When the Department of Ecology – the state agency that watches over polluters – recently tallied how many folks it needed to protect the health of Puget Sound and local lakes and rivers, officials came to a startling conclusion. The number of people policing water quality is less than half what's needed to do the job.
When the Department of Ecology – the state agency that watches over polluters – recently tallied how many folks it needed to protect the health of Puget Sound and local lakes and rivers, officials came to a startling conclusion.
The number of people policing water quality is less than half what's needed to do the job.
!ADVERTISEMENT!
Statewide, there are more than 6,500 construction sites, sewage treatment plants, machine shops, sand and gravel businesses and others holding permits limiting how much they can pollute. But there are only about 114 Ecology staffers to oversee them. The department estimates that about 280 employees are needed.
"The permits are really important; it's really our core work," said Sandy Howard, Ecology's Water Quality Program spokeswoman. "They're our primary tool for preventing pollution."
The trouble is that funding comes almost entirely from fees collected from the businesses and governments participating in the program.
Ecology is limited by public initiatives and state laws as to how fast and by how much the fees can be raised. Over the years, the fees haven't kept up with program costs as the permits have become increasingly complex and controversial, frequently resulting in lengthy court battles that chew up scarce resources.
"This is a program that is not just underfunded, it's critically underfunded to the point that there are aspects of the program that are dysfunctional," said Bruce Wishart, policy director for People for Puget Sound, an environmental group.
"Their ability to do compliance and enforcement work is severely compromised," he said. "We have a very serious problem on our hands."
The situation has become so dire that in January Ecology convened a task force that includes Wishart and representatives of the businesses, state agencies and local governments holding permits. They're working on a short-term fix to get more money for the program as quickly as possible as well as a permanent funding solution.
The shortfall has meant cuts in the number of people writing permits that set pollution limits, staff who provide technical support for solving pollution problems, and inspectors dropping in on permittees to make sure they're following the rules, said Kelly Susewind, interim director of Ecology's Water Quality Program. He said the program is still doing its job, but not as well as it could.
But many task force members want better accounting of how large a staff is really justified. And there's no consensus on who should pay to cover the gap. In the 2008 fiscal year, $17.4 million in fees were collected. It's unlikely the state's general fund would be tapped; last week Gov. Chris Gregoire ordered a hiring freeze and other budget cuts for state agencies.
"The economy's down right now and everyone is forced to cut back," said Dave White, strategic policy planner for King County's Wastewater Treatment Division and task force member. "On the other hand, you want a program that works."
'Kind of overwhelming'
In his red Jeep Cherokee, Bob Wright crisscrosses railroad tracks and dodges semis along the Duwamish River. This highly industrialized neighborhood is his beat as an Ecology water quality inspector.
"You can see all the leaks that get on the ground around here," he said, pointing to oily patches on a dirt road.
There are about 100 permitted businesses in his area along the lower Duwamish – a river that is also a Superfund site undergoing a multimillion-dollar cleanup. Wright, who focuses on industrial stormwater, tries to visit about half the businesses a year.
Elsewhere, many industrial sites regulated under what's called the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System are visited every five years at best. The Duwamish gets added support because of the cleanup.
It can be tough persuading businesses to control the flow of rainwater carrying grease, oil, heavy metals, solvents and whatever else is picked up from parking lots, trash containers, equipment and products stored outside.
While some businesses understand the importance of protecting water quality, that's not true for everyone, Wright said. Personnel turnover, high costs and a lack of understanding about how to control toxic waste can require lengthy, repeated conversations. Another challenge is figuring out who's ducking the program altogether and getting them on board.
"It's kind of overwhelming when I drive around looking for trouble and assessing what's going on," Wright said. "A little extra resources would let us be a little more broad and a little more thorough."
Oversight from inspectors like Wright is important. In 2007, more than 1,500 compliance or enforcement actions were taken against permittees – but only 46 fines for water quality violations were issued. With such a small risk of penalties, the program relies heavily on technical support and instruction to safeguard the region's waters.
Wishart drew a comparison of that approach to the State Patrol issuing speeders pamphlets on highway safety and the environmental benefits of driving slower in lieu of tickets.
"If there wasn't a consequence for speeding ... I think Interstate 5 would look like an autobahn," he said. "We need clearly to have both enforcement and technical assistance."
Compliance, however, remains high with a 98 percent rate for last year, according to preliminary numbers. But there is a significant caveat. The businesses are responsible for collecting water samples that are supposed to fairly represent their pollution levels and for honestly reporting the results. Without Ecology watchdogs, who knows if that's happening?
Enforcement is paid for out of a different pot of money than the fee-funded staff, but it's understaffed as well. In the 1996-97 period, there was one enforcement staff for 581 permits. In 2006-07, that rose to 950 per person.
Other concerns with understaffing include Ecology's increased reliance on "general" permits that apply broadly to business sectors such as construction sites or boat yards, rather than individual permits tailored to address a business's specific issues. Permits take longer to be renewed and strengthened, which means weaker standards remain in place longer.
Higher fees questioned
People for Puget Sound recently added up the volumes of some pollutants being released by sewage treatment plants and 15 of the largest industrial facilities permitted by Ecology. They calculated that 3.6 metric tons of lead and 2 metric tons of arsenic, among other toxics, are dumped into the Sound and its tributaries each year.
That doesn't include thousands of smaller polluters or the waste coming from residents and their cars, yards and roofs.
Against that backdrop, Gregoire has set a goal of returning the Sound to health by 2020 and a big piece of that is cleaning up and controlling pollution. Even some of the permit holders said that better compliance across the board would be a good thing for water quality.
"There are opportunities for permittees to do better," said Ken Johnson, regulatory affairs manager for Weyerhaeuser Co. and a task force member.
Weyerhaeuser spends $135,000 a year for a permit covering its pulp-and-paper plant in Longview. It pays $1,400 annually for each industrial stormwater permit for 16 or so separate facilities. Johnson is among those calling for reassigning the fees so smaller businesses and municipalities pay more, making the program more equitable for larger businesses that pay disproportionately higher fees.
Still, Johnson and others wonder if more costly permits and a bigger staff are the right way to improve water quality.
Ecology is "running the program now and saying they feel like they're understaffed. But permits are getting written and issued. ... It's not obvious to me why they need another 100-plus people in the program."
Last month, Ecology officials presented the task force with a list of ideas for raising their budget over the next few years. They include increasing fees to keep up with inflation and increased wages and overhead, raising a cap on fees charged to local governments, no longer refunding fees when permits are terminated before they expire, and withholding permit coverage to businesses who have not paid in full. Some of the changes require lawmakers' approval.
In September, the task force will consider more permanent solutions to the funding problem in order to boost staffing levels. How many that will be is unknown.
Ecology's Susewind said the estimate of how many more employees were needed was a preliminary number and needs more discussion.
But, he added, "We think it's a lot more than we have now."
