Results for Proposed Initiative #75

You can read a summary of the proposition at the Colorado Sec of State 

webistehttp://www.sos.state.co.us/.../2013-2014/75Results.html

- Community Rights Alliance of Winneshiek County 

That’s code words for “take your time, we’re in no hurry to see anything accomplished.

The Minesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) is in charge of organizing the three rulemakings mandated by last year’s silica sand bill, and it’s really not that complicated — narrow specific issues.  From the Session Law, here’s what they’re supposed to do.


Do notice that each directive for rulemaking says that “The rulemaking is exempt from Minnesota Statutes, section 14.125.“  That’s code words for “take your time, we’re in no hurry to see anything accomplished.  Dawdle, go around in circles, fall down, and get lost along the way…”  Folks, that’s just what we’re experiencing in this rulemaking process, molasses on a cold day in hell.

Silica Sand Rulemaking MIA -- Why we can NOT afford to be complacent at this time.

The work of an Advisory Committee is to review and comment on the draft, which moves through various iterations before going to the agency board & Commissioner for release as a draft rule for comment.  

Can't do the work if the draft isn't there.  It's that simple...

Carol A. Overland - Legalectric 


Last year's legislation has proven to be lots of wishful thinking and little enforceable regulation of silica sand mining.  The state did not enact a moratorium, there's no Generic Environmental Impact Statement, nor a requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement for individual sand mine permit applications, and we're waiting for the nominal narrow rules and the optional model Standards and Criteria.  Now another legislative session is upon us, legislators are touring their districts and preparing for elections, so now's the time to let the legislators know that last year's placating "compromise" doesn't cut it, that it's compromised the public interest, and we deserve and expect better. 

The people expect reasonable regulation of silica sand mining.

It's coming up on a year since Minnesota's Silica Sand legislation was passed -- what do we have to show for it?

 

Dear Friends and Neighbors,

  Although most of you have requested only action alerts, this info reminds us to not let up in our efforts.

Wishing you well,

Bonita

The question/demand participants in the Advisory Committee should have for the MPCA is simple:
        WHERE'S THE DRAFT RULE?

The work of an Advisory Committee is to review and comment on the draft, which moves through various iterations before going to the agency board & Commissioner for release as a draft rule for comment.  Can't do the work if the draft isn't there.
It's that simple...
Carol

The people expect regulation!

 

A year later, there's been lots of talk, but little action.  Enforceable regulation?  HA!  ... yet it's anything but funny...

Last year's legislation has proven to be lots of wishful thinking and little enforceable regulation of silica sand mining.  The state did not enact a moratorium, there's no Generic Environmental Impact Statement, nor a requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement for individual sand mine permit applications, and we're waiting for the nominal narrow rules and the optional model Standards and Criteria.  Now another legislative session is upon us, legislators are touring their districts and preparing for elections, so now's the time to let the legislators know that last year's placating "compromise" doesn't cut it, that it's compromised the public interest, and we deserve and expect better.  The people expect reasonable regulation of silica sand mining.

Find links to primary documents and statutes here on Legalectric:
 

Someone explain rulemaking to the MPCA

The Minnesota legislature has begun, a short session this year, and a budget session, not policy.  Where are the laws and regulations we expected to regulate silica sand mining?  Stalled out.  We've been to meeting after meeting, and there are no Standards and Criteria, and these were only models anyway, optional examples for local governments to adopt.  It's been taken off the EQB agenda, and I'm reminded of the way the EQB didn't want to address nuclear waste in Florence Township and took it off the agenda, and then just stopped holding meetings!  Deja vu all over again?  Will this really be on the next EQB Agenda and will action be taken?

And then there's rulemaking!  Oh my...  There were only three narrow areas to enact rules, it's not like they have to reinvent the wheel, but the effort, lead by the MPCA, has been one of resistance and failure to produce.  First they objected to expectations to form an Advisory Committee for input into the draft.  Then, once ordered to form Advisory Committee, rather than be prepared to talk turkey and produce a draft to discuss, they lead the group on a wild goose chase with literally TONS of "background information" that's enough to gag a policy wonk (background info and links here:Someone explain rulemaking to the MPCA)

I've participated in more than a few rulemakings over the last 20 years, including very intense ones reworking two chapters of utility regs, a decade ago and another now ongoing, and this silica sand rulemaking does not cut it.  We need draft language to discuss now, at the beginning, with fresh iterations after input at Committee meetings.

The MPCA has produced two process flow charts in their "background information," neither of which even show "Advisory Committee" as part of the process.  What??  Although that perspective is not really surprising, given the MPCA staff argued in comments to the EQB that they couldn't imagine what benefit an Advisory Committee could provide.  Get a clue -- Advisory Committees are authorized by statute and the purpose is to get the public involved at the front end and have a purpose -- to gather input on a draft and work towards consensus so the agency can then release for comment a workable rule (rulemaking law says that an agency can't adopt something that's substantially different from what's been released for comment, hence the need to do the work up front, before the draft is released).  The Advisory Committee has met once, and is soon meeting again.  I've checked with staff and they have no intention of bringing draft language to this SECOND meeting for discussion.  WHAT?  Draft language should be distributed before the first meeting to give folks time to chew on it and be productive right out the gate.  Revised draft language should be presented at every Committee meeting for review and comment.

The MPCA apparently doesn't do rulemaking the way other state agencies do (for example, in the Greenhouse Gas rule, they didn't even give proper notice and admitted it on the record!).  The agency should encourage input, understand the concern, and seriously consider whether and how to address it in the proposed rules.  It's to their advantage to do so to come up with an acceptable rule.  MPCA, get with it and open this process up to MEANINGFUL public participation.

Unfortunately, it looks to me as if they're going to manipulate the process -- take their sweet time, as invited to by the legislative exception to Minn. Stat. 14.125, and then, if the law isn't changed this session to eliminate the rulemaking and they then do have to move rules forward, that they'll continue to hold these nonproductive kaffee-klatsches, and yammer a bit, and then having dodged public input, MPCA will bring the draft directly to the MPCA Board for release for comment, without getting any substantive on-point feedback from the Advisory Group beforehand regarding the draft.  Then the "rule" will be released for comment, it will be horrible, there will be lots of public push-back, and everyone throws up their hands and says, "See, we couldn't and shouldn't try to regulate silica sand!"  That's the trajectory I see, and I don't like it one bit.

Hey, MPCA, prove me wrong!  I hope that you'll decide to do it differently and utilize the Advisory Committee as you should.  Enough of the "make work" meetings -- bring draft language on the three narrow issues for rulemaking to the Committee for review.  Disclose your draft rules!  Get substantive feedback on what rules you're proposing!

And for those of you in Minnesota and Wisconsin -- don't forget -- now is the time to tell your legislators that you expect regulation of silica sand mining operations.  Hold their feet to the fire.  Enough of this dodging and weaving!

On Mar 3, 2014, at 9:43 AM, Carol A. Overland - Legalectric wrote:

-- 

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent
about the things that matter."  Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. 


Carol A. Overland
Attorney at Law
Legalectric - Overland Law Office
1110 West Avenue
Red Wing, MN  55066

612-227-8638

overland@legalectric.org

http://www.legalectric.org/
http://www.nocapx2020.info/
http://www.not-so-great-northern-transmission-line.org/

This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.

Letters in Post-Bulletin Strongly Favor Moratorium. How to spread the word

  How to submit your letter as a comment if it was unpublished:

     

We did it!  We let the Rochester Post-Bulletin know that citizens want Gov. Dayton to enact a two year moratorium on frac sand mining in southeast Minnesota. Now let’s spread the message wider. 

The letters poured into the Rochester Post-Bulletin calling for a two year moratorium on frac sand mining.  Of the twenty-one printed all but one were in favor of a moratorium or ban! Read them here:  Your Turn: Should Dayton impose moratorium on frac sand mines? 

 

How to  spread the message wider.

 

1.       If they did not print your letter. Go online and enter it as a comment on the page. We know that many, many letters did not get printed.

2.       Email the link to the Governor and your state legislators with a short note along these lines: “It’s clear that southeast Minnesotans know that frac sand mining is bad for our community and want a moratorium.. Southeast Minnesota needs protections NOW but state regulations are over a year away from being implemented. Please, take the time to read the letters printed in the Rochester Post-Bulletin on the issue here: http://www.postbulletin.com/opinion/your-turn-should-dayton-impose-moratorium-on-frac-sand-mines/article_255aadfa-ef5f-596f-a297-18e33ba2e0dc.html. ”  You can email the Governor HERE.  You can get the email for your state legislators HERE.

3.       Share the Rochester Post-Bulletin page on social media.

Bobby King

Land Stewardship Project

612-722-6377

report from Citizens' Frac Sand Summit & LSP Petition to Gov. Dayton

 Report Back from the Citizens’ Frac Sand Summit

LSP Launches Petition Drive Urging Governor Dayton to Protect Minnesota from the Frac Sand Industry

The Citizens’ Frac Sand Summit in Winona was a huge success! Despite a winter weather advisory, over 225 people came together to build our power to stop the frac sand industry from destroying rural communities.

At the summit we launched a petition drive calling on Governor Mark Dayton to take effective action to protect Minnesota from the frac sand industry. Governor Dayton has laid out a policy that makes a lot of sense — a ban on the frac sand industry in the fragile karst area of southeast Minnesota and tough standards for the whole state that protect air and water quality. This petition supports that policy and urges the Governor to take action to implement it.  

Highlights included:

• ​Marilyn Frauenkron Bayer, LSP member from Houston County, reviewing the dozens of grassroots victories in Iowa, Wisconsin and Minnesota where people are standing up to the frac sand industry. Her conclusion? “We are powerful and we are committed to building more power to protect our communities from the devastation of frac sand mining.” Read her list of grassroots victories here.

• Bob Christie, LSP member and lifelong farmer from St. Charles in Winona County, sharing a statement he delivered to Governor Dayton about his experience with the frac sand industry and why it will destroy farmland and opportunities for beginning farmers. He received a standing ovation.

• Dr. Crispin Pierce, director of the Environmental Public Health Program at the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire, shared his research on how people who live near frac sand facilities are being exposed to silica dust and the health consequences of this exposure.

Much of the information from the conference is up our website here and more will be up soon.

TAKE ACTION!  With your help we can reach our goal of 5,000 petition signatures from Minnesotans in the next three months

1. Go online and sign the petition, then share it via e-mail, Facebook and Twitter
2. Print a copy of the petition and get your friends and neighbors to sign. An important purpose of the petition drive is to create an opportunity to have conversations with friends and relatives, to educate them about the issue and engage them.
3. Contact us about a LSP member-leader, or staff member, coming to your church or civic organization to talk about the frac sand issue and the petition drive. Contact LSP's Bobby King atbking@landstewardshipproject.org or 612-722-6377.

ACTION ITEM: YOU CAN HELP BY WRITING A NOTE TO YOUR LEGISLATOR TODAY!

Dear Friends and Neighbors,
  Contacting our national legislators is important in order to combine our efforts on this topic.
Wishing you well,
Bonita

On Tuesday, January 7, 2014 1:00 AM, Patricia J. Popple <sunnyday5@charter.net> wrote:

AN ACTION ITEM: YOU CAN HELP BY WRITING A NOTE TO YOUR LEGISLATOR TODAY!

The Frac Sand Sentinel (#31) from January 5, 2014, highlighted (via articles) the issues related to derailed tanker cars carrying volatile fuel.  I have copied the articles below for your reference.

Massive Fireball From North Dakota Oil Train Derailment Caught On Tape open original article

Mon Dec 30, 2013 16:46 from Zero Hedge by Tyler Durden

*NO INJURIES REPORTED FROM BNSF TRAIN FIRE IN NORTH DAKOTA

Wind is taking toxic smoke towards areas southeast of Casselton, ND, after train derailment. Residents urged to stay indoors

A train has derailed west of Casselton, North Dakota just before 2:20 p.m. Monday. As Valley News Live reports, several area emergency teams are on scene and are setting up an incident command center. Emergency crews are urging people to stay inside and a code red alert has been sent out to residents in a two mile radius of the accident. The Casselton Fire Department says a Burlington Northern Santa Fe train is involved. An unknown number of cars derailed, but Valley News Live reports is told one bulk oil car is on fire and toxic black smoke is being released

Fiery Oil Train Crash in Raging Shale Oil Boom State of North Dakota 

http://ecowatch.com/2013/12/31/fiery-oil-train-crash-north-dakota/ 

CRUDE BY RAIL SAFE?

http://www.mycenturylink.com/news/read/category/Top%20News/article/ap-weather_shift_near_nd_derailment_worries-ap

 Warning issued about oil shipped from the Bakken oil shale patch

http://m.billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/montana/warning-issued-about-oil-shipped-from-the-bakken-oil-shale/article_262d70e0-29f8-5a97-9a68-1d81f6427442.html?mobile_touch=true

************

After I sent out the newsletter, I received this comment from a reader in the La Crosse area!

"I have been screaming about these trains for awhile....I worked on changing laws in ND in 1980's.  This crap runs right through my backyard south of LaCrosse.  People need to make the connection...there are consequences to our actions."

Train explosions prompt regulator warning on Bakken oil flammability

Posted on January 2, 2014 at 11:30 pm by Zain Shauk in Crude oil, Pipelines

I then received a great article written by Steve Horn who writes for desmogblog.com  http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/01/05/exclusive-permit-shows-bakken-oil-casselton-train-contained-high-levels-volatile-chemicals 

I read the article and near the end of the article (you have to look for more beyond the first page) I found a video showing a discussion between Scott Smith and Mark Ruffalo (It is about 10 minutes long but you just have to see it!!! ).  The two have a discussion about the North Dakota derailment and the concerns they have about the vast qualities of volatile substances these old obsolete tankers are carrying across the plains! There are some pretty clear cut revelations.

I wrote to Craig Peachy, Director of SMART in the Transportation Division in Madison and asked him the following questions:

"Are tankers of crude oil coming through WI from the Bakken??? If so, what measures are being taken to safeguard residents? I had a note this morning from a guy from an area south of La Crosse tell me these tankers were moving through "his back yard".  I would guess that this problem is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of dangers to people living near the rail." I then asked him to read Steve Horn's revealing article and to take a look at the interview between Smith and Ruffalo.

Craig Peachy responded with the following:

"Pat,

Yes, that oil is moving through Wisconsin and yes many citizens are concerned with the recent derailments moving this oil. I have many articles on the subject and all eyes in Washington are on the issue. One of the biggest problems are the old DOT111 cars being used in moving the oil. However, the real problem lies with the railroads moving the oil itself-safely. Track conditions, mechanical inspections of rail cars, fatigue of train crews etc. There is currently an HR 3040 Safe Freight Car bill in congress right now that has about 45 cosponsors already signed on that would require 2 persons on every freight train. The Quebec train derailment may have been diverted had there been a two person crew on board. The fact of the matter is the railroads everyday haul much more dangerous products than this oil. Its all about moving it safely. When I get a chance I'll send you the HR 3040 link for people to contact their representative. We would appreciate if you pass on to your group.

Thank you,

Craig "

Craig Peachy then sent me a copy of the letter he had written to Congressman Petri-HR 3040 about supporting  two-person crews. It is attached and I suggest you read it to see why there are problems on some shipments of hazardous products particularly when only one crew member is on board. I suggest you write to your congressman to draw attention to HR 3040 asking that there be at least two certified people on board trains to assure greater opportunities for safety not only on the train but for the communities and areas where these very long trains travel, often carrying volatile and hazardous materials.

Craig also shared this article. Subject: Tell Congress: Support Two-Person Crews HR 3040
http://afl.salsalabs.com/o/4038/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=7508

Craig can be contacted if you wish to know more, but I think it is important that citizens support bills that require greater safety for those on board those trains not only for the crew's protection but for the protection of people living in the areas surrounding the rail.  I know for certain that tankers go through Chippewa Falls and often are seen on tracks waiting to be picked up. My assumption is that some of the materials they have on board are hazardous and require special handling. You have probably seen them in your area as well!

Craig Peachy, Director
SMART – Transportation Division
Wisconsin Legislative Board, LO 056
7 N Pinckney Street, Suite LL-25
Madison, Wisconsin 53703-4208
0ffice-608 251 4120

Cell-608-695-6116
utulo56@gmail.com
http://wisconsin.utu.org

Later today, another person sent this article to me which raises questions about the energy lobbyists fighting to reduce the regulation which seems to be the name of the game when it comes to corporations not concerned about the safety of people living around or near big heavy industrial operations. 
Trains Carrying Oil Keep Exploding, but Will the Energy Lobby Allow More Regulation?

http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2014/01/not_ready_as_texas_railwa
ys_tr.php

I urge you to write to your legislators at the national level as well as other governmental officials to help make life along the rail safe for all of those who could be affected.

Thanks for your help in this matter. I know you have lots on your plate in every area where this letter is sent. However,  policies need to be developed for the safety of all of us.
Pat Popple
www.ccc-wis.com
715-723-6398