Man faces $75G a day in EPA fines for building pond -- on his property

[Dr.3D]

I'm gonna say...yeah.

 

[Schifference]

I feel safer now!

 

[greyseal]

The EPA has no authority in the several states

http://www.wilderness.net/NWPS/documents/publiclaws/PDF/80-845.pdf




THE E.P.A. AUTHORITY IS FOR POLLUTION CONTROL OF THE FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY, OR THE FEDERAL WORKS AGENCY, AND DOES NOT APPLY TO THE SEVERAL STATES.
E.P.A. LETTER (below) STATES THE AGENCY’S AUTHORITY IS PUBLIC LAW 92-500, A MERE AMENDMENT TO THE ACT OF June 30, 1948, ch. 758, PUBLIC LAW 845(link below), an amendment cannot exceed the original enactment unless a person works for the FEDERAL SECURITY AGENY, OR THE FEDERAL WORKS AGENCY,THEY ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE E.P.A.

United States Office of Solid Waste 530-F-08-017
Environmental Protection and Emergency Response November 2008
Agency www.epa.gov/emergencies


On November 26, 2008, EPA promulgated a final rule to amend a Clean Water Act (CWA) section 311 regulation that defines the term “navigable waters” (73 FR 71941). In this action, EPA announced the vacatur of the July 17, 2002, revisions to the definition of “navigable waters” in accordance with an order, issued by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (D.D.C.) in American Petroleum Institute v. Johnson, 571 F.Supp.2d 165 (D.D.C. 2008), invalidating those revisions. The court decision also restored the regulatory definition of “navigable waters” promulgated by EPA in 1973; consequently, EPA is amending the definition of “navigable waters” in part 112 to comply with that decision. This final rule does not amend the definition of “navigable waters” in any other regulation that has been promulgated by EPA.

The term “navigable waters” of the United States means “navigable waters” as defined in section 502(7) of the FWPCA, and includes:
(1) all navigable waters of the United States, as defined in judicial decisions prior to the passage of the 1972 Amendments of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, (FWPCA) (Pub. L. 92-500) also known as the Clean Water Act (CWA), and tributaries of such waters as;
(2) interstate waters;
(3) intrastate lakes, rivers, and streams which are utilized by interstate travelers for recreational or other purposes; and
(4) intrastate lakes, rivers, and streams from which fish or shellfish are taken and sold in interstate commerce.
PARALLEL TABLE OF AUTHORITIES AND RULES
http://www.gpo.gov/help/parallel_table.pdf
Authorities

92–500..................40 Parts 21, 136, 140, 421, 429

40 CFR 116.3 - DEFINITIONS.
§ 116.3
Definitions.
As used in this part, all terms shall have the meaning defined in the Act and as given below:
The Act means the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (Pub. L. 92-500), and as further amended by the Clean Water Act of 1977 (Pub. L. 95-217), 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; and as further amended by the Clean Water Act Amendments of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-676);

Contiguous zone means the entire zone established or to be established by the United States under article 24 of the Convention of the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone;
June 30, 1948, ch. 758, title III, Sec. 311, as added Oct. 18, 1972, Pub. L. 92-500, Sec. 2, 86 Stat. 862
_____________________________________
THE ACTUAL LAW, PUBLIC LAW 92-500 AMENDED


CHAPTER 758 June 30, 1948, Public Law 845

AN ACT
To provide for water pollution control activities in the Public Health Service of the Federal Security Agency and in the Federal Works Agency, and for other purposes.
*note States retain their rights.
http://www.wilderness.net/NWPS/documents/publiclaws/PDF/80-845.pdf







http://www.wilderness.net/NWPS/documents/publiclaws/PDF/80-845.pdf
33 USC § 1270 - LAKE CHAMPLAIN BASIN PROGRAM
Source
(June 30, 1948, ch. 758, title I, § 120
The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, referred to in subsecs. (b)(1), (2)(A), (3) and (r), is act Aug. 7, 1953, ch. 345, 67 Stat. 462, as amended, which is classified generally to subchapter III (Sec. 1331 et seq.) of chapter 29 of Title 43, Public Lands

 

[GunnyFreedom]

The EPA has no authority in the several states

http://www.wilderness.net/NWPS/documents/publiclaws/PDF/80-845.pdf




THE E.P.A. AUTHORITY IS FOR POLLUTION CONTROL OF THE FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY, OR THE FEDERAL WORKS AGENCY, AND DOES NOT APPLY TO THE SEVERAL STATES.
E.P.A. LETTER (below) STATES THE AGENCY’S AUTHORITY IS PUBLIC LAW 92-500, A MERE AMENDMENT TO THE ACT OF June 30, 1948, ch. 758, PUBLIC LAW 845(link below), an amendment cannot exceed the original enactment unless a person works for the FEDERAL SECURITY AGENY, OR THE FEDERAL WORKS AGENCY,THEY ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE E.P.A.

United States Office of Solid Waste 530-F-08-017
Environmental Protection and Emergency Response November 2008
Agency www.epa.gov/emergencies


On November 26, 2008, EPA promulgated a final rule to amend a Clean Water Act (CWA) section 311 regulation that defines the term “navigable waters” (73 FR 71941). In this action, EPA announced the vacatur of the July 17, 2002, revisions to the definition of “navigable waters” in accordance with an order, issued by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (D.D.C.) in American Petroleum Institute v. Johnson, 571 F.Supp.2d 165 (D.D.C. 2008), invalidating those revisions. The court decision also restored the regulatory definition of “navigable waters” promulgated by EPA in 1973; consequently, EPA is amending the definition of “navigable waters” in part 112 to comply with that decision. This final rule does not amend the definition of “navigable waters” in any other regulation that has been promulgated by EPA.

The term “navigable waters” of the United States means “navigable waters” as defined in section 502(7) of the FWPCA, and includes:
(1) all navigable waters of the United States, as defined in judicial decisions prior to the passage of the 1972 Amendments of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, (FWPCA) (Pub. L. 92-500) also known as the Clean Water Act (CWA), and tributaries of such waters as;
(2) interstate waters;
(3) intrastate lakes, rivers, and streams which are utilized by interstate travelers for recreational or other purposes; and
(4) intrastate lakes, rivers, and streams from which fish or shellfish are taken and sold in interstate commerce.
PARALLEL TABLE OF AUTHORITIES AND RULES
http://www.gpo.gov/help/parallel_table.pdf
Authorities

92–500..................40 Parts 21, 136, 140, 421, 429

40 CFR 116.3 - DEFINITIONS.
§ 116.3
Definitions.
As used in this part, all terms shall have the meaning defined in the Act and as given below:
The Act means the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (Pub. L. 92-500), and as further amended by the Clean Water Act of 1977 (Pub. L. 95-217), 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; and as further amended by the Clean Water Act Amendments of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-676);

Contiguous zone means the entire zone established or to be established by the United States under article 24 of the Convention of the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone;
June 30, 1948, ch. 758, title III, Sec. 311, as added Oct. 18, 1972, Pub. L. 92-500, Sec. 2, 86 Stat. 862
_____________________________________
THE ACTUAL LAW, PUBLIC LAW 92-500 AMENDED


CHAPTER 758 June 30, 1948, Public Law 845

AN ACT
To provide for water pollution control activities in the Public Health Service of the Federal Security Agency and in the Federal Works Agency, and for other purposes.
*note States retain their rights.
http://www.wilderness.net/NWPS/documents/publiclaws/PDF/80-845.pdf







http://www.wilderness.net/NWPS/documents/publiclaws/PDF/80-845.pdf
33 USC § 1270 - LAKE CHAMPLAIN BASIN PROGRAM
Source
(June 30, 1948, ch. 758, title I, § 120
The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, referred to in subsecs. (b)(1), (2)(A), (3) and (r), is act Aug. 7, 1953, ch. 345, 67 Stat. 462, as amended, which is classified generally to subchapter III (Sec. 1331 et seq.) of chapter 29 of Title 43, Public Lands

You forget that in modern Amerika the laws only apply to us, they do not apply to them.

 

[Anti Federalist]

You forget that in modern Amerika the laws only apply to us, they do not apply to them.

I love these guys that come into a thread like this, greyseal and Christopher Brown come to mind, and post a bunch of obscure legal mumbo jumbo, as if it was a magic incantation that would stop 5.56 rounds from the SWAT raiders.

They are the fucking law...

 

[Anti Federalist]

Did anyone ever kill any of those employees in EPA because of things like this? I mean I read about this kind of stuff all the time and it simply is hard to believe that no one ever did anything violent.

Carl Drega comes to mind...there have been a few others.

 

[Dr.3D]

I love these guys that come into a thread like this, greyseal and Christopher Brown come to mind, and post a bunch of obscure legal mumbo jumbo, as if it was a magic incantation that would stop 5.56 rounds from the SWAT raiders.

They are the fucking law...

Yeah if paper could stop bullets, everybody would have a shirt made out of it.

 

[greyseal]

I love these guys that come into a thread like this, greyseal and Christopher Brown come to mind, and post a bunch of obscure legal mumbo jumbo, as if it was a magic incantation that would stop 5.56 rounds from the SWAT raiders.

They are the fucking law...

You know, there are people that understand this, lawyers, judges, and courts, that's the purpose of the post

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Did anyone ever kill any of those employees in EPA because of things like this? I mean I read about this kind of stuff all the time and it simply is hard to believe that no one ever did anything violent.

Carl Drega comes to mind...there have been a few others.

It's happened to food inspectors too. Of course these incidents do not lead to anything positive or productive, just more aggressive tyranny.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuart_Alexander_(businessman_and_murderer)

 

[GunnyFreedom]

You know, there are people that understand this, lawyers, judges, and courts, that's the purpose of the post

Having been an elected lawmaker, I'm pretty sure that I understand the law. What you do not understand is that the ordinary citizen is expected to obey every jot and tittle of the law on pain of enforcement and death, but those who act as agents of the government are not held to the same standard of law as we are. This is a violation of Article 4 Section 4, of course, but nonetheless citing US Code in order to describe the role of a government agent is naive at best. The law applies to us, the law does not apply to them. If you don't grasp that already, then I suggest you start paying attention. It's getting mighty ugly in this country.

 

[oyarde]

The EPA are godless ,evil nature haters who despise trout and ducks .There is no place for them .

 

[kcchiefs6465]

You know, there are people that understand this, lawyers, judges, and courts, that's the purpose of the post

Therein lies a major problem.

I read a little bit through what you posted and saw nothing of the EPA being limited in what states they operate.

And as well, would the FWS be limited as well? Or the Army Corps of Engineers?

 

[Anti Federalist]

You know, there are people that understand this, lawyers, judges, and courts, that's the purpose of the post

Sorry if I came off harsh, but you have to understand, all those people you just mentioned, they are working in opposition to the people's freedom.

 

[enoch150]

I read a little bit through what you posted and saw nothing of the EPA being limited in what states they operate.

By the "several states", he meant all of them.

 

[enoch150]

Did anyone ever kill any of those employees in EPA because of things like this? I mean I read about this kind of stuff all the time and it simply is hard to believe that no one ever did anything violent.

Carl Drega comes to mind...there have been a few others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Drega

It's happened to food inspectors too. Of course these incidents do not lead to anything positive or productive, just more aggressive tyranny.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuart_Alexander_(businessman_and_murderer)

Joe Stack flew his plane into an IRS building because he was being audited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Austin_suicide_attack

The Oklahoma City bombing was a retaliation for Ruby Ridge and Waco.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing

Rockne Newell shot up his local town council meeting after they evicted him from his property.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/alleged-pennsylvania-gunman-a-liberal-who-loved-the-second-amendment

Marvin Heemeyer wrecked half of his town with an armored bulldozer after a dispute over zoning and fines.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Heemeyer

 

[kcchiefs6465]

By the "several states", he meant all of them.

Ah.

As far as I'm aware, "navigable waters" is still vaguely defined and open to interpretation by vindictive busy bodies.

The Defense of Environment and Property Act of 2013 was just introduced to the House about six months ago.

It would, among other things:

Defense of Environment and Property Act of 2013 - Amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly known as the Clean Water Act) to redefine "navigable waters" to specify that included territorial seas are those that are: (1) navigable-in-fact; or (2) permanent or continuously flowing bodies of water that form geographical features commonly known as streams, oceans, rivers, and lakes that are connected to waters that are navigable-in-fact. Excludes from such term: (1) waters that do not physically abut navigable waters and lack a continuous surface water connection to navigable waters; (2) man-made or natural structures or channels through which water flows intermittently or ephemerally, or that periodically provide drainage for rainfall; or (3) wetlands without a continuous surface connection to bodies of water that are waters of the United States.

Until this is done, the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers will continue to run roughshod over the individual. The Act also asserts a much needed exclamation on the ability to obtain legal review. While I believe there was a SCOTUS decision in 2012 affirming one's right for an appeal (Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency), it is still somewhat vague, and many live in fear that the government will unduly target them for speaking out.

This ignores even the other bureaucratic monstrosities running roughshod as well. From persecutions using the Lacey Act to the persecution using the Endangered Species Act, it is clear the EPA is but one of multiple offenders, and that the Clean Water Act is but one of multiple abortions of legislation.

I had not read the entirety of what he posted, to be clear, as the usual legalese gives me a headache. I certainly don't wish to spend my Saturday analyzing the words (that will be bastardized by judges, anyways, as well as ignored by the busy bodies) and checking each law (and analyzing it the same) that was amended.

The law should be able to be understood by common folk. They speak and write in an intentionally convoluted manner in hopes that their crimes are not discovered. Misdirection, if you will, and a just society should not tolerate it. If the average layman cannot understand what exactly the law is dictating, it is my opinion that perhaps it should not be a law in the first place. (I only use the "perhaps" because I don't have particular esteem for the average person in America. If the average person could tell me how many SCOTUS justices there were, I'd perhaps not be so pessimistic) And of course, how can one have a guilty mind, or act with criminal intent, when they are violating a law they do not even know exists and as well, if they did know the general law existed, could not understand the finer ins and outs of it in the first place. This isn't justice.

 

[DamianTV]

Think about what comes next.

This incident will pale in comparison to the injustices that will transpire twenty years from now if we stay this course. If the EPA has its way, you will be heavily fined or incarcerated for having an Unapproved Lawn, or to maintain that lawn with Unapproved Equipment. You'll basically need Special Permission to plant a flower or reseed dead spots, and of course, have to pay for your own chains. You'll pay to be inspected and have to pay the hefty fines.

They've already got their foot in your door. How long until the are in completely? How long until vacuuming your own home becomes subject to regulation? How long until the food you eat becomes subject for inspection? How long until every free decision you make is regulated, inspected, and subject to someones elses opinion?

Fail the Present is.
Epic Fail the Future will be.

 

[mad cow]

The government says he violated the Clean Water Act by building a dam on a creek without a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers. Further, the EPA claims that material from his pond is being discharged into other waterways. Johnson says he built a stock pond -- a man-made pond meant to attract wildlife -- which is exempt from Clean Water Act regulations.

The dude built a small pond,by definition less than 8 acres,that dammed a creek that was already flowing into other waterways.

Once his pond is filled,the exact same amount of water would be flowing downstream,only discharged from his pond more filtered than it would have been otherwise.

I used to do a lot of smallmouth bass fishing,wore out one canoe after 12 years and had to buy a second from dragging it over long stretches of gravel in 2 to 3 inches or less of water (it would easily float in 4 inches) in what the EPA considered 'Navigable Waters'.

 

[kcchiefs6465]

The dude built a small pond,by definition less than 8 acres,that dammed a creek that was already flowing into other waterways.

Once his pond is filled,the exact same amount of water would be flowing downstream,only discharged from his pond more filtered than it would have been otherwise.

I used to do a lot of smallmouth bass fishing,wore out one canoe after 12 years and had to buy a second from dragging it over long stretches of gravel in 2 to 3 inches or less of water (it would easily float in 4 inches) in what the EPA considered 'Navigable Waters'.

It's absurd.

A lot of these cases when reading about them appear to be nothing more than personal vendettas or power trips. If one questions the authenticity of a particularly young looking busy body's badge, well he may find himself harassed for the rest of his life bogged down by debt, cease and desist orders barring one from building, and outrageous fines each day the property is not returned to its former state; along with decades of legal battles.

 

[Christopher A. Brown]

Defund the EPA!

He had approval from his state, shouldn't it be a state's right?

It would be a county grading permit. I didn't read he had one. Not that he should have to, but this has become nazi Amerika.

This should make it clear that all sincere Americans need to unify in defense of the 1787 constitution. I was trying in 1999 to get sincere Americans to unify and take action. Often they would say, "I just want to live and be happy."

I would ask them to justify that when the ultimate form of secrecy was being used to take over the nation. I substantiated my assertion with a few words they knew were true, then they would say, "Leave me out."