OBX Connection Home > OBX Connection Forum > Will a scaled back EPA lead to Currituck Bridge?
Will a scaled back EPA lead to Currituck Bridge?

Will a scaled back EPA lead to Currituck Bridge?




Just had a most random thought. With Mr. Pruitt taking the helm of the EPA and promises to scale back or even dissolve the EPA. I wonder what implications this will have on the Oregon Inlet and Currituck Bridge projects...

Time to go put my tinfoil hat back on!


OBX Connection Sponsored Links




RE: Will a scaled back EPA lead to Currituck Bridge?




Kellybean88, I have been thinking the very same things for some time now and hope the change in administration and the EPA will bring about positive changes for Hatteras Island. I sincerely hope for less restrictions and regulations, larger areas of free and open access for longer periods of time. I am hopeful!


RE: Will a scaled back EPA lead to Currituck Bridge?




IIRC, the EPA has had nothing to do with anything going on with the OBX, especially the bridges. From the RoD (record of Decision) for the Oregon Inlet bridge, I don't recall the EPA ever being a part of the decision group, since no serious environmental impacts were found/anticipated. Those blockages to construction were all created by 2 environmental groups, Defenders of Wildlife and Audubon Society, represented by Southern Environmental Law Center.

The Hatteras beach access issues are from decisions made by the Department of the Interior, and the National Park Service.


RE: Will a scaled back EPA lead to Currituck Bridge?




IIRC, the EPA has had nothing to do with anything going on with the OBX, especially the bridges. From the RoD (record of Decision) for the Oregon Inlet bridge, I don't recall the EPA ever being a part of the decision group, since no serious environmental impacts were found/anticipated. Those blockages to construction were all created by 2 environmental groups, Defenders of Wildlife and Audubon Society, represented by Southern Environmental Law Center.

The Hatteras beach access issues are from decisions made by the Department of the Interior, and the National Park Service.


Nice accurate summary of the involvement of the various groups/agencies Beachmark.


RE: Will a scaled back EPA lead to Currituck Bridge?




IIRC, the EPA has had nothing to do with anything going on with the OBX, especially the bridges. From the RoD (record of Decision) for the Oregon Inlet bridge, I don't recall the EPA ever being a part of the decision group, since no serious environmental impacts were found/anticipated. Those blockages to construction were all created by 2 environmental groups, Defenders of Wildlife and Audubon Society, represented by Southern Environmental Law Center.

The Hatteras beach access issues are from decisions made by the Department of the Interior, and the National Park Service.


I respectfully disagree. The Defenders of the Wildlife, Audubon, et tal all used regulations from The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to try and block the construction. NEPA falls under EPA's control.

One of the first steps in the process would have been to complete an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) which the EPA would have had input or oversight of, especially considering that this is Federally owned land.

http://edocs.deq.nc.gov/WaterResources/docview.aspx?id=135961&dbid=0&cr=1

Also when NPS revised their ORV management plan, the EPA also had a large part in the recommendation and approval process.

See page 18:
https://books.google.com/books?id=PzY3AQAAMAAJ&pg=RA1-PA22&lpg=RA1-PA22&dq=epa+jurisdiction+cape+hatteras+national+seashore&source=bl&ots=2KlLyXIDU0&sig=ihzIbHk2GnCJ9SjjN2plCkL7Ggs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiu5rq21JzSAhXHOSYKHUunBlUQ6AEINDAF#v=onepage&q&f=false





RE: Will a scaled back EPA lead to Currituck Bridge?




Your first link doe snot work for me. (Might be on my end.)

On the CHNSRA ORV EIS comments that you linked, I cannot see anywhere in the assessment where EPA expressed anything more that 'environmental concern' on some aspects of some alternatives. Comments also are there from numerous other agencies, so 'splain how did the EPA play any big role in the decision? They certainly did not originate or push for the plan.

While NEPA is the process, I have been keeping up to speed on the Bonner Bridge for several years, and the EPA never showed up as any big player on that process, nor was on the Decision team IIRC. The lawsuits did not come from them at all; the suits claimed violations of the NEPA process (which were rejected by the courts), but it was not the EPA making any claims.

I am a fan of doing something to scale back the power of environmental groups by changing environmental laws; they can stop too much, too easily. And I'll agree that the EPA has gotten out of hand (mainly is due to political agents inside IMHO) and can use some correcting.... as often do many bureaucracies, government and private. But blaming the Bonner Bridge and Hatteras ORV issues on the EPA is just way off of base. I would not expect to gain support for linking them to these 2 particular issues.

I think you may be talking about general environmental laws.... written by environmentalists for environmentalists. Not the right way to do things IMHO.


RE: Will a scaled back EPA lead to Currituck Bridge?




Much of the problem with the EPA is the EPA itself. Different entities or offices looking at the same thing can be at odds with each other.
We do work for the Navy and they have EPA reps on site for many aspects of the work. The navy and EPA can approve of your practices and in 2 cases were awarded "best practices" and used as case examples. With-in 5 months a different EPA office completely across the county voiced "concern" and required a complete review of practices that were already in place and that had been already approved.


RE: Will a scaled back EPA lead to Currituck Bridge?




Agree with points above and Beachmarks summary. my opinions:
One thing DOI learned from EPA was the "Sue and Settle" scam, which combined with the resulting "Consent Decrees" unreasonably burdened citizens with over-regulation, costs and loss of rights to public, and Private, property.
The +1, -2 regulation proposal on the table in congress now will possibly scale that back.
The EPA was a nice idea decades ago, but it is now a bureaucratic nightmare of tangled webs and collusion which does not benefit the environment, nor the general public, but rather niche special interests and lawyers.
For the Currytuck bridge, I don't see any money to be made by the niche special interests, other than delay and posture, so it will be up to the County and State to decide if this is reasonable. I have no opinion on whether the bridge is beneficial or not. Local government and residents should decide.