Did anyone see this thread over on the grime scene

With Ron M. doing so much for the past year or so helping out Houston, I really hope that this stuff does not start to make things start to go backwards or set other cities into motion to where Houston was before they got straightened out.

I would hate to see vendors being boycotted because of ulterior motives, scare tactics to try to sell reclaim equipment that is not needed most of the time to vendors that don't know what is going on or are told by cities what to do and buy because of what vendors recommend.
 
I think this will entice more Cities to adopt BMP,s..........I dont need any here
 
The coalition needs more members we need to out number the 2 so called national orgs(Roberts businesses). That way we have the voice of the industry not the voice of someone selling equipment. I have canceled my pwna membership and my membership to the umacc is about to expire. I will not be renewing! By the way I already have reclaim equipment so me having to buy equipment is not the issue. The issue is un realistic and unfair "bmp". On another note bmp's should never be a nation deal, it should be a local county deal, what works and is needed in Tampa is different than what is needed in Cleveland!
 
+100 Kory!

I think that once the coalition starts talking about things and announcing the size of the coalition, that will overshadow any org out there that is trying to manipulate cities or trying to get contractors to buy equipment and/supplies that are not needed.

I also agree about compliance in other areas, there should never be a "one size fits all" idea of a BMB for the whole country as there are many, many different situations and requirements needed as per the area or location.

Having a "one size fits all" BMP is not only a bad idea but shows that they have not thought this through and look through the contractor's eyes and have not been out there working with the location's epa or stormwater people to show that they can do the job properly without needing to have expensive reclaim equipment that is not needed more than 90% of the time.

I have reclaim equipment that I bought because I was "Misinformed and Misled" by "Authority Figures" in the industry, by vendors and by those that are helping spread the scare tactics to get contractors to buy equipment that is not only not needed but very expensive that will probably not be used much if at all.
 
Now both orgs have endorsed this publicly and I NEVER got one email discussing it with members. Why you guys going down the same track as the PWNA, now that you did, they are using you as their bitches. They just used the UAMCC name in a JOINT press release without asking WTF is our Org going to stand for this?. I told Ron he should take the position with the UAMCC, but I can't blame him for not. PWNA & Robert are going to do whatever they want to sell equipment and they are going to use the UAMCC name whether the UAMCC OK's it or not

Why don't the two orgs merge and get it over with PWNA UAMCC Hey just turn the PWNA name around some PAWN, its what we all have become for them, Pawns in their little game to sell equipment and make money for the ones that really run the PWNA

Russ what the heck is going on over there brother? I have a feeling if you werent on the UAMCC BOD, you would be raising hell about this
 
Jeff- I guarantee you, hell will be raised.
 
Here is my response:
For the record, I was on the UAMCC transition team and was going to head up the environmental committee. After an "interesting" discussion, and some things I did not agree with, I resigned the UAMCC board. At the time, there was an effort made to make it look like I had family issues, which could not be further from the truth. Then a solid effort was made to discredit my name, because I would not do anything. Of course, when I asked for an assignment, I was told that they did not want to
Overburden" me.
Then, about a year and a half ago, I was asked to join the PWNA, and at the time, a specific request was made that I serve on the environmental committee. The first round of suggested environmental recommendations was done without my knowledge. I always thought that if you were asked to serve on a committee, it was because they wanted your expertise. I was evidently wrong, because a complete set of BMP's were developped, that were supposedly not going to be shopped around, but were going to be presented to government organizations. I don't know how the not shopping and presenting to government organizations works. It does not make sense to me.
I say all that trying to establish that I have a bit of experience with the environmental areas of this industry, and will also mention that I developped the hazardous materials disposal program, from scratch, for the largest electric utility in Arizona, with something like 3,000,000 customers.
As I look at the efforts to develop industry standard BMP's, I am looking at it as a fools errand. Here is the reason why, and I will use an illustration. If I were going to sell pants, I could not manufacture just one pair of pants, and have it fit every need. There would be people bigger, smaller, some would want shorts, because that is more comfortable in their neighborhood, others would not want to wear jeans, because they prefer slacks. There are a lot of different things that can influence those pants, and the purpose that needs to be filled.
With the environmental BMP's it is very similar. You have flat work, you have Parking garages, there are fleets, decks, kitchen hoods, and every other type of washing that can be imagined, and we, as entrepreneurs are an imaginative bunch. Then we could throw in some other parameters, we have coastal environments, we have deserts with dry wells, there are locations with large areas that are covered in grass on site, there are other areas that are solid asphalt and concrete. There are so many different types and needs of recovery situations, it borders on the ridiculous. There is ABSOLUTELY no way to regulate ever situation, with one standard set of BMP's, unless full recovery is advocated.
The problem with full recovery is another complete, and perfect bag of worms. Where is it going to be disposed of? Who is going to transport it? where is the chain of custody, after it leaves the property? Is it really the best and most effective method of waste water recovery?
I do not see how it can be done, and I have looked at a variety of ways and means to see if it could be accomplished. I am not sure that it could be done if it just applied to the Phoenix area, with the large variety of washing that happens here, and all of the different regulatory agencies involved, many of them that have no clue that there might even be an issue.
 
The issue is, using the UAMCC's name in a release promoting the BMP without the Org's permission. BMP's for every City, State & County are coming via the EPA. With or without the P#NA's or Roberts help. Again if the UAMCC wants to add an "Environmental Standard" I see no problem with this, but to promote this BMP that doesn't represent All of it's Members is wrong IMHO. I still have a problem with the wording attached to the Ft. Worth BMP. The meat of the BMP mirrors that of the minimum of the CWA, which I don't have a problem with.

The P#NA has wanted for a long time to "Absorb" the Membership of the UAMCC they hate the UAMCC...Why? Because the UAMCC stands against everything they stand for, I think you guys know this. Why did the UAMCC accept the BMP that the P%NA took a Butt Whipping For??? There was a reason I believe, but it's only a hunch.

I'm sure the other Org. would love for you guys to Drop or not renew your Membership to the UAMCC, just gives them more power. They don't need Membership dues to survive, the UAMCC does.....Think About It.

To say (At This Point) that the UAMCC is in bed with Vendors is Stupid!!! No Way, No How.

Yes it was announced a few days ago that Thad is now the VP of the UAMCC, a great thing if you ask me.

Don't get me wrong, Vendors are one of the most important assets of any Org., but the most important asset is it's Members and the best interests of it's Members..... Period.
 
jlpressure said:
Thad are you on the UAMCC BOD ? I must of missed that email too or is this Russ using Thads account OR has the PWNA taken over everything? I am so confused
Click to expand...

Yes, I have been on the board for about a month, give or take, and was voted to serve as VP on the last conference call.

Will I get re-elected in October? I have no idea.
Will I do my job to the best of my ability and work for the members of the UAMCC until then? Absolutely.

Current UAMCC members can expect to hear from me in the next couple of weeks. I need your input and concerns.
 
Guy Blackmon said:
The issue is, using the UAMCC's name in a release promoting the BMP without the Org's permission. BMP's for every City, State & County are coming via the EPA. With or without the P#NA's or Roberts help. Again if the UAMCC wants to add an "Environmental Standard" I see no problem with this, but to promote this BMP that doesn't represent All of it's Members is wrong IMHO. I still have a problem with the wording attached to the Ft. Worth BMP. The meat of the BMP mirrors that of the minimum of the CWA, which I don't have a problem with.

The P#NA has wanted for a long time to "Absorb" the Membership of the UAMCC they hate the UAMCC...Why? Because the UAMCC stands against everything they stand for, I think you guys know this. Why did the UAMCC accept the BMP that the P%NA took a Butt Whipping For??? There was a reason I believe, but it's only a hunch.

I'm sure the other Org. would love for you guys to Drop or not renew your Membership to the UAMCC, just gives them more power. They don't need Membership dues to survive, the UAMCC does.....Think About It.

To say (At This Point) that the UAMCC is in bed with Vendors is Stupid!!! No Way, No How.

Yes it was announced a few days ago that Thad is now the VP of the UAMCC, a great thing if you ask me.

Don't get me wrong, Vendors are one of the most important assets of any Org., but the most important asset is it's Members and the best interests of it's Members..... Period.
Click to expand...

Guy, with all due respect (and you know I mean that brother) There are no minimum requirements for powerwashers in any way, shape or form in the Clean Water Act. The Clean water act allows for XXXX amounts of discharge. The reclaim brainwashing has convinced you and many others that that amount is zero. It's just plain false. If we can't get our own contractors to understand that there is no way on this planet that every one of us won't be carrying around a vacuum cleaner on every job within the next 10 years.
 
If the UAMCC is truly concerned about contractors they can publicly denounce the actions of the PWNA and follow that by an immediate separation with any vendor linked to the org in any way.

Until then I'm sad that many of upstanding and respected contractors on the BOD have to be associated with such a trainwreck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top