+menu-


A Thousand Wrongs? One Right?

A Thousand Wrongs?   One Right?

Sept. 17, 2014 WA STATE Appointed AGENCIES, including  ECOLOGY (DOE) have become AN INTIMIDATING AND THREATENING OMNIPRESENCE. They are  present in all places and at all times that LOCAL SMP UPDATES and/or  Water Rules  are discussed and at every LOCAL Public Meeting in every county, city and town in WA State.

 So  what’s WRONG with that?

 Jan. 26, 2011 When American Citizens are afraid of what their government is going to do to them, that is unacceptable to me.

——————————————————————————

A THOUSAND WRONGS  –  ONE RIGHT?

Specifically, The THOUSAND (1000) WRONGS that I am addressing , are the nearly 1000 PUBLIC OBJECTIONS and comments made to ECOLOGY by the citizens of Clallam County regarding the implementation of  Ecology’s Dungeness Water Rule.

OK, so  what’s WRONG with that?

We the people,  have  every  RIGHT to make a THOUSAND public objections and comments

So  what’s WRONG with that?

 

WHAT’S WRONG WITH THAT?

When nearly a THOUSAND OBJECTIONS FROM “WE THE PEOPLE”  are made  TO WA STATE DEPT OF ECOLOGY against the Dungeness Water Rule?

WA STATE ECOLOGY’S RESPONDS WITH  525 PAGES OF  “TOO BAD SO SAD” we respectfully disagree.

 So? What’s WRONG with that?

 ECOLOGY’S RESPONSE on PUBLIC OBJECTIONS and comments?

When literally thousands of OBJECTIONS, lawsuits and appeals are made against Ecology’s  Water Rules and the Shoreline Management Update (SMP)

ECOLOGY uses our WA State AG and OUR  OWN tax dollars to fight against “WE THE PEOPLE”

And, “We the People have to  dig into our own pockets to protect our RIGHTS.

So  what’s WRONG with that?

——————————————————————————————————-

 When did any OBJECTION OR COMMENT, that we the people have ever had on ANYTHING make a difference to ECOLOGY?

 THE ONE (1) RIGHT?

 When ONE (1) OBJECTION is made to WA State Dept of Ecology on something that really makes no significant economic or life altering difference to “We the People”?

 I do investigative documentation and reporting on my website. I have been signed up for Ecology’s WAC Track for years, receiving, reading hundreds of pages,  investigating and documenting, posting, commenting and disseminating information on  one proposed WAC after another WAC….

 —————————————————————————

I knew that making my ONE (1) OBJECTION could stop Ecology’s

PROPOSED AO #14-01 EXPEDITED RULEMAKING, in its  WAC tracks..

 

I posted and sent my ONE  (1) OBJECTION on Jun 26, 2014 – Washington Department of Ecology AO #14-01 NOTICE THIS RULE REPEAL IS BEING PROPOSED UNDER AN EXPEDITED RULEMAKING … full text on behindmyback.org. “Ecology’s Expedited Rule Making?”

 —————————————————————————————–

What difference does it make? How about this?

HELLO ECOLOGY… SOMEBODY IS READING THE FINE PRINT ON YOUR PROPOSED WAC’S

WOW…. SOMEBODY

ACTUALLY GOT ECOLOGY’S FULL UNDIVIDED ATTENTION ON A PROPOSED WAC…

—————————————————————————————

Ecology responds with the following? 

 (full text below)

 1. September 04, 2014 1:20 PM RE: Ecology’s Expedited Rule Making?

From: Schreiner, Bari (ECY)

To: ‘pearl hewett’

Cc: Dorsey, Kyle (ECY)

————————————————————————————–

 2. Tuesday, September 16, 2014 11:46 AM Request to discuss with you Ecology’s expedited rule making.

From: Schreiner, Bari (ECY)

To: ‘pearl hewett’

Cc: Dorsey, Kyle (ECY)

———————————————————–

3. I called Bari, left a message and she returned my call.

Bari (ECY) and I had a 30 minute phone discussion with  Kyle Dorsey (ECY) included in the conversation.

———————————————————————————-

4. September 17, 2014 9:22 AM Follow-up on discussion with Ecology on expedited rule making

From: Schreiner, Bari (ECY)

To: ‘pearl hewett’

Cc: Dorsey, Kyle (ECY)

 

—————————————————————————————-

Please consider withdrawing your objection

With the above in mind, would you would be willing to withdraw your objection?  If so, please send us an email letting us know you withdraw your objection.  We also would be happy to discuss this with you if you can provide a number where we can reach you.

——————————————————————–

When has Ecology ever been happy to discuss our ,THOUSANDS OF OBJECTIONS TO THE DUNGENESS WATER RULE? OR THE SHORELINE MANAGEMENT UPDATE?

And they actually have requested my phone number, so they can reach me, to talk to me about my ONE (1) OBJECTION.

—————————————————————————–

(Ecology)We would like to save taxpayers time and money, and we hope some clarification will be helpful.

———————————————————————-

My question?

Shall I request an economic impact statement FROM ECOLOGY related to my ONE (1) objection?

————————————————————————————-

Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 9:22 AM

Subject: Follow-up on discussion with Ecology on expedited rule making

Good morning,

Thank you for talking with us yesterday.  In our discussion you asked what the maximum time frame was for when we could file an adoption notice on this rule making.  The last possible date we can file is Jan. 12, 2015.  Please let me know if you have any other questions.

Have a good day,

Bari

————————————————————————————–

Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2014 11:46 AM

Subject: Request to discuss with you Ecology’s expedited rule making.

Dear Ms. Hewitt,

I am following up on the email below that I sent to you related to the expedited rule making Ecology is currently working on.  We would like the opportunity to discuss this with you in more detail (see the message below). If you are interesting in discussing this please send us your contact information so that we can schedule a time that works for you.  We look forward to hearing from you.

Have a good day.

Bari

————————————————————————-

 

Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2014 1:20 PM

Subject: RE: Ecology’s Expedited Rule Making?

 

Dear Ms. Hewett,

 

We want to acknowledge receipt of your objection to the use of the expedited rule-making process for the purposes of repealing two rules:

• Chapter 173-330 WAC – Used Automotive Oil Recycling Sign Requirements for Automotive Oil Sellers

• Chapter 173-24 WAC – Tax Exemptions and Credits for Pollution Control Facilities

 

Why we are using the expedited process

We would like to save taxpayers time and money, and we hope some clarification will be helpful.  The Department of Ecology is proposing to eliminate these two rules because the Legislature changed the  laws that originally authorized these rules, and the rules can no longer be used.  Repealing these rules is essentially cleaning house.  We don’t want the public to be confused by rules that can no longer be implemented, but we can’t take them off the books without telling people.

 

Because these rules are either invalid or no longer serve a purpose, we must repeal them as a matter of good stewardship.  The expedited process we are proposing will save the taxpayers money. If we go through the non-expedited process required for some rule making, the process will be longer and cost more.

 

Why these rules are no longer needed:

Chapter 173-330 WAC requires sellers of oil to post a sign visible to the public at or near the point of sale that indicates used oil is recyclable and where used oil may be properly disposed.  The statute authorizing Chapter 173-330 WAC (Chapter 19.114 RCW) was repealed in 1991 and replaced with Chapter 70.95I RCW.  The requirements for signs in Chapter 70.95I RCW are different from those in Chapter 19.114 RCW, so the provisions of Chapter 173-330 are no longer valid.

 

Chapter 173-24 WAC describes Ecology’s process for approving tax credits for pollution control measures authorized by Chapter 82.34 RCW.  In 1981, the legislature amended Chapter 82.34 RCW to provide that applications for pollution control tax credits could not be filed after November 30, 1981.  Since Ecology can no longer accept applications for pollution control tax credits, the provisions in Chapter 173-24 WAC serve no purpose.

 

Please consider withdrawing your objection

With the above in mind, would you would be willing to withdraw your objection?  If so, please send us an email letting us know you withdraw your objection.  We also would be happy to discuss this with you if you can provide a number where we can reach you.

 

Thank you for your further consideration.

Bari Schreiner

 

 

Bari Schreiner
Department of Ecology
Rules and Accountability/Plain Talk
Phone: 360.407.6998
Fax: 360.407.6989

Visit the Laws and Rules Web Site at:
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/laws-rules/index.html

 

 

———————————————————————————————————————————-

Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 9:22 AM

Subject: Follow-up on discussion with Ecology on expedited rule making

 

Good morning,

 

Thank you for talking with us yesterday.  In our discussion you asked what the maximum time frame was for when we could file an adoption notice on this rule making.  The last possible date we can file is Jan. 12, 2015.  Please let me know if you have any other questions.

 

Have a good day,

Bari

—————————————————————————–

Ridicule is  a good thing

Sept, 17, 2014  Lest we forget, the presence of Federal and State Agencies
that have been DISTURBING THE PUBLIC PEACE and become a
PUBLIC NUISANCE to the private property owners in Clallam County.

October 6, 2013 Lest we forget, the presence of Federal and State Agencies
that have been DISTURBING THE PUBLIC PEACE and become a
PUBLIC NUISANCE to the private property owners in Clallam County.

With the WA State DOE invasion of Clallam County for the DOE Dungeness
Water Rule and DOE Shoreline Management Update, they are guilty of both.

July 05, 2012 THIS COMMENT WAS SENT OVER A YEAR AGO.

From: Pearl Hewett
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2012 12:35 PM
To:Wessel, Ann (ECY);
Subject: DOE Dungeness Water Rule and DOE Shoreline Management Update

CLALLAM COUNTY CODE
Title 15 PUBLIC PEACE, SAFETY, MORALS

15.02.120 PUBLIC NUISANCE
Compliance with the terms and conditions of this chapter shall constitute minimum
health, sanitation and safety provisions and material noncompliance with said terms and conditions shall constitute a public nuisance and be subject to all criminal, civil and equitable remedies as such.

Chapter 15.30 PUBLIC DISTURBANCE
Disturbing the PUBLIC PEACE in Clallam County
Since Jan. 26, 2011 the Clallam County

Commissioners and elected WA State Representatives have been aware that
the presence of Federal and State Agencies have been DISTURBING THE PUBLIC PEACE and become a PUBLIC NUISANCE to the private property owners in Clallam County.  With the WA State DOE invasion of Clallam County for the DOE Dungeness
Water Rule and DOE Shoreline Management Update, they are guilty of both.

DOE is DISTURBING THE PEACE
and they have become a

PUBLIC NUISANCE
to the private property owners in Clallam County.

To date, no action has been taken to protect us, by the following
elected officials, WA State representatives, Rep. Van De Wege, Rep. Tharinger,
or Senator Jim Hargrove. Or by our Clallam County elected officials, Mike Doherty, Mike Chapman or Sheriff
Benedict.

We the People of Clallam County have documented grievances against.
WA State DOE Dungeness Water Rule and SMP taking of property value

WA State Dept of Fish and Wildlife unconstitutional trespass and search

Comments are closed.