|
|
|
 |
|
Home / Washington Business - September/October 2003 / Environment Issues 2003 |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Environment Issues 2003 |
|
|
|
Written On: September/October |
|
|
|
SUMMARY
The 2003 session was particularly active for those interested the state’s environmental programs. AWB was active in water policy reforms, land use reforms, energy policy, stormwater management, and a variety of toxics and waste issues.
WATER RESOURCES
This was year three for the Locke administration’s "Washington Water Action Strategy." On the agenda this session was water reform for municipal water systems. Adequate and reliable water resources are an essential component of a vibrant economy and an adequate housing supply. In order to achieve healthy economic growth and affordable housing, public water systems must have certainty about their water rights. 2E2SHB 1338, sponsored by Rep. Kelli Linville (D-Bellingham), represents a big step forward for our municipal systems. The legislation allows for flexibility in how service is provided coupled with the certainty of known quantities of water for future growth. The bill also requires utilities to develop and implement water conservation programs and continue to be good stewards of the resource.
While this bill was very beneficial it almost didn’t make it through the process. The municipal water bill was linked to another bill important to the business community, SSB 5028, sponsored by Sen. Bob Morton (R-Orient). SSB 5028 is the response to an action taken by the Department of Ecology (DOE) in an enforcement proceeding against the Methow Valley Irrigation District. DOE tried to use the water quality laws to enforce against waste which is a violation of water resource laws. According to DOE, they used the water quality code because it provided higher civil penalties. SSB 5028 clarifies that DOE may not use water quality to enforce against water quantity. Additionally, it grants DOE higher penalties for water quantity violations. Each of these bills passed at the end of the special session.
LAND USE
In the land use arena, AWB spent a great deal of time responding to various court actions. As a result of the settlement in the case of AWB et al vs. Department of Ecology, legislation was needed to extend the implementation schedule for local governments to update their Shoreline Master Programs (SMP). The bill number was SSB 6012.
AWB also participated in an effort to develop a new petition method of annexation as a result of the state Supreme Court decision in case of Grant County Fire District 5 vs. City of Moses Lake. The Court essentially eliminated the voice of the property owner in the case of the petition method of annexation where there were no voters on the property. As part of a broad coalition of stakeholders AWB promoted a new petition method of annexation that we felt would pass constitutional muster. That bill is SSB 5409 sponsored by Sen. Joyce Mulliken (R-Ephrata).
Finally, just prior to the start of session the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board issued a decision against the City of Everett’s Shoreline Master Program (SMP). The decision changed everything we thought we understood about the Shoreline Management Act and the Growth Management Act. Local governments were going to have a very difficult time moving forward with any SMP updates if parts of the decision were not corrected by the legislature. That resulted in ESHB 1933, sponsored by Rep. Jean Berkey (D-Everett). The legislation does not change the entire decision, which is under appeal, but picks off parts of the decision so that the City of Everett and other jurisdictions can move forward. The bill eliminates the dual regulation within the shoreline jurisdiction by replacing GMA critical area ordinances with local SMPs.
ENERGY DETAILS
AWB’s Energy Committee developed out of our concerns that the Northwest had lost its traditional energy advantage. We continue to focus our efforts on ensuring a reliable, adequate supply at reasonable costs. To that end we successfully blocked proposals that would have required utilities and others purchasing directly from the market to buy a specific amount of higher cost renewable resources. Additionally, we stopped several tax proposals that would have increased the energy taxes for some customers.
AWB did support two measures that were aimed at controlling costs. First HJM 4021, sponsored by Rep. Deb Wallace (D- Vancouver), and second SB 5632 sponsored by Sen. Luke Esser (R- Bellevue). The Joint Memorial was a petition to Congress asking them to stop the Bonneville Power rate increase. SB 5632 would have required Sound Transit to pay for utility relocation costs if infrastructure needed to be moved.
Gov. Locke vetoed the bill, but conceded that utility services are critical services and directed the appropriate regulatory bodies to acknowledge the added costs of utility relocation in rate-setting proceedings. The bottom line for business is probably higher rates for utility customers instead of higher fees for Sound Transit customers.
WATER QUALITY
AWB actively lobbied a number of water quality related bills during the 2003 session. HB 1689, sponsored by Rep. Kelli Linville (D-Bellingham) and its companion in the Senate, SB 5645 sponsored by Sen. Dan Swecker (RRochester), sought to implement permit requirements under EPA's Phase II rule for municipal separate stormwater systems in small communities between 1,000-100,000 people. AWB and member lobbyists were concerned with early versions of the bills because of costs that would have been shifted onto businesses by allowing Phase II municipalities to meet lesser standards and pay less than their fair share. Although the bill did not pass, the department of Ecology is convening a stakeholder process consistent with the AWB supported version of HB 1689.
The passage of HB 2088, sponsored by Rep. Mark Schoesler (R-Ritzville) was a big win for AWB. The bill exempts forest and timber lands from stormwater impact fees and require local governments to reduce stormwater impact fees by a minimum of 10% for any new or remodeled commercial building which utilizes a permissive rainwater harvesting system. The Legislature agreed with AWB's position that forest lands and rainwater harvesting systems are solutions to problems associated with stormwater and should be rewarded for their contributions to improving the environment.
HAZARDOUS WASTE
AWB was successful in eliminating funding for DOE's Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxics (PBT) program. PBTs include naturally occurring and man-made compounds which are thought to accumulate in plant and animal tissue and breakdown slowly. DOE's program is duplicative of EPA's national strategy to address PBTs and other state and local programs. The program has produced dismal results at best and the Legislature, led by Senators Dino Rossi (R-Sammamish) and Mike Hewitt (R-Walla Walla), agreed with AWB that this low level priority effort should be cut from the state budget.
HB 1002, sponsored by Rep. Sam Hunt (D-Olympia), was aimed at reducing mercury in the environment. Early versions of the bill were ugly - banning certain products from sale in Washington such as laptop computers, electronic games and automobiles that have switches and ABS brakes which rely on mercury to function properly. Early versions of the bill would have also required manufacturers to pay for the collection and disposal of these products and an education program. In the end, AWB was successful in crafting a mercury reduction bill that will not harm Washington state's economy and erode our competitiveness with other states.
DETAILS
Water Resources
HB 1338 – Additional Certainty for Municipal Water Rights
Introduced by Rep. Kelli Linville (DBellingham), HB 1338 provides additional certainty for municipal water rights in order to effectively meet obligations under approved plans for water systems, growth management, and other land use regulations. HB 1338 will allow municipal water systems to grow into their water rights and provide water for expanding communities, and went into effect July 2003. Most economic activity is occurring in areas served by municipal systems, and it is important for economic development and housing availability. AWB believes that municipal systems should be allowed to grow into their rights over time.
SB 5028 – State’s Authority to Regulate Water Pollution Clarified
AWB supported this bill, introduced by Sen. Bob Morton (R-Orient) on January 13, 2003, to clarify the state's authority to regulate water pollution. This legislation clarifies that DOE may not take or impair an existing water right to address water quality issues in a listed water body. Clarifying DOE’s regulating authority is very important to manufacturers and agricultural water right holders who have surface water rights. Hoping to stop the clarification, the environmental community has filed a referendum on section one of the bill. They have until September 8, 2003 to get enough signatures to qualify for the November ballot. SB 5028 was implemented on July 20, 2003.
HB 1317 – Water Trust Rights Program Deferred
HB 1317 would have modified the trust water program to make it easier to temporarily put water into trust and maintain full water rights. This bill would have been particularly helpful for agribusinesses that may need to rotate crops or allow fields to go fallow because of market conditions. HB 1317 would also have helped manufacturers that are scaling back or temporarily shutting down by allowing them to fully protect their water rights.
This legislation would have allowed water rights holders to retain the full quantity of their water rights for the future. AWB staff is hopeful that HB 1317 will make it through the Legislature in 2004.
HB 1689- Phase Two Federal Discharge Permits
As introduced, HB 1689 would have implemented separate municipal storm sewer system permits required for phase two municipalities under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. AWB and member lobbyists helped revise the bill to ensure costs would not be shifted onto businesses permitted under other National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits. Although the bill did not pass the Legislature, the Department of Ecology is initiating a stake holder process consistent with HB 1689, as supported by AWB, to develop the phase two permits.
Land Use
SB 5409 – Direct Petition Annexations Re-Created
On March 14, 2002, the state Supreme Court invalidated the direct petition method of annexation, effectively silencing the voice of business owners in matters of city annexations. The courts ruling created a situation where only resident voters were allowed a say. Uninhabited lands and commercial areas were left without a way to petition to be annexed. SB 5049 created a new petition method for annexation of uninhabited lands and areas where there are commercial and residential zones. A coalition of business and local government organizations helped support this bill through the process, and it went into effect on June 12, 2003.
ESHB 1933- Integration of Shoreline Management Policies With the Growth Management Act
This legislation is the result of a Growth Management Hearing Board decision that effectively crippled development in the shoreline jurisdiction, and would have created significant difficulties for our marine ports facilities. This legislation eliminates an area of regulatory overlap and is the most significant change to land use law in years.
• The bill establishes that the integration of the goals and policies of the SMA into the GMA does not create an order of priority among other planning goals of the GMA.
• Makes policies, goals, and provisions of the SMA the basis of determining compliance of a master program with the GMA.
• Limits the master program reviewing authority of the Growth Management Hearing Boards.
SHB 1707- Enhancing Economic Development
As originally introduced, this bill would have had great value for urban and suburban development. It met stiff opposition from the local government and environmental communities. The proposal was significantly scaled back, but will still provide some good opportunity to test early environmental review and assist in infill development. The bill also forces infill development to comply with GMA comp plans that are categorically exempt from SEPA requirements. AWB is hopeful that this proposal can be expanded upon in the future.
SB 6012- Shoreline Master Program Schedule Established
This bill represents the next step in the shoreline agreement by establishing a staggered implantation schedule for local governments to update Shoreline Master Programs. The first set of local governments start in 2005, and the final update should be completed by 2014. This legislation requires funding from the state two years in advance of your required update or the deadline moves. SB 6012 was signed by Gov. Locke on May 14, 2003.
HB 2088- Stormwater Impact Fee Relief
AWB fought hard for HB 2088, which exempts forest and timber lands from stormwater impact fees. The bill also requires local governments to reduce stormwater fees by a minimum of 10 percent for any new or remodeled commercial buildings that use a permissive rainwater harvesting system.
Energy
HJM 4021- "No!" to Bonneville Power Administration Rate Increases
HJM 4021 is a memorial to Congress requesting that BPA not raise its rates at this time, but instead use other tools to manage costs. This legislation insists that BPA make the same painful management decisions that businesses must face before raising rates. This memorial was passed by the Legislature and sent to Congress in April 2003. BPA is scheduled to make a decision in October. AWB will keep you informed on the outcome.
SB 5632- Utility Relocation Costs: Who Will Pay?
This legislation would have directed Sound Transit to pay the costs of removing or relocating utility facilities during construction, alteration, repair or improvement of its proposed light rail system. Any utility upgrading its own facilities would have been required to pay the additional cost of the upgrade. The governor vetoed this bill, but conceded that telecommunication services and energy utilities are critical services. He stated that when transportation projects impose obligations on utilities that cause costs to increase, those costs will be borne by businesses, homes, and schools. Payment will be in the form of higher utility rates or reduced investments in needed infrastructure. Gov. Locke directed the appropriate regulatory bodies to acknowledge the added costs of utility relocation in ratesetting proceedings. The bottom line for all businesses is probably higher rates for utility customers instead of higher fees for Sound Transit customers. AWB will be taking a close look at how these costs will affect the business community. Hazardous Waste
HB 1002- Mercury Reduction
As introduced, this bill would have prevented a large number of businesses in Washington from selling products containing mercury, such as laptop computers, educational games and light bulbs. Manufacturers also would have been required to take back those products and pay for their disposal and recycling. AWB’s substitute bill, which finally did pass, limited labeling and other requirements contained in HB 1002 to very few products. The bill was less restrictive than mercury legislation passed in other states and contained some positive actions such as removing mercury from schools and educational programs.
Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxics - Budget Reduction
AWB and member lobbyists were successful in removing funding for DOE’s PBT program in the '03-05 operating budget. The program is duplicative of other state and federal programs and is a poor use of scarce state dollars.
SB 5586- Lead-Based Paint
SB 5586 allows Washington state to receive federal funding to take-over an EPA lead-based paint activities, accreditation, training and certification program. The bill also paves the way for Washington to receive HUD grants for lead paint abatement. AWB successfully fought to make this bill a win-win for Washington businesses, human health, and the environment.
HB 1743- Hazardous Waste Management
HB 1743 would have directed DOE to adopt amended rules for financial assurance, pollution liability and closure plans at facilities accepting hazardous waste and used oil. It would have also required the department to establish a system for authorizing recycling and used oil processing operations and develop recommendations for a fee to support the program. Although the bill did not pass the Legislature, DOE is convening a stakeholder process consistent with the bill language supported by AWB.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
