HOUSE BILL REPORT
HB 543
BYRepresentatives Madsen, Fisch, Miller, Rasmussen, Baugher, Doty, Spanel, Brooks and Nealey
Providing procedures to investigate and remedy complaints regarding pollution from nonpoint agricultural activity.
House Committe on Agriculture & Rural Development
Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass. (12)
Signed by Representatives Rayburn, Chair; Kremen, Vice Chair; Bristow, Brooks, Chandler, Doty, Holm, Jacobsen, McLean, Moyer, Nealey and Rasmussen.
House Staff:Kenneth Hirst (786-7105)
AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE & RURAL DEVELOPMENT
FEBRUARY 19, 1987
BACKGROUND:
The 1972 federal Clean Water Act directed the Environmental Protection Agency to consult with state and local agencies and to issue guidelines for identifying the nature and extent of nonpoint sources of pollutants and means of controlling such pollution. Section 208 of the 1972 act required the development of area-wide plans for the control of pollutants for certain areas. Section 208 also authorized a federal cost sharing program for installing and maintaining measures incorporating best management practices to control nonpoint source pollution in areas for which approved plans had been developed.
The state's water pollution control statutes are administered by the Department of Ecology. In 1986, the Water Quality Account was established and funded by taxes on cigarettes, tobacco products and certain other products. Monies deposited in the account are administered by the Department of Ecology. The department's total distribution of funds appropriated from the account during the period from July 1, 1987 to June 30, 1995 is limited by statute. One of those limitations is that not more than two-and-one-half percent of amounts distributed for certain point and nonpoint water pollution control activities may be transferred by the department to the State Conservation Commission for water related activities.
SUMMARY:
SUBSTITUTE BILL: Complaints received by the Department of Ecology concerning nonpoint source water pollution from agricultural lands shall be referred to the conservation district office in the jurisdiction where the land is located. The district shall contact the person conducting agricultural activities on the land and shall determine if a nonpoint source pollution problem exists. The district shall provide a written report of its findings to the person and retain a copy of the report in its office but hold identifying information confidentially. If measurable water pollution is attributable to agricultural activities, the district shall offer certain specified assistance to the person which may include the development of a cooperative farm plan employing the wastewater management planning process referred to in the 1972 federal Clean Water Act or equivalent measures. The person has the option of accepting assistance from the district, in whole or in part, or solving the problem on his or her own.
A period of 6 months is allowed for the development of a plan and 18 months for implementation. However, deadlines may be extended for certain reasons. If the complaint reoccurs and the person has not undertaken cooperative planning or implementation of a plan, or has not otherwise taken steps to solve the pollution problem, the district shall rerefer the complaint to the department for enforcement.
The department shall enter a contract with each conservation district in the state to fund these activities of the districts. Monies transferred by the department to the Conservation Commission under state laws governing the Water Quality Account shall not be considered as satisfying these requirements.
These requirements shall be administered by the department with the advice and consent of the Conservation Commission.
SUBSTITUTE BILL COMPARED TO ORIGINAL: The substitute bill provides deadlines for the preparation and implementation of a plan and alters the circumstances under which a complaint must be rereferred to the department.
Fiscal Note: Requested February 17, 1987.
House Committee ‑ Testified For: Ron Juris, State Association of Conservation Districts; Stu Trefry, Washington State Grange; Bill Roberts, Washington State Farm Bureau; Marlyta Deck, Washington Cattlemens Association; Dan Coyne, Washington Dairymens Federation; Dave McMillin, Olympia Oyster Company.
House Committee - Testified Against: Carol Jolly, Department of Ecology.
House Committee - Testimony For: (1) The bill codifies the current memorandum of understanding between the department and the conservation districts concerning agricultural nonpoint sources of water pollution. (2) The Section 208 (federal Clean Water Act) plans that were developed in this state should be utilized. (3) A buffer is needed between the department and the agricultural industry; the department has requested additional enforcement officers. (4) The enforcement officers of state agencies need better training. (5) In areas where shellfish growing areas have be decertified, most of the pollution comes from nonpoint sources.
House Committee - Testimony Against: The department has appointed a compliance task force which is examining ways of delineating lines of jurisdiction between the department and the conservation districts. Legislation on this subject should be held until that task force makes its recommendations.