuant to a statute; or seized under
an execution against the property of the plaintiff; or, if so seized,
that it is by statute exempt from such seizure.
THERE IS NO SEIZURE ON THE PROPERTY FOR A TAX, ASSESSMENT, OR FINE.
THE PROPERTY IS BY STATUTE EXEMPT FROM SUCH SEIZURE.
(c) The requirements of subdivision (b) may be satisfied by one or more affidavits filed with the application.
512.020. (a) Except as otherwise provided in this
section, no writ shall be issued under this chapter except after a
hearing on a noticed motion.
(b) A writ of possession may be issued ex parte
pursuant to this subdivision if probable cause appears that any of the
following conditions exists:
(1) The defendant gained possession of the property by feloniously taking the property from the plaintiff. TRUE!
(iii) The ex parte issuance of a writ of possession is necessary to protect the property. TRUE!
512.070. If a writ of possession is issued, the court
may also issue an order directing the defendant to transfer possession
of the property to the plaintiff. Such order shall contain a notice to
the defendant that failure to turn over possession of such property to
plaintiff may subject the defendant to being held in contempt of court.
512.080. The writ of possession shall meet all of the following requirements:
(a) Be directed to the levying officer within whose jurisdiction the property is located.
(b) Describe the specific property to be seized.
(c) Specify any private place that may be entered to take possession of the property or some part of it.
(d) Direct the levying officer to levy on the
property pursuant to Section 514. 010 if found and to retain it in
custody until released or sold pursuant to Section 514.030.
(e) Inform the defendant of the right to object to
the plaintiff's undertaking, a copy of which shall be attached to the
writ, or to obtain redelivery of the property by filing an undertaking
as prescribed by Section 515.020.
Written notice to terminate & deliver possession. August 17 2009
Almost 30 years after Congress instructed the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to require facility owners and
operators to set aside funds for the clean-up of property that may be
contaminated by hazardous substances, a federal court in California has
held that the EPA may take additional time to draft and issue the
regulations. The court held that while Congress required the EPA to
issue such regulations, it granted the EPA some discretion in when to do
so. The EPA has stated that it intends to require financial assurance
for hardrock mining facilities first, and will also assess the need to
regulate hazardous waste generators, hazardous waste recyclers, metal
finishers, wood treatment facilities and chemical manufacturers.
The regulations at issue are required under the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
1980 (commonly known as 'Superfund'). Superfund is commonly said to have
been motivated by the notorious hazardous waste contamination
discovered buried at Love Canal , New York .
Section 108 of Superfund requires the EPA to issue
financial assurance requirements for certain types of facility based on
the risk of injury from hazardous substances in operations at those
facilities. Once issued, the regulations would require the operator of a
covered facility to set aside funds or otherwise make funds available
for a possible future clean-up of hazardous substances at the property.
Without such funds, costly clean-ups may force potentially responsible
parties into bankruptcy, leaving taxpayers with the bill, or lengthy
litigation may ensue over the allocation of costs. The EPA was first
required to publish a notice of those classes of facility which
presented the highest level of risk of injury by December 11 1980. (1)
The December 1980 deadline passed without the EPA
publishing the required notice. The statutory requirement languished
until in recent years it received renewed attention. The EPA was sued in
federal court in 2008 on the theory that it had failed to perform a
non-discretionary duty under Superfund. The suit was brought under
Superfund's citizen suit provision, which allows a private litigant to
force non-discretionary agency action. In February 2009 the Northern
District of California held in Sierra Club v Johnson (2)
that the EPA had a mandatory duty to publish classes of facility which
presented the greatest risk of injury. In July 2009 the EPA published a
notice of these classes in the Federal Register, pursuant to the court's
order. (3)
In its notice the agency determined that it would promulgate the first
financial assurance requirements for hardrock mining facilities, based
on the extent of contamination from such facilities and the high costs
of clean-up.
The EPA did not limit its inquiry to hardrock mining;
the notice also stated that the EPA will examine the need for financial
assurance at the following types of facility: "hazardous waste
generators, hazardous waste recyclers, metal finishers, wood treatment
facilities, and chemical manufacturers." However, the Northern District
of California held that the EPA is under no set deadline to issue the
financial assurance requirements. Instead, the court held that:
"although Section 108(b) requires EPA to promulgate
financial responsibility regulations and incrementally impose such
requirements, Section 108(b) provides EPA with discretion as to when to
promulgate such regulations. Unlike the duty to publish notice of
classes, Section 108(b) does not include a date-certain deadline for the
promulgation of financial responsibility regulations." (5)
In so doing, the court rejected "a bright line rule
that only duties with date-certain deadlines are non-discretionary for
the purpose of citizen suits under [Superfund]" and instead looked to
legislative history to help determine whether the EPA's duty to
promulgate regulations by a particular date was non-discretionary. To
maintain a claim that the EPA has "unreasonably delayed" its duties
under Superfund, the court held that plaintiffs may continue to press
their claims under the Administrative Procedure Act, but must do so in
another court. The court stated that:
"plaintiffs may bring an [Administrative Procedure
Act] claim in the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit alleging EPA
unreasonably delayed in promulgating the financial responsibility
regulations required under Section 108(b)."
Unless and until such a litigation is brought and
decided, the timeline for financial assurance requirements under
Superfund will remain unclear.
unrecovered past response costs for the EPA's unnecessary, unconstitutional, and improper activities. EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL
EPA raises the stakes
Houston Chronicle
By MATTHEW TRESAUGUE The EPA has threatened dozens of Texas refiners and chemical and plastic makers with penalties if they don't begin taking steps to ...
See all stories on this topic »
COMPLAINT IN INTERVENTION Case No. 104079
Superior Court of California, County of Shasta
Petitioners request leave of the court to file a
complaint in intervention in the above captioned matter, where
California has maintained a lien for a fine resulting from enforcement
of federal discharge standards promulgated under the CWA.
WE NEED TO KNOW THE LINE ON WHICH TO DRAW THE LIMITS OF STATE POWERS, WE WILL DETERMINE EXACTLY HOW TO DO SO HERE!
Therefore, to “establish certain limits not to be transcended by the government.”
Given [mining's] unique political history, as well as
the breadth of the authority that the [EPA] has asserted, the Court is
obliged to defer not to the agency's expansive construction of the
statute or to Congress' inconsistent judgment, but to prior rights and
patent title to deny the [EPA] this power.…
“Full relief and restore possession to the party
entitled thereto. a general verdict for plaintiff on a complaint which
alleges that the plaintiff is entitled to the possession of certain
described property, which is unlawfully detained by the defendant, and
the possession of which the plaintiff prays to recover, is held by the
United States Supreme Court to be sufficient.”
Here, in strictness, the people surrender nothing;
and as they retain every thing they have no need of particular
reservations. "WE, THE PEOPLE of the United States , to secure the
blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ORDAIN and
ESTABLISH this Constitution for the United States of America ." Here is a
better recognition of popular rights, than volumes of those aphorisms
which make the principal figure in several of our State bills of rights,
and which would sound much better in a treatise of ethics than in a
constitution of government.
“ It is not material whether the
Libel be true, or whether the party against whom the Libel is made, be
of good or ill fame; for in a settled state of Government the party
grieved ought to complain for every injury done him in an ordinary
course of Law, and not by any means to revenge himself, either by the
odious course of libeling, or otherwise: He who kills a man with his
sword in fight is a great offender, but he is a greater offender who
poisons another, for in the one case he who is the party assaulted may
defend himself, and knows his adversary, and may endeavour to prevent
it: But poisoning may be done so secret that none can defend himself
against it; for which cause the offence is the more grievous, because
the offender cannot easily be known; And of such nature is libeling, it
is secret, and robs a man of his good name, which ought to be more
precious to him than his life, & difficillimum est invenire authorem
infamatoriae scripturae; because that when the offender is known, he
ought to be severely punished. Every infamous libel, aut est in
scriptis, aut sine scriptis; a scandalous libel, in scriptis; when an
epigram, rhyme, or other writing is composed or published to the scandal
or contumely of another, by which his fame and dignity may be
prejudiced. And such libel may be published, 1. Verbis aut cantilenis:
As where it is maliciously repeated or sung in the presence of others.
2. Traditione, 7 when the libel or copy of it is delivered over to scandalize the party. Famosus libellus sine scriptis 8
may be, 1. Picturis, as to paint the party in any shameful and
ignominious manner. 2. Signis, as to fix a Gallows, or other reproachful
and ignominious signs at the parties door or elsewhere. That if anyone
finds a Libel (and would keep himself out of danger), if it be composed
against a private man, the finder either may burn it, or presently
deliver it to a Magistrate: But if it concerns a Magistrate, or other
public person, the finder of it ought presently to deliver it to a
Magistrate, to the Intent that by examination and industry, the Author
may be found out and punished. And libelling and calumniation is an
offence against the Law of God. For Leviticus 17, Non facias calumniam
proximo. Exod. 22 ver. 28, Principi populi tui non maledices.
Ecclesiastes 10, In cogitatione |[126 a] tua ne detrahas Regi, nec in
secreto cubiculi tui diviti maledices, quia volucres coeli portabunt
vocem tuam, & qui habet pennas annuntiabit sententiam. Psal. 69. 13,
Adversus me loquebantur qui sedebant in porta, & in me psallebant
qui bibebant vinum. Job. 30. ver. 7. & 8, Filii stultorum &
ignobilium, & in terra penitus non parentes, nunc in eorum canticum
versus sum, & factus sum eis in proverbium. 9
And it was observed, that Job, who was the Mirrour of patience, as
appeareth by his words, became quodammodo impatient when Libels were
made of him; And therefore it appeareth of what force they are to
provoke impatience and contention. And there are certain marks by which a
Libeller may be known: Quia tria sequuntur defamatorem famosum: 11
1. Pravitatis incrementum, increase of lewdness: 2. Bursae decrementum,
decrease of money, and beggary: 3. Conscientiae detrimentum, shipwreck
of conscience.”
Selected Writings of Sir Edward Coke, vol. I
The Most Unwanted
PLAINTIFF HUTCHENS APPOINTMENT QUO WARRANTO AS PROJECT MANAGER
REMISSION, REVERSION, AND DETINUE SUR BAILMENT, TREBLE DAMAGES
ANY AND ALL FURTHER RELIEF
THAT THE COURT FINDS JUST AND PROPER AND CONSISTENT WITH FINAL
ADJUDICATION OF ALL MATTERS IN THIS CASE.
Date: November 19, 2009 _under oath, Signature:
s/John F. Hutchens, grantees agent, tenant-in–chief, administrator; Iron Mountain Mines, Inc.
WARDEN OF THE FORESTS AND STANNARIES FOR IRON MOUNTAIN MINES, INC.
Verification affidavit:
I, John F. Hutchens, hereby state that the
same is true of my own knowledge, except as to matters which are herein
stated on my own information or belief, and as to those matters, I
believe them to be true.
Affirmed this day: November 19, 2009
Grantee's agent of record; Signature:
s/ John F. Hutchens, authorized agent for T.W. Arman & Iron Mountain Mines, Inc.
Working together to identify the issues affecting the
future of emergency management will provide the emergency management
community a holistic view of key future issues and needs. The network of
participants will also benefit by learning from and interacting with a
broader set of professionals who have similar interests and/or distinct
expertise. Additionally, the SFI provides an opportunity to further
align the emergency management community's disparate missions and
activities.
EPA has paid no rent for all the years of its experiment at Iron Mountain Mine.
Protecting and ensuring the continuity of the critical
infrastructure of the United States are essential to the nation's
security, public health and safety, economic vitality, and way of life.
- Critical infrastructure are the assets, systems, and
networks, whether physical or virtual, so vital to the United States
that their incapacitation or destruction would have a debilitating
effect on security, national economic security, public health or safety,
or any combination thereof.
Homeland Security Presidential Directive 7 (HSPD-7)
established U.S. policy for enhancing critical
infrastructure protection by establishing a framework for the
Department's partners to identify, prioritize, and protect the critical
infrastructure in their communities from terrorist attacks. The
directive identified 17 critical infrastructure sectors and, for each
sector, designated a federal Sector-Specific Agency (SSA) to lead
protection and resilience-building programs and activities. HSPD-7
allows for the Department of Homeland Security to identify gaps in
existing critical infrastructure sectors and establish new sectors to
fill these gaps. Under this authority, the Department established an
18th sector, the Critical Manufacturing Sector, in March 2008.
Each of the Sector-Specific Agencies developed a Sector-Specific Plan that details the application of the NIPP framework to the unique characteristics of their sector.
"A little rebellion now and then is a good thing” – Thomas Jefferson 
In October of 1941, counties in southern Oregon and
Northern California were upset with the condition of roads throughout
their counties. Their claims were that lack of proper roads and bridges
were hindering the economic development of the area, particularly by
making it difficult to gain access to and transport out the areas two
biggest natural resources: copper and timber. The roads were oiled dirt
roads that after rain or snow became impassable. The “greatest copper
belt in the far West” was located there and the roads made it extremely
difficult to mine and transport the copper ore. The counties were Curry,
Josephine, Jackson, and Klamath, Oregon and Del Norte, Siskiyou, and
Modoc, California.
Gilbert Gable, then mayor of Port Orford, Oregon
proposed that the seven counties should secede from their respective
states and form a new state, which would at the time have been the 49th
state in the union. This concept found sympathy throughout the area and
on November 17th 1941, county representatives met in Yreka, CA and voted
to allocate $100 to researching the formation of the 49th state. On
November 19th, 1941, the Siskiyou Daily News offered up a $2 prize for
the best name submitted for the new state and the name Jefferson, after
Thomas Jefferson, was eventually chosen. Yreka was chosen as the
capital.
After that, by November 27th, 1941 citizens of the
State of Jefferson began stopping traffic on Highway 99, brandishing
hunting rifles and handing out copes of their Proclamation of
Independence:
You are now entering Jefferson, the 49th State of the Union.
Jefferson is now in patriotic rebellion against the States of California and Oregon.
This State has seceded from California and Oregon this Thursday, November 27, 1941.
Patriotic Jeffersonians intend to secede each Thursday until further notice.
For the next hundred miles as you drive along
Highway 99, you are traveling parallel to the greatest copper belt in
the far West, seventy-five miles west of here.
The United States government needs this vital
mineral. But gross neglect by California and Oregon deprives us of
necessary roads to bring out the copper ore.
If you don't believe this, drive down the Klamath River Highway and see for yourself. Take your chains, shovel and dynamite.
Until California and Oregon build a road into the
copper country, Jefferson, as a defense minded state, will be forced to
rebel each Thursday and act as a separate State.
(Please carry this proclamation with you and pass them out on your way.)
State of Jefferson Citizens Committee
Temporary State Capitol, Yreka
This act, of course, immediately began making
headlines, and the San Francisco Chronicle even sent out a young
reporter by the name of Stanton Delaplane, to cover the secession. He
even earned a Pulitzer Prize for the series of articles he wrote. By
December 4th, with the state seceding every Thursday until recognized,
Judge John C. Childs was inaugurated as the governor of the new state
and followed by a torchlight parade led by two bears, Scratchy and
Itchy.
A State Seal was created which consisted of a gold
pan on which two X's were painted on the bottom. The two X's symbolized
how the new state was double crossed by both Salem, Oregon and
Sacramento, California. This seal is on the state flag.
The new state was going to have no sales tax, no
property tax, and no income tax. Red light districts and gambling halls
would be opened and the revenue from these would fund the state.
Newsreels of the events occurring in Jefferson were
to air nationally on December 8th, but on December 7th Pearl Harbor was
bombed by the Japanese thus throwing the United States into World War
II and ending the secession of the California and Oregon counties that
comprised the new state. The newsreels were shelved and both states
fixed the roads and bridges in order to access the timber and copper
required for the war effort. The secession movement died out.
But the concept of the State of Jefferson carried
on. Today the idea of Jefferson still exists and has grown to include
several other counties including Coos, Douglas, and Lake in Oregon and
Humboldt, Trinity, Shasta, Lassen, Mendocino, Tehama, Glenn, Butte, and
Plumas in California. If this area were to become its own state, it
would have over 423,000 people, but would still have the least
population of any other US state. The original idea behind the State of
Jefferson has been commemorate by the State of Jefferson Scenic Byway
that runs between Yreka, CA and O'Brien, OR. Near the California /
Oregon border there's a turn out spot with three informational displays
talking about the area.
Ultimately the 1941 attempt of seceding was very
much unlike any other secession movement. There was no violence, but
instead joy and merriment. Much of the actions of the state were viewed
as almost a joke by the rest of the country. Most people who were
stopped by barricades and given the Proclamation of Independence laughed
at the entire affair, thinking that the locals were just playing a big
prank. Ironically, the method in which the secession occurred actually
worked. The areas issues and problems were brought to light to the
entire country and who knows, had it not been for the atrocity of World
War II, Jefferson very well may have become the 49th state in the union.
It is important to note that actually seceding
would have been rather difficult for the new state as under the
Constitution, it was required that they had both the approval of the
U.S. Congress and the legislatures of both Oregon and California.
While people have worshipped many things, we may be the first to build shrines to garbage.
Many observers have made the point that
environmentalism is eerily close to a religious belief system, since it
includes creation stories and ideas of original sin. But there is
another sense in which environmentalism is becoming more and more like a
religion: It provides its adherents with an identity.
Scientists are understandably uninterested in religious
stories because they do not meet the basic criterion for science: They
cannot be tested. God may or may not have created the world—there is no
way of knowing, although we do know that the biblical creation story is
scientifically incorrect. Since we cannot prove or disprove the
existence of God, science can't help us answer questions about the truth
of religion as a method of understanding the world.
But scientists, particularly evolutionary
psychologists, have identified another function of religion in addition
to its function of explaining the world. Religion often supplements or
replaces the tribalism that is an innate part of our evolved nature.
Original religions were tribal rather than universal.
Each tribe had its own god or gods, and the success of the tribe was
evidence that their god was stronger than others.
But modern religions have largely replaced tribal gods
with universal gods and allowed unrelated individuals from outside the
tribe to join. Identification with a religion has replaced
identification with a tribe. While many decry religious wars, modern
religion has probably net reduced human conflict because there are fewer
tribal wars. (Anthropologists have shown that tribal wars are even more
lethal per capita than modern wars.)
It is this identity-creating function that
environmentalism provides. As the world becomes less religious, people
can define themselves as being Green rather than being Christian or
Jewish.
Consider some of the ways in which environmental
behaviors echo religious behaviors and thus provide meaningful rituals
for Greens:
• There is a holy day—Earth Day.
• There are food taboos. Instead of eating fish on
Friday, or avoiding pork, Greens now eat organic foods and many are
moving towards eating only locally grown foods.
• There is no prayer, but there are self-sacrificing
rituals that are not particularly useful, such as recycling. Recycling
paper to save trees, for example, makes no sense since the effect will
be to reduce the number of trees planted in the long run.
• Belief systems are embraced with no logical basis.
For example, environmentalists almost universally believe in the dangers
of global warming but also reject the best solution to the problem,
which is nuclear power. These two beliefs co-exist based on faith, not
reason.
• There are no temples, but there are sacred
structures. As I walk around the Emory campus, I am continually
confronted with recycling bins, and instead of one trash can I am faced
with several for different sorts of trash. Universities are centers of
the environmental religion, and such structures are increasingly common.
While people have worshipped many things, we may be the first to build
shrines to garbage.
• Environmentalism is a proselytizing religion.
Skeptics are not merely people unconvinced by the evidence: They are
treated as evil sinners. I probably would not write this article if I
did not have tenure.
Some conservatives spend their time criticizing the way
Darwin is taught in schools. This is pointless and probably
counterproductive. These same efforts should be spent on making sure
that the schools only teach those aspects of environmentalism that pass
rigorous scientific testing. By making the point that Greenism is a
religion, perhaps we environmental skeptics can enlist the First
Amendment on our side.
Mr. Rubin is a professor of economics at Emory
University. He is the author of "Darwinian Politics: The Evolutionary
Origin of Freedom" (Rutgers University Press, 2002).
How does your faith or religion or spirituality affect
your perspective of environmentalism or creation care? blog. How does
your faith or religion or ...
www.pbs.org/moyers/moyersonamerica/.../ environment .html - Cached - Similar
Apr 22, 2010 ... Thursday was the 40th anniversary
of Earth Day, which was celebrated this year, according to the Earth
Day Network, by more than a billion ...
www.ajc.com/.../new- religion -of- environmentalism -484726.html - Cached
Most people — and most lawyers — would assume that the U.S. Supreme
Court has jurisdiction to review any determination of federal law by an
inferior court, whether state or federal. And there was a time when it
was so. But the Court’s recent justiciability decisions have created a
perplexing jurisdictional gap — a set of cases in which state court
determinations of federal law are immune from the Supreme Court’s
appellate jurisdiction. The Court has thus surrendered a portion of its
supremacy and thereby undermined the policies that underlie its
appellate jurisdiction.
In an effort to address this problem,
the Court has created a strange exception to its justiciability
doctrines that turns the rationale for appellate jurisdiction on its
head. The Court has held that it may exercise appellate jurisdiction
over otherwise nonjusticiable cases only where the state court has
upheld the claimed federal right. As a matter of history and of
doctrine, however, this is precisely the set of cases where Supreme
Court review is least needed. A number of scholars have proposed
attacking the problem by requiring state courts hearing federal
questions of law to apply federal justiciability doctrines. But this
view is difficult to justify doctrinally, and, paradoxically, it risks
undermining federal interests by preventing state court enforcement of
federal rights and policies in a broad swath of cases.
Mr. Justice Ross in Lux v. Haggin
“The common-law doctrine of
riparian rights being wholly inconsistent with and antagonistic to that of
appropriation, it necessarily follows that when the federal and State
governments assented to, recognized, and confirmed, with respect to the waters
upon the public lands, the doctrine of appropriation, they in effect declared
that that of riparian rights did not apply. The doctrine of appropriation thus
established was not a temporary thing, to exist only until son one should
obtain a certificate or patent for forty acres or some other subdivision of the
public lands bordering on the river or other stream of water. It was, as has
been said, born of the necessities of the country and its people, was the
growth of years, permanent in its character, and fixed the status of water rights with respect to public lands. No valid
reason exists why the government, which owned both the land and the water,
could not do this. It thus became, in my judgment, as much a part of the law of
the land as if it had been written in terms in the statute-books, and in
connection with which all grants of public land from either government should
be read. In light of the history of the State, and of the legislation and
decisions with respect to the subject in question, is it possible that either
government, state of national, ever contemplated that a conveyance of forty
acres at the lower end of a stream that
flows for miles should put an end to subsequent appropriation of the waters of
the stream upon the public lands above, and entitle the grantee of the forty
acres to the undiminished flow of the water in its natural channel from its
source to its mouth? It seems entirely clear that nothing of the kind was ever
intended or contemplated. Of course, the doctrine of appropriation, as contradistinguished
from that of riparian rights, was not intended to, and indeed could not, affect
the rights of those persons ding under grants from the
Spanish or Mexican governments; first, because the doctrine is expressly
limited to the waters upon what are known as public lands; and secondly,
because the rights of such grantees are protected by treaty with Mexico and the
good faith of the government.
“It is the
rights of such riparian proprietors as those
that are unaffected by the doctrine of appropriation, and those are the riparian rights that are
excepted from the operations of the provisions of the Civil Code in relation to
‘water rights’ by section 1422 of that code, which reads: ‘The rights of
riparian proprietors are not affected by the provisions of this title.’ That
code, as well as the other codes of California,
went into effect the first day of January, 1873. The appellants contend, and
the prevailing opinion holds, that by the section of the Civil Code just
quoted, the legislature of the State declared that the common-law doctrine of
riparian rights should apply to all the streams of the State. It seams very
clear to me that this is not so, for many reasons. Leaving out of consideration
the question whether it lay in the power of the State to nullify the doctrine
of appropriation established by the United States with respect to the waters
flowing over their lands,-established too, in pursuance of the policy of the
State itself had previously adopted, and for the advancement of the interest of
the people of the State, I find nothing in the Civil Code, or in any of the
other codes, to indicate any intention on the part of the legislature of the
State to return to the doctrine of riparian rights with respect to the waters
upon the public lands. On the contrary, the code enacts in statutory form, in
language as clear as language can be made, the theretofore prevailing law of
appropriation. Title of the Civil Code is headed ‘Water Rights.’ The first
section of that title-section 1410 of the code-declares: ‘The right to the use
of running water, flowing in a river or stream, or down a canyon or ravine, may
be acquired by appropriation.’
“Can
anything be clearer? By the common law, the water flowing in a river or stream,
or down a canyon or ravine, could not
be acquired by appropriation, and must continue to flow in its natural channel undiminished
in quantity and unaffected in quality. Could there be any clearer declaration of
the fact that the common-law doctrine of riparian rights should no apply to the
streams of this State than is found in this declaration of the statute that the
waters of such streams may be acquired by appropriation?”
“Use cannot create and disuse
cannot destroy or suspend it.” Lux v. Haggin, 69 Cal. 391
In the case of Stowe v. Johnson, 26 Pac.
Rep. 290, the Supreme Court of Utah said:
“Riparian
rights have never been recognized in this territory, or in any State of territory
where irrigation is necessary; for the appropriation of water for the purpose
of irrigation is entirely and unavoidably in conflict with the common-law
doctrine of riparian proprietorship. If that had been recognized and applied in
this territory, it would still be a desert; for a man owning ten acres or more,
near its mouth, could prevent the settlement of all the land above him. For at
the common law the riparian proprietor is entitled to have the water flow in quantity
and quality past his land as it was wont to do when he acquired title thereto, and this right is
utterly irreconcilable with the use of water for irrigation. The legislature of
this territory has always ignored this claim of riparian proprietors, and the
practice and usages of the inhabitants have never considered it applicable, and
have never regarded it.”
The Supreme Court of California:
“We therefore hold it to be the law, and we
think it to be a moderate and just exposition thereof, that one may, by
appropriate works, develop and secure to useful purposes the sub-surface flow of
our streams, and become, with due regard to the rights of others in the
stream, a legal appropriator of waters by
so doing. That plaintiff thus was, at the time of the institution of its
action, an appropriator, permits of no doubt, but its appropriation was legal
only far as its taking did not imperil or impair the rights of others superior
to its own. One may not, of course, tunnel into the bed of such a stream, or
dam its underground flow, and by such means draw away either subterranean or
surface waters the rightful use of which has been secured by others. If, upon
the other hand, one can, by development, obtain subterranean waters without
injury to the superior rights of others, clearly he should be permitted to do
so.” Vineland
Irr. District v. Azusa
Irr. Co., 126 Cal.
486
For What Purposes Water May Be Appropriated.
The only statutory limitation of the purpose
for which water may be appropriated is that it “must be for some useful or
beneficial purpose.”
Civil Code,
Section 1411.
In the
early history of the State, the most important use made of water appropriate,
aside from domestic use, was for the operation of mines. And this use still
continues in some localities. But at the present time, by far most of the water
used is for the irrigation of trees and growing crops. It may be appropriated,
however, for mining milling, irrigation, agricultural, horticultural, domestic,
or any other useful or beneficial purpose. The appropriation, to be valid, must
be made with the intention of using it for some such purpose.
Uploaded by RepScottTipton on Mar 6, 2012
H.R. 2842: The Bureau of Reclamation
Small Conduit Hydropower Development and Rural Jobs Act of 2012.
Bipartisan plan would expand production of clean, renewable hydropower.
The federal reserved water rights doctrine was established by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1908 in Winters v.
United States. In this case, the U.S. Supreme Court found that an
Indian reservation (in the case, the Fort Belknap Indian Reservation)
may reserve water for future use in an amount necessary to fulfill the
purpose of the reservation, with a priority dating from the treaty that
established the reservation. This doctrine establishes that when the
federal government created Indian reservations, water rights were
reserved in sufficient quantity to meet the purposes for which the
reservation was established.
The
Winters Doctrine was a land mark case for it was the first time the
federal government deviated from the established convention that water
law was purely a state matter. In 1952, however, Congress passed the
McCarren Amendment which returns substantial power to the states with
respect to the management of water. The McCarren Amendment requires that
the federal government waive its sovereign immunity in cases involving
the general adjudication of water rights. Prior to this legislation, the
federal government had reserved the right not to be included in general
basin adjudications conducted under state law. The McCarren Amendment,
however, recognized that the exemption of the federal government from
these adjudications would undermine the state’s water allocation
systems. Therefore, any federal agency claiming a federal reserved water
right must participate in the state’s adjudication process.
Federal court decisions since the McCarren Amendment have further limited federal reserved water rights. In the 1976 Cappaert v.
United States of America, the Court ruled that a federal reserved water
right quantification was limited to the primary purpose of the
reservation and only to the minimum amount of water necessary to fulfill
the purpose of the reservation. In 1978, in United State of America v.
New Mexico, the Court found that the reserved water rights on national
forests apply only to the preservation of timber resources and water
flows. All other claimed needs were to be considered secondary purposes
and the federal government would have to obtain rights like any other
appropriator under state law. These rulings have narrowed the scope of
the Winter’s Doctrine. Federal reserved water rights may only include
quantities of water necessary to meet the primary purpose for which the
reservation was established ("primary purpose" requirement) and only in
the minimum amounts necessary to meet those purposes ("minimal needs"
requirement).
The
Winters Doctrine originally applied to Indian reservations but has since
been applied to other federal land reservations. A variety of court
decisions have extended the reserved right doctrine to encompass not
only Indian reservations, but water uses in national forests, national
parks and monuments, and military reservations. In the 1963 Arizona v.
California decision, the U.S. Supreme Court found the Winters Doctrine
equally applicable to other federal establishments and affirmed an
allocation of water for non-Indian federal uses.
Today,
federal reserved water rights can be asserted on most lands managed by
the federal government. Reserved rights are, for the most part, immune
from state water laws and therefore, are not subject to diversion and
beneficial use requirements and cannot be lost by non-use. The federal
government, however, is required to submit all reserved water rights
claims to the state’s adjudication process, and are limited by the
"primary purpose" and "minimal needs" requirements. In addition, federal
reserved water rights are nontransferable. By law, these rights can
only exist on lands owned by the federal government. If a land transfer
occurs, any existing federal reserved water right becomes invalid.
Because
federal reserved water rights must meet the "primary purpose" and
"minimal needs" requirements, it is important to quantify any federal
reserved right. Generally, quantifying a federal reserved right requires
specifying the amount of water claimed, the water sources, the primary
purpose of the reservation for which the water is needed, and the
priority date of the claim (the date the reservation was created). The
most contentious issue is often the amount of water claimed. The
quantification of a federal reserved water right often involves the
sophisticated integration of ecological models with surface and ground
water flow models. The data necessary for accurate modeling is often
unavailable or needs to be collected, and there are often discrepancies
over appropriate modeling techniques and the interpretation of results.
As a result, much of the current controversy is not centered around
asserting a federal reserved right, but in the quantification of that
assertion.
Federal Reserved Water Rights and the Bureau of Land Management:
The
following types of federal reserved water rights can occur on BLM lands:
public water holes and springs; mineral hot springs; stock driveways;
public oil shale withdrawals; wild and scenic rivers; national monuments
and conservation areas; and wilderness areas.
Probably
the most common federal reserved water right for BLM is for public
water holes and springs. These rights were created by executive orders
called Public Water Reserves (PWR). Until 1926, PWRs were created on an
ad hoc and sight specific basis. Federal agencies would identify the
springs they wanted reserved and these would be incorporated (by
executive order) into a chronologically numbered Public Water Reserve.
Therefore PWRs with early numbers refer to sight specific reservations.
In 1926, a cart blank Public Water Reserve was created through an
executive order by President Coolidge entitled "Public Water Reserves
No. 107". PWR 107 ended the sight specific system of reserving springs
and water holes. The purpose of PWR 107 was to reserve natural springs
and water holes yielding amounts in excess of homesteading requirements.
This order states that "legal subdivision(s) of public land surveys
which is vacant, unappropriated, unreserved public land and contains a
spring or water hole, and all land within one quarter of a mile of every
spring or water be reserved for public use". There was no intent to
reserve the entire yield of each public spring or water hole, rather
reserved water was limited to domestic human consumption and
stockwatering. All waters from these sources in excess of the minimum
amount necessary for these limited public watering purposes is available
for appropriation through state water law. To date, many of these
Public Water Reserves have not been registered with the state and/or are
not adjudicated.
Wilderness
designations can be considered the most restrictive of the federal land
management designation. Reserved water rights are set aside pursuant to
the Wilderness Act of 1964 (16 USC section 1131). Development within
wilderness areas is restricted, and these restrictions extend to the
development of water supplies. The Wilderness Act reserves the amount of
water within the wilderness area necessary to preserve and protect the
specific values responsible for designation of the area, and to provide
for public enjoyment of these values. Only the minimum amount of water
necessary to fulfill the primary purpose of the reservation may be
asserted as a reserved right.
Wild
and Scenic River designations are derived from the Wild and Scenic
Rivers Act of 1968 (16 USC section 1271). This legislation states that
"certain selected rivers of the nation which, with their immediate
environments, possess outstandingly remarkable scenic, recreational,
geologic, fish and wildlife, historic, cultural, or similar values,
shall be preserved in free-flowing condition, and that they and their
immediate environments shall be protected for the benefit and enjoyment
of present and future generations". Designation of a stream or river
segment as "wild and scenic" prevents construction of flow modifying
structures and other facilities on the selected stretch. The area of
restricted development can vary, but generally includes at least the
area within one-quarter mile of the ordinary high water mark on either
side of the river. The act also reserved to the United States the amount
of unappropriated water flowing through the public lands necessary to
preserve and protect in free-flowing condition the specific values which
were responsible for designation of the watercourse. The act, however,
does not automatically reserve the entire unappropriated flow of the
river.
Stock
driveways are reserved pursuant to Section 10 of the Stock-Raising
Homestead Act of 1916. This act was repealed by Section 704(a) of the
FLPMA, but reservations made prior to 1976 remain in effect until
changed in accordance with the act. This act authorized the withdrawal
of public lands containing water holds needed for watering stock during
their movement to seasonal ranges or shipping points. The priority date
for each water hole is the date on which the application for the land
withdrawal was approved.
Mineral
hot springs with medicinal or curative properties located on vacant,
unappropriated, and unreserved public lands constitute federal reserved
water rights. The BLM is authorized to lease these springs for public
purposes.
Public
oil shale withdrawals reserve that quantity of water which can be used
for investigating, examining, and classifying oil shale, but only those
waters needed for assessment of the oil shale resources. Federal
reserved rights do not apply to waters necessary to develop the oil
shale. Waters for development must come through state law and allocation
procedures.
Executive Order 11001, SEC. 3. Health Functions.
With respect to emergency health services,
as defined above, and in consonance with national civil defense plans,
programs and operations of the Department of Defense under Executive Order
No. 10952, the Secretary shall:
(a) National program guidance. Develop plans and issue guidance
designed to utilize to the maximum extent the existing civilian health
resources of the Federal Government, and with their active participation,
assistance, and consent, the health resources of the States and local political
subdivisions thereof, and of other civilian organizations and agencies
concerned with the health of the population, under all conditions of national
emergency. Maintain relations with health professions and institutions
to foster mutual understanding of Federal emergency plans which affect
health activities.
(b) Professional training. Develop and direct a nationwide program to
train health manpower both in professional and technical occupational content
and in civil defense knowledge and skills. Develop and distribute health
education material for inclusion in the curricula of schools, colleges,
professional schools, government schools, and other educational facilities
throughout the United States. Develop and distribute civil defense information
relative to health services to States, voluntary agencies and professional
groups.
(c) Emergency water supply. Prepare plans to assure the provision of
usable public water supplies for essential community uses in an emergency.
This shall include inventorying existing supplies, developing new sources,
performing research, setting standards, and planning distribution. In carrying
on these activities, the Department shall have primary responsibility but
will make maximum use of the resources and competence of State and local
authorities and of other Federal agencies.
California water bill
Although it's provoking more skepticism over its cost and
feasibility, the current salmon-restoration plan also is part of a court
settlement that could be difficult to unravel unless environmentalists
agree
"That's a non-starter," Costa said of the House provision.
Other House provisions, Costa suggested, could prove much more palatable.
ON THE WEB
House water and power subcommittee hearing on California water bill
MORE FROM MCCLATCHY
House OKs California water bill that favors farmers
California water bill now flows to uncertain future in Senate
San Joaquin River restoration likely a sore point in dry season
EPA is
readying an analysis of existing studies showing how navigable waters may be
connected to "headwater streams" and isolated wetlands, an effort that could
help the agency justify its forthcoming policy clarifying when the Clean Water
Act (CWA) grants regulators jurisdiction over such marginal waterbodies.
EPA is
advancing its controversial guidance clarifying when isolated wetlands,
intermittent streams and other marginal waters are subject to regulation under
the Clean Water Act (CWA), despite strong calls from industry, GOP lawmakers
and others for the agency to scrap the measure.
EPA has
released the final version of its scientific integrity policy as required by
the White House, but the agency has not crafted an explanation of how the new
document - intended to protect agency science and scientists from political
interference - will be implemented or whether key officials are available to
implement it.
EPA Inspector
General (IG) Arthur Elkins, Jr. is vowing an increased focused on evaluations
and other efforts aimed at protecting public health and the environment in the
coming year, while touting his office's accomplishments and saying the IG's
fiscal year 2013 budget proposal is adequate to avoid cuts in discretionary
evaluations.
Without
evidence of legally significant contamination, the government was
unjustified in filing suit to gain access to private property for a
response action under the Superfund law, according to a ruling by a
federal district court. [ U.S. v. Tarkowski , No. 99 C 7308, N.D.Ill., Nov. 26, 2001] Consequently, the victorious property owner can recoup his litigation costs.
John
Tarkowski is an elderly, indigent resident of a 16-acre tract situated
in Wauconda, Ill., an affluent community northwest of Chicago. Until he
was disabled, he worked as a building contractor. Using surplus
materials, he built his house many years ago when the area was a rural
backwater. His yard is filled with what his upscale neighbors regard as
junk — wooden pallets, tires, empty drums, batteries, paint cans and
other construction materials.
For
more than 20 years, Tarkowski's neighbors had harassed him and had
complained to environmental officials. The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) inspected his property in 1979, but concluded that it did
not pose any environmental hazard. In 1995, EPA rated the property zero
on its hazard rating scale. Two years later, state authorities took soil
and water samples and found no noteworthy contamination.
In
1998, EPA took additional samples of soil and materials on his
property, finding only trace amounts of contaminants that, in fact, were
comparable to levels found in surrounding properties and did not
indicate any release. Nevertheless, EPA filed suit against Tarkowski
alleging an “imminent and substantial endangerment to … public health …
and the environment” based on an actual or possible release of hazardous
substances. EPA sought an order to gain access to the site for
investigative and remedial purposes. After hearing the evidence, a
federal district court dismissed EPA's suit. An appeals court upheld the
ruling, castigating the agency's conduct and judgment. [248 F.3d 596
(7th Cir. 2001)]
Tarkowski
petitioned the district court for an award of attorney's fees and
expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act. The law allows certain
parties who prevail against the federal government in a lawsuit to
recover their litigation expenses unless the government's position was
reasonable.
Finding
EPA's stance totally unjustified, the district judge said, “There was
no evidence of legally significant contamination and … the government's
claim of an imminent and substantial endangerment was factually
baseless.” EPA cannot reasonably insist that “if a hazard was found, no
matter how small, it had the right to do whatever it wanted on
Tarkowski's property,” he added.
“It
is to protect citizens against … overreaching actions by government
bureaucrats that courts are empowered to prevent arbitrary and
capricious interference with property rights,” said the judge, again
citing the appeals court. “The government's position … ‘would give the
agency in effect an unlimited power of warrantless searches and seizures
[which the Superfund law] does not contemplate and the Fourth Amendment
would almost certainly forbid,'” he concluded with yet another
reference to the appellate opinion.
AIG DOESN'T OWN OR RENT
‘we just gotta get a return on our investment—we really don’t care about your company.’”
Member Company of American International Group, Inc
AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL SPECIALTY
LINES INSURANCE COMPANY
A Capital Stock Insurance Company (herein called the Company)
175 Water Street, Twelfth Floor
New
York, New York 10038
IRON MOUNTAIN MINE MANUSCRIPT
CLEAN-UP COST CAP POLLUTION LEGAL
LIABILITY SELECT® INSURANCE
DECLARATIONS
SOME OF THE COVERAGES CONTAIN
CLAIMS-MADE AND REPORTED REQUIREMENTS
PLEASE READ CAREFULLY.
POLICY NUMBER: EPP1950093
POLICY AGGREGATE LIMITS FOR ALL
COVERAGES, A through D - $336,706,450:
(a) For Coverage A: $301,706,450 less any amounts paid under Coverage
B
(b) For Coverage B
(c) For Coverages C and D:
$100,000,000 less any amounts paid under Coverage
A in excess of $ 201,706,450
$35,000,000 Combined
Item 5(a): INSURED PROPERTIES -
COVERAGES A and B
Each of the locations defined as the
Site in the Statement of Work
Item 5(b): INSURED PROPERTIES -
COVERAGES C and D
Each of the locations defined as the
Site in the Statement of Work excluding each of the
properties listed in Schedule C of
this Policy.
Item 6: POLICY PREMIUM: To be determined, as described in
Endorsement 3.
Item 7: RETROACTIVE DATE: Under Coverages C and D, the Pollution
Conditions must commence
on or after the date shown below.
Retroactive Date: Policy Inception
Item 8: CONTINUITY DATE: Policy Inception
Item 9: CLEAN-UP COST PROGRESS
REPORT SUBMISSION SCHEDULE: as required under
Section 6 of the Statement of
Work.
Project Coordinator, Iron Mountain
Mine
March 09, 2012
In
law and in
religion,
testimony
is a solemn attestation as to the truth of a matter. All testimonies
should be well thought out and truthful.As for EPA, "These people have
done nothing but drum up a godless, heathen worship of fish."
Read
more here:
http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/04/4160944/colorful-character-brings-unusual.html#mi_rss=Our%20Region#storylink=cpy
As for EPA, "These people have done nothing but drum up a godless, heathen worship of fish."
Read
more here:
http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/04/4160944/colorful-character-brings-unusual.html#mi_rss=Our%20Region#storylink=cpy
In law and in religion, testimony is a solemn attestation as to the truth of a matter. All testimonies should be well thought out and truthful.
- John F. Hutchens
Finis Rei Publicae ''civibusque' libertate, potestatem custodem libertate civium!
End of the central government's 'peoples-court' guarding liberty, restore custodians of liberty to the people.
Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine praevia lege poenali.
"No crime, no punishment without a previous penal law"
The absolute and imperative necessity of
preserving our water supply.
Cloud Services
MAX.gov Capabilities Sponsored by the Budget Formulation and Execution Line of Business (BFELoB)
February 2, 2012
How Water May Be Appropriated.
The right of
appropriation of water on the public domain is recognized and allowed by acts
of Congress, and rights already vested are preserved.
U.S. Rev. Stat.,
Secs. 2339, 2340;
19 U.S. Stat. at Large, 377, Chap.
107;
The acts of Congress
on the subject do not create any new right of appropriation.
They only preserve
and protect rights already accrued and vested by the law or customs of the
State.
Jennison v. Kirk, 98 U.S. 453;
Broder v. Water Co.
101 U.S.
274.
The manner of making
the appropriation is not provided. That is left to legislation or prevailing
custom of the State. It is a mistake to suppose that an irrigator obtains his
rights from the national government, further than that his right to appropriate
water on government lands is
recognized, if not granted, by act of Congress, or that the manner of making an
appropriation is governed or controlled by laws enacted by Congress. His rights
are, except as stated above, controlled entirely by state laws. The laws of
this State provide specifically how appropriation of water may be made.
Sec. 1415. A person
desiring to appropriate water must post a notice, in writing, in a conspicuous place
at the point of intended diversion, stating therein:
1 That he claims the water there
flowing to the extent of (giving the number) inches, measured under a four inch
pressure.
2 The purpose for which he claims
it, and the place of intended use;
3. The means by which he intends to
divert it, and the size of the flume, ditch, pipe, or aqueduct in which he
intends to divert it;
A copy of the notice must, within
ten days after it is posted, be recorded in the office of the recorder of the
county in which it is posted.
Sec. 1416. Within
sixty days after the notice is posted, the claimant must commence the
excavation or construction of the works which he intends to divert the water,
and must prosecute the work diligently and uninterruptedly to completion,
unless temporarily interrupted by snows or rain; provided, that if the erection of a dam has been recommended by the
California debris commission at or near the place where it is intended to
divert the water, the claimant shall have sixty days after completion of such
dam in which to commence the excavation or construction of the works in which
he intends to divert the water.
Sec. 1417. By “completion”
is meant conducting the waters to the place of intended use.
Civil Code, Secs.
1415-1417
The final and one of
the necessary acts of appropriation in any case, is the application of the
water to some beneficial use, and the proceedings must be with that intention
and for that purpose.
Civil Code, Secs.
1411, 1415;
Pomeroy’s Rip.
Rights, Secs. 47, 49;
Tanner’s High Line Canal &c. Co. v. Southworth, 21 Pac.
Rep. 1028;
Fort Morgan L. & C. Co. v. South Platte Ditch co., 30 Pac. Rep. 1032
Davis v. Gale, 32 Cal. 26;
Maeris v. Bicknell, 7
Cal. 261;
Combs v. Agricultural
Ditch Co., 28 Pac. Rep. 966;
Weaver v. Eureka Lake
Co., 15 Cal.
271.
And if the claimant
proceeds under the code provisions for the appropriation of water, he must,
after posting and recording the required notice, prosecute the work necessary
to make the diversion with ordinary and reasonable dispatch. The law does not
required unusual or extraordinary effort.
Ophir Mining Co. v.
Carpenter, 4 Nev.
534
These provisions
regulating the manner in which water may be appropriated are entirely inadequate, the final act of
supplying the water to a useful purpose, cannot be ascertained in any
satisfactory way.
Hence water rights
become inextricably confused, remedied only by expensive litigation.
It is a nefarious law
that permits such confusion of rights and claims and imposes the burden upon
irrigation of settling claims to water at such enormous expense.
The utter insufficiency
is well understood by all who have had occasion to deal with it.
Prof. Elwood Mead, formerly State Engineer of
Wyoming, wrote a commentary entitled “Water Rights on the Missouri
River and its Tributaries;”
“On many rivers there are now a
multitude of claims to the common supply. These rights have to be defined in
some way. If laws do not define them, a resort to the courts is all that
intervenes between the just rights of water-users and anarchy. In many States
the exigencies created by a failure to enact the administrative code have
compelled the courts to become practically both the creators and enforcer of
water laws. They have to devise a procedure for adjudication, supplement the
statute law in deciding what rights have been stabled, and finally have to
protect irrigator’s priorities by a liberal exercise of government by
injunction. The growing volume of this litigation, together with the uncertain
and contradictory character of many of the decisions is making a heavy burden
to irrigators and a serious menace to progress.”
Upon a review of this
branch of the subject at hand, one cannot but feel the need for an intelligent
revision of our entire system of laws relating to the appropriation and use of
water.
The subject is one of such vast importance to
the State and the laws are so imperfect and inadequate that it is amazing that
some improvement of the laws should not have been made long before this.
Effect of
Appropriation.
The general effect of the appropriation of
water is to give to the appropriator the perfect right to “the continued use of
the amount of water appropriated, subject, of course, to the rights of superior
rights and prior appropriations.
Under our statute,
and independent of it, the rule “first in time, first in right,” prevails
between appropriators, Civil Code, Sec. 1414,.
As between appropriators
and riparian owners, the rule is different. The right of the riparian owner, as
we have seen, grows out of his ownership of land bordering a stream. It does
not depend upon his actual use of the water as in case of and appropriator. He
does not lose his right by a mere failure to exercise it by a diversion or use
of the water. He may lose his right, however, by suffering someone else to to
use it adversely. The question of pf priority of time as between a riparian
owner and an appropriator can arise only in respect of the time such owner
acquired title to his land, and the time of the appropriation by another,
unless the question of continued adverse use arises. In this respect, the
question of time is important because, if the appropriation is made before the
riparian owner acquired title from the government, the appropriator is first in
time and first in right.
Corporations engaged in the business of furnishing water
for irrigation, under the laws of California,
exercising our right of eminent domain.
“Section II-1/2, Nothing in this Act
contained shall be construed to prohibit or invalidate any contract already
made, or which shall hereafter be made, by or with any of the persons,
companies, associations, or corporations described in section 2 of this Act,
relating to the sale, rental, or distribution of water, or to the sale or
rental of easements and servitudes of the right to the flow and use of water;
nor to prohibit or interfere with the vesting of rights under any such
contract. Stat. 1897, p. 49.
“Bona fide owner of agricultural lands desiring to improve
the same by conducting waters thereon.”
In re Central Irr.
Dist. 117 Cal.,
382, 398.
The statute of 1862 related to water furnished in counties outside of cities and towns provided;
" Every company organized as aforesaid shall have power, and the
same is hereby granted, to make rules and regulations for the management
and preservation of their works, not inconsistent with the laws of this
State, and for the use and distribution of the waters and the
navigation of the canals, and to establish, collect, and receive rates,
water rents, or tolls, which shall be subject to regulation by the board
of supervisors of the county or counties in which the work is situated,
but which shall not be reduced by the supervisors so low as to yield to
the stockholders less than one and one-half per cent. per month on the
capital invested."Stat. 1862, 540, 541 Sec. 3
In 1879, our present
constitution was adopted, and went into effect January 1, 1880. Article XIV of
the constitution begins as follows:---
USE AND RATES
Section I. The use of all water now appropriated, or that may
hereafter be appropriated, for sale, rental, or distribution, is hereby
declared to be a public use, and subject to the regulation and control of the
State, in the manner to be prescribed by law; provided, that the rates or
compensation to be collected by any person, company, or corporation in this
State for the use of water supplied to any city or town, or the inhabitants
thereof, shall be fixed, annually, by the board of supervisors, or city and
county, or city or town council, or other governing body of such city and
county, or city or town, by ordinance or otherwise, in the manner that other
ordinances or legislative acts or resolutions are passed by such body, and
shall continue in force for one year, and no longer. Such ordinances or
resolutions shall be passed in the month of February of each year, and take
effect on the first day of July thereafter. Any board or body failing to pass
the necessary ordinance or resolutions shall be subject to peremptory process
to compel action at the suit of any party interested, and shall be liable to
such further processes and penalties as the legislature may prescribe. Any
person, company, or corporation collecting water rates in any city and county,
or and city or town in this state, otherwise than as established, shall forfeit
the franchises and water-works of such person, company, or corporation to the
city and county, or city or town where the same are collected, for the public
use.
Sec. 2. The right to
collect rates or compensation for the use of water supplied to any county, city
and county, or town, or the inhabitants thereof, is a franchise, and cannot be
exercised except by authority of and in the manner prescribe by law.
Const. Cal. Art. XIV, Secs. 1 and 2
The Supreme Court of
California has held that the decree of confirmation is binding and conclusive,
not only as to the district and its property-owners, but as against the State
of California
and the whole world. Crall v. Poso Irr. Dist., 87 Cal., 140; Board of Directors Modesto Dist v. Trega, 88 Cal., 334; People v. Linda Vista Irr. Dist.,
May 18, 1900, .
“An irrigation district is held to be a public corporation
that cannot be dissolved for misuser or non-user of its corporate powers in the
absence of a law conferring power on courts to pass a judicial sentence
dissolving such corporation upon those grounds.” People v. Selm Irr. Dist., 98., Cal., 206, Stat.
1872 p. 945. The Wright Act.
Stat 1889, p. 15, Stat. 1891, pp 142, 244. Stat. 1893 pp.
175, 516, The Confirmation act.
Water Rights:
Water rights in California can be held by any legal entity.
There are no restrictions on who can hold water rights, thus the owner
can be an individual, related individuals, non-related individuals,
trusts, corporations, government agencies, etc.. Water rights are
considered real property (they can be owned separately from the land on
which the water is used or diverted) and can be transferred from one
owner to another, both temporarily or permanently. Any transfer (sale,
lease, or exchange) is subject to approval by the State Water Board
through the application process discussed above. Approval is granted
upon finding that the transfer would not result in injury to any other
water right and would not unreasonably affect fish, wildlife, or other
instream beneficial use.
An appropriative water right in California can be
maintained only by continuous beneficial use, and can be lost by five or
more continuous years of non-use. Riparian rights, on the other hand,
cannot be lost through non-use. Appropriative rights can also be lost
through abandonment, but to constitute abandonment of an appropriative
right, there must be the intent not to resume the beneficial use of the
water right. As a result, abandonment is always voluntary. The rights to
waters lost through abandonment or non-use revert to the public, but
only after notice has been given and a public hearing is held.
Adjudications:
In California, adjudication can be initiated through the
court or through statutory procedures. Court initiated adjudication
occurs when a water right lawsuit is filed in court (all surface and
ground water rights may be included in this procedure). In the case of a
court initiated adjudication, the court often asks the State Water
Board to act a referee and to conduct an investigation and report back.
Statutory adjudications result when one or more entities claim a right
from a specific source and file a petition with the State Water Board.
The statutory procedure can be used to determine all rights to any body
of water including percolating groundwater. The result of a statutory
adjudication is a decree that integrates all rights on the water source
and sets quantity, season, priority, etc..
California statute«.— (1) Under Civ. Code § 1007, the
running of limitations operates on the state in respect to any property
not dedicated to public use as soon as adverse possession thereof begins
without reference to a presumed grant. Peo. v. Banning Co., 140 P 587.
(2) A reservation of swamp lands of the state from s.-ile by state
statute is a mere restriction on the general power delegated to the
officers of the state to sell swamp lands, and the lands may be acquired
by adverse possession, unless dedicated to a public use. Peo. v.
Banning Co., 140 P 587. (3) Where tidelands of the state have been
dedicated to a public use, there can be no adverse possession thereof to
start the running of limitations against any action by the state or its
authorized agencies to assert the public right or such possession as
will give title by prescription to the adverse claimants against the
public right. Peo. v. Banning Co., 140 P 587. (4) It has been held by
the supreme court of the United States that the statute declares that
the people of the state will not sue any person for or in respect of any
real property by reason of the right or title of the people to the
same, unless certain facts exist, was held to be obviated, as regards
land in the bay of San Francisco beyond the established harbor line, by
the act creating the board of state harbor commissioners and directing
them to take possession of all that portion of the bay lying beyond the
established harbor line. Weber v. Harbor Comrs., 18 Wall. 57, 68, 21 L.
ed. 798. The court In this case said:
"It is contended with much force that the statute only
applies to lands which the State holds, as private proprietor, for sale
or other disposition, and in respect to which the title may be lost by
adverse possession, as defined in the same statute, and not to lands
which she holds as sovereign In trust for the public. . . . Where lands
are held by the State simply for sale or other disposition, and not as
sovereign in trust for the public, there Is some reason in requiring the
assertion of her rights within a limited period, when any portion of
such lands Is intruded upon, or occupied without her permission, and the
policy of the statute would be carried out by restricting its
application to such cases."
11-] In Minnesota it is held, however, under the statutory
provision that the limitations for the commencement of actions "shall
apply to the same actions when brought in the name of the state, or in
the name of any officer," etc., that no distinction can be made between
actions brought as "sovereign" or In a governmental capacity and those
brought as "proprietary" or such as a private person might bring. St.
Pnul v. Chicago, etc., R. Co., 45 Minn. 387, 48 NW 17.
46. Buckner v. Ktrkland, 110 S W 399, 33 KyL 603.
47. State v. Seattle, 57 Wash. 602, 107 P 827, 27 LRANS 11S8.
48. Rochester v. Kennedy, 229 Pa. 251, 78 A 133; Bagley v.
Wallace, 16 Serg. & R. (Pa.) 245; State v. Arledge, 18 S. C. L. 401,
23 AmD 145. And see cases Infra this note. Compare Chamberlain v.
Ahrens, 55 Mich. Ill, 20 NW 814 (where it was said that before the
express statutory enactment title could be acquired to land owned by the
state and held In a proprietary right as distinguished from lands held
In trust for the public).
??] Where lands have been forfeited to the State under the
delinquent tax laws or otherwise, (1) they cannot be the subject of
adverse possession while the title thus acquired remains in the state.
Bagley v. Wallace, 16 Serg. & R. (Pa.) 245. (2) And if the lands
were held adversely to the owner at the time of the forfeiture the
adverse character of the occupancy ceases when the state acquires title
and cannot be asserted against either the state or its grantee.
Armstrong v. Morrill, 14 Wall. (U. S.) 120, 20 L. ed. 765; Hall v.
Gittings, 2 Harr. & J. (Md.) 112: Levasser v. Washburn, 11 Gratt.
(52 Va.) 572. 578; Hale v. Branscum, 10 Gratt. (51 Va.) 418; Staats v.
Board, 10 Gratt. (51 Va.) 400; Hall v. Webb, 21 W. Va. 318. In Levas.scr
v. Washburn, supra, it was said; "It Is true, in a certain sense, the
commonwealth takes the land on forfeiture in the same plight and
condition in which It stood at the time of the forfeiture. The
commonwealth takes the estate and title of the former owner, and no
other. If at the time of the forfeiture his title were absolutely bound
by the adversary possession of another, it may be no title would vest in
the commonwealth, unless it were saved by the existence of her lien on
the land for arrears of taxes; a point upon which I express no opinion.
But if when the forfeiture accrued the right of entry still remained to
the owner, though an adversary possession had been commenced, the
possession as to her must lose Its adversary character, and she must
take and hold the subject with the same rights, privileges and
immunities which pertain to any other lands held by her In her demesne. I
can perceive no good reason why any discrimination should be made, or
why she should hold forfeited lands upon different principles and with
diminished privileges from those applying to other subjects of similar
character."
| $ 448] 2. Time When the Statute Commences to Run—a.
General Rule. The statute begins to run against a grantee of the
sovereignty only from the time when he acquires title; in view of the
rule excluding the government from the operation of the statute an occupancy prior to that time will not be deemed
adverse and can have no effect to give title by adverse possession
against grantees of the federal or state governments. The
applications of this general rule, however, are not uniform, as will
hereinafter appear.
[§ 449] b. Applications of Rule—(1) Introductory Statement.
Since there is a difference of opinion as to just when the title of the
federal or state government passes to a grantee the cases do not
agree in the application of the above stated general rule.
[4 450] (2) Grantees of the Federal Government—(a) Rule
That Patent Must Issue—aa. In General. On the ground that the title of
the United States does not pass until the issuance of a patent it is
held by one line of cases that the statute runs against a purchaser from
the federal government only from the date of his patent.
[b] Escheat. —Title by adverse possession cannot be
acquired in lands which have escheated to the state. Harlock v. Jackson,
5 S. C. L. 254, 6 S. C. L. 135: Ellis v. State, 3 Tex. Civ. A. 170, 21
SW 68. 24 SW 660.
By
virtue of the office of general conservator of the peace throughout the
whole kingdom, the High Warden may commit all violators of the peace, or
bind them in recognizances to keep it; but other Judges are only so in
their own Courts.
Terris, bonis et calallis rehabendis post purgationem. A
writ for a clerk to recover his lands, goods, and chattels formerly
seized, after he had cleared himself of the felony of which he was
accused, and delivered to his ordinary to be purged. Reg. Orig. 68.
ii. Local Governments
Section 2504 of the Lender Liability Act validates the
portion of the CERCLA Lender Liability Rule that addresses involuntary
acquisitions by government entities. State or local governments that
acquire property by involuntary means such as bankruptcy, tax
delinquency, or abandonment are excluded from the definition of “owner
or operator” in CERCLA, and therefore are not liable under CERCLA
Section 107(a). CERCLA § 101(20)(D). There is also a third-party
affirmative defense available for government entities that acquire
property “by escheat, or through any other involuntary transfer or
acquisition, or through the exercise of eminent domain authority by
purchase or condemnation.” CERCLA § 101(35)(A)(ii).
EPA’s 1995 enforcement policy on involuntary acquisition by
lenders and local governments was followed with the guidance memorandum,
Municipal Immunity from CERCLA Liability for Property Acquired through
Involuntary State Action (October 20, 1995). These two policy memoranda
clarified some of the issues surrounding involuntary municipal
acquisition of properties. EPA provided further clarification on these
issues in a fact sheet, The Effect of Superfund on Involuntary
Acquisitions of Contaminated Property by Government Entities issued in
December 1995. EPA continues to follow as guidance the Lender Liability
Rule and the two 1995 guidance documents and subsequent fact sheets when
addressing local government liability.
State or local government entities that acquire property
after the enactment of the 2002 Brownfields Amendments and that are
concerned about potential contamination may want to seek the advice of
counsel before taking title to ensure that they will have a liability
protection (e.g., BFPP status or protection under the involuntary
acquisition provision or third-party defense). State or local government
entities should note that to achieve BFPP status, an entity must
conduct AAI prior to purchase and comply with the other BFPP
requirements. Conducting proper AAI prior to purchase is also important
for state and local government entities relying on the BFPP protection
for brownfield grant eligibility.
Standing of Intervenor-Defendants in Public Law Litigation
Matthew I. Hall
University of Georgia School of Law
Fordham Law Review, Vol. 40, pp. 1539-1584, 2012
UGA Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2
Abstract:
Unless the plaintiff has a personal stake in the outcome, Article III of
the United States Constitution requires federal courts to dismiss a
plaintiff’s claim for lack of standing. That much is clearly established
by decades of precedent. Less understood, however, is the degree to
which Article III also requires defendants to possess a personal stake.
The significance of defendant standing often goes unnoticed in case law
and scholarship, because the standing of the defendant in most lawsuits
is readily apparent:any defendant against whom the plaintiff seeks a
remedy has a personal interest in defending against the plaintiff’s
claim.
Irregular Times' weekly column on the world beyond the gods.
irregulartimes.com/further10.html - Cached - Similar
Faith-based environmentalism is a growing trend, with an
increasing number of relgious leaders and organizations teaching that
doing God's will means ...
environment .about.com/od/.../a/ religion .htm - Cached - Similar
November 17, 2010 Andrew McCarthy's National Review on Line (NRO) post laying out the political context of capping the debt limit –
“Very soon, Leviathan's credit card will be tapped out.
Shortly after President Obama took office, Congress quietly raised the
debt ceiling from $12.3 trillion to $14.2 trillion — an amount that
strategically evaded the need to come back for more just before the
midterm elections. At its current rate of profligacy, however, the
government will steamroll past the current limit within a few months. It
will need a new, higher max-out to keep the gravy train rolling. So,
like clockwork, the punditocracy is in high dudgeon, warning the
speaker-to-be and other GOP leaders: Don't even think about not raising
the cap . Unless the ceiling is raised, we're told, life will end, the
government will collapse, the global economy will sink into deep
depression, the unemployed may have to make do on less than 99 weeks of
‘insurance,' etc. Go along, or prepare to be smeared as reckless
maniacs. In short, it's TARP time all over again .”
Grasping the California Disaster
Highlighting another self-inflicted environmentalist wound,
today George Gilder in his Wall Street Journal op-ed “California's
Destructive Green Jobs Lobby Silicon Valley” explains –
“Worst of all, economic sanity lost out in what may have
been the most important election on Nov. 2 — and, no, I'm not talking
about the gubernatorial or senate races. This was the California
referendum to repeal Assembly Bill 32, the so-called Global Warming
Solutions Act, which ratchets the state's economy back to 1990 levels of
greenhouse gases by 2020. That's a 30% drop followed by a mandated 80%
overall drop by 2050. Together with a $500 billion public-pension
overhang, the new energy cap dooms the state to bankruptcy. Conservative
pundits have lavished mock pity on the state. But as America's chief
fount of technology, California cannot go down the drain without
dragging the rest of the country with it .”
Historic Western town fights feds over very existence
by Bob Unruh
A new fight has developed in the American West over water, where
strategies to use the liquid gold routinely are litigated and
challenged. But in one case, according to a legal team, the result
literally could kill the historic town of Tombstone, Ariz.
The Goldwater Institute
today told WND it has filed a motion for a preliminary injunction that
would allow town officials to go into the Huachuca Mountains to repair
the collection system – pools, pipes and related equipment – that
provide the town with much-needed water in the desert climate.
The federal government has said no.
Nick Dranias, head of the Joseph and Dorothy Donnelly Moller Center
for Constitutional Government at the institute, said the issue is far
larger than just a dispute over whether trucks and tractors can be used
to repair city-owned property inside a federal land preserve.
“This is a case of egregious federal overreach,” an institute report
on the conflict said. “If the Forest Service can effectively seize
Tombstone’s 130-year-old water rights during a state of emergency –
rights that the service recognized as valid in 1916 – no state or local
government will be safe from the feds.”
In the arid West, most cities and towns, including Cheyenne, Wyo.,
and the Denver metropolitan area, draw at least some of their water from
collection systems on federal lands. In other parts of the nation,
municipalities have their wells and other critical infrastructure
sometimes on federal properties.
“By denying Tombstone access to its water, the Forest Service is
threatening to directly regulate Tombstone to death,” the institute
said.
The shortage developed because of the Monument Fire in 2011, which
denuded the hillsides of vegetation. After the fire, record-breaking
monsoon rains hit the region, triggering huge mudslides that left
boulders the size of cars tumbling down hillsides.
The slides crushed Tombstone’s mountain spring waterlines and
destroyed reservoirs for the town’s main water supply network.
“In some areas, Tombstone’s pipeline is under 12 feet of mud, rocks
and other debris, while in other places, it is hanging in mid-air due to
the ground being washed out from under it,” the institute reported.
However, instead of allowing repairs as has happened in the past,
“federal bureaucrats are refusing to allow Tombstone to unearth its
springs and restore its waterlines unless [city officials] jump through a
lengthy permitting process that will require the city to use horses and
hand tools to remove boulders the size of Volkswagens.”
Dranias told WND the organization expects to hear a decision on its
request for a preliminary injunction by the end of next month.
He called the skirmish just the “tip of the iceberg.”
He said there is evidence that the Forest Service under Barack
Obama’s leadership is adopting a comprehensive plan “to clear federal
lands of any private or non-federal uses.”
Ranchers in the West, according to Dranias, have been told to give up
their various access and water rights, ski resorts have faced problems
with access to federal lands and Indian tribes have been dealt the same
blow.
In
another Arizona location, he said, a longstanding RV establishment,
basically a permanent retirement community, has been denied a renewed
lease on the land it has improved.
“The way I look at it is if they can break Tombstone, take
Tombstone’s mountain water rights, then nobody is safe,” he
said.
History, he noted, is on the side of the town and its people.
A brief submitted to the court notes that in 1916, Tombstone’s
predecessor in interest to the rights at issue, Huachuca Water Company,
obtained a letter from the Forest Service admitting that it had full
right and title to the Huachuca Mountain water infrastructure.
“What was abundantly obvious to defendants in 1916 is now being
completely disregarded,” the brief said. “In fact, the chain of title to
Tombstone’s water rights, infrastructure and rights of way in the
Huachuca Mountains is clear. Tombstone actually holds previously
adjudicated water rights, as well as appurtenant and independent land
use, pipeline and access rights of way.”
The brief continued, “Defendants’ conduct in this case can only be
explained as an arbitrary and capricious effort to enforce fealty to a
clearly erroneous interpretation of federal law.”
It’s a key 10th Amendment fight, according to the institute, because,
“Just as the federal government cannot regulate the states, it cannot
regulate political subdivisions of the states, like the city of
Tombstone. And despite what power it may claim, the Forest Service
certainly has no power to regulate Tombstone to death.”
Forest Service officials declined to answer questions about the court fight.
The institute noted that Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer already has declared
a state of emergency for Tombstone, gathering together “all police
powers of the state,” to address Tombstone’s need.
The town has some wells, but they are subject to contamination in the
desert region, and its water for generations has come from the clear
springs of the nearby mountains.
“Gov. Brewer’s declaration of a state of emergency underscores the
threat to public health and safety faced by Tombstone,” the court brief
explains.
“The loss of Tombstone’s municipal water supply has caused a shortage
of water for both consumption and fire suppression during peak demand.
The resulting fire hazard is readily apparent from the fact that in
December 2010 a devastating fire broke out in Tombstone’s 19th century
wooden structure historic downtown district. The entire business
district could easily have been lost.”
Recurso
de perdido amparo; amparo de libertad; amparo contra leyes; amparo como contencioso-administrativ; amparo en
materia agrari; ejidal y comunal de segundo fumarse un
calumet.
The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo Lost Empires Provincial Commission - Directorate for
Reduced Savages Vested Prior Rights in California - Writ of Papal
Oblation Protection - "Pursuit of Happiness & Mutual Warm
Feelings Secondhand Smoke Freedom Ordinance".
DISCOUNT TOBACCO CITY & LOTTERY, INC.;
LORILLARD TOBACCO COMPANY; NATIONAL
TOBACCO COMPANY, L.P.; R. J. REYNOLDS
TOBACCO COMPANY; COMMONWEALTH
BRANDS, INC.; AMERICAN SNUFF COMPANY,
LLC, fka Conwood Company, LLC,
Plaintiffs-Appellants/Cross-Appellees,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; UNITED STATES
FOOD & DRUG ADMINISTRATION; Commissioner of the United
States Food and Drug Administration;
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, Secretary of the United
States Department of Health and Human
Services,
Defendants-Appellees/Cross-Appellants.
Nos. 10-5234/5235
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Kentucky at Bowling Green.
No. 09-00117—Joseph H. McKinley, Jr., Chief District Judge.
Argued: July 27, 2011
Decided and Filed: March 19, 2012
Before: CLAY and STRANCH, Circuit Judges; BARRETT, District Judge.*
Does the Tax Man or any government agency have the right to prevent us from traveling, even
without a formal charge of a felonious crime? The answer is NO! But that's not stopping them.
“Together,
we can equip our families and
communities to be resilient through
times of hardship and to respond to
adversity in the same way America
always has – by picking ourselves up
and continuing the task of keeping
our country strong and safe.”
EPA says its
upcoming rule adding vapor intrusion from underground sources of contamination
as a pathway for determining whether a site should be placed on the Superfund
National Priorities List (NPL) is likely to reprioritize its cleanup program
toward those sites because they may pose a higher risk than other sites without
such pathways
The Campaign to Privatize the World
One of the biggest con games going on at the moment is the
sustained attack on the U.S. public school system. It’s being
perpetrated by predatory entrepreneurs (disguised as “concerned
citizens” and “education reformers”) hoping to persuade the parents of
school-age children that the only way their kids are going to get a
decent education is by paying for something that they can already get
for free. You might say it’s the same marketing campaign that launched
bottled water.
§ 1988. Proceedings in
vindication of civil rights
(a) Applicability of
statutory and common law
The jurisdiction in civil and
criminal matters conferred on the
district courts by the provisions of
titles 13, 24, and 70 of the Revised
Statutes for the protection of all
persons in the United States in their
civil rights, and for their
vindication, shall be exercised and
enforced in conformity with the laws
of the United States, so far as such
laws are suitable to carry the same
into effect; but in all cases where
they are not adapted to the object, or
are deficient in the provisions
necessary to furnish suitable remedies
and punish offenses against law, the
common law, as modified and changed by
the constitution and statutes of the
State wherein the court having
jurisdiction of such civil or criminal
cause is held, so far as the same is
not inconsistent with the Constitution
and laws of the United States, shall
be extended to and govern the said
courts in the trial and disposition of
the cause, and, if it is of a criminal
nature, in the infliction of
punishment on the party found guilty.
(b) Attorney’s fees
In any action or proceeding to
enforce a provision of sections
1981,
1981a,
1982,
1983,
1985, and
1986 of this title, title IX of
Public Law 92–318 [
20 U.S.C.
1681 et seq.], the Religious
Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 [
42 U.S.C.
2000bb et seq.], the Religious
Land Use and Institutionalized Persons
Act of 2000 [
42 U.S.C.
2000cc et seq.], title VI of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 [
42 U.S.C.
2000d et seq.], or section
13981 of this title, the court,
in its discretion, may allow the
prevailing party, other than the
United States, a reasonable attorney’s
fee as part of the costs, except that
in any action brought against a
judicial officer for an act or
omission taken in such officer’s
judicial capacity such officer shall
not be held liable for any costs,
including attorney’s fees, unless such
action was clearly in excess of such
officer’s jurisdiction.
(c) Expert fees
In awarding an attorney’s fee under
subsection (b) of this section in any
action or proceeding to enforce a
provision of section
1981 or
1981a of this title, the court,
in its discretion, may include expert
fees as part of the attorney’s fee.
NINTH CIRCUIT RELIES ON STATE LAW TO
DETERMINE CERCLA OWNER LIABILITY
Steven M. Siros
Jenner & Block LLC
On March 14, 2011, the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals affirmed a California district court ruling that
found BCI Coca-Cola Bottling Co. (BCI) not liable as
an owner under CERCLA. In Los Angeles v. San
Pedro Boat Works, the city of Los Angeles sued BCI
to recover response costs it had incurred to remediate
contaminated sediments in the Los Angeles Harbor.
According to the complaint, the City alleged that the
activities of BCI’s predecessor-in-interest, Pacific
American, Inc. (Pacific-American) contributed to the
sediment contamination in the harbor. Pacific-American
did not own the boat works facility outright but rather
had historically operated the boat works facility
pursuant to a permit that had been issued by the City
of Los Angeles. In support of its CERCLA claims, the
City argued that because Pacific-American owned the
permit, it was an “owner” under CERCLA. The City
also argued that Pacific-American was liable as an
“operator” under CERCLA. The district court
disagreed, finding that BCI was neither an “owner” nor
an “operator” under CERCLA. The City appealed the
district court’s finding that BCI was not an “owner”
under CERCLA; however, for reasons that are not
clear from the record, the City elected not to appeal
the “operator” liability determination.
On appeal, the Ninth Circuit looked first to the
language in the CERCLA statute for guidance on
whether BCI was an “owner” under the statute.
CERCLA defines the term “owner” to mean “in the
case of an onshore facility or an offshore facility, any
person owning or operating such facility” (42 U.S.C.
§ 9601(20)(A)(ii)), which definition the court noted
had already been found by the U.S. Supreme Court to
be “entirely tautological, and thus useless.” San Pedro,
2011 WL 855858, at *5 (9th Cir. 2011); see also
United States v. Bestfoods, 524 U.S. 51, 66 (1998).
The Ninth Circuit noted that it had previously grappled
with how to define the term “owner” under CERCLA
in Long Beach Unified School District v. Dorothy B.
Goodwin California Living Trust, 32 F.3d 1364 (9th
Cir. 1994). In Long Beach, the court was faced with
the question of whether an entity that owned an
easement over a parcel of property was an owner
under CERCLA. Acknowledging that the statute itself
provides little guidance as to what types of entities
might constitute “owners” for purposes of CERCLA
liability, the court concluded that CERCLA should be
read as “incorporating the common law definitions of
its terms.” Id. at 1368. The Long Beach court
therefore looked to California common law and found
that numerous California courts had distinguished
between an interest in an easement and outright
property ownership. The court therefore concluded
that an easement holder was not an owner for
purposes of CERCLA. Id. at 1370. The Ninth Circuit
acknowledged that its holding in Long Beach was not
conclusive as to whether BCI qualified as an owner
under CERCLA; however, the court stated that its
Long Beach holding was instructive in that it illustrated
the distinction applied by California state courts
between absolute title to real property and less than fee
title to a possessory interest in real property.
The San Pedro court also recognized, however, that
courts in other circuits had not adopted the approach
articulated by the Long Beach court. Rather, these
courts had approached the issue by examining whether
the holder of the property interest possessed “site
control” over the facility. For example, the Second
Circuit established a multifactor test for evaluating
CERCLA owner liability, which included, among other
things, an evaluation of whether a party was
responsible for (i) the payment of taxes and insurance
or (ii) making structural and other repairs. See
Commander Oil Corp. v. Barlo Equip. Corp., 215
F.3d 321 (2d Cir. 2000). Similarly, in United States v.
South Carolina Recycling & Disposal, Inc., 963 F.
Supp. 984, 1003 (D.S.C. 1986), the district court
concluded that a lessee was liable as an owner under
CERCLA because it “maintained control over and
responsibility for the use of the property and,
essentially, stood in the shoes of the property owners.”
Rather than adopting the more flexible (and, according
to the Ninth Circuit, more nebulous) analytical
framework employed by the Second Circuit in
9
Commander Oil, the Ninth Circuit instead affirmed the
approach originally articulated by the Long Beach
court and looked to California law to determine
whether BCI was an “owner” under CERCLA. The
San Pedro court noted that California state courts
have consistently distinguished between possessory
interests in property such as a revocable permit and
title ownership. 2011 WL 855858, at *8 (citing
Auerbach v. Assessment Appeals, Bd. No. 1, 137
P.3d 951, 956 (Cal. 2006)). As such, the court found
that the holder of a permit for a specific use of real
property is not the “owner” of that real property for
purposes of CERCLA, especially where, as occurred
in this case, the City of Los Angeles retained the power
to control BCI’s use of the real property through the
revocation of the permit.
The Ninth Circuit noted that its interpretation of the
term “owner” was particularly appropriate in light of
the permissive “authority to control” standard for
CERCLA operator liability that had already been
adopted by the Ninth Circuit. See Kaiser Aluminum
& Chem. Corp. v. Catellus Dev. Corp., 976 F.2d
1338 (9th Cir. 1992) (holding that CERCLA operator
liability has been expansively interpreted by this court
to extend to any party with the authority to control the
cause of the contamination when the hazardous wastes
were released into the environment). This statement
could lead one to conclude that had BCI elected to
appeal the “operator” liability issue, the Ninth Circuit
would have had an easier time imposing CERCLA
“operator” liability on BCI as the successor-in-interest
to Pacific-American.
Steven M. Siros is a partner in Jenner & Block
LLP’s Chicago office. He is a member of the firm’s
Climate and Clean Technology Law,
Environmental and Workplace Health & Safety
Law, Insurance Litigation and Counseling,
Products Liability and Mass Tort Defense Practice
Groups with a focus on both litigation and
regulatory matters.
Shasta County Recorder's Office
 |
Document ID: |
1992-0007121 |
|
|
Assessor Parcel #: |
Please Contact Assessor's Office |
|
Recorded on: |
2/18/1992 |
|
|
Book Page #: |
Book: 2819 : Page: 27 |
|
No. of Pages: |
Unknown |
|
|
Image: |
Documents can only be viewed in Records Office, Internet access is not available. |
RELEASE OF JUDGMENT
Grantors: |
Grantees: |
| CALIF STATE OF |
IRON MOUNTAIN MINES INC |
States may make
whatever laws they wish (consistent with their State Constitutions)
except as prohibited by the US Constitution. Only Laws made by Congress,
which are pursuant to the Constitution, qualify as part of the General
Government Law of the Land.
This Constitution, and the Laws of the
United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof … shall be the
supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound
thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the
Contrary notwithstanding. [emphasis added]
By DYLAN WALSH
“As the world enters the 21st century, the human community finds itself
searching for new paradigms for water supply and management,” says a report released this month by the Water Science and Technology Board of the National Research Council, a division of the National Academy of Sciences.
“Law and practice have always been that water goes back into a river
or into groundwater or the ocean before it returns for further
treatment,” said Brent Haddad, founder and director of the Center for Integrated Water Research at the University of California, Santa Cruz, and a member of the committee
that wrote the report. The critical question, he said, is “whether that
natural stage of treatment is actually an efficient stage of
treatment.”
Sixteen experts
representing industry, government, and research fields in the social
sciences and hard sciences collaborated over three years to produce the
study, examining everything from pathogenic risks to public attitudes
about reuse.
The committee ultimately concluded that the reuse of
municipal wastewater can safely and significantly increase the nation’s
available water resources – potable and non-potable – without
intermediate discharge into the natural environment. “The technology for
treating wastewater is good enough that we don’t need that
intervention,” Dr. Haddad said.
“The fact is, people already drink reused water,” said Ken Herd, the
water supply program director for the southwest Florida district. In a
process known as “de facto reuse,” municipal water facilities are
commonly sited on rivers or reservoirs downstream from other wastewater
treatment facilities, which leads to a progression of unplanned and
unregulated water reuse, from one plant down to the next.
The
report found that levels of chemicals in existing water supplies and
recycled water are essentially equivalent. Pathogen levels were also
equivalent, and sometimes even lower, in recycled water, it said.
“Nonetheless, when reuse becomes the primary intention of water
management, this tends to create public pause,” Mr. Herd said.
Though reuse is not a silver bullet – such efforts must be
accompanied by less costly conservation and efficiency programs –
recycled water will inevitably become a “very important part of our
national water management portfolio,” Mr. Herd predicts.
Mr. Grumbles agrees. “In essence, there is no wastewater,” he said. “Just wasted water.”
William Blackstone referenced the principle of reasonableness in his Commentaries on the Law of England, which was a primary reference source of the founding generation.
Drawing together the basic features of the principle of
reasonableness,one can say that it requires exercises of delegated power
to be causally efficacious, measured and proportionate, and respective of background rights.
This principle constrains the federal executive and judicial powers
under the American Constitution even without textual specification; the
principle was part of the very nature of delegated executive and
judicial power in the eighteenth-century English legal tradition.
United Kingdom: Force Majeure - The Clause, The Definition, The Application
09 January 2012
Article by Juanita May Low
Force majeure is literally translated as "superior
forces". In contractual terms, it is recognised as the
occurrence of an unexpected event / events beyond the control of
either contracting party which disrupts the operation of the
contract such that the contracting parties are excused from their
liabilities and/or obligations under the contract. It is however
not intended to excuse any negligence or malfeasance. It can also
suspend the performance of an obligation or extend the time to
perform the same.
Force majeure is only recognised in English law if there is a
force majeure clause in the contract or a reference in the contract
to force majeure. This is different from civil law jurisdictions
where force majeure can apply regardless.
The purpose and effect of a force majeure clause is to define,
as precisely as possible, the circumstances under which a
contracting party is released from its contractual obligations.
Parties have the ability to negotiate the scope of the clause (i.e.
how wide / expansive the clause is) and the specific instances to
be included within the clause. For an event to be regarded as a
force majeure event, it must fulfil three tests:
- Externality – the event / circumstance must be beyond
the control of the contracting parties.
- Unpredictability – the event / circumstance cannot be
anticipated / foreseeable / expected.
- Irresistibility – the event / circumstance is
unavoidable.
Historically, force majeure events were recognised as forces of
nature or acts of God events. However, the clause can and has been
expanded to include events which are industry or transaction
specific. Certain events created by extraneous human intervention
can also fall under the category of force majeure events.
Example: fire, flood, earthquake, storm, hurricane, other nature
disasters, war, invasion, act of foreign enemies, hostilities,
civil war, rebellion, revolution, insurrection, military or usurped
power or confiscation, terrorist activities, nationalisation,
government sanction, blockage, embargo, labour dispute, strike,
lockout or interruption or failure of electricity or telephone
service.
In the event that there is only a reference to force majeure
– example "force majeure excepted", what
constitutes force majeure is then determined on a case by case
basis. This would include an "Act of God" / "forces
of nature" event but can also extend to extraneous human
intervention events.
The burden of proof rests on the party relying upon force
majeure. The party must show that the occurrence of the event falls
under the force majeure clause or constitutes a force majeure
event, such that the party was wholly or partially prevented from
performing the contract. The party has to show that the performance
of the contract was adversely affected by the force majeure event
and that such event and/or non-performance was beyond the
party's control and that there were no reasonable or
proportionally reasonable steps to be taken to avoid the event
and/or its consequences.
Parties can also agree to impose additional conditions before
the force majeure clause can be invoked. This includes requiring
notice before invocation to allow the other party to either try to
mitigate or reduce any foreseeable losses or reserve its rights; or
placing an obligation on the invoking party to mitigate the effects
of the force majeure by taking reasonable steps to limit or prevent
the loss.
Drafting Force Majeure Clauses:
- Is a force majeure clause necessary to protect yourself in your
contractual relations?
- What might constitute a force majeure event that would be
relevant to your contractual relations which should be included in
the clause, above and beyond the standard events?
- Is the clause intended to cover only events where there is no
party at fault?
- What are the conditions, if any, to be included in the clause
– notice, mitigation, suspension of performance,
extension of time for performance, etc?
- What is the intended effect of the clause?
What to do in the event that you think the force majeure event
/ clause may apply?
- Consider the contractual position in relation to applicable law
and jurisdiction. As set out above, the position in the UK is
different from civil law jurisdictions.
- Consider the scope of all the clauses – and consider
whether there is a specific force majeure clause and what the scope
of the clause is, also any other clause which may have the effect
of extending or limiting the scope of a force majeure clause /
event.
- Consider whether the three above tests are satisfied to
determine whether the event being relied upon indeed falls under
the ambit of being a force majeure event.
- Consider all facts to determine that you meet all the
conditions that may be required to be met before the force majeure
clause is invoked.
- Consider whether you can take any steps to mitigate the loss
that may follow from the force majeure event.
§ 7659. Libel and proceedings by United States attorney
(a)
Upon receiving the report of the prize master directed by section
7658 of this title, the United States attorney for the district shall promptly—
(1)
file a libel against the prize property;
(2)
obtain a warrant from the court directing the marshal to take custody of the prize property; and
(3)
proceed to obtain a condemnation of the property.
(b)
In connection with the condemnation proceedings the United States attorney shall insure that the prize commissioners—
(1)
take proper preparatory evidence; and
(2)
take depositions de bene esse of the prize crew and of other transient persons who know any facts bearing on condemnation.
California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1032
Legal Research Home >
California Laws > Code of Civil Procedure > California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1032
(a) As used in this section, unless the context clearly
requires otherwise:
(1) "Complaint" includes a cross-complaint.
(2) "Defendant" includes a cross-defendant or a person against
whom a complaint is filed.
(3) "Plaintiff" includes a cross-complainant or a party who files
a complaint in intervention.
(4) "Prevailing party" includes the party with a net monetary
recovery, a defendant in whose favor a dismissal is entered, a
defendant where neither plaintiff nor defendant obtains any relief,
and a defendant as against those plaintiffs who do not recover any
relief against that defendant. When any party recovers other than
monetary relief and in situations other than as specified, the
"prevailing party" shall be as determined by the court, and under
those circumstances, the court, in its discretion, may allow costs or
not and, if allowed may apportion costs between the parties on the
same or adverse sides pursuant to rules adopted under Section 1034.
(b) Except as otherwise expressly provided by statute, a
prevailing party is entitled as a matter of right to recover costs in
any action or proceeding.
(c) Nothing in this section shall prohibit parties from
stipulating to alternative procedures for awarding costs in the
litigation pursuant to rules adopted under Section 1034.
California Civil Code Section 1717
Legal Research Home >
California Laws > Civil Code > California Civil Code Section 1717
(a) In any action on a contract, where the contract
specifically provides that attorney's fees and costs, which are
incurred to enforce that contract, shall be awarded either to one of
the parties or to the prevailing party, then the party who is
determined to be the party prevailing on the contract, whether he or
she is the party specified in the contract or not, shall be entitled
to reasonable attorney's fees in addition to other costs.
Where a contract provides for attorney's fees, as set forth above,
that provision shall be construed as applying to the entire
contract, unless each party was represented by counsel in the
negotiation and execution of the contract, and the fact of that
representation is specified in the contract.
Reasonable attorney's fees shall be fixed by the court, and shall
be an element of the costs of suit.
Attorney's fees provided for by this section shall not be subject
to waiver by the parties to any contract which is entered into after
the effective date of this section. Any provision in any such
contract which provides for a waiver of attorney's fees is void.
(b) (1) The court, upon notice and motion by a party, shall
determine who is the party prevailing on the contract for purposes of
this section, whether or not the suit proceeds to final judgment.
Except as provided in paragraph (2), the party prevailing on the
contract shall be the party who recovered a greater relief in the
action on the contract. The court may also determine that there is no
party prevailing on the contract for purposes of this section.
(2) Where an action has been voluntarily dismissed or dismissed
pursuant to a settlement of the case, there shall be no prevailing
party for purposes of this section.
Where the defendant alleges in his or her answer that he or she
tendered to the plaintiff the full amount to which he or she was
entitled, and thereupon deposits in court for the plaintiff, the
amount so tendered, and the allegation is found to be true, then the
defendant is deemed to be a party prevailing on the contract within
the meaning of this section.
Where a deposit has been made pursuant to this section, the court
shall, on the application of any party to the action, order the
deposit to be invested in an insured, interest-bearing account.
Interest on the amount shall be allocated to the parties in the same
proportion as the original funds are allocated.
(c) In an action which seeks relief in addition to that based on a
contract, if the party prevailing on the contract has damages
awarded against it on causes of action not on the contract, the
amounts awarded to the party prevailing on the contract under this
section shall be deducted from any damages awarded in favor of the
party who did not prevail on the contract. If the amount awarded
under this section exceeds the amount of damages awarded the party
not prevailing on the contract, the net amount shall be awarded the
party prevailing on the contract and judgment may be entered in favor
of the party prevailing on the contract for that net amount.
Section: 1717
Last modified: February 13, 2012
CAL. CCP. CODE § 1033.5 : California Code - Section 1033.5
Search CAL. CCP. CODE § 1033.5 : California Code - Section 1033.5
(a)The following items are allowable as costs under Section 1032:
(1)Filing, motion, and jury fees.
(2)Juror food and lodging while they are kept together during trial and after the jury retires for deliberation.
(3)Taking,
videotaping, and transcribing necessary depositions including an
original and one copy of those taken by the claimant and one copy of
depositions taken by the party against whom costs are allowed, and
travel expenses to attend depositions.
(4)Service of process by a public officer, registered process server, or other means, as follows:
(A)When service is by a public officer, the recoverable cost is the fee authorized by law at the time of service.
(B)If
service is by a process server registered pursuant to Chapter 16
(commencing with Section 22350) of Division 8 of the Business and
Professions Code, the recoverable cost is the amount actually incurred
in effecting service, including, but not limited to, a stakeout or other
means employed in locating the person to be served, unless such charges
are successfully challenged by a party to the action.
(C)When service is by publication, the recoverable cost is the sum actually incurred in effecting service.
(D)When
service is by a means other than that set forth in subparagraph (A),
(B) or (C), the recoverable cost is the lesser of the sum actually
incurred, or the amount allowed to a public officer in this state for
such service, except that the court may allow the sum actually incurred
in effecting service upon application pursuant to paragraph (4) of
subdivision (c).
(5)Expenses of attachment including keeper's fees.
(6)Premiums on necessary surety bonds.
(7)Ordinary witness fees pursuant to Section 68093 of the Government Code.
(8)Fees of expert witnesses ordered by the court.
(9)Transcripts of court proceedings ordered by the court.
(10)Attorney fees, when authorized by any of the following:
(A)Contract.
(B)Statute.
(C)Law.
(11)Court reporters fees as established by statute.
(12)Models
and blowups of exhibits and photocopies of exhibits may be allowed if
they were reasonably helpful to aid the trier of fact.
(13)Any
other item that is required to be awarded to the prevailing party
pursuant to statute as an incident to prevailing in the action at trial
or on appeal.
(b)The following items are not allowable as costs, except when expressly authorized by law:
(1)Fees of experts not ordered by the court.
(2)Investigation expenses in preparing the case for trial.
(3)Postage, telephone, and photocopying charges, except for exhibits.
(4)Costs in investigation of jurors or in preparation for voir dire.
(5)Transcripts of court proceedings not ordered by the court.
(c)Any award of costs shall be subject to the following:
(1)Costs are allowable if incurred, whether or not paid.
(2)Allowable
costs shall be reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation
rather than merely convenient or beneficial to its preparation.
(3)Allowable costs shall be reasonable in amount.
(4)Items not mentioned in this section and items assessed upon application may be allowed or denied in the court's discretion.
(5)When
any statute of this state refers to the award of "costs and attorney's
fees," attorney's fees are an item and component of the costs to be
awarded and are allowable as costs pursuant to subparagraph (B) of
paragraph (10) of subdivision (a). Any claim not based upon the court's
established schedule of attorney's fees for actions on a contract shall
bear the burden of proof. Attorney's fees allowable as costs pursuant to
subparagraph (B) of paragraph (10) of subdivision (a) may be fixed as
follows: (A) upon a noticed motion, (B) at the time a statement of
decision is rendered, (C) upon application supported by affidavit made
concurrently with a claim for other costs, or (D) upon entry of default
judgment. Attorney's fees allowable as costs pursuant to subparagraph
(A) or (C) of paragraph (10) of subdivision (a) shall be fixed either
upon a noticed motion or upon entry of a default judgment, unless
otherwise provided by stipulation of the parties.
Attorney's fees
awarded pursuant to Section 1717 of the Civil Code are allowable costs
under Section 1032 as authorized by subparagraph (A) of paragraph (10)
of subdivision (a).
The prevailing party in litigation is entitled to recover statutory
costs in any action or proceeding. .Expert witness fees are an
additional item of costs awardable to a
plaintiff, and thus, are not the sole item of costs available to a
plaintiff.
T.W. Arman & IMMI are entitled to reasonable attorney fees too.
James J. Periconi, Esq. | March 29, 2011
INNOCENCE, PRESUMPTION OF - The indictment or
formal charge against any person is not evidence of guilt. Indeed, the
person is presumed by the law to be innocent. The law does not require a
person to prove his innocence or produce any evidence at all. The
Government has the burden of proving a person guilty beyond a reasonable
doubt, and if it fails to do so the person is (so far as the law is
concerned) not guilty.
Presumption of Innocence
The concept of the presumption of innocence had its roots
in the Common Law, long established in Britain and thence in America .
Besides being a part of the environment of justice in which our Founders
lived, the concept is central to the ideas of Freedom and Due Process
of Law. In addition, the common sense of any reasonably enlightened
people must dictate that a person accused is innocent until proven
guilty, just as much as they would believe that the other rights of
defendants must be reasonably protected. Those protections for the
accused were incorporated by the Founders into the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth
and Seventh Articles of the Bill of Rights , and could not have been of any import had there not first been a presumption of innocence.
A close parallel to the presumption of innocence is the
presumption of freedom -- that freedom is not something the government
rations to the people, but rather a birthright the people own in its
entirety, to be loaned back in small parts to the government with their
knowing consent. The presumption of freedom is guaranteed by the Ninth
and Tenth Articles of the Bill of Rights -- too often made light of
today, but of key importance to the concept of individual Liberty .
Those Articles demand, in essence, that unless specifically stated to
the contrary by the Constitution, the people shall be presumed to own
every freedom, as well as the power of self-determination.
If a citizen cannot be presumed innocent until proven
guilty, he likewise will not be presumed to have freedom without an
argument over his right to that freedom. At that juncture, both freedom
and innocence yield to the convenience of government.
In both cases, the opposite must prevail if we are to call ourselves Americans.
The principle that there is a presumption of innocence in
favor of the accused is the undoubted law, axiomatic and elementary, and
its enforcement lies at the foundation of the administration of our
criminal law.
It is stated as unquestioned in the text-books, and has
been referred to as a matter of course in the decisions of this court
and in the courts of the several States. See Taylor on Evidence, vol. 1,
c. 5, 126, 127; Wills on Circumstantial Evidence, c. 5, 91; Best on
Presumptions, part 2, c. 1, 63, 64; c. 3, 31-58; Greenleaf on Evidence,
part 5, ? ? 29, &c.; 11 Criminal Law Magazine, 3; Wharton on
Evidence, ? 1244; Phillips on Evidence, Cowen & Hill's Notes, vol.
2, p. 289; Lilienthal v. United States, 97 U.S. 237; Hopt v. Utah, 120
U.S. 430; Commonwealth v. Webster, 5 Cush. 295, 320; State v. Bartlett,
43 N.H. 224; Alexander v. People, 96 Illinois, 96; People v. Fairchild,
48 Michigan, 31; People v. Millard, 53 Michigan, 63; Commonwealth v.
Whittaker, 131 Mass. 224; Blake v. State, 3 Tex. App. 581; Wharton v.
State, 73 Alabama, 366; State v. Tibbetts, 35 Maine, 81; Moorer v.
State, 44 Alabama, 15.
Greenleaf traces this presumption to Deuteronomy , and quotes Mascardus De Probationibus to show that it was substantially embodied in the laws of Sparta and Athens . Greenl. Ev. part 5, section 29, note. Whether Greenleaf is correct or not in this view, there can be no question that the Roman law was pervaded with the results of this maxim of criminal administration , as the following extracts show:
"Let all accusers understand that they are not to prefer
charges unless they can be proven by proper witnesses or by conclusive
documents, or by circumstantial evidence which amounts to indubitable
proof and is clearer than day." Code, L. IV, T. XX, 1, 1. 25.
The noble (bivus) Trajan wrote to Julius Frontonus that
no man should be condemned on a criminal charge in his absence, because
it was better to let the crime of a guilty person go unpunished than to
condemn the innocent ." Dig. L. XLVIII, Tit. 19, 1. 5.
"In all cases of doubt, the most merciful construction of facts should be preferred." Dig. L. L, Tit. XVII, 1. 56.
"In criminal cases the milder construction shall always be preserved." Dig. L. L, Tit. XVII, 1. 155, s. 2.
"In cases of doubt it is no less just than it is safe to adopt the milder construction." Dig. L. L, Tit. XVII, 1. 192, s. 1.
Ammianus Marcellinus relates an anecdote of the Emperor
Julian which illustrates the enforcement of this principle in the Roman
law. Numerius, the governor of Narbonensis, was on trial before the
Emperor, and, contrary to the usage in criminal cases, the trial was
public. Numerius contented himself with denying his guilt, and there was
not sufficient proof against him. His adversary, Delphidius, "a
passionate man," seeing that the failure of the accusation was
inevitable, could not restrain himself, and exclaimed, "Oh, illustrious
Caesar! if it is sufficient to deny, what hereafter will become of the
guilty?" to which Julian replied, "If it suffices to accuse, what will
become of the innocent?" Rerum Gestarum, L. XVIII, c. 1. The rule thus
found in the Roman law was, along with many other fundamental and humane
maxims of that system, preserved for mankind by the canon law. Decretum
Gratiani de Presumptionibus, L. II, T. XXIII, c. 14, A.D. 1198;
[***492] Corpus Juris Canonici Hispani et Indici, R.P. Murillo Velarde,
Tom. 1, L. II, n. 140. Exactly when this presumption was in precise
words stated to be a part of the common law is involved in doubt. The
writer of an able article in the North American Review, January, 1851,
tracing the genesis of the principle, says that no express mention of
the presumption of innocence can be found in the books of the common law
earlier than the date of McNally's Evidence (1802). Whether this
statement is correct is a matter of no moment, for there can be no doubt
that, if the principle had not found formal expression in the common
law writers at an earlier date, yet the practice which flowed from it
has existed in the common law from the earliest time.
Fortescue says : "Who, then, in
England can be put to death unjustly for any crime? since he is allowed
so many pleas and privileges in favor of life; none but his neighbors,
men of honest and good repute, against whom he can have no probable
cause of exception, can find the person accused guilty. Indeed,
one would much rather that twenty guilty persons should escape the
punishment of death than that one innocent person should be condemned
and suffer capitally ." De Laudibus Legum Angliae, Amos' translation, Cambridge , 1825.
[*456] Lord Hale (1678) says :
"In some cases presumptive evidence goes far to prove a person guilty,
though there be no express proof of the fact to be committed by him, but
then it must be very warily pressed, for it is better five guilty persons should escape unpunished than one innocent person should die."
2 Hale P.C. 290. He further observes: "And thus the reasons stand on
both sides, and though these seem to be stronger than the former, yet in
a case of this moment it is safest to hold that in practice, which hath
least doubt and danger, quod dubitas, ne faceris." 1 Hale P.C. 24.
Blackstone (1753-1765) maintains that "the law
holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one
innocent suffer." 2 Bl. Com. c. 27, margin page 358, ad finem. How
fully the presumption of innocence had been evolved as a principle and
applied at common law is shown in McKinley's case (1817), 33 St. Tr.
275, 506, where Lord Gillies says: "It is impossible to look at it [a
treasonable oath which it was alleged that [**404] McKinley had taken]
without suspecting, and thinking it probable, it imports an obligation
to commit a capital crime. That has been and is my impression. But the
presumption in favor of innocence is not to be reargued by mere
suspicion. I am sorry to see, in this information, that the public
prosecutor treats this too lightly; he seems to think that the law
entertains no such presumption of innocence. I cannot listen to this. I
conceive that this presumption is to be found in every code of law which
has reason, and religion, and humanity, for a foundation. It is a maxim
which ought to be inscribed in indelible characters in the heart of
every judge and juryman; and I was happy to hear from Lord Hermand he is
inclined to give full effect to it. To overturn this, there must be
legal evidence of guilt, carrying home a decree of conviction short only
absolute certainty."
"Today's GAO report confirms my concern that EPA is allowing almost
$2 billion in taxpayer dollars to sit idle instead of using it for its
intended purpose"
GAO Report Confirms $2 Billion in EPA’s Superfund Special Accounts Idle
Washington, D.C. - A report by the Government Accountability Office
(GAO), entitled “Superfund: Status of EPA’s Efforts to Improve its
Management and Oversight of Special Accounts,” which was released today
confirms that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has almost $2
billion sitting idle in Superfund Special Accounts. This report was
requested in May by Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of
the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.
“Today’s GAO report confirms my concern
that EPA is allowing almost $2 billion in taxpayer dollars to sit idle
instead of using it for its intended purpose: to clean up superfund
sites,” Senator Inhofe said. “I am still waiting on answers from
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson regarding two questions I asked back in
May: why is EPA not using these funds, and does EPA have a plan to
obligate these funds in the future? If this is a management issue, it
needs to be resolved as soon as possible. Especially in this current
economic climate, if funds are specified for a particular project they
should be obligated and disbursed so that they can facilitate superfund
cleanups; if they are not needed, EPA must address its funding
management problems immediately.”
Specifically, GAO found that from fiscal year 1990 through October
2010, EPA’s 10 regions collected from potentially responsible parties
almost $4 billion in funds that were subsequently placed in special
accounts. Nearly half of these funds are still available to be obligated
for future Superfund cleanup; the remaining funds have already been
obligated, but not all of these obligated funds have been disbursed. As
of October 2010, of the $1.9 billion funds that EPA had obligated for
Superfund cleanup expenses, $1.6 billion had been disbursed. This means
that as of October 2010, EPA is sitting on $1.8 billion. Even more
troubling is the fact that EPA has $300 million that it has obligated
but has not been disbursed.
THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT IS FROM ROGER J. MARZULLA, FOUNDER AND GENERAL
COUNSEL, DEFENDERS OF PROPERTY RIGHTS, EXCERPTS OF HIS TESTIMONY BEFORE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE
The Founding Fathers recognized the fundamental role of
property rights in a free society. They recognized that an individual who
cannot retain the fruits of his or her labor is at risk of losing all of the
individual liberties that are guaranteed by the Constitution. Today,
unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, I think we must report that perhaps our most
endangered liberty is private property rights.
The findings of our report indicate that, as the GAO
indicates, there are fundamentally no records of takings implication analyses
being done. There are, in fact, no records of how much the Government has paid
out for the failure to observe private property rights and the failure to pay
just compensation. There are no reports to OMB, even though they are required,
and even though the purpose of that requirement was to apprise the Congress of
the extent to which agencies have been violating the Constitution, violating
private property rights, and have been required to pay as a result.
Today, the Defenders of Property Rights has issued a report
which in some ways parallels the findings of the General Accounting Office, the
Government's Accounting Office. And that report, Mr. Chairman, confirms that,
regrettably, there is a massive noncompliance with the executive order
throughout the Executive branch, and that the cost of that noncompliance is in
the range of at least one billion dollars.
Every day, we at the Defenders of Property Rights hear
from individuals who request help in dealing with governmental actions,
regulations, orders, requirements, that have caused them to lose their property
rights. I might add, Mr. Chairman, not one of the people I have talked to over
the years, the thousands of people I have talked to, has been dumping toxic
waste on his property and complaining about not being able to do so.
The executive order, as the chair has noted, was
instituted for two purposes. One, to protect our precious constitutional
liberties, and two, to protect the taxpayer's purse. Failure to observe the
requirements of that executive order, which we consider a ''look before you
leap'' type of approach, has cost taxpayers' hundreds of millions, probably
billions, of dollars.
Fundamentally, we found that of the
400 cases both filed and resolved over the period from 1991 to August of 2003,
the Government had judgments awarded of approximately $112 million against it.
There were settlements, the amount of which we could not gather, but since it
was about twice as many cases, we assumed that was about twice as much money,
or about $225 million; that is to say, about a third of a billion dollars.
We must assume that all of those people who could not
afford to hire lawyers, to file suit and go through the litigation process, to
obtain their constitutionally-guaranteed right of just compensation, probably
amount to at least three times, maybe four or five or six or ten times, the
number who actually received the payment that the Constitution entitles them
to.
PREPARED STATEMENT OF ROGER J. MARZULLA
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:
Thank you for the opportunity of testifying today with
respect to the federal government's implementation of Executive Order 12,630, ''Governmental
Actions and Interference With Civil Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.'' I congratulate the Subcommittee on instituting the first inquiry
in more than a decade into whether federal agencies are complying with their
obligations under the Takings Executive Order, which is designed to protect
individual constitutional liberties in property while saving money for the
federal government. Regrettably, in a report issued today by Defenders of
Property Rights, we conclude that widespread noncompliance with the Takings
Executive Order has resulted in massive violation of
constitutionally-guaranteed property rights, subjecting the federal government
to liability for $1 billion or more.
I. WHY CONSTITUTIONAL PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE IMPORTANT
If you believe in individual freedom, then you must
believe in property rights. As the Supreme Court has said:
Property does not have rights. People have rights. The right to enjoy property
without unlawful deprivation . . . is in truth a ''personal''
right. . . . In fact, a fundamental interdependence exists
between the personal right to liberty and the personal right in property.
Neither could have meaning without the other. That rights in property are basic
civil rights has long been recognized.
Lynch v. Household Finance Corporation, 405 U.S.
538, 552 (1972).
The protection of rights in property lies at the heart
of our constitutional system of government. The Founding Fathers, in drafting
the Constitution, drew upon classical notions of legal rights and individual
liberty dating back to the Justinian Code, Magna Carta, and the Two Treatises
of John Locke, all of which recognize the importance of property ownership in a
governmental system in which individual liberty is paramount. Concurrently, the
constitutional framers drew upon their own experience as colonists of an
oppressive monarch, whose unlimited powers vested him with the ability to
deprive his subjects of their God-given rights of ''life, liberty, and
property.''
The United States Constitution imposes a duty on
government to protect private property rights. Thus, within the Bill of Rights,
numerous provisions directly or indirectly protect private property rights. The
Fourth Amendment guarantees that people are to be ''secure in their persons,
houses, papers, and effects . . .'' The Fifth Amendment states
that no person shall ''be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due
process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just
compensation . . .'' The Fourteenth Amendment echoes the Due
Process Clauses of the Fifth Amendment, stating that no ''State shall deprive
any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of
law . . .'' Additionally, the Contracts Clause of the
Constitution indirectly protects property by forbidding states from passing any
''law impairing the Obligation of Contracts.''
The protection of private property receives such strong
emphasis in the United States Constitution because the right to own and use
property was historically understood to be critical to the maintenance of a
free society. To understand this concept, one must understand that property is
more than just land. Property is buildings, machines, retirement funds, savings
accounts, and even ideas. In short, property is the fruit of one's labor and
the ability to use, enjoy, and exclusively possess the fruits of one's labor is
the basis for a society in which individuals are free from oppression.
Arguably, there can be no true freedom for anyone if people are dependent upon
the State for food, shelter, and other basic needs. Under such a system,
nothing is safe from being taken by a majority or a tyrant because the
citizens, as government dependents, are powerless to oppose any infringement of
their rights.
The United States Supreme Court has repeatedly
explained that the primary purpose for protecting property rights is to bar
government from ''forcing some people alone to bear public burdens which, in
all fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole.''(see
footnote 1) During the birth and growth of the
administrative regulatory state, federal government agencies ignored these principles
and implemented policies that deprived owners of the use and benefit of their
property without providing compensation. Moreover, Congress consistently failed
to codify property rights protection into federal law and the judicial system's
maze-like procedures and hurdles made seeking redress for the infringement of
private property rights in the courts impractical for many property owners.
Thus, private property rights have become one of our most endangered liberties.
The
Kentucky
Resolutions,
written by Thomas Jefferson,
contained the
following
which has
often been
cited as a
justification
for both
nullification
and secession:
|
“
|
…
that in cases
of an abuse of
the delegated
powers, the
members of the
general
government,
being chosen
by the people,
a change by
the people
would be the
constitutional
remedy; but,
where powers
are assumed
which have not
been
delegated, a
nullification
of the act is
the rightful
remedy: that
every State
has a natural
right in cases
not within the
compact,
(casus non
fœderis) to
nullify of
their own
authority all
assumptions of
power by
others within
their limits:
that without
this right,
they would be
under the
dominion,
absolute and
unlimited, of
whosoever
might exercise
this right of
judgment for
them: that
nevertheless,
this
commonwealth,
from motives
of regard and
respect for
its co-States,
has wished to
communicate
with them on
the subject:
that with them
alone it is
proper to
communicate,
they alone
being parties
to the
compact, and
solely
authorized to
judge in the
last resort of
the powers
exercised
under it… .[11]
|
”
|
In
the Virginia
Resolutions,
written by James Madison
there is a
similar
argument:
|
“
|
The
resolutions,
having taken
this view of
the Federal
compact,
proceed to
infer that, in
cases of a
deliberate,
palpable, and
dangerous
exercise of
other powers,
not granted by
the said
compact, the
States, who
are parties
thereto, have
the right, and
are in duty
bound to
interpose to
arrest the
evil, and for
maintaining,
within their
respective
limits, the
authorities,
rights, and
liberties
appertaining
to them.
...The
Constitution
of the United
States was
formed by the
sanction of
the States,
given by each
in its
sovereign
capacity. It
adds to the
stability and
dignity, as
well as to the
authority of
the
Constitution,
that it rests
on this solid
foundation.
The States,
then, being
parties to the
constitutional
compact, and
in their
sovereign
capacity, it
follows of
necessity that
there can be
no tribunal
above their
authority to
decide, in the
last resort,
whether the
compact made
by them be
violated; and,
consequently,
as parties to
it, they must
themselves
decide, in the
last resort,
such questions
as may be of
sufficient
magnitude to
require their
interposition.[12]
|
Stoics
held
that no one
was a slave by
their nature;
slavery was an
external
condition
juxtaposed to
the internal
freedom of the
soul (sui
juris).
Seneca the
Younger
wrote:
|
“
|
It is
a mistake to
imagine that
slavery
pervades a
man's whole
being; the
better part of
him is exempt
from it: the
body indeed is
subjected and
in the power
of a master,
but the mind
is
independent,
and indeed is
so free and
wild, that it
cannot be
restrained
even by this
prison of the
body, wherein
it is
confined.
|
Stoic
doctrine
that the
"inner part
cannot be
delivered into
bondage"
re-emerged in
the Reformation
doctrine of
liberty of
conscience. Martin Luther
wrote:
|
Furthermore,
every man is
responsible
for his own
faith, and he
must see it
for himself
that he
believes
rightly. As
little as
another can go
to hell or
heaven for me,
so little can
he believe or
disbelieve for
me; and as
little as he
can open or
shut heaven or
hell for me,
so little can
he drive me to
faith or
unbelief.
Since, then,
belief or
unbelief is a
matter of
every one's
conscience,
and since this
is no
|
