Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

lquadland10 (< 20)

Bureaucrats run amok: EPA now classifies milk as a pollutant.

Recs

23

June 20, 2010 – Comments (23) | RELATED TICKERS: GS , SVL , GLD

While you were not looking because of the OIL TRAGEDY. Got to love the Government. Now you know why he wanted to get Rid of the EPA and let the States regulate their own pollution. But NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You wanted the GOVERNMENT TO TELL YOU WHAT TO DO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.ihatethemedia.com/epa-classifies-milk-as-pollutant

In case you doubted that government bureaucrats are committed to controlling every aspect of our lives, please be aware that they’ve now categorized milk as a pollutant.

Northern Michigan’s Channel 9 has the details:

The Environmental Protection Agency intends to classify milk as a hazardous waste; in the same category as oil.

That means, farmers would have to come up with an oil spill prevention plan which could cost them thousands of dollars.

The Senate Agricultural Committee passed a resolution today urging the EPA to take back those regulations.

This new interpretation of the EPA’s Clean Water Act will require dairy farmers to develop oil spill prevention plans for their milk storage tanks.

How much is that going to add to your gal of milk and to the children who need it?

Turn on the Water on back in Cal. for the Farmers. 

Dear Mr President. Let me be perfectly clear. Please take off the rule for the Foreign Ships not to come here.  Lift it today. Let the other Country's come in and help. People Call your Congress member and ask them to go on FOX or CNN or MSMBC and to Publicly and respectfully ask the President to do this in front of the Nation so he can not say that there has been no request. This is past sick. This is oh I am chewing steel and spitting nails I am so ruffled. Who will benefit from the Tax and Cap. Well you know. GS. May god bless us one and all including the President and may he do what is right.

http://townhall.com/columnists/HarryRJacksonJr/2010/06/20/capitalizing_on_the_latest_crisis?page=1

A thought runs through my head. Powers that Be is the Gulf Spill just collateral damage to you in your end run game plan? Iraq and Afghanistan also. 10 Years now. What war. Just nation building. No water in Cal. More Collateral Damage? You see people it was never about what is fair or just for the weak and the poor. They just wanted your vote. Silver will go higher because of the law suit with JP Morgan. Happy Fathers Day and thank you to those who have served.

 

23 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On June 20, 2010 at 9:32 AM, whereaminow (74.38) wrote:

Is this for real?  Did they also mandate no crying over the spilled milk?

I think if you work for the EPA, at some point, the realization has to set in that your skills are worth about 1/6th your current salary in the private market.  Ergo, it is necessary to always be plotting away, lest you lose your funding and your job.

David in Qatar

Report this comment
#2) On June 20, 2010 at 11:44 AM, devoish (98.71) wrote:

What a horrible horrible cruel farm destroying EPA. If only the world had a "google" and an "EPA.gov" website and comments on the oiginal story at "9 and 10 news" and ten open minutes in an otherwise busy day of pounding keyboards and repeating nonsense without "factchecking".

EPA Proposes to Exempt Milk Containers from Oil Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Requirements

Release date: 01/09/2009

Contact Information: Latisha Petteway, (202) 564-4355 / petteway.latisha@epa.gov

(Washington, D.C. – Jan. 12, 2009) EPA is proposing to exempt from Oil Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure requirements milk containers and associated piping and appurtenances. The containers, piping, and appurtenances must be constructed according to current applicable 3-A Sanitary Standards, and are subject to the current applicable Pasteurized Milk Ordinance (PMO) or a state dairy regulatory requirement equivalent to the current applicable PMO. The capacity of these milk containers would not be included in a facility’s total oil storage capacity calculation.

These amendments do not remove any regulatory requirement for owners or operators of facilities in operation before August 16, 2002, to develop, implement and maintain an SPCC plan in accordance with the SPCC regulations then in effect. Such facilities continue to be required to maintain their plans during the interim until the applicable date for revising and implementing their plans under the new amendments.

More information about the proposed milk containers exemption: http://www.epa.gov/emergencies/content/spcc/index.htm 

Regards,

The Unparalleled Grand High Exalted Mystic 'Doesn't Believe Every Stupid Right Wing Government Sucks Extremist Propaganda Piece That Makes The Right Wing Blogosphere Rounds' King Devoish.

I was born at night - but not last night.

Report this comment
#3) On June 20, 2010 at 11:49 AM, 100ozRound (30.61) wrote:

This is ridiculous - to them there is no difference between lipids and petroleum?

Report this comment
#4) On June 20, 2010 at 12:54 PM, whereaminow (74.38) wrote:

devoish,

You've mastered Google, but not the ability to place dates in their proper order.

Your EPA release is dated January 2009. 

The news story is from June 10, 2010 and, if you followed the link to the original, it came not from a right wing antigovernment conspiracy site, but from a Northern Michigan local news story: http://www.9and10news.com/category/story/?id=233147&cid=1

"A CBS affiliate, WWTV/WWUP-TV 9&10 News brings you 4.5 hours of local news every weekday plus 1 hour each day on the weekend.

We broadcast 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Our digital signals, WWTV-DT / WWUP-DT, can be viewed on digital broadcast channels 9.1 and 10.1."

And not only that, the story clearly states that this is a rumored intervention, not an actual one:

The Environmental Protection Agency intends to classify milk as a hazardous waste; in the same category as oil. 

Emphasis added to help you put this in context.

David in Qatar

Report this comment
#5) On June 20, 2010 at 3:28 PM, ralphmachio (24.73) wrote:

Wow, that's like showing footage of arabs celebrating in the streets from previous, out of context gatherings during the morning of 9/11, and saying they are happy about our tragedy. Who does that sort of thing? Dev? Oh, sorry, King Devoish. You may not have been born last night, but whoever pays you to write this may have been. Your mere existence only serves to prove the desperate measures some will attempt to make themselves out to be useful, rather than harmful, when any unemotional analysis would prove otherwise. Fortunately for you, you got a lot of people who are not emotionally prepared for the truth, huh?

Report this comment
#6) On June 20, 2010 at 4:04 PM, ElCid16 (93.36) wrote:

Geez, are you sure about the validity of this?  You're first link has a farmer being quoted as saying:

"The majority of milk is water, in the high 80s percentile is water. The rest of it, three and one half percent, is solids of the fat and a portion of that is oil."

Not only does this sound like something a 2nd grader would say, it also doesn't come close to adding up to 100%.  Why would they quote such an idiot?

In all seriousness, though, oils are very regulated in all industries - from food plants to refineries.  Full-fat cow milk has, I believe, about 20,000 mg/L oil and grease.  Large scale dairy plants have to reduce the oil and grease in their wastestreams down to like 10 mg/L before they can discharge.  I'm actually working on a project right now where we're analyzing the reduction of oil in a dairy wastestream using biological treatment.  This is merely pretreatment and we're looking to get the oil down to about 75 mg/L.

I know this might sound crazy, but depending on how large the spill is, (and if it weren't cleaned up properly) it could actually get pretty nasty if a bacteria-infested milk spill found its way into a groundwater source.  Dairy-eating bacteria use up oxygen incredibly quick, and septic water is not an ideal situation.

Oh, and by the way, I don't work for the EPA. 

Report this comment
#7) On June 20, 2010 at 4:13 PM, ElCid16 (93.36) wrote:

your*

Report this comment
#8) On June 20, 2010 at 4:36 PM, devoish (98.71) wrote:

David, and Ralph,

Good for you boys on figuring out why the story is irrelevant right wing extremist gibberish.

In 2002 EPA published proposed regulations concerning oil storage. Then took comments from interested partys.

In 2008 EPA resonded to those coments and published amendments addressing those concerns.

In 2009 the EPA issues a press release that says they are no longer going to be concerned with milk storage. You can read it two posts before this one.

In 2010 a reporter obviously did not read the press release.

In 2010 right wing whacko websites did not either.

My dear friends, the reason it is not news is because the EPA has already addressed the issue of milk storage in the farmers favor and decided that sanitary inspections are enough.

Good work Mr Government. You have done well in exempting milk storage while commencing inspections of oil storage facilitys BEFORE there is a big leak.

Bad factchecking Mr Local news reporter - who tipped you to the story?

Bad factchecking right wing blogosphere. Good politicing though.

Regards,

The Unparalleled Grand High Exalted Mystic Who Understands a Solved Problem is Not a Problem Any More Now Matter How Long the Right Wing Anti Government Blogosphere Harps on About It King Devoish

 

Report this comment
#9) On June 20, 2010 at 4:38 PM, devoish (98.71) wrote:

In other news - Sun Expected To Set - Live coverage at 8:00pm.

Report this comment
#10) On June 20, 2010 at 9:49 PM, whereaminow (74.38) wrote:

devoish,

I think your love for the Establishment is getting in the way of sound reasoning and factchecking.

Here is how you use Google, type in "EPA" and "Milk" and go to news, there you will 392 news stories about the subject.

You would find out that the EPA is revising the Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure rules, and has left milk out of the exemptions that applied in previous regulations - the ones from 2002 and 2008 that you cite.

King devo, this is not 2002 or 2008.  This is 2010.  Anything the EPA writes in 2010 can not be debunked by pointing out that they said something else in 2002 or 2008.  That just shows the inconsistency of non-elected bureaucratic control over private enterprise.

Now sing it with me (to the tune of America, the Beautiful):

E-stab-lishment
E-stab-lishment
You always know what's best......

Nice try debunking what you thought was right wing propaganda.  But the thing is, you are not a Leftist.  Leftists oppose big business, torture and the war machine, even if it "their guy" in charge. Your tacit support  for the war, rendition, authorized assassinations of American citizens, and Obamacare shows you are not a leftist.  You're an establishment shill.

David in Qatar 

Report this comment
#11) On June 20, 2010 at 10:28 PM, devoish (98.71) wrote:

You would find out that the EPA is revising the Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure rules, and has left milk out of the exemptions that applied in previous regulations - the ones from 2002 and 2008 that you cite.

No David, the EPA has not left out the exemption for milk.

First hit - Under pressure from the main lobbying group for dairy producers, the EPA is working out an exemption for dairy farms so their bulk milk tanks do not fall under the Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure rules the agency has been drafting.

2nd - The Hesperia farmer and others would be required to develop and implement spill prevention plans for milk storage tanks. The rules are set to take effect in November, though that date might be pushed back. (as i posted from the epa website the delay is to write the exemption)

3rd - This blog.

4th -  phosphourus in wastewater issues

5th - The Environmental Protection Agency has pushed back the deadline for dairy farms to comply with the Spill, Prevention, Control and Countermeasure regulations regarding milk storage tanks. EPA will be extending the deadline until early 2011.

6th - Danone/Unimilk merger.

It is nice that your link led me to 88 results about some things. Thanks for the help.

Report this comment
#12) On June 20, 2010 at 10:49 PM, whereaminow (74.38) wrote:

devo,

Be a bigger man and just admit you are wrong.  It happens from time to time.

You write "no, David, they are not left out."

and then in the next sentence, you quote:

bulk milk tanks do not fall under the Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure rules the agency has been drafting.

You made an arse out of yourself. Just admit it and move on.

And I am moving on from this thread.

David in Qatar

Report this comment
#13) On June 20, 2010 at 11:35 PM, fmahnke (95.93) wrote:

So Devo,

Just curious how you, in the role of the defender of the establishment and the environment, justify BHO's refusual of help from the foriegn tankers, or his feet dragging approval issue surrounding the LA dregging plans or his delays in everything surrounding the cleanup and containment efforts or his delays in addressing the MMR issues prior to authorizing more drilling.

Maybe is not just the right wing wackos who see these failures to execute and manage. Of course at this rate, maybe 90% of the country will fall into this category as it seems like the liberals love to demonize everyone who doesn't agree with the great big gov't directed by your exaulted leader.

PS.  We all know its much too late to balme George Bush  

Report this comment
#14) On June 21, 2010 at 6:28 AM, devoish (98.71) wrote:

fmahnke,

I researched the spilled milk lets hate on America political talking point of the day.

You do some work on the Jones Act. According to Admiral Allen it is not affecting clean up efforts ion the Gulf, but since it helps you folks feel better he'll expedite the waiver process. Of course George w Bush and company should have taught you that just "waiving" existing law at the whim of Executive authority is a pretty slippery slope.

You can start here for "balance"' then research which facts are correct for yourself by actually reading the law. I found this link 70 hits in from the right wing government hating blogosphere coverage repeating itself over and over and over...

I now nothing about "dregging" or dredging issues and I have to go to work.

How would you have handled the MMR issues prior to the spill? Did you post anything? Know anything? Would that have been retroactive to Deepwater? In the wake of Deepwater would you ban deep drilling? Forever? Or just until the puiblicty dies down? If not forever are you sure you want to risk another leak? Pretty high risk not go wind and solar electric powered cars.

PS. I promise you can find liberal coverage of MMS being in bed with oil companys from more than two years ago and conservatives telling us to let business alone so we don't wreck the economy, cost US jobs as companys move off our shores to free themselves from restrictive EPA drilling regulations. Congratulations on your victory and the Gulf of Mexico is your prize.

I hope you don't win a nuclear power accident too.

Report this comment
#15) On June 21, 2010 at 7:15 AM, whereaminow (74.38) wrote:

devoish,

I've never seen a person so completely discredit themselves in one blog.  From now on, if I ever catch anyone calling you smart, I am going to have to send them to this post.  

Nothing you wrote in comment 14 has anything to do with your total screw up in calling out iquadland as a spreader of false information and right wing propaganda.  Nothing you wrote has to do with the EPA's pending decision on milk.

And no link from the communist Mother Jones site is going to give you credibility in the eyes of this commnity.  LOL, like Mother Jones, the original IWW muckraking anticapitalist and the website named after her are going to find a home at the pinnacle of capitalism, a stock marketing investing site.  That is so effing funny that I almost piss myself.  And linking to that commie rag to support Obama talking points is about as smart as linking to Pravda articles from the 1970s extolling the virtues of central planning.

You have completely lost it.  There is no doubt in my mind now that you work for the federal government, because it takes a complete moron to be a fed, which would make you about a GS-15.

David in Qatar

Report this comment
#16) On June 21, 2010 at 7:45 AM, catoismymotor (65.26) wrote:

+ 1 Rec!

Kudos to all for making this a most interesting read. ;)

Report this comment
#17) On June 21, 2010 at 8:29 AM, lquadland10 (< 20) wrote:

Thank you all. I loved the comments. Sorry I did not get back to you or do more because I had to leave for work at the time. Then life takes over and it takes longer to get back here. The EPA first did try to put milk under the law and then made an exemption. Because of concerned cit. and lobbyist. Government will see how far they can go and test the waters. I like dev. he makes me think and see the other point of view. To keep balance. How many different laws are the same way. The news is from all places. This was something that the EPA intended. Was some of it left out of the reports. I do not know. No one covered if there are other Gov. agency's that have opposite rules that put the dairy farmer smack dab in the middle of a gov turf war.Based in the wide range of our life experiences it lets us see the wide variety of view points. I still want the Foreign Ships to be let into help with the spill. That is not right. I still want the water turned on in Cal so that the farmers can work their land and so we don't have to import food from China. I like buying local. I do believe that we need to call our Congress Rep. TO On Air ask the President to lift the Ban for 3 months to start. Thank all of you for your answers.It was most Enlightening.

Report this comment
#18) On June 21, 2010 at 8:33 PM, devoish (98.71) wrote:

I like dev. he makes me think and see the other point of view. - lquadland10

Now I feel like a shit for being so harsh.

I am not sure what "other point of view" you mean. Milk has oil in it so it falls under "oil storage" just as contaminated water with 3% oil in it does. Yet we are not talking about benzene or something like that. Standards for storage already exist for sanitary reasons so an exemption is justified and storage is already checked. No big deal. Is it news? Barely, and only because the EPA had to extend the start date for the regs while they work out the exemption legalise. Had they not delayed the start date farmers could have been at risk if the ruling was enforced without the exemption but typically federal employees have more sense than that, knowing an exemption was intended and in the works.

It is just not worth very much as news. Well maybe here, on this anti-government free for all site it is. It is simply the federal Government working as they should, addressing issues they need to address, considering concerns brought before them by American Citizens and addressing those. And in this instance doing a pretty good job of it.

And on this website syaing the Government did a good job is really pretty uncommon. Except by me.

From now on, if I ever catch anyone calling you smart, I am going to have to send them to this post - Hopelesslylost.

Good for you.

The Unparralleled Grand High Exalted Mystic King Devoish

Report this comment
#19) On June 22, 2010 at 7:47 PM, lquadland10 (< 20) wrote:

Laughing. Dear Dev. Giggling. What do you expect with seeing it and posting it 5 min before work. I knew if there was anybody out there you could explain it to me it would be you. Along with others. No need to feel bad. I like the way you type. Like I said. I am Just a Bookseller who is trying to self teach myself about the stock market as well as the gov. I have learned a lot. As for the Gov. well it depends which agency. I personally want the water turned back on in Cal. Pipe dream of mine. ;-P Yes I know. I am a prickly lady who can sure irratate the heck out of people. ;-)

Report this comment
#20) On June 22, 2010 at 9:03 PM, devoish (98.71) wrote:

:-)

I like the way you type

That may have been the nicest thing anyone has said to me in quite a while.

Report this comment
#21) On June 24, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Melaschasm (89.25) wrote:

Michigan dairy farmers are lobbying for an exemption to the oil storage rules, as per the original tv story.  What rules they will be exempted from, and which they will have to follow has not yet been determined, thus the political efforts to inform people, and encourage them to put pressure on the politicians. 

While the news headlines are over hyping the issue, as of right now the exemption has not been added, and thus it is possible that milk storage could face the same regulations as crude oil.  The fact that the EPA has extended the compliance deadline, rather than just issueing an exemption indicates that there is still unresolved issues being debated, and thus still value in expressing one's opinion on this issue.

On a related note, the asian carp have made it past Obama's electricity barrier, and are very close to entering Lake Michigan.  Local environmental activists are predicting this could have a devastating effect on the Great Lakes ecosystem, yet Obama is refusing to temporarily close off Lake Michigan while a long term solution is found.  Even Jenny, a devoted supporter of Obama, and Governor of Michigan has asked Obama to close off Lake Michigan until the problem is solved.

Report this comment
#22) On June 25, 2010 at 6:01 AM, devoish (98.71) wrote:

Melaschasm,

Yes. That is how Goverment happens in our Democracy.

"News" should include the relevant fact that the EPA has issued a statement saying they agree with the dairy factorys and are adressing the issue through the State inspections already in place.

It would also be nice to know how large the storage tanks are, I am sure we are not talking about spilling a 1/2 gallon onto the kitchen floor.

Of course it always fun to watch people running around in circles yellng in panic.

I am not sure how the asian carp are related to milk. I do know I read about installing the electric fences over five years ago (pre-Obama). If the Governor of the State is asking for a closedown of the man-made shipping connections to Lake Michigan then I would expect the administration to take the issue pretty seriously.

There is not alot of info in your paragraph. Is there any hope of a "long term" solution on the horizon, or will "temporarily" fast become decades?

I'll stay out of that one for now.

Report this comment
#23) On June 25, 2010 at 4:12 PM, lquadland10 (< 20) wrote:

Well all this is going to be instering on seing how this plays out. I thank you all and let us keep up on what happens.

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement