Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ChemistCat
From epa's web site:

Wetlands Criminal Enforcement

Since enactment of the Clean Water Act, EPA and the Corps have used their criminal enforcement authoritites sparingly in response to Section 404 violations. As demonstrated by the following examples, EPA and the Corps reserve their criminal enforcement authority for only the most flagrant and egregious Section 404 violations.

United States v. Pozsgai

In December 1989, a Philadelphia jury convicted John Pozsgai on 40 counts of knowingly filling wetlands in Bucks County, Pennsylvania, without a Section 404 permit. Mr. Pozsgai was sentenced to three years in jail, ordered to restore the site upon his release, and assessed a fine. His conviction and sentence have been affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court. Even prior to purchasing the 14-acre tract in 1987, Mr. Pozsgai was told by private consultants that the site contained wetlands subject to permitting requirements of Section 404. He purchased the property at a reduced price due to the presence of wetlands, and then proceeded to ignore no fewer than ten warnings from EPA and Corps field staff to stop filling the wetlands without first getting a Section 404 permit. He also defied a temporary restraining order (TRO) issued by a Federal court judge. In fact, the government documented violations of the TRO on videtape, thanks to the cooperation of neighbors whose homes were being flooded as a result of Mr. Pozsgai’s filling in his wetlands.
7 posted on 06/18/2003 7:47:02 PM PDT by Luke Skyfreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Luke Skyfreeper
a Philadelphia jury convicted John Pozsgai

Either it was the Pennsylvania equivalent of the OJ jury, or we're being snowed by the son....

I do not think cleaning up a dump should be criminalized--there should be a high burden of proof for the government here. Thanks much for confusing me further--LOL!
8 posted on 06/18/2003 7:54:39 PM PDT by ChemistCat (Transformers look just as good by morning light as they did the night before.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: Luke Skyfreeper
HIDEOUS. SIMPLY HIDEOUS INSANITY.
16 posted on 06/18/2003 8:24:33 PM PDT by Quix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: Luke Skyfreeper; drhogan
The neighbors have a problem while the man is making improvements to a property that has already been proven a hazard. The place is a tire dump and likely a public hazard in breeding malaria, (“wet lands”). The flooding appears to be a pre-existing condition that became offensive when more of the community became affected. The people have been ignoring their responsibility to each other for over 20 years.

Instead of addressing the problem as a community, correcting the problems together as they arise and strengthening their union, the neighbors run crying to Big Brother. Such practices do not serve the constitution. The excerpt from the EPA exposes to me a Mrs. Kravitz syndrome, who pisses and moans about the accomplishments of the beautiful Samantha Stevens, because of her own personal superstitions and perceived inadequacies.

Given the Governments propensity for unconstitutional encroachment into our personal lives, it allows the people to neglect their own responsibility in communicating with each other and strengthening the unions that make up the foundation of our United States.

The government should encourage local solutions to problems with limited mediation. Unfortunately our schools and special interest driven two party political systems encourage government encroachment, repressing our natural independent Spirit and weakening the will of the people.

I count myself among the Free and The Brave not the Limp and Bent Over. What is most offensive to me, is that had the land owner been in a weaker position in the first place, he too would have had the opportunity to invite an unelected Bureaucracy to bear pressure in favor an issue opposed to the will of the people. This later example is less often the case when we are discussing individual land owner’s rights.

Note the link that allowed the Army Corp, of Engineers to get involved. “These supposed wetlands stemmed from a 'stream' that was connected to 'navigable waters of the United States.’ “ Is a local zoning issue about a drainage ditch within the Corps authority when it appears to be simply a matter of which way the water runs through the neighborhood.

23 posted on 06/19/2003 5:25:12 AM PDT by Fearless Flyers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: Luke Skyfreeper
Misleading.

The dump site regularly flooded those homes *before* he cleaned it up.
27 posted on 06/19/2003 5:39:28 AM PDT by Maelstrom (To prevent misinterpretation or abuse of the Constitution:The Bill of Rights limits government power)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson