Lincoln, NE: sharing what "green" we have to attract what we lack.
LB 56 Discharge Pollution Bill
April 12, 2009 URGENT!
Those of us who care about Nebraska’s quality of life, the health safety and welfare of its citizens, and the long term viability of our environment, are faced with a legislative attempt to put all of those things at risk. On April 9th, our Legislature advanced LB 56 from General to Select File. This means it is on the Floor and there isn’t much time to act by letting our Senators know that this bad legislation should not pass. Below are some talking points that can be used in contacting any of our Senators you are willing to make the point with, in your own words. Contact information for all of the Senators appears below the talking points.
Talking points about LB 56.
LB 56, a bad bill, has advanced from the first stage on the floor of the Legislature. The next stage is Select File, and after that is Final Reading. We have the opportunity to communicate with our Senators and newspapers, for both of these stages.
Letters to the Editor, letters to our Senators, emails to our Senators, and phone calls to our Senators are all good ways to get our point across. We need to get our point across in every way possible and as often as possible.
LB 56 is a legislative bill introduced by Senator Fischer and is related to the Livestock Waste Management Act. As such, it purports to redefine a term; change provisions relating to permit requirements, applications, and rules and regulations; and to repeal the original sections.
In reality, LB 56 guts the already limited “bad actor” provisions in the Livestock Waste Management Act. It actually makes a mockery of those bad actor provisions.
Presently, in order for a livestock operator to be deemed a “bad actor” and have his/her permit revoked, the operator would have to be guilty of at least three discharge violations.
To date, for the approximately ten years that the Livestock Waste Management Act has been in effect, a total of three discharge violations have been determined. And, no single livestock operator has been determined to have more than one discharge violation.
LB 56 would change the number of discharge violations to five, within five years, before a permit could be revoked. In addition to that, the discharge violations would need to occur, within five years, at a single and distinct facility. In other words, a given livestock operator with multiple facilities could have any number of discharge violations to his/her credit without fear of permit revocation, as long as there wasn’t five or more at a single facility within five years.
Given the history of the Livestock Waste Management Act, changing the number of the discharge violations from three to five makes a mockery of this part of the Act.
It is highly unlikely, more likely impossible, to conceive of a way that the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality could accomplish the necessary investigations, hearings and legal determinations for five discharge violations, within a five year timeframe, for any given livestock operator at a single facility.
In the Unicameral Update it says that Senator Deb Fisher, the introducer of LB 56, emphasized that LB56 would not diminish any environmental protections. She is quoted as saying, “We live on the land, we take care of the land, and this bill doesn’t change that,” she said. “It recognizes that perhaps the law has been stringent and perhaps we do need to look at the real world today and how we can help young farmers.”
How could Senator Fischer claim that “perhaps the law has been stringent” when, in fact, no livestock operator has ever approached being held to account under the Livestock Waste Management Act? Three total discharge violations in ten years, with no more than one violation per livestock operator, certainly does not indicate a too stringent law.
LB 56 does not fix any problems, because the problems supposedly identified simply do not exist. The Livestock Waste Management Act works very well as it is, and the record shows that absolutely no livestock operator has been hurt by it.
In fact, LB 56 does have the potential to diminish environmental protections. It would allow for the possibility of a livestock operator with multiple feeding facilities to have been determined to have dozens of discharge violations without being subject to any “bad actor” penalties. We would lose the deterrent value of the Livestock Waste Management Act.
LB 56 is a bad idea, it would constitute bad law, and it threatens the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Nebraska.
Please contact as many Senators as you can, as soon as you can. This year’s Legislative session is getting short, so there’s not a lot of time. Letters to the Editor, in any of the daily papers, or your local weekly paper are a really good way to get your message across too.
Those of us who care about Nebraska’s quality of life, the health safety and welfare of its citizens, and the long term viability of our environment, are faced with a legislative attempt to put all of those things at risk. On April 9th, our Legislature advanced LB 56 from General to Select File. This means it is on the Floor and there isn’t much time to act by letting our Senators know that this bad legislation should not pass. Below are some talking points that can be used in contacting any of our Senators you are willing to make the point with, in your own words. Contact information for all of the Senators appears below the talking points.
Talking points about LB 56.
LB 56, a bad bill, has advanced from the first stage on the floor of the Legislature. The next stage is Select File, and after that is Final Reading. We have the opportunity to communicate with our Senators and newspapers, for both of these stages.
Letters to the Editor, letters to our Senators, emails to our Senators, and phone calls to our Senators are all good ways to get our point across. We need to get our point across in every way possible and as often as possible.
LB 56 is a legislative bill introduced by Senator Fischer and is related to the Livestock Waste Management Act. As such, it purports to redefine a term; change provisions relating to permit requirements, applications, and rules and regulations; and to repeal the original sections.
In reality, LB 56 guts the already limited “bad actor” provisions in the Livestock Waste Management Act. It actually makes a mockery of those bad actor provisions.
Presently, in order for a livestock operator to be deemed a “bad actor” and have his/her permit revoked, the operator would have to be guilty of at least three discharge violations.
To date, for the approximately ten years that the Livestock Waste Management Act has been in effect, a total of three discharge violations have been determined. And, no single livestock operator has been determined to have more than one discharge violation.
LB 56 would change the number of discharge violations to five, within five years, before a permit could be revoked. In addition to that, the discharge violations would need to occur, within five years, at a single and distinct facility. In other words, a given livestock operator with multiple facilities could have any number of discharge violations to his/her credit without fear of permit revocation, as long as there wasn’t five or more at a single facility within five years.
Given the history of the Livestock Waste Management Act, changing the number of the discharge violations from three to five makes a mockery of this part of the Act.
It is highly unlikely, more likely impossible, to conceive of a way that the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality could accomplish the necessary investigations, hearings and legal determinations for five discharge violations, within a five year timeframe, for any given livestock operator at a single facility.
In the Unicameral Update it says that Senator Deb Fisher, the introducer of LB 56, emphasized that LB56 would not diminish any environmental protections. She is quoted as saying, “We live on the land, we take care of the land, and this bill doesn’t change that,” she said. “It recognizes that perhaps the law has been stringent and perhaps we do need to look at the real world today and how we can help young farmers.”
How could Senator Fischer claim that “perhaps the law has been stringent” when, in fact, no livestock operator has ever approached being held to account under the Livestock Waste Management Act? Three total discharge violations in ten years, with no more than one violation per livestock operator, certainly does not indicate a too stringent law.
LB 56 does not fix any problems, because the problems supposedly identified simply do not exist. The Livestock Waste Management Act works very well as it is, and the record shows that absolutely no livestock operator has been hurt by it.
In fact, LB 56 does have the potential to diminish environmental protections. It would allow for the possibility of a livestock operator with multiple feeding facilities to have been determined to have dozens of discharge violations without being subject to any “bad actor” penalties. We would lose the deterrent value of the Livestock Waste Management Act.
LB 56 is a bad idea, it would constitute bad law, and it threatens the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Nebraska.
Please contact as many Senators as you can, as soon as you can. This year’s Legislative session is getting short, so there’s not a lot of time. Letters to the Editor, in any of the daily papers, or your local weekly paper are a really good way to get your message across too.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Kim Starlin on -
Thanks for posting this, I'll try and spread the word too.
About
© 2010 Created by Andrea Davis.
Powered by 
.
