WSP02801

• File Number: 8027
• Description: Section D General Correspondence - Federal Agencies - EPA
• State: CO
• Basin: Statewide
• Date: 10/10/1974
• Author: Andrew J Hinshaw
• Title: Statement of Andrew J Hinshaw of California in the House of Representatives - GOD and the EPA - From the Congressional Record
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

~~~'-
~ ~ ,'f: .., ~_~';so

0027b?

,~
",-~,,?1

{.flJ~-
"',~
....uv

D~,
!2 PA

Reprinted from the Congressional Record,! October 10, 1974
i
;

GOD AND EPA

HON. ANDREW J. HINSHAW
OF CALiFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Thursday, October 10, 1974

Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Speaker, under the leave to extend my remarks in the
RECORD, I include the following:

GOD AND EPA

In the beginning God created heaven and earth.

He was then faced with a class action lawsuit for failing to file
~n environmental impact statement with HEPA (Heavenly Environmental
Protection Agency), an angelically staffed agency dedicated to keeping
the Universe pollution free.

God was granted a temporary permit for the heavenly portion of the
project, but was issued a cease and desist order on ~he earthly part,
pending further investigation by HEPA.

Upon completion of his construction permit application and environ-
mental impact statement, God appeared before the HEPA Council to answer
questions.

When asked why he began these projects in the first place, he
simply replied that he liked to be creative.

This was not considered adequate reasoning and he, would be required
to substantiate this further. '

HEPA was unable to see any practial use for earth since "the earth
was void and empty and darkness was upon the face of the deep."

Then God said: "Let there be light."

He should never have brought up this point since one member of the
Council was active in the Sierrangel Club and immediately protested,
asking "how was the light to be made? Would there be strip mining?
What about thermal pollution? Air pollution - II God explained the light
would come from a huge ball of fire.

Nobody on the council really understood this, but it was provi-
sionally accepted assuming (1) there would be no smog or smoke resulting
from the ball of fire, (2) a separate burning permit would be required,